Alright, thumbs up.

I think we're good.

Good evening, everyone.

Welcome to tonight's meeting of the Belmont Planning Commission.

Excuse me.

Let's say the city council, but that's not us.

Okay for a motion.

The meeting of the planning commission.

Today is Tuesday, June 2nd, and let us go through some preliminary instructions for meeting participation and attendance.

So folks can attend tonight's meeting by watching Comcast Cable 27.

Also, the meeting is being streamed live via the city's website at Belmont.gov.

And of course, the meeting is available via Zoom, and the instructions for accessing the meeting over Zoom are included in the agenda.

For public comment, a member of the public can comment here in chambers by submitting a speaker slip to our clerk, and then coming up to uh the lectern.

Um can also uh participate remotely uh using the raised hand function uh via the zoom app.

And again, the instructions for um doing so are included in the agenda.

And then finally, um if written public comments are submitted to our C dev uh email account before 4 p.m.

uh today um those uh written comments will be considered.

And with that, uh let's please take a roll call vote or roll call of the members.

Okay, Commissioner Adam Kavich here.

Takahashi?

Here Kramer here, Chair Coolidge?

Here.

We have Commissioner Twig.

And Jadala here.

Thank you.

Great, we have a quorum.

Um item two is the pledge of allegiance.

If we could please stand.

Flag is here.

I'll leave everyone in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic.

For which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Um next is item three, our community forum.

This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the commission uh on matters that are not on the agenda within the commission's purview.

Um we'll start here with any uh public comments for um item three in chambers.

Um no speaker slips in house and no raised hands on Zoom.

Great.

And I'll ask Director Domello if there's any uh written comments submitted for this item uh by 4 p.m.

today.

No written comments.

Great.

That concludes item three.

Uh moving on to item four, commissioner announcements and agenda amendments.

Um I'll look to my colleagues here to see if there's any uh announcements to be made.

And I have uh no announcements.

I'll uh look the staff to see if we have any agenda amendments.

No agenda amendments.

Great.

Moving on to item five.

We have our consent business.

We have one item on um our consent business.

That's item five A.

It is the approval of the meeting minutes for the meeting that occurred on April 21st, 2026.

And um we'll entertain any questions, revisions, or comments regarding the minutes.

If not, we'll maybe entertain a motion to approve.

I move we approve the minutes that's submitted.

Great.

Is there a second?

Second.

Controversial item, okay.

It's been moved and seconded.

So let's take a uh I guess we'll take a roll couple vote just because she abstain.

Uh Kramer?

Aye.

Chair Coolidge?

Aye.

Um Twig?

Aye.

Jadala?

Abstain.

Yeah.

Okay.

So motion passes.

Um with four ayes and two abstains.

Great.

Thank you for that.

That concludes our consent business.

Uh item six is our study session.

We have no items for um uh the study session.

Uh so a move now to our public hearings.

And we have uh one public hearing item, it's item 7a, and it is a safety element update, and just because we do this for all things, I'll ask if anyone has any uh relevant ex party communications or recusals.

And seeing none, I have nothing as well.

So we'll turn to staff for a presentation.

Oh, there is welcome.

Thank you.

I'm just gonna pull up the PowerPoint.

Yeah, you're good.

Where is that?

Did I close it?

Let's see.

You're right.

Sorry.

Not bad, no worries.

I think I accidentally removed it.

So we're just gonna get it back.

We have plenty of time.

I'm sure Mayor Maids would be happy to know I attempted to take her job as heading the city council.

We'll let her know.

Let her know.

She can watch the meeting.

And see my gaff live.

Can we see that?

Yes, let me bring it up here.

Um, give me one moment.

It's looking a little different than normal.

Um, give me one moment, I'll be right back.

Of course.

That's green.

Yeah.

Let me know thank you.

All right.

Great.

We are in business.

Thank you.

Sorry for that delay.

Thanks for your patience.

All right, so we're gonna get into the safety element update adoption hearing.

We have a presentation for you.

I'm Adrian Smith, principal planner with the city, and I'm joined by our safety element consultant, Eli Crispy.

He's a senior associate with Placeworks.

Um, and he's been uh with us this whole ride, and he's um continues to bring his diligence and expertise to this update effort.

So thanks for joining me tonight, Eli.

Before I get into our agenda, I do want to thank the commission for a positive and productive meeting on the 21st.

Um, and we're happy to be here again to share some revisions that came out of that discussion.

You'll see that this is a pretty tight presentation.

Since at the prior meeting, we covered a lot of background on the update process, um, the function of the safety element, public outreach efforts, all those sorts of details.

But if any commissioners do want to revisit any of that detail, um please let us know and we can pull up the applicable slides and revisit.

So for our agenda today, we're gonna start with the study session comments that came out of the planning commission on the twenty-first as well as the city council meeting on the twenty-eighth.

Then we'll take you through proposed revisions that have come out of that feedback, and then we'll just talk about timeline and next steps very briefly.

So here we have our planning commission comments.

Staff compiled all the feedback and then sort of sat down to address that feedback in one of three ways.

So either one, the safety element is already responsive to the feedback, you know, in X section or policies A, B, and C, so we don't need to recommend changes.

Or two, the element is partially responsive but could benefit from additional content to help emphasize or clarify what's existing, or three, the element is not responsive and really does need some new content.

And so that's sort of how you'll see we've analyzed.

So for now, I'll briefly take you through what we heard, and then Eli will get into the analysis for the next few slides.

Firstly, I do want to say, and I'm sure you saw it in our staff report.

City Council really appreciated how thoughtful the planning commission was with the topics that they raised, and they did emphasize that in the meeting.

So that was great feedback to get.

So, in terms of planning commission comments in particular, one of the things that came up was providing clarity on standards for existing and new development in fire hazard zones.

So, what are the expectations for existing versus new?

Then we heard from the commission that they wanted to know a bit more about the uses and the benefits of the safety element.

So is this a document that we create and we kind of put it on the shelf and don't really think too much about it, or how does it actually come into actual application in the planning decisions that we're making in the city?

We also heard from the commission the to emphasize the importance of backup power and utility undergrounding.

Commissioners wanted to know a bit more information on the emergency alert systems and how we communicate with non-English speakers in our community.

And then there was a uh an issue raised about how the safety element addresses wildfire smoke and air quality impacts.

So we looked at that too, and then just a couple other minor requests for clarification that we also looked at.

So we'll pass it over to oh no, pardon me.

Let me get into the city council comments and then we'll talk about the analysis.

So as I said, council um emphasized how thorough the commission was.

So they didn't actually have too much feedback for us, which was nice.

Um, but something that came up was questions about how coordination with other jurisdictions and external external agencies work and is that codified anywhere.

They also asked what would the city's response be to simultaneous or cascading disasters.

So uh God forbid something happened where there was a wildfire and an earthquake.

You know, have we at the city thought about that and how we might handle it?

And then another thing that came up was this idea of we don't know what we don't know, and does the city monitor for novel or unforeseen safety events that we haven't really heard of or thought of yet.

Thank you, Adrian.

Uh good evening.

Uh Chair Coolidge, members of the commission, Eli Crispy with Placeworks.

Uh, I'll give a little more detail about how we've responded to the comments that we have received on the draft safety element.

Uh, and as a reminder, in appendix B of your packet or attachment B, there are more detailed responses than what I will get into that go into the specific wording of how we have revised the element, and we're of course happy to discuss that during the question and comment period.

So, in response to the planning commission's comments, uh here is how we have changed the safety element.

Uh, we have revised policy 6-6.10 to better clarify how state standards for wildfire apply to new versus existing development.

We have added some language in the introduction that better explains the uses of the safety element and the benefits that it provides to city decision makers, to staff, and to the community at large.

We have expanded the discussion of the emergency alert system, taking into account some information that was provided by SMC FIRE.

There is some added information about the impact of wildfire on poor air quality in Belmont, and we have revised one of the policies about emergency shelters to emphasize that that would include clean air centers as well.

We've also provided some additional details, as Adir mentioned, to clear up some of the more minor requests that we received for clarification.

Uh, in response to the city council's comments, uh, we further expanded the emergency response section to talk about how the SMC Fire and the police department interact with other law enforcement and fire protection agencies in San Mateo County, including how mutual aid works and how coordination works across jurisdictional boundaries.

We have expanded some of the policies to better emphasize the city's emergency response to those cascading or compounding hazards when multiple hazards occur either in a very short period of time simultaneously or one after another.

And we have we have uh revised one of the policies to explicitly call out uh that the city should plan for uh the novel and unforeseen hazardous conditions, the unknown unknowns that the city council brought up.

There are also a couple of revisions that uh staff recommended, and so here are the revisions we have made to that.

Uh we have revised a couple of the policies to better clarify how uh the flood and sea level rise resiliency policies apply to new new versus existing development, and that does include collaboration with the regional one shoreline body, again, making sure that what Belmont is doing is uh consistent and in sync with its neighbors and with the rest of the county.

Uh, we have also added a dedicated set of sanitary sewer uh policies and action.

So this is specifically meant to ensure that the sewer system is able to uh be resilient to hazardous conditions and that it is proactively maintained to reduce the risk of damage, particularly during flooding.

And with that, I will pass it back to Adrian.

Thank you.

So we're really getting close to the end of this process, which is really exciting.

Um, after this evening, hopefully, we'll be headed to City Council for a tentative date of June 23rd, where they're gonna consider adoption of the safety element.

And then once we make it through actual formal adoption, that's when we're gonna get into actually integrating the updated safety element and conservation element into the plan, and we'll be updating the website, and that'll be the current version that we'll be begin consulting.

Um, so oopsie.

Last thing is just the recommendation that we have before you this evening.

So staff recommend that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending that the city council amend the safety element and conservation element of the general plan.

So that's it.

Um we welcome any questions and discussion you'd like to have.

And again, if you want us to pull up any other previous slides that we talked about or any detail like that, we're happy to do it.

Great.

Thank you.

Um, I just want to say that uh initially.

First, the staff report I thought was really well done.

I really appreciated the hyperlinks that were included, kind of embedded in the report, so we can kind of toggle back to the other meeting and and kind of the other stuff.

So I thought that was a really kind of good improvement to the staff report, and it made it super easy.

So thank you for that.

Also, um I I did really appreciate the table that you all created that that kind of showed the issue, the response, you know, whether it was included, and then kind of the red lines that were.

I thought that was a really, really good way of presenting kind of a lot of different information.

So I just wanted to say from a presentation perspective, I thought um it was really well done.

So having said that, we can now turn and see if there's any questions.

You want to start?

Um, yeah, so I actually submitted um three questions to you by email in advance of the meeting.

I was unfortunately not present at the April 21st meeting, so my comments would have been more appropriate then, and they're quite late, but um, just uh for the record and maybe for the next revision, um, I had just a couple questions where maybe minor revisions are still possible, but if not, totally understood.

So, one question was around was actually two of them were in the conservation element, which you're updating in a linked way, was about the Twin Pines retention basin, because that's a really significant project for Belmont that we really hope will make a big effect on stormwater management.

And I was surprised that that project wasn't mentioned.

I know it's not, you know, obviously complete, but it's I just thought it would be it might be nice to mention that section.

So it's just a question whether you thought that was appropriate.

Yeah, I think our general approach to the updating the conservation element was to try to take a light touch and just, you know, update whatever was sort of necessary to ensure internal consistency between the two documents.

And we do mention that project in the safety element itself.

Um, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to call it out in the conservation element as well, and we'd be happy to make that um incorporation.

Okay, totally up to you.

I'm not gonna not try to make like last minute red lines here.

Um I just think it is a quite significant investment that the city's making, you know, with grant money and so forth that could make a really big difference to the folks living downstream, and so I just thought it city should kind of get credit for this forward-looking work that they're doing.

Yep.

Um another very minor thing that I mentioned the air quality data for what it's worth is quite out of date.

If it was easy to swap in the numbers, if it's just a matter of pulling them off the air district's website, it'd be great to plug them in.

Again, that's a very minor, I don't think it's that important because air quality is not a huge issue here, luckily.

Our plan is to do it.

So, yeah, so the data's like 12 years old.

So, and then the last thing was um I I I thought the safety element was was really complete and thorough, so now we're getting down into real details.

Um, but uh you mentioned cascading hazards, and one of them that has occurred to me uh that I worry about uh because of the San Bruno fire is the fact that we do have PGE, you know, high pressure gas transmission lines, right where we have earthquake faults, and so a hazard we could definitely have is an earthquake followed by a very bad fire.

So I just thought that uh the section mentioning um the gas pipelines, which is page 530 in the safety element, um I don't know, could could flag that.

They're mentioned that those transmission lines exist, but nothing about them being a hazard or what would the response be if one blew up.

Um so I just thought maybe another sense about that because high pressure transmission lines are definitely um as we all saw in San Bruno, a potential hazard to life.

Yep.

And again, I that's one we can act on as well, and we're gonna put some language together and and be more explicit about that in particular, the gas lines and the earthquake.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah, that's one I thought that kind of fit with the cascading hazards.

It's something you could definitely see happening.

So thanks, no, I really appreciate that.

And again, if those are not reasonable changes or you can't get them together, I'm I don't think any of this is necessary.

I think the report is beautifully well done.

Oh, I thank you.

We've talked about it, and yeah, yep.

I don't see any problem incorporating comments that the planning commission makes tonight.

So just through your discussion, um, just if there's consensus in the planning commission that those changes should be made, then we can integrate those into a potential resolution that you might pass and bring those forward to council.

Okay, only again, only if it's not gonna cause a lot of work.

But yeah, I really enjoyed reading it.

It was really nice document.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

Good suggestions.

Let's go down the line this way, I guess.

Any questions for me?

Yeah, I think we're not there.

I um one comment and two questions.

So one comment is nice to have not necessary in a lot of the different kind of risk factors, flooding, you know, etc.

etc., it said specific areas of Belmont that were more susceptible, but then in erosion, it didn't really note which areas of Belmont were more susceptible.

So if that's easy to add, you know, that would be great.

Um, so that was one, and then I one I I think it's a typo and a relevant one, but I want to check it's um the page 22 of the of the PDF of um C draft safety element, it says a warm night is when temperatures remain above 58.5 degrees.

Should that be 85.5 degrees?

It has to do with it's under um extreme heat.

San Francisco or or Belma.

It's a 98 days, and it talks 98, 91, blah, blah, blah.

And then it says a warm night is when temperatures remain above 58.5 degrees in Belmont.

So I'm thinking it's 85.5 degrees.

Yeah, that's good catch.

That's 6.7 on page 5-no, sorry, 6-22 upper right-hand column is where I see it.

That's interesting.

Yeah, it's amazing.

Okay, all right.

Um, we'll take a look at that.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

And then the last is um similar to um uh I don't want to say Joanne, I don't know.

I'm sure I don'd done it.

You can call me Joanne, that's okay.

So there are in the conservation element, there are a number of of figures and tables with data as of uh 2014.

And similarly, if there's more current data, that would be better.

Okay.

Okay, that makes sense, Jim.

Sure.

Okay, we just quickly consulted the the the warm night temperature.

Yes.

So the the definition of warm nights is defined basically looking at the historical record to see if temperatures remain above a certain level.

98% of the time they would drop below this level, so there are 2% of the cases where they do not.

And according to the state record for Belmont, that level is actually 58.5 degrees Fahrenheit.

All right, good to know.

So we appreciate you uh bringing that up.

Yeah, okay, thanks.

And just and thank you for following up.

So historically, like what time period would that be?

Because I feel like we definitely have more than six, it says six nights a year above that temperature.

I feel like we have more than six these days.

So uh at the moment the state defines that looking at the historical record between 1961 and 1990.

Okay.

Uh certainly as climate change goes on and as things get warmer, uh, that threshold may evolve.

Uh the state is currently working on some new projections.

Uh we they most likely will not be out until later this year or next year, but they could certainly be incorporated to future iterations of the safety element.

Yeah, it's interesting.

It says yeah, six nights historically up to 43 nights.

I think we're somewhere between six and forty-three already, but it'd be interesting to see the states and data.

Thank you.

And I have no additional comments or any questions.

Thank you.

Okay.

Great.

So we do need to open a public hearing?

Okay.

Yeah.

Um, let's do that at this point.

Turning first to see if there's anyone in chambers who'd like to submit public comment this uh item.

Um, currently no speaker cards in-house.

All right.

Anyone on Zoom?

And no raised hands on Zoom.

Okay.

Dr.

Damel, anyone submit any public written comments before 4 p.m.

today in this item, 7A?

And no public comments submitted to the Comdev website.

Great.

Uh, having considered uh comments in chambers uh via zoom and and written comments, um, we can go ahead and close the public hearing and now turn to commissioner deliberation.

And I guess we can we can deliberate or someone um can simply make a make a motion.

Um I'm I'm fine out of the way.

Can I ask what form of motion you would need, Laura, to incorporate these hopefully minor edits?

So if there's consensus of the planning commission that those items should be included, or if the motion maker wishes, just make the motion to adopt the resolution with the incorporation of the comments from the planning commission this evening.

And we understand that to be like to the extent feasible.

We'll capture the comments as much as we can, especially in terms of the data updates.

Okay.

Okay, great.

Uh well, I would like to make a resolution of the planning commission of the city of Beaumont recommending the city council amend the safety element and conservation element of the general plan per the draft that we looked at tonight in the planning commission, um, with the commissioner's comments about a few selected areas of of data or text update.

Uh second.

Okay, Commissioner Adam Kevich.

Aye.

Takahashi?

Aye.

Kramer?

Aye.

Chair Coolidge?

I.

Twig?

I like Jadala?

Aye.

Okay, motion passes six zero.

Um, for the safety element update, along with the incorporation of the comments um provided by the planning commissioners.

Great.

Thank you.

Really great work.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Yeah, the work product was I think fantastic, and I think the way you incorporated like all of the different kind of diverse comments, I think was really well done.

And as is was said at the last time, this is super important.

So good work.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Um, you know, this is my first project that I've been able to bring before you guys.

I've been working on it for the past year, and it's it's great to be at this uh um stage of things, and it's been a pleasure presenting to you.

So thank you.

Amazing.

Yeah, and if I could just add something, I wanted to really um, you know, I I'm thinking about um Commissioner Adam Kevich's comment about the San Bruno explosion and fire, and I don't know if all of you realize that I worked in San Bruno at that time.

Oh, I did not.

Um, and so I responded in the emergency operations center for the first 10 days, um, and then I worked with all of the families in the neighborhood to rebuild the neighborhood over many years.

And it is um the greatest challenge and the greatest honor and privilege of my career to do that work.

And so when we talk about the safety element and when we talk about these things, like to me, it's personal, I know what that feels like to try to do that work.

And so um, you know, this isn't something that I bring up all the time, but just wanted to mention to the commission.

As we do these things together, I want you to know kind of what my perspective is on it, and it's that like kind of first-hand um experience that I had.

And so always appreciate your feedback, your comments as we really try to change the way that we do safety planning.

And you know, safety elements used to sit on the shelf.

Yeah, and that they're becoming a real um part of the general plan, and that's really gratifying.

I think you know, as a professional planner, and uh from your comments, I hear that it's gratifying for you as well.

So I just wanted to let you know that information, and then just thank you for the for this work that we do together.

Thank you for sharing that.

That's that is um, yeah.

It's it's a good reminder that these disasters are real and the consequences are real, and so it is very important that we plan for them.

So thank you for that.

Um, okay.

Well, that concludes uh item 7A, and uh that concludes our public hearing section.

Uh we have uh now item eight, uh other business and updates, and we have one item, uh item 8A, which is our um fiscal year 2026-27 capital improvement program, the CIP.

Yes, good evening planning commission.

Thank you for your time on this tonight.

Uh Belmont's fiscal year 2627 capital improvement program or CIP identifies the city's proposed major projects or purchases and is considered with the budget every year.

Capital improvements are typically those individual public construction projects and purchases of land, equipment, and contract services to address citywide infrastructure needs.

Pursuant to California government code, the CIP shall be submitted to the county or city planning agency for review as to the conformity with the adopted general plan.

This commission uh fulfills the role of planning agency for this purpose.

Uh the city's budget uh and CIP was introduced to the City Council at their meeting on May 26th last week, and a planning commission finding of CIP consistency with the Belmont General Plan and Belmont Village Pacific Plan will facilitate CIP adoption by the City Council.

Uh the council is anticipated to adopt the budget and CIP at their meeting next week.

Um the commission's finding that the CIP conforms to the general plan and specific plan does not necessarily mean that the city will ultimately implement the CIP in a particular form, individual public works projects and most other CIP projects still must undergo environmental review and receive council approval before being carried out.

The council has full discretion in deciding CIP items.

The proposed CIP consists of 87 projects, which are focused on new construction, equipment purchases, and carryover of existing projects from prior CIP budgets.

Staff evaluated the fiscal year uh CIP that's before you and found it to be consistent with Belmont's 2035 general plan and Belmont Village Pacific Plan, and we've provided a resolution to this effect.

Um I'd also like to recognize Edric Kwan, our public works director, who has joined us tonight and is available for any questions.

This is a pro forma item.

We bring it to the commission every year in between council intro of the budget at their first meeting and adoption at their second meeting.

Um that concludes my presentation.

We have the list of CIP program budgets on the screen if you want to go through them.

But but your uh your uh focus is on general plan consistency.

Um the uh projects are what they are.

Uh we've um listed the um goals, policies, and objectives of the general plan and the BVSP that demonstrate consistency of the CIP program uh with our general plan and our BVSP.

Um we haven't received any uh comments um or emails on this item leading up to tonight and as of the um this item being before you at this time.

So that concludes my presentation.

Happy to answer any questions of the commission and Edric is available as well.

Great.

Thank you for that.

Sure, appreciate the the efficient presentation.

But we'll see, start at this end to see if there's any um any questions before we turn to public comment.

No questions.

I just had one quick um housekeeping question.

Um, how do we account?

I know this is capital improvements.

It doesn't include things like interest payments on bonds, for example.

So like the Belmont Sports Complex, we're still paying off those bonds.

So it looks like we're spending almost nothing on parks, but in fact, we're making a lot of payments.

Is that just covered in a different part of the city's budget?

So we don't put it in the capital improvement budget, even though it was a previous capital improvement we're still paying for.

Um, it's a five-year rolling plan, and if it was covered under previous projects, it would be captured under that.

I'm not sure if you have any context, Edric, but um most of these bonds are usually 20-year bonds, I think, so that we should I think we're still paying off the uh we'd have VSC.

I don't have that information available for you.

I think we may come up to the lecture if you want to come up through this.

So we have uh this for the record, yeah.

Hello, Edric Kwan, public works director.

Um yeah, so you'll probably find that in the funding source, and that table itself will show all the interest payments uh the bonds and such in there, not specifically in the CIP.

And I've found that through some of other projects like the SURA ones, it's in the sewer fund versus the sewer project.

So you'll see.

It must be in the in the budget elsewhere.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah, that's just great to clarify because in fact Belmont has invested quite a bit in our parks over the years.

Um I think it's important.

Great, no other questions.

Great, okay, thank you.

I don't have any questions.

Great.

We'll see if there's any public comment.

Um, still no one in chambers.

Uh, see if there's anyone um over Zoom who'd like to submit a comment on this item 8A.

Um, no raised hands on Zoom.

And Director DeMello, I think you referenced you had not received any questions um uh or comments as part of your presentation, but I'll just confirm that's in fact the case.

As of 10 minutes ago, there were no comments, but if you'd like I'll go back into the web page.

So, I don't get locked out.

Well, but there were no comments as well.

Well, if you have no comments as before PM before 4 p.m.

So we're good.

So we're okay.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh that then um concludes public comment, and we'll now uh turn to uh commissioner deliberation or action.

If anyone would like to make a motion, um that's that is an option.

I'm happy to make a motion, please.

Um that the uh move that the planning commission of the city of Belmont finds consistency of the fiscal year 2026 through 2027 capital improvement program with the Belmont 2035 general plan and Belmont Village Specific Plan.

Great, and we'll do that through adoption of a reso.

Thank you.

Is there a second?

Seconded, great.

It's been moved and and seconded, so let's take a vote, please.

Okay, um Commissioner Adam Kevin, aye.

Takahashi?

Aye.

Kramer.

Aye.

Chair Coolich?

Aye.

Twig.

Oh yeah.

Didala?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes six zero.

Great.

That was the only item we had for other business and updates.

I'll just confirm, I guess, with staff if that's in fact the case.

In terms of the agenda, just other updates.

Again, we had the Charles Armstrong groundbreaking event that occurred earlier tonight.

They may still be going up there on Solana.

Hopefully, you saw the public release in terms of some changes in the city in terms of staffing.

I want to formally congratulate Laura, who's going to be our community development director.

Congratulations.

As you're aware, I'll be exiting the city early part of September.

And this allows for some transition and change.

We've also made some changes at the assistant city manager role.

Our chief of police, Ken Stenquist is interim manager.

And we've made some other changes to our department.

And looking forward to the future in terms of how the city is going to be structured.

So again, very excited about Laura, about becoming the Comdev director, and certainly have enjoyed my time with the city working with all of you.

It's been a long run.

Excited, it's been great.

And really excited about the prospects for the city going forward.

We have a lot of great work ahead of us and we have a lot of great people here that are slated to make things happen.

So very excited.

Fantastic.

Congratulations to both of you.

Thank you.

No other announcements other than still on the fence whether we're going to have a June 16th meeting.

Public notices are due in the next two days.

So, but no other agenda items or announcements on my end.

Great.

So with that, I think we can adjourn.

It is uh what time is it?

7 38.

We are adjourned.

Thanks everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you.