The Public Meeting Index

The Richmond City Planning Commission met on September 15, 2026, at 6:00 PM in the 5th Floor Conference Room of City Hall. The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Rodney Poole. Key actions included approval of the previous meeting's minutes, a continuance of a special use permit for a multifamily dwelling at 1209 Overbrook Road, approval of a consent agenda item for renovation of Little John Park, and a vote to continue the discussion on a controversial special use permit at 5706 York Road to allow more time for consideration of affordable housing issues. Consent Calendar - Approval of minutes from September 1, 2026 meeting (adopted 8-0-1, Commissioner Robertson abstained). - Approval of Consent Agenda item: UDC 2026-13, location, character, and extent review of a proposed renovation of Little John Park at 1401 Little John Road (unanimously approved). Public Comments & Testimony - Item 2026-189 (5706 York Road): One speaker, Mr. Bearland, spoke in opposition. He argued that demolishing the existing 18 affordable apartment units (renting for $900–$1,200/month) to build eight single-family attached dwellings (estimated 1.3 million dollar townhouses) would result in the loss of affordable housing and displacement of residents. He cited the need for a household income of about $300,000 to afford the new units (the "30% rule"). He referenced a resident's statement, Wally Smith, who said he currently lives in the building, works in the neighborhood, and would likely lose his job and home. The speaker urged the commission not to recommend approval, stating the project contradicts Richmond 300's goals of inclusive housing and preventing involuntary displacement. He also noted that zoning-compliant alternatives exist (e.g., redeveloping the existing building with commercial and residential mixed-use). - Written comment received: The West Hampton Civic Association submitted a letter stating they neither support nor oppose the SUP request. This letter was received by staff during working hours on the day of the meeting. Discussion Items - Item 2026-189 (5706 York Road): Staff presented a proposal to authorize a special use permit for a property at 5706 York Road to allow up to eight single-family attached dwellings (townhouses) on a 0.4-acre lot. The property currently has a 18-unit apartment building built in 1963. The applicant, Greg Schron (with Senter Creek Homes), later added the option to include accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on six of the lots, bringing the total potential units to 14. The ADUs are small studio apartments (approx. 360 sq ft each) with kitchenettes. Commissioners expressed significant concerns: - Commissioner Rowe argued density does not automatically create affordability and that the project would remove existing affordable units (18 units renting at $900–$1,200) to create expensive homes requiring high incomes. She noted that a resident (Wally Smith) expressed fear of displacement and loss of employment. She voted against the continuance, indicating she would likely vote against the project. - Commissioner McKenzie echoed that the affordability claim "falls flat" because there is no requirement for ADUs to be used for affordable renting, and it's entirely dependent on the buyer's choice. - Commissioner Robertson noted the existing building is still occupied and that the owner could choose to demolish it by right, but the commission should consider the loss of affordable units. - Commissioner White appreciated the density but also struggled with the loss of affordable housing and the uncertainty around ADU affordability. - Commissioner Greenfield raised the option of deferral to allow further discussion on affordability. The applicant accepted a continuance to October 20, 2026, after it became clear the commission might not approve. - Commissioner Poole highlighted the need for the city to clearly define "affordable housing" to avoid confusion. - Commissioner Hancock Greenfield suggested the project might offer better community oversight than an entirely by-right development under the upcoming code refresh (MX3 zoning). Key Outcomes - Continuance granted: Item 2026-189 (5706 York Road) was continued to the October 20, 2026 meeting by a vote of 8-1 (Commissioner Rowe opposed). The continuance allows time for the applicant to revise the proposal to better address affordability concerns. - Consent Agenda approved: Unanimously approved as presented. - Comp Plan Update: A general update from city council indicated that the October 6, 2026 meeting agenda will be very full, with 26 items including 20 new special use permits introduced and referred.

On September 16, 2026, the Syracuse Common Council convened a labor agreement and HR educational meeting with the administration, including Head of HR Richard and Deputy Mayor Corey Jisco, to receive an update on ongoing union negotiations, wage comparability with peer cities, and to discuss recruitment and retention for public-facing city workers. Discussion Items - Labor negotiations update: HR reported negotiations span a number of departments, began in May 2026, and are ongoing, including on the meeting date. Skilled trades, whose contract expired January 1, have a tentative agreement before council. Some units are under contract through the end of 2028. - Impasse explained: Deputy Mayor Jisco described impasse as a point where a party essentially says there is no value in meeting further. He noted the rules of engagement signed at the start of negotiations prohibit either party from publicly discussing proposal terms. - Wage comparability: HR said the city compares itself to Buffalo, Rochester, Albany, Ithaca, and Yonkers, and that Syracuse is within a dollar or two of Ithaca for almost every position, but less than Ithaca. Councillor Manto questioned whether comparables are skewed because the county and city school district draw from a larger pool and some unions do not have residency requirements. - Pay differential: Councillor Jones asked whether the pay difference between the city, county, and city school district is roughly $4; the difference was not confirmed in the transcript. - Living wage: Councillor Hudson clarified the city's living wage ordinance, passed in 2012 and updated annually, sets the 2026 rate at $16.92 per hour for jobs providing benefits and $19.98 without benefits. Councillor Hudson and Councillor Moore expressed concern that this is not enough for workers to afford housing and basic repairs in the current market. - Health care value: Councillor Hudson noted the city's insurance plan has a 97.5% actuarial value, which she called "unheard of in New York State." HR noted the plan is worth the equivalent of a $26,000 health insurance plan even for someone who never uses it, while the city pays less than the cost of a bronze plan. Health care costs about one-third of the overall city budget and continues to rise. - Charter priorities and public-facing workers: Councillor Moore stated that under the charter, the three major responsibilities are DPW, fire, and police, and that the public most depends on these workers for safety and cleanliness. She and Councillor Hudson raised concerns about winter snow removal if staffing fails, noted many workers are 30 to 45 years old, and said many DPW workers work two jobs. - Crossing guards: Councillor Hudson said crossing guards have been overlooked too long, risk their lives directing traffic, receive no benefits, and should be given a living wage increase and some form of benefit or credit. - Ideas for recruitment and retention: Councillor Moore suggested thinking outside the box, including twice-yearly bonuses for workers, while stressing "our people are first." Deputy Mayor Jisco reported that Mayor Owens has tasked HR with exploring an employee housing portal and remitted tuition with higher education institutions. Councillors discussed concerns that CDL drivers, who are more transient, could take a sign-on bonus and leave. Key Outcomes - The administration stated it is "ready to partner" on a number of scenarios the council sees fit, including a targeted approach to address wages or recruitment. - Councillors requested that the administration consider sharing its proposals with the council for review. - No formal votes were taken at this educational meeting.

The Texarkana, Arkansas Historic District Commission met on September 16, 2026, at 14:30:41 UTC. Seven members were present and no members were absent; no conflicts of interest or ex parte communications were declared. No written agenda or minutes were provided with the source materials, so this summary reflects the raw transcript. The commission approved its summarized minutes and considered a certificate of appropriateness for Moonbrook, a counseling and holistic health facility, before tabling it because the applicant was not present. Consent Calendar - Adoption of summarized minutes: Approved as written by voice vote after a motion and a second. Public Comments & Testimony - Frances Brooks, 415 Pecan Street (adjacent property owner): Expressed concern about the original proposal’s community garden and greenhouse, saying those elements could attract homeless people to the area. She said she was glad those elements had been removed. She described the planned garden as “real lovely” and supported beautifying the lot, but she worried about homeless people using benches, lighting being too bright or poorly placed, long-term maintenance if the business closes, and the effect on her ability to sell her home. She said she had lived next to the property for 25 years and already dealt with homeless-related issues in the area. She also favored a see-through white fence over a tall privacy fence. Discussion Items - Certificate of appropriateness for Moonbrook (Jessica Kennington, owner, absent): The request was to (1) add shade trees, (2) upgrade landscaping, (3) add benches, (4) add a pondless water feature, (5) add a flagstone walk path, (6) add a fence to the area, and (7) add lighting to the building. The proposal involved a meditation garden next to the building. The commission reviewed a diagram and discussed fence height, style, and color; city rules requiring at least four feet in front and no more than eight feet on the sides and rear; the desirability of a white fence that can be seen through; the limited deterrent effect of any fence; and the absence of specified lighting locations. The garden was described as being for Ms. Kennington’s clients only. A commissioner also indicated a suggestion could be sent to the applicant to consider a darker-colored fence that might suit the mid-century building, while another commissioner noted that white fencing fits the area’s Victorian-style homes. Key Outcomes - Minutes approved: The summarized minutes were adopted as written by voice vote. - Moonbrook request tabled: The commission voted by voice vote to table the entire certificate of appropriateness until Ms. Kennington can attend a future meeting to answer questions. A letter was to be sent to her; the chair indicated the suggestion about a darker fence color could be included. - Historic Preservation Awards: The awards were tentatively scheduled for October 14, 2026. - Adjournment: After no further business, the commission voted to adjourn.

The Oakland Public Ethics Commission held its regular meeting on September 16, 2026, at 6:30 PM at City Hall, Hearing Room 2. The meeting addressed enforcement actions on misuse of Measure Z funds by OPD and a Sunshine Ordinance violation by the Oakland Police Commission, case closures under the backlog strategy, and informational items on commissioner recruitment, campaign disclosure tools, and staff reports. Public Comments & Testimony - Gene Hazzard (multiple occasions): Delivered extensive comments alleging unlawful actions by the City Council related to Rule 29 suspension and ballot measure alteration, criticized the PEC for dismissing his complaints, and threatened to file a lawsuit against the Commission. - Paula Hawthorne (former chair of the Safety and Services Oversight Commission): Stated that her commission discovered the improper use of $12,000 in Measure Z funds by OPD, emphasized that such funds are restricted to violence prevention, and commended the Commission's attention to the issue. - Unnamed speaker: Expressed concern that OPD is historically not held accountable for misconduct, argued that the Measure Z misuse was serious because funds were needed for youth and violence prevention, and urged strong consequences. - Rajni Mundal (Zoom): Requested a correction to the staff memorandum in Case 26-08, asserting that the characterization of former Commissioner Omar Farmer’s statement did not match the contemporaneous public record; asked that the letter distinguish Farmer’s interpretation from documented facts. - Another speaker (on Case 26-08): Argued that serial communications among OPC members did not cause harm because the recommendation was only advisory and accused some commenters of using the complaint to attack the Police Commission. Discussion Items - Approval of Minutes (July 15, 2026 & August 14, 2026): Two motions to approve the draft minutes were made and seconded. However, due to two abstentions (commissioners who were absent from those meetings), each motion received only three affirmative votes, failing to reach the required four votes. Minutes were not approved. - Case No. 24-30 – OPD Misuse of Measure Z Funds (Item 5): Enforcement Chief Tovah Ackerman presented the case. Eleven OPD officers used $12,000 in Measure Z funds for travel to a fallen-officer memorial in Washington, D.C., which is not a permissible use of Measure Z funds. The funds were later returned to the Measure Z account after the City Controller advised OPD. Staff found that the travel served a city purpose, so no GEA violation occurred, but recommended an advisory letter. Commissioners questioned whether the travel purpose justified all expenses, criticized the lack of itemized receipts, and expressed concern about OPD’s inability to produce expense reports. Commissioners also noted the citywide spending moratorium in effect at the time. A motion to continue the investigation (including obtaining expense reports and reviewing processes) was made and seconded. After public comment, the motion passed 4-0 (Upton, Tilak, Fisher, Micik; Apfeld excused, Bayeva excused). - Case No. 26-08 – Oakland Police Commission Sunshine Violation (Item 6): Staff presented evidence that four OPC commissioners (a quorum) exchanged emails and collaborated on a Google Doc regarding the BearCat armored vehicle recommendation outside a public meeting, violating Sunshine Ordinance § 2.20.030(F)(1). Staff recommended a finding of violation and an advisory letter directing OPC to agendize the matter for cure/correct. OPC had already taken corrective action (nullifying the November 20, 2025 vote). Commissioners discussed the severity of the violation and whether further interviews were needed. A motion to adopt staff recommendation was made and seconded. After public comment, the motion passed 4-0. - Complaint Backlog Case Closures (Item 7): Staff recommended closing two cases: PEC 22-26 (Trevelyon Jones) with no further action, and PEC 24-06 (former Commissioner Regina Jackson) with an advisory letter. Staff noted the complainant in 24-06 had withdrawn. Commissioners discussed the educational value of the advisory letter for other boards. A motion to approve staff recommendations passed 4-0 after public comment. - Commissioner Recruitment (Item 8): Senior Ethics Analyst Jelani Killings outlined the recruitment process for a PEC-appointed seat expiring January 2027. Deadline: October 30, 2026. Staff distributed flyers and requested commissioners to submit 30-second video testimonials. - Campaign Disclosure Tools Demo (Item 9): Ethics Analyst Niels Thorsen and volunteer Michael Ubel (OpenOakland) demonstrated the OpenDisclosure website (www.opendisclosure.io). Features include aggregated contribution and expenditure data, geographic breakdowns, independent expenditure tracking, and a searchable donor database. Commissioners suggested linking to raw data and improving presentation of independent expenditures. - Executive Director Report (Item 10): Executive Director Suzanne Doran reported that the PEC has reached full staffing for the first time in four years. A strategic planning retreat is scheduled for October 21, 2026. Work on the Democracy Dollars software platform (with MapLight) will begin in January 2027. Staff also conducted ethics training for department directors and explored new outreach methods. - Enforcement Program Report (Item 11): Enforcement Chief Ackerman reported that since July, 3 formal and 3 proactive complaints were received, bringing the total open caseload to 80. Two complaints were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A pending administrative hearing (Case 17-09) may proceed via default as the respondent has not responded. - Subcommittee Reports (Item 12): - Transparency Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Chair Upton reported recent meetings with IT staff and plans for a panel at CityCamp Oakland on October 17, 2026, focused on improving public records access and transparency dashboards. - Democracy Dollars Pilot Ad Hoc Subcommittee: Commissioner Micik reported that a meeting has not yet been held due to scheduling conflicts, but plans to convene soon. Key Outcomes - Case 24-30 (OPD Measure Z): Motion to continue investigation passed 4-0. Staff will seek expense reports and examine processes to prevent future misuse. - Case 26-08 (OPC Sunshine): Motion to adopt staff recommendation for a finding of violation and advisory letter passed 4-0. - Backlog Closures: Motion to close PEC 22-26 with no action and PEC 24-06 with advisory letter passed 4-0. - Minutes: Both the July 15 and August 14, 2026, draft minutes failed to receive sufficient votes and were not approved. - Strategic Planning Retreat: Scheduled for October 21, 2026, pending confirmation. - Democracy Dollars Development: Initiation moved to January 2027.

The Planning Commission Finance Subcommittee met at 6:33 p.m. on September 16, 2026, to review the preliminary draft of the 2026 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and prepare for the upcoming public hearing on September 21, 2026. The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Berger, with Vice Chair Daniel Garcia and Commissioner Ibrahimovich present. Staff from several departments introduced themselves and answered commissioner questions on CFP sections. Consent Calendar - The agenda and minutes from the previous meeting (September 2, 2026) were approved unanimously without discussion. No public comment was offered. Discussion Items - Parks (Tammy Ledou): Commissioners asked about the origin of the level-of-service (LOS) metric (parkland per 1,000 people). Staff explained it is a national standard adopted by the city and updated every six years as part of the Parks Plan. The Armory is categorized as a community park; specific performance measures will be developed once it reopens. Staff also referenced the city’s performance dashboard on the website. - Transportation (Joey Jones): Discussion focused on the CFP’s role as a financial document rather than a project-level document. Commissioners requested better cross‑referencing to source documents (e.g., the Transportation Master Plan) and noted that some linked PDFs were formatted incorrectly. The pavement management model (Street Saver) was explained; it models pavement condition index (PCI) but cannot predict mode‑shift impacts. Project prioritization is based on multiple factors (safety, community interest, emerging issues, grant opportunities) and is not formula‑driven. The sidewalk repair program uses a $500,000 baseline, adjusted annually based on identified locations. - Fire (Chief Flowers and Adam Cummings): Commissioners asked about the feasibility of smaller fire trucks. Staff noted that U.S.‑manufactured fire apparatus meeting NFPA standards are not significantly smaller, and that smaller European‑style trucks are not practical due to maintenance and equipment requirements. The discussion also touched on annexation of the South Urban Growth Area, which faces financial hurdles because of the need for a new fire station, sewer lift station, and other infrastructure; tax‑increment financing was raised but no immediate solution is on the horizon. The fire marshal’s office continues to evaluate single‑stair apartment designs in collaboration with Seattle Fire Department. - General Capital Facilities, Drinking Water, Stormwater, Wastewater, and Waste Resources: For sections without staff present, commissioners noted follow‑up questions. For drinking water, a question about rate‑increase projections was deferred to the Finance Committee meeting on September 19. For waste resources, commissioners asked about alternatives to constructing a new facility, such as renovating the existing one. The decline in cable‑tax revenue was also raised; no alternative revenue source has been identified, and staff acknowledged it is an ongoing concern. Key Outcomes - The subcommittee will forward the revised Questions & Answers (QA) document to the full Planning Commission by September 15, incorporating clarifications from the discussion. - The next meetings are: - September 21, 2026 – Full Planning Commission public hearing (including a retreat at 9:30 a.m., in‑person only). - September 22, 2026 – Final Finance Subcommittee meeting to draft the comment letter to the City Council. - Staff will continue to work on final line‑item adjustments for the CFP and will brief the subcommittee on changes after final adoption.

Note: The agenda and transcript list the meeting as September 15, 2026, but the provided date for this summary is September 16, 2026. The council convened at 6:30 p.m. to approve the agenda, present six ceremonial proclamations, hear public comments, and act on consent and regular agenda items. Key actions included unanimous approval of consent calendar items, adoption of a wastewater capacity fee update, and approval of an updated Integrated Pest Management Policy. Consent Calendar - Item 5A: Approved resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the legal services agreement with Richards Watson Gershon for continued city attorney services. - Item 5B: Approved resolution authorizing purchase of one para-transit bus via a cooperative purchase agreement with Morongo Basin Transit Authority and acceptance of Federal Transit Authority grant funding for FY 2026/27. - Item 5C: Approved resolution establishing maximum unit prices for twelve moderate-income affordable ownership units in the Harvest Glen subdivision. Councilmember Dios asked about the pricing methodology; staff explained the process uses area median income, estimated interest rates, and housing costs to back into a maximum price. No items were pulled from consent; the entire consent calendar passed unanimously. - Item 5D: Adopted the second reading of an ordinance amending Municipal Code chapters 27 (Parks and Open Spaces), 35 (Streets and Sidewalks), and 40 (Zoning) to support the Downtown Outdoor Dining Program. Public Comments & Testimony - Zachariah Okenda and Kate Curry (League of Women Voters of Yolo County): Expressed support for Measure W (Willow Grove development), citing its affordable housing commitments (at least 250 deed-restricted affordable homes, 20 for individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities), sustainability features (all-electric, solar, EV charging, 2,500 new trees, 44 acres of urban agricultural transition), and alignment with league positions on housing and climate action. - Kelly Wilkerson (read by speaker): Requested that the council not film student journalists covering the meeting, citing ethics and student safety. The speaker then criticized Ms. Wilkerson personally, alleging she placed the speaker on a hate watch list and misled students about gender identity. - Nun (QHT healer): Offered alternative perspectives on suicide prevention and cancer, and raised concerns about AI robot wives and school safety. - Leslie Blevins (Yolo County Association of Realtors): Commented on the Harvest Glen affordable housing program, recommending that buyers be pre-qualified before being placed on the list to reduce delays and improve certainty for sellers. Expressed willingness to help improve the process. - Alan Miller: Criticized Councilmember Vitla for past statements describing Israel as committing genocide, alleging the term was adopted from anti-Israel groups and undermines the Jewish state. - Norby Kumagai: Congratulated the Davis Phoenix Coalition on its proclamation and expressed support for Kelly Wilkerson’s work with student journalists. - Resident (Villanova Drive): Requested speed bumps on Villanova Drive due to speeding concerns and noted confusing parking lines downtown that have led to ticketing. - Dan (last name not stated): Continued criticism of Councilmember Vitla's statements on Israel, accusing him of ignorance and prejudice. - Michael Scheer: Encouraged infill development over sprawl, citing state policies and food insecurity. Offered to help collect Tier 2 food for needy residents. - Leila (CalPIRG student): Introduced CalPIRG’s campaigns for fall 2026, including a single-use plastic-free 2028 Olympics, public lands protection, voter registration, and direct service addressing hunger and homelessness. Discussion Items - Item 6 – Public Hearing: Wastewater Capacity Charges (Ordinance & Resolution): Public Works Director Ryan Chapman and Assistant Director Adrienne Heinig presented an update to one-time wastewater capacity fees, last adjusted in 2013. The proposed change establishes an equivalent residential unit (ERU) base for simplified calculation, adds an annual CPI adjustment, and increases single-family residential fees from $6,510 to approximately $9,500 (mid-range compared to other agencies). Revenues are restricted to system expansion. The Fiscal Commission recommended regular five-year reviews. Council held the public hearing (no speakers) and asked clarifying questions about the CPI adjustment and impact on Measure W. The item was approved unanimously. - Item 7 – Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Policy Update: Staff presented revisions to the 2017 policy: replacing a technical advisory committee with an internal coordination team, codifying the council’s previous direction to restrict glyphosate use and ban neonicotinoids (with an indoor-only exception for fleas, bedbugs, etc.), and adding administrative corrections. The Environmental Climate and Justice Commission recommended five-year reviews and public transparency. Councilmember Vitla clarified that the neonicotinoid exemption would apply strictly indoors. The policy was adopted unanimously with that condition. Questions about foxtail management and the Adopt-a-Park program were addressed. - Item 8 – AB 1234 Reporting and Long Range Calendar: No meetings were reported at city expense. City Manager Dunston noted a heavy agenda on December 1, 2026, and will coordinate with the Mayor to reschedule items. The October 20 meeting agenda will include city council administration (selection of mayor/vice mayor, subcommittee review, internal policy updates). No public comment on the long range calendar. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar: Approved unanimously (Items A–D). - Wastewater Capacity Fee Update (Item 6): Introduced ordinance amending DMC Article 33.02 and adopted resolution enacting fee changes effective December 8, 2026, with annual CPI adjustments. Approved unanimously. - Integrated Pest Management Policy Update (Item 7): Adopted resolution approving the revised policy, including the indoor-only neonicotinoid exemption. Approved unanimously. - Adjournment: Councilmember Dios requested adjournment in memory of John Mott Smith, a community contributor. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:08 p.m.

The Citizens Budget Advisory Committee (CBAC) of Golden, Colorado, met on Wednesday, September 16, 2026, from 7:31 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. in the City Council Chambers at 911 10th Street. Chair Loretta Huff presided, with Vice Chair Sandy Curran and members Chris Davell, Marv DeSelm, Dolly Kelly, Peter Luptovic, Karen Oxman, Bethany Thomas, Ross Fraser, Saoirse Charis-Graves, Jim Dale, and Kasia Zak present. Staff included Finance Director Joe Allaire and Interim City Manager Carly Lorentz. The committee reviewed the June 2026 tax report, the 2025 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), and the draft 2027-2028 operating budget, and made a funding recommendation. Finance Director Allaire also introduced new Accountant Jordan Edwards. Consent Calendar - The agenda was amended to add a City Manager update and to defer the CBAC bylaws discussion to October; the agenda was unanimously approved at 7:34 a.m. - The August 19, 2026, regular meeting minutes were unanimously approved at 7:35 a.m. Discussion Items - June 2026 Sales, Use, Lodging, and Marijuana Tax Report: Finance Director Joe Allaire reported generally encouraging mid-year results. Sales tax revenue in June totaled $2,714,329, up $89,157 (3.40%) from June 2025; year-to-date collections reached $12,192,116, up $353,162 (2.98%) and $79,504 above the seasonally adjusted budget. Out-of-city sales rose 7.91%, and South Golden, Colfax, North Golden, and Downtown Golden posted local gains. Use tax revenue totaled $460,270 in June, up $84,656 (22.54%) from June 2025, narrowing the year-to-date decline to 17.15%; audit and compliance activity recovered $466,224 in use tax audit revenue, with net audit revenue of $450,057 after $16,167 in refunds. Lodging tax totaled $328,108 in June, up from $269,078 in May but 4.0% below June 2025; year-to-date lodging tax was $1,208,854, $69,374 below budget and 5.5% below 2025. Marijuana tax brought in $63,082 in June, the highest month shown and 12.4% above June 2025; year-to-date marijuana tax reached $343,607, exceeding budget by $101,804 and 2025 by $47,539 (16.1%). - CBAC marijuana tax funding recommendation: CBAC discussed directing surplus marijuana tax revenue to community assistance. After an amendment, the committee unanimously approved a motion to recommend that $105,000 be given as appropriate to the needy through the marijuana fund for food insecurity and housing insecurity. Discussion recognized that the distribution details would be handled through proper channels, with input from staff such as Sarah. - 2025 ACFR / Audit Review: Joe Allaire highlighted the clean, unmodified audit opinion for fiscal year 2025. The City's total net position increased by approximately $16.6 million to $338.6 million, including $10.8 million from governmental activities and $5.8 million from business-type activities. About $263 million represents net investment in capital assets. The General Fund ended 2025 with a $14.8 million fund balance, of which approximately $11.7 million was unassigned, equal to 31.5% of General Fund expenditures and transfers out. The General Fund balance declined by about $8.7 million, largely due to transfers supporting capital projects. Combined governmental fund balances rose $37.3 million to $94.7 million, with the Sales and Use Tax Capital Improvement Fund at $67.5 million following the issuance of certificates of participation for the new Municipal Building. The Open Space Fund ended the year with a $5.2 million deficit tied to Ulysses Park improvements; the financial statements disclose a $6 million interfund advance from the Water, Cemetery Perpetual Care, and Medical Benefits funds, repayable at 2% interest over 15 years. Finance Department turnover was acknowledged. - Draft 2027-2028 Operating Budget: Allaire presented the working draft as a maintenance-oriented budget. Revenue assumptions include conservative 1.5% sales tax growth, with property taxes projected to decrease in 2027 and remain flat in 2028. The draft projects General Fund balance use of approximately $2.3 million in 2027 and $4 million in 2028, with projected ending fund balances of $13.9 million and $10 million, respectively - above the 20% reserve benchmark but with a narrower margin in 2028. Proposed transfers include $3.6 million to the Fire Fund in 2027 rising to $4.8 million in 2028, and a reduction in the Community Center transfer from $1.2 million to $200,000 per year, using the center's healthy fund balance without planned service reductions. Head count additions currently include two firefighters in 2028 and two grant-funded, time-limited sustainability positions; a possible conversion of a Community Service Officer to a patrol officer for creek enforcement is expected to go to City Council in October. Capital budget work remained in development, with a proposed budget scheduled for City Council on October 13, 2026. Some members expressed support for maintaining public safety and community center services while urging scrutiny of rising police, fire, and legal costs and of the Visit Golden marketing investment. Allaire and Lorentz responded that Visit Golden is being reviewed for transparency, business support, and strategic marketing. - City Manager update: Carly Lorentz reported on Ulysses Park security improvements, including cameras, design changes, and increased patrols; a successful drone show and employee picnic at the park; increased bear activity coinciding with trash contract changes and requests for bear-resistant containers; and start-up difficulties with the new HAWK signal near the Mines campus, including timing issues and traffic congestion. The PROTECT grant for Lena Gulch was in the process of being signed. One attendee raised concerns about REDI meeting transparency, asking that agendas and minutes be posted and meetings possibly streamed. Community Conversations - A committee member shared Golden United activities, including a meal program with Mines students, a mental wellness series, and a joint community dialogue with Mines Kickstart, as well as upcoming nonpartisan election forums. - The meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Key Outcomes - Agenda amended and unanimously approved; August 19, 2026, minutes unanimously approved. - CBAC unanimously recommended allocating $105,000 from the marijuana tax fund for food insecurity and housing insecurity support through appropriate distribution channels. - CBAC requested that the fund balance line be added back to the bottom of fund pages in future budget documents. - Bylaws discussion, including virtual participation, was deferred to the October meeting. - The 2027-2028 budget remains a draft; CBAC will continue its review in October before final recommendations.

The Design Review Commission (DRC) held a study session on two proposed Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE) at 1350 Montego Way (the Ivy project) and 1220 Rossmoor Parkway (the Rossmoor project). Both projects were presented for advisory input only; no formal action was taken. The meetings began at 6:00 pm with rool call (Commissioner Case absent). Consent Calendar - No items were placed on the consent calendar. Public Comments & Testimony - Project a – Ivy RCFE: Joe Perez, a neighbor at 1362 Montego Way, expressed concerns about the removal of mature deodar cedars that screen his backyard from the proposed third story, and asked about potential lighting impacts. The applicant responded they woul work on tree preservation and use downlit (night-sky) fixtures to avoid light trespass. - Project b – Rossmoor RCFE: No public comments were received. Discussion Items - Project a – Ivy Residential Care Facility (1350 Montego Way): Staff presented a proposal for a three-story, 100-unit (70 assisted living +30 memory care) RCFE on a 3.10-acre site. The project includes 82 parking spaces (54 required), a central courtyard, removal of 44 trees (none highly protected), and planting of 217 trees. The applicant, Carissa Savant (O&I Development), re quested density bonus waivers for building height, bike parking, and trash enclosure location. Commission comments focused on: (1) increasing modulation and color contrast on elevations, especially the east facade along Ignacio Valley Road; (2) de-emphasizing the top floor to reduce mass; (3) preserving mature trees where possible; (4) relocating the trash enclosure or providing heavy screening; (5) ensuring me mory care outdoor space is well designed; (6) confirming that all site lighting is downlit; and (7) considering an in situ rendering to show grade changes. - Project b – Rossmoor Residential Care Facility (1220 Rossmoor Parkway): Staff presented a proposal for a two-story, 100-unit (76 assisted living +24 memory care) RCFE on a 4.4-acre site. The project include s71 parking spaces (60 required), two courtyards, removal of 65 trees (including one highly protected oak), and planting of 73 trees. The applicant team (William Crowell, Peter Petragley, Elise Goulet) sought density bonus waivers for building height, public access to outdoor space, parking placement along the frontage, and window recess depth. Commission comments included: (1) enhancing the entry sequence with stronger architectural or landscape identity; (2) providing renderings that show the approach and tree canopy; (3) screening HVAC equipment and conducting an acoustic study; (4) leaning into the mid-century modern theme but toning down the bric colour; (5) reconsidering palm trees in the courtyard due to maintenance, shade, and resident safety concerns, possibly using deciduous trees; and (6) ensuring rendering s match spec ified plants. Key Outcomes - For both projects, the Commission prov ided advisory comments to be forwarded to the Planning Commission for its future review. No votes were taken. Specific next steps include: - Ivy RCFE: Update the arborist report (due end of week), explore tree preservation, and study trash enclosure relocation. - Rossmoor RCFE: Produce additional renderings showing the entry drive sequence and full canopy conditions; evaluate courtyard tree selection for shade and maintenance; refine architectural colours and air conditioning screening. - Staff reminded commissioners of a joint study session with the Planning Commission on October 22, 2026 (Thursday evening) for the General Plan existing conditions report.

The September 16, 2026, Venice city meeting opened as an equipment test rather than with formal agenda business. Staff tested closed captioning and broadcast streaming for the meeting feed, read quasi-judicial hearing time limits aloud to verify captioning, asked viewers to report what they were seeing, confirmed the broadcast looked okay on the receiving end, and ended the test when no one requested additional time. No agenda, minutes, or substantive discussion items are included in the available record. Equipment Test & Broadcast Verification - Staff announced the session was a test for closed captioning and broadcast streaming, noting a delay in the broadcast streaming feed, and asked viewers to email with what they were seeing on their end. - The operator read the quasi-judicial public comment time limits to check captioning: five minutes for residents, property owners, and business owners; two minutes for non-residents or non-owners; ten minutes for designated representatives; 25-minute presentations for staff, applicants, and affected parties; and per-witness limits for cross-examination, redirect, rebuttal, and final comments. The read was partially inconsistent, listing cross-examination as five minutes and then three minutes per witness. - The operator checked with "Tony" and referenced "RN," asking whether the broadcast was looking okay on that end; the feed was reported as looking okay. - Receiving no requests to continue the test, the operator ended the testing session. Key Outcomes - The closed captioning and broadcast streaming test was completed, with the broadcast appearing correctly on the receiving end. - No formal agenda items, public comments, or votes occurred during this portion of the meeting; the available record contains only the pre-meeting testing exchange.