We will call to order the Budget and Audit Committee meeting for May 27th, 2025.

And welcome to all of those of you who have joined us this morning.

We're happy to have you here.

If there's any item on our agenda which you wish to comment on, please be sure to fill

out a speaker form and hand that off to our clerk here at the front of the chambers, and

then we'll make sure to recognize you on the item in which you are interested.

And just for those who aren't, if any of you aren't familiar with the rules, you get two

minutes to speak on any particular item.

And so with that, why don't we call the roll to establish a quorum.

Thank you, Chair.

Councilmember Talamantes.

Here.

Councilmember Maple.

Here.

Councilmember Garrow, we absent.

And Chair Dickinson.

Here.

You have a quorum.

And Councilmember Maple, would you lead us in the land acknowledgement and the pledge?

My pleasure.

Please stand if you're able.

There you go.

He's got it.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people

and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nisanan people, the southern Maidu, Valley and Plains

Miwok, Potuan Wintun peoples, and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally

recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside us

today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather today in the active practice of acknowledgement

and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples' history, contributions, and lives.

Remain standing.

Salute and pledge.

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.

Thank you.

I think we can take our consent calendar.

Do we have any members who wish to speak to either of the items, three items on the consent

calendar?

And I have one member of the public, Lambert, speak on the consent calendar.

All right.

Mr. Davis.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Uh, I had no idea this was a meeting, but I have a group that keeps me in the loop.

I call them the millennials.

It's a group of them, actually.

They called me.

I was actually just getting back in town.

But this talks about Sacramento City employees' retirement system.

Uh, I'm the only one in town that I've heard say that I personally don't think that city employees

who are working remotely should get a raise.

It shouldn't even be factored into this system.

Because you'd be surprised, and the millennials have told me in writing, you can save millions

of dollars not giving people working remotely a raise.

What's the raise for?

They don't have to come back to work.

If you look at how the state has reacted, they have reacted as though they've never worked

five days a week.

They asked them to come back, I think, for four days.

That's a guaranteed three-day weekend every week of the year.

Who wouldn't want a job like that?

Where you, even if you have to come back to work, you're off three days.

You know how people react when they get a three-day weekend, just like they just got one just

now.

They reacted the same way.

People have abused COVID.

And I believe most of the people who are complaining have moved from their original residence.

And there's proof of that.

It was on 60 minutes.

Where a lot of people moved outside their district, hoping that it would stay remote.

But now that it's not remote, they've been caught.

And I personally think that if they don't come back, including here, they should be terminated.

You should be grateful that you have a job.

Thank you for your comments.

All right.

Thanks for the comment.

We have a motion for the consent items and a second.

I'll second with a comment on every item.

Oh.

Okay.

It's Tuesday after a three-day weekend, as Lambert said.

All right.

Hearing no further comments or questions, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no.

Any abstentions?

That motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

And we're on to item four.

So, aha.

The Safe Credit Union Convention and Performing Arts District Promoter Incentive Program.

Good morning.

Good morning.

So, good morning, Chair Dickinson and members of Council.

I'm Megan Van Voorhis, Director of Convention and Cultural Services.

Today, I'm joined by Interim General Manager of the Safe Credit Union Convention and Performing

Arts District, Jonathan Weiser, as well as Theatre and Auditorium Manager, Sid Garcia-Heberger,

and David Jones, who's our sales and booking manager.

I want to take a few minutes to talk about our approach to increasing activation at two

of the city's most important civic venues, Memorial Auditorium and the Safe Credit Union

Performing Arts Center.

These are not just event spaces.

They are historic civic institutions built and maintained for the public good, and they're

an important part of how Sacramento gathers, celebrates, learns, and connects.

We're on an upward trajectory in both facilities.

Occupancy at the Memorial Auditorium has doubled since 2023 at 190 days, and the Performing Arts

Center is at its highest level since 2013 at 246 days.

You can see here the portfolio event types at each facility.

Memorial Auditorium leads on civic events, while the Performing Arts Center leads on performing

arts and entertainment.

Still, we think there's enormous opportunity at both facilities, and we believe with the right

strategy and tools, we can further increase activation, increase financial performance

and surrounding area economic impact, and ensure these venues serve the full spectrum

of our city, artists, audiences, businesses, nonprofits, and residents alike.

This work is already underway, and we're here today to share a key element of the approach

we're building to get there.

Memorial Auditorium was built nearly a century ago in a time when society gathered in very different ways.

It hosted community clubs, civic meetings, sporting events, concerts, and circuses.

It served as a hub of shared civic life.

But the world around us has shifted.

Many of the civic organizations that once used these spaces no longer exist.

The way people attend and experience live events has been transformed by industry consolidation

led by companies like Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

And the pandemic disrupted everything from event production to audience habits to the economics of promotion.

Even now as we emerge from that disruption, we're doing so at a moment of economic uncertainty,

the tapering off of pandemic relief, and rising costs for both promoters and audiences.

We're facing challenges as well.

We currently lack the tools to attract promoters for ticketed events.

Changes in the industry and new venues coming online in the local market mean that we need to become more competitive.

We're addressing some operational constraints, including our sales strategy in order to create a more turnkey environment to attract promoters to our venues.

And the Memorial Auditorium is facing a bit of an identity crisis.

A surprising number of our city's residents can share with you a cherished memory from within the walls of the Memorial Auditorium, their graduation, their prom, a favorite concert, a boxing match, wrestling, a meeting, a gala.

For nearly 98 years, that building has served this community as a place to gather and everyone's vision of it is different.

Is it a concert hall? Is it a meeting venue? Is it a roller derby? A basketball court? A festival ground? A shelter? A community gathering space?

The answer is yes, it is all of these things and has been all of these things for our community, including a national historic landmark.

But here lies the opportunity. Public venues like Memorial Auditorium and the Safe Credit Union Performing Arts Center are in a unique position to be more affordable, more diverse, and more inclusive than the private market.

We can offer broader access and greater cultural representation if we create the right conditions for events to happen. And that's exactly what we're trying to do.

Earlier this year, we undertook a major structural change until recently, the Performing Arts Center Memorial Auditorium and Convention Center venues were treated as separate businesses with booking responsibilities split among different staff.

This left Memorial focused on concert activity, one of the most competitive and financially challenging sectors without the tools to truly compete. In April, we realigned the entire structure. We centralized all sales and booking under a single office across all venues.

We're now actively selling the full district, offering the right mix of events for the right spaces. We've created a dedicated sales function separating business development from event services and we're building data and feedback loops to understand market needs in real time.

But while the realignment gives us the foundation, we need targeted tools to close the gap between the venue availability and event activation, especially for ticketed events.

Not all events have the same kind of ripple effects. Ticket events, particularly concerts, comedy, and sports often drive broader economic and social activity.

They bring attendees into neighborhoods early and keep them there late. They support restaurants, retail, parking, transit, and nightlife. They create energy, visibility, and engagement around our civic facilities in ways that no other event category does.

So if we want to accelerate activation of our facilities and reconnect our communities, ticketed events are a high impact area where we need to compete more aggressively.

Like other businesses, promoters are in it to make money, meaning that revenue has to exceed expenses.

Regardless of their size, from a local promoter to the industry giants, the financial piece is real.

At face value, the idea of promoting a concert looks like this. On the revenue side, the promoter's potential is ticket sales.

Their expenses, on the other hand, include paying for the band, renting the venue, labor, marketing, security, insurance, and a whole host of other costs that eat into the profit.

Each expense means one of two things. Many times both. A higher ticket price or more tickets to reach to break even.

The result is that the promoter has to take on more risk. Regardless if all a concert sells well, the band, the venue, labor, marketing teams, and security all get paid.

Not the case for the promoter. It's important to recognize that what gives the dominant players the edge is not just their talent network.

In fact, promotion is a loss leader for those businesses. It's the way they monetize everything around the event. Ticket fees, secondary markets, concessions, and more.

Now, here's the important point. As a public venue, we do have access to those same revenue streams. What we don't have is the talent network.

That's why we rely on independent promoters, especially local and independent ones, to bring talent into our civic spaces.

But those promoters don't benefit from the broader revenue streams like the big players do. So we're asking them to shoulder high risk with much lower reward.

It's worth it to note that there is a strong demand from promoters to use our facilities, but the one thing they bring up over and over again is the need to mitigate risk.

This is the gap we need to close, and that's where the promoter incentive comes in. We're proposing a flexible promoter incentive program with two tracks.

Non-profit ticketed events. This track supports arts and cultural organizations, community choruses, dance companies, theater ensembles, whose events may use ticketing but who often operate at a smaller scale and thinner margins.

Here we propose fee waivers in place of rebates, emphasis on access, inclusion, and civic value, ensuring public facilities remain available to Sacramento's cultural community.

On the commercial ticketed event side, this track is for commercial promoters bringing concerts, comedy, sports, and other for-profit shows to our venues. These promoters often bear significant risk but don't benefit from the broader revenue ecosystem that vertically integrated companies do.

To help bridge the gap, we're developing a rebate structure that may include rent rebates, box office and equipment fee rebates, the ability to add ticket and food and beverage surcharges and redirect them back to the promoter, and potentially foregoing or sharing food and beverage commission.

Our aim through these rebates is to get to $5 to $10 per ticket sold beginning with the first event because we know the incentive has to be immediate to be effective. Promoters won't stick around for a long-tail payout. They need support upfront.

And we're also proposing a scaled structure that prioritizes local promoters. Those rooted in Sacramento, employing local teams, offering culturally diverse programming that reflects our city.

This is about growing local business capacity, advancing equity, and diversifying the event landscape while still allowing regional and national promoters to participate.

So briefly in terms of the guidelines, in order to be eligible for the program, a promoter would need to be paid in full for all previous engagements and they need to have favorable references demonstrating the ability to realize a capacity of 70% or greater on ticket sales.

Exclusions include those who are in some way in arrears with the city, have a history of issues such as security issues, or those that use their own Ticketmaster contract because those folks already have revenue streams built in.

We construct the rebate, as I said before, through these tools that you'll see here. And our scaled structure looks something like this. Introductory is for the promoters who might be new to our venues but still need to be enticed in some way to use them. Standard is for those who are regularly using our venues now but with more of an incentive would likely increase the number of events they do with us.

Premium is largely the national promoters. Local commercial is straightforward. These are the independent promoters who are in this work for the love of music, for the development of Sacramento's music scene, and for the vibrancy of our city.

And then local nonprofits, which we've already discussed. We're prepared to review and report back on our progress annually as well as make adjustments based on key measures including financial fiscal performance and attendance data, promoter feedback and operational costs and strategic priorities.

Now we understand there may be a concern about foregoing revenue at a time when city budgets are under pressure. And that's a valid and important consideration. But here's what we want to clarify about this. These incentives are targeted and customized. We're not offering blanket discounts.

The ticketed event category is only one part of our business strategy. Even if we book 70 concerts a year, that leaves nearly 300 other days to drive revenue through meetings, galas, festivals and more. We're actively managing the portfolio to balance revenue and access across all lines of business.

We believe this incentive program will allow us to attract new business. We believe this incentive program will allow us to attract new business we otherwise wouldn't get. Making our overall venue operations stronger, not weaker. And we know that the economic impact will be significant while contributing to other revenues like parking and sales tax revenue.

Revenues that the city relies on for its budget.

So today we're not asking for a final decision. We're asking for your comments and direction, feedback on this idea and your support to move this concept forward to the full council for approval. We believe the approach gives us the tools to strengthen local business, bring people back to our city center and accelerate activation of our public venues in a way that's equitable, inclusive and financially sound. Thank you for time and attention. Happy to take your questions as well as my team.

Happy to take your questions.

Happy to take your question.

I'm happy to take your questions.

Happy to take your questions.

Happy to take your questions.

Well, thanks for the presentation and to all who are, who are here.

I'm just, I'm curious because I, I don't follow this admittedly, but can you just characterize the extent to which the two venues are, are used now and by whom?

Yeah, so...

By category, not, not individual, but by category.

Yeah, so, you know what, Sid, do you want to take it?

Sid's got all this in her.

So the Performing Arts Center is used by five local groups who we consider our resident companies.

Broadway Sacramento, Sacramento Philharmonic, Sacramento Ballet, Sacramento Choral Society and Orchestra, and the Sacramento Speaker Series.

And then we infill those dates with concerts and comedy shows.

Outback is one of our primary users of the building.

But we also see Niederlander in the facility as well as Emporium, AEG, to name a few, Live Nation as well.

So, Sid, how many of those five core groups, how many dates do they take in the Performing Arts Center?

They take the bulk of the dates from September through May, leaving intermittent onesie, twosie dates sprinkled throughout the season.

We typically see around April kind of a lull in the offerings from the performing arts side.

So that's usually an opportunity where we can see events tuck in.

So there's somewhere between, somewhere around 150 dates?

Well, we're at 230 currently.

But that is, and that is all of those events.

Beyond the five?

Correct.

Yeah, I was just, okay.

But the five take, it sounds like something.

So probably about 180, 190.

Oh, that many.

Okay.

All right.

You think about it, Broadway Sacramento, when they come in, they do no less than eight shows for a particular performance.

So to give you an idea.

And then at the memorial, that is used, again, by AEG, Outback, Niederlander, Live Nation.

We have a couple of really great Latin promoters.

LJ Presents, Illusion Touring, and Amplified.

And how many dates does, if you included graduations and other ceremonies and events at Memorial, how many dates does that take up during the memorial?

190, 190, 190 dates per year.

Okay.

And, and you would, at both places, what, you would book up to, I mean, you said 230, but, but you would go with.

We have room for growth, most definitely, in both facilities.

75, I mean, 300.

Sure.

And, you know, it's true that in the summertime, concert business tends to slow up.

That's been my experience throughout my entire career, typically because outdoor festivals become more popular.

And so the concerts and events take place outdoors rather than indoors.

But we, that's another opportunity, right, for us to be a little bit more creative in what we can do in, in those time, time frames we know get sleepy.

Okay.

So the, just, I'm just trying to, to frame the policy that, that you're talking about this, this morning and thinking about it in terms of application to dates, which, which it sounds like might be between 75 and 100 dates each place.

Yes.

A year.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

And, we do, we see often where we have dates on hold, as Megan said.

We have dates on hold, but they don't convert to bookings.

And, again and again, we hear, do you have any ancillary income, any other revenue streams?

And, and we don't.

And so that is, that is the, the real, you know, sticking point.

And, I think that is the real point for us and for the promoters.

And, truly believe that if we had these tools, we would grow our, our ticketed commercial events considerably.

And, and, and, impact the neighborhoods in, in positive ways.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Mayfill.

Vice Chair Mayfill.

Yeah.

I would say, do we have any public comment?

Oh, yeah.

I'm happy to go after a public comment if that works for you, Chair.

Why don't you go ahead?

Oh, okay.

First of all, I just wanted to say thank you.

And, I appreciate your line of questioning too because that, that helps me kind of form my thoughts around this.

But, I just wanted to really appreciate you for your leadership and getting creative because we have to be creative in order to move this forward.

In order to actually make sure that we're booking this out or keeping up with the changing times, changing events.

And, also the changing market, right?

We know, you know, like, Live Nation, for example, has really completely shifted, you know, the music market and many more.

And, whether you like that or not, it's the reality that we live in until, you know, if the legislature ever, I know that they, they punted on it again just recently.

And, so, there may or may not be anything at the state level that changes.

So, while this is the reality we live in, I, I really appreciate being forward thinking about it.

And, I also, one of the things I'm, I'm interested in is around the cost, specifically for the Memorial Auditorium.

So, like, let's say if a nonprofit wanted to come in and book, like, an event there, what's the, what's the average, what's the cost for that?

So, if a nonprofit is coming in to do a ticketed event?

Yeah, let's say, let's say they're, they're hosting, like, their, their gala.

It's a fundraiser for them.

Okay.

So, they're hosting a gala.

The rent is $7,010.

And then, over and above is staffing, which is minimal for a gala.

The, their biggest cost after the rent of the building is their food and beverage spend.

And is there a required amount, like, minimum for food and beverage?

We have had a set minimum, or Sodexo has had a set minimum of 25,000.

We see most galas hit and exceed that without, without too much difficulty.

Most of the galas that take place at Memorial are 350 to 500 attendees.

So, hitting that minimum isn't, isn't difficult.

Yeah, I'm just, I'm interested, the reason why I ask is, that also seems, let's say you're a smaller nonprofit and you're trying to do, that would seem pretty, maybe a significant challenge to kind of meet some of those numbers in terms of the rent and everything else.

And so, I wonder if that's maybe part of the challenge, too, to get, getting other events in, is that if you see that $7,010 number, you might go, okay, well, I'm just going to go across the streets.

Well, and there have, yeah, there have been conversations about what we can do, like, when you hit these, these certain criteria, is there some amount of the rent that can be waived?

And again, that goes into the, to the rent waiver conversation for nonprofits.

Great, yeah, and I, so, I bring that up to say that I think that's a really good idea.

Because, you know, one of the things, one of the, I think the benefits that we have in Sacramento, I, you know, I'm probably misquoting this, but I think I read somewhere that we have the most, you know, CBOs per capita of, like, cities in the U.S.

Or, we're, we're very high up there.

So, we have a lot of organizations that are, like, community serving, people focused, and may, may not have the resources to do something like that, but definitely could, you know, contribute if we had more on days that we're not getting events booked.

So, I, I really appreciate this, and just wanted to thank you.

So, I, I support this.

I'd love to see this move forward to, to the full council personally, and happy to make that motion.

Okay.

I, I don't know that we need a motion on.

Oh, it's just direction.

Well, in that case, I support this.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor of Telemontes.

Thank you, Chair.

And I'm also just supportive and way to get creative on expanding how many more events we can book.

Because every single day that we don't have an event at the Memorial Auditorium or Safe Convention Center is a day of revenue loss for the city of Sacramento.

And we have invested a lot of money, TOT money into this, so that we can get a dollar in, get through back out.

And so, this is like you continuing that mission of TOT.

And tomorrow we have the Visit Sacramento State of Tourism.

And so, I'm really excited to see that we're presenting this today.

I think it's like really perfect timing.

And I guess it's kind of off topic, but kind of.

But weddings are very expensive.

I just planned a wedding last year.

And that's something that I think we can make it easier for people looking to book this as a wedding venue on the city of Sacramento's website.

Because I tried to do it myself and it was kind of hard.

And so, I think it's a really great industry that's not going to go away anytime soon.

That we can really market and make it into a pilot program aside from this.

I know this is more like nonprofit, CBO, kind of concert driven.

But this other private market is booming.

And so, it's just something to think about for future pilot programs.

If you want to answer, Megan.

Excellent suggestion.

I will just add to that.

I mean, that's one of the reasons we're looking at like who's doing the sales and how we're selling the building.

If we know we're low at certain periods, like there's all of the committee rooms in the memorial, right?

And, you know, the ballroom lends itself to larger events.

But the memorial at Hall, which is up front of the building, represents opportunity.

So, it's really us looking at it a little bit differently.

But recognizing that when you have a major concert in, you're just not going to be able to book all of those spaces at the same time.

But we think we can manage for that.

I think the team is prepared for that.

And so, our aim is to both, it's a hit, right?

We want to manage revenue.

We want to manage activation.

We're trying to like, we're trying to balance it.

But I feel like the team that we have is really strong.

And I think they can get us there with the right tools.

Yeah, that's really exciting.

I have a photo from the Center for Sacramento History in, on the fifth floor.

And it's like a yo-yo competition that takes place at the Memorial Auditorium.

And it's like, how do you bring back those type of like, fun, family-friendly activities?

And I think this is like the perfect avenue for it.

The Yo-Yo Festival contacted me.

I had only been in the job for about 12 minutes.

And I tried really hard to get them.

But I didn't, I didn't understand all of the nuances and all of the tools that I had at my disposal.

But I have had subsequent conversations with them.

And that's the Yo-Yo Festival and Rollerblades are on my bucket list of events.

Oh, very smart.

Got you.

Okay, cool.

Thank you.

I have a sign that says, Ruler Dippy tonight.

Yeah.

I love, I love to see it.

I love the energy too.

Looking forward to Yo-Yos.

Thank you.

Okay, there's something to look forward to.

So, just a little more context to the nonprofit.

So, yesterday several of us were at Memorial for Memorial Day ceremony.

And so, sponsored by the Veterans Affiliated Council.

Now, what was their arrangement with you?

So, that is the, that was, presentation was actually presented by our department.

I see.

I see.

We engage the Veterans Affiliated Council because they have the network of people who can come

and help with the ceremony, the ROTC and all of that.

But that cost them nothing.

We bore all of the costs.

So, that was absorbed in your budget as a city.

The community event.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

And, you know, we've talked a lot and I hope that we'll, we will embark on this in the future

of, you saw the gentleman who was playing the municipal organ.

Yes.

We're doing maybe some quarterly silent film screenings that would be open and available

to the public at minimal or no cost so that, so that everyone can enjoy that facility.

Okay.

Okay.

Thanks.

Let's take some public comment and then we'll see if we have more questions.

Okay.

Chair, I have four speakers.

The first is Lambert, then Jamison Parker, Damian Lynch, then Jim Cornett.

Another millennial masterpiece.

First of all, I want to send a shout out to Megan because over the years she's been very

kind to the grand drum line.

She made sure they got funding for food, travel and lodging.

That was very important.

And I always want to send her a shout out because a lot of money does not go to grand high school

and they're winning championships while the money's going elsewhere and they're not winning

anything, including the Kings and the Sacramento Republic.

Combined, they've never won anything and they've been treated like they have.

Uh, as far as this safe credit union, uh, Mr. Dickerson and the mayor and even the city

manager's office should be excited.

I just heard, uh, vice mayor Telemontes talk about weddings and bridal events.

Well, to the Bay and Back cheesecakes was featured at the April 27th bridal and wedding convention.

And the cheesecake received such great reviews.

We actually made the directory.

It's hard to make the directory when you have so many people there.

So if vice mayor needs any connections to bridal and wedding, anything, the better business

bureau has endorsed us.

I can get you a number directly to the president and CEO who loves the cheesecakes to, uh, the

city manager's office, the mayor, uh, Mr. Dickerson, especially in district two, you should be calling

us during Memorial weekend.

We were in Southern California and it went so viral that they kept asking us, where are

you from?

I had to say Sacramento at least 10 times, but I always say district two and I always say

Del Paso Heights.

My phone should be ringing.

Thank you for your comments.

Jameson Parker.

Good morning.

Good morning, chair, committee members.

Uh, I could probably just say ditto to the presentation by Megan because everything that

she stated was, was right on track with our talking points.

Uh, I'm Jameson Parker with the Midtown association property based improvement district representing

about 1300 property owners and businesses in our urban core.

Our mission to make Midtown, the center of culture, creativity and vibrancy.

We are here today to voice our support for the consideration of a program that incentivizes promoters

to bring more activations to Memorial auditorium.

These are really the type of public private partnerships that are exactly the tools.

That we need to re-energize our economy and continue to really focus on our urban core

at the destination for culture and entertainment.

As part of our long term vision for Midtown, we want to have an environment that allows businesses

to launch, grow and sustain our creative ventures.

This includes targeted support like the incentive program, but also complimentary investments in

infrastructure, safety, mobility.

Um, that helps support the venues as well as the surrounding businesses.

Uh, the city has taken some really positive steps recently, uh, to address some of those needs,

including the rollout of the limited entertainment permit program.

Uh, launching of the entertainment zone ordinance, which will activate and enhance the vibrancy of

key corridors and, and districts.

Uh, this promoter incentive program complements these reforms, bringing more energy to an iconic venue,

while lifting the businesses that surround it.

Uh, we know that music and live performance are really a serious economic engine.

Uh, we've seen the positive ripple effects that come from live entertainment.

Uh, in the recent opening of channel 24, uh, we've seen that creating the right conditions for success

through private partnerships, uh, investments in confidence in Sacramento.

Um, our businesses respond and our culture thrives.

Uh, Memorial auditorium is one of our region's most iconic venues.

Uh, when it sits dark, it's not just a missed opportunity from ticket sales, but it's a missed

opportunity for our nearby restaurants, hotels, businesses, and our, um, and our, our residents

in the area.

Uh, we're really grateful to be part of this conversation.

We're excited to see that this is being looked at, um, as an opportunity to, to continue to grow

our creative economy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Damien Lynch, then Jim Cornett.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Damien Lynch here.

Uh, just wanted to come and express my support for the community.

Um, and express my support for this.

Uh, also, express my support for Megan and her presentation.

As a local event producer, um, Memorial auditorium is a dream for most event producers, but with

all the barriers that we've talked about today, it is pretty much out of everyone's reach.

So, um, in combination with the, you know, channel 24s and live nations that are now coming into town,

uh, it has sent a pretty deep kind of rift through the local producer community.

Um, everyone knows that there are challenging times ahead, um, in terms of producing quality

events for Sacramento.

So, hope this passes, um, just your support.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Jim Cornett is our final speaker on this item.

Good morning.

Hello.

And thank you.

Uh, Jim Cornett, owner of Harlow's, the Starlet Room, Cafe Colonial and director of California

Capital Venue Coalition.

Uh, very excited to see this going through.

It's something we've talked about over the last few years.

The cost for the memorial just, just too expensive for local promoters to do shows in it.

And a rebate program is something that most cities do adapt to in order to help them book

shows like this.

So, uh, I hope this all goes through.

Thank you.

Thanks very much.

Uh, that's, uh, public speakers we have.

I actually had one other thing I wanted to ask about and Megan, I think you might be the

right person for this.

It, um, it's to the rebate point and, uh, in the staff report, it talks about, uh, the

rebate on tickets, uh, not to exceed $10 per ticket sold.

It also talks about a rebate or a credit on the convenience fee.

And so, um, I, uh, I just wondered, uh, whether, um, that's consistent with, with state law,

um, with respect to, I don't know that we ever got federal law on it, but state law with

a disclosure for, uh, all charges on related to tickets.

So this would relate definitely.

So our, we have a ticket master contract that's coming up.

I know Sid is coming up because she's very good at this.

Um, but we have that we're also looking into our agreements to make sure that we have the

ability to do this.

And Ryan is helping us out with that as well.

So state law requires that, uh, that ticket master or all ticketing companies have all

in pricing on their convenience fees.

So, um, at one point in time prior to this, uh, legislation, the, there was the convenience

fee, the per ticket convenience fee, and then there was a per order fee.

And so that has all been combined now to a single ticket fee.

So this would be consistent with that legislation.

Um, and I want to make a point that we wouldn't be, we were looking for tools, lots of different

tools.

So we might do something where we add to the convenience fees.

So the consumer pays for that rebate to the promoter.

We may use, uh, the drink rebates.

What we're doing right now is just trying to, uh, diversify our opportunities and our

authority to offer these rebates so that we can increase our, our ticketed commercial assets.

Yeah, I was, I was more thinking about it from the, the disclosure standpoint, Sid, that,

um, I, and I don't know because I haven't used Ticketmaster any of the, the ticket selling options

for a while since the passage of the state, of state law.

So do you get to see the entire price, uh, at once, ticket price, convenience price, price

for them, buying a telephone, everything on, for, having someone, their car, I mean, all

the things that have made consumers very unhappy over the years.

Exactly.

Um, yeah, our, um, our convenience fees currently are on the low side.

We, we, we held the line on how much the convenience fees would be on our, on our Ticketmaster contract.

Um, we can, we have the opportunity to renew and to increase those ticketing fees, but we

may want to keep those low to be able to have the opportunity to add this, to, to add the

rebate onto the tickets themselves.

Um, I can tell you that adding, uh, adding an amount of money to the convenience fee has

been happening for 25 years.

I remember hearing about it the very first time it was called a buck up.

It's not a buck anymore.

I can tell you that much for certain.

Um, so, uh, yes, I believe it to be consistent with, uh, with state law and, um, there are

different ways that we can tackle it.

Yeah.

So, I, I, I, I appreciate it.

Oh, you wanted to add something?

Yeah, I was just going to say point of reference.

I saw the disturbed show at Golden One.

Outside of my four tickets, I paid $150 in ticket fees on those.

Yeah.

And you wonder why consumers are so happy.

Uh, okay.

I, I mean, just, you know, I don't want us to do anything that exacerbates the, the, uh,

the unhappiness of, of ticket buyers.

That, that, that, that's all.

Absolutely.

And I would also mention that we, uh, we keep our box office open, um, 20 hours a week, I

believe it is.

Uh, we take phone sales so that people don't have to actually drive down to purchase a ticket

from us and still be able to forego any convenience fees.

So, we have that as an opportunity for all of our shows, um, no matter who's presenting them,

so that there is that opportunity for consumers to avoid that, uh, those convenience fees from

the comfort of their living room.

Oh, interesting.

I wonder how many people are aware of that.

That's, that, it's, I, good, great to do it.

Yeah.

I don't know how many people know.

It was something that we did when we reopened after the pandemic.

We, uh, we did have an in-person box office, um, but that was difficult to manage when we

were first reopening.

Um, so, instead what we did was we waived our phone fees in order to kind of remove that

barrier for consumers.

And it's worked very nicely.

It's, it's worked very nicely.

It's worked especially nicely for, um, like the Coral Society and some of our, our, uh, groups where people are really, really price sensitive.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, thank you.

Thank you both.

I think all three, three of us are very supportive of looking at, at different and innovative, uh, approaches to, to try to optimize the use of the facilities, uh, to the benefit, not, not just of, of the city, uh, as an institution, but the community as, as a whole.

So, uh, I think we all, um, appreciate the, the creativity, uh, we'll be, um, I think all interested to see how, how, how it works for you.

And I, I think part of your presentation was an annual update for us of, of how it's going.

So, uh, we'll, we'll, we'll set the, we'll set the alarm now for a year from now and, um, we'll look forward to seeing you back.

Uh, as I said, the recommendation here is just to review comment and provide direction.

I think the, the direction is go do it.

So with that, thanks very much.

Uh, and we can move on to the, the next item.

So item five, are we up to five?

We are up to five.

The audit of the Sacramento police department's military equipment, use policy and inventory practices.

Good morning.

Good morning.

It's still morning.

Okay.

All right.

Uh, good morning.

Um, chair Dickinson and members of the budget audit committee.

I'm Kevin Christensen, your assistant city auditor.

We're here to present our audit of the Sacramento police department's military equipment, use policy and inventory practices.

Our audit has four findings and nine recommendations.

The recommendation before you today is to accept to the audit and.

And forward the, to the full city council for final approval.

Before we get into the substance, we'd like to thank the police department for their assistance, collaboration and patience for what was, I think we would all agree along and sometimes tedious process.

So, the California legislature approved AB 41 in September 2021 in an effort to increase transparency over police purchase and use of military equipment.

And to provide greater authority to the local governing agencies in how military equipment would be used and deployed in their communities.

So, the law includes four principal requirements for local law enforcement agencies in the state in order to purchase and, and continue to use military equipment.

The first requirement was to publicly issue a policy guiding the use of military equipment.

The second, the law requires local law enforcement agencies to publish an annual equipment use report.

This report is, must include a summary of how the equipment was used, the purpose of the use, the summary of complaints pertaining to use and proposed acquisitions in the coming year.

Third, the local law enforcement agency was required to hold at least one community engagement meeting.

And finally, the local governing agency, in this case the city council, is to determine the necessity of the equipment and the sufficiency of the policies.

So, after performing some benchmarking to determine how similarly sized local law enforcement agencies across the state are working to implement the requirements,

we found significant variability in how these agencies are taking steps to conform with the law.

In researching our legislative history of AB 481 and the subsequent implementation efforts by local law enforcement agencies,

we found limited information concerning processes to enforce the law.

So, for example, we found no penalties or remedies stated in the law.

We found that no courts have ruled or found any violations of local law enforcement agencies,

and that no cities have revoked their local law enforcement agencies' ability to use the equipment.

So, this area of, okay, what happens and kind of what counts as compliance was kind of great for us.

Instead, to the extent that we, to the extent we included information regarding compliance by other local agencies,

such information is presented to provide context on how other municipalities are taking steps to comply.

So, for our first finding, we found the department is taking considerable strides in augmenting its reporting

and community outreach programming to comply with 481 over the number of years that they've been working on this.

So, the department has released an annual military equipment policy through what's called General Order 410.06.

This includes a description of the equipment and the quantities sought for each specific piece of military equipment.

The information includes the authorized and procedural uses, the fiscal impact, training costs, and information on how to file complaints

and how the complaints would be handled by the department.

Second, the department has obtained by the City Council annual approval of the military equipment use policy.

Third, the department has issued several military equipment use reports, which they call the AMIR for short.

That includes information and disclosures required by the law.

This includes a summary of purposes of how the military equipment was used, the result of internal audits related to use, annual training costs,

the annual equipment inventory, as well as information about intended acquisition.

Finally, the department has complied with the requirements by holding community meetings following the issuance of the reports.

So, this, so the second finding gets into kind of a more complicated issue here, the issue of the timelines.

So, AB 481 requires the annual approval of a military equipment use policy by the governing body to allow for the equipment,

to allow for the continued use of the equipment.

The renewal process included a series of required actions that must be required prior to the approval by the City Council.

So, this includes, as stated earlier, the issuance of a military equipment use report, the hosting of a community engagement meeting,

and the issuance of a policy.

Now, for the City of Sacramento, the Council is required to consider a proposed military equipment use policy as an agenda item for each year to approve the use.

So, the process that the department has been following is to report on the use of military equipment for a one-year period.

So, the period that they set was April 1st to, or May 1st to April 31st of the following year.

So, SPD begins drafting the annual military equipment use report shortly after the end of the reporting period.

Now, the concerns with the current timeline revolve around the fact that under the current practices,

the department must receive approval of their proposed military equipment use policy within one year of the prior year's approval.

Right? So, if you look up on, if, what the slide indicates is that because they require this annually,

the police department basically shows a practice to present the policy one year before the deadline.

This gives them a timeframe to adjust if there are any mistakes.

So, because the policy is set one year earlier, there is a contracting of timelines.

So, as you can see, in the first year in 2020-22, we lost eight days.

In 2023, we lost 16 days.

And in 2024, we lost 25 days.

So, what this means is that if this pattern continues, the days between the approval of the military equipment use policy

and the average time it takes to complete the report and conduct a required community engagement will be fewer each year.

Eventually, as that table indicates, in about seven years, the timeline will have become so condensed that meeting the timeline would not be possible.

So, we recommended the department develop a modified implementation timeline in consultation with the city attorney's office to address the issues discussed above.

The new implementation timeline should complement providing adequate time for the community to consider any relevant information helpful to its approval of the MEU policy.

Now, what the third finding discusses are some issues that the community has raised and the city council has raised throughout the AB 481 process.

So, a lot of this has to do with the compaction of that timeline issue.

So, here we found that the city council has provided direction to the department on a series of issues that we believe can be further clarified through a formal legislative process.

First, we found, as described in the second finding, stakeholders have felt an inadequate amount of time is being provided to receive, digest, and respond to the large amounts of information provided by the police department.

We believe that the council, following the resolution of the timeline compaction issue, can host a process to more carefully define what the community engagement structure will be.

So, once there's a little more time, we have a little more time to figure out how we want to engage the community on this stuff.

Second, we found the direction related to the reporting of use can be clarified.

We found that the AB 41 language pertaining to use was vague.

So, the police department has, in that space, created a definition that they've applied to all of the different types of equipment.

So, we found that while the department has taken significant efforts to augment the reporting, there are some metrics that we believe can be clarified.

Third, we found that consensus can be achieved through engaging in a more robust legislative process to determine information that should be included related to the authorized uses of equipment.

And finally, in response to a recommendation from community stakeholders, the city council can provide more direction about information required to make AB 481 required determinations about the military use policy.

So, basically, in essence, what we're saying is once this timeline issue is figured out, there are some of these kind of hanging around issues that the city council has discussed and sought clarification on, but hasn't really had time to really discuss with the community and flesh out.

So, that's what this finding is addressing.

Now, our last finding addresses the Sacramento Police Department's military inventory process.

So, AB 41 requires as part of the military use report that law enforcement agencies include the inventory for each type of military equipment.

The department has conducted and published multiple inventories over the course of their compliance efforts.

Now, the department has returned a number of times to update and include additional equipment that they've kind of found throughout this inventory process that wasn't included in the last report.

So, we analyzed the department's inventory processes and practices.

We also researched relevant inventory management best practices along with inventory audits.

So, what we found here is that the department employs what we would refer to as a decentralized inventory management system.

where the controls over the inventory vary pretty significantly depending on the type of military equipment and the department leadership overseeing the unit in possession of the equipment.

So, the department has different divisions.

Each different division has different operational capacities and they use different types of equipment.

So, depending on, you know, the risk related to the equipment, some of the controls are more stringent.

So, for example, the SWAT team has very different controls over inventory than the controls that, let's say, the firing range.

So, we attempted but were unable to reconcile the current equipment counts to the invoices in the system.

So, basically what we were trying to do is take the inventory that they put out and locate through the city's financial system inventories so we could build essentially a master list of what's there.

So, due to the existing inventory management system, the record keeping practices, and the reliability of finding records in the citywide databases,

the department faced challenges establishing this total inventory.

So, all this stuff is basically included in different systems and kind of developing this one master inventory list was just not possible for us.

So, as discussed in this finding, this will likely result in the department continually locating equipment and updating its annual inventory to reflect this.

That said, the department's inventory count, the department's count corrections over the years have been partially due to their improvements in their inventory

processes.

So, since the creation of, or since the implementation of AB 481, the department has tasked their inspections and standards team with implementing changes to the management system to improve the accuracy of their inventory counts.

This includes stuff like quarterly counts, annual inventories, just to keep better control over what's in the system.

Additionally, the ISD has created a system that allows them to track the acquisition of new equipment by analyzing all the purchases to

to ensure the correct identification of military equipment when it's purchased.

So, instead of relying on their financial department to kind of flag this stuff as they see it,

the department tasks an individual in the inspections and standards team to review all of the invoices that are coming through,

flag what's military equipment, and then put that into their master list and track it through.

So, we made a series of recommendations based on best practices that we think will improve the reporting inventory and monitoring of the military equipment.

The police department has worked collaboratively with us on implementing this stuff as they've gone through the process.

So, we believe that through the improved inventory counts, the departments will be able to implement best practices and ensure accurate and consistent inventory counts going forward.

So, that concludes the presentation and we're available to answer any questions you might have.

Thanks for the presentation.

I don't know if either of my colleagues want to speak on this, but there are a couple of aspects of this that struck me.

One is not limited to the police department, but to the inventory process the entire city has.

One is not limited to this, but I don't know what the cost implications might be, but it seems if this is an example that we don't necessarily have

contemporary inventory methods that we use in the city.

Do you want to comment on that?

It really depends on the department.

I think in IT we have very contemporary.

And each department, because we are so big and departments are so big, utilize their own inventory.

I know in public works and DOU they are more modern and up to date.

And I think we are doing our job as we recognize where there are shortfalls and building a more modern and up to date system.

But there is not one system that will work for every department.

So we will continue to rely on department specific resources in order to manage inventory as it is specific to the purchase and utilization.

It is very different in every department.

How it is used, who tracks it, how it is checked out, how it is checked back in.

But I think that we are doing a much better job in the nearer term in modernizing.

Well, I appreciate it.

And I don't want to get off the subject of this agenda item too far.

But given the ways of tracking inventory that are available today, it does seem as if we might be able to advance our ability to track inventory in this particular domain.

And that really goes to the secondary I was interested in, which is, as we have discussed and you alluded to,

because of the way what is classified as military equipment moves in the police department,

once it goes out to a division or a unit, it seems as if then that is where you have a hard time tracking what actually happened to it.

And so it seems to me that that is something to focus on in terms of trying to improve our ability to track inventory within the department so that both the council and the community have a full and complete picture as possible of the use of the covered items subject to the legislation.

Do you have any further comment, Kevin, you want to make on that?

No, I think the department was pretty upfront on some of the difficulties that they have in that regard.

We think that for a big bulk of the equipment that they have, the armorer has made, I think, what we would characterize as a yeoman's effort to try to use information systems not designed to track inventory to provide some tracking in that regard.

I think, as you pointed out, once it gets down to the division level, the operational needs are so different that creating one policy to oversee or to direct the inventory of the equipment is not necessarily practical for them.

So I think in kind of tailoring this recommendation, that's why we wanted to centralize the inventory tracking with the IST, right?

So they can get the equipment, the information as it's coming from these different departments without having to overlay like one major policy that could hamstring, you know, their ability to react quickly or any other kind of operational needs.

Well, it seems like an interesting challenge because you want to have something that's as simple as possible, but also as consistent as possible across the breadth of the department.

And if something gets to the division level and then, as you mentioned, it becomes, the challenge becomes how it's operationally employed and that makes it difficult to track,

then that seems to me to be something to examine further to see what improvements might be possible in that regard.

Sure, and I just want to point out that, you know, what we were looking at is a microcosm of the total equipment package that the police department uses, right?

We were just, our scope here was limited to military equipment as defined by AB-481.

So the real inventory package is large.

Yeah.

The other thing I wanted to just inquire about was, and this is something I don't know how this would work given a relatively recent arrival on this side of the dais.

There are a number of things that are referred to as seeking the input of the council as my interpretive, but a legislative change, which I assume is a reference to state law, changing state law.

But can you characterize how this is all supposed to proceed as you see it from the auditor's point of view?

Sure. So AB-481 included a section called 7075, which basically gives particular power to the local governing agency to go farther than what the general requirements of AB-481 are.

Right now, for example, this issue of reporting use.

Now AB-481 has a very general description of what use means.

Now, what the direction from the city council, from the dais, as well as community stakeholders from the police commission have asked for is far more stringent and more granular reporting than kind of what AB-481 envisioned, right?

Now, what we're saying is that, you know, they're meeting the basic, the basic tenets of what 481 required, but this, these additional requirements that the council through 7075 is empowered to give can be clarified.

Now, we found this with the, with the reported use. We found this with the authorized use. So what we're saying is that the city council can engage with the police department and community care holders, a legislative process,

to really drill down on what you guys want from them. So there's been a number of correct, a number of augmentations made on the granularity of things like the gender or the racial, or the racial makeup of individuals that this equipment is used on.

Now that's not in the, in the state law, right? That's something that you guys asked for. Now, from their perspective, because this information is coming from the dais, because that timeline has been so, has been so compacted, there's some, there's, for lack of a better term, confusion on their part about exactly what the council wants.

So what they've been doing is they've been, they've been making considerable efforts to kind of try to dig into the data and present more information. And then they come back and then the council gives them, gives them, well, you know, this is great, this is very informative, but what we're looking for is this, right? So I think what we're saying is that if, you know, if this council engaged in a more, more robust legislative process, you would be, I think the council would get better data, more along, more along the lines of what they want,

you know, once more clear direction is given. So that's, so that's the legislative process that we're talking about.

Okay, that's, that's helpful. You weren't referring to changes in state law. You're referring to the, the council exercising the discretion it, it has within the existing legislation to, to, to seek more information or have more information or process, whatever that.

Yeah, correct. Because I think, I think, you know, in the benchmarking that we did when we talked to law enforcement agencies, a lot of these agencies were left wanting,

with, you know, direct, more clear direction on what the state meant. And there have also, they have been left wanting on cleanup legislation to really clarify this stuff that just hasn't come down yet.

So I think what we're, what we're saying is that, you know, we can take the lead, figure out what we want and then get ahead of the ball.

Okay. So, so the, so the recommendation you're really making is should, should the council take the recommendation would be to set up a process to, to consider those issues and points and come to some collective direction to the, to the department.

That's correct, sir.

Okay. Thanks. Vice mayor Telemontes.

Vice mayor Telemontes.

Vice mayor Telemontes.

Vice mayor Telemontes.

Vice mayor Telemontes.

ryw Thank you, chair. I think my question was along the lines of what you just asked. Because I'm looking at page 81 of the staff report and Captain Buchanan responded to the city auditor's recommendations. And there's just a lot of points where it says we concur. We agree. And so what are next steps for us here on budget and audit? I mean, I'm happy to move, well, to adopt this and forward it to city council. But I guess the question for our city manager is like all these, when we

concur, what are next steps? Would you want these next steps to come back in a form of like law and ledge or come back here or just come back to the full council? Like, like the updated timeline, the Sacramento police department will create a proposed timeline presented to the city council. Like what does the timeline look like for that? And then like, how do we want to move forward with these next steps?

I think I'd like to leave between the two departments, the most flexibility to develop next steps. And I think next steps could actually be when we come up with a timeline provided to the council via memo, and then we will actualize it, roll it out. Kevin is.

Yeah. And I think that is, I think that that's consistent with how we, how we design these recommendations, right? We don't want to be too prescriptive here on something like this.

So I think we wanted to give the police department enough time to work with the city attorney's office to see what, what, what they believe is legal, what complies with the law, and then bring it forward to you guys to get your input on how much time you guys think you want to dedicate to certain elements, such as the community outreach, such as the, the time that you would like between law and legislation and the city council to really kind of vet and get into some of these more, more finer points.

Okay. Sounds good. Yeah. Just, there's a lot that you get that city auditor's office and city, well, captain agree with. So it's like, okay, let's take this and be able to move forward so that there's more transparency and there's more clear direction to the police department to be able to do this work.

Sure. And we understand that, you know, that the police department and the city attorney's office have been in talks on kind of, you know, what that timeline would look like and, you know, and, and, and what would work and what wouldn't work. So.

Vice mayor may, excuse me, vice chair may.

Oh, thank you. And thank you for the presentation.

I really appreciate the briefing as well.

It helped me wrap my mind around this, which is why I don't have very many questions for you.

It was really related, same line of thought as the vice mayor.

Thinking perhaps maybe a workshop in law and legislation committee might be a good place to start.

Cause I know there have been, I think many things that have been thrown out by the council over there over the last several years.

As it relates to the MAU policies, the data that we'd like to see, including myself.

I think I asked for at least one or two things over the last couple of years.

And so I think a really good place for me as chair of lawn ledge would be to,

to bring those things that have been brought forth at the meetings forward along,

invite the community to come and give their point of view, invite,

and then put that together to something that can go to the full council for consideration.

And so just, just a process point.

I think that would be a good place to start.

Otherwise, great job.

Thank you.

We have public comment on this item.

No speakers.

No speakers.

Okay.

Thank you.

Does anyone from the department wish to speak?

Equal time.

I'll be brief.

Thank you, Clay.

Good afternoon.

Clay Buchanan with Sacramento Police Department.

Thank you guys.

First of all, thank Kevin and the team.

They did an amazing job.

The auditor's office, if you talk about customer service,

did a fantastic job working with us.

And I just want to really thank them.

On the process.

And thank you for some clarification on memos and how to move forward with the stuff we concur on.

So I'm here.

If you have questions, I can answer them for you guys.

But besides that, I just really just want to thank the auditor's office.

Any questions?

None.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

We have a motion.

We need a second.

I'll second.

We have a second from the vice chair.

Any further comments or questions?

If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Aye.

And opposed, no.

No.

And any abstentions?

Hearing none.

Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you for that report.

And we'll send this on to the full council.

Okay.

And our next item, item six, if I can find my agenda.

Thank you all who've been here this morning, this afternoon.

And this is item six, the updated homeless response audit scope proposal.

Good afternoon.

Yes.

Hello.

Yes.

Good afternoon now.

Chair and members of the budget and audit committee.

My name is Farishtar Arari.

I'm the city auditor.

The recommendation before you is that you accept the updated audit scope proposal for our next homeless response audit

and forward it to the full city council for approval.

Last April, the city council approved our preliminary report on the city's homeless response

and our audit scope proposal for the next couple audits that we had planned related to homeless response.

And we're getting ready to release our homeless response audit in the next month or so.

And so during this time, I've had some discussions with council members and just heard during other staff reports that,

and the fact that a third of the council has turned over since the last time this scope was approved,

that I'm proposing an update to the next homeless response audit based off of that feedback.

So the scope of the next homeless response that we're proposing to do is evaluating the costs and outcomes

of the various shelter types that the city operates and funds and, you know, assess those with the potential,

like, positive outcomes of those shelter types.

Positive as in getting people into permanent housing some way or something better when they get out of our shelters.

So this will assess the costs with the various types of shelters and including some sort of per bed or per person costs related to that.

We'll be evaluating the effectiveness of those shelters in getting clients out of homelessness

and then also looking into various, you know, different types of shelters because some of the shelters are geared towards specific types of people

and subpopulations such as serving families or serving those with mental or substance abuse conditions.

And so we're going to try to incorporate that as well in doing that analysis to provide some meaningful and objective analysis

for the council to consider if there's going to be any expansion of the homeless services

or if we have additional funding, what types of programs you guys want to expand on.

So we'll be kind of making some recommendations on those different shelter types.

And part of our scope and methodology will be trying to look at the past two or three fiscal year data in HMIS mostly

and also in reviewing our contracts and expenditures in our financial records.

We'll also be interviewing city staff, shelter operators, service providers, and shelter participants during this next audit.

And that's the end of my presentation.

But I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you for that presentation.

I don't know if we have any questions.

No?

Okay.

Do we have speakers?

Chair, I have two speakers on this item.

The first is Lambert and John Frias-Morales.

Homeless Department.

It's a peculiar way to monitor because ever since homeless has been identified,

the beds have not increased as much as the money has.

So to me, it's becoming more expensive to house people and run this program.

And I think this auditor, who is, I think, an outstanding auditor, as well as the one that was there before her,

we need more specifics on where the money went to the contractors.

Those contractors need to be identified.

And it's real simple.

You do what's called a federal audit.

You can't really count on state and city for this type of situation.

It has to be a federal audit.

And I'm not very fond of the people that are in the White House, but I am fond of federal audits.

Because federal audits can get past the inside jargon of these graphs.

See, graphs can be skewered.

Those of you who don't understand that, then you shouldn't be sitting up there.

Graphs can be skewered towards a hidden agenda.

I learned that a long time ago.

I also learned that if you study too long, you're studying wrong.

I learned that at Grant High School.

You must catch on quickly.

That's why Grant wins championships.

We don't waste time, especially when it's under pressure and everything's on the line.

This program should be examined.

Thank you for your comments.

John Frias-Morales.

Five years ago, back in June 2021, the council passed the homeless audit.

It's now 2025.

Where is it?

Did the audit get lost?

Did it wander off?

The audit itself is probably homeless.

At this rate, the audit is going to need its own audit.

The homeless audit is so late and useless, the city should just issue the auditors a nuisance ticket and report them to the collections department.

The city spent a quarter billion dollars on homelessness over 10 years.

That's $250 million.

And today's scope?

No delivery date.

No completion date.

It's like the auditor said.

We'll get to it when we get to it.

The governor gave the city two simple goals.

Permanently close encampments and permanently house the homeless.

But the audit skipped both.

Because apparently following instructions is harder than finding a homeless person who will accept shelter.

That's right.

Where's the shelter resistance data?

The sad truth is that the county coroner, the coroner, is picking up bodies off the street.

Over 1,100 homeless people have died.

Why ain't that in the audit scope?

Is it because they're scared to report that the city has picked up 58,000 needles last year from these encampments?

And the chief of police said that 30% of all crimes in Sacramento are caused by the homeless.

The homeless audit is just like Bigfoot.

Everyone talks about it.

A few claim they've seen him.

But there's no proof it actually exists.

Maybe the auditor's office is just really good at social distancing.

Or maybe they're writing the audit in calligraphy with a feather pen.

Pull yourself together, Sacramento.

Thank you.

Thanks for your comments.

Vice Chair Maple.

Thank you.

I just wanted to say, you know, I know that this, while you come up here, I don't know if I'll have any specific questions, but I might.

I know this has been a long time in the making, but that's in part because we use one big word to really cover a collection of many, many different issues, right?

When we use the term homelessness, it can mean a lot of different things to different people.

And we know that there are, you know, the saying is as many reasons why people are on the streets as there are people who are on the streets.

Sometimes it's, you know, a loss of a job.

Sometimes it's a lot of different factors.

Sometimes it's drugs.

Sometimes it's not.

Sometimes it's mental health.

Sometimes it's not.

And so there's a lot of things that go into it.

And it makes it really challenging from your perspective to try to cover all of those issues.

And then you add on top of that what each one of us over the years has actually asked, which is more than you could do, more than you could do in any time period.

And so I really appreciated you last time coming to us and saying, hey, we really need to modify the scope here because otherwise we're going to be unable to complete this in a fashion that is good for us and good for the community as well.

And so I think where you've landed is a really good place.

It's going to help us have the information that we need to ensure that the programs that we are offering and the shelters are actually working.

I think the last thing that any of us want is to spend all this money, as was mentioned, on building shelters and on different types of programming

and not really understand what's working well, what's leading to the best outcomes, who's actually getting into housing, who's exiting to their family members and so on.

And so that's the kind of information that I want to know so that we can make the best decisions for our city and for the people who are experiencing homelessness.

And so I support moving this forward.

Happy to second the motion.

And thank you for your work.

I think you get to make the motion.

I'm going to make the motion to move it forward.

Sorry, I thought you already did.

Oh, you did.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I missed that.

Okay.

Okay.

Happy to second.

All right.

Thank you.

You all are ahead of me.

I would associate myself with the vice chair's comments.

And I'll only make a passing nod to my broken record of prevention is where we need to spend more time.

But this audit, I think, is focused in the right place.

I mean, the truth of the matter is we do help hundreds, if not thousands, of people in Sacramento County off the streets.

And we need to know more people in the right place every year.

But what people want to know is how much it costs and how effective are we in doing that.

And so it seems to me that your scope is designed to examine those issues and to look beyond our own borders to, as you said, to benchmark against other jurisdictions.

We need to know if there are better ways of proceeding in other places around the country.

And we need to know what works best here in our own efforts.

Because I think those are key factors in setting our own policy

and making our own financial decisions about what will work best.

So I agree.

I think this revised scope makes sense.

And obviously there's keen interest in the community.

So it's a demanding undertaking to do this.

But when we get it, and hopefully that will be with all deliberate speed,

we'll, I think, find it very useful.

So with that, yes?

Sorry, now I have a question.

Vice Mayor, yes.

Thank you.

I just want to let you know that if you run into any obstacles and challenges

and gathering the information, the data, please come back to us and let us know

so that we can assist you so that the report can keep coming along.

Well do.

Thank you.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to adopt or accept the audit scope proposal

and forward it to the full council for approval.

If there's no further comment or question, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, say no.

Any abstentions?

Hearing none.

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

All right.

And we are on to item seven, council member proposal request for committee consideration,

community facilities district pilot program.

Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

And excited to have this come before you today.

Just a little bit of background quickly and then I'll read the description of the proposal.

So the Hollywood Park neighborhood in my district, long before I was ever running for office or elected,

has always identified a neighborhood park as their number one issue.

And in our own parks plan, it is stated that's an area where we do need a new park as well.

But we know that, and I think all three of us elected on this dais know that it's really challenging to figure out how do you build a new park,

how do you fund it, how do you maintain it, especially when we look at our current budget situation,

when we look at the cost of deferred maintenance for our parks, we know that it's a challenge.

And then you add on top of that that we're in existing neighborhoods, right?

And so we look at a place like Northland Thomas.

It's a great example.

I often have community members who come to me and say, why do they get really nice parks and we don't?

And the answer is because it was a master plan community.

And those districts and fees were built in to the community that those homeowners pay into.

And so one creative way that I thought of was, well, what if we tried to do a community financing district in an existing neighborhood,

ask those neighbors, would you be willing to pay a fee per month or per year in order to fund the construction and the maintenance of a park?

And given what I know about this community, I think the answer is yes.

And there would be a process, of course, if this moves forward for there to be community outreach, there would be surveys.

We would actually figure out is that true before we move forward.

But I believe it to be true.

And so and then in addition to that, there is a school in the neighborhood that has a piece of land that they've been trying to sell for several years and have been unsuccessful in doing so to a housing developer.

And they approached my office about the possibility of it being turned into a park.

And I said, you know, I'm not sure, but let me explore it.

And which is when I started talking with our staff of the city saying, hey, is this possible?

And the answer was, well, we haven't done it that way before, but it is possible under the law.

And so we came to a place where our wonderful interim city manager said to me, hey, you know, we've got constraints in terms of staff time.

And so I really would like to see if the rest of this body and the council would like to move this forward so we can have staff work on it.

So my ask of you today is not that we say yes to this, it's that we move it forward so that the staff can work on it and actually give us a real sense of what would it cost?

What would it take?

How much would it cost to put this on the ballot?

What would it cost to do the construction and so on so that we can make a decision on if that's something that we want to do?

The last thing I want to know is my goal here is to limit the cost of the city as much as possible.

So if we are to move this forward and it seems like it's something that's possible, we would do a community fundraising effort to cover all the costs.

And so that is my goal as a council member to do that.

But in the interim, we need to get approval to say, can staff work on this?

Can they put it together?

And so that is my goal today to get that information.

And then happy to answer your questions.

Okay.

Vice Mayor Talamantes.

Happy to move this forward.

I think the only thing is if you're going to have to go to the voters for this specific measure, I know that there's community conversations about the parks, park bond.

And so you'd have two competing ones.

So just something to think about.

No, and that's a really good point.

And I think the great part about this possibility is it's a very defined area.

You've got street, street, street, and street.

And I think it's approximately 600 households within that.

So I think that that makes it very doable for me and my team to actually go out there to talk with the residents, make sure they understand the differences between them, understand what's being asked of them.

And then really for us to assess ahead of time before we even put on the ballot, does it have enough support?

Because I certainly don't want to have anything on the ballot that is not broadly supported.

And so this just allows us to kind of start those conversations and see what's possible.

Okay.

And I'm supportive of this moving forward as well.

I think we're all searching for ways to finance public assets that are not feasible to finance with our existing mechanisms or resources.

So if there's a there there with this, it may be also transferable.

So this sounds like as good a test case as you could probably come up with to address whether it makes sense here and potentially other places as well.

So do we have anyone who wants to speak on this item?

We have no speakers.

We have no speakers.

Now, it looks to me from what is among the recommendations, you have an option here.

You can we can ask whoever is appropriate on the staff to work on it and come back to this committee or work on it and go straight to the council.

So that's right.

My preference would be to go to the council after it's been put forward so that we can get because the timeline is condensed.

If we want to get it on the 2026 June ballot, we need to start working.

Yeah.

And so I want to make sure that we have the time to do that.

So that's your motion.

Yes.

That is all.

Or I guess.

I'll remove mine so you can make your version more.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I'll happily make that motion.

We'll give the author the opportunity to make the motion.

The staff has had the opportunity to work on it.

Okay.

So the motion is to direct the appropriate council appoint of officer.

And I think we leave that to the interim city manager to determine and then bring the proposal as is developed back to the full council.

And one last closing comment, if I may.

Yes.

Because I think you brought up a great point, which is that that is the intention of this is to be a pilot test case and say, does this work?

Because I would love to see this if it makes sense and it works for these communities to see this throughout the rest of the city of Sacramento.

Because we know that there are a lot of older and existing neighborhoods in the city.

We know that we're probably going to be in a challenge funding new parks and maintaining them.

That this may be one good way of doing that.

And so looking forward to hopefully seeing this spread beyond.

But we got to see if it works first.

Thank you.

If there are no further comments or questions, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no.

Any abstentions?

Hearing none.

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you for the proposal.

Okay.

Do we have any committee comments, ideas, questions, or meeting reports?

I don't hear any.

Do we have any public comments on matters not on the agenda?

Yes, Chair.

I have one speaker, Lambert.

Okay.

To Mr. Dickerson, the chair, and really the city manager's office.

I was notified during the holiday that a major, what I consider a major injustice to some teenagers.

Now, Grant High School's football team won the championship in December.

I'm talking about the state championship, not city, not northern.

And for those of you who don't understand, it's very difficult to win it all.

Everything has to go right.

And it went right for them.

And they won all three of their games on the road.

They never did play at Grant.

There was a controversy about that, all of that traveling for those young people.

And we've won the championship so much, we know when the teenagers have been shortcut by City Hall.

There has been no parade.

It's been something in the stadium.

But we're talking about a parade.

We want these young people respected and admired.

And when you had that photo, I was here that night.

And those youngsters came up to me and I said, I'm going to say I'd like for you to get summer applications, summer jobs.

These young folks are teenagers.

They'd like to help their families out.

I would hope that the city manager's office would do that.

You have enough money.

You have $1.6 billion budget.

Squeeze it out of there.

Don't get a raise.

Like Mr. Dickerson is leading the charge.

No raise.

Put his raise into the district.

To me, the only one who should get a raise, and it's because she was here during the pandemic, and I see her at almost all the meetings I go to, and I go to a lot of meetings, is Minty Cuppy.

Because I guarantee you she could work remotely.

Okay.

Thank you for the comment.

I don't believe we have any others.

So with that, we are adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.