Good afternoon.

I'd like to ask the interpreter currently on the Spanish channel to commence interpretation of the meeting.

For those just joining the meeting, live interpretation in Spanish is available, and members of the public or staff wishing to listen in Spanish can join the Spanish channel by clicking on the interpretation icon in the zoom toolbar.

It looks like a globe.

If you're on your cell phone or tablet, locate the three dots, tap them lightly and put a check mark on your preferred language.

Qualquer member del public o del personal que desee escuchar in espanhol, se puede unir al canal in espanhol a click in el icono del globo terrachio que verán ustedes in la parte de abajo de su pantalla de Zoom.

So they seen in un teléfono celular or in una tableta.

In mudo para escuchar solamente la interpretación in Espanyol.

Muchas gracias.

Back to you.

Welcome everyone.

The time is 2 31 and we'll call this meeting order.

Madam City Clerk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Council Member Rogers.

President.

Councilmember OK.

Here.

Councilmember McDonald.

Here.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Ben Willows here.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Mayor Stopp.

Here.

Let the record reflect all council members are present with the exception of Councilmember Fleming and Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Thank you very much.

We'll move ahead to our closed session items.

Items 3.2 and 3.3 both were conferences with legal counsel on existing litigation, have both been continued to the August 5th, 2025 regular meeting.

We will proceed with item 3.1, which is our a conference with legal counsel on anticipated litigation, and item 3.4, our conference with real property negotiators.

Are there any public are there any members of the public who wish to comment on either of these items?

Seeing seeing none, did you wish to We have Tom?

Oh Tom, my apologies, Tom.

Good afternoon, uh members of council, uh, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh I'm Tom Robertson.

I've been involved in Santa Rosa and in particular downtown for a long time, really going back to 1990.

Uh our company has had a commitment here.

Uh we did the restoration of the old uh Rosenberg Department Store building and uh brought Barnes and Noble to downtown a long time ago.

It seems like a lifetime.

In any case, uh, we're now joining with uh Rob Robinson, my partner, to build uh 425 Humble Apartments project, which is the 299 market rate uh mid-rise mixed use apartment building with a commercial space.

Uh we're doing very, very well.

Uh we have the funding lined up.

We're waiting for the approval of the bank loan, which we've been told by both the banks representatives and the equity sponsor who's arranging it, that it is a very easy loan to approve.

We expect that any day now, really, and our hope is that we'll be able to break ground uh either late this month or early next month.

In any event, uh I really can't talk about this project without complimenting the staff from top to bottom in the city.

It's really been a fantastic experience.

We began eight months ago with nothing.

Uh the project was approved from a design review standpoint in 90 days, which I don't know the city record, but it's way up there in terms of any approvals for a project of this size in California.

Uh we of course are working in the downtown uh where you have your new stationary stationary uh upgrade plan.

Uh we hope to sort of kick start this and get it going.

Uh, 299 uh units will be a win-win for the city.

Uh you've been kind enough to find us a grant for infrastructure, off-site infrastructure, and we're hoping for additional funding.

So there are going to be some moments over the next uh month when we'll probably be talking to you guys again and hoping for continued support.

But your support, the support of the staff, simply phenomenal.

Uh and I really believe that we get this project going.

You have a uh 420 mendocino project completed and running units and it's going well.

And we're going to get this uh stationary plan moving, and I I can't thank you enough for all the support and look forward to further support and a solid relationship with you folks.

And of course, if you have any questions, uh, we'll make ourselves available, Rob and myself, over the coming weeks, uh and look forward to meeting with some of you uh to talk about the downtown, but more particularly obviously our project.

Thank you very much.

Welcome back, everyone.

The time is four o'clock, and we'll reconvene.

Madam City Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilmember Rogers.

Council Member O'Kepkey here.

Councilmember McDonald.

Here.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Ben Wellos.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Mayor Stapp.

Here.

Let the record reflect all council members are present with the exception of Councilmember Fleming.

Thank you.

We'll move to item six point one, our report on closed session.

Madam City Attorney.

And its mission of helping individuals and families affected by mental health conditions to build better lives through education, support, advocacy, and by raising public awareness.

Now, therefore it be it resolved that our mayor, Mark Stapp, on behalf of the entire city council, in recognition of our community, do hereby extend heartfelt congratulations to NAMI Sonoma County on this milestone and commendation for its outstanding contributions to the health of our communities.

NAMI Sonoma County, 40th anniversary.

Wonderful.

And do we have Mary Francis Walsh here to speak?

Oh, please visit whatever microphone is closest.

Maybe that one in the top corner or whatever whatever's closest to you.

We'd love to have you say a few words.

Thank you, Mayor Staff, and thank you to the council members.

Um I'm here with two of my colleagues, Nick Fierro, who's our communications coordinator, and Hannah Casita, our program coordinator.

And we're a pinprick of the community that creates NAMI Sonomi County.

So many of our programs are carried out by family members and individuals with lived experience.

People who know what it's like to deal with serious mental illness, to have somebody in and out of an emergency department, somebody in and out of jail, somebody hospitalized, and not know quite how to navigate the system to get help and get support and feel comfortable talking about it.

So thank you.

We do this work because it means so much to us personally.

We we all have our own lived experience and we appreciate the recognition.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for the incredible work that NAMI does for the community, and thanks to the entire team for being here today.

We want to do a photo in just a few seconds, but before we do that, we're going to open this up to public comment.

Are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Ma'am, you're standing by the podium.

Are you wishing to speak?

Wonderful.

All right, thank you very much.

Seeing none, we'll close public comment and we'll ask the NAMI team to come down to the front so we can take a photo.

Thank you again to the NAMI team, and we'll move on to item nine point one: our city manager and city attorney's reports.

Madam City Manager.

Or assistant assistant city manager.

There's a there was a switch here.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Jason Nutt, Assistant City Manager.

Um, have one update today.

Uh, the 2025 fall winter, uh fall winter activity guide from Santa Rosa Recreation and Parks will be available beginning this Thursday, July 24th.

It's produced in English and in Spanish and will be available online at Santa Rosa Rec.com or can be picked up at Finlay Community Center.

Registration for all programs begin at 7 a.m.

on Thursday, July 31st.

Hopefully, we'll have uh great registration and a lot of fun coming this uh this upcoming fall winter.

Thank you.

That does it for me.

That's a good update.

Thank you, Assistant City Manager Nutt, Madam City Attorney.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I do have a litigation report uh for June.

Um there were no settlements previously authorized by council in closed section that were finalized in the month of June.

Uh our caseload remains relatively constant.

We have 33 current litigation matters.

Many cases are currently assigned or currently in the discovery phase with trial dates assigned to most.

We have a few in the appellate stage.

As always, we continue to try to resolve smaller cases at little or no cost to the city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We move on then to item 10, our statements of abstention or recusal by council members.

Are there any statements of abstention or recusal this evening?

There are none.

Item 11.

Mayor and council members' reports.

Are there any reports from council this evening?

Ms.

McDonald.

Thank you, Mayor.

I have a few things to report out on.

The um first, I'd like to start off by appointing uh someone new to the board of parks and recreation.

Um she's here this evening.

Um, our my former appointee Omar Lopez had to resign since he recently moved out of the city of Santa Rosa limits.

So I want to publicly thank him for his time and dedication to that board.

But I am excited that Keating Vogel is going to be representing district three.

She moved here from Tiburon in uh 2020 and lives in uh our district.

She's a tax accountant, so she has a background in uh finance as well as some IT support that I see on her bio.

But most impressive is she is a marathon runner and has uh ran the half marathon in Santa Rosa twice, and is an avid hiker and loves the outdoors in our parks and finds um like I do the importance of having open spaces.

We move to the Invil Housing, specifically in the downtown area.

She's married and has two kids and has two grandchildren, and so please join me in welcoming Keating to the board.

And then I'd just like to briefly announce I appreciate that Kating was so forward thinking that she put in an application in advance.

So when um there are uh seats that become available in our districts, having those on file is really important for us to know who's available in our districts, and to have that process already done makes it so that it's easier to appoint somebody when we do have a vacancy.

So I want to say thank you for for the ad that went into the Press Democrat from our staff and also for your forward thinking of having that in place.

Um it may it brought me much delight to see such qualified applicants, so thank you.

Um I also attended the ribbon cutting at 420 Mendocino, the new Felix building, and just want to congratulate the developers on such a job well done downtown.

I was there with many of my colleagues, and they might have more to add to that, but want to say thank you for that development that's going through, and it's exciting to see so many units um becoming available in our downtown area.

I attended the first public safety committee meeting this morning, and uh Councilmember O'Krepke will be reporting out on that.

As chair of the violence prevention program, I have some things to report out.

Santa Rosa PD did a presentation on scams that are happening in our community, specifically on how um young uh grandchildren are um are uh not really calling their grandparents, but they're asking their grandparents, they're scamming them to get money from them.

They're saying that they're going to send a carrier to their home to pick up gift cards to pick up money um to help get them out of jail.

And so I think it's really important that people are aware that this is happening.

I know it's happened in my district, and so um it was great to have a presentation from SRPD.

There's information that they have on their website around those scams and how to make sure that we're being um you know cautious when we have those fake calls from grandkids saying that they're in distress, that they have a DUI.

There's a lot of place uh places that we've been dealing with these kinds of things.

We also are working with some of our faith-based organizations on a graffiti abatement program, and so we'll be um just in the beginning talks of how we can work um with the city as well as um our organizations to help support houses in residential areas that continuously get tagged.

And so we were excited to hear that.

Um August 2nd in Julia Juilliard Park, there'll be a backpack and school supplies giveaway to those who need that.

It starts at 10 30, and that will support transitional kindergarten through eighth grade.

Um we also know that there's been a lot of reportings on um distress that ice is in certain parts of our community, and so one of the things that SRPD um had available was information on the website of how to find out who's in your neighborhood and always feel free to call dispatch and find out what officers are working in our neighborhoods.

Um, this is an effort to let people know when our officers are out there or sheriffs are out there that not all of them are ICE.

And so please work with our officers so that we can be there to protect the community, but also know that there's a way to get information so that you can find out who's in your neighborhood and feel safe.

Let's see.

Um we have a couple of youth empowerment groups and pro social activity groups happening this summer.

One of them is a teen culinary job training program, and I understand tomorrow they're going to be able to uh test some of that culinary training at the Finley Center.

I'm not able to attend, but I hope some of the council is able to.

And finally, I just want to say thank you to Boy Scout Troop 121 that put in our 650 feet of split rail fence in the Skyhawk uh community park as part of an Eagle Scout project led by Nick Gundy.

So this is just such a great example of collaboration between parks department and our volunteers to enhance our parks and bring our community members together.

So thank you, Nick Gundy, for choosing District Three and uh Skyhawk Community Part uh for your Eagle Scout uh job, and I wish you the best of luck on getting that.

Thank you, Miss McDonald.

Ms.

Rogers.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to give a um brief report out on an activity that I was able to um take partake in, although I did not get in the pool.

So um our work experience program here at the city, we had 255 uh participants, um youth that participated in that program, and I found it really fascinating to know that they volunteered 25,000 hours between the 255 participants this summer for that program.

Some of them it was the first summer that they have participated, um, and many of them they keep returning.

Um I was told that Santa Rosa has the best summer job ever.

But most of them are volunteers, so they don't get paid, but we're still the best.

So I really love that.

I wanted to yet again thank them for their service to our community, thank their parents, some of them for driving them back and forth to whatever site um they were assigned, and continue to come back because the community needs you, the children that you are serving need you.

Um but thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

O'Krupke.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um today this morning, uh bright and early, we had the um public safety subcommittee meeting, and the two major items were first the measure H implementation plan update, which uh for those that did not attend and unless you were online you didn't.

Um it is our uh countywide tax measure for our fire services, and uh some exciting news to come out of that is that um the approved funding so far includes our uh one new uh heavy rescue engine uh which helps with uh shoring up buildings and collapses in cases of collapse or uh trench collapse, uh very specialized things, as well as doing the the um day-to-day medical response that uh most of our fire engines do.

It'll be the first heavy rescue in the county.

Um it'll be not just a great resource for the city, but also countywide on mutual aid that's expected to go into service on July 1st of 2026.

But more exciting is that uh we will have a new engine, engine nine, that will start service on October 6th of this year, as well as battalion two.

Uh engine nine will temporarily be at a station one until we find its permanent home, and then uh station five um will accommodate battalion two, and when you hear me say station five, that is also because station five uh will be completed this fall as well and open.

And if you have not gone over Fountain Grove recently, uh it's a pretty remarkable site to see.

Um, in addition, we had an update on the downtown enforcement team who responded to uh 2400 calls last year and uh made 650 arrests.

The downtown enforcement team not only participates or not only uh covers downtown as a special enforcement area, but also is the um default uh um homeless uh uh enforcement um and advocacy portion of the police department um because of them there are no no large encampments currently within the city of Santa Rosa based on the point-in-time count, uh homelessness is down 23% because Santa Rosa has the largest share of the unhoused population.

We expect that to be a very similar decrease here, and uh most impressive is in uh uh partnership with our transportation public works department uh because of them they were able to remove over 1,300 yards of trash and refuse uh left behind.

Um, so uh big thanks to the downtown enforcement team.

Uh with that I will end my report.

Thank you.

And just three quick items from me.

On the ninth, I had the uh the pleasure of presenting with Mayor Gerard Judici of Roener Park and Mayor Rosa Reynosa of Windsor.

We did a panel presentation at the Business Alliance of Sonoma County, uh talking about our respective budget situations and how we are how we are working together and with other cities in Sonoma County and with the county itself to do things more efficiently, particularly in the area of homeless services, as we've talked about here in the past.

And so we had the chance to speak to about a hundred and fifty attendees that morning, and there will be more events like this.

Uh, there's great collaboration between cities in the county right now and the county itself.

Uh and then on the 10th, I attended the Sonoma Clean Power Board meeting um in place of Ms.

Fleming, who is traveling, where we got an update on the Lake County expansion project.

As we have talked about in the past, Sonoma Clean Bower has the great project underway of trying to take its operations over to Lake County to provide green energy over in the county where a lot of that energy is produced in the geysers, doing really nice things for the rural residents of Lake County.

So we got an update on that.

Uh and then as Ms.

McDonald mentioned, I think almost all of us were at the Felix Ribbon Cutting uh last week, which was just fantastic.

168 units downtown.

Um it's the just the perfect symbol of what we want for our downtown area.

Um residents love it, we love it, and lots of lots of other interesting plans for our downtown area in the future.

Um so stay tuned for more good news.

And with that, I'll conclude my report.

Oops, Ms.

Rogers.

Um, I just wanted to say that I was able to attend the SETCA, um, because Councilmember O'Krefke was unable to attend.

Um, and there were two things that I wanted to report out for that one.

And action was taken to continue um with the vehicle miles travel mitigation program uh for Sonoma County.

That was approved to continue that.

And then the second thing was a there was a projected uh completion date for the hearn overpass of November of this year.

So that is pretty exciting.

And that the and the second part of the old Hern overpass was demolished about a week ago.

So that in itself is pretty exciting, especially for those of us that live on that side of town and are watching this being put together.

So thank you, Mayor.

That's a great update.

We're all looking forward to that ribbon cutting.

And with that, we'll go to public comment on this item.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on any of the reports that we've given?

Seeing none, we'll go to item 12, approval of minutes.

We have we are reviewing the July 8th, 2025 meeting minutes.

Were there any edits, corrections?

Seeing none, we can adopt the minutes as submitted, and we can go on to consent.

Madam City Clerk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Well, I'm gonna interrupt myself because Ms.

Banwelo has just reminded me that we do have to do public comment on the minutes.

I like to forget that at least once every meeting.

Are there any public comment on the minutes?

Indeed, has there ever been public comment on the minutes?

Seeing none, we will move on to item 13 consent.

Madam City Clerk.

Okay, item 13.1 is a motion.

Contract award, Roseland Pavement Maintenance 2025.

Item 13.2 is a resolution.

Go Sonoma Cooperative Funding Agreement.

Item 13.3 is a resolution.

Santa Rosa City Bus Public Transit Agency Safety Plan 2025 update.

Item 13.4 is a resolution.

Approval and issuance of a purchase order to pro force marketing incorporated for the purchase of new duty handguns and accessories and trade-in of current inventory.

Item 13.5 is a resolution.

Extension of proclamation of local homeless emergency.

Thank you.

Bringing it back to council.

Are there any questions?

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Thank you, Mayor.

And I don't see Dan here in the but it was the question is simple.

Maybe uh, is he?

Oh, he's over highing over in the corner.

And and a yes or no suffice on the 13.1 South uh is part of that on the on the perfect.

I there's a little mark on the map that was uh provided for us, and I just want to make uh or or confirm that it is South A Street that is being worked on in that or A should I should say, or South Street.

Yeah, South Street.

Okay, thank you.

That was all and he nodded to say that it is indeed the street we worked on, and that answers my question.

Thank you.

Miss Ben Willows.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I had just a few questions on um uh item 13 point four.

And I was wondering if maybe there he is.

The chief is if he could um answer just a couple of questions, please.

Why don't you come on down?

Looking looking at our meeting timing, you might be down here for a little bit, so settle in.

Thank you.

I read our training sergeant's here today, too.

So I brought him as a subject matter expert.

Oh, excellent, great.

Thank you so much.

Um, yes, I just I understand that we're replacing what you currently have, and I just had some questions around that as I was going through the um staff report.

Um speaking of training, uh what kind of training will be provided for the um let me see if I get this right, pistol mounted optics, I guess, optics is what they're called, PMOs.

Absolutely.

I'll give just the high level and I'll let our training sergeant go into even greater detail.

We have one of our full-time training officers here tonight as well.

But for us, we already have through post, which is the police officer standards and training, mandated training that our officers are going through blocks of firearms training, both with our handguns or rifles or shotguns or less lethal weapons throughout the year.

But for us, this is the same Glock platform we have.

So it's the same nine millimeter Glock platform.

But what we're adding is these have 10 years of use with thousands of rounds and a lot of exposure out on the elements when we're out in the rain.

But there's some big upgrades that we're doing instead of traditional fixed iron sites that we have in a handgun that it has these red dot sites, which gives you like quicker target uh acquisition, but also you're able to keep both eyes open uh with it and really at the end of the day be a much more accurate shot.

And for us, like literally inches matter uh on these things, so being like so precise with this, and then also what's really important for me is that officers have a clear line of sight but view of the scene.

So these have mounted lights on them too.

So if you were going to a house or at nighttime and statistically, most police shootings occur at night.

So to make sure that officers really clearly see and what a difference it makes with them having a clear vision and be able to see, oh, that's a cell phone in someone's hand, not a firearm with it, and that and really be able to prevent maybe some shootings happen with it.

So we have uh something that we're really excited about this year.

We created two full-time training officer positions because it's so important for me, and these training officers are looking into issues at with our uses of force, with our pursuits, with anything we do and looking for training trends and really having that more upstream approach to like let's fix these problems before we start seeing them and issues on the street with it.

So our training officers have developed a post-approved training course for the transition.

So it's the same gun, but now we have the new site option with like that.

So we're gonna be going through a full day of training with our officers before they're issued the gun.

They'll have to be able to get the training with our residential experts internally, they'll have to be able to shoot and demonstrate their accurate, their use, their knowledge of those firearms.

And I'll turn over our training sergeant who has a lot more detail and he runs this team.

Thank you very much, Chief.

Uh yes, ma'am.

The chief did a great job explaining it.

I think for us, the initial training will be approximately 10 hours.

It'll cover uh target discrimination, uh, different lighting conditions, just the basic functionality of the of the system, and then we'll have continued sustainment training generally uh every eight weeks for the officers where they'll receive another four-hour block.

We'll make sure that they're comfortable with the system and they can operate it.

Uh, and then we can address kind of any anything from there.

But I think the chief's explanation is uh quite good.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

And thanks for telling me um how much time the 10 hours uh and the day and and all of that.

So, and that'll be continuing throughout the year.

I mean, do we is it how many training blocks a year are we doing with the firearms?

Uh yes, so we do uh this will be a 10-hour block, so a full day dedicated, and then uh every eight weeks.

Uh, we'll so we'll probably get another four blocks in at four hours to five hours each.

So total for a year would be about 30 to 40 hours, uh, which is uh right in line with national standards, if not a little bit higher.

Great, thank you.

Um, and then I was wondering about disposal.

Um, I think the the report indicated that it's going to be a trade-in, primarily.

Is there are there any other alternatives to that?

Because I I did read that, and I don't know how accurate that is that sometimes these end up in crimes later, uh, depending on where they get sold.

So I'm just kind of curious about um why we're only doing a trade-in and were we looking at other alternatives at all.

The trade-in all comes down to cost.

So we're basically getting a hundred thousand dollars taken off the price for trading and existing not only the handguns, but some older shotguns we had transitioned in the past with our shotguns and be able to trade in some of those with it.

The only other option we have is to have those destroyed, so it comes down to the cost.

That study is a little misleading.

I I I looked into that myself too, as like making the decision, and that's a study that gets passed around sometimes.

Uh, if you really look more into the granular details of that, it's not necessarily saying all those were involved in crimes, but had been found at crime scenes or located at crime scenes, so that could just be a residence that was associated with a firearm.

One thing that we're doing to mitigate that too is that we're working that uh our police officers could actually buy back their old firearm through the dealer, but we're not allowed, you have to be a federal license dealer to be able to do that.

We I can't do that as the police chief, so it goes into the custody of the firearm sealer, and then our officers can buy back their firearms.

So I would actually say a majority of these firearms are actually gonna go back to the police officers that they'll buy those firearms with it, they just have to buy it at a market rate from the dealer uh with it.

Uh, with it, but the reality is some will be.

So I want to be transparent in that.

Some will be held in the possession of the gun dealer and sold on the market.

But the reality is, too, that uh anywhere in Santa Rosa, anywhere in California across the nation, you can buy firearms.

So it's I think it's a difficult stretch as maybe some would argue that's saying that that they're more likely to be used in, or they're gonna be an increase in firearms.

But it comes down to us just being able to time on like being fiscally responsible with it and saving a hundred thousand dollars with our city and then hopefully mitigating some of those concerns with officers buying back those firearms.

Okay, thank you.

Um and then the last thing I was wanted to ask about was maintenance.

So when I was reading about the fiscal impacts, it looks like all of this is covered in your current budget.

Um, but I also understand that there's ongoing maintenance, so will you just be um putting that into your budget for the following year, or how how are you looking at maintenance of this kind of more high-tech?

I I felt as I was reading it a more high-tech type of weapon.

It will be, I mean, the same gun platform is the same.

So now we actually are adding just the red dot sites and the lights uh to it with it, but we're build-in, we already have budgeted, so we're not coming to council asking for additional funds during such tight times.

We basically have a savings account that we had, it was 45,000 per year that we got toward uh firearms and for ammunition and all these things, and it was like to build up.

So I've been strategically kind of saving this up uh for this purchase, so we have enough to be able to make this without asking for additional funds, and we'll be using so we did with some of the budget cuts that we got reduced to 20,000, but that's what we'll be doing.

We'll be staying within our line item budget that we have for firearm maintenance, and we have an internal team.

So we have five armorers right now that are our internal team, including our training team uh run by Sergeant Vickers here.

So our internal team that saves a lot of the training or the cost because they're able to do uh their own work.

Some of these things will have like some of the warranties on these things like that.

So I'm confident in the day that you're not gonna see an increase.

If anything, you're gonna see a decrease as our current firearms are aging.

We're starting to see more issues with them after the thousands of rounds, exposed to the elements.

So in the long run, we're gonna have a safer platform for our officers.

I think you're gonna see some of the costs go down, and luckily we were able to kind of strategically save up for this moment so it's not hitting the general fund dollars.

And just to follow that, and thank you for that.

Um, how long do you think these new ones will last?

The you know, you just had that the other ones that you have currently.

Yeah, absolutely.

I think we'll confidently get another 10 to 15 years off of these firearms uh with it if we continue our current training practices and the number of rounds that we're putting through these firearms.

So I think very confidently we're we're talking somewhere in the range of 10 to 15 years from now before we're having to make another purchase, and that's something that we'll start carefully saving for today.

Great.

Thank you so much.

I really appreciate it.

Also for the purposes of the public, so thank you.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions from council?

Vice Mayor?

Thank you, Mayor.

And I'll speak for myself.

Uh I I probably have a better understanding of what the the officers go through in the firing uh training classes.

If maybe we as council members could participate.

I'm available any day of the week other than Tuesdays.

Yes, thank you.

And we are working on some virtual reality uh uh trainings that we're having too that can kind of put you going through some of those things, but maybe we'll have to prepare a council day on the range.

All right, thank you.

Any other questions?

Then we'll open it up to the public.

Are there any other any members of the public who would like to comment on the consent items?

Miss Carmen.

Floor is yours.

So what what are the numbers for the uh consent items?

From what 13.1 to 13.5.

And thank you.

Thank you, Chief Kriegen.

All right, thank you.

Uh Janice Carmen, and um greetings to all of you.

I'm glad to see you again.

Um, I'd like to uh comment on the Sonoma County Transportation Authority and Regional Climate Protection Authority.

Um I've looked through the um boards and the committees, and Ms.

Carmen, I don't think that's one of the consent items today, unless I'm missing it.

So these would be items 13.13.

13.5.

Okay.

13.1.

Okay, I just got here, so I'm late.

Um, okay, that that's all right.

I'm sorry.

I thought it was starting with the no problem.

Thank you.

Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on the consent items?

Saying none, bringing it to the mayor.

Whoops.

Mr.

Mayor, there is uh an item relating to Ghost Sonoma uh as 13.2.

Um, and I don't know if that's what Ms.

Carmen was was attempting to speak on, but that is an SETCA.

Thank you for that clarification.

I was reading too quickly.

Uh, Miss Carmen, was that the item you intended to speak on?

13.2.

It's really short what I could say about it, but um, yes.

Um, thank you.

Okay, so uh this is what I just wanted to bring up is that I've been looking through the boards and the commission since this Terence Stomp got uh appointed to the city uh planning commission when he lives in district four and it's Victoria's uh district, not um ours, which is district three.

So um I looking through all of them, I found a number of inactive uh committees, and one of them because I remembered that uh one of the seven goals or six goals used to be now it's seven, was uh climate and climate is big.

Climate's big with everybody that knows stuff about what's going on, and uh it was inactive.

So um I just wanted to be sure that it's not getting joined with something else that would override what climate is about, and the experts and the kind of people that you would be uh trying to learn from with climate.

I feel like climate is enough without uh joining it to something else.

So I'm just gonna say that on the transportation climate thing.

Thank you, Janice.

Are there any other members of the public who'd like to speak?

Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the vice mayor for a motion.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to move 13.1 through 13.5 and wave further reading of the text.

Second.

We have a motion and a second for Miss Rogers.

Madam City Clerk, whenever you're ready, you can call the vote.

Thank you.

Councilmember Rogers.

Aye.

Councilmember O'Krepke.

Aye.

Councilmember McDonald.

Hi.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Ben Wellos?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Hi.

Yes.

Let the record reflect the motion passes with six affirmative votes with Councilmember Fleming absent.

Thank you.

And we are moving quickly through our agenda.

Uh, we are gonna hold off on public comment on non-agenda matters to five o'clock, and we're gonna begin with our uh report items, starting with item 15.1, our report on the our annual report on the independent independent police auditor.

Report from the independent police auditor, I should say.

Do we have a Mr.

Ganaco and Mr.

Connolly?

Perfect.

Welcome back.

Yeah, while they make their uh way to the podium, so I'm excited to uh introduce item 15.1, uh independent police auditor annual report.

Um so I look forward to this.

Um this item coming to council and before the public uh yearly as we want to continue to show our transparency and our relationship with the community uh between OIR and our police department.

Um we do have police uh in the audience to answer any questions as we go through the presentation as well.

So at this time I'll turn it over to OIR and Mr.

Genaco.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor, Council, thank you, Madam City Manager, um Michael Chanako, um, your independent police auditor team.

With me is my colleague Stephen Connolly, and we are here uh to present our year three report.

Um, and pleased to do that.

Um see a lot of familiar faces on the dais, and it's uh great to be back in uh in Santa Rosa on this beautiful afternoon.

Um the report uh was you know the narrative our report was submitted, it's you know some twenty-some pages.

Um what we intended to do this afternoon is really just to provide a high level um uh uh summary of our findings um in year three.

Uh and what I maybe would want to start with is to sort of contrast this journey that we have taken with the city and the police department, and you all as elected officials and leadership of the city, including your city manager.

And I can say that, you know, year three in 2025 is a lot different than when we first got started with the city back in 2020.

In 2020, as you recall, that was the year in which police reform uh really um moved forward uh largely as a result of a um a signifying event uh that is the murder of George Floyd.

And um there were protests here, and as you all can recall, those of you who are uh from those since you are familiar with Santa Rosa, some of the police response to those protests did not go as planned, did not go seamlessly, and uh created created issues.

Uh we did do an after action, that was after our first engagement with the city was the after action report when a lot of those um issues were identified and reported on publicly.

Uh after that, uh we were then appointed on a more continual basis or ongoing basis as your independent police auditor.

And this report uh is our third uh report since we received that assignment to continually report on police matters and provide a level of transparency to the city and your community uh that virtually no other uh city uh in this area provides.

We are uh we have been in the uh independent police auditor business for some over 20 years, and we have a number of other assignments up and down the state of California and uh so based on that experience um we try to provide what we are learning and other and other jurisdictions and applying some of those progressive police practices and reforms to this city and vice versa.

Um, for example, uh one of the more robust programs you have is not a police department function, but the mental health response in your city.

We often uh talk to other cities about uh that project being a gold standard in our view with regard to the way in which those in mental health crisis are responded to and the sort of the holistic and varied response and resources you have that many other cities are envious of having and don't have.

So with that being said, I just want to sort of give you one of the overarching themes from our report.

Uh it's not expressly stated in the report, but if you look at the report and you see, for example, that the number of recommendations we have made have decreased over the three years we've been here.

That's because the low-hanging fruit that we found when we first got started don't exist anymore.

And so I'd like to describe it as we've moved from oversight 101, which is when we just get started with a jurisdiction, to starting to provide oversight at a what I would say a graduate level.

Um that's where we are now.

It's more turning the dials and doing some more fine-tuning rather than looking at some of the basic uh concerns that exist when we first get started with any assignment.

Those don't exist anymore, and uh so that doesn't mean that the recommendations we make aren't important, and I'm sure at some point uh the chief will provide any feedback or acceptance or not with regard to those recommendations, but we do have five recommendations.

Could we go to the next slide, please?

One thing I do want to remind counsel and and your community is that the way in which we provide this level of oversight or this level of auditing is different than many of the other assignments we have in the state of California and elsewhere, in the sense that much of the auditing that we do in other jurisdictions is what we call after the fact auditing.

So what will happen is that there will be a force incident, there will be a civilian complaint, there'll be an internal complaint, that investigation, the force investigation, the civilian complaint investigation, or the internal investigation will all proceed, be completed, the decision maker within the agency within the police department will make a determination, and then that determination is finalized, and it's at that point that we get the material.

That is sort of the traditional way in which auditing is done in policing.

There are obviously some advantages to auditing a report that way.

And we do that in many jurisdictions, which is we look at the after, we look at the material, we review the body wearing camera footage, we look at the interviews, we look at the decision, and then we make our own independent assessment on how we thought how effective the investigation was.

We also look at the decision and whether or not that decision was principled, and then we write a public report indicating whether we agree, whether we thought there were shortcomings with regard to the investigation, or that the result of that investigation wasn't based on the evidence that we saw, we saw it a different way.

That's not what we do in Santa Rosa.

And there's a reason we don't.

What we do in Santa Rosa is what we call real-time monitoring as opposed to after the fact monitoring.

And with real-time monitoring, the advantage of real-time monitoring is that when a complaint comes in, oftentimes the complainant will reach to us directly, and we will then help the complainant get a complaint into the system.

For those that find their way independently from the police department, we'll be notified day one this complaint came in.

And what that means is we're not waiting until all of the information and evidence has been collected to weigh in on that investigative complaint and the ensuing investigation.

So in essence, because of that level of involvement early on, we can save a case from falling off a cliff.

If the case is already put to bed, we can be critical of the captain's decision, we can be critical of the witness who wasn't interviewed, we can be critical that the wrong questions were not, the wrong questions were not, the right questions were not asked.

But there's nothing we can do about it other than report and be critical.

In the real-time monitoring, we can have a real impact while that case is going on.

So the paradigm that we often see is that we'll have a conversation and we'll say, well, what about this witness?

And so before that investigative package is completed, that uh witness will be interviewed, and if we have a question about the decision making, we'll be able to have input into that decision making before again that case is put to bed.

And I do think that is an advantage.

I think it does save cases from going off the cliff.

And the other advantage is we don't have to publicly criticize a decision after the fact, since we are involved in those decisions all along, all along the road.

Um, and that's a big difference.

Uh just as an example, I think earlier in the week, my colleague Steve sat in on two very important interviews of a significant internal affairs investigation, and that's really important.

Uh the other uh aspects of the model that I do want to highlight uh because I also think they're critical to effective oversight, which in my view uh you have here in the city.

Uh one is uh the involvement of of the leadership of the city.

Um your city manager um checks in with us regularly on police matters.

Um I have to say uh candidly that other city managers and cities we work with don't have that level of engagement or involvement, and we are able to have candid conversations throughout the year, not just when we come back once a year, so that uh we get the sense from her about her concerns about uh police matters, and we can also report to her earlier on on what we're seeing with regard to police matters, significant cases uh that she should be aware of.

Um but that level of engagement doesn't exist in many cities, and we're pleased to uh be in a working relationship where that we do have that level of access.

The last thing that that I think really is critical is is what's happening this afternoon, and that is our ability to report not only just in a public report uh that will be, you know, that will be out there for all to see and posted on on websites, both ours and the cities, uh, but also that we're able to engage with leadership, the elected leadership of the city in a way on at least a yearly basis, so that we can provide an opportunity for you all to ask questions on how things are going, and that we can also provide you sort of high-level information about what we're seeing in the city and what we're seeing with how the police department is responding to public safety issues throughout uh throughout the uh throughout the past year.

Uh so the tandem of our public report, which you have provided us the authority to provide and give you give your community a level of trans transparency, plus this public engagement, uh, not only with your electeds, but also with the community leadership.

So tomorrow uh we'll be meeting with the advisory group that has been formed to focus on police matters and hear from them as well as yet another opportunity to have that public-facing engagement, which we think is really critical to any effective oversight.

Um the other thing that we're able to do and um and have done, and uh one example is is in the report that I wanted to highlight, and that is in addition to the individual cases, which are all included in our report.

If you look at the back end of our report, there is a whole list of all the active cases, um, we also can make recommendations with regard to systemic improvement, with regard to policy development, with regard to what we see as potential gaps in policy, and then can report publicly on the degree to which the uh police department leadership has been responsive to our um recommendations, just as an example uh over the course of this past year, there was a complaint that came in uh from a civilian uh resident of Santa Rosa, and the complaint was directed against the chief of police, the number one person in the organization.

And while in that case, you know, the case was investigated by um a subordinate of the chief of police, and we found the investigation to be thorough, we found the investigation to be fair, we found the investigation to be objective.

Uh there was a lot of tangible evidence that did not substantiate the complaint.

On the other hand, the optics of having a sergeant or lieutenant investigate an allegation against the chief of police, knowing full well that the sergeant is eventually reporting to that chief of police creates an optic optics issue that could be potentially problematic.

Imagine if, in fact, and this was not the case here, but imagine if in fact that case did have some legs and might actually uh have indicated a potential violation of policy.

Imagine how uncomfortable it would for the sergeant armed with that information now to have to do a sit down with the chief as a subject of the investigation and try to effectively interview and ask the hard questions that need to be asked in that in that situation.

It's just not a good, it's not a good fit.

So what we suggested, and the police department and the chief agreed with our recommendation and almost immediately uh made changes to the policy, is there's now a policy that calls for in the rare case, and this is the first time it's happened in three years we've been here, but in the rare case in which the allegation is against the leader of the organization, they will then the new policy then requires that there be a discussion with your city manager, and the decision is made about whether or not that kind of allegation should be investigated independently.

Again, that's just I'm not talking so much about the substance of that, but just as an example of the kind of changes we can make with regard to gaps in policy that we find and present to the police department.

Can we go to the next slide, please?

There we go.

At this point, I will turn over the remainder of our opening remarks to my colleague Stephen Connolly.

Thank you, Michael.

And good afternoon, Mr.

Mayor and members of the council.

Stephen Connolly of OIR group, and I'm very happy to be with you again.

So I want to talk a little bit about some of the particulars from this year's audit report, which covers the the run of cases that were opened in 2024, as well as some of the systemic changes that the department made during that time.

But on a regular kind of day-to-day basis, the the uh core of what we do is is to interact with the department with when any new investigation is open and kind of serve as the second chair of the investigative process throughout that um throughout that whole process from from the initial intake all the way through to the the final decision making.

There were sixty-two cases that were opened.

Most of them were generated from public complaints, but a number of them, I think 10 or 11 in this past year were also generated by the department when management recognized there was an issue that that it felt like rose to the level of potential policy violation and and uh opened a case accordingly.

And again, we played an active role in in kind of tracking and in some cases sitting in on interviews and and regular consultations with the main investigator to uh in the hopes that these would be investigated thoroughly and that appropriate decisions would be reached.

And we are pleased to be able to say, as we have had um, as we have in the the other couple of years, we can absolutely vouch for the legitimacy of the department's process.

It does a very good investigation, uh, excuse me, a very good job of taking investigations seriously, investigating them thoroughly.

Uh, we've worked with two or three different investigators in the course of our time here, and each one of them has been a very very qualified person, very good at at his job, and and uh in a lot of ways that makes our job easier.

And we really try to contribute where we can by bringing our perspective, asking a bunch of questions.

The accountability piece is is always important because if policies are violated, then officers obviously we should be held accountable for that.

There should be appropriate corrective action, discipline, whatever is is merited by the circumstances.

But one of our big pushes since we've got here is to really try to treat these cases and and the feedback from the public and the the review process that goes on as an opportunity for what we call holistic improvement, looking for ways to uh make performance better.

Even if the decision is, yeah, this doesn't quite rise to the level of a policy violation, but this could have been handled differently.

This was a little disappointing.

The department has become much better at um uh sort of embracing those and and taking advantage of training opportunities, following up with officers, even in the cases where the allegations of misconduct are not sustained in in a in a larger sense trying to make the department better.

There we go.

Uh in terms of the the uh process, as I said, um we we have found the investigations to be very appropriately thorough and effective.

I think the um uh one of the biggest places where we've seen a change since we got started here is that there are the interactions with the complainants we are increasingly impressed with.

The department really does try to engage with folks uh and and to explain, to do a lot more explaining than the law really requires in terms of of helping them understand the outcomes of cases.

If it it ends up being a result that they were, you know, weren't expecting or were disappointed with, there's a certainly a willingness to talk and engage and communicate and try to make the experience a positive one where people really feel like they've been heard.

Biased policing is certainly one of the more sensitive issues that we cover.

There were a handful of cases that raised allegations that among other things perhaps alleged that some of the perceived mistreatment that the complainant was mentioning was a function of some bias.

All of those cases were looked at very carefully, and the bias component of the complaint was certainly focused on, and we didn't have any sustained allegations of bias policing in this past year.

Mike talked about the new protocol for allegations involving the head of the agency.

And unlike previous years, last year, for example, one of the things that we noticed were a number, uh uh a number of a high percentage, you know, 10 or 15 percent of the total investigations had to do with issues of of homeless enforcement and people complaining about the way that they were treated in the context of the department's homeless enforcement efforts.

That number dropped by quite a bit in the 2024 pool of cases.

I think we only had two or three in which uh homeless enforcement was implicated as an issue at all.

As Mike mentioned from a transparency perspective, our our case status chart is is one of the ways that we try to provide the public with a sense of the kinds of things that are being complained about or investigated by the police department, uh the outcome of those cases, how they turned out, and any other kind of salient facts that would help people understand the process.

So certainly one of our goals today, uh, as Mike said, we're we're kind of giving you a high pass of the of the report as a whole.

We certainly encourage the public uh to take a look at the at the actual written report which is available online, and uh the case status chart in the back really is uh unusual in our experience in terms of the the amount of detail that it provides, obviously, while remaining um respectful and and in in legal compliance with officer privacy rights.

Another category of significant concern for us is has been use of force.

Uh we talked a lot about use of force in our report last year.

We really focused on the department's review process and and had a number of recommendations that we hoped would enhance the supervisory review process, make it a little more rigorous and thorough, and again, move beyond the bottom line question of in policy or not in policy, but look to see is there anything from a training perspective or otherwise that we could be doing better.

There were a couple of things that happened in the past year that we consider to be very, very significant in enhancing the department's ability to review uses of force thoroughly, constructively, and effectively.

To take a look at a range of incidents that are of special sensitivity or significance for one reason or another, and really give them a deep dive of analysis and discussion and debate, and again, without accountability being one potential component of it, but also this was a significant incident that happened.

What can we learn from it?

How can we get better?

And what are the messages that we want our training cadre to carry out to the department?

So it's a much more formal, documented and and sort of methodical way of doing something that presumably the department has been doing for a long time in terms of issue spotting, but this makes sure that the discussion is as good as it can be, and that the importantly that the follow-through is there.

And I just mentioned the training cadre.

It's a it's a new unit that the department is very proud of, and I think rightfully so.

It's a sergeant and two full-time officers who really focus on a number of different issues that are designed to help the department's training and and review of important enforcement events be as effective, constructive, and and um uh improvement oriented as it possibly can be.

So uh I think both of those changes are reflective of a mentality in the department that we are very supportive of.

Our special topic for this year had to do with vehicle pursuits.

I know that you your council has received uh a detailed presentation from from the department about vehicle pursuits recently, so I'm I won't belabor it, but we wanted to take a look at their process just because it is such a sensitive issue really throughout the state, throughout the country, there is uh I I would say increasing focus on it and and trying to figure out the right balance between rigorous enforcement and and the inherent dangers that go along with these events.

So we we learned a lot about how uh the department reviews vehicle pursuits, and I know the training cadre has added that to their uh plate in of responsibilities, which I think is really good.

And we took a look at a sampling of of the uh some of the department's 45 pursuits from last year to look at the uh again, look at the uh underlying substance, the body warrant cameras, the reports and everything else, but also to see how did the department respond to this and do we think that their issue spotting was good?

Did they follow up with identified issues appropriately?

And for the most part, we we found that there was uh a lot of good work being done, but as usual, there may be a couple refinements on the edges that we encourage the department to consider.

Uh, and that became the subject of a couple of our recommendations.

As Mike said, we only had five recommendations this year compared to I don't know, close to 20 the first year, and it was probably 13 or 14 in year two.

So the target is shrinking in many ways.

We see that as a very positive thing overall, and we are also very pleased to say that in the past uh the department has been responsive to our recommendations, and that's probably the the note that I want to end up on.

We we really do appreciate the the constructive relationship that we've had with the department from the beginning.

They certainly hold up their end of the bargain in terms of of notification, responsiveness, uh, and and availability.

And whenever we have a question or concern, they are certainly very willing to engage with us and oftentimes are willing to um go along with our suggestions or make an adjustment or interview an extra witness or what have you.

I talked to uh the the main investigator and professional standards a couple weeks ago when we were just running through three or four cases that had recently been concluded, and I I didn't have anything to say about one of them, and and he he was almost disappointed.

He said that I can't believe there's no annoying questions or or follow-ups that you want me to do on this one.

So uh there wasn't, uh, but oftentimes I do have something that I just want to tug at a little bit more or get some clarification with, and and the department is always very, very good about that.

So we are pleased with the uh the nature of our relationship and the direction that the department is going in.

We think they've made some significant improvements to their internal review mechanisms, and we also are happy to be an outlet as Mike said for for any public concerns.

We're in touch with a number of members of the public through email or telephonically and provide them information about the process and facilitate their navigation through the system.

And at the end of every complaint investigation, the letter that the complainant receives has contact information for us and basically says if if you want to follow up on this or ask any questions, you're very welcome to contact the independent police auditor as well.

And we think all of those are positive things.

So I'm gonna wrap it up here, and we're certainly happy to entertain any questions that you folks have.

Michael and Stephen, thank you very much for this this clear, thorough, and ultimately very positive report.

I'm gonna bring it back to counsel for questions on this item.

Any questions at the moment?

Ms.

McDonald.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just have a couple quick questions.

I'm not sure if if you'll be able to answer them or if the chief will need to come down.

But about how many calls does dispatch take in 2024?

Could you give me those statistics, Chief?

So calls for service in 2024, which outlines this.

We had just under 184,000 calls for service that came into our 911 dispatch center.

Officers actually responded to just over 117,000.

I believe it was 117,848.

I've said a lot of community meetings.

So that's how many responded to in 2024.

So of a hundred and eighteen thousand calls for service, we had 62 incidences.

So what's that percentage?

I was looking at it for actually preparing for a community presentation.

Yeah, so 17,000 was 62, so it was 0.05%.

So just a fraction of our calls for service that was measurable that actually resulted in uh an internal investigation.

And out of the 62, as Mr.

Connolly said, 10 of those were actually self-initiated by the police department.

That behavior that we saw through our own internal reviews with it that we were able to initiate and say, hey, we want to look a little closer into this behavior and see if it merits any type of discipline or training that we were able to take forward.

I just think those numbers are so significant when we look at a at this type of reporting out.

So and it's important for our community to know that while we don't want to have any incidents and we're looking at our process, I don't think there's too many positions where you're on a daily 360 um review process where every day our officers who go into work and are and uh sworn or not in your department, they're constantly being reviewed and under scrutiny to do better.

And so I just want to commend all of them for being so um helpful um with this process and how they've worked with our auditors so that we're providing the best um community care that we can.

But um thank you for answering that question.

I think it's really significant when I look at that, and I love that you're working yourself out of a job.

So um we appreciate all the help on that.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just a couple of quick things.

I was wondering when you all mentioned the um uh the major incident review board, um, what what does that look like and how do how would that work?

So what basically happens is that the department has the discretion, and certainly, Chief, uh feel free to supplement this answer.

But the idea behind it, and I I probably should have mentioned this earlier, one of the things that that we try to contribute is to take advantage of uh the relationship we have and the familiarity we have with a lot of different agencies, mostly in California, but other parts of the country as well.

So when there's a good idea that we think a department has adopted for internal review, we we would certainly try to spread that around and make sure other places know about it.

So we talked to the department quite a bit about some ideas for enhancing its major incident review process, and one of those ideas was don't you know treat it like a fire extinguisher behind glass and only break the glass in an absolute emergency.

Take advantage of this process and and bring put a group of in people in the room together to talk about a significant incident, whether it's a canine bite or a vehicle pursuit that results in a crash of some kind, or uh one of the incidents that they looked at was a SWAT barricade that had some different moving parts and elements to it.

So anytime you have an unusual event or one that had significant consequences, it's gonna bring together leadership of the agency and subject matter experts from the training group and and maybe some other folks as well to sit down and get a presentation about what happened and then be able to discuss it to say what are the learning opportunities here.

Did our officers meet our expectations and policies?

Have have has the scrutiny we've given this event exposed any holes in our policy or our equipment didn't work the way it was supposed to, or they don't seem to understand this new policy that we've implemented.

So it's really an opportunity to cover a wide range of things, and I think the department is trying to take full advantage of it.

Um, thank you.

Um, and the only other thing I was wondering about was uh access, how the public has access.

And I noticed that of course the the link for complaints is on the website that I imagine I imagine that goes through the police department uh initially, but then you do this real time, uh, which by the way, I think is great.

I I think it's um because you're absolutely right.

I I'm pretty sure the county does the other everything happens, and then it gets analyzed by the auditor.

So I think that's great.

But I was just wondering about access like how does the public know that besides going through the police department that there's going to be an auditor that's going to be looking at it as well, or do they know?

So my experience is that they that that when somebody files a complaint with the police, they have uh uh ideally they're gonna have a subsequent interaction with a investigator to do a more complete intake interview, if you will.

And I've listened to a whole bunch of those intake interviews, and and a regular part of it is just to explain the process.

And one of the things that gets mentioned towards the end of the conversation is the existence of our our office, and then other they get I think an initial notification letter after the investigation has been open, and then they get a closeout letter, and those make reference to our office as well.

And another thing, just to add some clarity that we have a dedicated web page on the police department about how to file a complaint.

It has all the OIR information with their phone number, their address, their email.

Uh, Mr.

Connolly gets direct emails regularly, and some of the complaints I don't know how many of the 62 actually went straight to OIR who then brought them to our attention.

So community members, but we have that information available on our website as including also each one of the annual reports are on our website too, so people can look at the past and be able to do that.

And we continue to do the community meetings when they're present.

A perfect example uh tomorrow night is we I have my chief's community ambassador team.

So that's 20 members.

Uh Mark each, our city manager Smith picked them throughout uh the city of Santa Rosa, and our police auditors are going to be meeting one-on-one with the 20 members of our CCAT team.

They already have the report, they've been reviewing it, they're gonna ask direct questions and feedback and be able to hopefully uh be a voice out in the community for that and bring direct questions to our police auditors.

Yeah, thank you, Chief.

In addition to that, it's hosted on the city manager's website.

Um, and it's the direct contact to uh OIR, and the public can also make complaints to the city manager's office, and I work directly with OIR as well.

Wonderful.

I just want to say thank you so much.

I think this is a great report.

Um, uh the uh annual audit really well done, and I'm really glad to hear the numbers are down.

Um, so yeah, I think it's uh overall a really really um huge asset to helping police work, you know, the everything involved.

So I just want to thank you and thank you, Chief.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions from council right now?

Let's open it up to public comment.

Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Ms.

Flores.

Uh good evening, counsel.

I am grateful that we are taking the time to audit the Santa Marosa police, and I did have an incident at the police station recently.

There was a young man that I was helping to represent from Fresno, California, and his 10-year-old daughter hung herself.

So he was here to seek information on his daughter's death.

And so because this man has been in and out of prison and his face is tattooed, I felt that he was not treated respectfully, and so I was really unhappy about that.

So I did email Chief Cragen and Chief Cragen got back to me by six in the morning the next day, and the lieutenant personally reached out to me to make sure that that young man was assigned a court uh court appointed victim advocate, and he gave me many resources to make sure that he was heard.

So I know that uh these things are being addressed because I've personally experienced that from your staff, so well done.

I appreciate that very much.

So, as far as my complaint just from a data perspective, I'd be curious to see if that was included.

I I'm sure it was uh so I can request that to compile further information, but to speak to council statements earlier, the public is not aware of these audits.

I I was not aware, and I feel that I'm well informed, so that would be something really helpful to share with the community because I know you are trying to build the bridges between the police and our community, and there's been efforts all the way around, so I would implore you to build the that bridge even further.

Thank you, and God bless you.

Thank you, Adina.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak on this item?

Ms.

Carmen will go with you first.

Can council and um uh the city council and members of the public.

Um I've had a long uh experience with uh the police and not current, none of it's current, and I know many of the police officers, and I don't know if they're still there, but there are formerly police officers who were not only totally infected, they didn't even seem to be able to navigate the issues at all.

And it was really very painful for me.

I got through it, and here I am on the other side.

But it wasn't necessary, and when they said there wasn't bias, there definitely was bias, and I've spoken before the supervisors about a year ago, year and a half ago about misogyny in this county.

I wanted to include it with uh the office of equity because a year ago I was really sticking up for the Office of Equity as well.

And um I want to say that uh I've been trying to um interact with the police more, but I'm still very cautious because of the very traumatic experience I had when I would call them on the advisement of superiors who said that they would help, and that's all I'm gonna say today.

But thank you.

Thank you, Janice.

The floor is yours.

Is this on?

Yeah, Gregory.

Thank you.

The floor is yours.

Thank you, Gregory Farron.

Um, today, representing homeless action, and I'll join the previous speakers in congratulating you and OIR for uh what seems like a very thorough and positive upbeat report.

Um I'm glad to be standing here congratulating you because a few years ago it wasn't so positive.

Um I do want to kind of um express a uh kind of a complaint, though it's not yours.

Um currently the California Highway Patrol is um what we believe to be taking some pretty bad action down in Santa Rosa Avenue, and we'll pursue that um against the California Highway Patrol, but at this point we have nothing awful to say about either the Santa Rosa City Police or uh any other um employee or department.

So again, thank you very much for the report.

We'll devour it as much as we can.

We'll continue to try to give you complaints when there are any, um, but it's good to hear that you've diminished them and the police are acting much more positively.

Thank you.

Thank you, Gregory.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak on this item?

Seeing none, I want to bring it back to uh Mr.

O'Krepke for a motion, and then we can have any final comments.

Uh I don't believe there is an official motion, it's just recommended by the city manager that the council receive and accept this annual report.

Okay, all right.

We have a we have a uh there's no motion.

I want to second it anyway.

We have done we have a lot of we have a lot of seconds.

Um any final comments from our from our group?

Ms.

Rogers.

I just want to say this has been a great report every year, it's getting better and better.

Um but the one thing I I did want to point out, and I think it would probably be more to um our officers in the department.

It's one thing to be within policy, um, but there is another thing when we look at the interaction that we're having um in the community, and I know that we're all human, so um, but I don't think you'll be out of a job because I think those complaints will continue to come to come in.

But to let the public know, our officers are human.

Um we will take the complaints because we're always willing to learn and we want to learn, um, but to our officers, because I think we have fabulous officers, and we have a great department.

Uh, please take your mental health days.

Make sure that you are rested up because those interactions with the public can leave a very bad taste um in their mouth for our department, which I feel is a great department, and I want the community to see what I see when I look at our officers.

So that's my comment.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor.

I think this report is great and all, but I think what I'm most proud of is the feedback that I'm getting back from my community when they tell me about their interactions with our police officers.

So, Chief Senior Team, I'm not tired of telling you what a great job.

And you I know in my in my area, you're making me look good.

And I love the the bridge that we've been building since your inception to the position of chief.

And I do have a question, sir.

Foot patrols.

I know that I would love to see our officers enjoying tacos, maybe also Pasopo Road or thereabouts.

Is there any plans in the future for food patrols?

Yes, absolutely, and it's really important for us.

And we're uh I send out uh emails to our teams and really encouraging like get out of the vehicles and be president.

That's something uh that we're really trying to do not only in Roseland but across the whole community, but that the officers just have to balance between calls for service that are pending, and unfortunately, right now you see a lot of calls during the summertime, so there's a lot of calls on the board for them to go to, but that's why we're really prioritizing some of the community engagement events that we can do.

And we're we're planning another tacos with a cop on Sebastopol Road in the next six weeks with it, and we have our national night outcoming too, but also just talking to officers about get out in the parks and shopping centers and apartment buildings and things like that and be president.

We've really seen an uptick.

We actually track that uh for that, and I have a thing that I put out like uh a monthly activity report about some of the things of activity, and one of the things that we track is community engagement time because that's just as important to me as going out and doing traffic stops or other important like that.

And we have that as one of our four operational priorities is community engagement with it because I want from every level the organization to know how important it is.

And before you go, I must also congratulate you.

No, no, not congratulate, but thank you for your position and your leadership in regards to immigration policy and ice interactions and and how we must navigate through those uh weeds very carefully, but nonetheless, I appreciate the position that you've held and how you've expressed it to the community.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

As my colleagues have indicated, we are very very proud to accept this report.

Thank you for thanks to the OIR group for all the work that you put into it.

Um this process is clearly playing dividends, and thank you to Chief Kriegan and the entire group at SRP for the work that you're doing.

Uh the council, the city are very proud of the police force we have here.

Thank you, thank you for the work that you're doing.

And with that, we will conclude this item.

And we're gonna we're gonna mix it up a little bit.

Thank you again.

Thank you, Michael and Steven, for your for traveling out here.

Looking at the time, we are gonna take our first public comment on non-agenda matters.

If there are members of the public here who would like to comment or like to make public comment on items not listed on the agenda, this is the time.

And I see we have a few cards submitted already.

We'll go from we'll start with Mary Ann, Elizabeth, and Clifton.

And if you could if you could use both of the podiums or both of the luck turns, we'll keep this moving efficiently.

So again, let's start with Mary Ann, and then we'll move on to Elizabeth and Clifton.

Good afternoon, members of the city council.

My name is Mary Ann Michaels.

I have been a resident of Santa Rosa since 1981, and my current address is 4444 Cullibra Avenue.

I'm a member of the religious society of friends of truth.

On October 13th, 2024, my monthly meeting approved the following land acknowledgement statement.

Redwood Forest Friends Meeting acknowledges that our meeting house and the homes of our members and attenders are on unceded land of the Coast Miwok, Pomo, and WAPO peoples who have lived here for millennia.

These lands were taken by settler colonizers in fraudulent and violent ways.

We seek ways to promote healing and right relationship with the land and indigenous people.

Toward this end, we commit to act as allies to support tribal sovereignty and help redistribute land, power, and resources back to native communities.

In keeping with my commitment to act as an ally to native communities, as stated in the land acknowledgement of Redwood Forest Friends Meeting, I urge you to do all in your power to respectfully recognize the original Pomo people who lived on the land that we now call Flat Rock Park by supporting the following three requests.

First, that the new wording on the plaque uses respectful language.

Second, that there is signage maintained by the city that tells the true history of this sacred site.

And third, that the name of the park be changed to Beta Kamtara Park.

Thank you for your support of these three requests.

Thank you for your advocacy.

Next we have Elizabeth and followed by Clifton.

I was gonna say this microphone work.

My parents grew up in Ontario, Canada.

I would have left the United States at age 20, but instead I decided to come to California to fight the Vietnam War, which my older brother was in.

When he resigned from the Air Force, they asked him, Do you want to sign here to denounce your Canadian citizenship?

He said, Why would I want to do that?

And he's lived in Canada for about 50 years now on an island off the eastern coast.

And we have given them billions of dollars and lots of free weaponry to persecute the Palestinian people, kill their children, deny them medical services, deny them food.

And um I just want to end with the um fact that I do have four sons, and none of them have joined the military, and none of them have become police officers.

Thank you.

Thank you, Elizabeth.

Clinton, the floor is yours.

Hi there, my name is Clifton Wilcox.

I'm a member of uh, excuse me, I'm a resident of the Roseland community.

Um I wanted to bring to you uh uh complaint and an issue that I've had a consistent nuisance with uh Matote Food Park.

Um, unfortunately, um I've tried to work with them in person and I've had to tie up some city resources with the police, and actually, as a positive uh mention, um, recently worked with uh Vice Mayor Alvarez, who responded very quickly to my complaint and tried to work with uh the folks that are uh operating the Meto Tech Food Park as well.

Um but um there's been a consistent nuisance in my neighborhood.

Um I live adjacent to the food park.

Um, and for the last three months, they've pointed a speaker at my house and played music through it for 10 hours a day.

Um, they have also used a gas sleep lower for an hour a day, seven days a week um to dry off their parking lot.

Um and there's been construction at all hours, including uh after 11 p.m.

Um and all the way up until four o'clock in the morning.

Um as I mentioned, I've attempted to resolve this myself, and I've tied up city resources for this.

Um I did want to make sure that this was noted by the council and by um City Manager Smith for future permitting decisions.

Um this has been something that has significantly altered my uh stuff my at my ability to enjoy my own house.

Uh I have to keep my windows closed all day long to be able to not hear this.

Um and oftentimes I can hear it through my closed windows.

Um so my concern really is that um they've been offered permits and continue to uh operate beyond uh the scope of what the city code says and I would like for that to be considered the next time their permit is uh up for review uh as uh they've continued to be sort of a bad actor and a bad neighbor.

I've tried to be a good neighbor and tried to discuss this with them in person, um, and now I've had to come all the way to the city council.

So I'd appreciate uh in the future if you could uh consider this when approving for future permits.

Thank you, Chairman.

And although we cannot go in a back and forth uh with you, I assure that we have not lost sight of your issue.

Absolutely, and thanks, uh Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Um I'm sure we'll talk in the future.

Absolutely.

Uh Catherine Bertolini, followed by Lori.

Uh greetings, um, Mayor and Council members.

Um, my name's Catherine Bertolini Dowdle, and um I'm here today with uh Madeline Waldman of Indivisible Sonoma County.

And um, my original ask that I sent on June 10th was to consider that the city of Santa Rosa not use any contractors like a vello and and specifically a vello um for any city-related business.

And since then, um has decided to no longer you know uh uh work in our county, so we have a little bit of time, and um our current ask is that um that the city not contract, that the city take a stand to not contract with any um vendors, any private sector vendors, um, for travel, um, for any logistics um or for any um transportation um uh that are working with ice and that uh hopefully to even put a clause in any RFPs and RFQs uh to that effect, um so that until ICE is um following the constitution, and um, you know, um due process under the law and human rights um that the city of Santa Rosa will take a stand along with like the city of um Eureka who has taken this stand will not um be contracting with um those vendors.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh we have Lori and followed by Adilia.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Lori actually asked me to go before her.

Very well.

Um and I'm using the projector, isn't it?

It's it's turned on here.

There we go.

Okay.

Uh there's somebody that I'd like to thank today in this community, and unfortunately he's not here, but that wouldn't be Mr.

Dwayne from Roseland, Mr.

Dwayne DeWitt, who is an OG here, longtime community activist, and I appreciate him because he's somebody who considers himself to be a white ally.

I don't like that word.

He is my friend, and he will take the time to sit down in these marginalized communities that we claim to serve and actually listen to what they want and not tell them how to think.

So recently we had a huge win.

The Koanas Club of Santa Rosa went ahead and agreed to reword their plaque that was historically racist.

And I know our natives had advocated for that change for years.

Vice Mayor Alvarez helped to push it forward, and so I'd like to congratulate them on that.

I know that we are discussing right now, possibly renaming some parks, and so Mr.

DeWitt has written in his articles in the Sonoma Gazette, I believe, about possibly renaming the park, Pomo Park or Pomo Preserve.

And so I would love to see that happen.

We do a land acknowledgement here about stolen lands, but a lot of it is virtue signaling.

I would like to tell this story that the City of Santa Rosa made it happen because what I see is that we had people of every race working together to achieve that goal, and it's a genuine story, it's not a politically driven one.

So I applaud Santa Rosa Council for moving this forward, and I hope that we could continue to listen to the voices of our Native American brothers and sisters.

God bless you guys, and thank you.

Thank you, Deal.

If I may, Vice Mayor, I think we should acknowledge that honoring Dwayne DeWitt with a picture of his with a photo on the overhead rejector is the most perfect tribute imaginable.

Thank you for that, Adina.

Noted.

Mayor Stapp, City Council members, City Manager Smith, thank you for having us.

I'm here to highlight something that needs to be brought to our collective attention.

I thank Mayor Stapp, Council members Ben Wellos, Okrepke, Rogers, for your responses to my messages to you recently.

I'm here with a couple, Tay and Anya, and they're in the chambers today.

Their recent arrivals invested deeply in Sonoma County, who chose Sonoma County for a natural beauty, affordability, and accountability and community.

However, just a scant year after arriving here, they endured a brutal beating in public, simply for challenging a racial slur being used among friends, late May of this year at a taco truck on Santa Rosa Avenue.

A group of young people, teens were using these racial slurs among themselves, and it was point when it was pointed out to them by the couple that the word was unacceptable.

They then turned on the couple, surrounded their small topless car, sports car, then used more racial slurs directed at the couple.

A group beating ensued, several on one.

Ty was the victim.

What has compounded the harm is the response from our community.

There does not seem to be an appropriate sense of urgency or accountability or notice.

No bystander action to intervene, to stop, to even yell stop.

And what is perceived, perceived to be slow police responsive follow-up.

We understand that investigations take time, that T's need to be crossed, and I's need to be dotted.

And while we need to trust the system, we also get to check.

Of note.

This signals a youth crisis as well.

Can they work?

Can they work with impunity?

So the incident is not just an individual incident.

It's it's a pattern of harm to BIPOC people, especially.

Our silence and inaction are harmful.

Ty and Anya spoke out on the use of a racial slur as casual speech.

As an educator myself, I would be compelled to correct teenagers in public as well.

Can I be afraid now?

I am super sensitive to anti Asian hate, which means hate to all people.

Hateful speech in our community cannot go unaddressed, and I thank you for your attention.

Thank you.

Tyler.

My name is Tyler.

According to FBI statistics, in nearly all regards for the last five years, crime is down, not just in Santa Rosa, but California and nationwide.

Yet from 2021 to 2025, the SRPD budget has been increased by 15 million dollars from 64 million to 79 million, larger and faster, a larger and faster increase than any other department, leaving out the millions in settlements the SRPD has had to has forced the city to pay out.

The SRPD now takes up 36.5% of the whole municipal budget, more than housing and community service, planning and economic development, recreation and parks, transportation and public works, and municipal water combined.

So more budgets, more budget, less crime overall to be solved.

And call me naive, but I would expect the police to do their job efficiently with that.

But funnily, after more than a third of our tax money goes to the SRPD, the SRPD clearance rate is not published or readily available without a FOIA request.

And if it follows the SFPD, the clearance rate is below the national average.

But when there is a crime, like a crime where your constituents are called racial slurs and assaulted on camera while just trying to get dinner from a local business, call me an idealist, but with less less overall crime and 15 million extra dollars.

The last thing I would expect is the SRPD to do everything that they can to drag their feet on this investigation.

Your constituents were attacked, and two months later, there is not even a report.

How can we expect our community to feel safe from crime, to feel empowered to call the police when a crime does occur, and most importantly, know that if they do call, they will be treated with dignity and respect as the victim of a crime.

When the SRPD refuses to communicate with victims, drags their feet, and refuses to file a report.

And then we have to read the president of the Sonoma NAACP in the Press Democrat that this isn't a first-time issue and that it's being ignored, and that my, our taxpayer dollars are paying for it to be swept under the rug.

These are my friends, your constituents, our neighbors, invaluable members of our community and a part of what makes Santa Rosa great.

And they have been made to feel unsafe in their community and due to inaction, feel unwelcome here in Santa Rosa.

All while these are incredibly precarious times, and our communities desperately need to know that you will do something, anything to protect them.

So I am begging you, please do something.

Anything.

Thank you.

Seeing none, Mayor, the floor is yours.

Thank you for filling in, Vice Mayor.

Alright, we're gonna go on to our public hearings for the evening, starting with the hearing or with uh item 16.1, our public hearing pertaining to the Santa Rosa Fire Department's annual weed abatement program report.

Ms.

Robbins, welcome.

Good evening.

Uh, good afternoon, good evening, Mayor Stapp, Vice Mayor Alvarez, and Council members.

My name is Kemplin Robbins, the interim fire marshal, and today I've prepared a public hearing for the fire department's weed abatement program.

Each year, following the declaration of the start of fire season locally by the Santa Rosa Fire Department, the department will begin inspections ensuring property owners have maintained their parcels in accordance with the city's wheat abatement ordinance.

This ordinance applies to properties located in the wildland urban interface wooy area, developed properties with over half an acre of unimproved land, and undeveloped properties are vacant lots, including those in the fire rebuilding areas.

The fire department's prevention bureau coordinates the wheat abatement inspection program throughout the city.

There are over 10,000 identified parcels currently on the list.

These parcels are inspected throughout the duration of fire season by fire prevention staff.

During these inspections, if a parcel is out of compliance, a notice to comply will be sent to the parcel owner, which will include a date for a reinspection.

A reinspection is conducted, and if that parcel continues to be out of compliance, a violation notice is sent to the owner with another reinspection date.

If the parcel is still out of compliance following the violation notice, the fire department will authorize an approved contractor to abate the property at the property owner's expense.

In the 2024 season, 84 parcels were found to be in violation after the reinspection.

Of those parcels, 21 required abatement by the fire department.

And as of June 30th, 2025, there are 41 parcels which have unpaid balances for fire department related expenses, which include violation notices, additional reinspections, and the actual physical abatement work.

Therefore, it is recommended by the Santa Rosa Fire Department that the council by resolution confirm the 2024 itemized report of the fire department of the cost of the wheat and rubbish abatement as provided for in sections 9-08.020, 9-08.080, and 9-08.090 of the Santa Rosa City Code.

And that's all for my presentation.

Thank you.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Camlin.

Bringing it back to council for questions.

Is there is there what triggers the violation?

Uh I the rubbish is pretty much clear.

But is there a height of grasses or abundance of grasses or where the grass is located on a property?

Uh yes.

So depending on the parcel, there can be a certain inches of growth.

Typically, we start looking at that at the beginning of the fire season, and then there's a certain amount of time for that to be abated.

There's some times where they'll just, depending on the size or the acreage, that they'll just be doing a perimeter, and then there'll be sometimes that they'll be doing the full parcel.

Anything else?

Perfect.

Thank you very much.

All right.

I will now open the public hearing.

Are there members of the public who would like to speak on this item?

Ms.

Carmen, I see you with the microphone first.

Go ahead.

And they have really abused the opportunity to just let the grass grow, and people couldn't even walk on the sidewalk hardly because it was such a mess.

And uh recently, these things have been addressed, and it's really a relief, particularly because of the fire and fires and uh just neighborhood wise, you know, it's it's just really unpleasant, and kids can't ride their bikes close to it, and all you know, all these other problems.

And they've also gotten the islands.

So I'm just saying the city's done a good job very recently with the abatement of the tall grasses.

Thank you, Janice.

Mr.

Hilbert.

Yeah, thank you.

Michael Hilbert has someone who used to be sent uh these notices regularly on an annual basis, sent these notices and inappropriately sent these notices.

Um I'm concerned about what criterion is being used, and I looked over the agenda packet to documents, and you know, there was uh lack of you know, photographic evidence to support this um these findings.

I noticed that one property was on Dow Drive, which is uh Corby Avenue Auto Row, and it's uh quite a large property that apparently is vacant and probably has some scattered um weeds and grass and also just plain dirt, like it's been graded.

So, you know, I'm concerned that um someone's riding around an air conditioned SUV with a high powered telephoto lens on a digital camera, and as soon as they can take a close-up of a bit of grass that's over four inches, they're gonna get a violation notice.

No, there's probably a downed drive.

It's a big property, it's quite possible that you know a little bit of weeds was too high, but I doubt it was um, you know, the entire property was left to grow wild.

So I'm concerned that um the weed abatement ordinances can be used abusively and uh, you know, just uh taking money from people is not appropriate.

Thank you, Michael.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak on this item?

Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing.

I'll bring it back to uh my colleague, Miss McDonald for a motion, and then we can have further discussion.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I'd like to move resolution of the council of the City of Santa Rosa confirming the itemized report of the Santa Rosa Fire Department of the cost of removing weeds and or rubbish from a pond or in front of certain lots or parcels of land within the city of Santa Rosa.

Second, we have a motion and we have a second by Miss Rogers.

Are there any further comments or discussion on this item from council?

Seeing none, let's uh let's go to the vote.

Madam City Clerk.

Council Member Rogers.

Aye.

Council Member O'Krepke.

Aye.

Councilmember McDonald, aye.

Uh, Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Council Member Ben Willos?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

I.

Mayor Stapp.

Aye.

The motion passes with six affirmative votes with council member Fleming absent.

Ms.

Robins, thanks for all the work on this and for the concise presentation.

Thank you.

We will move on to item 16.2, our second public hearing for the evening.

Uh, this one pertains to the increase in fire permit administration and certified unified program agency fees.

Uh and Miss Robins, you're with us again.

I am.

Again, my name is Kemplin Robbins, interim fire marshal and CUPA program manager, and I'm here today to provide a public hearing on the fire department's proposed fee increases.

It has come to my attention that the presentation was not posted online in advance of this meeting.

Hard copies are available at the top of the chambers, and we apologize for any inconvenience.

The Santa Rosa Fire Department manages several programs, including fire construction and operational permits, and the certified unified program agency or CUPA program, which oversees the management of hazardous materials and hazardous waste within the city.

The cost to administer these programs has increased significantly in the last several years and definitely over the last 20 years.

The increases are being proposed for three different fee structures today.

I'll first is discuss the micrographics fee and the technology fee.

These fees are assigned to each permit issued in the department to offset the costs of processing permits, storing files and documents associated with permits, as well as evolving technological demands, such as our need to be fully electronic with our inspection programs.

Since 2006, these two fees have not increased from 2.5% of the cost of the permits.

In order to modernize and maintain these demands, the department is proposing a 1.5% increase to each of the micrographics fee and the technology fee to make the new fee four percent of the total permit amount.

There is a graphic on the on the slide that shows the current fees being at that 2% each, the proposed fee being at 1.5 with the new total being four percent for each of those fees that will be incurred on the total permit.

Next, we'll discuss the proposed CUPA permit fee increases increases as well.

During the most recent state mandated mandated, sorry, self-audit of the CUPA program that's required by the California Environmental Protection Agency.

It was found that the current permit fees established in 2005 no longer cover the cost to run the program.

The CUPA program within the state is intended to be fully funded by these permit fees.

During the audit internally, it was determined that a five percent increase to each permit in the CUPA program would fully defray this expense of overseeing and managing the program and still have a minimal impact to the business community.

As an example, a small automotive repair shop may store minimal hazardous materials and generate some hazardous waste.

So they would be put into two different ranges and levels in our permit program.

In this case, they would have two operational permits plus the micrographics and technology fees we talked about a little earlier.

Currently, that total for this uh this general operating permit that we assign would be 1,441.66 cents total with the proposed increases for the micrographics, the technology, and the CUPA permit fees, the new total will be 1,556.28 cents.

So that's a difference of 114.62 cents annually for that overall permit.

The fire code operational permits and the required state surcharges that Cali PA imposes weren't included in this calculation because there is no proposed increases for those.

Therefore, it's recommended by the fire department that the council by resolution approve a 1.5% increase in the micrographics fee, a 1.5% increase in the technology fee, and a five percent increase in the CUPA operational uh permit fees.

And with that, that's the end of my presentation, but I'm happy to answer questions.

Thank you.

Thank you again for very clear and concise presentation.

And I'm looking forward to the questions that my colleagues no doubt have on micrographics fee increases.

There's no one.

It is an important issue nonetheless.

Let us open it up.

Let's let us open the public hearing.

Michael, excellent.

I knew that I knew that you'd come through.

The floor is yours.

Yeah, Michael Ilbert.

You know that uh there was a wrecking yard next to Lola's called Acme Foreign Auto Wreckers.

Um they closed up a year or so ago.

Anyway, I want to relate to you that um I sort of knew that guy vaguely, the owner of that place, bought a car from him.

But anyway, the one of the primary reasons he cited for closing up was the outrageous uh inspection of permit fees that uh he was getting hit with by the San Rosa Fire Department.

And if you look at the fee schedule, the permits for storing hazardous waste are really quite steep, you know, and this fellow is trying to sell uh salvage auto parts and uh not a hell of a lot of profit in that.

So it's quite understandable that he uh closed up and uh terminated his business.

Um, maybe people are happy with that to get rid of the wrecking yards, but I think the hazardous waste fee it applies to a lot of other businesses besides wrecking yards and you know understandably um, you know, it's very significant.

I see some really high uh fees for that, depending on how much you store and all that stuff, but I I don't think there's a lot of effort uh being put into keeping these fees in check.

Thank you, Michael.

Janice.

Yeah, thank you.

Um, Janice Carmen.

Uh I'd like to see it at three percent.

And I'd also like to hear it when the presenters are presenting something that they give you a fee amount.

They gave you the 1450, but then you have to do the math yourself.

So um I don'm thinking more like three percent, and then they divvy it up however they want to do it.

But I want to make a comment right now about uh micro everything, and that is that there's a lawsuit right now that's going on in the county, and um I'm hoping that this lawsuit is going to define some of the um technology issues because we've had a uh free for all internet for all of these years, and the uh technology for both AI and the draw uh droids, drones, is very uh serious and uh needs uh good attention, needs a lot of science, and I'm hoping that it'll be the opening for a big conversation related to the technology that has to do with moving forward, and this is another opportunity area I see for Santa Rosa.

Um I hope that you won't go and put a ton of money toward this because you think all of a sudden, well, that sounds great.

But uh, but I do think it's an opportunity for Santa Rosa to be first in the technology area, and it's unfortunate that there's a lawsuit, but the other side of this is that it could bring policy, and that would be a good thing, and it might be policy that would be for national uh appearance and uh be used in other uh areas and states as well.

Thank you, Janice.

Ms.

Flores?

Uh good evening, council.

I just wanted to ask if these increases with the fire department were included with the budget projections for the upcoming fiscal year, or if this is now being used to offset, and I would just like to echo the statement by Mr.

Hilbert.

I hear him speak frequently at local agency meetings and I learn a lot from him.

My take is that he's somebody who comes to these meetings because he's retired on a fixed income, and so I've looked at the data that he's put together uh mostly with the groundwater agencies, but he's done a tremendous job, so I really value what he has to say.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dina.

Are there any other members of the public who'd like to speak on this item?

And I will close the public hearing.

Bring it back to council, Mr.

Krepke for a motion and a second and then some additional discussion.

All right, I will move a resolution of the council of the city of Santa Rosa increase in fire permit administration and certified unified program agency CUPA fees.

Second.

We have a motion and a second from Ms.

Rogers.

Before we go to the boat, are there any final comments?

Ms.

Ben Willis.

Just a quick question.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, did you mention how long it's been since there has been a fee increase?

I think you did, and I just missed the time frame.

Yeah, no problem.

Yes, it has been about 20 years since there's been a fee increase.

In the last several years, there has been a significant increase in the cost to run the CUPA program.

So okay.

Thank you.

Thank you for that for that question.

And just a quick follow on.

And again, the the purpose of the permit fees is simply to cover the costs of the permitting review, correct?

Uh correct.

So it'll cover the entire program, and that includes file reviews, the inspection process, the documents, electronic software, um, everything that has to go with the program.

Thank you very much.

Any other comments or questions from the day?

All right, Madam City Clerk, we can go to the vote.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilmember Rogers.

Aye.

Councilmember O'Krepke.

Aye.

Councilmember McDonald.

Hi.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Van Willow.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

All right.

Mayor Stapp.

Yes.

The motion passes with six affirmative votes with Councilmember Fleming absent.

Thank you.

Thank you for two good presentations, Kevin.

With that, we will return back to our our two final report items for the evening.

Item 15.2, a report on the ordinance of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa amending Chapter 1-04 of the City Code entitled Custody and Use of City SEAL and Other Inficial Insignia.

I've been looking forward to this one.

I believe it is assistant city manager nut.

And also Bryce Aston.

Welcome, welcome to both of you.

I am wrapped with attention.

Good evening, Mayor Staff, members of the council, Jason Nutt, Assistant City Manager, and I'm joined by Bryce Aston.

And we are bringing to you an exciting item.

And we're going to explain to you why this is exciting and why it's important for us to go through today.

The concept that we've got is to look at amending uh city code section one-04, and it's relating to the custody and use of the seal and other official insignia.

But then we're also going to describe for you what we're doing to ensure that our brand, the city's brand, remains intact and it remains in a place that we can make sure that we're not seeing it disappear into other private hands and abused and used.

And so that's that's the goal where we're at.

So in 1949, one back in 1949, the city adopted its official seal.

Um we won't be talking at depth about the official seal, but when it comes to the most official documents the city has, the seal is embossed on those documents.

And you can see an image of the seal here.

It does show up both as color and as an embossed black and white.

And the city code references that the city clerk is fully and wholly responsible for its uh management upkeep, and uh is the only one capable of putting the seal on any specific document.

In 2013, there was a concern about the city logo uh and interest in wanting to ensure that we created some level of trademark, some level of uh oversight and control over the use of our city logo.

Uh and so they found a way of incorporating that logo into the city code by amending section one-04.

Next slide.

We came back, and that was uh through ordinance number four thousand and eight.

Um with that uh they began to describe in the city code um the specifics of the logo itself.

It actually would describe the detail.

It's uh uh rose emblem with three leaves uh and a the city name, both either stacked or horizontal.

Uh and then um that replaced the logo that you see there, which was more of the stylistic SR that was sort of in the shape of Santa Rosa Creek.

Um, and the idea was to make it more modern to give us a new feel and to give us a new uh look moving forward.

Uh and the idea that we put it into the city code was the attempt to secure that trademark.

Next slide.

Uh in 2015, the city uh team came back to council with an update.

And as you start to see the need for these changes, it relates to the changes in technology.

Um that uh emblem with the Santa Rosa and California on it as a stylized product doesn't always show up cleanly or clearly on your tablet or on your cell phone.

Um it also isn't quite as easy to use uh from the perspective of um some formatted documents, and so they started to look at other formats like the square one that you see here.

Uh that is now adopted, and in 2015 was uh amended into the city code uh again with a large level of detail uh in an effort to ensure that we maintained the trademark.

Now, since that time, there have been some adjustments and amendments, and and the the challenge we have is is because it lives in the city code, it is an ordinance requirement to make an adjustment every time we make the change.

So when Santa Rosa Water utilized the blue color for their logos, that was in direct violation of our own code.

So we are been working on making updates over the course of time.

Uh as we look at the adjustments that we made most recently with the city's website, uh, we began the process of reconstructing and recreating the um the city's uh brand image.

One more time.

And with that, uh this December, as you recall, we launched a brand new website.

That website has a different aesthetic to it, it had a different look, a different feel, all with the intempt of trying to improve the uh city's um interaction with members of the public, but not just on a computer, but on a tablet as well, and and a uh handheld device, a phone, uh either Android or Apple.

Uh and so far, we feel we've been successful.

That new product is working out very well.

Um, as we've started to work toward bringing this particular product to you, uh, we did want to make sure that the city attorneys agreed that by shifting uh or making the adjustment or the amendment to the city code and removing all of the level of detail out of the code, only referencing an adopted brand book that was still worthy of the trademark type of value.

It still allowed us to cite individuals who are inappropriately using our logo with a misdemeanor.

It gave us the opportunity to secure that moving forward.

We were informed that that in fact was accurate.

So, what the proposal will be is to uh remove that level of detail from the city code, make it simpler, but have you by resolution adopt an actual formal brand book?

And I'm gonna ask um Bryce to go through that level of detail and describe for you what the brand book is and uh and get you excited about Santa Rosa.

Absolutely.

Let's get into this.

An easy thing to be excited about.

Um, good afternoon, Mayor Stapp and members of council, and good afternoon, City Manager Smith.

My name is Bryce Aston.

I am a community outreach specialist with the communications and intergovernmental relations office at the City of Santa Rosa.

And I'm really glad to be here with all of you today to get you very excited about our new brand book that we will hopefully be adopting.

Um as assistant city manager Nut outlined, the City of Santa Rosa has developed over time several different versions of our logo, several different versions of our branding, and we have been previously guided by the 2015 brand book.

However, as the city continues to grow and change, it's really important that our communications and our representation of ourselves to the public continues to adapt and grow with us.

Um, and so because of that, we felt it was time about high time that we got a new brand book that represented new technology, new look, etc.

So just to give a quick overview in case there's any confusion of what a brand book is and the role it serves in an organization, essentially a brand book provides a set of really comprehensive and clear guidelines and principles on how to use an organization's branding.

And so branding includes brand colors, logos, fonts, templates, etc.

Anything you're going to be using to communicate both internally and with the public.

Um and it's really important to maintain that so you can maintain a sense of professionalism and continuity across all communications, both internally and externally on an organization.

So with the 2025 City of Santa Rosa brand book that we're proposing, along with new specifications aligned to the new City of Santa Rosa website.

We will also have specific use cases for formal and informal city and departmental logos.

This is very important.

We really didn't have much of that in the 2015 brand book, and it would be nice to have that clarity for both ourselves and for all other staff members.

We will also have specific design recommendations to ensure consistency and professionalism and legibility in all city outreach and communications.

And we'll have expanded guidelines on adhering to graphic design best practices and ADA recommendations, also really another important aspect to maintain accessibility of all communications for the city of Santa Rosa for all people.

So why is it important that the City of Santa Rosa have a brand book?

You may be wondering.

I think it's really important to adopt our brand book for a number of reasons, but above all, ensuring consistency and imagery and messaging really conveys a sense of professionalism and continuity across all city communications.

And I believe this is really key to building a sense of reliability within the community we serve.

When we adhere strictly to these consistent guidelines, residents can see that we approach our work and our service to the community with the seriousness, care, and attention to detail that they really deserve.

Beyond that, just practically continuing to maintain and build upon our already recognizable branding as the city of Santa Rosa also ensures that residents can easily identify trustworthy, reliable communications from the city of Santa Rosa.

So when residents are downtown and they see a poster for an event, when they see a truck with a logo on it, when they get a letter in the mail from the city of Santa Rosa, they understand that those are communications directly from official City of Santa Rosa channels, and there's no confusion about any of that.

So that's really important, obviously.

And then additionally, consistent branding guidelines outlined thoroughly in the brand book will help our staff across departments really streamline their workflow and the process of developing outreach materials and other city communications.

You know, it's really easy to just look in the brand book and know how you can use templates, how you can use logos, et cetera.

You don't have to have any confusion about that.

And likewise, that will help with working with outside city contract or outside contractors outside the city.

We can just send them the brand book and say, please adhere to these guidelines and principles in order to maintain our standards when you're working with us.

So as we present this brand book to you for hopeful adoption, I'd like to outline some of the highlights of what we have in this brand book for you all.

I already touched on most of them, I'll just go over them really briefly.

So, as previously mentioned, one of the biggest impetus for this process was the relaunch of the city website in December of 2024.

The 2025 brand book will have an updated color palette for city design and outreach materials that includes the new slightly tweaked main logo colors and accent colors that are featured on the website.

So again, that's just really maintaining that consistency across all City of Santa Rosa communications so that what we have online and what we have out in public printed will all look the same.

Maintain that professionalism.

Additionally, we wanted to make sure this resource provides clarity and guidance for staff across departments and recognize that there has previously been some confusion about where to use what.

So logos, what logo do I use?

There's about a million of them.

When can I use it?

And so it's really helpful to have those best use cases for all logo types, really specific ones.

So hopefully that will remove that confusion in the future.

Oops.

We also took a closer look at accessibility and design, as I mentioned when we were developing this brand book.

So one of the ways in which we did that was updating our list of official city logos to include ADA compliant logo or sorry, ADA compliant fonts.

So we want to make sure that we have those on our list of official city fonts, and then we also outlined really specific use cases for all city fonts as well.

And then finally, we updated our brand book guidance on ADA compliance and design, just the overall general guidance, and I think that this is really important.

Where our previous guidance was incomplete and at this point outdated because it'd been written several years ago.

Our new official guidance in the brand book is that all city outreach materials and design materials communications should align with all city ADA policy, risk management guidance, and ADA graphic design best practices as outlined on a number of like federal and state ADA websites.

This really provides a lot of flexibility in the future because ADA compliance and ADA recommendations are shifting quite often as technology changes and as understanding of what makes something accessible changes.

And so having that flexibility to send staff resources and say this is these are our recommendations, this is what you should work with, would be really helpful in the future.

And that's about it for the highlights.

Gripping, I know.

Thank you all for this opportunity to present the brand book to council.

I just wanted to say that my entire team worked with me to put this together to build a really robust resource for our staff and for our community.

And we think it's really important to serving our community that we continue to develop reliability and trust for the city of Santa Rosa by paying attention to these admittedly very small details.

Thank you very much.

Here, here.

That was a perfect ending, price.

All right.

Bringing it back to council for all the questions.

Thank you.

Fine.

I'm gonna ask a question then.

So as I was as I was paging through the brand book this weekend, like all of my colleagues, I noticed on page 11 when you got into the department-specific logos that we're that we're mixing serif and sans serif fonts.

Does that say city of tomorrow?

Is anybody else?

Is anybody else bothered by this?

It's easy to do a comment or asked to do it.

It is.

It's not hard like we can do it.

I guess I'm partially ask asking that rhetorically because it has been explained to me bluntly by friends and colleagues that nobody else wants to talk about this.

But I will persist.

Mr.

O'Krepke.

Alright, I'll I'll venture to have a relevant question.

Um we last changed our logo in 2013, and it looks like there's been a lot of efforts to sort of uh standardize everything that we use, including the palette with such great colors as mustard, mustard light, and zing, um, which remind me of the appliances my parents had growing up.

Um general marketing and design theory, when when is it appropriate time to rebrand something or attempt to rebrand something?

That's a great question.

Um many brands have tried and failed to find the answer to that.

Um they've done it at varying levels of success.

Um I think that a rebrand generally involves a lot of really fundamental change to an organization.

So I would say that probably the city of Santa Rosa is not at that point yet.

Yeah, I mean, if you look if I think about other municipal organizations and how often they change their brand types, it doesn't happen often.

Let's just be blunt.

I mean, you try to establish a standard, a standard logo, a standard look, and a standard feel, and that's sort of what you want to live with over a period of time.

I think to Bryce's point, if there is a large formatted fundamental change in an organization, then we can contemplate and look at how we might make an adjustment in what we what we're presenting ourselves at.

Um, I want to say that this is coming out of the Great Recession, and the city managers at the time were trying to identify how we could reimagine who we were uh coming out of that space.

So, you know, in that case, that was uh fairly substantial time in history, and in the view of those city managers, it was it was an appropriate action to evaluate.

I appreciate that, but I would also point out that there are many marketing and CEO geniuses that thought new Coke and Crystal Pepsi were appropriate at the time, and I just disagree.

Um I think I think possibly it may be time to to look at a rebrand down the line.

I know we have limited resources now, but uh I do appreciate your efforts to standardize everything as is needed to protect our brand and to not have it be uh uh compromised.

The brand book is great and it's necessary.

And my colleague or our colleague, Miss Ms.

McDonnell, I think is gonna demonstrate her level of emotional support by departing at this moment.

So with that, actually, we can I think we can are are there additional questions?

I'm guessing the answer is no.

Uh let's open up the public comment.

Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on the brand book for the city of Santa Rosa?

That is disappointing also.

That is that's an important point.

Thank you for that.

Um let's bring it back to council for a motion in a second.

Uh Ms.

Rogers.

Or we'll close public comment, seeing none.

Ms.

Rogers.

Well, Miss Van Welos, apologies.

I read the wrong line.

Miss Van Wellos, the honor is yours.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um okay, so I would like to make a motion to introduce the ordinance entitled Ordnance of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa, amending section one-04, uh excuse me, uh point zero two zero of the Santa Rosa City Code and waive any re reading of further text.

Second.

We have a motion and a second by Ms.

Rogers.

I'm assuming oh, Miss Rogers, please.

We don't stole mine, but I do want to say, yes, and you did not even go to the left and to give your public comment.

But I do want to say that it looks beautiful, and I pass it all the time, and it gives me a certain amount of pride when I see it.

So we need those around more.

So it's just the rose, but it's like in embedded in the concrete.

It just it looks it looks great.

I love it.

If you haven't seen it, please go by the hearn overpass and check it out.

They're also incorporating those into the redo of the Mendocino Overcrossing as well.

So I think it's more of a general effort throughout the entirety of Santa Rosa to do that.

We love our roses and we love our city.

Madam City Clerk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilmember Rogers.

Councilmember O'Krepke.

Hi.

Councilmember McDonald.

Hi.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Banuelos.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Hi.

Mayor Stapp.

Hi.

The motion passes with six affirmative votes with Councilmember Fleming absent.

Jason and Bryce, thanks for all the work on this one.

Good presentation.

Mayor, if I could, there was a second part to that, please, which is the option of a resolution.

Apologies, Miss Ben Welos.

All right.

Uh I move to adopt a resolution entitled Resolution of the Council of the City of Santa Rosa, adopting the 2025 brand book and waive any uh further reading of the text.

Second.

Motion is second by Miss Rogers.

Madam City Clerk, whenever you're ready.

Councilmember Rogers, aye.

Councilmember O'Krepke.

Aye.

Councilmember McDonald, aye.

Councilmember Fleming is absent.

Councilmember Banuelos.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Alvarez.

Mayor Stopp.

Aye.

The motion passes with six affirmative votes with Councilmember Fleming absent.

Thank you again.

And with that, we'll move on to item 15.3, our report on city asset naming and renaming.

And assistant city manager Nutt, I think we still have you presenting.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Assistant City Manager Jason Nutt.

Uh, you're stuck with me for one more.

Just let me get this loaded up.

All right.

Thank you for putting up with me one more time.

Uh this is gonna be um a little more engaging because we're gonna be talking about city assets uh and the naming and renaming policy.

Um there's uh a little bit of a history to this, and so I'm gonna start off with a little bit of a purpose statement.

I'm not gonna read this, but uh the bottom line is is right now the city does not have a comprehensive policy that identifies or provides guidance to the city, city council uh or the community on how a city asset could be named or renamed uh and when it's appropriate to do so.

Uh and because of uh an interest from members of the community, interest from members of the council, interest from other staff members here.

Uh, we felt it was the right time to start to develop a policy that would help us uh move forward with different evaluations that that could result in renaming or naming.

Um from a background perspective, as I mentioned, there's been a number of uh uh there's been a number of interested requests over the course of at least the last decade that I've been here, and I'm sure uh well beyond that.

Uh the only policy that we currently have is this policy zero zero-25, titled park naming policy and procedure.

Uh, if you've read through that, it's uh it's actually it's not a bad policy.

It's very simple, but it leaves a lot to the imagination as far as how we would take care of more complex requests.

Uh, and it doesn't go beyond parks uh or recreational facilities.

Uh and so uh the park and rec team has actually been working on this for the last couple of years.

Uh, and uh it really came about when we were renaming Creekside open space to Mary Traverso open space, and and it was highlighted at that point, the process for that renaming was very complex and it wasn't clearly outlined.

So the recreational parks team has for the last several years begun to conduct a series of evaluations.

They've been looking at other policies around the country, trying to come up with the most reasonable and appropriate approach for us moving forward.

Uh and so I um was lucky enough when I took on this assignment to uh stand on their greatness uh and utilize a lot of the background and information that they came up with, and you'll see that incorporated through here.

That policy that we have in place was originally adopted in 1989.

Uh, it's been amended four times or three times, and um it even though it's been amended, it has yet to really come into uh enough detail to help us, and that's why we were looking to do it again.

As I started drafting uh this policy, I circulated it to each of the departments, gave some feedback.

Uh, here's some of the aspects that the department's asked me to consider.

Uh from a street naming perspective, uh, some cities and municipalities around the state have actually incorporated how new streets are named into theirs into their asset naming and renaming.

Uh, in working with planning and economic development, we determined that we already have a process that we've been very comfortable and happy with.

So you'll see that that's actually excluded from the document that we are asking you to adopt today.

Um, but it does give us other opportunities to look at how we would rename those city streets or how we would establish something like a ceremonial street name.

When it comes to the recreation and park side of things, uh, as I said, a lot of work was done by the team, and I'm very thankful for the efforts that they put into it.

There are a couple of other aspects.

Not that we have a request to look at what a themed asset might look like, but there could be.

There could be that shift as we look to enhance some of our parks where we think this falls under a themed asset concept, and I wanted us to have a framework set up so that if we had a request to name that particular park or that asset after something specific, the framework was there for us.

Um then when we start talking when I start talking a little further, there really is some level of priority on this.

City assets, some are named for a particular purpose, and we don't really want to encourage the constant renaming of city assets.

We think that there should be some level of conscious approach to evaluating requests as they come forward.

And so you'll see we've incorporated a number of steps for the community, for the boards and commissions, and for council to really strongly weigh uh each of the criteria and the requests that come forward to ensure that this is the way we want to move forward.

And then as we were working through the final portions of this, and in light of some of the activities that have occurred over the last five years, uh the city attorney's office really identified a great point in here that we really should have uh a portion of this policy that gives council the authority to remove a name.

And we'll talk more detail about what that means, uh, but um you know that was absent from several over the policy examples that I've looked at, and and it made sense once the attorney's office and I had this discussion as to why we might want to include that.

So the policy is outlined in nine different sections.

Um I'm gonna very quickly go through each of these to explain what that section is about and why.

Um the first is the definitions.

Um it has a number of definitions to it.

I'm highlighting only a few just so that I can set the stage on what it is we're trying to accomplish.

When we're talking about city assets, it's recreation facilities, it's city-owned facilities, the buildings that we have.

Uh it's streets, it's parks, um, and it's ancillary components of each of those.

Uh and you'll see that when we talk about the city facility, it goes into a little bit more depth.

It could be our library, it could be a room within the library.

Um, I'm gonna use the term ceremonial at some point.

This is not an official name change.

This is a name change for the benefit of recognizing an individual where we are not establishing, for example, a ceremonial street name isn't going to change the post office or mailing address of that business.

It's to provide some contextual indication for what those people, individual or events provided our community that we want to honor.

Memorials and plaques.

Um, right now we have a standards policy that we are not allowing, we prohibit memorials.

We don't actually have any documentation that says why.

Uh, we don't have any process that gives folks an opportunity to come forward if they feel they've got a reason for wanting a memorial.

Uh, and so this gives us a tool to be able to make those evaluations and for the public to understand uh what it would take for them to bring forward a request.

When we talk about parks, parks is a generalized term, but uh the recreational parks department wanted me to make sure that I emphasize it is all of our activity areas.

It's open space, it's trails, it's plazas like JG Way, um, it's neighborhood parks and community parks in our open space.

Uh and then from a recreation facility, it could be um the gazebo at Southwest Community Park to Finley Community Center, uh, to the aquatics pad over here across the street at Prince Gateway Park.

So I just wanted to set the stage so that when we use these terms, you understand what I'm referencing.

So from a general naming criteria, these are the key major ways with which we believe that names should be evaluated or considered when it comes to a naming or a renaming.

Location obviously is the one we would generally look at as the priority.

It's the one that that we think makes the most sense.

You're honoring a particular location, you're honoring the environment, you're honoring a space in your community.

When we think about significant events, people or places, it's for a specific landmark.

The Sonoma County Museum, there may be a specific landmark because it's the original post office, or it's an event-oriented type of activity that we want to reference for that specific space because it had history.

Um, outstanding individuals is another, where we want to reference an individual who, in this case, uh, individuals must be deceased in order to be considered for naming.

Uh, but these are folks that have contributed substantially to our community, and we want to make sure that we honor them in certain ways.

Mary Traverso open space was one of those we did recently, and the reason why we're uh embedded in that conversation.

Major donations.

Um, from a major donation perspective, the idea is if you have the person family who donated the person's senior wing.

They donated a significant amount of money for the benefit of our community to support the well-being of seniors in our population, and we wanted to honor that family by making that uh building reference the family donation uh that was provided to us.

And so we've created uh an area or criteria associated with that.

I mentioned theme assets, uh, and then the last one is one that uh, you know, again, I threw a placeholder in there.

Uh I felt it was important for us to at least put the concept out on the table, which is one of naming rights.

If there is a facility that we want to sell naming rights to for whatever purpose or reason, there's now a there's now a statement in there that the council is one open to it and that there is a generalized process.

There's no detail on that process, but it says you will establish an agreement with the council for that benefit.

From a provisions perspective, and this really says you've got the criteria, and now what are you doing with that criteria?

How are you evaluating and determining whether or not that criteria is worth further evaluation?

And so there are eight uh general naming provisions, talking about historical cultural, talking about the location and history of uh of the low of uh the asset, general broad public support, uh, and then even though I talked about naming rights before, the idea is there's no commercialization uh of a particular asset.

That's not the intent of our naming policy and program.

As I mentioned, the idea is that there's a standardized process now for moving these types of requests through.

Uh, and I identified five different uh boards and commissions that would support the council's evaluation process.

I've identified specific types of facilities that we may be naming or renaming and which board I thought was the most reasonable to per to do the initial evaluation process.

Um in talking with uh the executive team here at the city, it seemed reasonable and appropriate to them as well.

Now, from a process perspective, we did create an application, and we will require that all naming requests come forward with an application.

Um I've created a draft that draft was attached to uh the council packet.

Um that is a draft form.

We will continue to work on trying to ensure that that encompasses all of the data that we need to collect to ensure that that application is acceptable.

Um within that application, there's gonna be justification letters, it's gonna be letters of support, it's gonna be documentation.

Um, it's the description of why that particular name best fits that asset.

Uh, and then there's the process of justification, which is petitions.

Um we require a petition uh for each application, and in many cases, we're gonna want to see a thousand residents uh sign with 50% of those residents immediately adjacent to the assets that's being named.

It's important for public buy-in.

I mentioned that on the priorities.

It's important to make sure that the public agrees with the process that we're looking at, agrees with the naming, and so that's how we get into the queue for evaluation purposes.

Now, I'm just gonna say that thousand residents is a number where we kind of best fit.

When we looked at policies across the state, they range from 500 signatories to over 1,500 signatories.

So our thought was we're gonna balance in the middle, and if council would like us to evaluate a different number relating to that, I'm happy to consider that and incorporate that in as part of the final um draft of this.

When we go through the review and approval process, um, as I said, this this shouldn't be an easy thing to rename.

I'm sorry, it needs process, it needs evaluation, it needs to make sure that the work that the community is doing to justify is validated by the community and by the the policymakers.

And so those committees that I showed previously would take the first three steps in this.

And in those steps, it's the petition application, it's the initial evaluation of what the request is, then it's the board and commission asking staff to work with the applicant to further justify and identify whether there are other petitioners for that specific or similar asset.

Uh, and then it's bringing back a series of conversations and final decision making to that board and commission that would then be recommended to the city council for final evaluation.

Um, in each of these cases, public outreach must ensue.

Uh, and for example, on Mary Traverso uh open space, in addition to the Board of Community Service meetings, uh, we also had public meetings out in the community to further discuss that in an effort to try to gain public support and ensure that this was the right path and direction uh for that process.

In the end, the uh cost if we if it's approved by council, the cost is of renaming that is to be borne by the applicant, proponent, which means any signage would need to come at the cost of those applicants.

That we are all bought into this, not just from the policymaker, but from the community that's really advocating on their behalf.

Now, built into the policy, there's also the ability for the city manager to consolidate some of these activities, in particular, consolidate steps two and three and consolidate steps four and five, depending upon whether or not there are other alternatives or other petitioners for that same asset.

If there aren't any, then the city manager can authorize that those uh that those two processes uh shrink to uh one less meeting uh each.

I mentioned ceremonial street naming, and I'm gonna spend a couple of slides talking about this.

Um there are several cities that have started to adopt this, as I mentioned.

This is not an a an official uh name change.

This is a temporary naming of a street.

The official address will remain the same.

Uh it will always be Santa Rosa Avenue.

Uh, even if there was interest in honoring uh an individual event or time in history for a ceremonial street name, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue will continue to be the mailing address for this piece of property, even though we might have a different um honorary name to go with that stretch of street.

There's a series of criteria here relating to the individual philanthropic organization or significant event or landmark on how that would be incorporated.

These are not dissimilar from the original criteria that I mentioned at the beginning of this in section three.

Um, but there are provisions that need to come with this for honorary uh street naming.

Uh, we want to make sure that the community that lives on that street has the loudest voice uh in either its uh approval or the voice saying we we don't support uh this particular request.

Uh and so only a member uh of that street or a property, uh resident on that street, uh a community group that operates from that street or a council member can bring forward these types of applications.

Um, this is not dissimilar from other communities that have this type of ceremonial street naming process, and so this wasn't something I made up.

This is fairly common for those other communities as well.

This application would be vetted originally by the city manager and then come to the city council uh for consideration.

It would not go through one of the boards and commissions.

Um, so it would have a different path along its way.

Uh, there is a protest potential for this particular uh process, which is 20% of those impacted residents, as I mentioned, it's the folks who live on that street that need to be given a higher weight of voice.

Uh and then it's a matter of how we would address uh the time frame on the ceremonial street naming for that.

Uh, we're identifying a 10-year time frame, and that the applicant would be paying for the installation of the commemorative uh signage.

And you can see in the example of uh one of the cities uh that has this policy and how they are demonstrating that in their community.

Um section eight, as I mentioned, is the memorial recognition.

Uh, this really does say if someone wants to create a true memorial that they'll need to come to council to make that request.

Uh we will not, we will be in essence prohibiting additional memorials in this community.

Memorials include not just uh memorials such as the veterans memorial that exists outside these doors, but also memorials within parks uh in dedication of a particular individual who uh is deceased.

Um, it's these are very difficult for uh the city to manage, maintain, and to ensure uh they stay in good condition.

Um it is a challenge uh that um several years ago from an organizational perspective, we decided that we were going to cease offering these uh and so we've incorporated it here as part of the policy.

Um, should there be an interest in allowing a particular memorial through the course of the application, uh, as you can see, we're referencing section three.

These are the criteria that are established as to what constitutes a naming for a particular location, and we believe that would be consistent uh for uh a memorial.

Um these applications would only be considered by the city council and not one of the boards or commissions.

Uh and then lastly was the removal of a name.

Um there have been points in time uh in our history in our recent history where uh information comes to light about a particular individual who may have been honored or a corporation or uh a nonprofit that is uh uh no longer appealing for the city for political or other reasons, and this allows the council to bypass uh the other processes to remove those names with a little bit of expediency.

Um, it doesn't necessarily establish a renaming process other than council can remove a name and insert something temporarily in its place uh while we go through a permanent renaming program.

Um but we felt this was important uh to incorporate because it was unclear without it how uh council might make a request of the city manager or others uh to conduct an evaluation for removing a name of something that we no longer are wanting to support from a naming perspective.

So with that, it's recommended by the city manager's office that council by resolution adopt council policy entitled City Asset Naming and Renaming, and rescind policy zero zero zero-25 titled park naming policy and procedure.

And I am here to answer any questions should have me.

Thank you, Assistant City Manager.

There was a lot of work that went into this and certainly a lot of discussion in the community in recent years about this.

So it is good that we are finally evaluating this.

I'll turn it to council for questions.

Ms.

Rogers.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so one thing that popped up for me, Assistant City Manager was Cancer Survivors Park.

Would that be an example of us calling it something else?

Uh from a historical perspective, it would not warrant us to go and do something unless council believes that there is a significant reason why we would want to undo that name.

Um council could initiate a solicitation for alternative naming and go and have that process work through here.

Um but there was a rhyme and a reason as to why that park was named that way, and we would want to go back and do uh evaluation and vetting of of how that name came to be.

But it was based on a donation labeled and named as Cancer Survivors Park.

Okay.

Um then also uh 3.1 number four, the major donations.

They still have to go through the entire process, correct?

That that's correct, and and actually I'll just say um I had an extensive conversation with the city attorney's office over this specific issue.

Um there are individuals that we would be unwilling to accept a donation for, or maybe we're willing to accept it, but we are not willing to provide them naming, uh, we're not willing to put their name on it.

Um, and so uh this uh this forces even those individuals to go through the process to ensure that the community agrees uh with their name being placed on that facility or that city asset, even if they provide us funding to construct.

I won't go through the examples that I discussed with the city attorney's office, but you know, you can you can envision some fairly egregious um individuals, for example, that that don't have um community that are not likely to have community support, but have lots of money that would be interested in in having their name adorned on something they build for us because they can afford to pay for it.

Um that would not be necessarily in the best interest of the city to see their their name there.

If I can afford to give you a million dollars to go towards something, I'm sure I can afford to buy a thousand signatures.

I'm just saying, but um that is one that I really don't care for necessarily, especially if they have to go through the process um anyway, and I'll say for me, it's because I feel like people shouldn't be able to just it's like almost bribing or buying something from us.

I'm fine with taking money, don't get me wrong on that one.

Um, but just I'm gonna give you this, but you have to do this.

So it just reminds me of the have and the have nots.

Um, and I it just doesn't sit well with me.

Um, but that will be on the comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Krupke, yeah, just one quick clarifying question.

First of all, I I thanks for this presentation.

As the mayor said, I I understand a lot of work went over went into this over a long period of time.

Um it comes to the ceremonial street naming.

You said earlier in the presentation they have to be dead.

Under this new uh proposal, is that still the case or is that revised within the new proposal?

So the ceremonial street naming does require that the individuals being honored comply with the outstanding individuals component of the criteria, which is which is deceased greater than three years.

I think it's one I we we adjusted at some point.

Give me just a moment.

Actually, we said uh deceased greater than five years, and so and so for a ceremonial street naming um that would uh require uh an individual to um to comply with that if it's to be named after an individual.

Okay, and sorry to to go backwards.

That does that that apply for all naming as well, or just ceremonial street naming?

That would apply for all naming if we're going to honor permanently an individual uh specific individual that follows under that particular criteria of outstanding individual.

Okay, there are just two different mechanisms for honoring an individual.

One is a permanent recognition, one is a temporary recognition.

It's more of an honorarium.

But both have to have the okay.

So I think I I think I would want to have come back for comments, but I do have concerns about that portion of it.

Okay.

Ms.

Bangwayos.

Thank you.

Um, first of all, I want to say this is great.

I'm glad that we that, and thank you for working on this process because you are absolutely right.

We get requests all the time, and um now we'll have some kind of a structured uh process that we can help our constituents with, right?

To walk them through the process.

Having said that, um, there's a lot of different levels here, which I think is is good in many ways, but also a little overwhelming.

I know I would be like, okay, what does this fall into, etc.

etc.

So there's that.

Um the other thing I'm wondering about, you know, the petition, um, and then the thousand signatures.

This is the general under under the general, um, and then cost to the applicant.

Um, that I understand because, yeah, mail and all that all of those things have to be considered, but I think it precludes I don't know, regular folks, working class folks from bringing forth um a change or not necessarily even a change, but something new, something that may not even have a name, but could use a name.

Uh, I would be really concerned about that because would we even have an idea of what that cost would be, since it could so many things could be affected by that change, or that or that entity being named.

Council member, I I'll say that that varies depending upon the location.

For example, um, from a uh public safety response perspective, all of our park signs are now have to be internally or have to be illuminated.

Uh and generally we're starting to put them in more durable materials than we have in the past.

So there is a higher cost associated with renaming those spaces.

Now there may only be one sign for those particular parks, which reduces the cost, but with some there may be multiple points of access, and we and each of those points would need to have the name adjusted or changed from a uh street name perspective or renaming, um, depends on the length of the stretch.

If we're talking a mile, you could have uh almost 20 to 50 signs that need to be replaced to demonstrate that new street name if we were officially changed the name.

Um, and so wanting to make sure that uh we were able to manage the cost to the city and the organization.

Um, again, this is a draft policy.

If council chooses to direct us to go a different way, you know, that that's the prerogative of the council.

Um, but I think the reason we've incorporated it this way is it's not uncommon for other municipalities to require that the applicants be that they put that that kind of teeth in the game for wanting to see the name changed um to fit with their interests.

So I'm thinking like for example, in my district, um, there's a whole section uh named after presidents, right?

You know, you know what I'm talking about, uh Madison and Polk and all the presidents, but they're all the old presidents, just by the way.

So, so I could see someone saying, Well, you know, I want to rename my street Obama, or I want to rename my, you know, I mean, but but they wouldn't be able to because of the costs.

So, I mean, that's just one thing that comes to mind.

The other thing I'm wondering about is what uh council member uh Rogers was talking about, the donation.

I know there are many organizations that do that.

If you make a big donation, I can think of a couple that I'm associated with that that um have that practice.

And that's another thing that has always um bothered me as far as working-class folks again that having that opportunity, um, they wouldn't be able to because they would never be able to match what the Schultz can do or any of those folks who are wonderful.

But you know, you don't get a library named after you unless you have a lot of money.

So I'm just thinking about that.

Just that the disparity between the what council member Rogers said the haves and have nots.

And the other thing I wanted to ask you, you mentioned that council members could bring forth something.

Um, great.

Would we also have to pay for it?

You know, or or if our constituents came to us and said, could you do this for us?

Because we can't afford it.

You know, uh so there's kind of just a lot of different things that are coming to mind uh with the the way the policy is presented right now.

And so from the perspective of the major donations, um I I certainly understand the concept of the have and have nots.

I I will say that there's that we have many assets in this organization right now that are the benefit we benefited from substantial donors, and we're honoring them by having their names on there, whether it's Doyle Park or whether it's Finley Community Center or Person Senior Wing, and there are many others out there.

Um I do understand that it may give the appearance that it's seg it separates those individuals with money from those that do not.

This particular policy allows for anyone's name to be honored on a city facility.

It doesn't only uh relate to those individuals that can afford to pay for the facility itself.

Uh and and so I I just want to make sure that you know it it's it's under that it's clear that that the attempt was not to completely isolate the ability for us to name something for someone who has the fiscal means, but instead it's really wanting to appreciate those individuals that do spend money in our community uh that way to give council the opportunity to say thank you for that donation.

Again, to you know, the conversation earlier, even someone who makes a major donation must go through this process and get approvals to have their name placed on that.

I'm not sure that's the way it has always been.

Um but I didn't feel that there was a benefit for shortcutting those individuals over others, so they have to follow the same process.

There's just a category that says we would really like to consider this as a potential.

And just to say I agree, I mean, when someone comes along and they offer a huge donation, that makes it possible to build something that has to be rewarded in some way.

I get that.

I'm just saying that it might discourage others from even putting a suggestion in, that's all.

Thank you.

Ms.

Rogers.

So if they're gonna have to go through the process anyway, it doesn't matter that they made the donation.

Like thank you.

But when we're looking at outstanding individuals, and we're saying that there will be some individuals that even if they made a donation, we would not allow them to uh put their name on something, to me, they have to go through the process anyway.

Um giving a substantial amount of money to a community center or something that's gonna give to our kids for for many generations to come, that's a big deal.

But then that also makes them an outstanding individual, and that also can go, you know, it like falls into different categories.

And and council member, I'd say, but not necessarily a major donation doesn't necessarily require the same level of um, it's not the same criteria as the outstanding individual.

And so, for example, the um the Finlay family uh is donating this, it's not the particular individual, it may not be the particular individual, and then they have to follow that person's been deceased five years.

They've substantially uh provided for this community, they've they've been outstanding in all of these ways.

It could be that this is a pillar family in the community that's still here that is donating the money, and it's our intent from a city perspective to honor that donation by naming that facility after the family name, or you know, or a particular the individual or the the nonprofit.

So a family obviously the whole family is not gonna be deceased.

Um a family that is currently living uh can have something named after them.

Um and then if something happens within that family or an individual disgrace the name of that family, then we would take their name off of the buildings.

So if the donation, if the donation is in the name of an individual, that individual needs to comply with the outstanding individuals criteria.

If it's a family name or a nonprofit, it does not need to comply with that particular section.

Okay.

I mean, I still don't like it, but okay, and here you and and again, you know, you're you're seeing a draft.

If there's even though I'm asking you to adopt this, if there's a particular adjustment or amendment, I'm happy to to evaluate that.

Um so if we're looking at uh 3.13, would it be too far-fetching to say outstanding individuals and our families?

I I don't think it's it would be, however, the criteria here does require that that person being honored as deceased greater than five years.

So then again, uh a family name can only go on something if they have a lot of money.

So then that goes back to the half and the have nots.

I don't want to get into the weeds, but I'm just saying it still goes back to the have and the have nots.

Rather, we I mean there's no way you can put a family name on something unless you have a lot of money.

Is what it's is what this policy is saying.

If I could relate this to Mary Traverso open space, the family that made that recommendation could have just said Traverso open space in honor of Mary.

Let me interrupt for a second here, just because I sense that we might be uh going down a rabbit hole.

I'm I'm sensing concerns from colleagues.

Uh this is gonna be tough to wordsmith on the dais here.

So is that is it a better, is it more efficient for us to potentially not approve this tonight and take this back to um a more informal discussion, two by two, something like that, to gather more feedback from council.

I'm looking, I'm looking for some head nodding.

Vice Mayor.

Jason, you you're you're uh requesting to create a draft is what?

No, I presented you with a draft, and I'm asking you to adopt that draft as a permanent policy.

And my colleagues or some of my colleagues are saying the haves and have nots is really not still an issue.

And our mayor's suggestion that we have a two by two conversation.

Yeah, it's sounding like we need to need some more discussion off the line, Mr.

Kropke.

Yeah, I just want to say I think I think the the structure of this is great, right?

I think what you have sort of laid out as a framework is is great.

What I think my concern is and and what I'm hearing from my colleagues is that there is some input that needs to be had on certain items, whether it be um large donations, families versus individuals, um, what the cost, how those are borne out, um, you know, deceased five years or not.

I mean, I think Obama was a perfect example of that.

I don't think we should have to wait to see if he does anything more.

Um, you know, I think he's worthy of it now.

Um, that's just me though.

Um so I think to that end, while the the framework is great, I think it might be more productive for us to have you know our our two by two discussions to fine-tune and have because give you more direct feedback than you could aggregate than doing it right here over the next hour.

Because that's what it's gonna, in my opinion, I think it's gonna end up being like an hour of us going trying to figure this out.

Plus, we have two colleagues that aren't here.

That's fine.

I mean, I I'm I'm I'm happy to um take the feedback that I've received so far and create a focused discussion uh in a in some follow-up meetings.

Looking at my colleagues, are we in agreement on that?

All right, let's let's proceed in that manner.

I I will echo what uh Mr.

Krepke just said.

Uh this is an excellent first draft.

I like the issues you're raising.

I like the the process of the general process that you're putting into place.

Um, and I think with it with some offline discussion, we can we can tweak this a little bit.

Thanks.

To that end, if there are no additional questions, let's go to public comment right now, and we'll start with uh trustee Jeremy De La Torre, and then Joe Salinas.

Good evening, mayor counsel.

It's very refreshing to be on this side of the podium for a change.

Um, this is a very emotional and near and dear um discussion for me.

Um, Timothy Russell Gillasby sacrificed his life June 24th, 2018, obstructing a lone gunman with multiple loaded firearms and a bag of explosives with the intent of murdering his estranged wife, his son, his daughter-in-law, and his grandchildren on Garfield Park in Rinca Valley in 2018.

He was postmanally honored by the Santa Rosa Police Department with a newly appointed civilian medal of courage that was presented to his widow and his sons the following year at one of their POW football games.

Um I asked in 2019 how to rename a park in honor of this man who I memorialized with a tattoo on my right forearm.

So every person's hand I shake.

I have him with me.

And I've been going through this process for the last six years, and my request has not been denied or approved, but it has been presented with challenges due to the former policy being as vague as it was and not having appropriate structure.

Now for the applicant to be solely responsible for the cost, that then makes my consideration obsolete.

I cannot no longer be a part of that conversation.

Nothing is more substantial and significant than the sacrifice of this man's life.

When we the park I would like to rename is Oak Lake Park in Rinkin Valley, it has three entrances.

Tim took his last breath, 15 yards from where this sign is, and it's the same sign that has been at that park for 61 years.

And I offered to provide the cost of the same sign if it was renamed.

I was told that if it was renamed, then I would have to be responsible in 90,000 in fees for two illuminated signs due to new safety protocols on parks.

When I started the six years ago, it still got the same wooden dilapidated flaking painted sign.

I could do that, no problem with the volunteers I have involved, but I cannot pay for electricians and new illuminated signs, and that shouldn't be in consideration to rename a park in honor of this man.

So all I ask is we consider this policy and we consider working out the kinks of how to make this progress.

Is that my initial request does not get swept under the rug and rescinded, and I have to start that process all over again?

I've sent you all information that you could read through on why this has been presented and why it's important and what I've done thus far to request it, and I'd like to continue to be a part of that process as a community member.

But we should be able to honor a man's life who's sacrificed to save so many without writing an exorbitant amount of a check.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jeremy.

Joe?

Indigenous people of this land.

We have nothing to represent our people except LCL in high school.

Got a river named after Russians, everything, all these parks named after colonizers.

Nothing for our people.

When's the city of Santa Rosa gonna take initiative to do this on their own without us, me as an individual to say, hey, you need to change this sign?

Hey, this can you represent our people for this?

Can the indigenous people be recognized?

I'm glad that this will finally happen.

When I met with John Santos, I was telling her I wanted to name a park after Betty Otterberry, who's uh CEO for uh Indian Health Project and was also tribal uh chairwoman for Dry Creek for some years.

She's not right at this moment, but she was.

She deserves to be honored.

She's done a lot for Sonoma County and the people and our in our native people.

But I was told that I have to wait till after she dies to honor her or name something after her.

Um what good is it to really honor our people if they're dead and gone after you want to show them the that you're honoring them?

I mean, so it'd be nice to honor a lot of our people, my ancestors that have gone out, and I'm talking about basket weavers, uh, uh spiritual leaders, uh many of our native people that are recognized through UC Berkeley but are not recognized through Santa Rosa, not recognized through Sonoma County, but they're recognized through UC Berkeley for the things that they've done for this area.

And now it's good to see this.

But also, but also like even I wanted to do Flat Rock Park of renaming the Bitcoin Terra Park.

Do I got a thousand natives that live in anywhere near that that uh neighborhood?

Not at all.

I'd be lucky to get a thousand signatures to have those people support my native people.

Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't.

I don't know.

But that whole thousand uh signatures for some areas that was at one time uh and documented by UC Berkeley to be an ancestral village.

Could that be recognized?

And it's not just about getting recognition for the indigenous people, it's about making that self-awareness, self-identity, self-pride for our our indigenous youth, but also our youth coming up here in the future to help educate them.

If you love Santa Rosa, you love Sonoma County.

This is the history of where you're from.

Have some pride of being where you're from.

And I think that to me, why I it's a big thing to me is to make that honor, making that pride for our youth.

Because I think fentanyl take a lot of our kids, and I feel like a lot of and gangs, and I feel like that I know that the reason why a lot of that is because of self-pride, self-awareness, self-worth.

I didn't have that.

That's the reason why I got involved in that stuff when I was younger.

So what can I do to fix that?

What can I do to make things better?

And again, I am part of the working class.

I wouldn't be able to afford to do any of these things.

But I can easily sit back on my couch and say, what can I do to make Santa Rosa better?

What can I do to make Sonoma County better and not do nothing and say, Oh, yeah, we should do this, this, and this.

No, I come here after work.

I was supposed to do dance practice tonight, but I'm not.

It's important to us and it should be here, and I shouldn't have to be here to say these things.

But again, you know, the thousand people living there being dead, paying for the renaming.

Like these are initiatives that I feel the city should be taken care of for stuff that should have been done a long time ago.

And I got a whole list of basket weaver spiritual leaders and uh cultural leaders, uh tribal leaders that if you guys are looking for names that should be recognized and should be honored.

Thank you.

Thank you, Joe.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak?

Gregory.

Thank you, Joe.

Santa Rosa City Council has sold off Santa Rosa parks and other facilities for your entire existence.

We have parks named after people with money.

You can't have a park named after you unless you've got money.

I'm a veteran of a battle that took place seven or eight years ago in which a park you had to name was given to the guy who donated the land for the park because his daughter wanted it.

He wasn't dead, he didn't turn in a thousand signatures.

A few of us wanted to name the park after uh a recently died only two years before park and rec department manager who had been here for lots of years, who everybody in the community loved.

No, you can't do that, Gregory.

He hasn't been dead for five years.

So I'm asking you, and it's gonna be a little inconsistent, I admit, to not name anything after people who just give you money or park land or anything else.

Subject them to what Jason suggested a signatures, not paid signatures, but signatures or some demonstration of a really important contribution.

Now, on the other hand, I'm married to someone who's trying to build you a library, and naming rights are important to the library foundation.

So come to some way of doing both, please.

Thank you, Gregory.

Next, uh Miss Carmen.

Is there somebody else?

Janice, you're up.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Janice Carman, uh thank you to the city council.

Um, I agree with uh Carolyn, uh Natalie, uh Greg, uh Joe Salinas, um, all of them.

Uh in another state, uh the uh county has taken it upon themselves to translate into Indian dialect the uh names of the street signs, so they're on all the roads and the people are educated along with with everything else that goes on with the Indians, um, should say Indi.

Indigenous people.

Anyway, uh Sonoma County has become much more of a melting pot than it used to be, and when I went to school, there were three black people totally at Herbert Slater Junior High when I moved here from San Francisco.

And not that there were a lot in San Francisco, but um I'm I'm glad that Santa Rosa is getting more uh diverse and uh having uh more of uh every kind of people here.

Uh, the Chinese were important, the uh Japanese, the Mexican, and uh Italian, Scandinavians, all of them.

But I'm going around town now and I'm seeing black murals.

I have a degree in art, and I love to look at the murals.

I like to see natural things and beautiful uh gorgeous uh design, and there is some of that as well.

But I think that when this happens, and I'm pretty sure it's gonna happen because it needs to, uh, that when this happens that it'll be uh the three agencies, possibly uh art and public spaces, the uh design review board, and uh there is one other that I was thinking of.

Uh without the city manager being involved, that this would be more of an open contextual thing with uh the public and the people who are looking at these kinds of things and who actually have a real investment in those specific areas.

And um I don't go with the idea that it adds contextual uh imagery or interest with a street.

I think it sounds confusing to start changing street names, but in subdivisions and other things that are evolving, I think that it's a great idea that there be some uh connection with other things that are going on in the neighborhood or Santa Rosa or historically, that they evolve with that instead of just naming a street like Harry Drive or something like that.

But anyway, thank you.

Thank you, Janice.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak on this item?

You may step forward and lean into the mic.

My name is Mary Ann Michaels, and I spoke earlier.

Uh you know that I came primarily to support uh Flat Rock Park being renamed to um Bita Comtara Park.

And when I listen to the litmus test that you're gonna try to run all these names through, I think this is a good example of one that probably won't make it.

The residents around this park are not indigenous people.

The residents may have other ideas about this park, and the intent of the request is that we people with settler and colonizer ancestry learn our own history.

The reason we don't know it is because it has been erased, and we're trying to put it back.

This is a very dynamic question.

And then listening today, I don't know if public buildings are also in this, but I was at Carol Ellis' Memorial, and the suggestion came out of that experience that in Rincon Valley, Rankin Valley Junior High be named for Carol.

And now I know that some of the junior highs aren't even going to be open next fall.

So as you think about this into the future, what if you finally get the right name on the right place and then something happens and the place isn't there anymore?

What happens to that honoring and that name?

I think this is very difficult question.

I don't think it's gonna be answered easily, but I think it's very important.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mary Ann.

Are there other members of the public who'd like to speak?

I'm Guido Boccleone.

I'm on the Board of Community Services for the City of Santa Rosa, pointed by lovely Natalie Rogers, and I've been on the board now going on, I think about three years.

I served on the board park and recreation commission in Petaluma for almost nine years, and uh there's a big big uh need or that needs to be done on the park on Burbank.

I believe it's called Burbank Park.

Consul Bonavera Alvarez, is that what it's called?

So there almost went across from the school.

Well, it it's it's it's Rosen uh Creek, but I'm hoping that it will be called Pomo Park.

Okay, okay.

The there's a group that would like to see that park named Pomo Park would be meaningful and respectful to the an act of acknowledgement.

Uh it would serve as a living tribute to our ancestors and uh gesture towards rec reconciliation, and uh there's uh a number of people that would like to have that happen.

And the other thing that I'd like to bring up is I think things like this should come before this particular item before the park and recreation commission, and uh instead of us getting it at the end, and then all we got to do is say, yes, we approve, we approve, but these type of things.

When I was on the board in Petaluma, everything that had to do with parks, recreation, and that type of uh thing came before our group.

We got to say go uh go through all this that you're going through tonight, and then we'd bring it to the council and and uh get it get it approved or disapproved.

So I think that's one thing that I know that uh most of us on the board would like to see happen uh a little bit better so we get more involved.

But um this is this uh the Pomo Park is something that they're really really pushing for.

Thank you.

Thank you, Guido.

Any other members of the public wish to speak?

All right, we'll close public comment, and it sounds like we are going to put a pause on this item for now.

Um, what I do think we've demonstrated by our comments uh at the dais and um the comments of the members of the public is just how complicated naming is.

Um, I have to confess, uh, given that I I work in fundraising and work for large organizations like the San Francisco Zoo and Sonoma State University, where discussions of naming are relatively common.

I'm not I am not surprised to see us go down this road.

Naming inspires passion.

There are lots of complicated questions.

How do we name what's the process?

What's the cost?

Who pays, how long?

Uh again, the draft that you put together, Jason, I think it starts to get at those questions in a really helpful way.

Um there will there is going to continue to be discussion even after we approve a draft, uh, but it does look like our our best first bet is to bring this back to council to have some offline conversations to see if we can we can tweak this a little bit to get at concerns of the council members and members of the public, since many of you reiterated the concerns that we that we um brought forward up here.

Um, and we will come back and discuss this at council on a future day.

It is gonna be important in the city in the long run for all sorts of reasons that we highlighted tonight.

So thank thank you for your continued work on that.

I'll look to my colleagues.

Any other final questions?

All right.

Well, we are gonna go.

We got for those of you who want to make yet more public comment.

We've got one final public comment on non-agenda matters.

And uh Janice, I believe you commented on the earlier public comment for non-agenda matters.

So for any who have not commented earlier, so there okay, please go ahead.

Is it is it Joe?

Lenis, uh and our last comment is um, yeah, I'm talking about the parks and uh doing flat rock parks and renaming some of these things and getting some recognition for the indigenous people.

Well, um my next thing I like to go after is uh you got about 27 Snoopy statues.

You don't got one Pomo statue.

Oh, just one, maybe one.

And that's uh something I'm gonna be going for coming here in the future is uh asking the city to maybe uh promote and do something to uh honor the indigenous people with uh a statue or something like that.

And um, and in these parks, I'm also looking to make signage to educate people on why these parks, why bit the Conterra park is that because that is the tribe that once lived there, it's documented from UC Berkeley, and these are the people they are.

But thank you guys all again for your support.

Thank you for your hard work in the city.

I love Santa Rosa just as much as you guys, and uh hopefully we can do what we can for the future of our of the city for our youth and for all of our people and teamwork makes a dream work.

Thank you guys.

Thanks for all your work, Joe.

Are there any other members of the cup public who want to make comment on uh on non-agenda matters?

Seeing none, I again Janice.

I think you made comment at the earlier correct.

But you there were we've done two, we've done two two non-agenda item periods air comment sessions.