Public Meetings - Folsom, California

The Folsom City Council convened a special meeting at 6:15 PM for closed session (no report), then reconvened at 6:30 PM for the regular meeting. The regular agenda included public comments, two scheduled presentations (Arbor Day proclamation and the Active Transportation Plan), approval of a consent calendar, a joint public hearing with the Folsom Ranch Financing Authority for bond issuance, discussion and votes on a fiber optic network agreement and allocation of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, consideration of a response to a Brown Act demand letter, and city manager/council reports. Consent Calendar - Unanimously approved the following items: minutes from March 8 and March 22, 2022 meetings (Items 3–5); food and beverage concession agreement at Lembi Community Park with Folsom Athletic Association (Resolution 10828); amendment to shelter services agreement with Sacramento SPCA (Resolution 10829); Riley Street Sidewalk Feasibility Study contract amendment and fund appropriation (Resolution 10832); reduced tipping fee agreement with Sacramento County (Resolution 10833); household hazardous waste collection program agreement (Resolution 10834); building valuation data update (Resolution 10836); and shaded fuel break and ladder fuel removal contract with Brightview Tree Care Services (Resolution 10837). Public Comments & Testimony - Business from the Floor (non‑agenda items): Jean Schumann and Beth Croton thanked the council for a $5,000 grant to Folsom Alliance for the Unhoused, detailing services provided (medical supplies, outreach, 13,000 miles driven, assistance for 82 unhoused individuals). Sharon Kindle advocated for activating the Hinkle Creek Nature Center, noting a prior $740,000 grant and 12 years of underuse. Janine Ferrer, on behalf of feral cat volunteers, requested removal of anonymous posts on the C Click Fix app that reportedly led to harm of cats; she also noted similar stalking of unhoused volunteers. Janet Black supported the nature center. Margie Donovan raised concerns about SACRT Go paratransit fare restrictions and discrimination. - During ARPA discussion (Item 15): Michael Reynolds (Heifer president) supported enforcement funding for historic district parking. Kathleen Cole, Jim Snook, James Via (shuttle entrepreneur), Jerry Brunell (FHDA treasurer), and Will Kempton (River District Organizing Committee) spoke in favor of historic district funding, shuttle purchase, and economic development plans. Discussion Items - Arbor Day Proclamation (Item 1): Mayor Howell proclaimed April 23, 2022 as Arbor Day; Folsom’s 16th year as Tree City USA. Approved unanimously. - Active Transportation Plan (ATP) Presentation (Item 2): Staff and consultant Aaron David presented the draft plan, summarizing public feedback (safety, speeding, crosswalks, trail connections). The plan recommends 300 projects; high‑priority projects total $88 million. Councilmembers discussed speed, bicycle boulevards, and prioritization. No vote was taken; public comment period open through April 24. - Fiber Network Agreement – SiFi Networks (Item 14): Public Works Director Mark Rackovan presented an updated agreement adding a maintenance funding clause. Public speaker George Condon raised concerns about construction costs and pavement stability. SiFi’s Scott Bradshaw addressed funding (backed by a pension fund with $690B AUM) and construction methods. Councilmember Aquino voted no; motion passed 4–1. - ARPA Funds Allocation (Item 15): CFO Stacey Tamani outlined the remaining $6.2 million in ARPA funds. Staff recommended broad categories: $3M for facilities/infrastructure, $1.3M for economic development (including River District plan, historic district shuttles, parking management), $800K for general government, $540K for public safety (including a ladder truck), and $450K unallocated. Councilmembers debated the shuttle bus funding ($200K) and enforcement; Councilmember Chalamcherla requested delay for public input but motion to approve as presented carried 4–1 (Chalamcherla dissenting). - Brown Act Demand Response (Item 17): Council unanimously approved sending a letter responding to a demand from Scott Rafferty regarding alleged Brown Act violations, affirming ongoing compliance. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar: Approved unanimously. - Arbor Day Proclamation: Approved. - Folsom Ranch Financing Authority – Bonds: Resolutions 10835 and 008‑FRFA (authorizing up to $17 million in Special Tax Revenue Bonds for CFD No. 23, Improvement Area No.1) approved unanimously. - Fiber Network Agreement – Resolution 10838: Approved 4–1 (Aquino opposed). - ARPA Fund Allocation: Approved 4–1 (Chalamcherla opposed); staff directed to use the standard allowance for revenue loss and allocate funds within the broad categories presented. Ladder truck funding was prioritized due to supply chain concerns. - Bidwell Place Affordable Housing Grant (Item 16): Continued to May 10, 2022 special meeting. - Brown Act Response – Resolution: Approved unanimously. - City Manager Reports: Noted upcoming events (Spring Extravaganza April 16, Community Service Day Sept 17, battery collection program collecting over 36,000 pounds in 2021). - Council Comments: Councilmembers reported on regional board meetings (STA, Air Quality Management District, RT) and infrastructure updates; urged safer driving.

The Folsom City Council reconvened its regular meeting on Tuesday, March 22, 2022, at approximately 6:30 p.m. The meeting included public comments, presentations of a proclamation and a resolution, consent calendar approvals, a joint city council meeting, city manager reports, and council member comments. The council adopted an ordinance finalizing the transition to by-district elections and adjourned in memory of a community member. Consent Calendar - Councilmember Aquino pulled item No. 4 (a report on the General Plan Housing Element implementation) for discussion. She requested additional specificity regarding the cultural resources inventory, noise reduction programs, wildfire prevention (noting 47 human-caused fires in open space in 2021 but none since closure was implemented), and suggested linking the corporation yard study with the river district study. Staff agreed to include more quantifiable information in future reports. The item was approved unanimously (5-0). - Items 3 through 14, with the exception of item 4, were approved on a single motion by Councilmember Aquino, seconded by Councilmember Kozlowski. The roll call was unanimous. Public Comments & Testimony - Chandra Vinicoda, representing a nonprofit spiritual organization, invited the council to an event in Orangevale from April 12–16, 2022, and handed out informational materials. - Judy Alexander, on behalf of the Heart of Folsom Board of Directors, expressed gratitude for the city’s $15,000 allocation in the 2021–22 budget for transitional housing. She reported that the funds paid four months of rent at Bidwell Studios, housing three women and one man in clean-and-sober apartments with mentoring support. She also noted the involvement of 14 faith communities, four restaurants, Rotary clubs, and over 80 volunteers. She requested continued support from ARPA funds and the upcoming fiscal year budget. Discussion Items - Proclamation – National Public Safety Telecommunications Week (April 10–16, 2022): Mayor Howell read the proclamation, highlighting that in 2021 Folsom dispatchers handled over 89,000 telephone calls, dispatched more than 55,402 events, and answered 99% of 911 calls within 15 seconds. Dispatcher of the Year Brynn Miller and the police chief accepted the proclamation. - Resolution of Commendation – Folsom High School Bulldog Varsity Football Team: Councilmember Kozlowski read the resolution recognizing the team’s 2021 CIF State Division 1-AA runner-up finish, their defeat of De La Salle High School (a Sac-Joaquin Section first), and their 10th section championship. Head coach Paul Doherty (named Sacramento Bee Coach of the Year) and several staff members were honored. The resolution was adopted unanimously. Key Outcomes - The consent calendar (items 3–14, with item 4 discussed and approved) and the joint city council consent calendar (for the Folsom Redevelopment Successor Agency, Folsom Public Financing Authority, Folsom Ranch Financing Authority, and South of 50 Parking Authority) were both approved unanimously. - The council adopted an ordinance finalizing the transition to by-district elections, with Council Districts 1, 3, and 5 to be elected in 2022 and Districts 2 and 4 in 2024. The ordinance will take effect on April 22, 2022, after a 30-day waiting period. - The meeting was adjourned in memory of Jesse Ballard, a former guest of the Heart Winter Shelter, at the request of Councilmember Aquino. City Manager Reports (Informational) - The draft Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is open for public comment through April 24, 2022, with public hearings scheduled for March 24 (Traffic Safety Committee), April 5 (Parks and Recreation Commission), and April 12 (City Council). - Registration for Fun Factory and Kindergarten Readiness opens March 29, 2022. - A community survey by McGuire Research and Godby Research is underway; residents contacted are encouraged to respond. - The League of California Cities Sacramento Valley Division membership luncheon will be held on March 25, 2022.

This regular meeting of the Folsom City Council on March 8, 2022, addressed multiple items including district elections, a controversial home occupation ordinance amendment, public comments on a group home, and a proclamation. The meeting featured extensive public testimony, particularly on the home occupation ordinance, which involved firearm sales from residences. Consent Calendar - Items 2 through 9 were approved en bloc except Item 3, which was pulled for discussion. - Item 3: Resolution No. 10804 designating a landmark tree was approved unanimously (5-0) after brief discussion and public comment from Bruce Klein in support. Public Comments & Testimony - Business from the Floor: - Michael Harris and Sarah Norberg urged the council to consider adding Juneteenth as a city recognized holiday, with Harris describing it as an American holiday tied to red, white, and blue. - Hubbard Boose (resident on Prospector Court) expressed opposition to the placement of a group home for alcohol and drug abuse at 130 Prospector Court, citing traffic, safety, and lack of neighborhood notification. He criticized the planning department's approval process. - Margie Donovan (online) requested postponement of the zoning agenda item due to inaccessible web materials, citing violations of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and ADA. She recommended hiring an accessibility specialist. - Public Hearing on Home Occupation Ordinance (Item 11): - Over 30 speakers presented, with the vast majority opposing the allowance of firearm and ammunition sales as home occupations. Key points included safety concerns, proximity to schools and daycares, fire risks from ammunition manufacturing, and that no other nearby jurisdiction permits such sales. Several speakers urged grandfathering existing businesses and prohibiting future sales. Supporters argued that current businesses have operated without incident, are heavily regulated by federal and state agencies, and serve a legitimate market. A few speakers requested that the Historic District Commission (HDC) review the ordinance due to unique parking and density issues in the historic district. - Public Hearing on District Elections (Item 10): - Cheryl Davis and other speakers argued that the proposed map (Preferred Map No. 2) violates the Fair Maps Act, gerrymanders districts to benefit incumbents, and does not create a strong influence district for Asian voters. Muriel Bronsteen and Scott Rafferty (attorney) urged the council to submit the map to a court for approval, citing the city's departure from the safe harbor deadline. Discussion Items - Item 10: By-District Election Process (Ordinance 1324) - City Attorney Stephen Wan introduced the ordinance formally establishing by-district elections under the California Voting Rights Act. The ordinance uses Preferred Map No. 2, with Districts 1, 3, 5 up for election in November 2022 and Districts 2, 4 in 2024. No councilmember terms are cut short. - Public testimony raised concerns about gerrymandering and legal compliance. The council approved the first reading unanimously (5-0). - Item 11: Home Occupation Ordinance (Ordinance 1325) - Principal Planner Desmond Parrington presented the proposed ordinance, which updates Chapter 17.61. Key changes include a prohibited uses list (initially including firearms, ammunition, tattoo parlors, manufacturing), but the Planning Commission removed several of these. The ordinance would allow up to four firearm sales per customer per day (down from no current limit), require alarm systems, and maintain two levels of appeal. The fire department raised concerns about ammunition reloading under fire code. - Council discussed the need to add ammunition manufacture/reload to the prohibited list due to fire code violations. Councilmember Aquino moved to make that change and to send the ordinance to the Historic District Commission for feedback on potential district-specific provisions. The motion also clarified that appeals to the City Council should be preserved. The motion passed 5-0. - Item 12: Response to Brown Act Demand Letter - The council approved a proposed reply letter to Scott Rafferty's alleged noncompliance with the Brown Act, without public comment and unanimously (5-0). Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar (Items 2, 4-9): Approved unanimously (5-0). - Landmark Tree Resolution (Item 3): Approved unanimously (5-0). Councilmember Aquino requested proactive nominations for landmark trees on city and private property. - Ordinance 1324 (District Elections): Approved first reading 5-0. Second reading scheduled for March 22, 2022. - Ordinance 1325 (Home Occupations): Council voted 5-0 to (1) add ammunition manufacture and reload to the prohibited uses list, (2) modify appeal language to include the Historic District Commission where applicable, and (3) refer the proposed ordinance to the Historic District Commission for feedback before final action. - Ordinance 1325 – Firearm Sales: The council did not finalize the status of firearm sales at this meeting; the issue will return after HDC review. - Item 12 (Brown Act Response): Approved 5-0.

The Folsom City Council convened a special workshop on March 8, 2022, to continue discussions on developing a strategy to close the city's projected future funding gap and to initiate strategic planning for the next five years. The meeting included financial updates, compensation reviews, public safety overtime analysis, and two strategic planning exercises (goal-setting and SWOT analysis). No public comments were made. Council gave staff direction to proceed with community engagement and to return with a set of visionary statements for the strategic plan. Consent Calendar - None. The meeting was a workshop with no consent items. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public addressed the council. Discussion Items Financial Overview and Funding Gap - Stacey Tamani, CFO, provided a recap of the city's fiscal picture. Key points: - The city faces a projected future funding gap because revenues (especially sales tax) are growing slower than expenses. - Current obligations are met, but there are millions in unfunded/underfunded deferred needs. For the upcoming FY 22-23 budget, departments submitted $25 million in additional requests, including 53 new positions, but typically less than 20% of top requests can be funded. - Property tax and sales tax together account for 61% of general fund revenue. Sales tax growth is flattening due to shifts in consumer behavior (e-commerce, services, digital goods), and property tax growth is modest and accounted for in projections. - Over the next five years, the gap between projected revenues and the cost of current service levels is expected to grow, potentially requiring service reductions by 2027. - Of the projected $39 million in one-time needs and $20 million in annual needs (within 5 years), $233 million in needs beyond 5 years; 102 new positions are requested. Blue-highlighted items relate to the Folsom Plan Area south of Highway 50. - Tom Adams, sales tax consultant (via phone), explained that nationwide trends (shift to services/digital, e-commerce, and reduced buying power) are affecting sales tax. Folsom's sales tax mix leans toward retail and transportation, and online sales allocation changes (e.g., Amazon via county pool) have reduced local receipts. - Council members asked about strategies to increase sales tax, including land use rezoning, focusing on existing strengths, and targeting businesses with higher sales tax generation. Staff agreed to provide data by business category to inform recruitment. Employee Compensation - Alison Garcia, HR Manager, reviewed how compensation packages are established via regional surveys, targeting middle to high-middle range. Benefits include education incentives, tuition reimbursement, uniform allowances, deferred compensation, and car allowances for executive management. Employee retirement contributions are fully paid by employees; retiree health benefits and longevity pay have been eliminated for new hires. - Council requested a detailed breakdown of vehicle, tech, and cell allowances with annual cost totals, to be provided later. Fire Department Overtime and Response Times - Chief Ken Cassano explained that overtime often exceeds budget due to: - COVID-related absences (contact tracing, family leave). At one point, over half of personnel were off. - MOU provision allowing 15% of shift to be off (3 positions per day), requiring mandatory overtime to fill. - Mutual aid (OES) deployments, which are partially reimbursed but still net cost to city. - In FY 2021, overtime hours reached 30,994 at a cost of $3.49 million; $1.1 million was OES-related. Reimbursements are less than full cost. - Average personnel off daily was 4.88 in FY 2021. To maintain staffing, a medic unit was temporarily closed twice. - Three limited-term firefighter positions were added to provide relief; neighboring agencies often overstaff to cover leave. - Response times: average turnout+travel for emergency calls is consistent, but total incidents are rising. From October 2019 onward (new software), data shows increasing call volume. - Council discussed the changing culture (younger firefighters seeking work-life balance) and the challenge of recruitment/retention (resignations to Roseville, Oakland, Contra Costa). Police Department Overtime and Response Times - Chief Rick Hillman reported that the department has 79 sworn positions, with 62% in patrol. Current vacancy rate 13% (10 positions). Overtime budget is $510,000 for FY 21-22; as of the meeting, $810,000 had been spent, but $474,000 is reimbursable through grants and mutual aid (Dixie and Caldor fires). - Average response time for all calls is 12 minutes; for emergency calls, 7 minutes. Response times have increased over recent years. - Staffing: optimal patrol is 5 officers per shift, but often only 4 are available, leaving the South of 50 area uncovered. Officer per thousand residents ratio is 0.9, compared to regional average of 1.4. - The department is hiring laterals to fill vacancies and hopes to implement an online reporting system to reduce non-emergency calls. Strategic Planning Exercises - City Manager Elaine Andersen led two exercises: 1. Five-Year Goals: Each council member provided up to five desired accomplishments by 2027. Common themes included financial stability (15%+ reserves), public safety staffing, river district master plan, Folsom Boulevard revitalization, economic development (especially tech/healthcare), public-private partnerships, a new events center, and enhanced bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure. Council Member Kozlowski's submissions were read in absentia. 2. SWOT Analysis: Council identified strengths (safe community, skilled staff, engaged residents, lakes/history), weaknesses (affordable housing lack, risk of complacency, understaffing, aging facilities), opportunities (river district, vacant land, technology, state parks partnerships), and threats (budget deficit trajectory, unfunded mandates, recruitment/retention, climate change). Staff also shared their SWOT input. Key Outcomes - Council gave consensus direction to staff to: 1. Incorporate community feedback (via polling/engagement) into the strategic planning process. 2. From council and community input, distill a set of visionary statements to become a policy agenda. 3. Develop specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-bound (SMART) goals and objectives, subject to available resources. - Council also agreed to discuss potential sales tax measure for the 2022 ballot in a future meeting (within 30 days). City Attorney clarified the deadline for council adoption of a revenue measure is August 9, 2022, with submission to the county elections office by July 18–August 1. Some council members suggested aligning with a presidential election year (2024) for higher success, but no decision was made. - Staff will provide a detailed breakdown of vehicle/tech/cell allowance costs by the next meeting. - The meeting adjourned at 3:58 PM.

The Folsom City Council met on February 22, 2022, to conduct regular business including a continued public hearing on voting districts, creation of an ad hoc subcommittee on city properties, and a commendation for the Folsom Jr. Bulldogs. The council voted unanimously to adopt a new district map and set the election sequencing, and also approved a subcommittee to inventory city properties. Consent Calendar - Items 1 through 12 were approved unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Michael Harris spoke in celebration of Black History Month and highlighted local history. - Jim Harville (Placerville & Sacramento Valley Railroad) reported that steam locomotive operations are suspended due to lack of crossing protections south of Highway 50; urged council to break the impasse. - Jerry Brunot and If Stasios Papas (locomotive owner) supported the railroad’s efforts and emphasized the need for crossing upgrades. - On item 15, Deborah Grassell and Terry Sorensen requested that residents be included on any subcommittee, expressing concern about bias toward developers. - Robert Goss and Bruce Klein volunteered their service and recommended broadening representation. - On item 13, speakers urged the council to follow the Fair Maps Act and not split communities of interest like South of 50 and Prairie Oaks; some requested more time, but the city attorney clarified statutory deadlines prevented further delays. - Scott Rafferty and others noted that no map is perfect but urged adoption of map two. - Danielle Savalingham (South of 50 resident) opposed splitting her community and requested a map that keeps South of 50 whole. Discussion Items - Commendation (Item 16): The council presented a resolution of commendation to the Folsom Jr. Bulldogs for earning the 2021 Excellence in Academics and Athletics Award. 32 students with a GPA of 3.0 or higher were recognized. - Nomination for Citizens' Advisory Committee (Item 14): The council considered two applicants and unanimously nominated Jim Silva. - Ad Hoc Subcommittees (Item 15): Councilmember Aquino proposed creating one subcommittee to inventory and evaluate city-owned properties, rather than three. After public input, the council adopted Resolution 10809 establishing an ad hoc subcommittee composed of two councilmembers, two Parks & Recreation commissioners, staff, a Greater Folsom Partnership representative, and five public members (selected by the councilmembers), with a report due by July 1, 2022. Resolutions 10810 and 10811 (retail recruitment and land planning economics) were not approved. - Continued Public Hearing on Voting Districts (Item 13): After the fourth public hearing, the council was required to select one of two draft maps published for seven days. Councilmembers debated the merits of each, with some preferring map one (splitting South of 50) and others map two (keeping South of 50 whole). The council voted 5-0 to adopt Preferred Map Number 2. The council also approved sequencing: Districts 1, 3, and 5 will hold elections in November 2022, and Districts 2 and 4 in November 2024, with subsequent four-year terms. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar approved (items 1-12). - Nomination of Jim Silva to the Citizens' Advisory Committee for Folsom Prison (unanimous). - Adoption of Resolution 10809 creating ad hoc subcommittee on city properties; other two subcommittees tabled (not approved). - Adoption of Preferred Map Number 2 for by-district elections (5-0). - Approval of election sequencing as described (5-0). - City Manager Reports covered water system rehabilitation, fireworks sales, swim lessons, and home business ordinance updates. - Council Comments included condolences for a fatal accident, condemnation of hate crime vandalism, congratulations to the railroad, and recognition of community volunteers.

This special meeting of the Folsom City Council was a continued public hearing (No. 4) under the California Voting Rights Act to transition the city from at-large to by-district elections. The council discussed modifications to a draft preferred map, heard public testimony, and ultimately voted to continue the hearing to February 22, 2022, with two maps for final consideration. Public Comments & Testimony - Teresa Garcia (resident): Opposed splitting South of 50, arguing neighborhoods are communities of interest and should not be divided. - Bruce Klein (resident): Criticized the “Cimarron/Willow Creek triangle” attached to District 2, saying it is not contiguous with historic district or north of the river; urged following major streets as boundaries and requested additional public comment on sequencing. - Scott Rafferty (resident): Argued the process lacked transparency and public input; said the council’s language about residents (“trading,” “swapping”) was inappropriate; noted the safe harbor deadline had passed; urged collaboration. - Cheryl Davis (Empire Ranch resident): Stated the map appeared designed to protect incumbents rather than communities of interest, splitting several neighborhoods; noted that communities of interest shouldn’t include political parties or incumbents as per city staff reports. - Barbara Leary (resident): Urged keeping communities of interest intact, mentioned Natoma Station, Lexington Hills, and Briggs Ranch as long-standing communities; expressed concern about splitting historic district. - Bob Holderness (resident): Defended the council, saying the purpose is not to eliminate incumbents; said the people of Folsom elected them and they should be given a chance to continue serving. - Robert Goss (resident): Supported removing the “triangle” from District 2 and using major streets like Silverhorn as boundaries; suggested modest population adjustments to balance growth. - Peggy Blair (resident): Noted that Esplanade (part of the Parkway) had been moved out of District 5 and asked to keep it with that district. - Sharon Kindle (resident): Asked that the public have more opportunity to comment on all three viable maps, not just two, and noted the difficulty of attending daytime meetings. Discussion Items - City Manager’s Statement: The city manager clarified that during the February 8 meeting she read aloud texts from residents, and she now identified the sources: Bruce Klein (population/demographics/party split), Robert Goss (Knowles area), and Lorraine Pajoni (Coventry/MacAdoo/Willow Springs). She asked the city attorney to confirm no Brown Act violation; the attorney confirmed no violation because the meeting was a duly noticed public hearing. - Demographer’s Presentation: Doug Yokom showed the draft map and proposed two cosmetic changes: (1) move Folsom Lake from District 2 to District 5 (zero population change), and (2) move 11 people from District 2 to District 1. Council approved both changes. - Boundary Adjustments: Council debated several amendments: - Reversed a previous carve-out between Districts 3 and 4, restoring a straight line along the UP alignment (supported by Mayor Howell and Councilmember Chalamcherla). - Discussed whether to split the area south of Highway 50 into two districts. Councilmembers Aquino and Kozlowski favored splitting to allow multiple representation as the area grows; Councilmember Chalamcherla supported splitting due to rapid growth. Councilmember Rodriguez expressed concern about dividing neighborhoods like Lexington Hills and Prairie Oaks. - Councilmember Kozlowski proposed a three-way trade (moving Creekside area from 5 to 1, then adjusting between 3 and 5, and 1 and 4) to clean up boundaries, but the resulting population deviations were too large (one district 13% under, another 15% over). The council abandoned that attempt. - Later, after further public comment, the council attempted additional tweaks using Glen Drive, Silverhorn, and other boundaries, but these also created illegal population deviations. The demographer noted the challenge of balancing population while respecting neighborhood boundaries. - Final Approach: The council agreed to move forward with two maps: (1) the draft map with the two cosmetic changes and the reversal of the 3-4 carve-out, and (2) a version with additional adjustments. Councilmember Kozlowski proposed to swap District 1 and 2 numbers on the first map so that odd-numbered districts (1, 3, 5) would be elected in 2022, and even-numbered (2, 4) in 2024. The city attorney confirmed the sequencing could be finalized at the next meeting. Key Outcomes - Motion Approved (3-2): Councilmember Kozlowski moved, seconded by Councilmember Rodriguez, to continue Public Hearing No. 4 to February 22, 2022, and to present two maps: (1) the draft map with the cosmetic changes, reversal of the 3-4 carve-out, and with District 1 and 2 swapped, and (2) a version with additional adjustments. The motion also included that the sequencing recommendation (odd-numbered districts in 2022) be posted for public review. Vote: Councilmembers Rodriguez, Kozlowski, and Howell in favor; Councilmembers Aquino and Chalamcherla opposed (Chalamcherla stated he wanted to allow a full week of public review after the final map is chosen). - Next Steps: The council will meet in person on February 22, 2022, at the regular evening meeting to select one final map and adopt an ordinance. The two maps will be posted for seven days prior to the meeting. The city clerk will provide large-format maps to council members in advance. - No Additional Meetings: The city attorney clarified that if the council were to make changes to either map at the February 22 meeting, a further hearing would be required, which would push the timeline past the legal deadline. The council acknowledged this constraint.

This special workshop was held on February 11, 2022, from 1:00 PM to approximately 4:00 PM, to begin developing a strategy to close the city's future funding gap. City staff presented detailed financial information, potential solutions, and a proposed community engagement plan. The council provided direction to proceed with community outreach, explore a sales tax measure, and form ad hoc committees on specific economic development topics. Public Comments & Testimony - Lorette Hedinger: Noted that the station master's house (on the Y property) is on the National Register of Historic Places and stressed the importance of preserving historic district ambiance in any redevelopment. - Robert Goss: Encouraged bold vision, said Folsom risks losing its regional position. Suggested documenting past cost controls, asking what residents/visitors should say about Folsom (e.g., "most fun small city"), and creating specific plans (not just master plans) for the central business district. He advocated for accelerating projects like the river district, Johnny Cash Trail, and a national-level museum. - Bruce Klein: Questioned why Folsom received less ARPA funding than initially promised. Argued a sales tax measure would fail without a clear, specific use and a robust strategic planning process. Suggested exploring property sales/rentals for revenue. Emphasized the need for a vision residents can buy into. Discussion Items Financial Presentation & Projections - City Manager Elaine introduced the workshop as a first step in strategic planning. The city is fiscally sound now but faces a structural deficit due to slower revenue growth (especially sales tax) versus expense growth (4.5% annually). - CFO Stacey Tamani presented: - General fund: $21M unrestricted balance expected end of FY22. - Major revenue sources: property tax (34%, $33M), sales tax (27%, $26M). Property tax grows 5%/year, but sales tax growth projected at only 2.5% due to e-commerce, changing consumer behavior, and reduced buying power. - Citywide budget: $220M; general fund employees reduced from 452 (FY08) to 352 (FY22) – a 36% reduction per 1,000 residents (6.81 to 4.39). - Unfunded needs: $39M in one-time costs, $20.5M in annual costs over next 5 years, plus 102 additional positions. - Five-year forecast shows a deficit of at least $2.3M by FY27, growing. - The Folsom Plan Area (south of 50) has net-zero effect on general fund; property tax increases are offset by required service costs. - Councilmember YK Chalamcherla asked for breakdown of new staff needed for the plan area vs. general service levels. Potential Solutions - ARPA Funds: City received $8.4M (not $15.3M as originally expected). Already allocated $2.2M; council indicated interest in $560,000 for master plans. ARPA is one-time; cannot be used for ongoing needs. - Revenue Enhancements: Rate/fee increases (e.g., 10% parks and rec fee increase yields $266,000/year). Raising ambulance fees unlikely due to changed usage. Planning/development fees require nexus study. Caution about tipping points (people leaving for cheaper options). - Sales Tax Increase: A half-cent increase could yield $11M/year; full cent $22M. About 40% of sales tax is paid by non-residents. Neighboring cities (Roseville, Rancho Cordova, Sacramento, Davis, West Sacramento) already have such increases. - Service Cuts: Limited further cuts possible; city is already lean. Eliminating programs would require strategic community input on priorities. - Economic Development: Communications Director Christine Brainerd outlined strategies: retail recruitment, innovation district, workforce development, tourism, public-private partnerships (central business district, river district), leveraging healthcare cluster, pursuing grants. These are long-term and won't solve immediate gap. - City Manager noted that economic development is table stakes for high-performing cities but cannot grow out of a deficit. Community Engagement Plan - Proposed two-pronged approach: educate community and seek informed input. - Tools: statistically valid polling (consultant), online simulation tool "Balancing Act" (allows users to adjust service levels and see tax impact), "Flash Vote" for quick surveys. Also websites, social media, mailers, community forums. - Goal: determine community priorities and appetite for solutions (including sales tax). Key Outcomes - Direction to Staff: - Proceed immediately with community engagement process, including statistically valid polling and use of digital tools, to gather input on service priorities, revenue preferences, and vision for Folsom. - Explore formation of three ad hoc council committees: one on underutilized/underutilized city properties (activation for revenue), one on retail/commercial recruitment, and one on economics of land use planning (to inform zoning code update and maximize return on investment). Staff to bring resolution to February 22 council meeting. - Hold a public forum on March 8 (in-person, if health order allows) to present a summary of the financial challenges and seek community vision and input. - Sales Tax: Council consensus to include exploration of a sales tax measure as part of the community engagement. Timing (2022 vs. 2024) will be tested through polling. Councilmember Aquino expressed caution about proceeding without a fully baked vision; Mayor Howell and others emphasized need for robust engagement to explain the problem and proposed uses. - Additional Information Requests: - Staff to provide breakdown of which new positions are needed for Plan Area growth vs. general service levels. - Provide comparison of city salaries/benefits (including perks like cell phone, vehicle allowances) to regional peers. - Provide analysis of overtime costs, particularly in public safety. - Provide documentation of past cost-control measures to counter claims that cuts are still possible. - Next steps: Staff to prepare for February 22 council meeting (daytime) to formally establish ad hoc committees and continue planning for March 8 community forum. Community engagement process to launch immediately.

The Folsom City Council held a special meeting at 6:15 PM, immediately followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 PM on February 8, 2022. Both meetings were conducted virtually via Zoom due to the Sacramento County Health Order. The special meeting consisted of a closed session regarding existing litigation (Kalei Silva v. City of Folsom), with no action reported. The regular meeting included a financial report, consent calendar actions, a public hearing on district map selection under the California Voting Rights Act, and public comments. The council discuss and adjusted a district map before continuing the public hearing to a special meeting on February 15, 2022. Consent Calendar - Approved January 11, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes - Approved January 25, 2022 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes - Ordinance No. 1323 – Second reading and adoption of an uncodified ordinance approving Amendment No. 3 to the Tier 1 Development Agreement with Lennar Homes of California LLC for the Russell Ranch Phase 2 Lots 24-32 Project. - Resolution No. 10792 – Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Program Supplement Agreement for the Highway Safety Improvement Program Cycle 10 Traffic Safety Project. - Resolution No. 10793 – Authorizing a design and consulting services contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Highway Safety Improvement Program Cycle 10 Traffic Safety Project and appropriation of funds. - Resolution No. 10794 – Authorizing a design and consulting services contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Blue Ravine Road Pavement Condition Investigation and Rehabilitation Analysis. - Resolution No. 10795 – Revising the boundary of the Pilot Residential Permit Parking Program in the Historic District (pulled for discussion; see below). - Resolution No. 10796 – Authorizing a construction contract with Doug VeerKamp General Engineering Inc. for 405 Natoma Station Drive Exterior ADA Upgrades and appropriation of funds. - Resolution No. 10797 – Resolution making findings to continue teleconferencing options for public meetings under AB 361. - Resolution No. 10798 – Authorizing an additional appropriation in the Police Department operating budget for the purchase of police equipment. - Item 7 (Highway Safety Improvement Program design contract) was moved to the February 22 agenda. Public Comments & Testimony - Mike Reynolds (Hefra) requested that item 8 (Resolution 10795 on parking permits) be pulled from the consent calendar, noting an earlier offline resolution had been satisfied. He also asked for clarification on recusal rules for the Historic District Commission, referencing FPPC conflict-of-interest subsections and stating that a proximity recusal is not an option under those rules, requesting documentation to support what he termed “far stretched” recusals. - Joe Galliardi clarified that his request for parking permits was for guest passes only for nine residences with Sutter Street addresses but vehicular access via alleys, not for resident permits or new restricted parking. He stated he was not “going to the mat” on the issue. - Mike Reynolds (second comment during consent discussion) noted that the parking work group felt issuing guest permits to those nine residents would not corrupt the pilot data but would require dealing with optics of potential similar requests. - Scott Rafferty argued that the area south of Highway 50 is a community of interest, criticized the council for not respecting neighborhoods, and claimed the process disadvantaged the Asian community. He referenced a post by Bruce Klein and stated the city is past the safe harbor date, suggesting court action is likely. - Cheryl Davis (Empire Ranch resident) supported starting with the Klein map but expressed a desire to keep the historic district separate from American River Canyon and unite South of 50 as a community of interest. She also asked later whether adjustments made to protect an incumbent council member constituted gerrymandering. - George (Modella) supported the Ferrari map because it splits South of 50 and believes it is the most intelligent layout. - Robert Goss emphasized that South of 50 must be a community of distinction with its own representation due to unique development issues. - Muriel Brownstein Dooley supported the Dooley map, citing contiguity, communities of interest, easily definable boundaries, and compactness under the Fair Maps Act; she opposed splitting Natoma Station and South of 50. - Bruce Klein objected to linking Briggs Ranch/Willow Creek with north of the river, asked for more time to review the map, and suggested a special meeting if significant tweaks are made; he also noted the final map should be public before a vote. - Dolly Soon supported keeping South of 50 together as a community of interest. - John Wright supported the Dooley map, citing community interest for South of 50 and noting that Briggs Ranch has more in common with north of the river due to similar lot sizes. - Cheryl Davis (second comment) asked whether the last-minute adjustment to district three to protect Councilmember Chalamcherla was gerrymandering; the City Attorney replied it was not, as the council must also consider citizen input and the desire to elect all five members. - Scott Rafferty (second comment) accused the council of disregarding legal standards, neighborhoods, and the Fair Maps Act, stated the map would be challenged in court, and called the process “an attack on California democracy.” - Bruce Klein (second comment) expressed frustration at the late hour, said the map appeared to preserve incumbents, and again urged a special meeting to allow public review. Discussion Items - City Manager’s Financial Report (Item 1) – CFO Stacy Tomani presented the audited Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for FY 2021, which received an unmodified opinion with no findings. She also presented the second quarter projections for FY 2021-22. Key points: General fund revenues were projected at $98 million, expenditures at $96.5 million, resulting in a $1.5 million increase to the unassigned fund balance (to $21 million, or 21.4% of expenditures). Property tax projections were $500,000 over budget; sales tax was $2 million over budget due to faster recovery. The city received $1 million in CARES Act reimbursement in FY 2021 and appropriated $2.2 million in ARPA funds for FY 2022. Salary and benefits were $1.4 million over budget primarily due to fire department overtime (partially reimbursed by Cal OES). Community development contract costs offset by increased revenue. Capital expenses in the water and wastewater funds were delayed to future years due to project timing. The risk management fund was drawn down to $4.8 million to stabilize insurance costs, but will need replenishment. Councilmembers asked about expenditure increases from FY 2021 to FY 2022 ($89M to $98M) and were told it reflected planned salary/benefit increases and unfreezing of positions. Questions were also raised about delayed capital projects; Environmental & Water Resources Director Marcus Yasutaki explained projects are shifting to the next fiscal year due to environmental requirements and design schedules. - Item 8 – Pilot Residential Permit Parking Program (Resolution 10795) – Councilmember Kozlowski pulled the item. Discussion centered on whether to issue guest parking permits to nine residences (lofts on Sutter Street with alley access) without changing the pilot district boundary. Councilmembers Kozlowski, Rodriguez, Aquino, and Howell supported issuing guest permits; Councilmember Chalamcherla voted no, preferring to complete the pilot as-is. The motion passed 4-1. Staff was instructed to allow those nine residents to request guest passes. The boundary remained unchanged. - Public Hearing No. 4 – Voting District Map Selection (Item 12) – This was the fourth of five required public hearings under the California Voting Rights Act. City Attorney Stephen Wong and demographer Doug Yochum (National Demographics Corporation) presented eight focus maps and two new draft maps (NDC 201 and 202) based on council direction. The maps were evaluated for population deviation (must be under 10%), contiguity, communities of interest, and compactness. The council narrowed discussion to maps that either split or kept together the area south of Highway 50. Councilmembers expressed different views: Rodriguez preferred splitting south of 50 (maps with two districts); Aquino preferred keeping it together; Kozlowski and Howell initially favored keeping it together but later indicated flexibility; Chalamcherla supported splitting. After public comment, the council began live tweaking a version of the Klein map with the goal of splitting south of 50 via East Bidwell. Extensive adjustments were made using mapping software, with real-time public feedback (including text messages to city staff). The final draft map (named for continued discussion) had a total population deviation of approximately 8.36%, districts one, three, and five to be contested in 2022, and two and four in 2024. The council voted 5-0 to continue the public hearing to a special meeting on February 15, 2022 at 1:00 PM (to allow further public review and potential adjustments) rather than adopting a final map that night. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar approved as amended (item 8 pulled; item 7 moved to Feb 22). - Resolution 10795 approved with modification (4-1, Chalamcherla opposed): The nine residents identified as having Sutter Street addresses and alley access may request guest parking passes during the pilot; the district boundary remains unchanged. - Public Hearing No. 4 continued to a special meeting on Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 1:00 PM via Zoom. The council selected a preferred draft map (modified from the Klein map) and tentatively approved sequencing: districts 1, 3, and 5 up for election in 2022; districts 2 and 4 in 2024. Final adoption will follow on February 22, 2022 (first reading of ordinance). - The council will return to in-person meetings on February 22, 2022, pending Sacramento County health order changes. - Special meeting on March 8, 2022 at 1:00 PM set to discuss a strategy to close the city’s funding gap.

The Folsom City Council held a special meeting at 5:45 PM for a closed session on the Murer House property lease, followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 PM on January 25, 2022. The regular meeting included business from the floor, recognition of holiday lights contest winners, approval of a consent calendar, a public hearing on the Russell Ranch Phase 2 project, appointment of a historic preservation member, city manager reports, and council comments. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM. Consent Calendar - Resolution No. 10789 – Authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement with Western Truck Parts & Equipment Company LLC for the purchase of a dump truck. Approved unanimously. - Resolution No. 10790 – Authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement with PSOMAS for construction management and inspection services for the Natoma Alley Rehabilitation and Replacement Project, and appropriated funds. Approved unanimously. Public Comments & Testimony - Mr. Reynolds (speaking during Business from the Floor) expressed support for moving forward on parking management and code changes in the Historic District, citing a need to reduce inefficiency and conflict. He also endorsed John Lane for appointment to the Historic District Commission. - Kate Tedesco (speaking during Business from the Floor) requested direction on how to advocate for a Kaiser emergency hospital in Folsom, noting long travel times to Kaiser facilities. Mayor Howell advised her to contact Kaiser directly, mentioning Dr. Anthony Rotodo as a starting point, but noted that the decision is beyond the city's control. Scheduled Presentations - Recognition of 2021 Folsom Holiday Lights Contest Winners – The inaugural contest had over 50 entries across five categories. City social media reached more than 35,000 people; the Folsom Telegraph reached more than 21,000 weekly readers; Macaroni Kid reached more than 20,000. Winners were selected by council members: - Holly Jolly Residents (best overall residence): Tyler Pepper, 1510 Thurman Way (judged by Councilmember Aquino). - Hollywood Christmas (best use of fictional characters): Darren Prochew, 1027 Hildebrand Circle (judged by Mayor Howell). - Clark Griswold (best use of holiday lights): Enid Baldock and Michael Aubrey, Christopher Street (judged by Councilmember Chalamcherla). - Merry and Bright Business: Jim Snook, Snooks Candies and Chocolate Factory (judged by Vice Mayor Rodriguez). - Illuminate the Block (best multi-house display): Gene Perrier, 117 Ledgemont Court (judged by Councilmember Kozlowski). Discussion Items - Public Hearing: Russell Ranch Phase 2 Lots 24-32 (PN 21-118) – Planning consultant Kathy Peace presented the project, which amends a previously approved plan to convert 208 age-restricted units into conventional single-family homes. The change eliminates a gated community, private roads, and a second clubhouse, replacing the clubhouse with a 1-acre private park (passive use, with turf, barbecues, and benches). The project generates 59 new AM peak trips and 79 PM peak trips, and an additional 83 acre-feet per year of water demand, still within the specific plan's 5,600 acre-feet per year cap. Condition 42 prohibits turf in front yards. Councilmember Chalamcherla suggested installing water-flow monitoring devices (e.g., Flume) and adding more active recreational amenities (e.g., volleyball net) to the park. Councilmember Kozlowski supported leaving the park as turf for flexible use. The applicant (Lennar Homes) agreed with staff recommendations. No public speakers testified. The council approved Resolution No. 10791 (unanimous 5-0) and introduced Ordinance No. 1323 (first reading, unanimous 5-0). - Old Business: Appointment of At-Large Historic Preservation Member to the Historic District Commission – Four applicants were considered. The council voted orally: Councilmembers Chalamcherla, Kozlowski, and Aquino voted for John Lane; Vice Mayor Rodriguez and Mayor Howell voted for Darren Brock. John Lane was appointed (3-2). City Manager Reports - City Manager Elaine Andersen reported: - Condolences for Elk Grove Police Officer Ty Linehan, killed in the line of duty. - The city is transitioning to by-district elections; a public hearing on draft maps will be held February 8, 2022, at 6:30 PM. Feedback can be submitted to AttyDept@folsom.ca.us. - A new community recycling bin is available at Folsom City Hall (mixed recyclables), joining existing bins at Folsom Middle School, Andy Moran Sports Complex, and the Historic District. - The application window for nonprofit groups to sell state-approved fireworks runs from February 1 to March 18, 2022. - The February 8, 2022 City Council meetings (special workshop at 1:00 PM on the funding gap, and regular meeting at 6:30 PM) will also be held via Zoom. Council Comments - Councilmember Aquino shared insights from a FACOG meeting on walkability, noting that creative solutions (like parking meters) are sometimes necessary. - Councilmember Kozlowski noted that he will chair the SACOG Policy Committee. - Councilmember Chalamcherla requested updates on the fiber cable project and parking management in the Historic District. - Vice Mayor Rodriguez reminded everyone of the State of the City address on February 24, 2022. - Mayor Howell urged traffic safety, noting increasing speeding and red-light running, and adjourned the meeting in honor of Officer Ty Linehan and all uniformed personnel who have lost their lives.