Good afternoon.

Um welcome to the October 20th, uh 5 30 p.m.

meeting of the Measure U Community Advisory Committee.

Uh the meeting is now called to order.

Will the clerk please call roll to establish a quorum?

Thank you, Chair.

Members please unmute your microphones.

Member McGee.

Present.

Member Smith.

Here.

Mr.

Salah.

Here.

Member Cook.

Here.

Member Johnston.

Present.

Member Goris.

Present.

Member Novello.

Present.

Member Garovsky.

Present.

Paskell is absent.

Member Fry Lucas.

Here.

Present.

Member Rosa.

Present.

And Chair Georgioff.

Here.

Thank you.

We have quorum.

I would like to remind members of the public and chambers that if you'd like to speak on agenda item, please turn in a speaker slip when the item begins.

You'll have two minutes to speak once you are called on.

After this first speaker, we will no longer accept speaker slips.

Uh we will now proceed with today's agenda.

Um we're gonna do the acknowledgments, Atlanta acknowledgements and the um Pledge of Allegiance.

So member McGee, will you be willing to lead us this time?

So the original people of this land, the Nissan people, the Southern Maidu Valley and Plains Miwa, at Winton Peoples, and the people of the Linton Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federal 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 together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples, history, contributions, and lives.

Um our first person today is the approval of the consent calendar.

Are there any members of this public who wish to speak on this?

Thank you, Chair.

I have no speaker slips.

Okay, uh then I'll need a motion and a second.

I don't think there's anything very particular about the agenda or the uh consent calendar this month.

Do I have a motion and a second from anyone?

I make a motion.

Consent calendar.

Cool.

And is there a second?

There's a second.

I'll second.

And we have first and a second.

We can do this quickly, hopefully.

Yes, sorry, for the uh for the motion, Commissioner McGee, you stated specifically just the just the minutes, or did you mean the consent calendar in its entirety?

Yes, correctly.

And I'll second as amended.

Then I could either do a roll call vote or you could call a voice vote.

Yeah, I'll just do voice vote.

Um all in favor, say aye.

Any abstain and any decline?

Cool.

We have consensus.

All right, we will move on to our first item of the discussion calendar, which is the Measure U Community Advisory Commission Community Priorities.

Um, if I'm not mistaking, the ones that uh wait a minute, am I looking at the right thing?

I am, right?

Yeah, I am okay.

Uh review and provide direction on the 2026 community priorities for the measure you community advisory commission and pass a motion of approving the 2026 community priorities as discussed.

Um so this is to do with the survey.

I don't see if the survey mentioned the agenda item, but it is that one, if I'm not mistaken.

Um and so I'm not really sure there is like I'm seeing here that there's an item to pass a motion approving these priorities.

Um do you want to elaborate on that a little bit?

So this agenda item is in response to finance director Pete Coletto's request at the last meeting that the committee identifies some priorities for the following calendar year or even fiscal year that um we could pass on to department heads as they prepare their budget reduction strategies, and so I know there's kind of been two streams of activity.

One is that I believe an ad hoc committee, the one charged with developing the annual report has already had a chance to discuss some of these ideas and to support their work.

We did send out a survey at their request to commissioners to help further inform those priorities.

And so our goal for this agenda item is to get approval on the specific set of priorities, potentially to be finalized by the ad hoc committee.

We will want those as a separate document.

We can pass on to department heads as they prepare their budget strategies, and then subsequent to that, those would also just be attached and included in your annual report.

So it'll kind of go to both places.

One is a standalone item that we take to the Department of Finance and the other departments, city departments, as well as part of your annual report.

Okay.

Understood.

The one thing that I would say here is I think I remember last meeting we said that these may be separate documents, that these recommendations wouldn't necessarily become come with the annual report due to the fact that we don't have the metrics to evaluate the programs in an objective way yet.

Is that correct?

So we don't have to necessarily include what we decide to do with these uh community priorities quite yet.

Like I honestly, as staff, we we don't want to provide direction on this other than um, you know, it the finance director, he talked about the fact that departments are gonna be preparing their budget reduction strategies, and so whatever you all as a commission feel like would best inform that process would really kind of be the end goal that we have as staff.

But beyond that, I mean I think it's really up to the commission how it wants to articulate its priorities, and so we'll really defer to you all.

Sure.

And then my one question that I would personally need to know, but I'd happy to open it up is like the status of that um metrics report.

And so that might determine the timing of what we when we can move.

Sure.

So the um we are aligning the metrics with the first quarter measure you programming update.

That update is that large grid of programs that we've presented to you in the past and is also included in the dashboard.

This first quarter covers July 1st through September 30th, and so departments are in the current, they're currently actively providing their updates as well as their metrics.

And so we're gonna pull all that together by your next meeting.

Uh I'm pretty much committed to giving you what we have.

We it may not be complete.

We may need to come back, but I recognize that November 17th is the commission's last meeting of the year, and I I do uh recognize the urgency that you all have to see this data.

So I think um regardless, we'll be able to provide you more than we have ever provided in the past as it relates to the level of detail in terms of performance metrics that directly correspond to these measure you programs.

Um whether or not you know that looks the same or we refine it for the second quarter or between now and the second quarter, and that's all kind of subject to the commission's feedback.

But we do want to um give you what we have by that November 17th meeting and get your feedback on it.

Great.

And then one last point I'll say before I move on to raised hands is that there may be a quorum issue going into the next meeting, and we may not even have that meeting because I know that there are people some traveling for Thanksgiving and such.

So I think it would be smart for us as a uh commission to sort of decide almost like a conditional, like if there is not quorum, we allow this ad hoc or these individuals to you know proceed with what we would expect to see, uh, given that we didn't have that meeting.

Um anyway, um member Goris.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I have a question, so well, two questions.

We've only in December, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

So if we do decide some community priorities today at this meeting, Mr.

Chair, will they be able to be amended as we get the new the new data by the next meeting date?

Assuming we don't submit them before that next meeting, then yes, and I assume that would be the case because I don't think we would be submitting before that meeting anyway.

Our only concern is is well, not my concern.

The departments are already preparing their budget reduction strategies, and I don't remember the due date for those, but they are in November.

And so if you wait till after November, the basically put it this way the longer we wait, the less likely they'll be able to meaningfully incorporate your input.

Member Cook?

I'm unclear on the timing.

I thought like the direction was to give a memo to Pete by the end of October that he could use as input into his overall strategy.

But if the metrics aren't going to be provided until the middle of November, then like that's a gap.

So is that is that the correct sequence of steps and timing?

So yeah, it's a hard question to answer because we are providing these metrics for kind of the first time and the timing just isn't gonna work.

Um and so our recommendation would be for the commission to develop priorities absent those metrics.

Having said that, we do have metrics that we have provided in the past uh related to uh mainly the metrics that are in the annual budget.

Um so are we voting on the language in in item three right now?

Is that what's being voted on?

Whether Section B 2026 priorities gets approved by this group.

Is that like the actual document we're agreeing or disagreeing to?

Or is it something else?

Yeah, I think given that that document doesn't exist yet, and all we've done is so far is serve sort of survey the commission with like uh the thing that you have in front of you in terms of what people care about, which is definitely important and as an input to that document.

But since we don't have it, we can't even vote on that language yet.

I think it's more of a around like we already have our annual report which discusses slight slightly our recommendations.

So if um we'll be getting to that on item five, um, which I think that in your report actually discussed a lot of the feedback that we had last meeting, um absent like Ash is asking for absent the data that we are looking for.

Um I'm not sure how comfortable I personally am in giving like another memo to Pete out outside of that annual report without the metrics to back up the things that we want to say, but um, you know, it's not like we're limited to one meeting with Pete after this anyway.

So if we want to give him something and then revise it after we receive um more objective measures, that's fine too.

Uh I think there's opportunity to figure out what we want to do here today rather than like uh it's preordained.

I think this number three is fairly open.

Uh, this discussion item is fairly open on what the uh the commission wants to do.

So if people have preferences of what they think would be best, um I have my ideas, but I'd much rather hear what the commission has to say first.

So um, yeah, does that answer your question a little bit?

It does, and I think my last point is maybe that is the memo to Pete.

Maybe the memo is hey, there's there's no measurable outcomes, step zero, solve that.

Just throwing that out there for the team.

I'll just say that's perfectly fine.

It just doesn't inform the departments as they prepare budget reduction strategies.

Uh member Drosky or Noveo, one of the two.

Sorry, that was gonna be me.

Um, so correct me if I'm wrong.

So the priorities uh statements that were prepared in draft form, um, is that something that came out of the ad hoc committee that was put together?

So I wanna I want to stay that and so if so thank you for doing that work.

Uh and it was really meaningful for those who answer that um uh the survey um and even the updated one, I would definitely go back and review to really try to get an understanding of what your head is and hard when it comes to how um you are prioritizing a lot of the work uh that is coming out of this uh committee.

I do um agree that there is um the need for the data, however, for when it comes to that um rationale or at least the priorities, whether you want to call it a memo or whether that is a sense of direction.

As of these are the things that we're looking at, I need you to consider it as you prep the final um you know budget uh numbers.

I think it's important for us to include it sooner rather than later and now allow it uh to one particular point that we're not even have um access to into a lot of time uh to at least make sure that we're part of that process and continue to monitor as things, you know, continue to develop so as of right now again thank you for all the work that you have done and thank you for everybody who completed that um the survey and thank you for allowing us to do so.

I'm ready to move forward with um the statement as it is on item three.

Yeah, I mean I will say a lot of this this survey kind of came because of your comments, so I mean it was a reaction directly to you saying, Hey, I would like to be a participant and like give my thoughts so you know doing what you kind of asked, which you can thank yourself a little bit.

Umber McGee.

Yes.

Thank you.

Um looking at the survey results, I think it's still tracked so I mean we don't have the data to validate and really get into the nitty-gritty, but in the interest of kind of what we're up against, I think that this could be a good guiding North Star, you know, just for them to get the spirit of what we are feeling and what we desire, and they can take from what we presented in terms of the survey, and then they can build out because I think that when you read it, you get the the passion for the community, and that we're not so much not to disregard infrastructure and city needs, because there's some of that in there too, but that for example, you know, um Commissioner Lucas Fry talking about the library, right, and really those services that are impactful for community engagement, right?

Uh a safe place for our young people, in information, you know, services such as internet, so multifaceted community engagement in in just the libraries, right, as an example.

So I think like if we could provide this and frame it, they should be able to look at that and get the spirit of what's important to us in the in terms not that we can't still revisit and keep a close eye and then make sure that as they're doing the things that it tracks, and if there's any way for us to continue to engage and give that guidance, then you know we're able to do so.

Um member Solo.

Um so thank you very much, and I agree with um uh Commissioner McGee because they this is the first time finance.

We've been trying to do this since I've been here, and that's like four years, five years.

We've been asking for us for them to consult with us early on the process as they're beginning.

And if we if we do not do this, um, because we're waiting for the matrix, we're waiting for something to be perfect, can be an perfect perfect can also be not could be harmful to us.

And um, I think we go with you there was a reason you sent this survey out to get feedback and get a sense of our priorities.

There's nothing in here that's not new that we don't already know, uh measure you money should go towards so we should go through these and pick out where there's um where there are similar priorities and and put that forward, and those were maybe not, we can have a discussion, but then also keep the door open that we can go back and modify it.

But if we don't submit something to them now, we we miss this opportunity that that has not been given to us in the past, and it's important they have something because they also said um they're develop in November they're starting to start going out and doing some public um engagement, um getting feedback, and that would be nice for our priorities to be in there when they're when they're out there in the community, and they're gonna start that in November.

I thought I heard them say November, December.

So, uh member Smith.

Thanks.

Um, you know, I'm not sorry, I'm just I'm not comfortable with this document.

The priorities that that Pete has asked us to or excuse me, I shouldn't say that he's asked.

I feel like I'm being asked to rubber stamp this.

And frankly, if someone's gonna put something in front of me and say, hey, I want you to take a look at this document, see if you can go with it.

Uh I'd like that person there to answer questions.

And frankly, I mean, look, I I see what Pete's trying to do here.

I get the whole public finance aspect of it.

Um he's trying to give himself some wiggle room.

Uh we've got a structural deficit.

I get that.

Um, but I mean, some of the statements in like um the borrowing cost of increased statement.

Um, a lot of this stuff is just it's unsourced.

Uh and again, Pete's a smart guy.

Uh I don't doubt that he believes what he's telling us is true, but I don't think Pete has a crystal ball either.

Uh we're talking about uh uh you know debt service in 2026.

Sure, we can all make guesses, but ask me what inflation is going to be in the last quarter of 2026.

I can't tell you.

I don't know.

Um we don't know what the what the Fed's treasury uh window rate is going to be.

No one knows.

So you know, I it just I'm pretty uncomfortable with some of these statements.

I I see how they uh I see what Pete's trying to do here, I do.

Um, and I I clearly think uh he has some priorities, but I I can't, I I can't.

I I can rubber stamp this, I won't.

Um these are some really general statements that either you gotta back them up or or uh or maybe withdraw them.

I don't know.

Yeah, to clarify, what you're currently discussing is the uh annual report that we are planning to submit.

Pete didn't necessarily write this came off of uh the link that I clicked for item number what is that three, I think it was earlier.

Let's see.

Are you sure?

Community priorities.

Oh, okay.

The lower part of it.

Yeah, okay, yeah, yeah, I gotta go.

So while yeah, if we want to give the departments this document, I have no problem with that.

I I don't.

But signing off on this, that's something I'm not prepared to do right now.

Got it.

Um that is still something that we've written.

Um, wait a minute.

Didn't they just say that this that this was recommended by Pete?

No.

Uh so the recommendation from Pete is that we give him some sort of um guidance.

Okay, so my misunderstanding.

Yeah, for the departments to like make decisions on what they should be, you know, keeping a high priority on.

Um, and so I guess the purpose of this survey in part was to get some feedback from the entire uh commission beforehand so we could like determine what those priorities are, because all of us have probably have different thoughts.

Um but still that's still relevant.

Like if you feel uncomfortable with some of these things that are said, like, it either needs to be sourced.

Yeah, or um we need to make.

I mean, I've got a bunch of questions about where some of these numbers came from and uh some of the assumptions that are going into that one statement.

Let's let's bring that back up for number five then because I think it's relevant um for the fifth agenda item, basically.

Um, because that document they're looking at right now is basically extracted from part of the um, okay.

Yeah.

This yeah, this came up earlier today when I clicked that link.

Yeah, yeah.

I'm not totally sure why it's in there.

Probably because I think Ash thought it would be relevant to like add to this uh with the feedback we got, but yeah, I'm s I'm just I wish there was an easier way to explain this.

2026 priorities need to go both to the departments and need to be part of your annual report.

So they're one in the same.

You can do different versions of that, but I don't know why you would when you could just have the same document go to department heads that also articulates your priorities in the annual report.

I think the reason that we came to that conclusion um as we discussed was the like when we're discussing about departments, we want to be very low level and actionable.

Whereas the high-level type top priorities, 2026 priorities tend to be a bit higher in the like pyramid of uh not so specific.

Like, it's not gonna talk about this program needs change, this program needs change, or this, this is how this program should be measured.

Whereas the 2020, it could, I suppose, actually, I guess.

Um, because you're saying that I mean we were planning on pushing this to like first the budget and audit committee, right?

Or not necessarily.

Can you refer to what you're saying as this?

Because so what I hear is like the annual report.

No, no, the what we're looking at is your priorities, your priorities.

Which is included in the annual report.

Yes.

Yeah.

But it so we have, okay.

So I it's fine, yeah.

We either way, I think that the the real crux of this is that the annual report has 2026 priorities.

Now, Pete has asked us for priorities as well.

These can be the same thing, which is I think what Ash is advocating for, or they could not be the same document.

And the reason that they would be the same document is it relieves work from us, we just do one thing.

But then the reason that may not be the same thing is because the customer of each of these documents may be slightly different, right?

So I guess I would just ask when we write this annual report, this is going to the um the city council, right?

And so not necessarily the departments, it might get passed down, but then if we write a something that's recommended to Pete, it may be very budget-specific, very program-specific, more department toll specific.

So there may be a reason to have it be separate documents.

I'm not really like in favor of either way.

Does that clarify it maybe?

There is no.

Great.

Um yeah, I mean, I'm not really sure how else.

So my only piece of advice would be not if you're gonna have two different documents, don't call them both priorities, because language is important, terminology is important.

So in terms of just communicating what it is that's being conveyed, you don't want to call them the same thing if they're different things.

Is what are our goals for 2026 as a commission and committee, where what Pete wants is like what would we like the programs to prioritize.

Maybe that's where the language is a little bit different there.

So like in the annual report, maybe that's like our goals for us and what we would like to achieve versus what we would like the programs to prioritize as they go into budgeting.

Does that make it more sense to everybody?

Like, is that what the interpretation was?

That was mine at least.

Um, more to elevate when it comes to those specific areas.

Yes, and so I see like in the survey that helps us develop what we would like the programs to prioritize when they go into their budgeting process this winter, but then the report is our goals of like kind of what the our goals are for as a commission for next year, what we'd like to achieve or what we'd like to work towards or implement for us.

And just on that note, those are two no, I'm sorry, I just want to be clear like those are those can both be included in the annual report, and they already are both included.

That you have a section, the report had your annual report has a table of contents, goals, and community priorities are two different sections within that table of contents.

Okay.

Um I'm just gonna check.

We call that currently in the appendix.

Or yeah, so we have the measure you budget recommendations, and we have the final report on the 2025 measure you focus groups are the two additions to the annual report.

Um you're saying that both of those things that uh member Drowsky just reflected are included in the annual report.

I'm not sure I totally see that.

I think she's more accurate than saying that.

Like we've only discussed really like measure use commission's priorities in the annual report, not like program priorities.

So I mean that they would both go in to the report.

We could both we they could both go in, but I don't know if we've drafted that.

Well, you what you just referred to are two attachments to the report, which are appendix A and Appendix B.

Above that you have section five, which is the 2026 work plan.

Section 5B is the 2026 goals and objectives, and then before that is section three, which is advice to city council regarding community priorities, and 3B is specifically 2026 community priorities, and so that's those that's where the 3B is the priorities.

Five B are the goals and objectives of the commission.

How are we able to ascertain any program-level priorities in the absence of data?

Like it doesn't exist.

So I'll just kind of quickly define a common set of understanding around community priorities.

They're broad areas of focus that express what the community believes is most essential for the city to support, sustain, or strengthen.

They're not program level budget recommendations, but rather high-level statements about what matters most to residents.

Some examples are maintain safe and clean community spaces, protect core youth development and after school programs, support housing stability and homelessness services.

And just one example is a couple weeks ago the city council did an off-site strategic planning workshop in which they came up with economic development, public safety, and homelessness is their kind of top three priorities.

So they're just high-level areas of focus that the community or the commission believes are most important.

It's not sort of this granular, you know, program level evaluation based on.

I mean, it can be, and this is where I don't want to like be super, you know, um directive about what it needs to be, but that's just kind of the common understanding of what we think of as priorities versus like really specific program level recommendations.

But the measure you commission puts forth a priorities, a set of priorities in this work plan that says we support clean and safe streets.

What action does that yield?

Like we'll like does the city council see that and they say, great, so do we.

Like what happens next.

Well, so in the context of budget reductions and the kind of fiscal climate we're going into, I think it would more inform which programs are most important to kind of protect from uh larger cuts that might otherwise occur with other programs that are not identified as a high priority area of focus.

I think it's on us as a commission to determine how we want to like where do we want to interject.

Um I think there's been a pretty good consensus, at least my opinion is feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, that people feel that the higher level sort of broad sweep uh asks have not really led to the action that we would particularly like to see.

I think people specifically outlined in this survey, for example, like direct programs that they would like to see and like kind of looked at with higher scrutiny.

And that is not something that you can say with just like we want, you know, bright and vibrant neighborhoods, right?

Or we want to help homelessness.

Like there's so many programs that we as a city have to help homelessness that I think um we can be more effectual if we look at those programs individually.

Now, I think the annual report currently, as it is, does not do that, and that's fine.

But I think I do not think that what Pete was asking for was necessarily that.

I could be wrong.

Maybe he was looking for the high-level stuff, but I don't even want to give them that high-level stuff.

I want to give them the low-level details that we we care about.

Um because I think it's it's when I say we want vibrant neighborhoods, I bet every single person up here has a different image of what that means in their head, and instead of like talking about the program specifically.

So I mean I respect it.

I think we can do that sort of uh we can do that ahead of getting the data, and we can talk about those sort of things.

I think we could also include some of the re the feedback we've already gotten about specific programs that we would like to have maybe higher scrutiny of, or we care about high, like more, um, because we have both of those in here.

And that can be added to the annual report.

It could be a separate thing that we give Pete directly.

I'm okay with both, um, but that's where I sit personally.

Um I guess member Smith, did you still have a hand up or okay?

Um and then I guess member Noveo or Jrovsky.

Yeah, the way I see it is that the community's already told us what the priorities are.

Um I don't think it's up to us to make that decision.

We've done the focus groups.

There's also the citywide survey that's done every year, and they've specified what those priorities are, and they are big and broad.

And I do think that that it would be us going against who we're representing the public to not utilize those priorities.

I think that is then where our goals come in, where we're saying now what we want is the data and the metrics to evaluate the programs that say they're going towards these priorities.

Are they effective?

Are they actually doing it?

Over the course of the next year, evaluating all the programs that exist and saying these are programs that we don't think align with these goals that the community have asked for.

Or here are programs that are saying that's what they're doing.

However, when we actually look at the data and the metrics that we have, that's not what's happening.

That's where we can start to get specific.

That's the work that we would do in 2026.

What we're saying is here are the types of programs that we think should be prioritized based off of what the community has asked for, big and broad.

Yes, clean, vibrant neighborhoods is very broad, but they can be thinking about that when they're doing their budgeting priorities over the course of 2026.

What we can do is say, how do you define a clean and vibrant neighborhood?

What do we mean by that?

What are the metrics we would need to collect?

What's the data that they would have to give back to us?

And then once we start to get that, we can start to then look at specific programs of if they're doing it and if they're effective or if they have a framework towards working towards that goal.

Yep.

I agree.

I think our current process that we're doing with the metrics coming back, we'll iterate on that.

That will help define or be a part of that process that helps define what we mean by vibrant neighborhoods or reducing homelessness and etc.

So okay, then I guess uh oh member Sola, go ahead.

I have a question.

Um are you saying that not give the finance department a um our priorities for 2526 and we're gonna wait till we get the make because that's gonna take a long time.

We get the matrix and we do the evaluation, and then based on the evaluation we make the recommendation, we'll be in the same place that we were last year giving recommendations or uh at the towards the end of the budget process.

So is that is that what's being no?

No, I don't think so.

I think I take what you said earlier with like high importance and I agree that we should take this opportunity to express our opinions earlier.

I think that what I'm I'm trying to get at is we will include what we have available to us in the annual report for now and probably give that to Pete.

Uh we'll give that to Pete as our suggestions, and they will have to be a little bit high level, but we do have some program level ones in here as well.

But then once we get the metrics, we can do another report at that point and then give him an updated um an updated document and suggestions.

Okay.

Um so we would we would give him with maybe some modifications of the the report, the annual report that has commute priorities, which I agree they're more like goals for for us, and there is some priorities specific that's that goes more specific.

But I I would like I would like to do a high level and say, okay, um, for Yipsey under Yipsey, what specific programs we think, and each of us have our own little program that we think like uh, you know, Gardenland Northgate, their parks are hideous, they're horrible, and there's no money for them because they take measure you money and put it somewhere else, and it should really go because that is the underserved uh under resource community, and it should go towards fixing the bathroom.

We have no bathroom in Gardenland Northgate.

I mean in Gardenland Park, there is no bathroom.

And when I asked when when can we have uh a bathroom that people can use communities and families can go to oh maybe four or five years that's that so being able to identify under these broader areas same thing with homelessness yes they're investing but prevention I remember last year we had a whole discussion about the importance of of funding prevention programs for homeless like rental assistance and blah blah blah so um though for me that's how I interpret giving him priorities we have the big umbrella but then within there are specific programs that are very important in our communities and align with measure you and it's the spirit of measure you that we can call it out and we should call it out so that I think if we don't call it out they're gonna interpret this this is very um it's fluff.

It's good it's good writing and it's good information but it's not really specific.

So the department and going back to Yipsey will say oh we're we're kind of doing that we're doing that with their money but we don't give them very specific as to this money should not you use Yipse we don't want measure you to fund your administrative costs because that could go into this area that aligns with measure you and that and I don't know if if that can be done right now or maybe the survey kinda helps that but that's that's how I interpret um giving them priorities.

And I would like to see that happen.

I think about why this is happening and how there's this broader there's this the finance team and the city council saying we need to cut 15% from every program go find 15% to cut so I I don't know I I hesitate to get into this like battle of which which programs are good.

It like there's a lot of good programs but there are a bunch of programs that are being funded by Measure U that are objectively not that should not be funded by measure you for example 2.2 million dollars measure you funding to repair replace roof structural elements mechanical systems exterior coatings of city facilities $58,000 management department wide technical equipment and software expenditures it goes on and on there's like 20 million dollars of this kind of stuff so rather than like debating on which program and which department is the best perhaps the mental model is there are these programs which are definitely not meeting the spirit or intent of measure you and they should be the first to to go if we're going down this path of budget reductions.

Yeah I would I would agree with that where being able to give some definite examples that folks can use right so if we're saying one of our priorities is public safety right here are some programs that we think are really great examples of it um or based off of the data that we currently have or at least the description of the program we're able to say that.

But then also there are things that are it's a little bit of a slush fund right we mentioned one being ADA compliance no one here disagrees that that is an important thing.

However that's something that the city should be paying for out of general funds like they're legally required to have things be ADA accessible why is measure you funding that right so I think one of our priorities would be maybe a broader priority would be that um or like an ex a line item could be something along the lines of you know programs that are required by the city are not funded through measure you some examples of that would be the roof or infrastructure replacement of buildings or the ADA compliance simply because those are things that should be coming through the general fund regardless um and not taking that money away from underserved communities.

Uh go ahead number no I appreciate that conversation.

And I'm glad that we here right now because I at some point we was already addressed is something that uh previously this body has not been able to do but I think we still have to move forward on things.

There was something that was presented we can go and dissect it.

We can go and have a conversation to midnight tonight.

So I'm ready to prepare uh present a motion to move this document as it was presented.

I hope there will be a second and we can go into the process or we can actually continue to move forward with this item.

Thank you.

Uh before I hear second I just want to propose maybe something in addition to so although I want to forward this feedback as is um I also think it's important to add to our annual report like a clear section that maybe Ash sort of intended us to write but we didn't really write which is that like specific program section, right?

And so we have um what we care about we have the specific best worst defined examples um whether it be ADA or the structural replacement um the specific programs that we want we didn't really include that in our annual report and I'd like to do that.

We can talk about that on like item five if we want but um as for a motion of push this forward would this this would be pushing it forward I assume you're saying is as an addendum to the annual report is that correct?

Okay yeah.

Okay.

Is there anyone else who wants to speak on this?

Okay.

Otherwise I'll I'm happy to second and just basically include this oh actually well do you accept the modified motion which is just to also add like a summary of these uh suggestions and feedback into the annual report.

And how would that process or collected that um work out and is there a specific deadline so how would that work?

So the group the ad hoc that already has been preparing this annual report will likely meet again in terms of like driving those edits.

I don't actually have to add this to you as a modification yet because we can again talk about it in item five so maybe I'll just I'll retract the amended motion I'll just second as is sounds we can talk about it later.

Maybe do a roll call on this one.

Well what's the motion again?

It's too to include these as is as is in as an addendum to the annual report yeah.

Are we comfortable with that?

You don't you don't have to be but yeah the commissioner survey results specifically correct basically this will be attached at the bottom of the annual report yeah.

Um member Salah go ahead yes so if I was the finance people you're we're gonna attack and then ask them to figure out what we're saying in here and and give this to the department?

Well yes but I have this idea that eventually on item five we will talk about how we'll summarize this and also include that in the um annual report uh but we're not voting on that yet I guess does that make sense?

So I would also like to summarize it and extract the information because I think that's your concern is right or what is your Yeah because they're they're we're asking them on top of everything that they have to do.

Right.

And and we're telling them okay try to figure out what we're saying in here.

Make some sense out of it and then include that and I get to be a dead horse.

I I thought we're delivering a different memo to the finance department.

Yeah.

Wasn't that like the what we're doing there's this it's going into report then there's a different memo going to P that's way more detailed measurable specific isn't that the the finance document I think um the the well here's my thoughts is that yes there's two different documents.

One is that once we get the metrics we'll write a document.

But that's like in the future because we don't have metrics yet yeah what about the the document wants in like the next two weeks.

And so we're gonna have to modify the annual report to include all those things that we just mentioned, which are like specific programs which are the best and the worst, and basically summarize what we have here, including what we just talked about today, into an annual report category.

I don't think that the category that we've I think that again that I said that Ash was sort of intending us to write, we wrote in a way that reflects that, right?

So we did write measure U priorities, not program priorities, yes?

But we can write another section in this document uh that reflects that and send it to Pete.

Right.

And that's the finance memo document requested in the last call.

Correct.

Okay.

I mean he didn't really specify like how he wanted that information delivered.

And so the suggestion that I heard was, and I kind of agree with it, is that we'll just add it to the annual report as is.

Then if city counselors also want to look at it, fantastic.

Um but it would be included there and we'd reference Pete to that.

Does that make sense?

Yeah.

Okay.

Cool.

Um anyone else up?

I think these are all dead hands, but okay.

Um then I guess we'll continue with um the motion to append this to the end, but later we will have a motion.

I will start a motion to summarize it and include it into the uh full report.

But I'm not doing that yet because member Noveo started the motion, I guess.

Yeah.

Does that make sense?

Okay.

So what you're saying is they'll attach this, the annual report, and then later on, before November when we meet again, or somewhere in between uh submitting this and the end of the year or in November, you're gonna abstract what we put in here as um what each member said, and you're gonna put a separate document and say and to Pete the finance and say these are the pri programmatic priorities that we want you to include as you're developing the budget.

That's correct.

Pete will get a summary of this information.

It now it won't go directly to him because it'll be included in our annual report, but the annual report will be included and sent to him.

So he'll get it that way, I guess.

Yeah.

It's a bit like of a rick and rule, I understand.

But um I think your concern, which is it will it be summarized and sent to Pete?

The answer is yes, it will.

Yeah.

But we won't have an opportunity to discuss it to make sure whatever he's getting, we're all we're all aligned with.

I had my opinion, you have your opinion, and I may not agree with you.

Absolutely.

So how do we allow for that debate?

I think the it's up to the commission to determine how much we feel the uh expediency of it is important versus the um like agreements on it as an important, or do we trust an ad hoc to basically summarize as is.

The message I'm currently sort of hearing, and I think we all heard from Ash is that like the sooner the better, right?

But, and if we can meet in November, we can, as a commission, we can decide, right?

We can all say, okay, let's wait till November, and if we have the meeting, we'll we'll reflect and do it.

But if there's not enough people, then we move forward with it.

So it's not gonna be here in November.

You, one?

I think Member Jarovsky also won't be here.

In November.

I might be here.

So so far we have two that won't be here, so we still have enough to have a meeting.

Yeah, I I think but but I feel that we should do a conditional, meaning like if we don't have that meeting, like we can move forward.

Because if we don't have that meeting because people can't make it, maybe someone's sick, whatever.

Um, I still want to make sure Pete gets information.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, so okay.

Um I guess are we comfortable to move forward with appending this?

Okay, I'm just gonna say feel free to run the motion.

Oh.

The meeting date would be the 17th of November, not the 24th, correct?

The 17th, that's correct.

November 17th.

Well then I would also not be present.

Yeah, it's gonna get dicey for sure.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah.

Uh so if we do push if we do um as a commission, push forward, right?

Just to kind of for Pete to get it.

Is there a way that Pete can tell the city manager's office he's got he's received it and we kind of know that it's kind of in his court?

Is that can he can he confirm that that once he we send it to him, he's got it?

We can confirm receipt.

I mean, yes.

I I didn't catch all the nuances of that, but if all you're asking for is just confirmation that Pete received it, we can provide that.

I don't know.

If somebody reminds us that that's what you're looking for.

Okay.

Um so then the current motion on the table just to remind everyone is that we're going to add this to the annual report, the thing that's in front of us as is.

And then once we get to line item five, we'll continue to discuss how we want to summarize, how do we want to send this to Pete, etc., but we won't discuss that yet, okay?

Um because we have the outreach committee item in between.

All right.

Fantastic.

I think we could probably do the call.

Thank you.

And just for the record, confirming that the motion was made by member Novello and seconded by Chair George.

So I'll now do the roll call vote.

Members, please unmute your microphones.

Member McGee.

Yes.

Member Smith.

Yes.

Member Salah.

Oh, okay.

Yes.

I need a yes or no, ma'am.

Yes.

Yes.

All right.

Uh member Cook.

Yes.

Member Johnston?

Yes.

Member Goris.

I trust my commissioners.

Yes.

Member Novello?

Yes.

Member Jurofsky.

Yes.

Member Pascal is absent.

Member Fry Lucas.

Yes.

Member Rosa.

Yes.

And Chair George Off.

Yes.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

I love unanimity.

All right.

Uh moving on to the next agenda item.

And we'll bring this topic up, I'm sure, the last one, but um the outreach uh engagement and communication strategy.

Member Salah.

Okay.

Um so I I really apologize to all the members be and to my ad hoc committee for sending out last minute requests to meet, and I wasn't s I haven't been successful and because of that in getting the group together and then getting community engagement to meet with us.

Uh Lynette Hall is out until December, but I was able to have a meeting, uh 30 minute meeting with a member or two members of community engagement and a c and a few of our members are ad hoc to meet with them tomorrow and discuss kind of how they can support us and um the direction we don't have a we haven't discussed a direction, but how they can support us and what they could do to support us and what some of our ideas are.

So what I was hoping that at this agenda I at this moment, since we haven't really the ad hoc hasn't under my leadership hasn't really um met yet, I was hoping that maybe I can get thoughts from all of you as to what would be important um to discuss or or what the direction you think we should be going in for the coming year or or discussing with them specifically.

I'll um community engagement, that department is um completely funded under measure you monies, and um it's been it's kind of been a sore subject for me because I feel that there hasn't been, and it's not their fault because we haven't really reached out to them in the in a few years to say this is what we really need from you.

Other than what they always say is oh you're ha you're welcome to attend our events and you're welcome to uh be out there and and have flyers out there.

So I I think we need something much more robust from them because we are all volunteers and if we really want to to get information out to the community, it needs something more robust m beyond the what we can do as individuals.

So I wanna I I'm hoping that I can hear from all of you as to the direction you think we should be doing in community engagement.

And I'll just tell you right off the bat, and I think I saw it in here in the survey is and it was um the last uh focus groups we did is the community really like small focus groups interactions and um one is is the dashboard is they like the dashboard is being able to put that out there and and each each member in their district with the support of their council member is hold smaller groups or attend neighborhood associations and do the dashboard and do many little focus groups and it doesn't have to be a lot but the importance I think out of the focus groups that happened the the small uh number that happened was is giving educating them about measure you the dashboard and then getting their their feedback and engaging with them.

So from my perspective that would be something that I would like to see the commission take it it is a little more work and it takes some resources but that's maybe something that uh a council member could facilitate and say I want to do a few focus groups in your district around these issues and finding a way to get support from that council member.

But I would like to hear from all of you as to what other things we can be doing um to get information out.

And the main the main problem what I I noticed is so many people don't understand what Measure U is and what it is not um and then where the money is going and again the dashboard is they've really like that and I know that that Ash is working on on or improving it and and modifying it but I I think I don't think we you it's a very underutilized document and I we can we can use that to go out into our individual districts or even yeah I I I originally I thought maybe including it in the newsletter that each council member does but it really needs one on one I mean a discussion with with smaller groups to help them understand what they're looking at and then being able to to dialogue.

Um and I I know it's it there are focus groups and it's not intended to well it is intended to get feedback but it's more like education and when we did the participatory budgeting by the way I didn't see that as one of our priorities in here.

Um I did I forgot to add it but I thought about it later.

One of the good things about the participatory budgeting process is it really educate so many people f had a better understanding of of Measure U but also of the budget process because it was they had to give feedback and uh there was education around it and I I thought it was not it was a great process for community engagement.

Not that we're gonna I mean it's too bad we're not gonna they're not well we should push again to see if we can get it funded but it but participatory budgeting is is engage is a really good engagement for the community because you're you're seeking you're educating and then you're seeking information back from them and and they um and so what the finance department does when they say they go out to the community and have these community meetings it's it's very high level and it's very quick and it's it I've been to a few of them and I don't really see that it's intimate and getting at informing and getting feedback it's not bi directional.

So anyway that's just my thought and I would like to hear from the rest of you to begin the dialogue and begin to put an uh plan uh an action plan for the coming year of what we want to see happen.

But tomorrow is just giving some direction so they can start thinking about how they can be more proactive in supporting our outreach efforts on Measure U.

That's oh god, ladies first.

Okay.

Um I've also gone to, well, you know, I'm retired.

I hang around at these places.

But Lynette Hall did say, and she's a manager at the with the engagement team, that we can share their table at any point.

That we can actually sit at their table and talk to people about measure you.

And they are everywhere, they have tables everywhere.

So is she, you know, I'd like for us to consider that.

One of the things I wanted to share is when I first joined the Measure U Commission, I reached out to every single council office to ask them what their priorities I sit in CO, which is focused on like youth programming and experience working with youth to figure out what their priorities for measure you funds in that realm.

Only one council office got back to me to actually set up a time to meet.

I don't think that's necessarily like representative.

It was also as we were going into the you know budget crisis and whatnot, but um I think that might be something our outreach and engagement committee takes on as um engaging with not only council offices as I know many of you represent a particular district as well as um engaging with your own councilmen and other priorities that we come to as a group to share with them in terms of like getting their feedback and priorities for funding so that it's not as if we're proposing a bunch of things that just eventually get ignored because we don't have any actual say.

So member Goris.

No, it's all in, okay.

Um member Drowski, Renova.

It would be me.

Hi, Mariah.

How are you doing?

I'm glad I'm glad you're here.

I hope you're uh recovering well.

Um there's there's a few things that uh when when you start off the process, I would like you to consider and for anybody who is gonna be part of um that particular ad hoc.

One is to actually go back to the basics, understanding that if we can set specific objectives for that particular committee and ensuring what are the tangible uh actionable points of engagement for us that would deliver on the objective or not only the commission, but also the specific um uh department or entity which we would um advise or provide support on.

So um there's a difference between providing oversight and providing some sort of um advice.

And I will um encourage you to really think about the latter part.

So if it is a pointing where um you'll be working directly with the net hall, they do an amazing job.

Um I was part of that um uh city planning academy with you, um, and they continue to do a lot of great work there.

So maybe uh a strategic points in where we can um help her or support her efforts will probably be when it comes to the time of her preparing her own budget or her own strategy for the upcoming year.

That's something that then she can come present it to us um or uh provide us opportunity uh to provide some sort of feedback that she then can consider as she's moves over to finalize it or when it comes to implementation.

Um you are correct, um uh commissioner uh uh.

Uh Sarah, um your uh the events are amazing uh not only because you only not only get to see folks that you normally don't see engaged, um, but I also small business guy, they always host that a small business in the corridors or in the community.

So it's something that I actually do appreciate.

So when it comes to that type of um engagement as an example, if it is a pointing where she needs us to uh ensure that more folks attend those events, um, in that case will be supporting um a particular effort.

So both from an advising, um, ensuring that we are able to provide uh feedback on her strategies um because she does have a wide uh uh uh uh how can I jurisdiction or she has a charge when it comes to working with every single department so we can provide that specific focus and also um from the delivery side how can we support her efforts um so uh whether that is again attending uh supporting outreach uh marketing efforts um how can we best uh support her efforts so we can be an odd on not just to um you know have give her even more work um that we probably don't live on the day today because she is that face and that individual that does a lot of that work internally but also externally on managing a lot of the community partnerships.

And the last one will be um start a um draft or live item type of paper so we can understand and can provide you more specific uh type of uh edits um on your strategies.

One of the things that happens at that connect is they introduce you to the group I think that that fundamentally would be really great for us to be introduced to the group because nobody knows who we are I always nobody I sit down to talk to to do anything about measure you and I find that disheartening but even if we were to attend the City Connect and they say this is blah blah blah commissioner from measure you then people will come to us and we're able to have a realistic conversation with them.

Um I guess I'll add my thoughts um you know I don't want to all fall on members either like there are six people in that ad hoc like I'd love for you know if something happens and you're sick or like it'd be great if someone else sort of stood you know stood up and organized.

I know you're like very passionate about it so you've kind of become the the go-to person which is great but um you know if yeah I think it would be great if other people I think tensing up is a great idea like going to the if they're if we're gonna we can share a booth and we can show up with that's not the concept the concept I was thinking of she's in all of our districts.

If we concentrated on our districts we would be doing more than we are now.

Sure.

If we just concentrated on when she is in our district, if we just concentrated on working on our council people that are in our district we will cover more territory than we are now.

Yeah so I guess getting like a schedule of like where she is and when she knows she knows she's a very organized person.

I'm sure she does yeah but I don't have that info.

So I can't ask her yep I'm impressed.

And then or at least the ad hoc can sort of pursue that as well and then let us know or what have you um yeah that would be my feedback um looks like member drawski.

Yeah unfortunately I can't attend the meeting tomorrow I would love to I just have a conflict um but I think I love this idea of us being if they're willing to share the tables I think that's lovely.

I think that'd be wonderful maybe something that could happen is um we could get this would just be my suggestion since I can't attend tomorrow is getting a list maybe of the meetings or the events that they'll have for the upcoming month and we could look at that as like a standing item and discuss if anyone's going to attend who would be attending it.

But I do think one thing would be we need it's one thing for us to be like yeah we're gonna attend and sit share the table maybe one of our goals for next year would be that we need what what's our purpose there?

What is it that we're trying to achieve when we go to those meetings?

What is it that we want to be sharing?

Do we have like a measure you elevator pitch?

What are we asking folks to do um as a response?

And I think that's a conversation for us to have is what it what would our what would our goals be in going to those events?

What are we telling the community, what are we asking the community to do?

Yeah, I'll just add that.

I think you know, when I've gone out and talked about it, most people don't even aren't aware of what measure you is or that it exists or anything.

I think that's definitely one of the elements.

Um second thing what I would love to have is more community engagement, right?

So I think we included that in our 2026 priorities to have like more butts and seats.

Um trying to like basically recruit and say we talked about all these cool things that affect you directly, like come be in the part of that conversation.

Those would be my two uh priorities, but I'd love to hear other people's.

Um okay, is anyone else queued up?

I want to have one more thing.

Go ahead.

They said measure A.

That first time I saw a sign, is it measure A.

And it really drew my attention.

I I was just wondering how much of that, and Commissioner Seller has brought that up.

Where we can have a sign that says this is here because of measure you.

Um, yeah, and that's something we do have our logo funded by measure you and some, like the library.

Mm-hmm.

They're good at the that is funded by Measure U, but not all departments, and not everyone does that and lets you know that this program or this is funded by Measure U.

And um we I don't know how to get departments to do that, because it's we we developed a logo and it's just it's a simple thing, funded by Measure U.

And that's something that I am going to bring up tomorrow, is say, like I I go to the City Connect as much as possible.

I go whether it's in my district or not, um, for the same reason that you all mentioned, but they should have something that says funded by Measure U, and there isn't.

And um whether we're there or not, they should have our dashboard, but they don't they wouldn't be able to explain it.

So we if we're there, we should stand by there and and um have the dashboard to talk about that.

Yes.

But there's no sign.

There's no yeah, there's no yeah, but that I'm definitely gonna bring that up and say you should really have something that says this whole thing is um not it's just a sign that says funded by measure you.

So thank you for your feedback.

And um, so we'll have with a few of the few of us we'll meet with them, but then I agree with you, uh Commissioner Um Novello.

Nov so I do agree with you that we need to have a document, a live document where we we have something that outlines what our plan is, and then be able to all of you be able to comment and give feedback on, and that's my plan.

Uh member cook.

It seems like uh listening to this conversation that it's up to like this this commission to raise awareness of measure you, which is kind of disheartening that there's no like entity within the city government that's acting as like the change agent to at least raise awareness and like if I were to push this, I would look at the funding of the programs and saying, is the community is are there community engagement programs which are receiving funding from measure you?

I bet you think the answer is yes.

Make them raise awareness of measure you as a proxy of the funding we give them.

I don't know if that's way too aggressive, but if they're getting money from measure you, part of that should go to raise awareness of the measure you to the broader community, and if they can't do that, then maybe they shouldn't receive funding from us.

Very good point.

Uh member Mickey.

I was gonna say, as far as I've seen, like I think South Atomas Library is one that got Measure U funds.

They usually have a little sign or a little plaque, but it's not visible, right?

And that doesn't resonate and mean anything to the community.

So I do agree that maybe we incorporate um that as a part of the the receiving of the money.

Like in within the plan of how they're gonna spend our money or what they're proposing when they're requesting the money, like how will you tie back what you receive to measure you for that that greater visibility?

But there I I went somewhere recently and I was like, oh, this was funded by Measure U.

And then I walked in and I told everyone, right?

They wouldn't know.

So I I did platform Measure U.

But to the point it becomes just uh a sign on the wall, you know, it's just a statement, but there's no true community connection where I think if people saw the sign and they knew about Measure U or knew that they voted on it and then this was the impact, it would be, you know, resonate a bit more in terms of the community engagement aspect that we're always seeking to um to elevate.

Yeah, I think I saw that sign at one of the uh one of the parks playgrounds and had it on like the gate and I was like, oh cool, but I probably the only one there who even knew what that meant.

Um, but I felt great.

I felt real good, yeah.

It's like the sign was for me.

Um okay, it looks like there's no one else speaking.

Uh any closing stuff, member Saul or anything to close on, or we can move on.

Our 30 minute meeting, I will share some of the feedback and then pull our ad hoc together and by the November meeting, we'll have a draft document to present to all of you.

Awesome.

And there is still one spot available in that ad hoc if anybody wants to be an additional head in that.

Um, because I think there's six at the moment and we can have up to seven.

So uh right now I have it as um member Fry Lucas, Member Drowsky, uh, Member Goris, Member Pascal, Member Rosa, and member Sala.

So just feel free to let me know if someone wants to be added to that list.

Thank you.

Okay, and then I guess we'll move on.

Um to the last agenda item, which is the Measure U Community Advisory Commission annual report.

So kind of what going back to what we were talking about before, um I think there's quite a few people who want to talk on this that have read it and uh are uncomfortable with some parts or wanna amend others.

Obviously we've talked about it before that we want to amend the section for the community priorities um sort of summary, but we'll get to that after.

Um member McGee, that's an old hand, or is that a new hand?

Maybe old hand.

Okay, cool.

Uh member Adrowski or Noveo.

I just got one item on this one.

It would be on the introductory section.

Uh probably gear more stores uh D, uh, which it doesn't outline the ad hoc committees and the membership off.

So that would be my only amendment to the document.

Um it would be possible to for historical records just to make sure that that is something that is included.

Which section did you want that to be added to?

Uh D.

Uh that would be page uh five.

Uh which talks about the composition and the commissioners.

It is all of us um or the folks current commissioners, but it does not include any record of the ad hoc committees and its memberships.

Gotcha.

Uh this was a section that was staff created.

Are we allowed to modify this or not really?

I think so.

Okay.

I mean, yeah.

Yeah.

Okay, cool.

I thought I was gonna take it on, but if you want to take it on, go for it.

Sure.

Yeah, I'll make a note for that.

Okay.

It's uh I um member Smith, I'm kinda calling on you here, but I know you had thoughts on this, and I don't see your hand, so we're not.

Okay, um, so yeah, my qu my my questions and and concerns were with um with uh the section five B.

Uh specifically regarding um some of the verbiage in here.

I don't.

As I said before, either we need to source this or we need to figure out a way um to say this more simply.

I do not think we want to go down the road of trying to predict what Muni bond markets were going to be doing six months from now.

Um, if it is the case that we would prefer see departments um to use measure you funds to fund programs as opposed to infrastructure, then maybe we ought to just stick with that and say that's gonna be our priority.

Um that would be my preference in this particular case in anyway.

Although on that note, I would I I'm curious to know because I didn't see this in um any of the stuff that that I looked through.

How much of our measure you funds in the past have been used to fund infrastructure repayment?

I mean, are there any specific examples of that?

Uh I think that's a great question.

In order to figure that out, you'd have to go back through all the previous years' budgets and sort of tally that up.

I don't have that on the top of my head.

Yeah.

Okay.

So um, whereas this section is concerned.

I don't recall that we wrote this, did we?

Or so yeah, that was Member Cook's section, yeah.

Okay, that was member that was your that was your section.

Um yeah, I realize I'm gonna get through the buds buzzsaw right now.

So the intent of this section.

I'm sorry, I'm sorry to bring this up here, but yeah.

I mean, you know, some of this stuff, it just requires that we have a crystal ball.

And uh yeah, I don't dispute this lot of uncertainty.

Like, like the narrative that I was trying to frame is that like the economic climate of 2020 is not the same as the economic climate of 2025.

Therefore, we should exercise more caution and be a little more judicious in how we allocate measure youth funds.

Like that is the essence of it.

And I I don't disagree with you.

I see what you're trying to do in terms of get uh mean making sure that we have wiggle room.

Yeah, um, and I appreciate that.

But um, yeah, I mean, there are just too many ifs there.

You know, the the interest rates in the muni bond market are largely tied to uh treasury yields.

And so when you track 30 year municipal unibond rates, you'll see they track with uh treasury yields very closely.

Um the Fed is in the process of I mean, quarterly they review their rates.

I think there was a quarter percent reduction.

Uh the last time they met, they're due to meet again in November, I think.

Um there may be another one.

So uh I mean it depends on what the economy's doing.

No, totally, I hear you.

Uh the like uh this is like a loosely held opinion, totally happy to remove it.

I think the intent is that today uh the overall all in budget of the city of Sacramento, like six percent goes to debt service.

And like what I'm trying to position is that as interest rates goes up and these debts mature, and you have to refinance it, that the percentage of the city's budget that goes to debt service will also go up.

Like it's one piece of the total like pie that's trying to express that we need to like be more judicious and like measure you funding.

Now that I'm saying this out loud and hearing myself say it, I acknowledge it's probably a little like a little too dense, probably can cut it.

So, yeah.

Um again, or or just go with a simple statement.

Yeah.

Let's focus on projects instead of um or programs, excuse me, instead of of cement.

Yeah.

I will say that one part I do think is fair because Pete has mentioned a lot is that the federal government funding is getting reduced.

Oh, yeah, absolutely.

I agree with it is likely that um given the direction Washington is going right now that state and and uh state and federal funding will be reduced for Fair City, and um that's you know the nature of things.

Um I also don't agree or don't disagree that um there's little or there's little appetite for new or more taxes.

Uh we are in a recession, or well, close to a recession.

Um yeah.

No, I I I agree with uh with most of these statements, um, but I think they should be simplified.

I don't think I think we should commit ourselves to details that we have no way of of um knowing.

Absolutely.

Yeah.

Sounds good.

Um member Johnson.

My comment is a little off topic.

Just because I wanted to address, I don't know when a good time was addressed.

Maybe I should have done any full point um points before about my comments and this.

Um first and foremost, I wish I was able to spend more time, and I appreciate the reminder email.

I was one of the belated responses.

But I I think what I want to articulate, I want to expand on this for any ad hoc committee that's going to have to summarize what I'm saying here, because I will be unable to make the November, meaning I have a good excuse.

I'm going to SVP fast pitch, which is a nonprofit event that supports local nonprofits.

It was a tough decision, but as a partner, I felt like I had to go there.

So I my concern is that I've been on this commission for a year now, and I still don't fully understand the impact of the measure you funds and how to trace them.

It's like holding on to smoke to a certain degree, right?

You talk about potentially targeting a program like reducing funding for roof and infrastructure, right?

If they say, all right, we're not gonna find out what measure you, it's just gonna possibly, it's not gonna go away, right?

They're still gonna pay for it in the general fund, they're just gonna push something else over to make it seem like it's not, right?

And I I'm not saying that there's malintent.

That's just the nature of the city's budget, right?

And so what I have a hard time doing, what I try to articulate in here, is that every person, every organization that came up for every department that came here, I asked the same question is like how do you see the measure funds in your budgeting process.

If the the sales tax revenue goes up two million dollars, do you expect the same percentage of that?

Commiserate with it, or is there some other mental calculation that you're doing?

Because if it goes up, let's say two million dollars, that doesn't necessarily mean, you know, if you know, let's say libraries get an extra million dollars.

I don't think that's one for one, right?

Because it's it's the general fund and the measure you are impossible, I think, to really discern or differentiate.

And again, that's just the nature of how this is set up.

So I want to be clear in this is when we talk about what is it in terms of priorities in our view of what the measure you is.

The one of the first issues is just the mechanics of how that money's spent.

So I want and I still haven't gotten a clear answer on how that calculation.

Maybe I just gotta run the numbers myself and see, you know, measure you fund went up 10%, and this program went up only one percent, and this program up with 15%.

Therefore, we're gonna say, oh, this program was therefore better benefited by measure use increase.

I don't know.

The second point that I want to, and I still don't know.

Second point I want to bring up is something that I've continued on, is I still don't think we have a clear understanding of what it means to be supportive of measure you spirit.

Um we all have a certain assumption, and I think that assumption personally is probably right, but it's an assumption I don't think we've explicitly named or agreed to.

Of saying, are we going off of the former mayor's declaration of the people?

Are we going off of just like how I feel this amorphous community feels towards measure you?

I don't know.

My guess is here we're all members of various community organizations, and we I hope that we have a pulse to a certain degree with the community wants.

We did some focus groups, we do City Connect, we do other things as well to be a part of the city, but that's should be explicitly written somewhere.

Like what is where are we getting these assumptions of what is or what is not the spirit of measure you, and that's why it's hard for me reading this.

Um, being like, well, I need to define the rule before I apply the rule to the problem.

And that's what I just wanted to articulate here to add more color in my really brief comments that I don't disagree with uh all the other members wrote on this.

I think they're really good, but it's really hard for me to still decide this one's more measure you spirit, this one's less measure you spirit because it's so arbitrary.

And I understand that might be it, but I just wanted to say then it's up to individual members to decide.

I'm comfortable with that because the ambiguity was written into the measure, and we're the ones spending the time on Mondays nights trying to articulate what's best for the community in using these funds.

So I think that's a morally uh you know appropriate way to approach it.

But I want that to be clear.

That's the only that's what I wanted to add here.

So whatever the powers that be in terms of the ad hoc, um, preparing maybe recommendations more specifically, or our outreach to the community, when we say this is what measure you does, we should say, well, maybe, because you know, we're still trying to figure that out to a certain degree in every iteration of this committee changes when we add or subtract members as well.

So that's all I wanted to add.

I didn't know where that was appropriate in all the items, but I hope that it's kind of on point to this as well.

Thank you.

Uh Vice Chair Cook.

I think your point is valid, and I think uh the challenge that I have is trying to go down this pathway of trying of discussing what programs are the most effective in the spirit and letter of measure you.

Yes, we have the surveys, but it's like a highly qualitative conversation, and I feel like it could be debated until one of us passes out.

But I think there are a certain set of truths that are objectively correct that could serve as a prerequisite for program funding that I think we could collectively agree upon, independent of what programs we think are good or bad.

So for example, outcome-based measures as a prerequisite to funding.

I don't think that's controversial, and however we think that should be applied to which programs, it seems like it's a fair precondition for program funding.

So I initially I I joined this commission ready to debate like which programs are good, which programs are bad, but now I've pulled the curtain back and I and I can see the data or lack of it, it's apparent to me that before we're not even in a position to like quantitatively ascertain a position because the data doesn't exist.

Shouldn't that be like the first step in the measure you good or bad journey?

Yeah, I guess um I want to talk about this a little bit too.

I think when I first joined, um I don't know how long it's been now, but maybe a year and a quarter, year and a half.

Like I was in the same position.

I felt like, oh cool, I'm gonna come and evaluate what programs, you know, I think are doing good and what programs are not doing good, and I realized I didn't have the information to do so, and so then it became the quest to sort of find that information.

And then I think yeah, it's like a second order problem to then be like, okay, then what pro programs do we feel like are representative of measure you?

And then there was one I think there's two outcomes that I've come to like uh in my head, which is one, like the resolution defines a few tenants, and like that is what was voted on.

So that's like that's like the I don't want to say the law, because I'm not a lawyer, but like that's kind of a law, right?

It was like it's to make vibrant liverable neighborhoods, make safe and enable our residents and future generations have greater economic opportunity and mobility and businesses thrive.

Like that's a that's a statement, okay.

From that, we can start to evaluate and all statements are subjective in this case, right?

So it is on us to figure out what that means, um, or at least as Member Drowski said, how that's measured, and then we can go from there and kind of say, okay, these programs, you know, impact these measures that we care about for those, you know, equity, vibrant neighborhoods, safe neighborhoods, youth, and economic opportunity.

Um for me, in terms of like the combined budget, because you mentioned that as well, uh, Member Johnson, is like, um, I think Measure U provides a floor.

So it makes sure that no matter what, the the funding that we get through Measure U will at least that much money be spent on the things that we define as vibrant lab level neighborhoods safe uh youth economic opportunity, right?

At a minimum.

So even if we do say, you know what, this isn't really um fitting the measure you thing, that goes to general fund, and they shove something else in measure you.

Well, that new thing they shove in measure you better be reflective of one of these things.

And we can advocate for that if it is or isn't.

Um and of course it's up to city council to agree with us or not.

But um, you know, that's kind of our job over s as oversight.

Uh that's how I see it.

I think, you know, I we're gonna make some I think this commission will make a lot of progress in the next year because we're gonna have a lot more tools that we didn't have prior to, and I think we'll be able to do a lot of that stuff that you I think feel important, which is like defining this more clearly.

And even I'm I'd be down to like even work on with you on some like language to put that to like you know, something more official, but if you have interest.

Um, go ahead, member Johnson.

Uh first I just wanted to 100% agree that I think metrics there's no point in describing our priorities and and programs that we want to promote for that we think is in the community or the spirit of measure you if we have no idea whether they're actually doing anything or not.

Right.

I I and I think what the committee has been doing in terms of metrics, I 100% support.

Um, and I just maybe maybe I'm thinking we're putting the cart before the horse a little bit whenever we talk about this, because that is the issue.

Like you read one thing, I've read that too.

But then I'm reading also 2019.

Shall the measure to protect and enhance essential public safety services including nine one one response fire protection.

That's like another clarification of the measure you right.

And I really I don't know if I even can um or want to volunteer finding like a legal memo of like what what is what is the scope at least in my maybe I'll just do it as my personal opinion as a member of this committee because there's just so many disparate things.

And maybe that's a personal problem that I have and everyone else is like I don't really care I'm just gonna move forward.

I can use my heart and soul and figure out what's what's important here.

Maybe that that's the problem of of you know being over analytical sometimes.

So I just want to appreciate and emphasize again that I do think metrics are core and I I support the commission's uh objectives on that.

Um looks like member Fry Lucas.

Nope.

Member Salah I I agree with well first of all I if you go back and in history and and look at our annual reports we were we've been asking for data every single time um at the end of our annual report and say this is all good but we need we need data and we had the hard hardest time we always would get some kind of response of why we couldn't have the data.

They did they didn't have the capacity, blah blah blah so I'm really happy that we're we're at work we are here where um and we're actually getting the data and I and it's a combination of all of you who are expert in understanding how to get that data, how to ask the right questions but it's also the leadership in the city that's willing to work with us.

And that wasn't the the case uh several years ago.

The other thing I agree with you all of us we we received our assignment we we applied we were appointed and we um came to sit here when I I never was there was no onboarding done for us.

I I kinda had to go back and try to read, figure things out on my own and when I was appointed it was COVID.

So there was no meeting in person, it was all Zoom which even was much more challenging.

So there's no onboarding and there's we're just kind of here and we don't have um we all have our different opinions and our different thoughts of what measure U is and as when I first I had a totally different opinion when I when I came to after being on the commission for a year.

And that shouldn't happen.

So I I really appreciate you saying that we should have a discussion of what we what is the spirit beyond what's what those words are very vague.

Can mean anything when we when um I had just been on Measure U when they were changing most of 75% of the budget was going to fire and police because of public safety in the in the ordinance that was passed.

So 75% and and um thankfully there were members there and um Dr.

Flo was the um the chair pushed and pushed and that changed.

So um I think that having a good discussion about what it what what is the spirit of as we view it and it could change with different commissioners but for us to have that discussion so we're all clear and we're all on the same understanding of that is really important and we haven't had that discussion.

Other than you're reading just the words and you're interpreting it uh based on your your perspective and your experience so I d I uh I would like to be able to have just a time where we can each talk about what we think it means and where them um what is the spirit of it?

So then that would help guide us along with the matrix.

And I think the data that was one of the frustrating parts and I I'm hoping that it will result in really being able to do a uh thorough evaluation of how the money is being spent and the impact it's having.

So I I I don't know where we could have that opportunity, um, but it's it's worthwhile pursuing.

Uh member Drowsky or the way.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um just for the public record, we were all on boarded.

Uh we were provide uh provided online documents for us to review of the city dev in a really good and meaningful way to is accessible to everybody.

If there is any party else or we ask, I'm sure that you facilitate any other personal or in-person um uh meeting as well as uh and I wanna specifically say this because we were all uh required to take it to our uh training on conflict of interest.

So there is an onboarding process when it comes to that onboarding or the conversations related to this particular committee um and the goals and or the objectives.

I think that's what's happening right now.

And the fact that uh for instance, uh, I know that uh in the last committee uh meeting, um I was uh uh suggesting that uh survey is because nothing if it's the uh uh the action of you to actually have it in writing.

Um and so uh any of this opportunities in which we are each able to provide some sort of um insight or ask the questions, um that's what part of the process is, and yes, we'll be better off.

Um and yes, next time when we had this conversation, we're most likely gonna have a better chance of making sure that our priorities that then go to be evaluated by the console will be more informed.

Yeah, I agree.

I think we do see a lot of like I I love for at least the people who responded to this, like I see sort of like what how you view it and I think we can get more clarity as well if we like target even more specifically questions because this was focused around like programs, but if we talk wanna want to talk high level, we can do some sort of surveys and stuff like that as well.

Um then given that we don't have any more speakers, but feel free to cue up.

Um I just want to come up with like an action item on this last thing, which is basically uh to incorporate the feedback that we had.

Um, and this would be done by the annual report ad hoc.

It's already been declared, which was a few things.

One was to add our ad hoc information for the request of member Noveo.

Um remove sort of the debt service percentages, um, because maybe it's not our business to even talk about it, which I kind of agree.

Um, but we're cool with leaving the like we expect less revenue from the state and federal, or do you think that even also should probably just be actually that it's not yeah, okay.

Sure.

Maybe just a sentence then or like make it condensed.

And then you're on this ad hoc too, so you can kind of you can try to help uh reword that, yeah.

Cool.

Um and then lastly is of course the summary of the survey.

Um which is like sort of what member Solo was addressing, which is like how do we summarize this and put it in?

So a more specific program level report of what we kind of want Pete to see but included in the annual report.

So um those are the three changes.

I think I mean, Member Johnson, you kinda um d was there like a change specifically to the annual report that you wanted to do in regards to like the uh yeah, go ahead.

No, there wasn't any if we're just I didn't realize this might be attack as an attachment.

And if someone's summarizing it, I just wanted to add more color to this because there wasn't a lot of meat in mind, you know, it was basically saying I tried, but I can't think of anything because I'm still figuring out what the put what standard we're putting to it.

And so I just want to make that clear.

Maybe we can just summarize, and there might be some members who are still figuring out how to potentially just this define what spirit of measure you is.

I don't know, I trust your judgments on how to how to phrase that.

I just wanted to add additional color, but I know specific edits, the actual report itself.

Sure.

Fair enough.

I also wanted to call out that we did mention in the report one sentence is sort of like this idea that you know because the budgets are so combined, like a proper analysis would kind of require us to look at both the general fund and the measure you.

Um I wrote that.

So hopefully that captures a little bit of like what you're trying to say as well.

And that's kind of I I like that because it's saying the quiet part out loud, I think.

Like that's what we're doing here, right?

Where we have to look at the entire because that's because of the mingling.

Yeah.

Yep.

Okay.

And then with that, I guess the last thing of this would be if we can't have a meeting in November, that that ad hoc is basically okayed by the committee to push that to Ash, which will push it to the required channels, including Pete and City Council.

Um, but if we do have membership, then we'll wait.

Unless we don't want to.

Um it's up to, I think, seems like we uh go ahead, Member Staller.

Yeah.

Oh, how would you know at what point do you know that we'll we won't have a quorum?

I think basically it would be um we can set out a yeah, go ahead.

I just would like to know as soon as possible because a lot of work does go into preparing the agenda, so knowing that we don't have to prepare that in advance instead of preparing it and then canceling the meeting would be super helpful.

Maybe you can set out an email soon.

Sure.

And say if you can't make it.

Yeah, it'll be kind of like if you know for sure that you can't make the meeting, check this box.

If you think you might not make it, check this box.

If you're gonna try and make it for sure, check this box.

Or just yeah.

Yes or no.

Do we do we know for sure right now how close we are to not having it?

So that's two.

Commissioner rules are saying that.

Yeah, how many people can we have missing?

Um six.

Is that right?

We need a quorum of eight.

And we have how many seats filled?

Okay.

So we have four people that can be missed.

Okay.

So it's pretty tight.

Or it would still be a quorum.

Four people missing, it would still be a quorum.

If you were the last one, we'd still be able to meet it.

I think I can get a flight that lands at five.

So okay.

I mean, if I can make it, I will.

But I'm not making anything.

At that point, it's largely out of my control.

But it seems like we would have a quorum even if I can't make it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

I mean, either way, I think we should still sort of whatever motion is going to be made, that we make a verbiage that says we can like have that ad hoc continue if for some reason that meeting doesn't happen.

But if but as soon as we realize there won't be quorum, that's when they sort of pull the trigger on that.

Until that happens though, we sit tight and we wait for the next meeting to agree on what we send to city council and Pete.

Cool.

I think everyone's agreeing on that.

Okay.

Um so then I'll make a motion, which I can repeat at all if you've if we feel it's necessary.

Um to make the changes to the annual report as stated before, which is the ad hoc debt service, um, etc.

And then on top of that um create a summary of the uh commission survey results priorities and add that to the um annual report.

And then conditionally, if we do not have a meeting or is foreseen that we won't have quorum that the ad hoc has permission to submit it on behalf of the council to Ash, and then you can propagate that onto the required channels.

Um otherwise the ad hoc will wait and present at next meeting in November.

I'll second that.

Cool.

Is that you go with that, Jacob?

That works as long as the um city attorney's office has no qualms with the conditional is probably a little weird, but I think it's fine.

Overall, yeah.

We'll go with the conditional then.

Nice.

Um I'll let you call roll on that.

Excellent.

So I have a um motion by Chair Georgeov and a second by Commissioner Goris.

I'll now do the roll call vote.

Members please unmute your microphones.

Member McGee.

Except.

Member Smith.

Aye.

Member Salah.

Yes.

Member Cook.

Yes.

Member Johnston.

Yes.

Member Goris.

Yes.

Member Novello?

Yes.

Member Jurofsky.

Yes.

Member Pascal is absent.

Member Fry Lucas.

Yes.

Member Rosa is absent.

And Chair Georgioff.

Yes.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Okay, cool.

And then the last thing on this one I just wanted to say is that this also ad hoc only has five seats filled and we can have up to seven.

So there's so it is myself, Member Drovsky, Member McGee, Member Smith, and uh Vice Chair Cook.

So if we have two more hands, if you want to be in that final report, we'll probably meet here soon, like ideally in the next week.

But yeah.

Okay.

If not, that's okay.

We can move on to the next agenda item.

And for the record, we had no uh public comments on this item or the previous item as well.

Yeah.

Um okay then we'll move on to the ad hoc updates.

We've kind of talked about the um community engagement one already, the annual report one we've definitely done um the metrics ad hocs we've also kind of covered because Ash was sort of give the update on that um that it's in progress um which means commissioner comments or ideas and questions um if anyone has any McGee.

Yes um circling back on the previous ad hoc that you were searching for other committee members um because I was unable to add to the initial work of the ad hoc I'd like to um request removal from the ad hoc because the work has now moved forward and you know it's the train has left the station so I don't know how I can then come in and add to it.

So I respectfully ask to be removed.

Not a problem.

Uh for the annual report ad hoc I'll do that for free.

Yeah sorry you couldn't make the meeting times that we set forth yeah it's always kind of hard when it's like wrangling a bunch of people together.

Yeah.

Um okay and member Goris.

Um thank you Mr Chair just want to make sure that this is appropriate time I can have some announcements in my district.

Go for it.

Perfect so uh real quick just some Halloween activities we're having in District eight um on this sun this Sunday the twenty sixth we're having Halloween at the Meadowview certified farmers market that's from eight to twelve and that's gonna be Meadowview light rail station at 3501 Middleview uh road Sacramento California and please dress up in your best uh outfit and there'll be races at eleven AM and also on Thursday the 30th there's a trunk or treat of Fruit Ridge collaborative and that's at 4625 44th Street Sacramento from 5 to 7 and lastly on Halloween day we have the chunk retreat harv harvest festival at Macworld Valley High Community Center 7833 Center Road Parkway and that's from five to eight.

Thank you Mr Chair.

Awesome and I'll just add something as well I just want to thank Ash because he put together a lot of this like annual reports um and even if we like have disagreements on like what sections should be involved or whatever um i his work is obviously super valuable so uh sorry to put you on the spot earlier but we definitely appreciate you um all right uh member Noveo thank you as a chair um I just want to make a few uh uh a note uh if you didn't attend um the stay with the seated this morning I extremely encourage you to uh watch it I think they will be at recording uh posted uh sometime in the future if it's not already up.

Um there were two announcements made uh significant in there uh to um uh the previous conversation on Texas there is a tax that is being proposed as well as a partnership with the city of West Sacramento to ensure that we build momentum to have a major league baseball uh team uh and what it will mean uh because that will also impact our um our our budget so I sincerely encourage you to go and watch it.

Is there any public speakers?

Thank you chair I have none.

All right and the meeting is adjourned.

Thanks all the questions.