Music

Good afternoon.

Welcome to, let's see, Monday, January 26th,

2026, 5.30 p.m. meeting of the Measure U Community Advisory Committee.

The meeting is now called to order.

Will the clerk please call the roll to establish a quorum?

Thank you, Chair.

Commissioner McGee?

Present.

Commissioner Smith?

Present.

Commissioner Sala?

Present.

Commissioner Cook?

Present.

Commissioner Miller?

Present.

Commissioner Johnston?

Present.

Commissioner Goris is absent.

Commissioner Novello is absent.

Commissioner Jorofsky?

Present.

Commissioner Paschal?

Present.

Commissioner Fry Lucas?

Present.

Commissioner Rosa is absent.

And Chair Georgiouf?

Yep.

I'd like to remind, oh well, do we have quorum?

Thank you, we have quorum.

Yeah, cool.

I'd like to remind members of the public and chambers

that if you'd like to speak on an agenda item,

please turn in a speaker slip when the item begins.

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

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

We will now proceed with today's agenda, which is land acknowledgement and Pledge of Allegiance.

Member Johnson, if you're willing to do it.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nisanom people, the Southern Maidu Valley and Plains Miwok,

Patwan Wintu peoples and the people of the Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the Native people who came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands

by choosing to gather together today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's Indigenous peoples,

histories, contributions, and lives. Thank you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

and to the republic for which it stands, one nation,

under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on the consent calendar?

Thank you, Chair. I have no speaker slips for the consent calendar.

Okay, is there a motion and a second for the consent calendar?

Yeah?

Okay, we have one.

We have a motion.

Do we have a second?

Excellent.

So we have a motion and a second.

We can do the call just by voice.

So all in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed or abstain?

Okay, great.

And that means we will move on to the discussion calendar.

First item of today is to talk about the draft fiscal year,

2025-2026 Measure U programming update.

Let's see, if we look at that.

This is mostly to talk about,

we submitted, it's been a while since we've been here,

about three months, so welcome all back first of all.

Oh, and before we move on,

I do want to actually introduce a new member.

Jeff, if you'd love to introduce yourself

and tell us a little bit about why you're here

or how you're here and, yeah, what you're interested in.

Hi, I'm Jeff Miller.

I am recently appointed through the commission

from District 5.

I am interested in just public policy generally.

I've lived in Sacramento for, let's see, 11 years, 10 years,

between 10 and 11 years.

I also lived here years ago after college

and I work

for a city government

not the city of Sacramento

and so I'm just interested in

city policy in general

I am interested in the goals of this

commission

the goals of Measure U

and

it's a good way for me

to be involved and kind of use

my background in

public policy and hopefully to good use

Awesome. Well, we're really happy to have you.

So I will let Ash introduce the number three discussion calendar item.

Sure. Thank you, Chair, members of the Commission.

We originally had agendized this item for November,

but because we didn't have a quorum, we had to cancel that meeting, so we postponed it to this meeting.

So I'm prefacing that just so you're aware that this is still the first quarter data that is in the system or in this dashboard.

So it's covering the period of July 1st through September 30th.

As we get further into the discussion, we can talk a little bit later about some ideas on the frequency of updates moving forward.

But I'm just going to give a quick demo of what you're looking at.

and talk about some of the changes

to what we had previously presented to you.

The biggest difference is we've incorporated metrics.

And so really this is an opportunity to get your feedback

and hopefully come back in the future,

either in February or March with an updated version

based on your feedback

and eventually get some updates

based on the second or third quarter of data.

So with that, I'm gonna sort of scroll through here

If you're looking at your screen,

if you push a projector A button,

you'll be able to see what I'm looking at

instead of turning your head to the screen.

So at the very top here,

these cards represent the totals that are displayed below.

So right now, by default, it's displaying all departments,

all categories of programs.

I can use the filters.

For example, if I wanted to look at just community response,

I could click this checkbox here,

and that amount is gonna change to 39.6 million.

The FTEs change up here at the top.

Then if you wanna actually click into

a department or category,

so in this case, to kind of describe what you're seeing is,

if you remember the way we've organized the data,

is it's categorized by both department and category.

We previously called it priority,

but now that we have adopted the city council's priorities,

which are economic development, public safety,

and homelessness, we don't wanna confuse those terms anymore,

so I'm just using the term category.

But in this case, what you're seeing is that 39.6 million

on the left is spread across two categories on the right,

which are 25.5 million for community response

and then 14.1 for homelessness.

You can click into any of these bars to expand it further.

And so I'm gonna scroll down a little bit here.

You can see the programs that are listed

that total the 39.6 million.

And then you can use this button here

that's called metrics by department

to look at the metrics that are associated

with this department.

You can basically do the same thing on the right-hand side,

but the difference is that these are metrics by programs

and metrics by category, not department.

So I know I'm kind of throwing a lie,

it's like a multi-dimensional way of looking at this,

but just know that whatever you're focused on,

category or department,

I would suggest just focusing on that

and not trying to look at both at the same time.

So I'm gonna stick with the left side of the screen for now

which is department and kind of demonstrate

some of the rest of this here.

So like I said, under community response,

this is the department of community response.

We have the programs.

You can see the amount of the programs

and then the metrics.

All of these metrics are associated

with this department as a whole.

But if you wanted to see program level metrics,

which is what we heard as a request from this commission,

you would be looking at the programs

and you would open up any of the programs

to view those metrics.

So I'll look at Office of Community Outreach here.

All I need to do is click on that program.

I can see it's 3.6 or 3.7 million.

You can see some of that data there at the top on the FTEs.

the description or purpose of the program is there.

And by the way, this is the same information

that's in your staff report

that was originally in that table format.

It's still there for reference.

And then that first quarter update is included here.

All of these metrics are the metrics

that tied up to this specific program.

I'll just briefly acknowledge that,

especially with a department like Community Response,

90% or more of their efforts are focused on addressing homelessness.

So when you look across these different programs, let me go back a little bit.

So right now I'm in the Office of Community Outreach.

What I can tell by looking at this is the authorized FTE is 25.

So what this is really telling me is that this program within the department is primarily funding their staff.

It's funding 25 staff members with those FTEs.

And so the point I'm trying to make here is as we look at metrics, so in this case we're looking at number of 311 calls received, number of cases open, number of unique locations responded to.

You could easily see these metrics in some of the other programs as well.

I think we were initially just as a starting point taking the commission's proposed mapping of metrics to programs.

and so that's really what you're seeing here.

And this is something that we'll just need to continue to refine

and make sure it reflects reality.

So if you want to close out of this, or sorry, let me back up and say,

you can click on then any of the metrics to see more detail.

So in this case, the 20,663 cases opened over this period.

I can see that the start date was July 1st, and it's ending September 30th.

So this is a clean first quarter metric.

So in the future, we will hopefully have additional quarters that you could compare that to.

You can even see that the frequency that it's collected is quarterly or reported on.

The reason why we're including this is because if you think of some seasonal programs,

like in the Department of Youth, Parks, and Community Enrichment,

all those programs are seasonal, and so they occur in the summer.

and so the metrics are basically going to be zero throughout the fall winter and perhaps even

spring it's really not until that summer period that covers the last quarter of the fiscal year

and then the first quarter of the next fiscal year if you kind of do that before july 1st and after

july 1st period and so in other cases we'll you'll see that that frequency is going to change

because we don't necessarily want to keep reporting

on data that's not changing quarter by quarter.

So I think I'll kind of stop there,

see if there's any questions.

Really, like I said, the goal here was to get feedback.

I know this is different than the last dashboard

that you've seen.

I could even pull that up if you were interested,

but I know we were really trying to solve this problem

of like, this is a lot of data,

and if we just gave you a giant spreadsheet of metrics,

it would be really hard to digest that,

and so we're using some design principles

around something called progressive disclosure,

which allows you as a user to kind of click in and drill down

from the top to the bottom without being overloaded

with a lot of information at once.

And so that hopefully is more easier for you all to digest,

easier for you all to digest, but again, what's important is your feedback, because we're

designing this for you. So I will stop there and see if there's any questions or feedback.

Yeah, I mean, first, I'll just say this is awesome. The school is amazing, and kudos to

building this. I'm very excited to see where this goes, and I'll let some members speak.

I obviously have some thoughts, but Member Saul, if you want to go first.

Yes, I echo the sentiment as well.

This is really, really good.

Very simple, very straightforward.

And it allows, if I really want to go in and see something specific,

it allows me to go and see it in a very simple but complex.

I know it's complex, and I know a lot of work went into getting it to look simple like this.

So thank you, Ash.

This is great.

The only thing, what's value?

Value represents, I'll go ahead and pull that up.

It is because different metrics

are measuring different things,

value is simply the number that corresponds to the units.

So I'm gonna pull this up specifically

on number of 311 calls received.

In the case here, we have 6,718.

and the unit is number of 311 calls received,

so the value is just that 6,718 number.

If we used a term like number or percent,

then it might not apply to the other metrics,

so it's just kind of a generic header in that table.

Yes, fantastic.

I'm so happy you opened the community response one

because that's one that I hear a lot sitting on my HOA board.

So when it says cases open, do we assume that for the number of cases open

that those will be closed?

Is there somewhere where we can see the open cases versus the closed cases?

Because I'm sure some of the cases may have nuances

that lead to it being open or extended period of time.

yeah um i'm seeing that there is a metric called average number of cases closed

um this is where we are missing essentially descriptions of what the metrics actually are

it says daily on frequency oh daily okay thank you thank you okay thank you so we could technically

multiply that by the 90 days that are within the quarter to kind of compare

the two. I will also point you towards DCR specifically has their own

dashboards. I'm going to go to homeless.cofsacramento.org.

This actually has weekly data and so that's where because of all of the

attention on this particular issue they have lots and lots of data so we have

cases opened and cases closed up here in the top left.

And you can fill, this is by week, this is weekly data,

so you can go back and view, like for all of 2025,

it was 48,000 cases opened and 74,000 cases closed.

The reason why those numbers don't match

is because sometimes there's a backlog of cases

that were reported in a previous period

and they stayed open for a longer period

than the new cases came in.

So they're not always in the same period.

You're not always closing.

Just because you get to the end of a 90-day period

doesn't mean you're able to close all of the cases

that were opened in that same period.

There's always going to be a backlog of cases that carry over.

Thank you so much.

This is really helpful information to put out to the community

as you have the questions on homelessness

and what's being done by the city.

Member Cook or Member Miller?

This is great work, Ash.

Thank you.

So what I'm trying to get at is the cost per the encounter,

the cost per homeless placement, the cost per 3-on-1 call.

I'm trying to do rough math, and I'm not sure the math is mathing,

so keep me honest.

For example, a community response, is it correct to take the $39 million and then for each one of these metrics, like number of intakes into city shelters, divide that by 1,000 and say, okay, it costs the city $39,000 per intake into city shelter?

because ultimately the goal is to not necessarily have these nominal metrics

but actually have some financial metrics where you can compare equivalent cities

to see is the city of Sacramento effective at placing individuals into city shelters

at a higher rate, at a lower rate, but that requires a financial metric.

And you tell me if that math is correct or incorrect or more work needs to be done.

Yeah, it's a great question. I'm trying to see. Okay, I see. So I think the city itself is hesitant to open up this Pandora's box, mainly because we don't necessarily account.

I think you have the 39 million divided by 1,000 equals 39,000.

We have to also account for all of these other metrics,

and there may be other programs that are specifically addressing those objectives.

There may be multiple programs that are addressing those objectives.

There may be efforts from the county that actually assist and help us

to better address those issues in the first place.

the place I would probably start though is at the programs themselves so really looking at the cost

of a particular program so like I said office of community outreach is unique because this is and

many departments are like this where all of the staff will be bundled together in a single program

so that's kind of the money this is the program that funds the positions and then there are other

buckets of funds, and that is ultimately what a program is. It's just a bucket of funds.

All of these are, you know, we have buckets of funds by departments, we have buckets of funds

for programs, and we have buckets of programs for categories. So if you were looking at this

particular program, I know this is primarily funding the staff, but the city receives a lot

of state money in the case of homelessness, the HHAP funding, and I'm sorry I don't remember

what that acronym stands for, but it's kind of a way of blending funds where the city

funds its own positions, and if we didn't fund those positions, we wouldn't be able

to apply for or receive those funds from the state.

Those funds from the state come in, and then we typically, I don't want to say pass them

through, but we typically use those funds to actually purchase and build the infrastructure

that we need to address the homelessness issue. And so there's just a lot of complexity to kind

of get to that number. I think we can continue to talk about this. I think there may be better

data we could provide you with. I'm not even sure where to start with that at this point,

But perhaps it's a conversation with the budget office as we start to talk about the budget deliberations, which you all will be receiving updates throughout this year or the first half of this year on the city's budget situation.

and as the budget gets proposed, those will be opportunities to learn,

I mean, not just about how the city is proposing to address the deficit,

but to get at more granular data to see if we actually have that kind of data available.

That's good feedback. Thanks for that.

Maybe like taking a step back, just thinking about the buckets of funds.

Like I go to this website, a normal person goes to this website.

They don't drill into it.

They just say, oh, measure you spending $14 million on homelessness.

But once you start, like, drilling into it, you see, like, community response, homeless housing, $20 million, homeless housing initiatives, $13 million.

Then you have to manually add up, like, these programs within these departments plus the categories to get a true number that says, how much is the city spending on homelessness this year?

I don't know if, like, that's a feature of this design, but, like, why are there two homeless?

There's a homelessness category on the right, and then there's, like, homeless initiatives.

within each department and they don't add up.

Yes.

In this case, sorry, I was muted.

In this case, like, there are,

particularly in community development,

which runs our code enforcement division

and addresses a lot of the blight issues

and other cleanup-related violations

that are associated with the city's ordinances

around homelessness,

the way that we're trying to describe this here is if you click on homelessness let me see if this

actually works give me one second community and then i will just be honest with you that

i often get confused between homelessness and community response they're sort of the same thing

I think we can get back to you with a better definition,

but I'm here on the right-hand side

where we do have both of those homelessness

and community response.

I'm gonna go up here to community response

and show that as a category,

this is different than the department,

which is on the left-hand side.

So on the left-hand side here, we have,

and these are actually different numbers,

even though they're pretty close.

There's only a $400,000 difference.

On the left side is the budget for the Department

of Community Response.

On the right hand side is the category of community response.

And if I were to look up this $5 million program,

the animal care slash shelter program,

I can see that this is actually within our community

development department,

not the Department of Community Response.

So I think all of that is an open acknowledgement that maybe we need more unique terms in the same way that we don't want to use priority and have that mean different things in different contexts.

But that's just kind of currently how things are.

Great work.

Thanks for explaining.

Member McGee.

Sorry.

Nothing to say.

No problem.

Yeah, so I guess it seems like I'm the last one.

I mean, obviously, yeah, I said it before, I'll say it again, this is awesome.

The ability to, like, get information that we are seeking as a group, I think, is now very much available.

I think, you know, I've slew through this quite a bit, and I still have questions.

And I think if everyone here has also looked through this, they probably as well have questions, just as we saw, like, Member Cook similarly.

I think we should sort of try to aggregate all these questions and figure out, you know,

are there ways we can improve this dashboard in certain ways or modify how we view the

data so that those questions can be answered more readily.

I think also tentatively, like, Pete is coming next meeting.

Yes.

And so if there's questions around budget, that's a great time to do it as well.

So prepare your questions for that meeting, please.

And then lastly, given that we have, there's always still some work to do.

There's some metrics missing from certain departments or what have you.

There's, when you click on the $20 million in community response housing initiative,

there's no metrics assigned to that one.

This is no related metrics, for example.

Or it doesn't have the percent FTE budget that we've, I think that member Frey Lucas

sort of wanted to get in there.

so these things are coming

but I still think as a

commission we should be able to show some value

from what we've already received

and so we've asked for this

now let's try to come up with a report

or some sort of aggregation

of ideas

from this report that like look what we can do

now right so that we can kind of convince

city council that yes this was

a good idea keep investing in it

make sure that we get these remaining

metrics or if we have questions or want some

changes that'll be invested into.

Because if we ask for this and then it sort of like drops flat and we don't do anything

with it, that's going to be problematic, obviously.

And then Ash probably will not be helping us continue to work on this dashboard after

that.

So yeah, I think if everyone can sort of take the time, look into this, get the questions

they want to ask ready, maybe we can even have some sort of like they can send them

to you or something, and then the metrics ad hoc

can sort of aggregate those and come up with a report

or something like this, I think it would be awesome.

Cool, that's all I have.

Is there, okay, Member Salwa?

Will this be, is this being sent to the council members?

You know, so we have this big warning at the top

that says prototype for discussion.

This dashboard is a working prototype for feedback and review.

All data and information presented are preliminary

and subject to change.

Sorry to be bureaucratic.

We have not fully discussed that.

So for example, if you go to the city's Measure U web page,

the current dashboard that's linked from there

is the old dashboard from the previous budget year.

I think city staff did do a quick internal review.

I will say there are some issues that we're uncomfortable with.

One of them is like the metrics where they're just not reported.

We weren't able to get those metrics in time.

And similarly, we weren't able to kind of do the necessary follow up to figure out

why we weren't able to get those metrics.

The second issue is on this issue of FTEs as a percent of budget.

I'm not going to get into the details right now, mainly because I don't remember them,

but there's a lot of concern about the consistency through which that number is calculated,

mainly because of something called budget offsets, which is, as I understand it,

a department's budget is budgeted for the amount that it's budgeted,

And then there are offsets when, for example,

a department receives a grant, like a state grant,

and then that offsets the department's budget.

There are questions about,

and this is where I can't quite get into the nitty gritty

in a way that is accurate,

but the question is how does that affect the FTE

as a percent of budget,

and are we doing that consistently across programs?

I will say that was the number one question I received

when staff was populating this data.

So long story short, if we do go public with it,

I think we may end up removing that.

But I don't know.

I don't know.

We haven't had that discussion.

The other thing I should mention, too,

is our new city manager, Markeisha Smith,

just finished her third week.

She's starting her fourth week on the job.

I met with her this morning.

She has a really bold vision for performance metrics

across the city, and we're going to be doing a lot of work, particularly around the city council's

priorities. And so, and we, Amy and Pete, who have presented to you before, have talked about how

as an organization, this is like turning an aircraft carrier around, and now we have a new

captain of the ship, and so we are still turning that aircraft carrier around, but we're also kind

of calibrating the direction that it's gonna go in.

And as we systematically build our,

or rebuild I guess, our performance management structure,

because it's gonna have the same metrics

that are included here, or at least some sample of it,

we wanna make sure we're not duplicating efforts

and confusing staff when we're asking for metrics

over here and over there.

And we want it to all live in the same system

and essentially run a filter and say,

show me the Measure U ones,

show me the council priority ones,

and all of that is in a single system

without having to pull different data sources

at different times and all of the repetitive staff time

that goes into something like that.

So that's just a preview of what's to come, but yeah.

That would be great.

I, what was the other question I had?

If it was being to council.

I just, anyway, it just slipped my mind.

I had another comment, a question.

You mentioned the city manager is,

and I know that she's new and she's just getting oriented,

but it would be great if we could meet her,

she could come and we have a dialogue with her,

a conversation with him.

That would be really good.

And at some point, I know that she's being pulled that

in a lot of different directions right now.

But it would be nice to have a conversation with her.

I'll definitely submit that request.

And yeah, just on your point,

she's still meeting department directors for the first time.

So it's a lot of sort of orientation and ramp up.

And now I know what the comment I was going to make.

I think it's a very valid point that you made, Teddy.

Sorry.

Okay.

Because that's what I was thinking.

So we have the first quarter report,

and I agree that even to the extent possible,

we should look at this, have our questions,

and be able to utilize it to the extent possible in informing our discussion about our priorities

that we're going to give to the finance department that they're going to incorporate in the development of their budget, right?

Yes, and that work has already been done.

The departments have your priorities.

I will say I know I think it's the next item on your annual report.

I don't know that they're going to change drastically,

but the departments have the priorities

that were originally on your November agenda,

and they are taking those into consideration

as they prepare their budget reduction plans.

And so Pete will be providing an update next month

on how that process is going,

but the departments do have your priorities at this point.

Okay, so in our discussions with finance

as we move forward, this could help inform us

because it's one quarter worth of data that's important for us to know

so that we're knowledgeable and we can influence the discussion with this.

So thank you for getting it done.

Even though it's only just one quarter worth of data, it's still viable information.

And you're right, we need to do something with it.

Otherwise, they're going to say, we do all this work, and it just sits in the shelf.

we also have our oral report coming next month and we can incorporate some of that into because

our yearly budget reviews kind of like we go and present budget audit and so right budget audit or

no uh personnel and public okay yeah pp and e um then we can sort of incorporate some of the ideas

that we have from looking at this metrics dashboard into that if we want to um also yeah we're going

and we're gonna talk about it in the next item.

So, member Pascal?

I just wanted to give my appreciation to Ash

that I think from the first day I've been on this commission,

we've been talking about needing data, metrics, whatever.

It's been a long time.

And this is like leaps and bounds ahead of where we were.

So I'm like, this is,

it's super impressive to see the trajectory

from where we started.

So thank you.

I know this is like probably very tedious and thankless work.

So I just wanted to say thank you.

Member Johnson.

I may have answered my own question.

I'm looking through this and there's some metrics.

This is great also.

Juana, kudos, amazing, et cetera, et cetera.

But this, there's a lot here, right?

And I'm trying to understand some of these because they might use jargon I don't know.

so I wanted to see if there's like a glossary or some way I don't it's that

fine balance right of putting too much work this is fantastic and we don't

want to have like everything paragraphed out by detail but I also if you click on

it is that as detailed as we're gonna get I realize there's some program detail on

some of this but for instance like the GPIT police stuff I wasn't sure what

that was open up police and just says events attended events missed I don't

know what that means it's just like an outreach that's just an example of like

Like, my one suggestion, if there's, like, some easy glossary or some just, like, background info of, like, do I care?

They've only attended one event.

I don't know.

Because that's what's listed here.

So that's my only suggestion that I have come up with right now.

No, thank you.

Just quickly, GPIT is Gang Prevention and Intervention Task Force.

But, yeah, I will say we can go through these.

or I can, maybe the metrics ad hoc,

if there's any clarification you need,

we can provide that.

I think having full definitions may take some time,

and that's an example of something

we would wanna try to align

with the broader performance management efforts.

And I will say, once we go down that road,

there may be fewer metrics.

So what, if you recall what this process looked like

last year we kind of had back and forth interaction with the commission on kind of an iterative basis

where we presented the metrics that we collect internally all across the city and then your

ad hoc committee came back to us and and matched those metrics that we said we had to the programs

that were listed that is funded by Measure U.

And then we went and collected those values

or that data and we presented it here.

And so we can continue as an iterative process

to try to provide some clarity

on the terms and definitions.

Yeah.

I will just say this might just be user experience

because I think it was by department.

If you do it by program,

then it kind of gives that explanation.

I was just looking at departments.

so I just saw all the metrics without knowing what program,

and I didn't realize going back to programs.

Oh, yes.

It then gives you that kind of,

so it's just, I think, getting used to the tool and seeing it.

I wasn't too granular without being able to figure out how to get set back.

I see what you're saying.

Yep.

And I'll just say on that,

that's actually a good example where that's a breakdown of participants by race.

Like, obviously, that would,

we would just prefer that to be a single metric that's displayed as like a bar

chart or a single, you know,

so you could see the numbers compared as opposed,

right now they're just kind of listed as standalone metrics,

so that's definitely an area

that we'll wanna improve on in the future.

I remember Pascal, is that a hand still or?

No, okay, all good.

Yeah, so I'll just close this one out

because I think we're done,

no one else has any comments.

I just wanna give everyone a little bit of homework

to be like, yeah, go through this,

and if you have thoughts and questions,

or not just about how to use the dash,

of course those two,

or things you think could be improved, those are great,

but also using it in the sense of

why do we spend this much on that,

or this seems like a really great return on investment

for what we're getting,

or whatever the thoughts might be,

just so that the metrics ad hoc

can compile all these thoughts

and create some sort of letter for our next meeting

to bring it as a draft.

Because I think, like I said, I really would like to use this quickly and get sort of like a turnaround and show that this is a valuable tool and that we want to keep growing with it.

All right.

Then are there any public comments for this agenda?

Thank you, Chair.

I have no public speakers for this item.

Okay.

Then we can move on because I don't think it requires a vote of anything.

Basically this next discussion item is the City of Sacramento Measure U Community Advisory Commission 2025 Annual Report and 2026 Work Plan.

It's just a review what we put together and sort of approved last year.

We already sent from this group that did the, they put that report together.

We sent what we wanted to peat, like subsection.

and then we still have not presented or given this to city council in any form, if I'm not mistaken.

And so there were some feedback of like if there's any comments or concerns with what we currently have

before it goes to city council, then we can talk about that now and make our PP&E,

before it goes to PP&E, we can talk about that now and make some final adjustments, essentially,

if anyone cares to.

I'll give you guys the floor.

No, no.

Okay.

Member Cook.

Here to providing feedback here.

Let me get out the actual section.

Are you going to project it on your screen

or do we just talk through it?

I don't have the ability.

to the control room.

I am plugging my laptop back in.

Let's see.

I didn't have it open.

Was there a page number?

We're looking.

Yeah, hold on.

Section C, 2026 program recommendations.

You have a page.

Search for that.

I think it's on page seven.

Is this the other one?

No, this is a much larger one.

I downloaded the file from the agenda.

It's seven, it's eight pages long.

But if you look for the phrase 2026 program recommendation,

that's the body of content.

You see that?

Okay, so for the most part, we went through this.

We had many meetings.

We outlined like what the priorities are.

And directionally, I think most of us agree on this.

Where I'm getting the disconnect is that public safety is not called out as an area of alignment in the 2026 program recommendation.

And the reason I think this is not correct is if you look at this, if you look at what the citizens of Sacramento want to prioritize with the measure you budget, you will see that public safety is in the top three.

It's not my opinion.

It's like what the citizens of Sacramento want.

You can see this in the 2023 Community Response Survey.

City surveyed 780 people.

over-indexed for low-income districts and communities.

And when it was all said and done,

the top three priorities were homeless housing,

mental health, and public safety.

I see sprinkles of homeless housing,

mental health throughout the series of alignment,

but there's no public safety.

So because the citizens of Sacramento,

through the 2023 community survey,

expressed that the top three areas of focus

for the Measure U budget include public safety.

Public safety should be one of the areas

of alignment in this table,

and it's not some requesting we added.

Does anyone object to that?

What thoughts do you have?

I'll just add that the council workshop

did also do a survey and they did have

pretty close to what you're saying.

It was like, number one was public safety.

Number two was homelessness.

Number three was housing,

which I assume like homelessness and housing

are fairly closely related.

Yeah, I think that makes sense.

I don't see a reason we couldn't add it here.

It just, I think we might want to figure out

what we mean by that, right?

So what does the notes sort of section look like?

So if we say public safety,

what do we as a group agree fits in notes?

I think the path of least resistance is to take the definition out of the 2023 community survey

and just use that verbatim. It's literally what the citizens of Sacramento

put in the survey as part of their priorities. Do you have that language?

I can send it to you afterwards.

That's all.

Thanks.

Any other thoughts on the draft that we have so far?

Member Sala?

I just want to comment on his comments.

So I agree that, yeah, public safety, but I would, and I'm not sure I agree that we should use the definition that's in the community survey

because the community surveys, if you look at the demographics of who responds to those community surveys,

it doesn't represent our communities typically.

It's more middle, middle-aged, middle-class, white who responds to those surveys

because the survey is long and it requires people at that bracket or in that demographics,

they're more willing to respond to a survey versus a mother or a father who's working two jobs.

Latino may not have command of the language, and even though it's in Spanish,

but they're not going to respond to the survey, so you're not getting their feedback.

So I think the results are a little skewed.

and I would just say a definition

because if you were to ask right now

that Latino community

if they think public safety is important to them

they would say no.

They would say things like jobs,

affordable housing,

things that make their life better

and they don't think that the police

would provide them

and they don't.

Well, I'm not going to say that. They do.

But they feel safe because we have more money and more police officers in the field.

So they might answer public safety would be more in the area of prevention

before the young people get into trouble or start committing crimes,

that there be more in the prevention arena

and the whole thing around gang violence, et cetera.

So if we're going to put it, we should use a description

that just doesn't say, you know, it's more police on the ground.

However, I don't know how it's in the community survey,

but it needs to be a little broader description.

So yes, the people who respond to that community survey,

yeah, they want more police in their neighborhood, but the people who don't respond to the survey

and for my community don't want more police in the neighborhood.

They want more programs for the youth that are about prevention versus having more police on the streets.

If you truly believe that the people in the lowest level, the socioeconomic ladder in the city of Sacramento

want to actually defund the police and reallocate funds to another program,

I encourage you to put forth a body of evidence that proves that.

What I don't want to do is get into a debate about cops good, cops bad.

What I'm trying to put forth is based on the 2023 community survey,

which was structured in such a way to over-index on low-income communities

like it over-indexed on individuals in Oak Park, individuals in Del Paso Heights,

by sending more surveys in more languages to those communities to address the problem that you've described.

With that said, the results of that community survey still want public safety as a top three priority.

So I hear you, but I reject the premise that the survey is like skewed towards middle class,

white affluent individuals in ESAC,

because that is like objectively not true.

And if you think certain levels of the socioeconomic ladder

want to defund the police,

put forth a body of evidence that proves that.

Okay, first of all, I didn't say defund the police at all.

Reallocate funds from the city budget.

Wait a minute. I didn't interrupt you.

Okay.

I didn't say defund the police.

I never said that.

I'm saying that

public safety

a lot of people think public safety

is more police and I'm saying it isn't

just that and in my

community they want more prevention programs

that deal with

the youth

that help the youth stay out of trouble

and also the gang violence

that exists

and poverty

the whole issue around poverty

and we can get into a big debate about that, and I don't want to.

What I'm saying, yes, you can put that in, and I agree, add it in the alignment,

but maybe we should be more thoughtful in the description

and not just say it's about adding more to the police budget.

I'm going to read the description of the survey first,

just so we have a ground to stand on, and then we can modify that as we see fit.

So public safety services, example, police, fire, emergency medical services,

citywide emergency management and use center prevention services so it's quite

like it's quite a large bundle so it's hard to discern you know what people are

saying oh yeah like I want fire or I want to mention emergency medical

services or I want you center prevention because it was bundled it is quite

difficult to like parse out what people were excited about when they said yes I'm

for this and maybe because of that it might be good to just use that as a

as a statement, because it does include sort of all of the above.

But, yeah, I'm happy to hear other people's opinions.

Member McGee, I think you were next.

I think it's a question of an equity lens, right?

And, you know, we could use whatever verbiage was crafted

based on whatever survey went out.

But I think that we cannot act as if there was a disparity.

There's not a disparity with equity and the equity lens

and how we craft and how, you know, surveys are administered across any community, right?

Like we could pick any community that has a diversity of people, right?

There are going to be those that are more prone to respond versus those that are not for many different reasons.

So I just think, you know, whatever one we go with, you know, the question is, are we looking at it with an equity lens?

And what is that equity lens?

And, you know, are there any other lenses that we can overlay to make sure that it's most inclusive to the biggest amount of the population possible?

I don't know if that is possible, but I think the question is equity.

It's not about police and defunding, right?

But we cannot sit here and act as if disparities in equity and engagement at a community and city level does not exist because it does.

And if we say it doesn't, therein lies the problem because we're ignoring that.

And you just can't, from my perspective, right?

I'm speaking on behalf of myself.

We can't ignore that these things don't exist in Sacramento.

Just as a commissioner here, but also on an HOA board, in my regular community, and we're paying dues, right?

Like, we're in a fluid neighborhood.

But the apathy just to get a response on our community surveys in our own community with our own homeowners, our response rate is like we can never pass anything.

The response rate is that low.

And that's in a community that's supposed to check all the boxes.

And I use that as a broad example.

you know but you know so how much more other communities and other areas if in my own community

just from my lens you know as a HOA member it is so hard to pass anything for our community

in a middle class community that should have the highest response rate and it doesn't just just the

lens that I'm using in terms of crafting my response so you know where I'm coming from

in terms of my response so just really what is the equity lens and what can we overlay to

ensure that equity exists in whatever verbiage that we chose.

Member Drozdowski.

Yeah, I think, I do think that it's missing as being a called out area of alignment, but

I also think that there in the notes part that we have here that's in the draft, their

public safety is a very broad definition and it's inclusive of a lot of things.

there's the response to a public safety issue and then as member Sala was

mentioning there's prevention is a huge aspect of public safety and you know to

Commissioner Cook for it to be narrowed down to public safety equals police I

don't think that's what member Sala was saying whatsoever in her conversation

in in her comment and I think that I do agree that should be called out but I

I think there's also the idea that public safety can be embedded is a factor of a lot of other programs.

So when we talk about youth and community programs, that's a public safety program.

When we talk about libraries, that's a public safety program.

When we talk about homelessness initiatives, that's a public safety program.

All of these have public safety aspects to them and have impacts on public safety.

and so to have that narrow of an idea of what public safety is I think limits us and then when

we actually do look at the Measure U programs that are funding public safety and the police

department specifically that's just funding staffing and as we saw whenever they presented

that they're having how many kids go through these programs and actually only hiring a few

meanwhile we have community youth programs that are incredibly successful that are serving a large

amount of youth and we know that they have public safety impacts.

So just because it's not the police doesn't mean it's not public safety.

Either Member Miller or Member Cook.

I agree with your point.

Like part of public safety is long-term preventive programs that provide after

school options for youth, summer programs, et cetera.

I just think the challenge is if we start saying everything is public safety,

then nothing becomes public safety like it's too broad of like an abstract concept and

all i'm trying to advocate for is that we took a survey of the community in 2023 and asked them

what are their top three categories of funding for measure u public safety as it was read out

is number three,

and therefore it should be included

in the areas of alignment.

That's it.

I feel like I've been beating a dead horse

that this is, I think, central to the problem

of what we're all facing,

of like, what is measure you do?

What is our purpose?

And I think we've all kind of settled on,

it feels like what we want it to feel

because we're members of the community.

and I think if

Commissioner Cook feels that it's important

then it should be included and I think as

a citizen of this I've known

a lot of people that think public

safety is very important to this.

I agree definitions important

but if you look at all the definitions here

they're pretty vague let's be completely honest

like they're one sentences right?

This is a very

important issue. There's a lot

of strong and I think reasonable

positions on the whole spectrum

but I don't think

this goes against what Measure U is

by including something that a commissioner

feels is important for the community, personally.

This might be a preamble

to something I was going to maybe bring up at the end

that I'm personally trying to find time

to set aside of putting a real analysis

of all the various ballot propositions

and all that stuff to kind of figure out

what it is, how we're supposed to measure it,

because that's a constant thing

that we're struggling here with.

And I just want to create space

that I think that's good,

because I think that's our job.

and so I just want to say that I think if Commissioner Cook thinks it's important I don't

think that it's unfounded either I'm trying to look at the report I'm trying to also look at

what we did but I think we only had I don't know I forget like how many participants in our survey

that's something I need to go back to and look through 11 yeah so it's like there's not a lot

of data right and the 2023 I'm looking through it it is a little vague on what public safety is

and defined as, and I think that's a fine debate to have.

So I just wanna say that's something that,

I just wanna flag, as I always do,

we're still working on what Measure U stands for

and how we articulate that.

Okay, so to sort of bring it all together,

I agree that it should be added.

I think, again, even if just one person

thinks it's important, I don't see that we shouldn't

find the space to fit it.

And on that note, the only question was, I guess, the verbiage.

And I still kind of do feel that the existing survey, although vague,

is maybe the best thing because it's vague.

For example, having police, fire, emergency, medical services, citywide emergency

management, and youth center prevention services.

If we want to specify that there are many other programs that also provide public

safety, I think that could also be included in the description.

and we have listed them above in that document.

However we wanna word that,

is that something that everyone is sort of okay with?

Or is anyone strictly opposed to it?

Maybe that's a better question.

Okay, cool.

Are there any other, so moving on from this then,

are there any other thoughts about this draft

that we want to change or modify

before it goes to PP&E.

All right, well then in that case,

are there any members of the public

who wish to speak on this agenda item?

Thank you, Chair, we have no speaker slips for this item.

Okay, then we can move on.

Also just say like, definitely, oh.

This item does require a vote.

It does require a vote.

Okay, well I guess we can vote on what

I just sort of concluded,

which was we can add it, stick to mostly the same verbiage

as the 2023 community survey,

and then we can also add something where we believe

that there are many ways to achieve public safety,

including the programs that we've listed above,

if that sounds reasonable to people.

I guess we'll call this one.

Excellent. I can do the roll call vote.

I guess I'm a first. I do need a second.

We do have to. So you made the motion.

Sure.

And does that motion include authorizing?

I will fix it, yeah.

To make those?

To make those changes, yeah.

Is there a second?

Second.

Great.

Member Miller?

Excellent.

I'll now do the roll call vote.

One moment.

Commissioner McGee?

Accept as presented.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

I agree.

Yeah.

Commissioner Sala.

Yes.

Commissioner Cook.

Yes.

Commissioner Miller.

Yes.

Commissioner Johnston.

Yes.

Commissioner Goris is absent.

Commissioner Novello.

Yes.

Commissioner Jorofsky.

Yes.

Commissioner Paschal.

Yes.

Commissioner Fry Lucas.

Yes.

Commissioner Rosa is absent.

And Chair Georgiouf.

Yes.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Excellent.

All right.

Moving on to number five.

Approval of the 2026 measure you community outreach engagement and commissions communication strategy. I think this will wait

Am I mixing one this is is this

Member solid yes, okay, I'm sorry. Do you want to present this one?

Yeah, so we met

In October

With there was a few of us

that met with community engagement and we discussed ways that we could work with the

community engagement department in being and not reinventing the will but leveraging what

they're already out there once a month in the community doing they have their City Connect

programs and that they do once a month and other and there were other

strategies that we came up with and we did have a great discussion about this

City Connect taking that opportunity because I know I attend there's a couple

of commissioners that I've seen go and we're there but that making it more

formal that we really try to go particularly when it's in in a district

that there is a commissioner in the district they try to pick different

areas where they hold these events and I try to go to to most of them when my

calendar allows it but that it be more strategic and that commissioners go and

and then we're visible, we're there.

They'll introduce us.

We can say a little something.

We thought of having, that's where we would have our table.

We would have your dashboard there.

And it's not good for them to just have information to hand out to people

unless a commissioner is there that can be by the table

and can talk and engage and have that dialogue,

it still remains to be an unknown for a lot of people.

What measure you?

I still get questions all the time.

What is measure you actually being funded, et cetera?

So if we have the dashboard there, not that this one would be ready,

but we can have last year's, which is ready.

and we could have a copy of the ordinance, have a table,

and we would be there and have a dialogue.

That would get more information out there to those that attend.

On average, there might be like 25 to sometimes 50 people in attendance, even more.

And so we came up with strategies, and I'm not going to read it.

You can read it and see what the strategies are around the City Connect.

We also spoke about wearing a T-shirt that identifies us, a different color,

because they have, so the way they identify a city staff is they wear the Hawaiian lays,

and that's how you know it's a city staff.

We talked about maybe having some way that we could be identified.

I just think if we're by the table and we're there and we're talking with people, that that would identify where we're identified as Measure U and people can ask us questions.

They also said they would introduce us.

and then the other one that's an important one that I know that we have

discussed and shared with all of you is the importance of getting surveys being

able to talk to the community in some way and having simple questions about

measure you that we want information that maybe the community surveys not

giving us exactly what we want is asking our city council.

So my council member is going to be having a community forum in the next few weeks.

So I've approached her to see if she would allow me as her commissioner to ask.

We can just, you know, just the questions that we asked that were developed at the last survey

that was done by Stanford Settlement, taking a few of those questions and just asking people

there, not reinventing the will, but engaging at that community meeting that she's holding

and asking questions and collecting information from that neighborhood, that community, and

having all of the commissioners do the same thing with their council members, whether

it's at a community meeting because they all have their community meetings at

least once a quarter so and those were kind of the the strategies we came up

with and trying to get the information out to the community about Measure U I

think that's my missing something one of the other things we talked about was

the fact that the City Connect is all over the place,

all over the city,

and what we would like to do is to have some kind of a sign

at their sign-in table or guest table

that says that we're supporting their efforts.

Oh, yeah.

This is supported by Measure U.

Oh, yes, yes.

What about that?

Yes.

In fact, just a little clarification about how to get involved as an individual commissioner

and in what has already been said would be to go to our particular district

and find out what activity our district council people are doing

and go to one a year, present a standard survey or whatever we're going to call it,

get that feedback at that time and bring it together to analyze it.

And if we each obligate ourselves to at least one event,

we'll have a lot more information about what's going on out there than we do now.

And just work with your district, one event,

and then use that as a way to get to more than 11 people.

yes and I forgot one one important piece too I think that is yeah you if you don't if you can't

go every month which I really encourage you to try it's fun and you get to meet people from

not only the staff that attend but community people that attend from different areas of

Sacramento.

But I forgot.

So Community Engagement

has a podcast

and we spoke about

that and they would

include, interview us

and do a podcast just all around

Measure U.

So that's

using their technology

and they said they would

give us a whole space

of podcast or a session

for Measure U.

And it could be several of us, one of us.

It could be our chair.

So that was the other.

I thought that was good.

The City Connect

does the events in different districts,

but you can actually go to them

and ask them to do one in your district, right?

We can actually go to them and say,

District 8 would like to have a Connect activity.

Yes.

you can actually request that they come to your district.

Right.

I think it would be pretty awesome to have a sign-up sheet

if we wanted to sort of organize between ourselves

which events people wanted to go to

and then make sure that we have good coverage.

Maybe not everyone, or not every event,

but at least if people were interested, they could sign up

and it would be cool to also go with a buddy

so you don't feel like you're alone or whatever.

Yeah, if you guys want to put something together

to make that happen, that would be awesome.

And then maybe we could just route through ASH

so we're not breaking the Brown Act or anything.

The deal is we don't know what's going on in your district.

That's why you have to contact your council person.

I see.

So these events aren't predetermined or no?

Okay, so there's the city connect,

but then there's like finding out

what your council member is doing.

Oh, I see.

It's a community event.

That's a separate.

So there should be two opportunities to be out there in your district.

One is through City Connect,

and the other would be if your council, like Vice Mayor Talamantes,

is having a community meeting.

So I'm going to be there, and I want to be able to use the dashboard,

put that out there, and then ask questions

and just engage with the community that's going to go and attend anyway.

They're going to be there to hear her.

And your neighborhood associations.

Oh, yeah, the neighborhood associations.

Just a quick clarifying question on the dashboard.

In the past, we had a paper fact sheet that we haven't updated.

Happy to update that and provide you copies with it.

I was just, as a clarifying question, on the dashboard,

were you actually talking about like bringing a computer no no no no no oh just the just the

printout yeah fact sheet oh that's okay that's too much the first time i try to show someone

they'll walk away from me it would be interesting also because you mentioned uh survey questions

like even just like a simple like we have like a big i don't know like chalkboard where people

can just like mark what they think is like the most important or something or i don't know just

to make it a little bit larger to get people interested

or something like that would maybe be cool.

Definitely something real simple.

Yeah, yeah.

Or put like a ticket in a box or I don't know,

something interesting.

And then you can even raffle something off at the end.

Whoever participated, I don't know, anyway.

Okay, so then I guess are there next steps

that you guys want to take on this

or what are you guys thinking as next step for the commission?

What? What are you asking?

I guess what do you want us to do next?

What are our next steps with this?

Well, I think it's getting,

my understanding is getting all of you,

we're proposing it, bringing it to you

as our strategic plan, having a discussion,

which it sounds like we kind of did,

and then approving it as going forth.

Okay.

Right?

Sure.

Yeah, sounds good.

Are there any other comments on this?

Anything that needs to be added or clarifying?

Member Miller or Member Cook?

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify.

You mentioned getting feedback from people while you're out there doing these events.

And, you know, you mentioned a few different kind of creative ways,

but is there a thought about doing, like, our own survey?

Like, using a SurveyMonkey or something like that?

That's what we're saying.

Yes.

Okay.

So would you have, like, a QR code that people could enter it on their, do it on their phones?

Oh.

Oh, no, but that's the QR code.

No, but that's.

So you're talking about a paper survey.

Well, because I'm old school, but I know that no one's going to do it if I do it that way.

But a QR code, that's an easy way to get it.

And it's simple.

They can fill it out right then and there.

or we should just have a simple

one, two, three, I would say simple

what's your name, blah, blah, blah

what do you think you're going to be

you know you just have a question

you write it down

you have interaction with the community

three or four questions are always the same

and then

you write it because you're talking to the person

and then they go away

then you talk to someone else

because we're also talking about interaction with our community

and our council members.

Or maybe we can just do both.

Yeah, I think we can talk about that.

Younger people aren't going to want to be.

Yeah.

Look at you and say, what?

They're going to want to do the QR code.

But maybe we can do both.

I think that's a good idea.

Member Drozdowski.

Yeah, I really like these ideas.

I think one thing I would add when we're going to these

is trying to encourage folks to come to these meetings.

as part of that outreach.

I know we've talked about this a little bit

within the commission,

but we don't get a whole lot here,

but this is actually because of the nature of our group.

We're talking about the things

that are the highest priorities for the communities

and we've all watched or attended a city council meeting.

It's very hard to have an opportunity to speak at those

or to be able to have an opportunity to talk about an issue that maybe isn't on the agenda

or even get to speak to something that's on the agenda.

Here's an opportunity for folks to be able to come,

to be able to hear what the different programs are doing, to talk about priorities.

And we have plenty of time and space for them to be able to share.

And we can hear from them, too, when we're thinking about making our recommendations

for future budget years, too, because we're here to represent them.

And so this is a great place for them to be able to come and talk about those priorities.

And there's actually space for them to get to do that.

So I think really encouraging people that, you know, if you can't go to city council meeting, if it's difficult to be able to speak, if you're nervous to do it at something like that, too.

Right. There's always a big crowd or it can feel really intimidating with all the different council members there.

Right. And the mayor. This is a really safe and easy space to be able to have your voice heard and be able to share that here.

yeah I like that thinking so when we go whether it's at a community meeting or

we go to the City Connect we should look out what so the City Connect is always

the third Thursday of the month so that Thursday before the agenda is the City

Council agenda is printed out look at it and see what's on the agenda and say

this is going to be on the agenda,

but because it's budget time right now,

and for now, for here on out,

for most of them,

it's going to be talking about the budget.

We're also talking about the budget,

and we're also engaging and making priorities

that's going to influence the budget,

so you can come.

I think that's a great suggestion

to encourage attendance to come and make it interesting

in how it connects to what's happening on the city council.

Member Novello.

Hi, everyone.

I'm going to state this and try to be as careful as I can.

One, could you please appoint me to that ad hoc, please?

I think I have been asking for specific write-ups

or what the strategy is, because right now we are talking about different things

and we are speaking in different languages and where we then go into adding a little bit more confusion

when we go out to the public.

I think there's a point where we all have to come together, really realize what is the objective,

what is the language that we're using, what are the strategies, what are the synergies, what are the timelines,

how are things going to really cement in a way that really allow us to not only communicate that objective

but also be as effective as we can, you know, not only when we're in these meetings,

but also outside of that community, in that community.

So I have a lot of questions.

I have a lot of suggestions.

I think you know me enough, but I think you also know me enough that I'd rather figure that out

and really strategize in a way that is as productive as possible for everyone.

So I look forward to joining that committee and get to work, and I'll leave it there.

Thank you.

So is this an item that we vote on or what I'm hearing is that maybe this strategy.

I did send out a summary of our meeting back in early November.

So this strategy that's before us right now, what I hear, I thought I heard you saying it might not be quite ready and we need more work before we vote on it.

Is that, did I hear that correctly?

I think so.

I think that there are specific elements that I will hope and if there's anybody else who have a different perspective, please voice them.

when it comes to the type of work that we're going to be doing out there.

The objectives of, is the objective is to bring more people into these meetings?

Is the objective is for people to drive more traffic to the touch board?

Is the objective to people to just have a general understanding of what's going on?

It's all those things.

It's all, yeah.

But each one of them needs a specific type of mechanisms that may be internal and external

that we need to ensure that we not only all understand and agree that we all can utilize

to ensure that it's not only cohesive but allow us to really accomplish

or have some sort of measurable impact to our efforts.

That's what I'm trying to communicate.

Okay.

Okay.

So we will postpone this until next month,

and we'll have an amendment plan in place.

I think from my perspective,

like if there's events that are coming within the next month,

then we can jump on those or what have you.

But if we're trying to create like,

hey, what is the strategy you want to do this year?

It'd be awesome to have something in writing that's like,

and then sort of get volunteers to join in when they can or what have you to me.

But, yeah, I think if you guys want to think on it a little bit more or what have you,

it's up to you guys.

It's up to the ad hoc.

I did want to actually clarify just real quick that ad hoc,

community outreach ad hoc, currently is member Fry Lucas, member Drozdowski,

member Gorse Jr., member Pascal, member Rosa, member Sala, and now member Nevao.

Is that a line with staff?

That's seven, which is fine.

It is seven, which is one under quorum, so that's good.

Is there anyone who doesn't want to be on that but doesn't want to be on that now?

Just if somebody else wants to join or something like that.

Is it?

Because they've already been communicating.

Oh, it'd have to be a new ad hoc.

Sure.

What?

Good point.

Okay, fair enough.

It's got to remain unless we wanted to remake a new for like 2026 year ad hoc.

Then we could shuffle up people who like leave and join.

So Member Rosa, is he still here?

I believe so.

Because he has not participated in any of our discussions.

He had a conflict tonight.

It's actually the homeless point in time counts.

Oh, that's right.

He volunteered for that to help count unhoused individuals

and couldn't make it tonight.

Okay.

Okay, I guess unless there's any other speakers on this,

then we can move on to the next one.

Good deal.

Okay.

For the record, I have no public speakers on the item.

Yep, okay.

Then we'll move on to number six.

and I guess we'll try to finish in the next 30.

So the next agenda item is

development of fiscal year 2026, 2027 budget recommendations.

And it says oral report here.

Yeah, I can just clarify.

We wanted to give you the opportunity

to start talking about the next year's proposed budget

as soon as possible.

So we're just going to stick this item on every agenda

until we get to a final budget adoption.

So not necessarily expecting significant discussion

at this point, but just to highlight,

one of the things that I heard in the last item

is that you wanted to invite folks to come

and potentially present their budget priorities.

So you might wanna pick a date now

and start planning around that.

It would take a lot of outreach

to get folks to show up.

And so this item is probably less about substance in terms of what your actual budget recommendations are going to be and maybe more about the process of thinking about how you want to approach giving recommendations to city council on the budget.

Next month, Pete, our director of finance, will be here to give you all just an update in terms of where we're at as a city.

I believe in May you will receive the actual proposed budget that's going to have those actual proposed cuts to close the deficit.

Potentially they could propose new revenues, but it's most likely going to be substantial cuts.

I don't even have the number at this point.

I believe it was in the ballpark of $60 million that was projected last year for the upcoming deficit.

So like I said, this item is really just for you all

to kind of discuss how you want to approach

giving your next set of budget recommendations

to the city council.

I'd also love to have on here the departments

that are going to come and present to us

like the month before.

So like I think right now the fire department

is going to come next meeting.

Is that right?

Yeah, we were actually trying to get

the fire department at this meeting.

Couldn't make it.

So, yes, we can put in that request, and then it would be great to know if one department is okay or if you want other departments, and we can continue to extend those invitations.

And then, actually, just as, like, kind of a sanity check, do you all want to try to get all the departments in before May or only the substantially funded, Measure U-funded departments?

I apologize like this was like not on my radar I know in your work plan actually it does suggest a schedule but yes we at a minimum we should be talking at every meeting what the next meeting is going to look like in terms of any department presentations that you're requesting.

Yeah, my primary reason here is so that we can sort of talk together on like what are the things we really want to dig into with this department, right?

And we can do that together ahead of time because it's very difficult to do like, you know, they come and then we hear their presentation,

but we, I don't know, it's a little bit like maybe too late or something like that to like get ahead of the curve.

And then on top of that, it also gives them time to prepare.

So if we have questions, like there have been times where someone has come and they haven't been able to answer our questions or they would like need to get back to us.

we can change the expectation to be like, well, we gave you, you know, we were giving you the

questions 30 days ahead of time, essentially, and that way they can come prepared for those

sorts of questions. Anyway, Member McGee. Thank you, Ash, for the gentle jog of memory.

And so two things. Oh my gosh, I'm drawing a blank. I was thinking. So May is the date deadline

for when we should kind of have our rubric together of what we want to do. So May is the

deadline and then secondarily i know um previously last year we were kind of in a cadence of having

the department so what my question we that we get the departments that didn't get to come before us

that are remaining to start and head up so we can have at least one complete like round of seeing all

the departments and then go forward and maybe think about how we want to focus on for this year

But I think, so that's a clarifying question as well.

So there were a few departments that we didn't get to see,

because I know we didn't meet in, I believe, November,

and then we didn't meet in December.

So we should have some departments that did not get a chance to come before us

from last year before we start looking at this year.

That's the complete thought.

Yeah, I'll quickly add, I don't want to show my screen again,

but in the dashboard, since they're kind of in order

from most measure you funding to least measure you funding

in terms of those bar charts

and how they're laid out in the left column.

I will say we got through Convention and Cultural Services,

which was at 3.6 million.

Below that, you start to get into some somewhat obscure,

well, not obscure, I should say.

The Office of Public Safety Accountability

is under mayor counsel

because they actually report directly to the council, not the city manager.

So they have $2 million in Measure U funding.

They had a change in leadership last year, and so they were unable to present.

But below that, I just wanted to flag the three other departments are human resources,

information technology, and city attorney.

I don't want to downplay those departments.

I just kind of want to transparently share with you what the specific programs are,

just so we don't go invite the city attorney's office and then you show up and you're like,

oh, they have $300,000.

I'll just read it to you.

Increase staffing to address legal mandates related to the release of police videos and documents.

If you want to have that presentation on $300,000 in Measure U funds,

we can extend that invitation.

But IT would be, information technology would be

kind of systems and infrastructure, that's at $450,000.

It includes 311 and a few other systems.

And then human resources does have our Office of Diversity

and Equity at $500,000.

They're doing some pretty interesting work.

You all might be interested around specifically metrics

and results-based accountability.

So all of that is to say, just to put a bow on this,

the departments you did not hear from

were Office of Public Safety Accountability,

Human Resources, Information Technology,

and City Attorney.

So I would just want to pose to the commission

the question of do you want to hear from one

or all of those departments,

or do you want to take a pass on some of them?

I'll start and just say,

I think we definitely need to hear from the Office of Diversity and Equity.

They came and presented their GIS tool before, and it was fascinating.

And the fact that we're both trying to do metrics-based accountability

seems imperative that we talk to each other.

So that one's huge.

The other one, with the city attorney department,

I don't know if we need a presentation,

but there have been, in our survey that we did internally, just us,

where we were like, what are the things that we think don't necessarily fit within Metro U?

legal mandates related to release of police videos and documents we don't

think necessarily there was a good plurality of people who didn't think

that this fit but because it's like a it's a mandate it's not like something

that it's just something that city has to do it's not something that we're like

you know trying to foster in our community sort of like the ADA renovations

obviously important stuff but it's not necessarily something that measure you

feels responsible for so I don't know if we need necessarily a presentation from

them but regardless I'll let other people talk on this as well. Or Member

McGee did you have any final thoughts? Thank you for that. Based on what you

said you know for me personally just myself I would want to see all of them

like even like the legal office right because like I don't really know what I

mean I know what they do fundamentally but it might be interesting to see I

know I'm trying to I was trying to not look at Angel. I was trying to like not look that way but I think it would be

interesting right even though like it's not a priority if we can maybe get them within one

meeting so it's not extended if we can just have one session focused on getting those four offices

in because we might find out something that we didn't know that is impactful to our city and to

our residents that is just not surface and to our knowledge base so for me i would want to see all

of them but i'm flexible i'm not invested that's fair also given like our shorter time presentation

preference, like maybe they can just be like five minutes and then they can leave or something

like that. That would be fine. Okay, noted.

Member Cook or Member Miller?

I think if a department or program receives funding from Measure U, they're obligated to speak

to the Measure U Commission. It doesn't matter if it's $300,000 or $500,000.

Office of Public Safety is $2 million a year budget. That's a lot of money

and it's crazy to think that relative to other budgets we should consider

not having them present no like they should present if they receive measure you funding

and I think there's actually a problem what I'm noticing is that departments are not compelled

to speak to this commission like the Office of Public Safety many reasons they didn't speak like

last year I think that was a reschedule the fire department was supposed to speak didn't speak

whatever it seems a pattern is emerging where departments which receive funding from measure u

are not incentivized to actually speak to this commission and that's a problem so i'll take it

a step further and say every department needs to speak to the measure u commission to present their

vision and if they can't be bothered to even come here for an hour they shouldn't receive funding

and it should be a hard line no from us because these are millions of dollars we're running a

budget deficit. It's not unreasonable to get them to take an hour out of their day to present

their priorities for the Measure U funding. If they can't do that, they shouldn't receive the budget.

Fair enough. Member Smith?

Simply this, I think we might be putting the cart ahead of the horse.

In earlier meetings, we discussed not only having departments come to meet with us,

but we also discussed whether or not there should be a format to their presentations.

We said we were going, or maybe I said this and saw a bunch of you nodding.

Maybe I thought, I don't know.

But there seemed to be some agreement around the idea of having them present their program

and then answer perhaps a standard set of questions regarding their metrics.

We talked about that during one of our meetings.

Yeah, we did.

Okay.

Well, anyway, I think that before we have them talk to us,

we probably need to tell them what we want them to talk to us about.

That being said, we also might want to give a few departments the opportunity

to speak to some of the things that we identified as stuff

we don't want them to present on.

John, by the way, I'm just going to say this.

I go both ways.

I'm of two minds about this.

In this document, we basically, we set forth this principle that departments should prioritize

impact over activities where possible, and I agree with that on some level.

It makes no sense to talk to how many people participated when it's not relevant to the impact the program is supposed to have.

I would even go so far as to say that some of the 311 metrics that we're seeing aren't relevant to what the program is supposed to do until it is.

If we're talking about an arts program, for example, how many people attended is entirely relevant to that.

The same with childhood literacy and, you know, if we really want to bake our noodles.

Every time a department does a survey, how many people participate in that survey is entirely relevant,

not only to the credibility of the survey and its results,

but also to whether or not the survey effort was worth the money that was spent on it.

Surveys are incredibly expensive.

So, again, I think that we probably need to start with setting up a format.

And I don't know if that has to be for, if we can set up one format for all departments,

or if we have to go through an iterative process where we think of specific questions to ask specific departments.

But that's my thinking at the moment.

Member Johnson.

In the interest of trying to keep this to two hours, I will just say I agree with everything that has been said.

I think everyone should come here.

I think most people here have been through the process now for the last year, and we're going to be a lot more efficient

and know what we're going to ask them and ask of them to be prepared for.

So I think that should happen.

Member McGee?

Agreed with Commissioner Johnson, please.

I'm sorry.

I can't see that far.

But just one point.

Thank you. Thank you. That part. And I'm wearing my glasses. But I just want to say, I don't think we should prep them with questions because I don't want a prefabricated response. Like, if you are doing the work and you are doing what you say you did with the money, like, to some degree, you should be able to speak to the impact of your work.

You might not be able to give the specifics of numbers and details,

but I feel like if we pre-present the questions, yeah, it's more streamlined.

You know, it might be more equitable and fair because everyone's getting the same lens of questions.

But then you have a chance to fabricate and give the answer that you think that I want to hear.

I don't want to hear the answer you think I want to hear.

I want to hear the answer of what was and what wasn't.

And I think that anyone that is getting funding that is coming to present on that

should come prepared to answer a diverse set of generalized questions

concerning their programming and their funding and their impact

and their outreach and their engagement and their methods of research

or how they're getting their data.

So that would be my only thing.

I don't think that, for me, that I would want that.

I want them to be on the cuff and give a true response.

Member Sala?

Well, and maybe not the questions, but we can state that your presentation should focus on impact, et cetera, et cetera.

These, we can just say focus, we want to hear this, because that's what I want to hear.

And what was the impact, et cetera, et cetera.

And just have some key points that we want to make sure they make.

because otherwise I think what we've seen in the past is it's a dog and pony show.

And somewhere in there you have to figure out, oh, this is what they did with the money.

So if we tell them we want you to focus on these areas,

they can still do the dog and pony,

but we're going to be sure that they're focusing on the areas that we want to hear about.

I can agree with that.

Thank you for crystallizing that thought.

I could agree with that.

And I'll just add on to that.

I agree.

The impact and how that program and the impact then ties back to and relates to the measure you priority areas, right?

So it having to tie back specifically or trace back specifically to, I mean, we already know what the category that the program is supposed to fall with under is.

So how is that impact helping to achieve the goals of that category or that priority area?

And at being specific in that way.

So we're getting kind of that whole picture.

Okay.

I mean, I think this is all great feedback.

It's pretty clear that this commission really wants all departments to present.

So maybe we can organize that.

Yes.

And I would love to know for February, beyond, it sounds like you want the fire department, or did you want to shift to the departments that you haven't heard from?

I just need a little more clarity on what we're looking for, at least for your February meeting.

and then maybe if you all want to create

like an ad hoc committee, we can work

offline and kind of figure out this

structure so we can actually provide

a specific template

or set of questions

for those departments to be able to respond

to in their presentation.

Sure. I think from my perspective

feel free to jump in anyone, but

we should probably get as many as we can

as soon as quickly, or as quickly as we can.

So whoever's willing to come in February,

I feel like we can make space.

even if it was all five, I think that's fine.

The idea here being that we already kind of mentioned

that we want their presentation part to be very small,

like 10 minutes, and then we would do the questions

after that, right?

Now, I think in terms of whether or not we give them questions

ahead of time, I think we can leave that to every commissioner.

If your question is very specific and you want to know

something very specific, then I don't see a reason

that we couldn't send that to them.

But if you want to sort of not, if you just want to hear

what they're saying from off the top of their head,

then by all means, save your question

and don't submit it.

And then in terms of what do we want to hear,

I think we can submit some,

I can write up something where,

or write an email essentially to you saying,

we want to hear about impact measures.

We're not here for,

remember, also the dog and pony show.

So like, yeah.

I don't know if we necessarily need an ad hoc

to describe that,

and I'd rather actually have sort of everyone's opinion

because I think we can do it quickly enough, but yeah.

So just to confirm the five departments

we would invite.

Are you sure you want five departments?

And then I guess maybe a time limit.

And if you want the same time limit

for all departments,

you want to kind of adjust that

based on the size of their budget.

My first guess is that most of them

won't be able to come on February.

But if that is the case,

then maybe we can talk about it.

But I think it'll be fine either way, honestly.

Okay, so the five departments are

FIRE, Office of Public Safety Accountability,

Human Resources,

specifically the Office of Diversity and Equity,

Information Technology, and City Attorney.

Is that correct?

Okay.

We will get those requests in.

Fire.

What was that?

I think fire is a bigger one.

I don't think it can fit them with the smaller ones.

I would tend to say I think we can.

The last fire presentation didn't take very long,

given they only have like the one program versus like,

and they kind of just said like this is to help with outreach

and then also like to staff the additional firehouses

because without the money they would have to close one,

I think is what they said.

But the problem was when we asked them about like,

what are your diversity stats, they didn't have that data,

which was crazy to me, but okay.

I think if we are limiting the presentations to 10 minutes,

I feel like we'll fit.

unless people feel really strongly

and they wanna spread it out,

but I think we can make space for them.

Maybe they have the, I can ask.

I can ask their neighbors, yeah.

Okay, then any final thoughts on this?

I guess there is a recommendation in this agenda item

to make an ad hoc for, basically to do what the last,

well actually this is slightly different

It says the recommendation is for the Measure U budget recommendations,

which is the yearly report.

Different than the yearly report, Ash, or not quite?

We are on item, sorry.

We are referring to item six,

where the staff recommendation is discuss the Measure U Community Advisory Commission's

desired approach to developing recommendations regarding FY 2026-27,

Measure U budget expenditures, and provide direction.

I could have sworn in the details

in the description, but no matter.

It's fine. I think we don't need to

create an ad hoc yet.

And you have the authority to create an ad hoc

without a vote, so that doesn't

even need to be motioned.

Sure.

Unless people feel that an ad hoc should be

made for this,

I'm okay with just keeping it to the

commission at large.

And then, are there any

public speakers for this agenda item?

Thank you, Chair. I have none.

Okay, I don't think we'll use an extreme amount of time the next one, but I do want to make sure that there is time for it.

So I would like to do the hour extension now just so we don't interrupt the flow of like picking chair and vice chair.

If that's cool.

Certainly.

So are you making the motion to extend the meeting?

Yeah, I don't think we'll use it that much of it, but I'll make that motion.

I hope so.

I will second.

Member McGee for second.

And then we can do a voice vote for this if we're equipped with it.

So all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any abstain or decline?

Decline the right word.

What do you say?

No.

Just say no.

Any no's?

Okay.

Yeah, sure.

Okay, great.

Well, then let's move on to the last agenda item, which is the selection of chair and vice chair.

Just to make sure it's fair for everyone, I would love to hear if there's anybody interested in these positions before we vote or even make motions to elect somebody or to push someone.

Before that, clerk's office, just to clarify, every member is eligible for both designations, chair and vice chair.

city code section 2.40 does state that a member may serve as a chairperson or vice chairperson

for no more than two calendar years and no one on this commission currently has reached that

threshold cool is there preference on going from chair to vice chair first or typically there's

nominations and elections for chair and then vice chair however if folks can make a nomination for

both and we can take a vote.

Yeah, I think we'll just do chair first and then we'll do

vice chair.

So if anyone is interested in being chair,

please feel free to

speak up and

put your name on the request to speak and then we'll give you

some time to speak for it. I'll just say

I am interested in continuing to be chair.

I'm honored to be the chair and I would love to continue doing it

for another year if you guys will have me.

But obviously if there's someone else

who's interested, please.

Member Novell.

I would state or make the motion for you to continue your chairmanship for that coming here.

A second.

Okay, before we move to the motion, though, is there anyone else who is interested in?

Wait, is anyone interested?

Okay.

We just went right to it.

Fair enough.

Yeah.

Okay, then I guess we'll take a vote on that.

Can you accept that?

I do accept, yeah.

Excellent.

And would you like me to do the roll call vote?

Sure.

Okay.

Wonderful.

One moment.

Thank you.

Commissioner McGee.

Accept.

With joy.

Commissioner Smith.

Accept.

Commissioner Sala.

Yes.

Commissioner Cook.

Accept.

Commissioner Miller.

Yes.

Commissioner Johnston.

Yes.

Commissioner Goris is absent.

Commissioner Novell.

Yes.

Commissioner Jorofsky.

Yes.

Commissioner Pascal?

Yes.

Commissioner Fry Lucas?

Yes.

Commissioner Rosa is absent and Chair Georgiouf?

Yes.

Thank you, the motion passes.

Thank you guys.

I appreciate your guys' trust in me, I really do.

So I'm happy to serve you guys for another year.

Okay, let's move on to Vice Chair.

Let's, if anyone again is interested in this position,

please feel free to queue up

and we can hear your sort of proposal for why you want to be that.

I would like to put forth my candidacy and my vote

and my desire to serve in that capacity.

It's just really been fantastic being on this commission,

and I do so many different things in community,

but sitting in this seat has given me a really broad landscape

and understanding of city legislation, government, politics,

all the things. And then I currently consult to the state of California. So for me, it's like I'm at

the state level seeing a lot of things. And so sitting on this commission, I've seen a lot of

things. And so it would really solidify and round out my experience to really be in that role.

And it's been a joy. As busy as I am, you know, making this candidacy statement, you know,

my commitment would be that first, you know, and you're just really stepping up.

When I started, I remember I met with Commissioner George Off, and we had a great meeting, and

it's just been really great to see you step into this, because we never imagined that

when we were sitting at coffee, but here we are, and so I think you're doing a fantastic

job, and I would love to partner with you.

Okay, awesome.

Member Novello, is that an old hand or a...

Sure, no problem.

Is there anyone else who is interested in the position of vice chair?

Okay, fair enough.

If no one else is interested, then, of course, I will give Member McGee my full support,

and I would second a motion.

Oh, actually, I'll first that motion.

I'll make the motion that she can be vice chair.

If there's a second.

I'd like to second.

And I think Commissioner McGee has really added a lot of thoughtfulness and depth to our discussion.

I'd really like to see her step into that leadership role.

I'm glad she's interested.

Okay.

Then let's do a roll.

Thank you, commissioners.

Commissioner McGee?

Yes, with Joy.

Commissioner Smith?

Yes.

Commissioner Sala?

Yes.

Commissioner Cook?

Yes.

Commissioner Miller?

Yes.

Commissioner Johnston?

Yes.

Commissioner Goris is absent.

Commissioner Novell?

Yes.

Commissioner Jorofsky?

Yes.

Commissioner Paschal?

Yes.

Commissioner Fry Lucas?

Yes, with Joy.

Commissioner Rosa is absent.

And Chair Georgiouf?

Absolutely.

Thank you.

The motion passes.

Congratulations, Member McGee.

Okay, and on that, we'll move on to metrics and ad hoc committee updates.

Oh, wait, are there any public speakers on this last agenda item?

Oh, thank you for the record.

There are none.

Okay, cool.

So the metrics ad hoc, again, I think to iterate sort of point, was it agenda item four?

or no, agenda item three actually,

where if you guys can review the dashboard,

report back to Ash any questions or concerns

that you guys have or if you've written down

some information about like,

hey, I'm curious as to like why this program

is costing us so much when they're doing it

in some other city cheaper or whatever the metrics

that you're interested in maybe your feedback may be.

Please funnel that to Ash and he will funnel it

to the metrics ad hoc and we'll process it there, I guess.

cool that's pretty much the only update for metrics

anything else that I'm missing from metrics ad hoc people

no okay cool then we'll move on to community engagement I think we've

already gotten a pretty good update on that

the 2025 annual report 2026 work plan ad hoc committee

this should probably be absolved

yes we can bring that item to the next commission meeting

Okay.

Where you'll formally vote to...

Do we have to formally vote or can they...

Yes.

Okay.

So we have to formally vote to end but not to create.

Correct.

Interesting.

And it's mainly because we have to put in the public record a report of what the ad hoc's activities were.

Sure.

So that's mainly...

Makes sense.

Okay.

And then Commissioner, comments, ideas, and questions?

Connor, do you have something you want to say?

I'm sorry.

I do have one.

To what you said, Ash, in terms of putting in that report, where is that report shared out?

Oh, it'll be on the next agenda.

So you'll actually have an agenda item that is to, I'm sorry, dissolve.

Dissolve is the word, to dissolve the 2025 annual report and 2026 work plan ad hoc committee.

And then in that staff report, we'll have just kind of a record of what that ad hoc committee accomplished.

and then you'll vote to receive that report and dissolve the committee.

Thank you.

It'll probably be on consent calendar as well.

Yes.

Good point.

Okay.

So, yeah, back to the commissioner comments, ideas, and questions.

Yeah.

I just alluded earlier on that I've been debating whether I want to write,

I've already kind of did when I joined the commission,

like what is it that we do and what's our purpose

and what is the measure you goal.

and there was some discussion offline

of whether this should be a formal thing.

I think I'm just gonna write something real quick,

and then maybe just see if you guys think about it.

I've written, unfortunately,

hundreds of legal memos in my career.

I don't want this to be too formalistic,

but just putting all the information,

like the ballot measures,

what the Mayor Steinberg said during it,

and kind of just aggregating the information

of this is the universe of what Measure U is,

just so new commissioners and current commissioners

have a better idea of the landscape

of what our responsibilities are and kind of the mandate,

which, you know, jumping ahead, it's very ambiguous,

is probably the ultimate conclusion of it.

And today's kind of discussion, I think, amplifies that.

And again, I don't think that's necessarily bad,

but I think having a kind of clear, concrete idea

of what the bounds are might help us.

So I don't wanna promise that I'll do it in the next month,

but it's something that's on my to-do list,

and we didn't know when it would be a good time

to talk about it, so we just said maybe just at the end.

So there's nothing I think to add other than maybe you'll get something in the next month, maybe you'll not.

And I would welcome feedback on it if I do give it to you.

Awesome.

Yeah, I appreciate you taking this on.

Cool.

Any other comments, ideas, and questions?

If not, any public comments, matters not on the agenda?

Thank you, Chair.

I have none.

Okay.

Then we can be adjourned before the hour even.

Thank you.

Thank you.