Okay.

Go ahead.

Not doing our beginning.

Go ahead and call the meeting to order at six oh three and I'll call on staff to provide information on how to participate and comment.

Yes, good evening.

So in pr let's see here, remote join on your computer or smartphone at umtere dash ORG dot um zoom.

No, that's for per.

I'm sorry for me.

Uh the meeting is available on YouTube or at the Zoom uh dot gov uh zoom.gov if you want to participate um live.

Uh public comments will be up to three minutes per speaker based on the chair uh discretion.

Um total time allocated for public comment this evening will be um fifteen minutes for items on consent, 30 minutes for public appearance items, and uh fifteen uh thirty minutes for general public comment.

Um that is what I have.

You miss your buddy.

I do is not here this evening, so please give me a little uh grace.

Right, Richard, can you take roll call?

I will take roll call.

Uh Aguajito Oaks.

Give me one second.

Dean is remote, but Dean, we did not get your um we did not get your uh request to attend remotely, so he can't participate this evening.

So Aguajito Oaks is not present.

Altamesa?

Present.

Here.

Okay, Deer Flats is absent.

Del Mani Beach?

Here.

Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande.

Here.

Okay, and who was that, please?

Joseph Hill.

Joseph, did you uh tell us you were gonna attend remotely?

Uh probably did not.

Was out of state just for turning.

So I'm not sure if Scott's there.

Uh Scott is not present.

All right.

Um just we would have to go through the um I guess I can go back to Dean then.

So Joseph, in order for you to participate remotely, you would have to give us uh justification.

So were you you you say you were traveling?

Yes, I always been out been out of state.

And just keep in mind you only get two um remote attendees per um per 12 months.

Okay.

Uh downtown?

Here.

Lynn Wood?

Here.

Monterey Vista.

Here.

All right, new Monterey.

Here.

Oak Grove.

Right.

And uh you're you want to introduce yourself briefly since you're new tonight.

Sure.

Hi, my name is Jennifer Davidson, and uh I've been here in Monterey for about three years, and I'm very excited to serve the community.

Old town.

Here.

Good evening.

Del Monte.

I don't see.

So I'll go to Dean Aguito Oaks.

Oh, let me upgrade you to uh panelists that allow you to speak.

Speak, Dean.

Can you hear me?

Yeah, there's some echo, but go ahead, Dean.

So uh can you give us uh a reason why you're attending remotely this evening?

I'm filling in for AJ Purdy, I've just had surgery.

Surgery, thank you.

We have quorum.

Okay, great.

Um so we'll go ahead and move to general public comments.

Uh so at this time I'll call for public comments on matters that are not on the agenda and within the jurisdiction of the NCIP.

If there's anyone present here who wants to make a public comment, if you'd like to stand up.

Yes, you can line up site.

Okay, I'm new, I'm not new to Modern.

I'm sorry.

I just want to make sure.

Is there anyone else?

Just one more person.

So there's two people here, and then people online.

One person online.

Okay.

Well, I'm sorry, and I had a request if we could just make sure that everyone speaks uh projects this evening.

Speaks loudly when you can.

Thank you.

Do I have okay?

So we'll have you we'll have comment for three minutes per person, and then just remember to speak into the microphone.

I sure will.

Yes.

Okay.

Uh, my name is Shark Carter.

I've lived here for many, many decades.

I live on the hill in Monte Vista area, and for years we've had flooding.

Um houses are here, my house is down here, and every time it rains, we have a lake.

Okay.

Now I I'm I've been at uh become a Culver expert.

So I went down to see Andrew.

So I got this little map.

Have you all seen this before?

Have you seen it?

Okay.

In my on my street, there are no culverts.

So from the main here to the main there drains, there are no culverts on the uphill side.

Airgo, all the downhill houses.

I've just found this out because Gene was nice enough to bring, I think Andrew up about three months ago.

I found out from all my neighbors that we all have drainage problems because there are no culverts on the uphill side.

Okay, the culverts on this diagram right here are the responsibility of the homeowners, correct?

You all know that?

Well, they are so the uphill side and my dear neighbors would have to spend a lot of money to put culverts now.

Nothing makes sense.

Because if you put one culvert and I pay for it on the uphill side, it's not attached to the next door neighbor's culvert, right?

So we have a problem.

We have a major drainage problem in the downhill driveways and the downhill basements, etc.

So I am here tonight to ask you how does my street get money from you all.

I have no idea because I've never been here before.

Andrew gave me this application, right?

To apply for a culvert from one main to the next main on the uphill side, not piecemeal by my neighbors.

They don't want to pay for it.

Nothing makes sense.

So I'm asking, how do I get money to put a culvert from one main to the next main on Sierra Vista Drive?

So I think Andrew gave me this application.

So we do we've had a major major problem for 50 years.

So does that make sense?

Do you have any questions?

I guess this is the right application, correct?

No.

What?

Stop the nail section.

Yeah, and that's the three minutes.

Am I up?

Yes, your time is up.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So it's a traffic issue.

I live on Franklin, right on the steepest crest of the hill of Franklin, two blocks below the opening of DLI.

And my concern is that when the classes are out up there, uh I think I think they used to be out at five o'clock, but now they're out at four, and I think they are summer out at three.

So when these people are out of classes, and maybe some of the staff too, the traffic is intense coming down Franklin Street.

If you're ever down on Van Buren or Pacific and you look up Franklin Street, you can see it's a straight line of cars coming down.

Well, that in itself isn't the issue, but so many people now are on those motorbikes or on bikes and coming down Franklin Street.

It's at the speed that so many come down.

If one is if a person driving, and this happened to me the other day, that's why I thought about coming here.

If you're on high street, and Franklin's coming down here, high's here, and you stop at the stop sign here.

You there's a big house on the corner, and it blocks the view pretty well of cars coming down until the car is right here.

So if there were an accident of a bicyclist coming down, I mean they come down so often so very fast.

Maybe because I was a nurse, I'm more aware of the disasters that can happen.

But it's not just that one bicyclist could be hit by a car, and you might be two severe act, you know, two people badly injured, but there's no way to easily stop that entire line, excuse me, coming down from DLI.

The cars that would come down and have to break suddenly.

It would be it would be it seems to me catastrophic.

So my question was whether it might be possible to put some kind of signs up right below DLI, and then in the next block that says something like slow down or caution.

Um I can just imagine when I'm witnessing these cars coming down, and especially the bikes so fast that if there were an accident, it would be a multi-person accident.

Thank you.

Okay, and then there's one person online.

All right, Esther, you should be able to speak.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everybody.

I just wanted to give you all an update on the Laguna Grande Park project that's kind of on hold for the um approved workout equipment.

We are going to resubmit um an amendment to it, because we found out the location where it was originally submitted for would require tree removals, and we don't want to have that happen at the park.

And we have a new location.

Um, and as I've mentioned before, we're working with um the city and others to try and get nonprofits to join us in funding this.

So when we submit this amendment, we're going to actually ask that installation costs and leveling out the um ground in that area be included since they weren't in the original um estimate that we got.

So I just wanted to let you all know that we are actively working on this, and while we understand that the budget is going to be a problem, we plan on pursuing this so that in two to three years we want to have all our ducks in a row and be able to get this through when we are hopefully out of this budget crisis.

And since our project was ranked at the top with unanimous votes, we are hoping that the amendment will be enough to just finally make it happen.

So I'm looking forward to hopefully seeing that happen with all of you guys on the committee.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

So we'll go ahead and move on to next section uh where I'll call for approval or comments, modifications to the minutes of any or all meetings held on January 28th, 2026 and June 10th, 2026.

Are there any comments or motions?

I move to approve the two sets of minutes that we have in front of us.

Oh second, take roll call, please.

Yes.

Are we old?

Yes.

Altamesa.

Yes.

That's no vote.

No.

I was not present at the January 28th meeting, so I'll abstain, but I vote aye on Dintec.

Your flats, I was absent, sorry.

Um, Del Money Beach.

Yes.

Uh Del Mani Grove Lagoon Verde.

Yes.

Downtown.

Hi.

Richmond Flats.

Hi.

Glennwood.

Yes.

Monterey Visca.

Yes.

Monterey?

Yes.

Oak Grove.

I was not at January 28th.

Um, but I can improve June 10th.

Old Town.

Skyline?

Yay.

Bill.

Absent.

All right.

Motion passes.

We'll move on to the next section.

Informational reports and staff comments.

Uh we'll call on city staff for any presentation of informational reports.

I do not have an informational report this evening.

Okay.

I just have one quick update that we did submit uh the North Remont Gap Project to an RSCP grant.

And just to note for the record, I see Jill Johnson is present for Bill of Del Monte.

Thank you.

All right, next is NCAP informational reports.

I do not have any informational reports.

So we'll move on to our first public appearance item.

I'll hand it off to city staff.

Okay, give me one second to uh pull up uh my presentation.

Okay, thank you.

So this evening uh we're going to um talk about let me go back here.

Item four recommend city council appropriate additional funding, grand CIP projects previously approved.

So uh we have I think it's either eight or nine projects to go through.

Um I'll present each one.

We'll have uh opportunity for committee questions, public comment, uh committee um deliberation, and then a vote.

Yeah, make a recommendation.

So the first project uh this evening is uh American Legion to Harrison Way um stairs, so path improvements focusing on the stairs.

If you remember back in June, I presented this project, and uh we had looked at um from the American Legion all the way up to the stairs.

Uh there was a request by members of the committee to narrow the scope and to look at the stairs and railing on this project only.

Uh so based on that request, we would look at an additional hundred thousand for a total of one hundred and eighty-eight thousand on this project.

I'm gonna add sorry.

Uh sorry about that.

Um so and then here's a picture of that stair, uh those stairs.

Um on the left is coming up from Veterans Drive, one on the right is going up to Harrison Street.

Sh.

Oh, let's have somebody else.

Sorry, didn't all right.

Okay.

Um we have here Casanova Openova Park improvements.

This one is uh original budget was 125,000.

The majority of the work has been completed, which was the installation of a metal fence, uh shade structure, and we've relocated a park bench.

Um the original fence budget was estimated at 75,000.

However, the final cost was 106,500.

Uh, and that pushed us over budget.

And in order to complete the project, we're requesting an additional 20,000, which would take this project up to 145.

Uh, and that to complete the project would be the installation of a new food prep table with umbrella.

Um, and I know there was conversation previously about other sources for funding, and uh we've we've looked into those, and and this NCIP would be the only uh funding source to complete this work.

And then so here's some pictures of the work that's been done on the left.

You have that that fence in the center, you have the the new shade structures that were uh installed and the relocated bench on the right.

Um the next project up here is Fairgrounds Road Airport Road Street Lighting Project.

Uh the original budget was 150,000.

We've completed design, the installation of these lights.

Um additional budget required is 432,000.

The reason for the significant price increase is that originally the plan was to install the lights on the existing utility poles.

That is not possible, given us several different factors, including equipment that's all on those poles and um the height of the utility lines.

Uh so then in order to do that, we would need to install nine uh 21 total um street lights on new steel poles.

Um, and then the question was how many were on airport road?

There's planned for two.

Um, and price of steel and the lights are driving and the number of lights are driving the cost increase.

This total project would be 582,000.

And then here you can see those poles with the existing equipment and lines on Fairgrounds Road.

The next project up is uh Bruce Areas Way lighting upgrades.

Original budget was 35,000.

Uh we've completed design again.

These would be wired lights.

Um, and we're requesting an additional 71,000.

That would make this total project um 106,000.

And uh, this is that Bruce Arias Way Park.

Uh the next one up is Moonrest Avenue and via Arbolus Curb Ramp.

Um construction original budget was 25,000.

Again, we've completed the design requesting uh 76,000 additional.

Um of the things that's driven up the cost here is that it was originally planned for one curb ramp.

However, uh, we can't do that because the other curb ramp is not up to current um requirements.

So we would need to upgrade both curves curb ramps.

So that's that's part of what's driving this, and and uh just additional costs.

And here's the location.

So you can see the existing curb and curb ramp that's not up to current um uh Americans with Disability Act and what ProAG uh requirements, and then the one to the south of that that has no curb ramp.

The next one is uh request for additional funding to support the uh swing space at Hilltop Park Center for the relocation of the firefighters from Fire Station 12.

The original budget was 1,050,000.

Uh we made a request for an additional 900,000 to bring it just under 2 million, and uh at to date we've completed uh building permitting.

Uh only thing that it's pending award of a contractor, and we're currently in review of specifications.

Uh so we're again requesting an additional 100,000 for swing space, which includes um uh improvements to the uh existing facility at Hilltop, plus uh bringing in some trailers for restroom and um shower facilities and for their uh firefighter equipment, uh including for uh their their uh turnouts.

And here you can see our plan.

Uh the greens the green rectangle is a carport uh fire to for to protect the fire truck.

Um we have our shower trailer in blue, turnout gear container in orange, and then the firefighters will be located in this north west corner of the building.

Um next one is uh requesting additional funding for solicitable field lighting.

Original budget was 422,000.

We've requested 42,200 previously, and now we're requesting additional 50,000.

The design has been completed, and the equipment is um it has been ordered, and we're at a place right now where we need to upgrade the electrical panel breakers, electrical service and wiring.

Um as if you recall from last time, this is what the cabinet looks like at that powers those lights at Solicitor Ballfield.

And unfortunately, we were not aware of the condition when we submitted the original um cost estimate.

And then we are requesting an additional 2840.89 cents to close out the Del Monte Beach boardwalk uh cable project.

And this is mainly because we made some higher um quality improvements, I would say to the boardwalk and where they added some uh alcoves and and some good uh railings into some of the spaces.

Uh and this is the final actual cost for this project.

And here you can see some of that that work that was done.

So these wood railings were an improvement over the previous uh wire cables that were there.

And that is the end of that um that presentation available for questions.

Any questions from the committee?

So I have two first for a fair grounds road.

The original was 150,000.

Did you spend all of that 150,000 for the design, or is there still money left in that?

We have not spent the entire 150,000.

There is, I don't have the number in front of me, but there is funding available.

Yes.

And the other question is of all of these, did either the committee or you reach out to the submitter of these projects to let them know that this was coming up.

Um I did not personally reach out to any of the submitters on these projects.

So some of these submitters have no idea that this is going on.

That is correct.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

So we don't have a contingency fund project anymore, but we do have uh a fund balance that's available.

What is the amount of fund balance that's currently available?

Current fund balance is just shy of 700,000.

What's uh what's the combined total of additional funding that's being requested?

So for these projects, the total would be 851,840 as is right now.

Any other committee questions?

Um so I noticed that um when I just kind of look through the the projects.

There are there's one project in here that's from 2023, three projects from 2024, and then the other four projects are all really recent.

You know, they're the last real group of projects that got going.

So um I just want to make a uh point of that.

I was gonna ask the question about the money myself because I didn't see where your money worked out for you with the amount of cost versus the amount of fund balance.

But since that's been stated, I'll just leave it with um prioritization and kind of how do we look at the other.

I'm gonna guess at the number, Reggie, you know 50 projects that are out there besides these that have been hanging around in the bin for since the 2023 perhaps or the 2024 that are probably accruing cost because that's the way life is, right?

When it takes longer.

So I'm not sure that you're gonna be the answer for that, but I just want to get it on the record, so to speak.

And if you give me an answer, I'd like it.

Right.

So um it is up to the committee to prioritize the projects and to and to make a recommendation um on any or all or none.

Um I I think that they're all available.

I mean, if anyone has a question on any of them specifically, I can give you more information.

Um, I'll just share that I personally was not going to include the fairgrounds lighting, but um I had a request to include it, so that's why it's here for what that's worth.

Um, without that, there's an extra form that removes it that lowers it by 400,000.

Is there anyone online that has a question?

I see Dean's hand is up.

My bad.

Should be different.

Hey, Dean, uh, I'll mute you back.

Uh Jill.

Hi, um, could you give me a little more information on the type of cover that's for that fire truck?

So the fire truck awning, we haven't completed the design, but what we're looking at right now is a steel structure.

Um that would be it.

So part of the cost is to design the footings for that.

So it'll have open sides and a and a top cover.

Okay.

So I I was thinking like the big tents people put up to make garages out that wouldn't work and be no.

So, you know, we we've talked to the fire department and there, you know, and and as they put it, I and I don't want to misinterpret it, but it's like it's a million dollar vehicle.

Um, we want to keep the sun and you know, other debris off of it.

So, you know, we're looking at spending, I would say an appropriate amount of money to protect that vehicle.

And then um long term the plan is to reuse that uh awning at fire station 13.

So it it will get relocated and reused.

Okay, that's good to know.

I was just wondering how the neighbors felt about a big you know, aluminum or tin roof.

So at um Hilltop Park Center where we're proposing to park it, there are no um houses on that side of the facility.

So I'm thinking it'll be minimal impact.

And we're looking at um a total time of five to six months where this will be there.

So that's kind of our schedule for uh construction.

Okay, I have another question on another project, the Casanova Oaknell project.

Um in my family, we have something that's called need to have versus want to have.

Can you hear me?

Yes, yes, I can hear you.

And uh so I think to myself, well, you know, we're prioritizing things, and like does a food prep station need to be right now completed?

Is that something could be pushed down the road a little bit when there's hopefully not the budget crisis we're in?

Or um or does it have to be there to um you know to provide the need that they originally, you know, in other words, can't that wait?

I I I would say that's a committee deliberation comment.

I yeah, so hold it.

Okay.

I was just wondering like, does it need to be there for some other part of the design?

Like do you need to do it now so that you can complete the rest of it, or is it just um something that can be done later?

That was my question.

So maybe I can answer that.

Um I was waiting till committee comment period, but I did speak to the submitter on the food um prep table and the shade structure.

He still feels very strongly that it's needed.

He is the original proposal.

Um he is very adamant that for food safety issues that this is important given the number of um barbecues and parties that this park does host on the weekends, as well as the upcoming boys and girls club coming in, um, that there'd be adequate shade for food prep.

Um so he is very adamant that this project go forward at this time so that we can complete park improvement project proposal that was approved a while ago.

Um, but I did have a question about the location of where the food prep table has gone.

One of the comments the submitter made was maybe they could cut a branch off the tree to put the shade structure.

I did go look.

There's no way that that's a big tree.

That branch that's pointing towards the food prep is quite large.

But there was a comment made during our uh the course of reaching out to several people in the neighborhood about this particular project.

Can that table be moved perhaps maybe over where the cert um trailer was, and that could be used as part of the structure for the shade structure?

Maybe that would cut some costs down.

Um I don't know that it necessarily needs to be placed where it is.

Um my understanding was there was going to be an additional table, food prep table, since that one couldn't host the um stage structure.

I don't know if that can be moved, but I'm kind of curious where proposed location for this new table and shade structure is and how we looked at different areas that maybe might have some infrastructure that we can go ahead and use as part of the shade structure.

So what we're looking at is placing that table in this area here.

Um and it would be like a one unit, a table with an umbrella.

Okay.

Um and uh so that's and it's clear of any any overhang from trees, and we think that would be the uh the best location.

So Reggie, is this shade structure that you're proposing like those umbrellas?

My understanding it was a much larger kind of covering.

So I mean, these types of for lack of a better word, equipment are you know, manufactured and they, you know, so we're looking at like one piece of equipment, it's a table with a stroke with an awning or cover um that would meet the expectation.

So I'm sorry if I if I didn't understand the question, but it's not gonna be the size of these umbrellas, if that's the question.

No, it'll be lower and just over the table.

Kina, do you want to go?

Yeah, so one other um question Hans actually had mentioned.

He's not here um today.

The the Monros and Via Arbolus curb ramp construction might be able to be integrated with the San Burnaby project and thus have some cost reduction associated with it.

I mean, I don't know how that would work, but he suggested that.

That is the plan, actually.

Oh so you've already included the cost reduction in this estimate, Darren?

Correct.

That is the plan.

Okay.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Any other questions?

Okay, so we'll close uh committee questions and open it up for public comment.

Um you'd like to make a public comment if you could stand and move to the left side of the vault.

So I have three people and one person online.

Okay, so we'll go ahead and do three minutes for each person.

Whoever would like to go first.

Give me one second to that up here.

Just give me one second, sorry.

Okay, ready when you are.

Good evening, SP NCIP committee.

My name is Greg Greenley, assistant fire chief for the Monterey Fire Department.

I'm here to speak on the department's behalf for the uh proposed or recommendation for the additional money for the hilltop remodel.

Really just want to point out that one of the key components to getting the remodel and the swing space at Hilltop is that allows us to keep that fire engine in the new Monterey uh neighborhood and in our jurisdiction for that.

We're really looking forward to having found a home for that at the hilltop spot.

But then also, as Reggie pointed out, we have the uh added benefit that the uh carport and the storage box are both things that we reused at station 13 in the future, and all about protecting the city's investment in the fire engine, the equipment, everything we have up there, but also trying to minimize minimize the impact to Hilltop while we're there.

We've had several meetings with their staff and the city staff looking at how can we orient the parking, where can we put the engines to address the concerns about uh impacts to the neighborhood?

And we think we have a really good plan there.

Um obviously have a few unexpected costs, so we're looking forward to hopefully the continuous support from you all to get that project done and get us moved up to Hilltop so we can get the fire station remodel and get everybody back home to a much nicer uh station.

So thanks for considering that addition.

Good evening, my name is Ken Hutchinson, the vice president for the Monterey Firefighters uh association.

I just wanted to come and thank you guys for your continued support to public safety.

I know you guys have a lot of projects and uh a lot of things you want to accomplish in your neighborhoods.

Um, but your commitment to the public safety is much appreciated by the firefighters.

I've worked through a previous uh relocation from a fire station during a remodel, very similar to this one uh 20 plus years ago.

And I can tell you the cost for the relocation was um close to the cost being proposed here.

And so I think that's uh testament to the work that's been done to minimize the impacts on the cost for relocating.

And we appreciate all you do.

Thank you.

So much shorter than them.

It's on.

Okay.

Um Chelsea Linovska.

Um here to actually draw attention to, I think what is technically under one of the Casanova Oknol uh projects, but is for the fairgrounds road lighting.

Uh, this is one of the oldest projects, I think that's listed on here.

It was initially submitted in 2019-2020 in a slightly different budget state than what we're currently in now, and obviously also at a much lower cost.

Um, I did speak with our neighborhood association and a few other neighbors about this specific project.

And many feel that the ballooning costs do not make it worth the initial submission submittal.

Um mind you, the neighborhood association did not submit this project.

Um, the Monterey County Fairgrounds actually submitted this project, which led me to a lot of other questions about like is this even NCIP related, but that's a city attorney thing, not mine.

And so I do, I do wonder the utility of it today.

We have not had complaints in our neighborhood of recent of issues of vandalism or burglaries, which were specifically quoted in this initial project submission.

The way the lights would have to be oriented with the steel costs, which thank you, Reggie, by the way, for the estimates on that.

However, those costs have gone up in Q3 as well, another 5%.

So I would like, you know, add a little bit more onto that padding.

Um, and depending on when it actually gets done, could potentially cost even more further down the road.

Uh so it is something that I don't personally see as a high need currently, uh, maybe sometime in the future.

Uh, but it is also something you know that is more from uh the community businesses standpoint necessarily than the I mean businesses are vital part of our neighborhood.

I'm not negating that.

It's just not something necessarily the neighborhood association today is like we need to do this under the current cost portfolio.

So just for consideration for the committee.

Thank you.

And then we have one person online, so Esther, you should be able to speak.

Yes, thank you.

Um, I just wanted to comment that it seems odd that the fairgrounds would submit such an expensive project to our NCIP or even the city when they're a state entity and they should be going somewhere else for some funding.

Um, I would rather see that money go to our fire department than to the fairgrounds.

So I think that um again, I've said this many times in the past.

Um, we all have to start thinking differently about NCIP project funding and trying to collaborate with other nonprofits and other entities, whether they're state or county to help fund some of these things because this just isn't sustainable, even when we get our city deaf deficit in order.

Um, we should be thinking differently about how we are funding some of these projects that are submitted.

So I think this this one in particular um is a good example of where there should be other funding that should be considered before us giving them that much, especially if it didn't come from uh a resident specifically in that neighborhood.

Thank you.

Okay, that's the end uh public comments.

All right, so we'll open it up for committee discussion.

Um we'll start, Jamie.

You know, this has been a really interesting discussion.

We haven't had it quite so clear, I think uh recently.

One of the things we look at when we look at projects that need more money is we look at it and say, you know, I know we we say do the estimates fast, don't waste a lot of time and engineering dollars making the estimates.

And we we grant they're going to be different, they're not going to come in exactly the same.

When I look at this list, I see they cleanly fit into two buckets.

One is we did the estimate, you know, things change a little bit, prices change a little bit.

Yeah, makes sense.

The other is wait.

Looks like a change in scope.

We do not approve changes in scopes uh at this level.

We say come back and ask for more money.

This is a new project.

You know, we say, hey, I wouldn't have voted for that if if I had known it was going to cost that much.

New project change in scope.

And it's very interesting.

You can kind of look at it accounting geek-wise as a percentage.

When you have something costs 100 and they want 400 more, you divide 400 by the 100.

That's a 400% increase.

So when I look through this list, I see that that one wanted 15% more, one wanted 5% more, two wanted 10% more.

Those feel like reasonable estimates and projects that just need to get wrapped.

Then I see one wants 100% more, one wants 400% more, one wants 200% more, and one wants 300% more.

That feels like a change in scope.

So I've already commented on the picnic table or the food prep table on the shade structure, which was part of the original project application.

It's just such a fence cost more than anticipated.

Um, in terms of the fairgrounds lighting, since that's technically in my neighborhood, um, what Chelsea said was correct.

We have not heard anything from any neighbors.

Um, I have concerns because it is a 63%.

That the the total being asked is 63% of the available funds that we have.

Um again, the neighborhood didn't, we did try to reach out to the fairgrounds and got no response.

So I don't even know if it's something they still want.

Um we've sent emails we called short of going over there, which I thought about today, but didn't have time to do.

Um, we didn't get to hear anything, but again, none of the neighborhoods and neighborhood association hasn't heard any complaints.

I drive that fairgrounds road at night quite a bit.

Most of the homeless issues that were there have moved on to the garden road.

Um, they're no longer on fairgrounds.

So um I I have issue with this taking 63% of what's available.

And um, like I said, we haven't heard any complaints, so I don't necessarily know that it's a need.

It's a nice to have, but it's not necessarily a need at this point.

Um for example, let's say we decide we're not gonna fund the fairgrounds lighting.

Does that project go away?

Does it come back next year?

That I think we need to decide that too.

I think we need to say, well, if we're not gonna fund it, it goes away.

And if they want to do it again, they need to resubmit.

Okay.

I think that's fair.

Yeah, that's definitely not moved.

Uh Gina.

Um, yeah, the the um multiplication was impressive as well.

And I would just add the Bruce Arris Way lighting also doubled.

I don't know why, but I would just note that I'm not sure it's all only due to scope creep when we start getting older projects ahead of us and in front of us.

I mean, uh I wish they were ahead of us in front of us because costs change and our time to implement is long.

Um so I really support the idea of cutting off scope creep.

I think it's critical.

I I mean, we have to say nope, that wasn't in the written in the project, so ain't doing it, but we need to catch up then with projects when I I made the point of how these are outlined, and we have four of the most recent projects in front of us, and the other three years spread over the other half of the projects.

That means we probably have 30 projects that are very old still hanging through our system, and we're gonna I would imagine many of them will get more expensive.

So, how do we start addressing that as a committee as well?

How do we start um managing the number of projects?

However, we want to do it.

I won't I won't say how we should so that we begin to move things through expeditiously so we can say, sorry, bring them back next year because we're moving on to something else because you changed your mind.

Um I'm gonna recommend that we go through these one at a time rather than just try to vote on all of it as one and uh would we be able to have comments as we go through each of the voting, or since we've had some discussion.

I don't see why not.

Yeah, okay.

So I'd I'd like to let's let's take them one at a time and and discuss and then act upon.

So we need a motion.

Uh I would like to review these projects one at a time.

Okay, so we're gonna start with the American Legion to Harrison Street walkway.

I'll second.

Yes, and you need a second like a we need to follow.

So but a roll call on each one.

No, for this motion.

I think for the motion, the motion that we have okay.

I I mean I don't know if you do, but it's just feel better.

The procedure, I'll go that way.

I don't think you need to.

That's fine.

Like you just need the vote on each one in the if I understand you you want to vote on each project individually.

Right.

There's eight total projects, correct?

So you want to have eight votes on each paper.

Correct.

Okay, so would someone make a motion for the first one first?

One more comment.

If we're gonna do if we're gonna do one by one, then I think we should go through the uh Parker procedure and um make it a um proposal and have it second.

That's that's what I yes.

I agree.

Good.

vote on each project individually correct there's eight total projects correct so you want to have eight votes of each correct okay so would someone make a motion for the first one first one more comment if we're gonna do if we're gonna do one by one then I think we should go through the uh parker procedure and um make it a um proposal and have it second that's that's what I yes I agree okay good I just want to make sure English so we need a motion for American Legion the Harrison Street Walkway stairs and railing only one hundred thousand dollars someone gonna make a motion I just decent so you're making the motion yes I'm making the motion that you second seconded and and that's to funding discuss or approve because in one case I think we might want to just go the project so you could do either one so what is your motion to consider oh no okay votes to consider okay and you second it all right so any more discussion so a yes vote would be to move forward with it a no vote would be no fund it don't fund it it's just funding no funding it's not to kill the project because that's not part of the agenda yes it would be funding or no funding yeah okay we've done in the past any other discussion did we have a second okay old town seconded all right I guess we'll go ahead and do roll call vote and is there any other discussion on old town stairs or sorry on the stairs I'd like to add that one of the criteria that we we apply for these projects is safety and those stairs are out of compliance they have been since they were put up by the Boy Scouts so this really needs to be corrected okay I'll do roll call aguito oaks yes is for no is against yes funding yes okay Alta Mesa noak no air flats oh absent del Monte Beach Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande fundtown Fisherman Flats yes Honore Vista yes oh sorry I skipped Glenwood Glenwood yes new Monterey yes all right Oak Grove yes Old Town yes Skyline for safety reason yes yeah all right motion passes so the next one would be the Casanova Oakno Park improvements an additional 2000 for umbrella and food tech food prep table is there a motion I move that we consider funding for the Casanova oak no picnic table improvement or completion okay skyline do we have a second we have a second new Monterey okay aguajito oaks any comments oh I'm sorry yeah any discussion sorry any discussion no okay aguido oaks no alta mesa no vote no aye your flats is absent Del Monty Beach aye Monte Grove Laguna Grande yes downtown Fisherman Flats aye Glenwood yes new Monterey yes Honore Vista sorry yes yes Oak Grove yes Old Town yes yes Villa del Monte no motion passes there were one two three no votes fairgrounds road airport road lighting is next for request of an additional 432000 dollars so can oh go ahead I was gonna make the motion that we defund each project and have the submitters we submit next year so uh a yes vote means we defund it a no vote means we don't so we can't defund it because it wasn't on the agenda to be defunded I think we can make a motion agenda to defund do that okay so we can do that okay so right now it would be a vote to is it okay to keep consistent if we do a

I was gonna make the motion that we defund this project and have the submitters re submit next year.

So uh a yes vote means we defund it.

A no vote means we don't.

So we can't defund it because it wasn't on the agenda to be defunded.

I think we can make a committee motion agenda to defund do that.

Okay, so we can do that.

Okay, so right now it would be a vote to is it okay to keep consistent if we do a vote to fund it, and then you can say no.

Okay, that would be easier.

Okay, so take a motion to fund it and then have a second and then have a vote, and that's just uh okay.

So go ahead and make a motion to fund the fairground road, airport road lighting.

So I'll second it.

Okay, so we have new Monterey motion and downtown second.

Right.

Okay.

Any discussion?

Okay, go ahead.

All right, Aguajito Oaks.

Oh no, got it.

Alta Mesa.

No, no, Casanova Oak No.

No.

Oh, sorry, absent.

Sorry, Del Mani Beach.

No.

Uh Del Mani Grove Laguna Grande.

No.

Downtown.

No.

Fisherman Flats.

No.

Glenwood.

No.

Monterey Vista.

No.

New Monterey.

No.

Oak Grove.

No.

That's my neighborhood.

Old Town.

No.

Skyline.

No.

Bella del Monte.

No.

Motion fails.

Number four would be Bruce Arias Way Lighting Upgrade for requests of an additional $11,000.

Make a motion to fund Bruce Aerisway lighting.

New Monterey made them any any second?

I second.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

And a 200% increase.

This does feel a lot more like a change in scope.

Can we understand a little bit more about why it was so much?

Yes.

Well, the original.

It's almost a it's almost a full hundred per.

Yeah.

So the original um proposal was or original cost was 35,000.

Requesting an additional 71 for a total of 106.

The construction estimate is uh roughly 84,000.

Um so there were a couple things that are going into this, but it's it's mainly the cost for lighting for the lighting equipment and to run the electrical.

Um I think that in this case we it was it was just a bad estimate, I think for lack of a better term.

Um it should have been um closer to this hundred uh hundred thousand dollars.

I think you know 35 was just a bad estimate.

Amy, sorry, yes, go ahead.

Um was this original submittal based on safety issues with the stairs, or was it just based on uh so it's it's not the stairs, it's it's the so the area is got some uh a lot of tree growth, I would say, and it's it's just um and I think that the request was to you know there's like one light there now.

Um so this would add more lighting and just make it if safety is it, but it would definitely improve the you know area in terms of it being submitted, it was submitted for safety here.

Yeah, that was the intention.

There you go.

Yeah, I didn't understand what you said, and I also wanted to confirm.

Um this is the one that needs a new box.

No, no, no.

This is the one, so this is from the recreation trail to foam street.

If it's um near where there's the the workers' houses, it's in that area of cannery row.

So no, this does not need a new um electric service box other comments, okay.

Okay, roll call vote.

Um, agua hito oaks.

No alta mesa, yes, nova oak no, yes, oh dear quests.

Yes.

Oh, Deer Flats.

I'm gonna abstain.

Okay.

So Del Mani Beach?

No.

Del Mani Grove Laguna Grande?

Yes.

Downtown.

No.

Fisherman Flats.

Glenwood.

No.

Monterey Vista.

Yes.

New Monterey.

Yes.

Oak Grove.

Yes.

Old Town.

No.

Skyline.

Yes.

Villa Del Monte.

Yes.

It passes with eight yes votes.

Yeah, eight yes votes.

Num uh number five is Moonris Avenue via Arbolus Curb Ramp.

Um construction requesting an additional seventy-six thousand dollars.

Motion to fund the curb ramp construction.

Second.

Any discussion?

So for me, this is a good example of scope creep because I never ever vote to put sidewalks on commercial properties.

So this is now putting something on the corner when there isn't any sidewalk all around it.

Um, and so I would have had concerns about that.

So it always was a curb on a on public private property.

So that was the original proposal.

But then the other side is a second side is private property.

Yes.

Yes.

I I don't have a lot of um like uh it wasn't it was an interesting addition because the San Burnaby curve kind of attaches to it, but it is a very dangerous place.

I totally understand your your concerns about private property, it's on private property, yeah.

Although, although I'm gonna vote for it, but any other discussion?

I got it, roll call vote.

All right, roll call aguajito oaks, nota mesa, nousanova oaknol.

No, on the basis it's on private property, air flats, no, Del Monty Beach, no, Del Mani Grove Laguna Grande, no town, oh flats, oh Glenwood, no Monterey Vista, yes, new Monterey.

I never know Grove, no Old Town, no Skyline, oh thank you Monte.

No, motion does not pass item number six is fire station 12 rehabilitation uh swing space request for 100,000 dollars, motion to fund fire station 12 rehabilitation from Skyline.

Any discussion?

All right, seeing none Aguajito Oaks, yes, Alta Mesa, yes, Casanova Oaknoll.

Aye Deer Flats, yes, Monty Beach, yes, Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande, yes, downtown, yes, Fisherman Flats, yes, Glenwood, yes, Monterey Vista, yes, yes, new Monterey, yes, Oak Grove, yes, Old Town, yes, Skyline, definitely, yes, Villa Del Monte, yes, motion passes item number seven is replace and install new lights and poles at Solicito Ball Field requests for fifty thousand dollars.

Motion to fund uh replace and install new lights and poles at Celsius Field.

Second advice, Skyline.

Any discussion.

Aguajito Oaks.

Yes.

Alta Mesa.

Yes.

Casa Nova Oak Noel.

Yes.

Air Flats.

Yes.

Del Monte Beach.

Yes.

Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande.

Yes.

Downtown.

Yes.

Fisherman Flats.

Yes.

Glenwood.

Yes.

Monterey Vista.

Yes.

New Monterey.

Yes.

Oak Grove.

Yes.

Old Town.

Yes.

Skyline.

Yes.

Villa Del Monte.

Yes.

Motion passes.

Last one.

Del Monte Beach replace cables along walkways.

Requesting an additional $2,840.89.

Del Monte Beach.

Replace cables along walkways.

I guess can't we take it out of pocket change?

Any discussion?

Andy, why did this one cost go up?

So this was actual cost for completed construction.

And this is the one where we installed some wood railing in addition to the wire cable.

Additional costs for the wood case, um, wood railing.

I can tell you when they were out there working on it, they decided this kind of on the fly because they realized it would help the rest of the cabling last longer, make a stronger structure.

All right, oaks.

Yes.

Alta Mesa?

Yes.

Casa Nova Oak Noel?

Yes.

Deer Flats?

Yes, please.

Del Monte Beach?

Yes.

Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande?

Yes.

Downtown?

Aye.

Fisherman Flats?

Yes.

Glenwood?

Yes.

Monterey Vista.

Yes.

New Monterey?

Yes.

Oak Grove?

Yes.

Old Town?

Yes.

Skyline?

Yes.

Villa Del Monte?

Yes.

Okay, that's that's it.

So can I now do a motion to put on the agenda to defund the airground road, airport road lighting?

So yes would be to defund or put on the agenda and no would be not to put on the agenda.

The next meeting.

Do we want to put can I make a friendly amendment?

Anything that did not get a positive vote that we bring those back for consideration of funding the original project.

Yes.

Well that would be two items.

That was the fairgrounds road, airport road lighting, and the moonrist and via Arbolus curb ramp.

Those two projects.

So would I second?

I can second this.

Friendly amendment.

You accept a friendly amendment.

Yeah.

You can accept.

So it would be new Monterey's amendment with skyline second.

And any discussion.

No discussion.

Okay.

Aguajito Oaks.

Could I ask to have that be explained again to make sure that I make the proper vote?

Yes.

So the motion is for the two projects that did not get additional funding approved, which was Fairground Road, Airport Road Lighting, and Via Arbolus Moonrest Herb Ramps, they would come back at the next meeting for a vote to defund and close out those projects.

I vote yes to have a future vote to defund those.

Yes.

That's exactly what it is.

It's vote to have a future vote.

Perfect.

Alta Mesa.

Yes.

House and vote, no.

Aye.

Del Monte Beach.

Skip.

Deer Flats and then Deer Flats.

Yes.

Del Monte Beach.

Yes.

Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande.

Yes.

Downtown.

Hi.

Fisherman Flats.

Yes.

And Glenwood.

Yes.

Honorated.

Yes.

New Monterey.

Yes.

Oak Grove.

Yes.

Old Town.

Yes.

Skyline.

Yes, thank you.

Villa Del Monte.

Yes.

Motion passes.

So we'll bring it back at the next meeting.

So we're moving on to item five.

Give me one moment to set it up.

Okay.

So tonight we have three projects recommended for uh for close out for um various reasons.

Um the first one is so it's in the Ville del Monte neighborhood.

Oh, it's uh Del Robus Avenue Solar Street Lights.

The project was originally uh budgeted at 150,000.

Um original scope was to install four solar street lights.

We have completed the design.

Um looking at three solar street lights.

And uh after reaching out to the property owners on multiple occasions, the two affected property owners have both declined to move uh to allow this project to move forward and uh because they would are of the opinion that it will adversely affect them with light shining directly into their um their house or houses.

So um we have our budget remaining of 131,100.

So as I don't see a path forward with this project, I'm recommending that it be closed out.

The next one is uh in Casanova Oaknole neighborhood.

It was uh project to uh do a sidewalk infill at 57 Millway Circle, original budget of 1,000 dollars with the plan to combine with Ramona Avenue and 801 Casanova Avenue sidewalk infill projects.

Um sorry, the remaining budget is 1,000.

Now it didn't increase um that's a typo, and this work was completed by others.

So here you can see the before and after.

Uh so this work was done, we assume by the property owner.

Um the next project, project number three is here this evening is to install a bike rack in the Beachway parking lot in Del Monte Beach.

Original budget 20,000.

Uh city staff met on site with the NCIP rep and uh talked about limitations and rationale for why we can't place the bike rack inside the parking lot.

Um we looked at some alternate locations, none of which were um acceptable to the project proponent.

So based on the feedback, we're recommending this one be closed out and budget remaining is 20,000.

And that's the uh that's the end of the presentation.

Okay, so open it up for committee questions.

So Reggie, just to clarify, I I did have a question who the others were on the cast on the Millway Circle sidewalk infill.

And sounds like you're not a hundred percent sure, but all of a sudden it's sidewalk appeared.

Correct.

The project's done.

Project is done.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

Okay, so we'll close committee questions and open it up for public comment.

Is there anyone here that would like to make a public comment?

You can stand up.

Okay, one person here, and anyone online.

There are no hands raised online, so we'll go three minutes.

Just a reminder to let those proponents know and and probably let the ones that have been defunded that are going to vote next time for defunding to let them know.

Yes.

Thank you.

Well, and in and on these in particular, we did reach out.

We had conversations with all of the project proponents on these ones.

I guess really let's talk about all right.

Uh so we'll go ahead and close uh public comment and open it up for committee discussion.

That's fine.

I have a question.

Do we feel that we have enough justification to do all three of these at one time, or do we want to do one at a time?

Three.

All three.

Cool.

And I move that we uh have a vote to consider all three jointly.

Uh okay, so that was okay.

That's uh skyline and then second it.

Okay.

Uh roll call vote, Aguajito Oaks.

Uh, just to make sure I'm clear being the first one, I want to make sure I I want them to not to be dropped.

Is that what we're talking about?

Correct.

The yes vote is to close these projects.

And the money the existing funds get returned to the uh NCIP fund.

My vote is yes.

Alta Mesa.

Yes.

Aye.

Dear Flats?

Yes.

Almani Beach.

Yes.

Damani Grove Laguna Grande?

Yes.

Downtown.

Hi.

Fisherman Flats.

Aye.

Glenwood?

Yes.

Monterey Vista?

Yes.

New Monterey?

Yes.

Oak Grove?

Yes.

Old Town?

Yes.

Skyline.

Yes.

And Villa Del Monte.

Yes.

Excellent.

Thank you all.

So all three projects will be closed out with the funds returned to the NCIP account.

And then one final uh public appearance item this evening is item number six.

And that one is have an open discussion by the committee on the pending joint meeting with city council and the NCIP committee.

Somehow here, give me one second.

All right.

So currently there's a joint city council and CIP committee meeting scheduled for the evening of August 4th, with the idea of strengthening collaboration between the city council and NCIP committee.

This evening you have an opportunity to have some discussion and come up with topics for that meeting.

Applications we have received 13 as of earlier today.

But uh the ones we have that weren't here, we have one in Casanova Oaknole, that would be C O K02, which is for North Fremont Street Aesthetics.

I would say that this project is not eligible.

It's not a capital improvement project.

The request to add holiday decorations along the length of North Fremont Street within the city of Monterey.

Second project that's new is Casanova Oak No3, which again focuses on North Fremont Street, and it's a request to repave and fill potholes along the length of North Fremont Street within the city of Monterey.

Jump here.

Sorry, that's my fault.

Um and I believe we have the downtown Glenwood.

Um there was an additional request that wasn't on here in Old Town, which the lady spoke about this evening, which is for Franklin Street slow down signage due to traffic speeds and traffic volume.

Otherwise, there have all been um included on the list.

Go ahead.

Reggie, C O K C O K01, the water fountain that has been rescinded by the project applicant because that project's already found alternate funding and is fountain's been ordered and is waiting to be installed, which should be probably within the next month.

Yay.

Okay, any other sorry.

Sorry.

Any other committee member questions?

Um I think we still have a couple weeks left for these to get in, and and somebody will be able to reach out to the other speaker tonight, and that'll go on the list too.

So my mind, this is just a growing list.

We're not ready to have anything to talk about.

Right.

So the um current the application deadline is August 15.

Okay, so just a reminder it's questions right now.

Um so Kurt.

This is a question.

There are two Forest Service clearing projects, one for the Capital Old Capital Site, and then regular one that we always do.

Is there any way we could reach out to the two applicants and combine those into one?

Because that just makes life so difficult.

Well, you're sitting next to one of them.

No, that's why generally talking to the forestry department, generally they do combine them, and they've already been working on them.

The goats in the shape have been in O Capital the entire month of July.

And they have cleaned up Iris Canyon and a couple of the other areas, and they're working on the rest areas of the city.

So it's already in progress, and they always can be combined.

Reggie, just on um is it CO C O K3.

Does Measure S cover any of that?

For the road work, yes.

That's measure S eligible.

So that project would qualify for it so I can speak to the applicant.

Okay.

Yes.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Great.

So we'll close committee questions and open it up for public comment.

Does anyone present want to make a comment?

Yeah, one hand raised online.

So it looks like we just have the one person online.

So we could go ahead and give them three minutes.

Esther, you should be able to speak.

Yeah, I was waiting for the unmuted.

I just unmuted myself.

I'm just curious.

Um I can't recall what was decided if new projects should be continued to be accepted when we've got all this backlog and the budget deficit and all of this drama going on.

I'm just wondering what is going to come of these new projects being submitted in light of that.

And I wanted some direction on my project at Lugunagrande Park.

If I should be submitting this amendment with this deadline, or I don't know if my project was tabled.

I don't know where what the status is.

And our amendment is going to be with the consideration of it waiting until the budget deficit got better.

So I don't know if we should be submitting the amendment now.

Um because if frankly, if it was on this list, I would say the same thing.

It's like, why are we taking new projects?

My project isn't a new one, but what's going to happen to all these new projects, considering where we are financially?

So it's a two-part.

I just want to know where my project stands and why we're still taking new projects and what's going to be reported back to these people.

I mean, if you keep taking new projects this year and next year when we don't have enough money to cover what we've already got going on, I don't see the point in that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um that's the end of public comment.

All right, we'll open it up for a committee discussion.

Well, I can do you want me to address the one the one question.

I can so um all projects are still viable, right?

Um the one in particular um the at uh Laguna Grande Park, we do need some additional funding, and that would be one that would have to come back to the committee uh for funding request.

So that's the status.

And I think the other question is up to you guys.

Yeah, so the the discussion is whether or not we would want to have the joint meeting on August 4th versus postponing that meeting to a later date.

Um I can just kind of give my my thoughts on that.

So I wasn't able to attend the July 7th uh city council meeting, but I did listen to it afterwards, and I will say based on the discussions that were had during that city council meeting.

I do not think uh meeting with the council at this time would be productive.

Um, I think it may actually be more inflammatory, if anything.

Um I did not feel like there was a spirit of collaboration with NCIP based on the statements that were being made.

Um and as uh I'm sure Dennis will make a comment as well.

But as he pointed out, uh, we do have elections this year.

There is potential for the city council to look completely different.

Um and I just don't want to repeat what happened last year, where we're kind of spinning our wheels and not really getting clear direction about, you know, are we gonna have funding?

Are we not gonna have funding being tasked with additional things that we kind of already did?

Um and I just kind of I feel like if we were to have a meeting at this time, it would kind of be a repeat of last year.

And it was very frustrating last year.

So I think uh it would be best to postpone it.

So that would be my um thoughts on that.

And actually, I'd go a little bit further than that.

I think um the mayor made a statement in that July meeting that why are you even looking at projects?

We may have to take all of the money for funding the city.

So I don't think we should be looking at projects right now.

I think what we should do is postpone our schedule until after the election, and then we'll have a somewhat tightened window, but uh I believe we can actually get our cycle in prior to the budget, which needs to be done by April.

If we start in November, middle of November and move forward from there.

We could request the staff to re-look at the schedule.

Um not make any judgments on these projects that have been submitted.

I would also ask that we potentially extend the deadline for project submissions to that time when which sometime in November, so that other projects might come to fruition that are bare our uh interest.

Um I would also recommend that we have the joint meeting post the election so that we can educate new council people how NCIP works because the current council does not seem to understand our function, but I think it's an important function.

It was voted in by the people to have this committee in this function uh to get the temporary occupancy tax in the first place, and I want to be a good steward of doing that.

Um my recommendation is push off considerations till after the election in November, and then we'd have to kind of rush to get everything done to get it done, but I think it's doable, and I don't want to have us spend a lot of time on projects and discussion, public testimony, etc.

on projects if the city is ultimately going to have to take it to make the budget.

So that's my thinking.

I concur with our chair and our vice chair.

I found the meetings in the past have been unproductive and hostile.

Uh and it uh also hindered the productivity of the engineering department and the public works department.

Uh I think our time would be well spent letting them do their job.

And uh I mean we haven't even had the preview time to look at any of these projects that are gonna be coming in, that pre-screening or anything.

We need to step back, take a deep breath, um, let them be able to do their job so that they can present these things to us so that we can look at them and assess them intelligently in our time.

I also agree with postponing the um joint meeting until after the elections.

Thank you.

I I agree with most of what's being said, but I have I think one difference that I'd like to talk about.

Um I I too think we should not do a meeting in July in August, and not until the uh council is set, but also I would think until we have a chance to um get our bearings on what NCIP um might be like to accommodate to a really wretched budget.

Um I don't think that it's right for the NCIP to ignore that.

I think we have a fiduciary responsibility that when we see it in front of us that we should be talking about how we can contribute to the solution.

And um that doesn't mean coming up with a whole lot of projects unless there's money to have a whole lot of projects.

We have plenty of work to do with the projects that are in the portfolio right now.

It could probably take three or four years to get through those.

So I don't think there's a threat to the being itself, the entity of the NCIP.

And I think it's NCIP's responsibility to do the reshaping to meet economic conditions, just like it would be for the council from their perspective.

Thank you.

Just wanted to ask a clarifying question that's related to this.

Is the 2025 26 council resolution number 26 058 CS is that actually thrown out?

That's the resolution that approved and provided funding for all of the ranked projects.

No.

Okay.

Thank you.

Not to get back into all the detail, but I do believe that NIP decided to have a cycle this year because it has a role to play in helping to identify critical needs that the city has and prioritize them as part of the budget process.

But I'm I'm kind of knocked off my feet.

We have never needed to sit and discuss projects with individual projects with the city council.

This committee is an amazing group of people that work together and make a consensus that comes out of the whole city at large.

And that's the job we do, and we do that without sitting and discussing anything with the city council.

They can then work on the list we give them.

So I don't see any for that.

I do think there's a great need to upskill the city council, but I think it would be better to do that on a person by person basis.

If we were going to have a two hour meeting with them, if instead we had a 15 minute meeting with our rep, our people in charge in each one of them alone and talked about one IP, what NIP was, far more beneficial than another joint meeting.

Not only was the last one painful, the one before was very painful.

And it was not helpful at all.

So I I would uh recommend uh support the recommendation that we not have this joint meeting.

And then I would ask do we need to have a motion to move the calendar around.

I I agree.

We we shouldn't have the meetings council.

Also agree with Dennis that we should wait to assess new projects.

It is on.

I'm just not talking to it.

So again, I agree with what Dennis was saying, but I still think we need to go through the current projects that we have on the budget on the list, and we need to decide some of those are not viable, some of them are so old that they're never going to get done.

We need to clean up the list, obviously, at least in my mind.

That would be my added books.

So I agree with almost everything that's being said tonight.

Um I do have one thought that kind of pops in my head because I like to play devil's advocate with myself.

And my concern is if we don't accept any projects and we don't go through a cycle, even if we just approve three projects, excuse me.

This program, which is very beneficial to the city and then the community and our citizens, our fellow citizens in Monterey County like this program.

It benefits us.

If we don't accept any projects this year, they may just do away with the committee totally.

So that's something to think of.

We all understand the budget, we all want to do our fiduciary duty, but if we don't accept any projects and we freeze the cycle, council may say, you don't need this committee anymore.

We didn't need it this year, so let's do away with it.

And it's it's a it's a beneficial program and it's a beneficial to the community and all of us that live here to offset the tourism and the impacts that we have to deal with, especially during event weeks.

So that's my concern.

And I would rather approve two projects and send two projects to council, even if they're two $5,000 projects than say let's not accept any at all.

So maybe we need to think about setting a limit or dollar amount or something that's greatly reduced than what we normally would, but that's kind of what got us in the situation anyways, is by approving X amount of projects, X amount of projects every year.

We reduce the number, we keep the program alive, we show that there's a need for it and a want for it.

And but we do our diligence by reducing the dollar amount or the number of projects that we put on staff's plate.

Let me throw a couple more things out there that I forgot to mention.

If we have some time off and don't have meetings all over the place, Reggie will have more time to get stuff done.

And actually completing a lot of stuff.

Definitely the big dollar projects that we approved are shovel ready and moving.

The reason we had to put 100,000 on the table for the fire department move is so that they can get moving with over three million dollars worth of projects that we approved.

All of those projects are not neighborhood improvements, although neighborhoods would be kind of bad off if they had a fire.

But we have because we need to.

And we've had a discussion that he's likely to need money before the end of the calendar year.

Is that correct, Tys?

So, like we had done when we were doing the calendar change, we would probably vote in a project to get forestry done ahead of going through some of the other stuff.

Um the recent grant of 950,000 is not a one-time grant.

It's over multiple years, so it's not like they've got a bunch of money sitting on the side from the California grant.

Um so we will be having projects.

We have to.

Oh, I did.

Um, because I'm good at that.

One of the reasons I want to have a joint meeting uh after the election is we have a new city manager.

We have we will have potentially new people on the council.

I think it's a great time to educate the staff.

Um as you guys know, I'm this September I've been uh with the third program for 29 years.

We had a fire chief who really wasn't into what we were doing and didn't understand what our capabilities were.

We did a presentation to the fire department, police chief was there.

Now we work with both sides, police and fire, because they know what we can do.

Well, let's educate the council, let's educate the new city manager, let's get on the same page together, and let's play well.

So that's what I'm hoping to achieve.

A couple of things.

Uh one um for Shelley's comment.

I since we're in the charter, I don't think the city council can't get rid of this committee.

I'm pretty sure they would have already done so if they could have.

So we're safe on that.

But um I appreciate Gina's comments.

Um, just in terms of it, I don't think we should have a meeting next week.

I think that's too soon.

None of us are, I don't think we can prepare and be ready for it with real goals that we need to discuss by next week.

Um, but I don't like the idea of waiting until after the election.

I think I I think it is our duty to we are partners with the city, and it is our duty to work with them.

That's the budget is not their problem, it's our it's all our problem.

And so I don't I don't necessarily support that we wait and think we're gonna get different people to work with.

I think we work with whoever the council is and whoever's in that seat.

Um anyway, that's I I like to have a meeting, a joint meeting, but I don't think next week is the right time.

So I I think the the purpose of asking for the joint meeting was to improve communication and improve collaboration.

So I do think there is value in having a joint meeting.

It doesn't feel like that that spirit is being reciprocated.

I feel like Dennis and I and working with um city staff a lot of improvement in communicating and collaborating and proposing changes to better align with the city needs, to be receptive to feedback from city council, receptive to feedback from public comments.

I will say personally, I do feel offended every single time I hear that narrative that NCIP is not responding to feedback, that we're not changing, that we're doing the same thing over and over again, because I don't feel like that's what's happening.

Um and even the comments made by the mayor on the seventh, you know, he said something to the effect of well, you know, last year it was just one year that they only approved 14 projects and all the other years before, you know, there was 30, whatever, whatever.

And what makes you think that they're not going to do the same thing over again?

Well, because we listen to feedback and we're making changes, so that's why things are going to be different.

So I feel like we're we're constantly kind of being compared to what things were like in the past when I feel like a lot of effort has been made to move things forward and to implement changes so that we are functioning in a way that um benefits, helps benefit the city and and benefits the city's needs and addresses the city's needs specifically.

As Dennis mentioned, you know, the 14 projects that we uh recommended for approval.

Seven of them are multi-neighborhood projects.

Covering police, fire, library, ADA, radar speech lines, undergrounding, wharf repairs.

Like we listen to what is being uh given for as feedback and we're making those changes.

So I know I've spent a lot of time going through past projects, um, printing them out, scanning them, emailing them to all of you guys so that when we do review the list of projects that have have been approved that are not yet completed, we all have that information.

So again, I that this is more personal because it really like annoys me when I hear that narrative over and over again because it makes me feel like the time and energy that I'm spending on top of, you know, we all have other things going on and other responsibilities, but it does feel a little bit insulting at this point to keep hearing that narrative over and over again.

So I agree with um Kurt that we should uh consider having meetings where we review all the projects.

I think that's a process that we started last year, and I think that's a process that we can continue to do and continue to review projects, continue to identify projects that may need to uh be defunded or closed out and recommend that.

Um the last thing I'll say is we're recommending body.

We don't necessarily make those fiduciary decisions.

That comes from the city council.

And I know this probably differs for some some opinions that people have, but I feel very strongly that if the city wants to close out projects or to fund projects, I feel like they need to be the ones to make that decision.

And I feel a lot of times NCIP is kind of being repo or shield to, you know, we'll give that back to you guys.

You guys do this for us, and then when they take it back, at the end of the day, they make the final decisions anyway.

So it just kind of feels like there's extra tasks that are being put on us that aren't necessarily gonna make a difference because there does seem to be uh, but I in my opinion, there does seem to be a clear agenda.

So I again feel like I do want there to be a joint meeting.

I don't think now is a good time, certainly not next week in terms of the timing of that.

I you know, we can have discussions of whether we want to do that sooner versus after an election.

Um, and just so everyone's aware, Dennis and I do meet with um the mayor, we do meet with the vice mayor, we meet with um the city manager, we meet with staff.

Um, so we do have these meetings uh where we are trying to to communicate um the importance of this program and how important it is to the community.

Um so I know that was a little bit of venting, but I just get like really frustrated when I kind of hear the same narrative over and over again as if things are not changing.

And I think things are changing, and I think things are changing for the better.

And again, I just want to say thank you to um you know, city staff, Andrea and Reggie for all the hard work they've done.

And it's um to really try to make things better.

So yeah, that's it.

Let me throw in one button.

Don't follow.

We have been meeting with public works often.

The mayor and the vice mayor have not followed up on meetings for probably the last six months.

Might be more than that.

So we're not really communicating with the council other than Gene and Ed, which I'm sorry to see that Ed is not running this year.

Um I think improvements and communication in that area is something that we all can strive for because I think it's important.

Do you have anyone online that uh yes, there are people online, and uh no one is raised their hand to say anything.

Um I just want to say one thing about that.

I think that it was the um events of last year were really unfortunate because it gave um an impression to people that are connected to their projects in the community, and um so I think that there's uh a role we have to not only change our activity and our our kind of zone or whatever it is we're changing with the city council, but also carrying the message out to the community that all of this stuff about cutting projects that have been sitting around.

I mean, that that was painful.

I mean, you have to understand for the people with the projects with a lot of projects.

So it's it's something we need to heal as members of this committee with our community as well.

I don't know what you can do with elected officials except for you know what you're doing and waiting for an election, but there's a lot of other things that I think NCIP could change for the better, and it starts.

I do think with going through old projects too, but also with um recognizing that uh what that event was like for folks.

Any other comments?

I'm gonna support what Kurt said.

I think we should have some meetings prior to November looking at the budget, which will help us to have budget to deal with if we see projects that are useful post-November.

Yeah, um, you know, to the extent that we have projects that are not executable, then we should take and take the money and put it back in the fund.

So that 689,000 that's sitting right now is unreserved funds, could be increased if we the projects left global and cancel it.

But we have to make has to be on the agenda.

We have to have an opportunity for the public to speak to that, and then we can ask city council to agree with us, and then it'll go back into our ending balance, increase our ending balance, which gives us more funding to work with in this cycle.

I'm not suggesting we don't have a cycle, because for sure Tice would not be happy if we didn't have a cycle.

All right, so just to kind of bring it back to the agenda topic.

Um, I would like to make a motion to postpone the joint uh city council and CIP meeting to a date later to be determined.

I'm sorry, I got zoned out.

Um the motion is to what?

I'm sorry.

Motion is to postpone the joint city council and CIP meeting to a date later to be determined.

No, you got it.

Okay.

All right, roll call vote.

Any further discussion?

No.

Aguajita Oaks.

I vote to You did public comment.

I sorry, go ahead.

Dean.

I vote that the meeting be postponed for a later date.

That's a yes vote.

That's a yes, okay.

Alta Mesa.

Yes.

Casanova Ognol.

Deer Flats.

Yes.

Del Mani Beach.

Yes.

Del Mani Grove Laguna Grande.

Yes.

Downtown.

Yes.

Fisherman Flats.

Lynwood.

Yes.

Monterey Vista.

Yes.

New Monterey.

Yes.

Oak Grove.

Yes.

Old Town.

Yes.

Skyline.

Yes, please.

Villa del Monte.

Yes.

Motion passes.

We need another motion to have staff to redo calendar.

Uh, do we need a motion to redo calendar?

Okay.

Um, we will we'll bring back a calendar.

We have a and the next meeting is September 2nd.

We can hash it out by then.

Thank you.

So we can move on to uh committee member comments.

Any final comments?

Somehow.

That's that's part of the calendar.

Um, so unfortunately, we didn't we don't have a revised calendar today, and the next meeting is September 2nd, so it's September 2nd we can, I guess, retroactively change it.

Any other committee comments?

The um NCIP status report as of April 2026.

Is this the list of all the projects that other than these incoming 10 or 13?

Are those the ones that I need to familiarize myself with?

They are okay, great, thank you.

Any other comments?

All right, so we will go ahead and uh close the meeting.

Our next meeting is September 2nd, 2026, and meeting is adjourned at 7.54 p.m.

It declared