Thank you. Then we will adjourn the special meeting and call to order the regular meeting of the Folsom City Council for Tuesday, June 10, 2025. Would the clerk please call the roll? Councilmembers Rachel, Rorbaugh, Eric Kozlowski, Larry, and Akino.

Here. If you'd all please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

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

Okay. Mr. City Attorney, any agenda updates?

Yes. Good evening, Madam Mayor and a member of the City Council.

So we have an additional information transmittal for item 10 and a revised staff report for item 11 on 10S agenda.

A copy of both have previously been provided to you and they should be on the table in the back as well.

Thank you. That takes us to business from the floor.

This is the public's opportunity to address the council on items that are not on the agenda.

But please understand that we cannot take action or deliberate on items that are not on the agenda.

If you'd like to speak now during business from the floor or on a future agenda item later today, you could please fill out a blue card, hand it to Lieutenant Verhalen over here, and the clerk will call you up at the appropriate time.

So we do have some requests from business from the floor.

Yeah, you have two requests to speak this evening under business from the floor.

First will be Tracy Stafford, and Tracy will be followed by Ruth Anderson.

So Tracy, come on down, and Ruth, you can be ready.

You'll be next in three minutes.

Just a reminder, we give everyone three minutes to speak, so short and sweet.

Right there at the center.

There you go.

Okay.

Is there a timer?

Oh, there it is.

Okay.

Can I take it here?

Oh, we got them all.

Welcome.

Yes, thank you.

Well, I am Tracy Stafford, and I'm the self-appointed executive director for the Juneteenth Festival at Black Miners Bar.

And self-appointed means basically I'm a volunteer.

We're all volunteers.

It's a community-driven event.

And often people are asking, well, what is it?

Why did we change the name?

What is Juneteenth?

What is the big deal?

Right?

So we like to come out and just sort of share what it's truly about.

Now, we know what the 4th of July is, right?

You know, that is where our great country earned its independence.

And we all celebrate it, and we all love it, and we all eat a little too much and go on about our lives.

And then there is Juneteenth, which occurred on June 19th in 1865, and that was when all Americans were freed.

So our country was freed on the 4th of July.

But all Americans were notified of their freedom on June 19th, 1865, when the last of the enslaved in Galveston, Texas,

were notified two years after they had been freed that they actually were.

So we celebrate 4th of July, and we've always celebrated as a black community Juneteenth.

But the reality is that this is a celebration that we should all be a part of.

Juneteenth, again, is when all Americans were freed in this great country that earned its independence on the 4th of July.

So that is why we celebrate.

And with Black Miners Bar, there's a lot of discussion about that.

You know, why did we change the name?

And isn't Negro Bar, Negro Bar?

Isn't that Spanish?

What's the big deal, right?

And many don't really understand the history.

We know that that's where the black miners mined, gold mines.

Many don't understand that that was the first black settlement in California.

And it was in 1849, which was decades before the Emancipation Proclamation.

So we're not even free to travel freely, to own property, any of that.

And they came here and were able to build lives and build community here.

And it's so important.

And so with the name change, and trigger warning, I've got to say a word, you know, originally it was Nigger Bar.

So let's make no mistake that this is what it was called, and this is what it's still called.

That's what I heard when I first came here, right, by some folks.

So this is not something that came from the Spanish community.

This is where black miners mined, and that's what it was called, until 18 or 1965,

with the federal mandate that required that the name be changed on state parks to Negro Bar.

And we've evolved, and we've changed, and now, finally, it's the third year anniversary,

where it has been renamed to something that really honors those who started their lives here,

and that is Black Miners Bar.

So that is the background, and Ruth is going to tell you more about the event.

But we hope that you support.

We really need donations.

It's quite an expensive event, but we make it happen.

Thank you, Tracy.

Thank you.

I remember it was hot, hot, hot last year.

We are still dehydrated from last year.

You're going to get some better weather this year.

So it's only 4 to 8 this year because we're like, we are not doing that again at 10 in the morning.

So thank you very much for your time.

Yep.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Our next speaker is Ruth Anderson, and Ruth will be followed, I believe, by Margie Donovan online.

Good evening.

Good evening, council and members of the city of Folsom.

My name is Ruth Anderson, and I am proud to be a citizen here for 15 years.

We chose it after breakfast at Karen's, not knowing anyone, and we are delighted to be members of this city.

But I want to invite everyone to a party, and Juneteenth is a party, and it is right here in our neighborhood.

So you don't have to go to San Francisco or anywhere else to experience the joy of when you come down the stairs,

and we're on the beach at Black Miner's Bar, and you see the stage is—

Ruth, sorry.

We're trying to pick this up on the microphone for the people who are watching it webcast.

So the stage, when you come down the stairs, the stage is kind of right on the water, and the entertainment is nonstop.

There is drumming, and that includes us if you want to practice African drumming.

And then at night, last year, we had a Tina Turner tribute band that was awesome as it gets to be night, you know, that wonderful time before it's dark.

And there's vendors and food trucks, and there's people on kayaks.

There's horseback riding.

What else can I say?

It is a blast.

There's stuff for kids to do, and it is for the whole community.

So no matter what you have planned for Saturday, June 28th, cancel it or bring them along from 4 to 9 p.m., and may I say it's for free.

You do have to pay the state park.

It's a $10 entrance fee, but Tracy and her team has done an amazing job of getting sponsors to pay for all this stuff.

So why not enjoy this community event?

And my job is also to get different vendors to offer gifts for people that are coming.

And I just got another gift certificate from Ace Hardware this afternoon and just restaurants.

So I can't say enough about this wonderful community event and really ask you all to join us again from 4 to 9 on Saturday, June 28th.

Okay.

Did I forget?

Yes.

23 seconds.

May I finish?

Of course.

Okay.

19 seconds.

Okay.

We want to make sure that we also talk about that there's horseback riding, and there are, let's say, a beer garden.

Did we say beer garden?

There's a beer garden.

There's a beer garden.

There's a beer garden.

There's a beer garden.

There's horseback riding.

There's kayaking.

The usual water sports that we have there.

Educational exhibits.

We have the buffalo soldiers out there with campgrounds.

You're going to be mining for gold, and I don't even know what because I'm too busy running around.

But please show up.

This is a community event that we would love everyone to participate in.

Thank you.

Are you just a little excited about this, Tracy?

I'm tired.

We have a talk show going now.

Thank you all very much for coming out.

And if you'd like to stay for our budget discussion, you're welcome to.

But if you want to leave, we'll understand.

Okay.

Okay.

Our next speaker will be Margie Donovan.

Margie, I think you're muted, so go ahead and unmute yourself.

Am I audible?

Yes, we can hear you.

Wonderful.

Hello, Mayor Aquino and honorable council members.

I'm Margie Donovan.

I'm a resident of the city of Folsom.

I come once again to this council meeting to express my very serious concern about SACRT Go,

which we armed out Folsom's stage line and dial a ride to regional transit.

Regional transit is having some very serious issues with their new software.

While I've battled my battle and I've won my battle for me and my rides are on time,

I'm hearing more and more from the residents of Folsom that they're missing doctor's appointments

and having to pay for missed appointments.

That the buses are late outside of their 30-minute window.

This concerns me gravely.

Some of you may know that I went to CBS and I was on channel 13 after missing a doctor's appointment

and having to pay $100 fee for missed appointments.

This is an unacceptable.

RT got the second worst software in the transit industry for its SACRT Go system

for elderly and people with disabilities.

The worst was what they had.

This is very problematic.

We're getting drivers in this town that weren't committed to be in this town.

I almost fell and hit my head the other day on the bus because the driver failed to tell me

someone was sitting in the front seat.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a crisis for residents that are elderly and with disabilities.

I know we have representatives on the RT board.

I can't speak enough how serious of an issue this is.

I would like the City Council to address this outside of our representatives to the board.

We have got to get our residents to their medical appointments on time.

It is unfair that we have to pay for missed appointments because the buses are late.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Margie.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker will be Sharon Kendall.

Is this working tonight?

Yes.

The head projector?

Yes.

But, Stacey, can you turn it on for her, please?

Sorry.

Yeah.

It needs to be turned on on the top corner.

Sorry, Sharon.

We weren't prepared that you would do a presentation, so it's going to take us a second.

Hang on.

You might have to help her focus it.

It just takes it a second.

Okay.

Good evening, Sharon.

You should be able to zoom in.

Is there a way to zoom out?

Yeah.

There's a dial at the top there.

Yep.

That's it.

Sorry.

Sorry.

Sorry.

Sorry.

Thank you, Stacey.

So, my name is Sharon Kendall.

Into the microphone, please, so the camera picks it up.

Thank you, Sharon.

My name is Sharon Kendall.

I'm a longtime resident of Fulton, California, and I'm here tonight to discuss parks maintenance

deficit.

I hear it a lot.

Parks maintenance deficit.

But do people really understand what that means?

To me, it means public safety hazard.

Because, for example, in Davies Park, which this picture is in Davies Park, we have Bradford pear

trees there.

And the Bradford pear trees live between 15 and 25 years.

These trees are 27 years old.

And they have all of the signs of being diseased.

The city arborist has recommended a year ago to remove them.

And I, as a resident that used that park, I'm concerned about that.

I'm concerned about that.

So, this is a picture across a limb from a Bradford pear tree.

And it's over the sidewalk.

If you look closer to this limb, this is what you see.

Would you like to walk underneath this limb tomorrow?

I don't think so.

The other thing is, is that here's a picture of a tree stump.

Anyway, you can see that the bark is definitely affected.

But you cannot see what's inside that stump.

It's basically hollow.

It's not a, it's actually, not a stump, but it's a trunk.

And it's basically hollow.

And it's been infected by fungus.

If you try to push on the tree, it stands.

But that's not where the problem is.

The problem is, is when you look up into the limbs, the limbs of the Bradford pear tree are very soft.

And they're known for dropping their limbs.

In Davis, California, they just had a lawsuit settled.

For $24 million.

Regarding a woman that was in a park in Davis.

the limb fell down

and she was killed

in front of her daughter

I

I need you to wrap it up please

encourage you

whatever you have looked at

as far as increasing

the budget for parks

and recreation that you triple it

because

this is only one park

and this is only

a couple of trees

I've been taking pictures of these trees for years

I could probably call them by name

thank you for coming out

I hope you'll stick around for the budget discussion

so I really

want to encourage you

public

parks management deficit

means public safety

hazard got it

thanks for coming out

this takes you to your consent calendar

okay anybody have any item

they want to pull

I'm not hearing anything

so we'll entertain a motion

I'll move the consent calendar

second

we have a motion and a second

please call the roll

council members

Rathel

yes

Rohrbaugh

yes

Kozlowski

yes

Leary

yes

and Aquino

yes

next item please

all right that takes you to your new business

item number 10

this is resolution number 11399

a resolution approving the preliminary

engineers report for all the landscaping and lighting to districts for fiscal year 2526

and setting the public hearing

good evening Jameson

good evening mayor and members of the council

we'll get this up here

I'm Jameson Larson senior management analyst for the parks and recreation department

I will be presenting information regarding the LNL districts preliminary engineers report

this report incorporates all 30 LNL districts into a single report

our recommendations are that the council adopt resolution 11399

the resolution approving the preliminary engineers report

staff also recommends that the council direct the engineer of record to include a table within the final engineers report

to reflect revenues and expenses to further highlight operational deficits as well as the total district account balance

as of April 30th 2025

annual operational deficits are funded from the city's pooled cash account

and any reserve fund balance deficits are assigned to the specific district and is the ongoing financial responsibility of that district

operating deficits can be reduced by annual reserve fund collections or a reduction in services provided to that district

so what is a lighting and landscape or landscape and lighting district rather

as you can see here an LNL assessment district is a funding mechanism which is intended to pay for landscaping

lighting and other specified services within a district

when a new development project is in the planning phases the project is conditioned with creating a funding mechanism to pay for maintenance of common areas

common funding mechanisms include community facilities district as seen in much of the Folsom Ranch area

homeowners associations or a landscaping and lighting district

beyond the legal definition seen here an LNL district maintains those quality of life features that make each district unique and inviting for instance the waterfall and the

American River Canyon the art in the Thomas station or the monument signage in Willow Creek Estates South

and the open spaces throughout the districts these are all assets maintained by the district and provide a benefit to the residents within that district

this graphic here shows the location of all 30 LNLs here in Folsom all LNLs were created pursuant to the LNL Act of 1972 and the California Constitution

the districts within the city vary in size from 10 to 2370 units and the majority of the districts in Folsom were formed prior to Prop 218 in 1996 and therefore do not have an escalator built in to account for increased costs over time

the engineers report process is a three-step process

step one is a resolution directing the preparation of an engineers report this step was completed on February 25th of this year

step two is a resolution approving the preliminary engineers report that is what we are here to do today

step two is normally a consent item however we've received feedback during our community engagement meetings that residents were not aware of the process and their districts financial health and in response we wanted to

provide this in a public forum so everyone can have the same information

step three is a resolution approving the final engineers report and holding a public hearing this is planned for July 8th of 2025 here at the council meeting we have an additional step that we complete between steps one and three where the municipal landscape services manager presents the preliminary budgets to all landscape and lighting district advisory committee members to allow them to review and provide comments this was completed on May 15th of this year

here we have the listing of all 30 districts here within the city of Folsom and each district is unique in the number and type of amenities that are maintained the picture here is of the American River Canyon North waterfall which is an asset maintained by their district however common assets include landscaping street lighting sound walls open spaces mini parks and monument signage

this graph here shows the California construction cost index and the consumer price index for the period of time between 1990 and 2025 as you can see it takes $2.76 in 2025 to have the same buying power as $1.19.90 when a lot of these districts were created due to the cost increases over time districts without an inflationary adjustment have struggled to keep up as

to keep up with the rising cost of services on their static assessment

with the rising cost of services on their static assessment

here's a high level overview of all 30 L and L districts the total expenses for all but the highlighted districts represent the baseline cost to provide the current level of service

the current level of service has stepped down with each of the past two landscape maintenance contracts due to the rising cost of that service

so if we look at this table it'll be presented a couple different ways throughout this presentation

you have the district name and then going across to the right you have the assessment revenue the total expenses revenue less expenses and the actual fund balance on April 30th of this year

the two that are highlighted here have enhancement projects going on they have a healthy budget and are able to do the enhancement projects their landscaping so American River Canyon North has $160,000 set aside to do a landscape and hate enhancement project on American River Canyon Drive on your way up to the waterfall

and Prairie Oaks Ranch number two recently went through the prop 218 process and they have $150,000 set aside to do a landscape enhancement project on Blue Ravine and Roosie

the districts listed here are currently they currently have a negative account balance and their annual costs provide the basic level of maintenance exceeds their annual assessment

we'll look at each of these districts in more detail in the slides to follow staff's current prioritization plan has Briggs Ranch Broadstone one two and four and a Toma station going out for prop 218 ballot process and the coming fiscal year

and Hannaford cross and cobble Ridge to slash reflections to would undergo the prop 218 process and fiscal year 2627

and simple terms the prop 218 process is a legal process in which a new district is presented to the property owners to vote on how they want their district to be maintained.

It is a three step process that starts with the resolution initiating proceedings and ordering an engineer's report. Next the preliminary engineer's report is presented to the council and the ballot proceedings ordered and setting up a public hearing to tabulate the ballots. The final step is the tabulation of ballots public hearing and a resolution declaring the results. There is a legally required 45 day period between steps two and three and a fast track approach to the

and a fast track approach to the proceedings takes a minimum of two months to complete.

Here is the high level overview of those five districts which I have highlighted in yellow. You can see that starting from the right the account balance is negative on these and then the annual costs are exceeding the revenue for each one of these as well.

So now we'll look at each individual district. Each district will have a similar slide to this with the table showing some important information including the actuals for fiscal year 22 through 24 and the budgeted assessment revenues and expenditures for fiscal year 25 and 26.

Additionally there is information in the gray box which shows the actual account balance on April 30 of 2025 the year which the deficit began and the number of total single family equivalent units in the lighting landscape district.

Each of these slides will also have a breakdown to show what an average payback amount would look like over a 10 year period. This is for reference only 10 years was used for consistency across all slides but the payback timeline line can be set by the council.

Briggs Ranch has a negative account balance of 218,000. They are projected to have an operational deficit of $125,000 this coming fiscal year. This includes $70,000 in planned spending to complete the Prop 218 process.

The district has approximately 659 single family equivalent units so that $218,000 equates to about $332 per unit. If the deficit was paid back over a 10 year period the cost per single family equivalent would be approximately $33 annually or $2.75 per month on average.

This is one of the districts that's one of the districts that's prioritized for outreach this coming fiscal year.

Can I ask you a question?

Yes.

This will apply to all of them. So you're giving us a 10 year period $33 for example on this one to be paid that could pay back the deficit. Is that on top of their regular fee that would continue the maintenance or is this just to pay back the deficit or does that include also continuing the maintenance?

So that portion would be in addition to the maintenance. They're currently running a deficit of if we take away that $70,000 for this year.

They're running a pretty healthy deficit of $55,000 annually just to complete the basic levels of maintenance. So that $33 would be to pay back in addition they would need to right size their budget to pay for the minimum level of maintenance as well as set aside funds for future replacements of assets when they reach end of life.

So to remain healthy if they if this fixes it to remain healthy their assessment would be higher than $33 a year.

Yes. Okay. That's what I can I I just want to clarify something since I've been deep in this whole thing since January because of my district.

So each district that has a deficit would be assessed over a 10 year period perhaps longer if there's some difference in the annual cost but each district that is in a deficit would also have to raise their basic maintenance rate annually so that they would increase the income to cover the cost of maintenance that they're not able to raise their basic maintenance rate annually.

So that they would increase the income to cover the cost of maintenance that they're not able to meet currently.

Yes. Ideally they would raise the rate to meet the needs of annual maintenance long term planning and paying back the deficit. The other side of the coin is you do not increase the assessment and you have to reduce expenditures to a point where you can pay back that assessment on the existing $80,000 say.

So it would include substantial cuts to services at that point.

Yeah. I think that's the piece that's been confusing for people is that you know if they don't want to raise the annual assessment that services will be cut back such as reduce mowing or pruning or repair of you know things that can be deferred for repair.

Yes. We've already reduced the maintenance to a level that is the minimum level we can really do without just starting to cut certain maintenance items out of the budget.

Right. And then each district is going to be notified in advance of the cuts or there have they already taken place in our proceeding as costs of maintenance and repairs goes up and income remains flat.

So I'll be getting into that a little bit and the future slides however our recommendation will be to continue to provide the level of services budgeted in this engineers report for this coming fiscal year while we complete outreach for the majority of these districts with the exception of Natoma Station which recently went through the prop 218 process and the measure failed by a very narrow margin.

Okay. Thanks Jameson.

All right. And then we have Hannaford Cross. They currently have a negative account balance of $51,000. They are projected to have an operational deficit of $15,000 in the coming fiscal year. They have 103 single family equivalent units and that $51,000 equates to around $499 per unit. If we were to pay that back over

over a 10 year period. It would be approximately $49 $50 annually per single family equivalent or $416 a month on average. This district is planned for prop 218 proceedings in fiscal year 2627.

Next we have Cobble Ridge 2 Reflections. They have a negative account balance of $90,000. They are projected to have an operational deficit of $18,000 this coming fiscal year to provide the base levels of service.

They have approximately 389 single family equivalent units. That $90,000 equates to approximately $231 per unit. If the deficit were paid back over a 10 year period, the cost per single family equivalent would be approximately $23 per unit annually or $1.93 per month. This district again is prioritized for prop 218 outreach and fiscal year 2627.

Jameson can ask a clarification. So the 70 grand outreach cost was only included for Briggs Ranch.

So it will be included for Briggs Ranch and Broadstone and then Natoma station also has outreach within that. However, their engineers report has already been created once recently and just will require updating. So it will be substantially less to do the outreach and balloting for that district in particular.

Got it. So Broadstone, Briggs Ranch in the next year and then the other three.

Three. Yes. We'll be doing the following year. The Toma station, Briggs Ranch, Broadstone this year, Hanford Cross and Cobble Ridge the following year.

Thank you. Broadstone one and two is the original district. So this slide's a little different. It's got two separate districts there. Broadstone four is an overlay district of Broadstone one and two. So it's the same residents paying for the same assets.

So it's easier to look at this combined to get the full picture of the health of the district. Broadstone four was approved in 2015 with a higher level of assessment for a five year period.

And then it was reduced to a lower level assessment that is unable to keep up with the rising costs.

When you look at both districts together, they have a negative account balance of $597,000. They have a projected operational deficit of $234,000 this year to provide the base level of service plus setting $70,000 aside to complete the outreach.

The district has approximately 25 or 2531 single family equivalents. So that $597,000 equates to approximately $236 per unit. So you can kind of see that when we looked at Hanford Cross, they have a lot less units there.

Their deficit is much smaller as well. But when you're spreading it across as many as Broadstone, the cost per individual unit is much less.

If the deficit were paid back over a 10 year period, the cost per single family equivalent on average would be $23.63 or $1.97 per month. And like I said, this one is prioritized for outreach this coming fiscal year.

And then the Toma station, they have a negative account balance of $729,000. They are projected to have an operational deficit of $62,000. This includes $70,000 in planned spending to complete the Prop 218 process.

The engineer's report was completed before I was able to get a bid back from the consultant. So due to this district already going through the process and having engineer's report that needs to be updated rather than created from scratch.

We do not anticipate that full $70,000 being necessary. We don't anticipate it to cost more than $10,000. So before the final engineer's report is presented to you, we intend to reduce the expenditures by $60,000 within that district, which would leave a operational deficit of just under $3,000 for this coming fiscal year.

This district recently had the opportunity to complete the Prop 218 process and a majority protest existed with the vote at 49.65% for and 50.35% against the district.

The budget for this year reflects cuts of approximately $100,000, which includes removing all landscape maintenance services.

The district has approximately $1,857 single-family equivalent units, and the $729,000 equates to approximately $392 per unit.

If it were paid back over a 10-year period, it would be approximately $33 annually per unit or $2.75 per month.

This district is prioritized for Prop 218 outreach in the coming fiscal year, and staff intends to bring a resolution to the council on June 24th to initiate proceedings for a new balloting process in Atoma Station.

So this next meeting, we will have something in front of you for that.

And so I will be asking in the recommendations and directions slide this question.

Do we continue the base level of service during outreach and balloting for all of those that aren't highlighted here?

And then also I will be asking, do we continue to provide the same level of service to Atoma Station,

or do we reduce the levels of service to what we have budgeted currently, which is removal of landscape maintenance?

Here's a comparison of the average cost per single-family equivalent in each of the 30 lighting and landscape districts.

Cobble Ridge and Atoma Valley, so Cobble Ridge and Cobble Hills Ridge are two different districts, so they have two different budget.

So Cobble Ridge and Atoma Valley are not being assessed at the maximum authorized rate,

as they have adequate funding to set aside funds for their long-term maintenance as well as pay for their ongoing regular maintenance.

So those two are reduced quite substantially.

I believe in the Atoma Valley, the maximum authorized rate is $1,075,

and $381 is what they're going to be assessed this year to cover all of their costs.

The districts listed here are forecasted to go into a deficit over the next five years at their current rate of spending.

Current service levels have previously been reduced to slow the growth of the deficit.

The annual assessment revenue in these districts cannot support the annual maintenance costs

or provide for long-term replacement of assets at the end of their useful life.

These districts are planned for outreach in the Prop 218 process over the next three to five years.

And here is just a quick look at those.

They're highlighted in yellow here.

You can see that many of them have a positive fund balance currently.

This doesn't take into account that money that needs to be set aside for long-term replacement.

This is just all of the funds in the account.

And so you can see that they're spending beyond their revenue every year,

and so it's just progressively making their way towards a deficit.

And I just wanted to highlight that we do have a landscaping and lighting district advisory committee.

They meet on the third Thursday of each month right next door at the community center in the R.G. Smith room at 7 p.m.

And the districts listed here, many of which were represented in the first part of this presentation,

do not have representation.

So if anyone lives within these districts or knows somebody who lives within these districts,

it would be great to have their input in the future of their district.

And then stay informed.

We are committed to providing timely information to district residents.

We are currently working on revamping the L&L district website to provide relevant documents and fact sheets for each district.

The example here is for the Natoma Station Lighting and Landscape District.

We will continue to build these pages out based on priority of outreach efforts

with the end goal of an updated page for all 30 districts.

And with that, to my recommendations, which were to adopt Resolution 11399

and order the engineer of record to include a table within the final engineer's report

to reflect revenues and expenses to further highlight operational deficits.

And for direction, I just want to make sure,

is the council in agreement with staff's recommendation

to continue to provide current level of service to the four districts

that will be going through the Prop 218 process in the next two fiscal years?

And is the council in agreement with staff's recommendation

to reduce the level of service in Natoma Station starting July 1, 2025,

as shown in their district budget?

Thank you very much, Jameson.

Questions? Start with you, Council Member Leary.

Thank you. I have quite a few questions,

even though I think we've talked about a lot of this.

I'm in this undergoing this process in the Natoma Station area.

But I think that one thing that has been really difficult to overcome,

and that's the lack of public knowledge about what LNLs are.

And I know you've done this before for Natoma Station

and are now starting on this.

And one of my concerns is the ability to do outreach to the public

because, A, a lot of people didn't know there was such a thing

as a lighting and landscaping district.

They didn't notice that on their annual tax bill.

And then the other piece of that is there doesn't seem to be a way

to communicate to each individual lighting and landscaping district,

especially if they don't have a representative.

But even when they do, there isn't a process for them

to get the information about what's going on with the budget

and changes in service to the rest of the neighborhoods.

So I'm not sure what the plan is going forward.

I know that we've talked with the city manager about this,

and I think that that needs to be made clear at some point

because a lot of people won't be able to attend the meetings,

and we know how that gets difficult when people can't go.

But I think we've got to come up with some message to communicate.

All right, yeah.

So, I mean, you saw the list of the districts.

Over the next couple of years, we'll be doing a road show,

going to a lot of these districts and providing this information.

We've also teamed up with the city's communication team.

So they are doing targeted outreach on social media,

whether it's Nextdoor or Facebook,

to provide that information to the residents

to let them know that a meeting is happening

or this is how you get to the district webpage

to find all of those relevant documents.

So we're definitely doing that,

and we're going to try and reach as many people as we can

and provide the facts of the matter.

Are all these slides going to be available online

on the lighting and landscaping?

I have no issue with that.

All council presentations are posted on the-

Yeah, including the whole slideshow.

Sometimes I've checked back and there's been some missing pieces.

And then-

We will make sure that it's on the website.

We do it every morning.

And then the question that you brought up

about whether to continue the regular service,

especially in the districts with deficits,

or to discontinue that,

and that's basically what the residents of Natoma Station have been told,

is that anything above watering and keeping the streetlights on

will be cut with no maintenance for lawns and shrubs,

unless it's an emergency situation where a tree is about to fall down

and it needs to be removed.

So it sounds like that's still open for additional conversation this evening.

Yes.

So this is a preliminary engineer's report.

You guys can direct any changes you want to see before the final engineer's report,

which will set it in stone a little more there.

So it is the council's direction that will determine that.

However, our recommendation is to reduce those services as presented within that budget,

and then within those other four districts to continue providing that level of service that is budgeted,

which is the base level of service for their landscaping,

and allow them to accrue that deficit one last year while we give them the opportunity to vote on that.

And so the other piece of this is, and this is a common question, as you know,

is how did, you know, there's a deficit, so the bills were paid over the last few years,

so the residents are being asked, you know, in this upcoming budget to repay that deficit.

And it's a hard thing to explain to residents, and, you know, you've done a good job of showing this here tonight.

I don't know if our city manager wants to chime in on this,

because this came up at the two public hearings we had consistently,

and I have another question or two after that, but if you want to address that.

Is that okay?

So I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this.

I think it's important to note that I think all of us on our staff, on our team,

are kind of disappointed that we're at this point,

and we recognize that we have to do better going forward.

And, you know, as we've kind of analyzed and assessed the situation,

our review has demonstrated that the money spent

was to the benefit of the specific districts.

And so taking that from one step to the other,

it seems logical that those who receive the benefit should pay for that benefit.

If we were not to do this, basically other neighborhoods,

other residents would have to pay for the benefit that that specific district received.

And so in an effort to kind of be fair and equitable,

and then amortizing this in a significant period,

so that even if they raise the rates,

it's not going to be something that they really feel a lot of pain.

And what I mean by that is we would hate to have a situation

where we raise the rates for the district,

and they don't see any benefit or improvement in the district

until they pay off the deficit.

That's not what we're proposing.

What we're hoping for all of these districts

is that we can work together and communicate

and take our necessary tongue lashings at all the public input meetings

because we deserve it.

We deserve to hear about it,

and we're committed to doing better like this.

And furthermore, in our budget conversations,

hopefully we have documentation and other things

that people can follow not just now but throughout the year

and communicate with us because we want to be open

and transparent about all our finances.

But our hope for Natoma Station,

our hope for the other districts,

is that we can create a plan

so that we can refurbish these communities back to what they were.

And so that is kind of our ultimate goal is how can we come together to make that happen.

And I really appreciate Jameson and Derek and Kelly

and all the folks involved with this

because it's taken a lot of effort to get to this point,

but I think we've created a foundation

where we can show the information

and communicate with our communications team and get it out

so that it can be more of a productive conversation

as opposed to one of those frustrations.

And we're just going to have to demonstrate it.

But I think we're in a point where we can ultimately get to a better place.

Thank you, Brian.

So I really don't take this lightly

that these deficits were carried forward

for the great number of years that they were.

You know, this was the responsibility of prior administrations.

But we do need to move forward.

And so I'm trying to make sure that we're all well-educated enough

and that we're going forward with a process

that the community understands is for their benefit.

And that's a big hill to climb.

We've been climbing it for a while now.

But I want to double-check back

and make sure that this measure tonight

or the resolution is actually compliant with Prop 218

and that everything going forward is transparent.

So can you address that, Mr. Attorney?

Thank you, Council Member Leary

and Madam Mayor, Member of the City Council.

The answer is affirmatively yes.

We do not do anything that's separate and different

from what the law requires.

In fact, we have learned from this exercise

that over the years, even though with good intentions,

benefits were provided to the district residents,

we got to do it better, just like the city manager said.

We got to do this right.

So we're doing this the right way.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, thank you.

And I just want to reassure the public

that I've gone through some of the bills.

Jameson's, you know, passed information on to me

to show what has been paid for within the district

because I've repeatedly heard that they're, you know,

that the city is wasting money or spending things

that they're not supposed to have been spent on.

And I've gone through not every budget for the last 10 years,

but recent ones.

And, you know, the funds are being spent within the district

that have been spent today.

And there are things that are necessary.

There haven't been the funds to make improvements.

And I think that what you're trying to outline here is if these things,

if these district changes can be made

and the establishment of a new district can go forward

with a probably a higher payment each year on each individual's part,

that improvements can be made beyond just doing basic maintenance

in the future.

Yes.

I believe that's the goal.

Yes.

For instance, in Toma Station,

there were four options for the residents to choose from

what they wanted us to bring forward.

The fourth option being enhanced landscaping,

new renovation projects,

setting aside those funds for long-term replacement.

That's what was voted on.

And that's what will be brought forward on the 24th.

And so similar to Prairie Oaks,

I don't have the date here,

but it was only a few years ago,

I believe during COVID that that passed.

They've had a large landscape enhancement on Grover and Iron Point.

They addressed their ladder fuel this last year,

and they'll be addressing another main entry on Roussi

and Blue Ravine this year,

including new irrigation controller,

new landscape lighting,

new everything on that corner,

repainting their signs,

refinishing the lettering on the signs.

So that is the goal is to have these projects

that bring it back to what it was

when it was originally installed over a period of time.

Right.

So what we're seeing is as big deficits

that haven't been addressed can be addressed.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Can the member work out?

Yeah.

The last bullet item,

what does that mean to reduce the level of service

in Natoma Station?

You know,

I can't really see it in the budget,

in the district budget,

if that's what I'm looking at in the packet.

So can you kind of explain what level of service?

You're not saying we won't do any service.

You're saying reduction.

Yes.

Yes.

So reducing the level of service

for Natoma Station in particular,

the top line in their budget

is their scheduled maintenance.

And I believe that should show zero

within their district budget.

That is their scheduled landscape maintenance.

And so they needed to cut

approximately $100,000 from their budget.

Their landscape service was $101,000

and some rounding.

So essentially removing the landscape maintenance

in its entirety

is how we get to the numbers you have in front of you.

Okay.

So that was the only reduction

is the maintenance is almost everything.

But so is this something

that the community agreed to

as far as a reduction?

Or maybe I'll wait before I ask.

I don't think it's something

that we've gone out and polled

the district as far as what they want

at the public meetings

there was at least a number of folks

that said, hey, is there any way

if we're really going to bring this to a vote,

is there any way we can continue

at least maintaining that

for a period of time

until we understand

where we're going to end up?

And, you know,

I was pretty firm in those meetings,

especially because they were so upset

about the deficit.

How could you let it get to a deficit?

And then to ask for us to continue

to let it go deeper into a deficit.

But being that we're on a track

that I think we have

some positive momentum there,

I mean, personally,

I don't think I would be opposed

to continuing that on

and making it equal

with all the other districts

if we're...

But we just do it with eyes wide open

that if we increase the deficit

and for some reason these don't fail,

it's actually a significantly greater problem

to try to overcome that

if that increased revenue doesn't happen.

So there's, in some ways,

a calculated risk.

I'm not necessarily opposed to that risk,

especially with the work

that our staff has done

and the communications.

I feel better that things

will have a more positive outcome,

but I can't guarantee

that that will happen.

Okay.

Thank you.

That helps me.

And I think I'll wait

until I hear from the residents.

Thank you.

Jameson, could you go back

to that slide about Natoma Station

because I want to ask a follow-up question

and then I'll go to these gentlemen.

Because...

So even if you just kind of put aside

that $729,220,

that's kind of the debt

that's already been accumulated, right?

You're saying even if we cut their budget

by $100,000

and get rid of the maintenance,

we're still going to run a deficit

this year of $62,859?

So that's what I was talking about

during that.

We set aside the $70,000

because the engineer's report

and budget were going through

before we had bids back

from the assessment engineer.

And so the standard rate

that we set in all districts

was the $70,000,

which is kind of the full report

and everything.

However, they recently went through this.

They just have to pull

some new information,

but the backbone of that report is there.

So our recommendation

is to reduce their spending

by an additional $60,000.

And so their deficit for this year,

taking out that $70,000

and turning it into just $10,000

to pay for that

would be just shy of $3,000.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor Rachel, questions?

Sure.

So you mentioned something

which I think

I didn't really know.

you said the districts

that were created

before Prop 218

had no escalator.

Were they not allowed

to have an escalator

before Prop 218?

Was that why

they don't have an escalator

or was it not common practice?

I just kind of was getting back.

I hadn't heard

that part of the story yet,

so I wanted to get

some clarification on it.

Thank you.

If I may address that,

really good question,

Mr. Vice Mayor and Madam

is not a mayor of city council.

So it's actually

kind of the reverse.

they were able to do a lot

before Prop 218.

The council was able

to adjust the rate,

change the assessment,

increase, decrease,

a lot of flexibility

before Prop 218.

Prop 218 put a stop to that

because now

it's a properly-based assessment.

So if there's no escalator,

that means all of the assessments

at that time are locked in

and hence the council

lost the flexibility

because the Prop 218

cannot change any.

Hence the current rate

has been on the books

for 20-some odd years.

So essentially

they didn't think

they needed an escalator

when they put them in

because they didn't

because they just changed them

at will.

Yes, sir.

Nobody did before Prop 218.

So now those that have been

established after Prop 218,

I see some of them are CPI,

some of them are CPI

not to exceed 3%

and some are 4%.

What is our standard practice

that we're looking for

in new assessments?

Or what are we looking

to adjust to?

I mean, typically what I've seen

is the 3% rate escalator.

I mean, that's something

that as we go forward

and consult with folks

that we may come back

with a modified recommendation,

but that's typically

what I've seen

is the 3%.

Okay.

Yeah, it looks like

we've got a mix of everything.

So I was just kind of

trying to understand

what our standard was.

I think that kind of builds in.

If we were to pass a lower rate,

but it's a not to exceed,

if it doesn't have a not to exceed,

then we have maybe some more room

to grow into debt service, right?

If it's not to exceed 4%,

we may have some extra room

and flexibility 10 years down the road.

What I don't want to do

is pass something

and then kind of end up

right back in the same situation.

That's where I'm going with it.

So Mr. Vice Mayor,

you're spot on about

the escalator, the CPI.

The CPI is the best we can do

to give the council

the flexibility on the Prop 218

so that you can have

the flexibility to decide

how much adjustment

you want to make

within that escalator component.

That doesn't mean

every year it's automatic 3%.

It means every year

you have to go through

the engineer's report

and figure out

and find out

and engineer this before you

to make a recommendation

as to how much adjustment

you need to consider making.

It doesn't mean

every year it's automatic 3%.

It can be 1%.

It can be less.

It can be 0%.

But depending on the need

of the district

and also the cost

of providing the service.

Thank you.

Next question.

I live in Briggs Ranch

where it looks like

we are the next

guilty L&L in this.

And one of the things

when I'm looking

at the individual L&Ls,

I'm used to commercial

maintenance associations.

And when you set aside,

you know,

when you know you're going

to have to replace

your parking lot

every 20 years,

you really want to

make sure you're collecting

those assessments

along the way.

So that's the same

really as our

installment cost reserve here.

What I would suggest,

and maybe this is

a question at this point,

is shouldn't we also

be highlighting this

to the residents

along with the fund balance?

Because to me,

it's like,

well, yeah,

you're $200,000

in the hole

to the other L&Ls,

but you're also $200,000

if you're a Briggs Ranch L&L,

you're also $200,000

behind on money

you should have been

setting aside

for all the work

that you're going to do

in the future.

Yes.

So when we do

our individual outreach,

we will be highlighting

all of the budget items.

Out of respect

for your time

on budget hearing night,

I am at 40 minutes

and didn't want to,

I've got another

12 to 15 slides

that I didn't pull up

on all of those

other districts

for the next five years.

So there's a lot

of information

and we will be providing

that to each individual district

when we do that outreach.

But I guess you're

asking us to direct

the district engineer

to put the fund balances

front and center

on the report, right?

Yes.

So essentially that table

that I included in here

is what I'm looking

to have incorporated

into the actual

engineer's report.

to just further highlight.

Should we also include

in that table

the installment cost reserve?

We can absolutely do that.

For each district?

Just so you know,

like, hey, by the way,

you're also behind.

Because to me,

that's relevant information

that I would like to know.

We can do that.

Okay.

Next question.

Can we use L&L funds?

It seems like this has been

a lot of communication problem.

I went back to the last budget.

I can find these numbers

in the last budget.

I've looked at the city budgets

for many years,

and I can't say

these ever stuck out to me.

So it seems like it's a lot of it

as a communication challenge

that we're facing.

Are we allowed to use L&L funds

for public outreach?

And do we use any funds

for that at this point?

Like, is there any designated,

like, hey, 5% of this

should really be used

to get this message out

and to get people

that are serving

on this commission,

you know, to get that.

Like, an HOA probably

spends some of their money

on inviting people to meetings

and brewing some coffee

for the meeting, right?

Some donuts.

So a really good question.

The answer is probably

not coffee or donuts,

but incidental.

Not a huge amount.

Incidental expenses fine.

The primary purpose

for the assessments

is to pay for the improvements

for the benefit

of the district residents.

So those incidentals are fine,

but not a huge amount.

Outreach is fine.

So flyers would be okay.

Yes, sir.

All right.

Last question is,

when is Natoma Station

back on the ballot?

And sorry if you said this.

And when, if it were to pass,

when would funds

start being received?

So our intention

is to bring an item

back to you

at your next council meeting

to initiate the proceedings.

And then in August,

we would have the step two

of three,

which would order the balloting

and set the public hearing.

And then I believe,

I don't know that

I have the timeline on here,

but that puts us

in the October timeframe

after that 45-day waiting period

to then count the ballots.

And then I guess August

would be when it hits

the assessment rules.

I would have to talk with

the county to see exactly when.

Right.

And if it hit that,

then it would be over the course

of the next year

in those property tax installments

that we would get it.

So you're looking more

towards the end of 26, 27

that you would have.

End of 26,

beginning of 27.

Where we'd actually start

to see the revenue flow in.

Got it.

So it would be floating them

four months

until we knew a ballot result.

And then a year and a half

if we expect,

if we had a positive result,

we would be floating them

for a year and a half.

Yeah.

Stacey, does that sound about right?

If we're looking at the,

getting this moving forward,

Natoma Station,

we get a positive outcome,

we go through

the assessment process,

really,

that wouldn't happen

until like the 26, 27 year.

Is that?

Okay.

Thank you.

All good.

Council Member Koslowski?

Just one probably

unrelated question.

The sound wall

along East Natoma

on the outside of Briggs Ranch,

is that part of their

lighting district

or is that a city wall?

We'll look at Mr. Chance.

Because that was added

much later.

Yeah, that is a city wall.

It's the public works

department maintains that.

Okay.

Thank you.

I don't have any other questions.

All right.

Thank you.

I think we have several requests

to speak on this.

Just a reminder,

if you want to speak on this

but you haven't yet submitted

a blue card,

if you could just get a blue card

from the table,

fill it out,

hand it to the officer

and we will call you up.

Okay.

Your first speaker

on this item

will be Michael Amet

who will be followed

by Kevin Goddard.

So Michael coming down.

Kevin,

if you know you're next,

you can be up and ready

on deck.

Good evening, Michael.

Good evening, Mayor Aquino

and Honorable Council Members.

I'm a resident of Natoma Station

and have been for the last 29 years

and I was a little blindsided

by this whole thing

and finding out

that we've been spending money

we don't have.

That's contrary to the way

I run my household budget

and it seems poor practice.

Thank you, Mr. White Meyer

for acknowledging

that things have slipped

through the cracks

to put it politely.

I was one of those

who voted no

and the reason I voted no

on this new assessment

was because A,

I felt blindsided

like it just came out

of the blue

and I had no view

of it before.

Now, being a guy

who's got a life

and busy

and got lots of things

going on,

I admit that I don't look

at my property tax bill.

It comes out of the mortgage

et cetera

and I wasn't noticing details.

I don't spend a lot of time

on the city website

and I have not been

attentive to this

so I'll own my part.

However,

what I would like to say

is that

I appreciate the position

that we're in

and I understand

that we have work to do

and I know that it's time

to take some responsibility.

It's going to cost us some money.

We need to backfill a hole.

I'm happy to do that.

So my no vote

has become yes

and that is because

I value my neighborhood

and I value my neighbors

and I want to preserve

my property value.

It is in my interest

to vote yes

now that I understand

at a more granular level

what we're up against

and what we would

be dealing with.

That much said,

I would like

very much

if we could

be carried

until this new vote

I will do the footwork

to get out the vote

to change

no votes to yes.

We have a very

skinny margin

to overcome

and I think

we can do that

and I would really

appreciate not having

my neighborhood

go to crap

in the meantime.

So,

thank you very much.

Thank you for the feedback.

We appreciate it.

Okay,

our next speaker

will be Kevin Goddard

and next on deck

will be Bill Barcelona.

Welcome Kevin.

All right,

thank you Madam Mayor,

Mr. Vice Mayor,

City Manager

and esteemed

City Council.

I am Kevin Goddard.

I live in Natoma Station

so that's what I'm here

to talk about

and that's why

I'm in this section

and to kind of just

I appreciate the questions

you were asking

because I was sitting back

there going yes

this is the kind of stuff

that I want to see

and I want to hear.

These are the kind of questions

that again

the average citizen

has no idea.

I want to thank Jameson

for the presentation.

I just wish

that it had been done

before Natoma Station

had to vote on this

because like we're hearing

from these residents

they had no idea

what it meant.

It was just after Measure G

and people were like

I don't want to pay anymore.

Like I'm done paying more.

The city gets enough money.

I don't know.

But what they didn't understand

what that vote actually meant

and in talking to residents

when they voted no

they thought it was just

keeping the level of service

that they already had.

They did not realize

that voting no

meant removal of services.

The presentation

and understanding

of like the debt

and everything

and the other districts

what they're going through

makes complete sense.

I'm in full support of it.

I voted yes the first time

because I had been

paying attention.

I was voting.

I was part of it.

Went out and talked to people

but it wasn't enough.

So what I just ask of you

is to continue the services

that we have

in Natoma Station.

We'll work on it

to get this ballot measure out

and like you've seen

with the community outreach

there's a lot of people

that are very passionate about it.

Natoma sits

right at the entrance

to Folsom

right next to the outlets

which is a very popular place

in the summer.

I think it would not meet

Folsom's motto

of distinctive by nature

if we're letting

these places go.

So please consider that.

I appreciate you

and your service

to the city.

Thank you.

Thank you Kevin.

Okay the next speaker

is Bill Barcelona.

Bill will be followed

by Dean Williams.

Good evening Bill.

Good evening Mayor

and Council.

Thank you for

hearing us out tonight

and I want to thank

the city manager

for meeting with us

last Friday

and going through the budget.

I reviewed the budget

draft from 527-2022

which I think

is the only version

that's available

to the residents online

and I looked

at the engineer's report.

This problem

is significant.

It extends far beyond

Natoma Station.

It's not just

the eight districts

that are in deficit.

It's also an additional

10 landscape

and lighting districts

that will fall behind

over the next five years.

This is something

that's been brewing

for over a decade

and this was one

of the complexities

that we faced

when we were walking

the neighborhood

to garner yes votes

and as you saw

we only lost

by 1%.

There was a lot

of misunderstanding.

When we talk

about outreach efforts

the outreach efforts

were two of our neighbors

paid to develop

the flyers

and a handful of us

maybe half a dozen

of us

walked the neighborhoods

including Councilmember Leary

to try to educate

our neighbors

and of course

we had a poor understanding

of what was going on

as well.

All of those things

I think boil down

to the fact

that we really need

your help

to maintain

the minimal level

of services

that we have right now.

If you've been

through Natoma Station

in the last few years

you'll know

that our monumentation

is crumbling

our grass is dying

our landscape

is way past

its lifespan

our sprinkler systems

are outmoded

so just maintaining

what we have

will barely keep

the appearance

of the common areas

sufficient

for the next couple

of years.

We need your help.

Now in looking

at the budget

I have some

different numbers

based on what I'm seeing

from what Justin

has presented.

The eight districts

that are listed

in the budget

who are at a deficit

amount to about

$2,589,000

that is the current

deficit amount

that's about 1%

of the city budget

that you're evaluating

right now.

That is the deficit

that we're carrying

on these districts

and then over the next

five years

we'll move into

further deficits

if we don't do anything

with those additional

10.

So we really need

your help tonight

and we really hope

that you will help us

with our outreach efforts

as we move forward

to get this passed.

I think we have

a good shot

at getting it done

and thank you

for your time.

Thank you for the

feedback Bill.

Okay the next speaker

is Dean Williams

and Dean will be

followed by Margie Donovan.

Good evening Dean.

Good evening Mayor

and Council

and City Manager.

I don't want to repeat

everything that a lot

of people already talked

about Barbara

hit some really key points.

I live in the Tomas Station.

The frustration

that we've seen

is just the lack

of clarity.

Not knowing

what's going on.

We've already talked

about it.

I've talked to

a couple other people

just in Folsom

kind of getting there

and questioned

hey do you know

what's and they are

clueless.

I would bet

that 95%

of the people

in Folsom

have no idea

what a lighting

and landscape means.

That they're even

paying it or anything

and I think

that's a really big

issue for you

coming down the line.

So we're the guinea pigs

and we beat ourselves

up the first time

and we're ready

to come back around again

and as you've heard

and at the meetings

that you were involved

with Brian

once people understood

what was going on

and they realized

the cause and effect

they were like

yeah and that makes sense.

I mean geez

when was the last time

you didn't have

an increase

in 35 years?

that's basically

what has happened.

So I think

most people

are frustrated

with the debt

and how that got

pushed aside.

That's another story

and pointing fingers

isn't going to fix

the problem

at this point.

I do ask

that during

this time period

that we get

coverage

so that what

we do have

doesn't completely

go away

because that's going

to cost even

that much more

money to fix

if it all dies out.

Hopefully

and I think

we will pass it

then to help

cover us

until it comes

back around.

I do want

our measure

or assessment

to be like

I guess

was level four

because I want

to fix things

replace things

but also build

in replacement

costs.

The city

of Folsom

doesn't do that

at all

on our parks

and trails

and a lot

of other stuff

and this is just

a situation

that Folsom

never has done

and it's killing us.

We have no money

to do extra stuff.

We can't get money

for matching funds

for the bridge.

We can't get

the parks fixed.

We can't add more

because we're barely

surviving month to month

and we need to figure

out how to get

around that.

My other question

real quick

I'm hanging in there

is what happens

when we pay

the debt off?

We're paying

700 and some thousand

or whatever

it's going to be.

Now all of a sudden

we've got this

excess funds.

What happens?

He said we couldn't

lower it.

Is there a way

to get around it

or is it set aside?

Essentially what you do

every year

with the engineer's report

you can adopt

the new assessment.

If the situation

is one

where you're seeing

an influx

and the reserve

is building

at too great

of a level

and if you don't

have capital projects

to assign to it

then you can say

hey this year

we're not raising

the assessment.

We're leaving it

as it is.

And so

the maximum assessment

can still grow

per the CPI

of that year

but you just

would hold the line.

I think on

one of the charts

that Jameson had

there's two

of the districts

that are not

at the maximum level.

So I guess

one of the positives

about this is

through the

council hearing process

and the engineer's report

the residents

will continue

to have a say

that hey

let's raise it

advocate for

raising it

or hey let's

keep it where it is

and that way

we can actually

you know

use reserves

to fund the level

of maintenance

but you have that

ability to go up

or down.

Okay perfect.

One last thing

communication.

We suck at it

and it's what

this why we have

this problem

and I think

doing something

whether it's

a biannual report

that comes out

to every district

that says

here's your budget

here's where

the money's going

here's what you got

left for the year

and because then

people can look at

and go well

I thought you said

you were going to

fix the trees this year

and we can come back

and make sure

that that gets done

or at least

there's communication

because then

we can't

people can't

come back

and go well

I didn't know

if you're giving

them more information

and that's going

to help the city

council whether

it's the L&L

or Parks and Rec

or whatever

the more communication

you can get out

to people

the more information

that you can get

in our hands

the less

there's a lack

of trust

and there's a lack

of trust right now

and this will help it

Thank you Dean

I appreciate the feedback

Thank you

Okay our next speaker

is Margie Donovan

who will be followed

by Sharon Kendall

Margie go ahead

Thank you

I have a statement

and then a question

I am blind

and I find it amazing

that people do not

pay attention

to the tax bill

and know that we're

paying lighting

and landscaping

and I think

Jameson did

an outstanding report

Thank you Jameson

My concern

is for districts

that choose not to

sounds like

Natama Station

might be changing

their mind

but when public

trees are overhanging

the sidewalk

that's an access barrier

for those of us

that are blind

that navigate the city

and I would like to hear

if a particular area

chooses not to increase

and their funding

their taxes

for L&L assessments

what then happens

with those trees

that are overhanging

the sidewalk

become barriers

that's my question

Brian

you want to take that

Yeah

I appreciate the question

I mean

we'd evaluate

every circumstance

and our goal

would be to eliminate barriers

but this is kind of

a fundamental question

for everything

not just Natama Station

but for the budget

in general

as a community

although we have

these desires

to resolve

all the issues

if the money

is not there

regardless of the risk

or the liability

how do you make

something out of nothing

right

I mean so

I totally understand

that in this particular case

if it was just a tree limit

we would go out there

and cut it

but when you magnify

that by literally

thousands

tens of thousands

of work orders

if the funding

is not there

and so

what we're committed to

is putting together

budgets

and communication

and other things

so that we can

have a plan

for all of those things

and we may have to

modify what we focus on

compared to what we do now

but those are things

that we're going to

have to work through

thank you

well I will close

by stating this

in the neighborhood

in which I live

we have a lot of trees

that belong to the city

and they've been barriers

I this

in the last couple weeks

have been walking around

with pruners

and cutting them

when I'm hit in the face

by them

and that's my solution

because the city

is not staying on top

of this

for whatever reason

and I don't believe

that the ravino

is an issue

in this discussion

thank you

thank you Margie

for the feedback

okay our next speaker

is Sharon Kendall

okay thank you

all right

Jameson would you just

mind putting back up

that slide

where you ask us

to take action

and for our

okay

and Madam Mayor

could I add a comment

before

you know based on

the comments

that we've had

and then just

the feedback

that we've received

through the public

comment period

you know

in this recommendation

we were leaving

Natoma station

out as one

that we would

carry over

staff would be

comfortable

if the council

wanted to include

that

that way

we could continue

it over

obviously there's

risk when we do

that that the

deficit could grow

but I mean

my personal opinion

based on

all the different

challenges we had

with the last

process

despite that

it just

barely

you know

did not pass

and I think

from what we've

heard today

with the increase

in communication

and information

that we have a

very good chance

of seeing success

great thank you

can I ask a

quick clarification

on that

are you saying

for the four months

until the next ballot

or the year and a half

until the funds

arrive

well I mean I guess

in essence

this is a critical

policy decision

in that

it would set the

precedence for all

of those

in that

you know

because none of us

want to see things

just degrade to

such a level

that it actually

costs more

to replace it all

later on

and so we would

go that with our

eyes wide open

in the sense that

we would know

that it's actually

that 18 month

period before the

funds would come in

but I guess we would

be supportive of that

if the council

is comfortable

sure but I'm

saying is if they

vote yes

in four months

then we'll kind

of be assured

for that

oh sure

but the other

year

oh you're saying

if it's a no

vote then

then we would

reduce level of

service at that

point because it's

the voters have

spoken twice right

right and so

we'll talk about

this a little later

in the budget

presentation

with the process

that we will

follow in

having kind of

a budget review

in September

October and then

also in February

that we would

have other

opportunities to

either turn on

or turn off

the funding to

that to those

districts

thank you

I'm sorry

I just wanted

to add one other

thing because we've

been talking about

the current level

of service

which has actually

been diminished

probably over the

last 10 years

so plants aren't

being replaced

when they die

dead plants aren't

even being pulled

out of the ground

I mean there's

there's been a

significant reduction

anyway so we're

not talking about

going back to what

I think a basic

level of service

would you know

what that term

would mean to

most people

it would mean

more than

we've been

getting so

I think we're

saying maintain

for 25-26

what we did

for 24-25

yes

correct

yeah

Jameson is that

does that make

sense

if we were to

continue with

Natoma station

that 100,000

that you removed

would go back

but that 100,000

represents a pretty

much bare

minimal

yes

so the deficit

the operational

deficit would be

roughly 105,000

this coming year

all right

I'll entertain a

motion

are you ready

sure

I can

I can make

the motion

but I guess

I just want to

get a little

clarity first

because to me

I also want to

be cognizant

that this is a

democratic process

right

at the end of

the day

if the voters

say they don't

want this

then I want to

respect their

wishes

and so

I just wanted

to be clear

that we're

going to

extend funding

for the 25-26

year

unless

the voters

vote this

down

in October

and then

in that case

we don't

fund it

for the whole

25-26 year

we reduce

level of service

based on their

wishes

would that mean

that we bring

it back

after the ballot

yeah

I mean

whether it be

through the

normal budget

process

there would be

a decision

point

I mean

one we would

just carry it

on if it

passed

we would know

if it's a

no vote

we would come

back just

it would be

when we

announce the

results of it

and we would

just say hey

clearly this

means that we

have to

modify the

budget so

that we're

not I mean

we would end

those contracts

or whatever it

is

yeah I don't

hopefully that's

not a discussion

I just want to

be prepared for

that I don't

want to make

sure we're

respecting the

will of

folks that

have voted

I think that

needs to be

made abundantly

clear to the

community

that you know

it will be

extended but

if there

is a

no vote

that

that

more draconian

measures will

be taken

understood

yes

so this is

resolution number

11399

yeah I'm

comfortable too

with the

what if

you're directing

the engineer

to basically

include the

total district

account balance

in the table

so you guys

can figure out

what the total

district account

balance means

but I think

that would

mean what

we're missing

and you

know deferred

collections

also and

with that I'll

move resolution

11399 with

a maintenance

of funds for

all of the

LNL districts

as included in

the district

engineers report

do we have a

second

I'll second

okay and I

know council

member

has a comment

yeah I have a

couple comments

I agree with

the direction of

including an

Natoma station

on the continuing

level of service

I also agree

you don't have

to come up

I don't have

a question

I don't think

I don't think

but we never

know

I agree with

that and I

but I also

agree that

you know

they're going

to speak very

loud at the

next ballot

so we

if we have

to reevaluate

that we need

to that's

just to

encourage

I do think

that we

want to

or at least

I do want

to support

Natoma station

as much

as possible

as they

need to

get their

voice out

because you

really are

as one

of the

speakers

said

the guinea

pig

for the

rest of

our

LNLs

and

but I

do want

to say

thank you

Jameson

for your

presentation

you did

a great

job

these are

kind of

tricky

issues

because

this is

showing

what

transparency

will

do

and

maybe

why

there

wasn't

as

much

transparency

in

the

past

because

it

feels

icky

in

the

beginning

it's

a little

bit

more

chaotic

but once

we get

there

and we

can build

that trust

then it's

we're much

better

together

all being

on the

same

page

and

and

then

deciding

together

how we

move

forward

as a

city

to make

sure

that we

still

are

as

vibrant

as

we

once

were

and

are

at

the

time

and

can

continue

to

be

so

I

do

want

to

thank

our

city

manager

for

that

he

hasn't

shied

away

from

any

tough

issues

so

far

in

the

three

or

four

months

that

he's

been

here

so

I

really

appreciate

that

and

I

think

that

Natoma

station

residents

are

feeling

that

I

also

want

to

thank

you

for

your

tone

tonight

you

were

very

respectful

understanding

I don't

think

anyone

is

getting

everything

they

want

but

I

do

appreciate

that

a lot

of

you

engaged

in

the

process

and

the

workshops

and

to

our

council

member

being

available

to

you

guys

so

thank

you

for

that

tone

you

did

a

really

great

job

and

I'm

really

proud

to

call

you

residents

of

Folsom

and

so

those

were

my

comments

any

other

discussion

I

just

want

a

little

bit

of

clarification

here

and

that

is

we

are

approving

the

preliminary

engineers

report

tonight

and

we

are

asking

for

the

final

engineers

report

to

include

the

projected

deficits

and

we're

not

approving

at this

time

the

I

guess

the

actual

rate

of

repayment

or

the

time

period

for

repayment

because

I

think

there's

still

some

desire

to

change

that

for

this

particular

district

and

I'm

not

proposing

that

we

add

that

tonight

but

I

think

there's

still

additional

negotiations

or discussion

that needs

to take

place

when we

come back

with the

final

engineers

report

is that

correct

if I

could ask

a

clarifying

question

are you

talking

about

the

period

with

which

the

payback

occurs

correct

yeah

I mean

we'll

come back

with a

formal

recommendation

with the

final

engineers

report

is that

okay

Jameson

if we

do

that

related

to

the

payback

yes

yeah

because