Measure U Oversight Committee

CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA MEETING OF THE MEASURE U OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE City Hall Council Chambers 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 MINUTES Wednesday, January 29, 2025 CALL TO ORDER 1. OATH OF OFFICE FOR NEWLY APPOINTED MEMBER SCOTT FISHMAN (Administered by City Clerk Caitlin Corley ROLL CALL PRESENT: Kerry Davison, Leland Fishman, Scott Fishman, Rosemary Hart ABSENT: Tyler Sturm (excused) GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT During General Public Comment, the public is invited to make comments on items of public interest that are within the Committee’s subject matter jurisdiction and that are not listed on the current agenda. Public comments are limited up to three minutes per person. Depending on the number of persons wishing to address the Committee, time will be allocated in equal shares totaling no more than twenty minutes, subject to the Committee’s discretion (Cal. Gov’t Code §54954.3(a), Petaluma City Council Rules, Policies and Procedures, III). -No written or submitted comments were received for this meeting. -General Public Comment was opened by the Chair. Seeing no members of the public in Chambers wishing to speak, General Public Comment was closed by the Chair. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2. Approval of Minutes for the regular Measure U Oversight Committee Meeting of 5/14/24 051424 DRAFT - Measure U Minutes.pdf -Chair Fishman asked for approval of the minutes from the 5/14/24 meeting. -1-

-A Motion to Approve was made by Committee Member Davison, however no one else aside from the Chair was present at that meeting (Committee Member Hart was absent (excused) from the 5/14/24 meeting). The Minutes will carry to the next scheduled meeting of 4/17/25 to be approved at that time. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 3. Measure U Oversight Committee Biannual Report for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024 Boards & Commissions Report.pdf Measure U FY 2023-24 Report.pdf Measure U FY 2023-24 PowerPoint Presentation.pdf -Chair Fishman turned the meeting over to Finance Director Jessie Gooch to share the PowerPoint presentation. -At the conclusion of the presentation, Chair Fishman turned it over to the Committee Members and asked for questions. -Committee Member Hart: Praised improvements she’s seen downtown that are a result of Measure U dollars. Asked a few questions (public restrooms, homelessness, amount of funding going to the General Fund, adjusting 5-year forecast, new technology costs). Finance Director Gooch replied to each inquiry. Lastly, asked about how the committee will report to Council. - Finance Director Gooch and ACM Cochran: Considerations are that Staff will take verbal comments from this committee during a scheduled meeting, so it’s public, create a draft letter and publish it on a future Measure U meeting agenda for discussion purposes and the Committee can make edits live during that subsequent meeting, approve the letter contents and present it to Council as a presentation item at the start of an upcoming Council meeting. -City Attorney Danly: Spoke further about how reporting to City Council could take place this year in a public, legal manner (by either the Chair or a Committee Member(s)). -Committee Member Hart asked about agendizing that discussion -City Attorney Danly -ACM Cochran - Committee Member Hart: Asked if ‘discussing the report’ or ‘creating a report’ could be placed on the next meeting agenda? -ACM Cochran -Chair Fishman: Appropriate to discuss things tonight? -ACM Cochran: Willing to take specific comments about the annual report tonight and if the Committee wished to ask that a Letter Drafting item be agendized for a future meeting, Staff would take Committee comments tonight, draft a letter and that draft can be reviewed at the next meeting and finalized. -Chair Fishman: Yes, he thinks that’s what the Committee would like. He doesn’t feel the community is getting what they thought they would get from Measure U funds (instead more staff vs fixing the roads). That money seems to be absorbed into the General Fund. Where else will the City look for more money when Measure U runs out? Feels the -2-

Committee should be reporting out to the public and not just to City Council (i.e., in the newspaper as a guest editorial). -Committee Member Davison: Agrees with the Chair. Also thinks it would be important to address City Council together, as a Committee, to show they’ve taken this role seriously. Didn’t recall seeing a letter last year ever going out. -ACM Cochran: Yes, a letter went out in the packet with the published Annual Report. -Committee Member Davison: Feels it should be in the newspaper. Discussed holding over some funding; not spending every dime. Asked about road improvements and the bonds that went with that. -Finance Director Gooch: Discussed the bonds/debt service associated with the road projects. (back and forth conversation w/Davison). -City Attorney Danly: Discussed Measure U bonds, Measure U spending priorities and the $6M structural deficit in the General Fund that Measure U was instrumental in rectifying. -ACM Cochran: We were at a services/staffing deficit and positions (many more than the 11 mentioned in the presentation) have been added (and not all paid for from the General Fund) so services could be provided to the community. Road improvements continue to take place and more of those types of improvements are to come. Bonding is required for those improvements and the economy will dictate the type of bonding the City can secure. -Chair Fishman: Feels the community wanted things that they could see as improvements and not just have Council use the funds to balance the budget. Respectfully states that the funds should be allocated towards the things the community voted for. -City Attorney Danly -Chair Fishman: Hopes this year’s letter could be worded more strongly so the Committee’s concerns are heard, that they, as a group, have done their job on behalf of the community watching over the use of the Measure U funding. -City Attorney Danly -Committee Member Hart -City Attorney Danly -Committee Member Fishman: Thanked staff for the presentation. Does worry the public thinks the money only went towards personnel. As a new committee member, he thinks the public really wants to see the flagship projects and spending that Measure U offered; let’s highlight the tangible things that the funding allowed. Agrees with the rest of the Committee with how the spending looks to the public, and the fact that it’s almost gone. -Chair Fishman: Did the money go where the public thought the money was going towards? He knows the money is being spent appropriately. The original long list of projects seems to be thinning. There doesn’t seem to be a list of projects anymore that are being worked on. -Committee Member Davison: 84% of the new budget was going to the General Fund? -Finance Director Gooch: Dollar amounts are fairly equal, but there was more money going into the prior year to use (only about $500K difference). -Committee Member Davison: The public may want to know what the future hiring needs of the City will be. It seems we can’t continue to keep adding new staff w/benefit packages and pensions. Is the City looking at personnel needs in the coming years, or will there be cutbacks? -3-

-ACM Cochran: We are looking at that right now. That’s what happens during the yearly budget process. The budget workshop that goes before City Council in early May each year reviews personnel by department. Chair Fishman: He recommends taking some of the workforce stabilization funding for future years from Measure U and put it towards some of the tangible projects that the public expected or wants to see (infrastructure items). After 5 years, the money has become co-mingled into many things. Does staff feel they’ve heard enough today from the Committee to put together a draft report that can be brought back to the next meeting for review? -ACM Cochran: Yes, I believe so. -Finance Director Gooch: Yes. -Chair Fishman: Let’s put it into something that can go to City Council but that the public can also read and understand and can be sent to the Argus as a guest editorial from the Committee as a whole so they feel they’ve done their job. -City Attorney Danly: Reporting to Council is consistent with your role; sharing with the newspaper doesn’t necessarily fall within your purview because you’re not necessarily spokesmen of the City. But sharing how you feel the money is and will be spent is your role. -Chair Fishman: Feels a citizen overview committee is there to represent the public. If there’s no public report out (such as in a newspaper), one could ask what that overview committee is there for? -City Attorney Danly: There are many other bodies such as these that report out to City Council and those reports go on the website, they’re made at public meetings, and Council can make further recommendations. The information is shared with the public. -Committee Member Hart: Hopes to get the process right this year. Asked about how to get on a future Council agenda. -ACM Cochran: We’ll work with the Committee on finding a good date this Spring to bring this item to Council. -Chair Fishman: Any other comments from the Committee? -Committee Mamber Fishman: As a new member, he wants all to know his tone for the Council report is purely constructive. -City Attorney Danly: Staff’s job is to capture it all, as best we can, so you can provide feedback. -Committee Member Davison: What month does staff recommend sharing this with City Council? -ACM Cochran: Our next meeting is April 17th. A draft report will be provided then. The Budget Workshop is in mid-May, perhaps the next Council meeting after that Workshop would be a good meeting. -Finance Director Gooch: I agree with that timing. The budget isn’t adopted until June. Council will have time to review Committee comments and ensure it aligns with the next budget. -ACM Cochran: We may poll for a 3rd Committee meeting this Spring to make sure we’re able to fit in the Committee’s report with the Council dates dedicated to the budget. -4-