Okay, thank you.

I now call this meeting of the Sacramento City Council Law and Legislation Committee to order at 10.

Oh, I'm sorry, 1104 a.m.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Thank you, Councilmember Dickinson.

Councilmember Plucky Bomb will be absent today.

Councilmember Jennings.

And Chair Maple, I am here.

Please join me in the land acknowledgement and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Rise if you are able.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands to the original people of this land, the Nissanon people, the Southern Maidu, Ballyon Plains Miwok, Putwin Winton 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 people's history, contributions, and lives, can remain standing, salute and pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which of stands.

One nation under God and divisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

All right, I welcome everybody to law and legislation committee.

If for any members of the public who wish to address the committee on any of the items today, you please get a speaker slip from the back of the room, and then you can bring it up to the front desk.

Our wonderful team at the clerk's office here will take it from you.

Please submit your speaker slip before the item begins.

You will have two minutes to address the committee once called upon.

We ask, of course, that you abide by the rules of decorum, which can be found in the rules of procedure on our website and on copies in the back of the room.

With that, we will move on to the consent calendar.

Do we have any members who have any questions, comments, want to pull anything?

We have a motion, uh and a second.

And then do we have any public comment on the consent calendar?

I have no speakers on consent.

Okay, hearing none.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed or abstain?

That passes unanimously.

All right.

Moving swiftly along to our first item.

Very exciting.

Um, we have an update on our state legislative and administrative activities.

Maybe I'd pass it on over to you, Consuela.

Thank you.

I will make this quick.

I'm pleased to have Ross Buckley, our uh state lobbyist, contract lobbyist here to give us an update on all things over at the Capitol.

We also have Brian Sanders from DOU in case you have any water questions.

Okay, great.

Thank you, Ross.

We really appreciate you being here.

And I know it's really busy time at the Capitol, so thanks for making some time out of your day.

Hopefully, we can make it short and sweet.

But just wanted to make sure that we have an opportunity not only for the members of this committee, but also the public to hear about um what's going on at the capital, what the city cares about in context of the capital, and uh if there's anything that we can do to help you.

Good morning.

I appreciate that uh that welcome and uh thank you for inviting me to be here to give an update.

Uh I want to give a short summary of kind of topics I want to cover this morning.

Uh one, I want to talk about key legislative deadlines and kind of where we are in the legislative calendar.

Uh, two talk about uh some of the party bills that the city is working on and actively engaged in, uh, then transition to a budget conversation because a lot is happening in the state budget right now, and then finally kind of wrap up on uh regulatory action at CARP that's kind of going on that intersects all of those all of those issues.

Uh so first, where are we in the legislative calendar?

Uh this is actually kind of a critical week uh for the legislature because this is the all-important suspense committee hearings in the assembly and senate appropriations committee.

And the suspense calendar is when any bill costs a certain threshold of money to the state, it gets preferred on math through the suspense calendar.

Uh, it's often described as kind of a uh uh you know unique process, a black box of some sorts where it's not like unique or normal uh committee hearings where you know the chair really has a lot of authority and leadership has a lot of authority to hold or pass bills off the suspense calendar.

Um of the things that I will say is that this will be um, you know, uh given the where we are on the state budget backdrop and where we are in sort of uh spending, uh, you know, this is typically where most bills, if they're going to stop in the legislative process, they stop in the two uh suspense hearing appropriations.

Um given also that most bills have associated state costs, this is where you know a significant motion of bills are currently, where there's hundreds and hundreds of bills on both of the lists that they will hear on Thursday.

Uh once we get through that legislative uh deadline of the probes fiscal deadline, we will move to the House of Origin deadline, which all bills they're induced in the House uh need to be to the next House by the end of this month.

So really this marks the halfway point in the legislative process where uh once assembly bills get the Senate and Senate bills get to assembly, we'll kind of start the process over, you know, immediately in June and get through that policy committee hearings uh before they break in early July for their summer recess.

So that's kind of where we are in the legislative calendar and a broad overview of where things are headed.

Um next, I want to highlight some of the priority bills that the city is working on.

One is uh SB 802 by assembly member or Senator Ashby, excuse me, majority leader Ashby.

Um that's her bill to kind of uh restructure and reimagine how we address homelessness here uh in the region.

Uh that bill is already in the assembly and is in assembly policy committee waiting for a hearing.

Uh the next bill is SB 865 by Senator Ashby as well.

This is the California Music Festival Preservation Grant Program.

This is really trying to help keep live uh music events happening, and obviously we have a couple here that are important to see of Sacramento.

So the Senator's taking that on.

Uh, the next one is assembly bill 2016 by assembly member Soya, which would remove some barriers for the SPAY and neuter programs to help facilitate that for our pet animal shelters.

Uh and then the uh next bill is assembly bill 1349 by still member Isaac Bryan.

Uh this bill is really trying to crack down on uh secondary ticket sellers and the speculative selling of that's often predatory in nature for some of these live events.

So that's another bill that's um already made it to the second house.

And the final bill I wanted to highlight is assembly bill 2069 by assembly member Krell.

Uh this is the fair ground act for investment and reviolation.

This is a limited sales and use tax suspension to help kind of develop uh infrastructure around the fairs.

Uh so all bills that we're watching, most of those are in the aforementioned uh suspense hearing, so we'll pay close attention to the outcomes on Thursday.

Um now I wanted to kind of turn to the budget process because this is also a very important week for the budget process as well.

Uh the governor's May revise is due by this Thursday.

Um, we assume it's gonna come out in the next uh 48 hours here.

Uh, he hasn't quite mentioned on when he's gonna release it yet, but it will be within the next day or two.

This is really a time for the governor to one provide us the most updated revenue after the April tax deadline, and then two kind of set out his priorities of what he wants to pursue in the budget negotiations with the legislature.

Um what I will say is two key points when it comes to the May revise.

One is it is just a proposal.

There's nothing necessary concrete or uh in bills that associate with that, uh, because we really have a month left before that June 15th budget deadline where the administration and the two houses legislature have to come together and kind of solidify a final deal.

But this will give us a good sense of where things will be discussed.

Um what I will also say is that revenues have been better than expected for that the government was expecting in January.

Uh, earlier this year we were talking about an $18 billion deficit, uh $20 billion deficit, 10 billion dollars.

So uh up until early April, we actually collected $8.6 billion over our revenue estimates, so that is good news.

Uh we haven't quite seen the the drop-off that some were anticipating.

Uh, but I will caution you that any surplus or any talk about surplus should be um you know cautiously taken because one roughly 50% of any surplus is already accounted for with the Prop 98 spending, rainy day spending, so state obligations.

So it's already smaller than kind of what the numbers suggest on paper.

Um, and then secondly, these were two big uh programs that were um contemplating the governor's January budget proposal of this rainy day or sorry, the Prop 98 kind of true up fillment payment, which was about 5.6 billion dollars to schools that we uh saw as savings are here for closing as savings this year, but we may have to pay that or more in coming years, and then a $2.8 billion dollar true up for the budget stabilization act.

So those were some savings.

So again, that's already $8 billion of when we only have you know an $8.8.6 billion surplus.

So it's uh a little bit of uh, you know, we'll see what the new revenues are from the governor in the next couple days, but it's also you know, when you see a surplus number, it's you always have to be a little bit cautious on how you approach that.

The Senate and Assembly have already put out their budget uh blueprints, and so particularly for the Senate, they actually put in budget numbers in their plan, which a lot of priorities for the city were included in the Senate's plan.

That include 500 million for HAP round seven, that was the kind of the true up payment from the half we got uh in last year's budget, and then a billion dollars going forward for round eight and half.

Uh one billion dollars for homeownership programs, including the uh Dream for All program to help with down payment assistance, uh, a billion dollars for affordable housing programs, including the multifamily housing and low-income housing tax credit, and then additionally a billion dollars for the GGRS funding for legislative priorities that were negotiated last year.

Um that includes TRCP, uh, housing programs, uh the AB617 money among kind of those priorities.

Lastly, wanted to uh provide an update on some regulatory actions by the California Air Resources Board that is kind of seeing this legislative and budget conversation uh meet all together.

Uh so as a reminder, last year the legislature passed and the governor signed the CAPA Invest extension program to 2045.

Uh this January, the California Resources Board released their first set of staff proposed regulations to comply with that bill.

Uh they received a ton of feedback, they opened a 45-day comment period.

Uh, and as a result of that feedback in mid-April, April 14th, so just a few weeks ago, they released a revised staff uh for uh uh amendment to those proposals.

Uh that include a couple of key points that I wanted to touch on.

Uh one was uh that they increased the uh climate credit, so this is the electricity bills from $8 billion to $10 billion, so that's a $2 billion additional credit.

Uh two, they established the manufacturing decarbonization incentive fund.

Uh in their January proposal, that was a $2 billion, they've increased that to $4 billion.

Uh, this is really to help refiners and some other industrial folks comply with the Cap Invest program.

And then three, they include an $800 million as a kind of a compliance cost to help with compliance costs with investment.

That has caused a number of folks to engage on this issue.

One, because the MDI would be funded by a hundred and hundred and eighteen million of new allowances to the program.

Um, so there's some concerns around our climate goals and then including this on top.

And then secondly, this also uh kind of restructures how the legislative priorities are gonna be funded by the GGRF program.

So again, that includes a follow-up affordable housing 617 and many other programs important to the state.

And so the Senate ended up holding kind of an emergency informational hearing last week on the issue where most of the senators expressed concerns.

Uh the budget chair, the Senate budget chair was on that committee, and he kind of uh, you know, talked about how everything could be opened up in the budget process if CARV moves forward with this when it comes to legislative priorities and legislative oversight.

Uh so something to watch because it kind of intersects all of these things.

Uh CARBIS uh slayed to hear this at the end of May, so uh one to watch as we as we get through the month of May.

Okay.

Is that your presentation?

Yeah, that's my presentation.

That was a lot of information.

Thank you.

And this is exactly that exactly what we were looking for.

So I appreciate it.

And I know I just uh I didn't think about it until after the fact I'm like, oh yeah, this is a pretty big week.

Yeah, the main revis, you got suspense file.

Um, so you know, more to come once once we figure out what ends up making it off the assistance ballot, I'm sure, in terms of our legislative priorities.

Um I have a quick question and then I'll pass it on over.

Um, I know that this is an issue that I think a lot of people are watching.

There's a lot of opinions on all sides, so not inserting my opinion, but um, you know, there's I think an assembly member lee bill related to um state workers and return to office.

I know that's something that people are watching really closely, and then obviously you have you have the union itself negotiating.

So are you hearing anything about about that?

That bill, anything related to return to office that might be relevant to Sacramento?

Yeah, and that's uh, you know, that's a as you mentioned.

I think that's kind of a a complicated issue for many people in the legislature obviously it's uh been a priority for the unions to you know keep that kind of flexibility in the work schedule um I know that we've had conversations here at the city level about you know getting workers and um you know having workers you know occupy the the kind of the downtown space I think the question is and uh uh is uh kind of a wait and see approach um for the legislature and particularly the governor uh the governor has come out and said that he was you know kind of extending it and allowing some of the flexibility to continue um so uh obviously something we're monitoring closely yeah okay really interesting yeah I I know there's that looming July first deadline that the administration has given the department so we'll see we'll see what happens there in the timing of the bill so with that I'll pass it on over to someone who might know a thing or two about this stuff our former former assemblyman Roger Dickinson.

Well a little familiarity with this uh I had three things I wanted to uh ask about um first of all uh month uh two a couple months maybe ago now um I I forwarded uh to Consuelo and I think the chair did well a request to take a look at at AB 2214 uh by Corey Jackson and uh I have not seen anything in terms of of uh the the city either uh engaging on the bill or not so I'm wondering if if there's some update with respect to to that.

Let me ask you the next question I'll check.

Okay.

Um second question was uh and I appreciate your your presentation uh from what I from what I gathered from press reports as as you mentioned uh the assembly didn't put any numbers in its in its um uh position statement regarding the the budget but I didn't even see that they mentioned HAP was happened in there it was very briefly mentioned and it what the assembly did is essentially they put out guiding principles of how they want to be guided in what they want to stay true to in the budget process.

They had a very brief blurb about prioritizing HAP so I I assumed that that was a uh uh a supportive comment about HAP, but it was it was not the detail level of actually putting numbers to the to the program.

Well it didn't sound like it must not have been in the in the core of of what they were talking about.

They were talking a lot about health and human services are things of that kind of look like but so this was uh just more in the nature of a footnote it sounds like huh uh it was it was a couple pages in let's put that way a couple yeah okay but you didn't have a chance to look at it uh directly um do you do you have any sense I I mean I have a strong sense from from having talked to uh some members that the the Senate is is pretty firm on what they want to see with respect to restoring as you mentioned restoring half to a uh a billion dollars for uh round seven and a billion for round eight cycle um do you have any sense of of where the assembly is on that issue?

Yeah I think they're supportive as well and and I know that the big city mayors among others and league of cities ourselves and a lot of uh coalition partners have been telling talking to the legislature about how important this funding is uh to the cities and and COCs and and counties um so I think that they're on board it's and as you very well know that sometimes the budget process is a lot of um you know not grandstanding but uh you know we're gonna make you ask for X, Y, and Z and negotiations and uh if the government you know the government has not included happen his last couple budget proposals and so the legislature has had to ask for those things to be included and said these are our priorities and that's just part of the negotiating process as you're you know very well aware of um so it's uh I think that the legislature the legislative buys are there.

Yeah I I mean it it it strikes me as more a negotiating tactic on the part of the administration frankly than um what they really feel about the substance of the issue so um obviously that one's one that we're paying attention to and um and and the Senate proposal is pretty encouraging uh I would say it from the housing perspective at least.

The um third uh issue I wanted to raise uh you touched on with the uh uh process at the ARB with with respect to implementation of cap and and Invest.

And uh I just got a copy uh of a of a letter that that's been submitted, it was submitted April 30th, actually, or at least it's dated April 30th to the chair of of the resources board from uh an array of transit agencies across the state and including Sacramento Regional Transit signed by Henry Lee uh expressing their their concern with the regard to the proposal that was uh is under discussion, and they note that uh uh the affordable housing, sustainable communities, TURSIP, and LCTOP programs under the proposal would be zeroed out uh of annual annual funding, and that uh those programs would lose uh up to uh 1.65 billion dollars of uh and obviously a lot of that money goes to housing that the city has made considerable use of uh through the affordable housing and sustainable communities program, but the others are also critical to us both both in terms of local transit and intercity rail uh when you start talking about TERSIP and LCTOP.

So my question uh is have we as a city engaged on on this issue uh number one uh number two have uh what if anything is the League of California cities doing if you if you know and have we have we engaged at that at that level as well.

So the uh I don't know if you can shed any light on that, but uh I think I can shed some light on it and then uh maybe I'll defer to consult on some of the other uh uh some of your questions.

But uh first the League of Cities, the transit agency partners, uh everyone has been engaged, affordable housing, environmental justice advocates have all been engaged on this on this proposal.

Um, it was quite concerning to many um the amended proposal as you mentioned, and really uh to step back, it's in the legislative deal.

We essentially said there's tier one, tier two, and tier three priorities.

Essentially in tier three, there's all the programs you just mentioned, affordable housing, sustainable communities, TERSIP, uh all those programs.

So essentially the assumption is if we remove and refigure some of the allocations, they'll just be less money to you know to generate for the GGRF auctions.

Um that's why tier three like kind of the tier three priorities would not be funded at all.

And would again the legislature has heard from everyone that this is an issue.

The Senate at this point seems more concerned and more um uh in I won't say engaged, but they held a hearing uh and uh informational hanging the assembly declined to hold one.

Um I think there's a lot of T-leaf reading in kind of that those actions, um, but ultimately uh this is resides at CARB, and so I know folks are engaging with CARB board members and uh locals and statewide organizations all throughout.

Okay.

Well, uh uh thank you for that.

This is I mean, this is alarming to me.

Uh and uh I hadn't really been following the the process at the CARB uh admittedly, but uh it does seem like this rises to the level of an issue we ought to be as a city of Sacramento communicating directly with our delegation about our our concerns.

So um I would I I would encourage that if it hasn't already happened, thanks.

I'll add myself on to that as well, and you know, I think uh I think a couple of us may know a CARP board member or two, including one of our colleagues.

Um, are we we're back to the first question.

Yes, 2214.

I apologize, this may have gotten lost in the flurry.

Um I looked it up, it is still waiting for a hearing in the first policy committee, so it looks like it's not moving this year.

Okay, well, um okay.

So the milk bill is not moving.

Correct.

It is got a rule waiver on April 13th and was re-referred to um it's like business and finance.

I mean, if it hasn't, it's for first policy committee here, yeah, it's it's um only gonna get there through a much a number of role waivers.

Correct.

Uh and I assume it's uh it would go to uh to uh banking and finance, sorry.

Uh to to a probe, so yes.

Um, yeah, so it's probably not moving.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and saying it's not moving this year.

Okay, and I can just add, sorry, I wasn't familiar, I didn't call the bill off topic, but when she mentioned that, uh I actually reached out to their office as well to engage with them on the bill, and they were still in a very much of a uh work in progress mode when it came to the bill.

Um so uh you know, we offered our support, but this sounds like it might be something that the author reintroduces um in the new session.

Okay.

Um I know uh I also sent in a request for the same bill.

Um so I think you know, maybe maybe it's not worth um your time and our time right now to engage at this point, or at least to you know put a formal letter together, but you know, it might be worth uh having conversations with their office and seeing what the next version may look like and getting engaged in the new session.

Um okay, and I really want to appreciate your your comments on Cap and Invest and some of that as well.

I I share some of those concerns and um I also wasn't aware of that letter, which is funny, you know, sitting on we what we all said on the transit agencies and other um, so uh I would love to see a copy of that.

Um, and might might go back and watch that Senate hearing as well.

Um, okay, Councilmember Jennings, any questions on your end?

Just one question, um, and just it's really a clarification.

I heard you say the June 15th final budget date.

Uh I also heard you say uh 8.6 uh million billion dollar surplus.

And then I heard a word of caution.

And I want you to just explain that word of caution for me a little bit better.

I I I will say I should clarify every one of those points.

Uh, because you you know you're you're you're asking some good questions.

Uh when I say June 15th is the constitutional deadline for the budget to be done.

However, in the last I would say four years, they've passed a the the constitution says that the legislature does not receive pay unless a balanced budget is passed by the legislature.

So what they've done the last four years is they've essentially passed a shell of a budget and continue to negotiate for two more weeks before just July 1st fiscal deadline.

So I don't want to say that they're it's uh it's it's a creative solution to give themselves a little bit more time to negotiate.

So I just I should have clarified that point that sometimes we continue this negotiators up until July 1st, and then we continue to have conversations in August.

Uh 8.6 is currently what Department of Finance has said that they would be collected till about early April.

Again, we'll get an update from the governor the next 48 hours on after the April revenue of the tax dealing, what that exactly number is.

Uh but the caution is always uh, you know, we throw out big numbers.

$8 billion is a very large number, but when you you know take out the Prop 98 uh education guarantee plus the brand day fund plus uh you know the the sell-up payments that we have to maybe make because we suspended the uh and withdrew from the brand day fund last year, uh that that surplus goes away quite quickly.

And so uh I think that it was the LAO just put out, I think it was a week ago that the state's state uh spending has increased by a hundred billion dollars, I think the last six years.

So it's we've seen our budget kind of grow in a significant way, and so there's always caution around spending.

Thank you very much.

And then, you know, um when when you when you mentioned the June 15th deadline, I saw a little smirk.

Um, I think unfortunately, at least m what I've seen over the last several years is that there's been this kind of fun new budget process in the legislature where they pass it by the deadline, um and then it's followed up by uh a flurry of other bills that are much more specific.

So it's more of like a framework essentially that that gets passed on June 15th, and then the the details to follow.

I think it's an interesting new strategy that has been in play.

So I think is that what we expect this time around?

I would uh I would uh anticipate that that'd be a similar process.

Got it.

Um so yeah, um a lot of really great questions have been asked.

I don't have a lot to add.

I just really appreciate um the information.

I think it's really helpful not only for us um and our colleagues who may be listening in, but also um for the public to understand that the city is very, very engaged um uh through our firm and through um our government affairs manager and others um and what's going on in the legislature.

We know that what happens there impacts us greatly uh and our voice matters, and so it's great to know what we're working on.

And I know that you heard just a highlight here today.

We are actually engaged on a multitude of issues, everything from water to you know infrastructure to housing to you know the environment, so on.

Um, and so this is just a high line.

One thing it was already noted, but uh just want to put like a really fine point on the hot dollars.

I'm sure you hear that from cities and counties all over, but it's it's a huge priority for us, and we know that there's a lot of uncertainty.

I don't think we have any.

I I can speak for myself, I don't have any expectation that we're gonna walk away with the with more than than we've what we've had in the past, or maybe even what we had originally, but the hope is that we can get as much as we can.

Um, you know, I'm I'm really heartened to see what's in the Senate version of the budget, though, you know, I don't actually have a lot of hope that that's where we'll end up, but I I if if we get there, great.

Um, but it's it's a high priority, but just because of the um our priorities of our community, and so uh just want to thank you so much for your time during a very busy time in the legislature.

So, with that seeing no other questions or comments from my colleagues, uh we will release you back to do your job.

And then, do we have any public comment on this item?

I have no speakers on this item.

Thank you.

Thank you, appreciate it.

Okay, that was really informative.

Um, and so now we're gonna move on to our next really enthralling item.

Um, just for my my colleagues' awareness.

Um, I requested this item because um I I've heard from uh many other colleagues about you know what happens in the policy proposal.

Uh, once once something gets uh introduced by by a member or two or three or four, um, and then it gets uh you know put on the agenda by the mayor uh to whichever committee it goes to, the vast majority of which go to this committee, but some go to others.

Um we focused only on the proposals obviously that have been assigned to this committee, uh, and then they usually get heard at some point.

Um, and then sometimes what happens after that point is a little bit of a mystery, and that is because staff is working really hard.

All these proposals are different, um, they require a different amount of resources and time and energy and research and everything else, and so I thought it would be helpful maybe every once in a while for this committee and the public to hear about where we're at in the process of all those various proposals, because sometimes you know, you they get introduced, they get heard at committee, maybe some articles get written, maybe something gets posted on social media and the public's you know, gets really engaged, um, and then they may not hear about it for a while.

So, just so they know that we're working on it and they can hear the updates.

So, with that, I would love to invite up uh the lovely Miss Amy Williams, the chief of staff of the city manager's office to provide an update.

Welcome.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, um, Chair Maple and uh committee members of the Law and Ledge Committee.

I appreciate the opportunity to come provide this update this morning, and hopefully quarterly updates as well to keep us all on track, too.

Um, thank you also for giving that introductory because I will just jump to a little further down on my notes.

So I'll pick up where once the mayor and charter officers meet, and these proposals go off to committee land, and the committee uh hears this proposal from staff, and then if they approve it and it moves forward, then it gets assigned to a staff.

It gets assigned to, and you'll look at your log list.

You could see that it'll get signed to a department and it'll get assigned to a department lead, and then we'll also notate that it had been seen at law and ledge.

And so at that point in time, I involve myself in tracking with staff, you know, where are we and maintaining any updates that we have throughout this the proposals lifespan?

Um the log itself documents each proposal status, including whether it is submitted, assigned, under review, concluded, or advanced.

Um staff typically will meet with the council member or the council members.

Um I often ask staff, you know, have you met with the council member?

Have you sat down with to figure out is that what they're trying to achieve with this proposal and how we can go at it?

Because sometimes we have to address something in a creative way, it's not so linear.

Um, and so you'll see in the status notes, this is where I start documenting, like okay, staff met with this council person and got this feedback, or we had a community meeting, got this feedback, and it's moving along.

Um, so this actual tracking log lives on our MS teams channel, and it's under OneDrive, and staff can review it so that they can also see where we're at in the process.

There's also the proposals themselves.

They live there too, because this doesn't really explain under subject a lot of well, what does this proposal mean?

The proposals themselves live on the MS team's channel as well.

So I want to also mention that in addition, we have recently implemented a memo closeout process that it's a much more formal documenting of when a proposal is completed.

And we started this back in March.

What happens is staff, once they've completed, we will confirm within an elected office.

Hey, have we completed this item to your expectation?

And then we'll, and hopefully we'll hear yes, and then we'll go draft a memo, and the city manager transmits this memo back to the original council members saying your item was heard, this is how we addressed it.

It's we're closing it out.

And once I kind of give it a pause, and when I don't hear anybody, you know, saying, No, no, no, don't close it out.

I move it to a closeout spreadsheet so that that also lives on the MS Teams channel.

Um, this supports both transparency and accountability, and that process, like I said, has been very helpful.

I think we've closed out six items since March.

Um, so today I'm here to give you just the items that you've heard at Law and Ledge.

Um, but there are a total of 18 items on the council follow-up blog right now to date.

So um I will just go ahead and get started on those 11 items.

If you look at your spreadsheet in front of you, um the item at the top is item brought by council member Kaplan and Telemontes, and this is a request to amend the ordinance or the code, excuse me, with regard to shopping carts, and right now you'll notice that it this one's a little different.

Um you'll notice that it doesn't have a law and ledge date in the law and ledge columns.

But I did circle back with Peter Limos, who is our code manager and he's our lead, and he said that this had gone to law and ledge through the proposal process, but back to staff.

And right now, staff has spoken, and I'm giving you an update that isn't on here yet because I just got it today.

But this is coming, this will be coming back to law and ledge.

Um, and Peter has met with council member staff and has gotten direction and uh on language cleanup, and then he's gonna work with the city attorney's office, and we're thinking in the weeks ahead, um, he'll be ready to to bring this back.

So that is an um an update on this particular item.

The second item below is a council member Kaplan request to amend an ordinance regarding landscaping requirements, and this is an item for commit community development department, and they are working with staff from council member staff on a potential administrative policy that could actually address this nuisance code.

So if it's an administrative policy, um, I will keep tracking that, and if it needs to come back to law and ledge, it'll come back to law and ledge.

If not, it'll just keep going forward.

Um the last one on this page is another Kaplan request, Councilmember Kaplan regarding amending the firearm ammunition and weapons explosives, and I am working with PD on scheduling an actual council date.

Okay, so that one will be going back to council, excuse me.

Second page.

I actually have a before we move on.

I have a quick question on I guess on some of these so far.

Yes.

Um, so I'm I'm I'm seeing that you know, these these three were submitted, there might be more in 2024, and now we're in 2026.

Is it and they may they all have different reasons, but is the case that it's just taken that long to work through the process and get to the point, you know.

In one case, they're still working on language, in another case they're exploring different options, like administrative policy, and in this case, it seems like there was a sent a closeout letter that was sent, but then it wasn't accepted for one reason or another, and then now it's coming back.

Can you just talk a little bit through about the timeline of these and and uh why some of that happens?

Yeah, I think, um, well, as an observer and a communicator with staff.

I think some of them can be very complicated, layered requests that we um need further discussion with council and going back and forth with dates and getting further direction can be difficult.

I also think with staff, they are balancing um their current workload, and these are also obviously important, but um, and so there's that.

And you know, I would also say it's helped too to have um, you know, we are I'm more involved in monitoring these now, I would say, and also a city manager that is um is in favor of moving these along and getting these um to a resolution, whether it is we implement something new or we've modified language.

Um so I think you know, it is a lot of things, I guess, uh, in my response to that question.

But we are working towards I think the memo closeouts gonna be helpful, that transparency too, um, and coming here quarterly is gonna be very helpful as well.

Um, so because staff knows I I tell them I said I'm coming back to Law and Lange and I'm giving an update, so I'd really need an update on this, or how can I help you with this staff on this particular issue, council staff with this particular issue, so they know that we really need to get this moving along.

Um, so and some are just more cut and dry, you know.

Yeah, that's helpful.

Um, and it's actually a great segue into the next item, which is is uh item with myself and um council member Guerra, where I would openly acknowledge that it's really it's good that it's been stalled at this point because we have a lot of work to still have to do on it.

Yeah.

Um so I'll let you continue.

Okay.

Well, um, so the next item is um council member Gera and Councilmember Maple bringing back um a loan, a city loan program for deed restricted housing developments.

And you know, this has involved the city treasurer's office and our um Office of Innovation Economic Development.

There's been lots of meetings you could see on the status notes, but currently what I understand is that the city treasure's office and OIED, when they bring back the SCRS council report, there'll be language in there that should address what you're you're aiming to do with this proposal.

So then I'll get to submit a close out or we will submit a closeout.

So that's moving along.

Um we have a um community development department, Peter Limos has been assigned to a councilmember getas moratorium on code enforcement of RV trailers in front yards, and um there is a draft modification that has been completed by our code folks as in with the city attorney's office going through their draft ordinance review committee.

So that is moving along.

So we should get hear back from them, and then Peter will do his magic and we'll likely go back to law and ledge on that or to council.

So for credit enforcement on trailers, it says in the notes here that uh they went back and forth with the council office and that the request is to take it to full council.

Okay.

Um and then it says targeting fall 2025.

Uh as like the last update.

Um, oh so the last update says fall of 2025.

Um, oh, tar well that was under, so yes.

So that one was passed, that was back in March uh 2025, and I think that that was that what their thoughts were.

Oh, excuse me, that they'd be going back in the fall, and then obviously there was some sort of reset that happened along the way of the timeline of this particular proposal looks like to me, but I could follow up with um Peter to get a little bit more of that life timeline there that happened.

Um, timeline gap here.

Um, and the next one we have Councilmember.

Before you before you move on.

Sorry, I see that Council Member Jennings had its question.

Sorry.

Sorry to interrupt you.

So not a a question as much as um maybe just understanding if there's an opportunity to put a finish line on the charts that you have here.

So an anticipated date that we would get to the finished line.

What would be the goal that we have as individuals, as departments, as council members?

What is the anticipated so that it just doesn't stay out there forever on an island and not knowing what what's going on with it?

So I'm looking at the chart that you have on vote to initiate staff work and the one on the side that says legislative body review proposed dates, and I'm looking for one that says anticipated closure date.

Okay.

So that everybody could be moving in the same direction.

Even if that date changes, but it has some date that we anticipate there's going to be closure.

Yeah, I see that right there between the status notes and the legislative body review.

Maybe we add a column for that.

That will help.

Thank you.

Okay.

Councilman Magetta and Council Member Pucky Baum requested an ordinance amendment to our digital signage.

And the mayor requested delaying this consideration until after we are complete with or the republic's market study is complete for Republic's master billboard lease, and that should take place in the fall of 2026.

And then so then this would pick up steam again.

Then the next one is a pilot program for homeowner encroachment.

This is a Vice Mayor Talamante's item, and it's focused on her Niños Parkway and Yipsey's the department lead, and they've been working hand in hand to bring something forward.

Lots of community meetings.

But where we are at right now is that staff is gonna bring a pilot program proposal to consent into council in the coming weeks.

And there should be a pilot program in spring and summer, and like I I didn't mean to mention, but Niños Parkway is the pilot area, so uh for that particular project.

Okay, so sorry um is if that's helpful because uh I made sure to check in um with the council member on this to make sure I understood um because it the last thing it says on this is pending council member review from November of 2025, but she did let me know that there was a meeting in like March, like March.

Right.

So you'll see at the top.

So how I do it is the is the most recent is at the very top, and it's dated April 30th, 2026.

I don't delete any past notes, which actually is might be what is causing a little bit of confusion because it's it's my reminder of the timeline of things, too.

Um, and I want to keep I want to be transparent and keep all of the interactions in this spreadsheet.

Um, so no, that's helpful.

My brain was flipping them.

Yeah, because I was like, oh wait, the latest updates will be at the bottom.

Yeah.

Um, okay.

No, that's that's I just read it.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, so okay, ordinance establishing limitations on number of homeless shelter beds.

Um, and this is a council member plucky bomb, and this is waiting for a council date to move forward.

Um then we have an item on the top of page four, roll book community plan, and this is a council uh proposal from council member Dickinson and Kaplan, and um there's a lot of work and discussion, I think, on this particular item, and I believe we're staff has landed um and is to actually fold this into the general plan update, which is happening in 2027.

Um, I did ask staff, I'm waiting for council member Dickenson because this is this item, but I was waiting for um staff, which is um Greg Sunland said that he would double check with each council office to make sure that we're in alignment and whether or not this can be removed, or we keep it on there until the general plan update to make sure it gets folded, and it's up to you guys.

But um Greg is the the lead on this, so um that's for with that item.

Then uh we have a resolution directing city manager prohibit the use of facilities, city property related to immigration related enforcement activities, and that did come to LNL on the 10th of February and it went to council on April 28th, but given this particular item and that there are a lot of other pieces to it, we're leaving this um currently on the log.

And the last item but not the least is council member Maple and Vice Mayor Talamantes, and it is a um declaration of state of emergency regarding traffic deaths, and the most current update is that well, you can see that the item was placed back on the log, um, in March, and staff had a meeting on the 30th with the council members and got direction, and they're moving forward.

And that will be continued to be tracking that item as well.

Thank you.

Any additional information before I move on to council?

This is what I have.

Thank you.

And I really appreciate it.

I think this was helpful for for us, but also hopefully helpful for the staff too to just put everything in one place and review it.

I understand that we are all moving a million miles a minute and we are working on a ton of different things.

And so acknowledge that.

I wonder if there's a disconnect between how I understand the council proposal process and what actually happens in real life.

So my understanding has always been that the process came along because there was a tendency for previous councils to from the dais say, we want you to work on this, we want you to work on that.

And it was unclear to staff at that time whether or not there was enough support, let's say a majority of the council to actually work on those items.

So they would spend a bunch of time and resources putting something together that then wouldn't have the support it needed to move forward.

And so the thought process was well, we need to we need to have a way to ensure that what we're working on, what staff is working on is actually a good use of resources and what the council agrees they should be working on.

And so this process was formed.

Um and I actually really like it because I prefer to put things in writing, and I think it helps me formulate my thoughts better and uh communicate better what I my expectations are.

And so my understanding of that is you submit your proposal, um, you come to whatever committee, usually this one, um, where it is heard, and the the committee decides okay, this is something worth working on, or no, it's not something worth working on, or why don't you go back to the drawing board?

Something like that.

But the intention is for then the idea to come to the council and and have a vote of the council.

And I think what I'm at least seeing here, especially for like multiple proposals that are still from 2024 and 2025 that have not ever gone to council is that there's this it um bottleneck that's happening, perhaps, and and I that might not be a fair representation in every case.

Um, for example, I think there are ones that are super complicated that you know the you know the city treasurer really needs to take a look at everything related to that.

I agree, but I think there's other ones where the council members probably expected.

Here's my idea.

I heard from my colleagues on the committee that they think this is an idea that is worth worthy of exploring, um, and expected that it would go to next to council in a timely fashion, so that the council could then vote and say, yes, we think this is a good use of resources or not, and yes, staff go work on it, and then um that take place.

Uh and I just I don't think that that's what's happened.

I think what's happened is it shows up to committee and then it kind of goes into some negotiation between staff and the council member.

But I'm I would love to hear from my colleagues on this.

That wasn't my understanding of how this process was supposed to work, and so I'm curious if that is become a problem, because like I know for myself, um, for at least one thing that I was very confused about where it had gone.

We had one we've talked about it.

I don't want to bring it up here as a as an issue because I appreciate the staff working with me on it.

Um but my expectation after that that um legislation meeting was that my idea and my proposal would go to council and be considered by council, and then they would decide if it was worthy of going moving forward in its full form or some other version of itself.

And what ended up happening was that that vote never happened, and that we and then instead uh it's you know it ended up not moving forward, and then we I had to work with staff to bring it back to life.

And so I'm I'm just concerned that there might be some confusion in the process.

Um, and so would love your thoughts on that, and then also open it up to my colleagues if you have thoughts on this as well.

Whoever wants to go, I'll I'll pitch it to the team.

Chair.

Mr.

Assistant City Attorney.

What do you what say you?

I think so.

Ah, okay.

Um the process is actually laid out, as you know, in the council rules procedure, and there's a good flow chart in there.

Um it's supposed to come to this committee for thumbs up to work on or not.

Get sufficient votes.

Then staff works on the proposal, comes back to this committee for a vote with a recommendation to go to council.

So when it gets past this committee, it's going to council for up or down vote on the ordinance itself, not whether or not staff should continue working on it.

Okay.

Um I think there's actually a couple different things that are outlined in that uh flow chart.

One is if there's not so so, for example, if you don't if you have a two-to vote on this committee, then it and it goes to council for up or down to say yes, they should work on that.

That's what I'm thinking of.

Um, and then I guess what I've been stuck on a little bit is um, you know, what I've heard off I've seen this happen now multiple times on this committee, um, where something will come forward, it'll be discussed.

The this committee will say, yes, uh, we want to move this forward unanimous vote.

Um sometimes those things move quickly and they are on the next council agenda and being voted on, and other times, um, for example, some of these other ones that are from 2024, they they're not, and there's no, you know, there's no timeline for when they come forward back to council.

Um, and I recognize that some may be more complicated, um, but also some don't really appear to be to me, where you know it's it's literally saying in the proposal we want to change the language of this ordinance to say X, Y, and Z.

So it seems a little bit I'm a little confused at how some of those things end up being two year long processes versus other ones that do seem also very complicated, but end up only taking a week or two or a month to come to council.

Just any enlightenment on that would be helpful for me.

I can I get back to you on that because I think I I the planning and the some of the code stuff, there's a lot of regulations and law that I'm not familiar with, but they're trying to thread the needle.

But I all I can do is just acknowledge the frustration.

I I can see why you're feeling that way and that you're experiencing actually that.

And so um I want to validate that and and just reaffirm that this is a priority of the new city manager, and I um will be managing this and working with staff.

I think the next time you see me, um, I hope to uh by demonstrating our progress will ease your like, you know, okay, I see the wheels turning on these things a little bit differently.

Um, and that's what my focus will be.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um, and I will pass it off to Councilmember Dickinson.

Oh, thank you, Chair.

Um this is the uh I'm just thinking uh about this uh as we're discussing it and the the process and trying to remember um it does seem to me with with the EIFD for North Sacramento proposal that I mean that went through budget and audit that we went straight from the uh along the lines you were just describing, we went straight from the committee to the council, and the council said yes, go ahead staff and work on it, and there wasn't there wasn't that intermediate step that you've described of the committee saying yes and the staff then working on it and then going to the then coming back to the to the council because it had a unanimous vote.

So um I I'm not sure whether we we didn't act in accordance with with the procedure in that case, or my memory's faulty and it did come back to the committee.

I don't think it came back to the committee, I think it went to the council.

I don't have I know you don't have that one.

My memory might be on the spreadsheet.

And just to add some color to that, oftentimes the motions that are made in this committee are explicit about whether or not something comes back to this committee or goes straight to council.

Okay, I mean I do think that the um it would it would make sense to review the process to see if it is the most efficient and effective because if it if it goes from here, assuming an affirmative or even tie vote to the full council, then the full council is going to give a preliminary indication that yes, this is worth the staff working on it.

If it goes from just the committee and the staff works on it and then comes back to the committee or even to the council, they've invested the time to work on the idea that the full council may say no, we don't think has merit.

So perhaps maybe it's uh worth taking a step back to look at uh at what the process should be compared to to what's outlined in the uh in the council rules.

I was going to um also ask whether uh this whether the it would be possible because I think this uh flow chart um summary is great that just on a uh whether maybe it's a quarterly basis to just um provide that for all the pending all the pending uh proposals by an email to the council members and staff.

Okay, that way that way uh we could all see what's what's pending when what its status is, what the latest is, and I don't know if you're doing that anyway.

I mean, uh you you've got this this flow chart that you have put together or uh summary rather.

Um I don't know if you're updating that on a routine basis or whether it would be burdensome to to do it on a quarterly basis.

But then if any one of us saw something we thought was lagging or stuck uh or needed needed some kind of attention, at least you'd be alerting us that you know, hey, pay attention.

Yeah, okay.

So and I also would like to offer I know that you know if you don't go into the team's channel often, you'll forget exactly where this all this information lives.

Um, and I'm happy to meet with your staff to at any point in time.

Um just you know, I can just pop over and help them out, figure out where that all lives so you guys can track the actual log itself.

And I'll work with Mindy, who um along with the city manager created this process and the mayor and everybody else that it's probably is a good time.

It's been three years, a good time to review what that looks like now and can we make it better, more transparent.

Yeah, and I appreciate the comment about it being uh lodged in teams and look up, I mean I will admit uh the only way I get to end the teams is when I'm dragged in there.

I understand.

So um that's what I'm saying.

If someone sends me an email, I'm likely to look at it.

So I need to do many points of communicating and that that can happen, definitely.

Thanks, Chair.

Yes, and a fair point as I uh hilariously I uh was leaning over and talking to our city clerk, and I was like, just so you know, most of the council members are probably not actively in teams all the time, but we're all pretty good on email, I would say.

So um just a point of to remember.

So council member.

Thank you.

Um I I totally agree with the review of the process, and that we need to kind of go through that so we can get some consistency so that all members ultimately will have the opportunity to see what those that are on the committee are seeing.

So when it comes before them to vote at council, they have more information about what it is that we're talking about.

And so whether that's one-on-one meetings or having it just available in the what did you call it, the channel, the the uh Microsoft Teams.

It was a term that you used, um, the teams channel.

I might have said teams channel.

Yeah, and and so I've been sitting up here trying to find where is the teams channel the whole time because I'm not familiar with that terminology.

I might be familiar with the channel, but um I don't know that I know that.

So I'm willing to take whatever training you can give me to help me make sure I understand how to do that.

So I'm in I'm in support of reviewing the process.

Um I wanted to just make a point on the consistency of the report.

Um, and somebody talked about it earlier.

Maybe it's every quarter, maybe it's every two months, um, that it, you know, go out to us in paper form, which is emailed and whichever the way we send it out.

But I'm in I'm in support of that because this is valuable information, and I want to make sure that the council sponsor who puts it out knows what's going on, and then the rest of us who will ultimately vote on it knows what's going on.

Great comments.

Um, yeah, I want to align myself with my colleagues.

I think that with every process, there's always improvements and opportunities to make it just a little bit better and more intuitive for all of us, but uh, I think for for me, it's just really important to say that oftentimes when when council members are submitting whatever their proposal is, is because we're responding to an urgent need of the community as we see it.

And what at least what I'm doing, I I don't want to speak for everybody else, is I want to get a sense um from my colleagues whether or not they agree with me or not that this is a worthy thing to work on, um, so that I can communicate back to my constituents about what you know what we're prioritizing.

And so um it's been really challenging for me at times when when something feels very urgent, and I um get I'm getting a lot of like, where are we at on this?

What's the status?

And I don't really have an answer for them, you know.

Um, and so I I I would love to see some process improvements indeed, and then um, I think it would be great to maybe maybe as a as a part of that process improvement, we can explore how much time and energy gets spent in this negotiation after law and ledge before something comes to council, because to me that seems like in some cases it might be warranted.

I don't want to prescribe that, but in other cases it may not be, because what if it goes to council and the council's like, oh no, this isn't something that we want to spend time on?

Because you you only have a subset of the council at the committee process.

Um so I think uh that might be something worth exploring, like if if maybe some direction to staff on, you know, from the city manager perhaps or someone else about how um how much time to spend on something before it's good enough to take to the council to get the sense of where they're at.

Um and if the the sense is hey, we're we're this is something we're really interested in, then we can um spend a lot of time on something.

Um and then the last thing I want to note is I I really appreciate all the work that you put on this, Amy.

But it it was it did, I did notice that in a lot of the updates, they were, you know, there was long periods of time, and then the last update was basically shortly before this meeting.

So um I don't know if that's just because there weren't any updates in those periods of time or if there's just no one really asking the question up until now, but I just it sounds like you're gonna be that person now or whoever that may be to be a liaison to make sure that things are moving forward, but um it sounds like this is needed because um I know that we're all moving really quickly, but these are these are priorities for these council members, otherwise they wouldn't have submitted them.

So I really thanks for the update.

Um, and with that, do we have any public comment on these?

No speakers on this item.

Okay, um, we don't need a motion on that because it's just an update, right?

Receive and file.

All right, fabulous.

Okay.

So with that, do we have any committee comments, ideas, questions, meeting reports, jokes, fun facts?

Nope, hearing none.

Okay.

Any public comments or matters not on the agenda?

I have no speakers seeing none.

We are now adjourned at 12.05 p.m.

Yay.