►
From YouTube: San Bruno Special City Council Meeting June 22, 2021
Description
San Bruno Special City Council Meeting June 22, 2021
Declare the Results of the June 15, 2021 Mail-Ballot Election in Connection with the Proposed Storm Drainage and Flood Protection Fee and Abandoning Proceedings
trt: 52:35
A
C
A
Here,
thank
you.
Mike
was
too
far
down
low
on
the
volume
councilmember
mason
will
be
with
us
shortly
as
soon
as
she's
available.
So
we
will
go
ahead
and
proceed
on
to
item
number.
Three
public
comments
for
items
not
on
the
agenda.
Individuals
will
be
allowed
up
to
three
minutes.
It
is
council
policy
to
refer
matters
raised
in
this
form.
The
staff
for
investigation
and
or
action
were
appropriate
that
their
own
act
prohibits
the
council
from
discussing
or
acting
upon
any
matter,
not
pursuant
to
state
law.
A
D
D
The
objective
of
the
brief
presentation,
subsequent
discussion
and
action,
will
be
for
the
city
council
to
adopt
a
resolution
declaring
the
results
from
the
june
15
2021
melon
ballot
election
in
connection
with
the
proposed
storm,
drainage
and
flood
protection
fee
and
abandoning
procedures.
There's
an
alternative
to
the
council
desire.
You
can
adopt
the
resolution
and
give
staff
direction
regarding
storm
drainage,
financing
and
or
the
proposed
2021-22
stormwater
budget,
because
the
fee
did
not
pass.
D
D
The
finance
director,
as
well
as
your
staff
in
the
public
works
department
that
run
our
stormwater
system,
are
prepared
to
answer
questions
and
support
the
council
through
your
deliberations,
and
so
the
first
portion
of
this
presentation
will
actually
be
given
by
our
city
clerk
regarding
certification
of
the
election
results.
So
now
I
will
invite
melissa
thurman
to
the
virtual
podium
to
provide
the
next
two
slides.
B
B
During
the
counting
process,
there
was
83
ballots
that
were
rejected
for
various
reasons
which
are
listed
here
on
the
screen.
We
had
ballots
that
were
returned
in
the
envelope,
but
they
were
missing
a
signature,
so
the
yes
or
the
no
was
checked,
but
the
signature
which
was
very
important,
was
missing.
B
B
We
received
some
ballots
where
it
was
really
unclear
if
it
was
yes
or
no,
perhaps
they
scribbled
it
out
and
they
didn't
initial
next
to
the
one
that
was
correct
or
indicate
to
us,
which
one
was
the
one
they
wanted,
and
so,
after
determining
between
all
four
of
us,
we
just
couldn't
come
up
with
the
decision
as
to
what
they
meant.
We
did
mark
those
as
rejected,
so
that
was
we
had
24.
There
was
no
choice.
Mark
32
that
was
unclear.
B
We
did
receive
four
duplicate
ballots,
which
means
that
the
original
ballot
was
sent
to
us.
We
had
already
counted
it
and
then
at
some
point
during
the
accounting
process
we
had
the
same
exact
ballot
being
counted
again,
and
that
typically
was
because
the
property
owner
forgot
that
they
had
already
submitted
a
ballot.
So
they
requested
a
separate
ballot
and
voted
twice,
probably
just
on
it's
an
innocent
mistake.
It
happens.
Sometimes
you
just
forget
that
you've
already
filled
something
out,
so
we
had
four
of
those
and
then
we
surprisingly
had
zero
empty
envelopes.
B
It's
pretty
easy
to
forget
to
put
the
item
in
the
envelope,
so
we
only
had
zero
of
those,
so
those
were
the
83
rejected
ballots,
and
then
we
also
received
quite
a
few.
I
believe
the
count
just
now
over
we're
still
receiving
them
over
200
ballots
that
were
received
after
the
june
15
2021
deadline
they're
coming
in
through
the
mail,
so
those
are
also
being
counted
as
rejected
and,
like
I
said,
we
are
currently
over
200
of
those
and
they
are
still
coming
in.
B
We
also
issued
34
replacement
ballots.
Typically,
this
was
done
because
the
property
owner
says
they
never
received
the
first
one
or
they
possibly
threw
it
away
or
forgot
that
they
had
received
one.
So
they
asked
for
a
second.
So
we
would
we
mailed
those
out
before
the
end
of
the
ballot
closure,
and
I
believe
that
is
the
end
there.
But
if
you
can
go
to
the
next
slide,.
D
So,
council
members,
we
will
return
to
certification
of
the
elections
at
the
conclusion
of
the
the
presentation.
So
staff
is
available
for
these
remaining
sections.
I
will
go
through
it
at
a
high
level.
If
there
are
additional
questions,
either
myself
or
staff
will
respond,
just
a
quick
overview
of
your
stormwater
system.
There
are
total
of
just
over
six
employees
that
are
allocated
to
the
city's
storm
water
system
stream
sweeping
as
what
as
well
as
storm
water
collection
is
a
part
of
the.
A
D
Plan,
I
know
you've
seen
before,
but
it
is
critical
that
we
talk
about
this
once
again.
As
the
city
clerk
mentioned
are
nearly
year
and
a
half
effort
to
put
forward
a
a
revised
fee,
revising
the
fee
that
was
set
some
27
years
ago
was
not
successful,
and
so
that
means
that
the
fund
is
projected
to
go
negative
in
the
2021-22
fiscal
year
and
a
precipitous
decline
of
continued
negative
activity.
D
As
we
all
know,
our
funds,
when
they
run
negative,
someone
has
to
pay
the
cost
or
we
need
to
reduce
the
expenditures,
and
so
we
will
be
faced
with
that
decision
in
subsequent
years,
as
well
as
in
this
current
year.
For
the
budget
that
begins
in
july
21-
and
I
know
the
city
council,
as
well
as
staff,
is
committed
to
finding
a
solution
to
this
problem,
one
that
will
hopefully
be
accepted
by
sam
rental,
property,
property
owners
or
whatever
the
plan.
D
D
So
at
a
high
level,
we,
why
don't?
We
just
talk
about
the
proposed
budget.
That's
probably
the
the
most
appropriate
place
to
begin,
so
it
has
a
fund
balance
of
300
000.
That
will
be
there
projected
on
july
1..
There
is
just
over
650
000
revenue,
the
vast
majority
of
that
comes
from
the
existing
fee
or
the
average
property
owner
pays
40
47
a
year.
D
There
are
operating
expenditures
of
1.5
million,
which
brings
a
operating
surplus
and
deficit
to
800
000.
That
is
that
point
that
the
current
feed
does
not
cover
operating,
nor
does
it
cover
capital
and
the
476
000
that
you
see
there
is
primarily
related
to
the
spyglass
project
and
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
that.
D
As
our
pension
liability,
total
personnel
budget
for
this
system
is
848
000.
that
alone
eclipses
the
the
current
revenue
to
the
enterprise.
Then
we
have
a
material
and
supply
budget
of
just
under
300
000.
It's
worth
mentioning
that
in
prior
years,
that
budget
was
over
500
000,
so
that
budget
has
already
been
cut
and
cuts
substantially
and
inter
departmental
charges
and
governmental
charges
connected
to
the
system
or
another
380
000,
which
brings
that
total
operating
budget
to
what
you
saw
before
is
1.534
million.
D
With
regard
to
capital
improvement
projects,
there
are
four
active
capital
improvement
projects
within
your
stormwater
proposed
capital
improvement
program
for
the
coming
year.
As
the
city
council
knows
that
there
is
a
vast
number
of
unfunded
projects,
projects
that
are
not
active
simply
because
of
lack
of
funding,
one
of
the
problems
that
we
were
trying
to
address,
and
so
there's
a
regional
stormwater
capture
project,
a
trash
capture,
device,
design
and
installation
project,
a
storm
water
pipeline
replacement
project
and
then
the
spy
glass,
warm
water,
storm
drain
improvement
project.
So
really
quick.
D
I
know
we've
talked
about
these
before
with
the
city
council
on,
I
believe
it
was
june
9th
when
we
reviewed
our
entire
capital
improvement
program.
Just
would
like
to
highlight
them
very
briefly.
So
the
regional
storm
capture
project
at
I
280
and
I
380.
that
project
is
carrying
over
just
over
1.1
million
dollars.
As
the
city
council
knows,
staff
has
obtained
grants
to
support
that
project.
We
do
not
need
additional
funds
at
that
at
this
time
for
that
project,
but
in
the
future
there
will
be
significant
needs
for
this
project.
D
It's
important
to
note
that
this
project
was
not
included
in
any
of
the
funding
mechanisms
that
were
proposed
in
the
field.
This
project
was
always
intended
to
be
that
regional
project
that
attracts
state
and
federal
grants.
A
local
project,
however,
is
certainly
our
spyglass
storm
drain
improvement
project.
D
D
And
so,
while
we
understand
that
property
owners
did
not
elect
to
contribute
to
the
storm
drain,
flood
protection
fee
and
that
measure
failed,
there
still
remains
30
million
dollars
of
master
plan
projects
that
we
identified
in
2017.
That
we
know
will
cost
more
than
30
million
dollars.
Even
today
that
are
still
unfunded,
and
we
know
portions
of
our
system
are
over
100
years
old
and
that
needs
to
be
addressed.
D
D
So
let's
talk
about
addressing
that
deficit,
and
so
we
need
to
address
that
2021
deficit,
that
that
looming
deficit,
if
you
will-
and
so
what
are
our
options,
and
so
this
is
a
repeat
of
what
you've
seen
before.
But
currently
the
projected
in
funding
balance
is
a
million
dollars,
and
so
we
have
to
fund
that
million
dollars
where
we
have
to
trim
expenditures.
D
D
We
want
to
maintain
the
individuals
and
the
street
sweeping
program
that
we
currently
have
and
for
our
capital
improvement
program.
We
think
it's
absolutely
critical,
that
we
take
advantage
of
the
1.2
million
dollars
that
the
federal
government
has
given
us
to
a
grant
and
identify
a
way
to
move
forward
with
that
important
spy
project
for
the
spyglass
neighborhood
option.
D
The
city
council
could
appropriate
funds
from
entergy,
and
so
we
will
talk
about
that
and
you
can
also
utilize
funds
from
the
american
rescue
plan
act
so
so
to
go
through
the
last
two
very
quickly
and
then
pause
for
council
deliberations
and
questions.
A
measure.
G
as
we
know,
is
a
half
cent
sales
tax,
a
general
purpose,
revenue
tax
that
in
the
next
fiscal
year
we're
projecting
to
bring
in
3.5
million.
D
D
The
city
council
does
have
the
discretion
to
appropriate
measure
g
funds
for
the
stormwater
enterprise
with
regard
to
measure
g
just
really
quickly.
It's
worth
noting,
and
we
will
talk
about
this
slide
in
greater
detail
later
on
tonight,
during
our
regular
meeting
when
we
address
item
6a,
which
is
adoption
of
the
full
budget
for
fiscal
year
2122.
D
The
amended
proposed
budget
that
reflects
conversations
that
we
have
with
the
city
council
and
the
direction
to
reduce
position,
requests
on
measure
g
or
the
oversight
committee's
recommendations,
which
does
not
include
three
line
items
in
that
were
in
the
amended
proposed
budget
and
all
of
those
levels.
You
have
more
than
a
million
dollars
of
general
of
a
measure.
V
fund
balance
left,
and
so
you
could,
if
you
choose
either
one
of
those
scenarios
have
the
million
dollars
to
cover
the
the
this
year
budget
and
deficit
in
stormwater,
1
million.
D
D
Funding
the
city
council
knows
this
chart
very
well,
so
I
will
again
not
go
through
it
all,
but
through
this
chart
again,
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
with
based
on
the
recommendations
that
you
have
in
the
in
the
amended
proposed
budget
that
very
bottom
line:
number
2.9
or
2.9
million
dollars,
rounded
unallocated
arc
of
funds.
You
do
have
sufficient
arpa
funds
to
cover
the
measure
cover
the
stormwater
deficit
of
one
million
dollars
from
arpa,
and
that's
what
that
little
red
box
shows
next.
D
This
is
a
repeat,
but
I
just
want
to
point
this
out
for
council.
Again
and
again,
we
will
have
this
discussion
at
our
next
meeting,
but
should
the
city
council
choose
to
fund
those
four
positions
that
were
initially
proposed
to
be
funded
by
measure
g
with
arma
and
that's
the
economic
development
manager,
the
police
officer,
a
firefighter
and
a
fire
inspector?
D
Remember
those
were
measure
g
recommendations
from
in
the
city
manager's
proposed
budget.
Should
you
elect
to
fund
those
through
arpa
just
want
to
point
out
again
here
that,
even
with
those
allocations,
you
will
have
sufficient
funding
to
cover
that
one-year
stormwater
deficit
now
these
are
are,
of
course,
funds
that
we
can't
rely
on
in
perpetuity.
D
A
C
D
D
Even
with
this
one
million
dollar
deficit
that
we're
facing,
I
think
by
the
two
to
one
margin,
the
the
community
has
said
that
the
storm
drain
fee
as
proposed
is
not
acceptable,
and
I
think
we
have
to
have
further
conversations
and
further
analysis
to
actually
define
exactly
why,
and
there
could
be
various
reasons
why,
but
certainly
as
an
organization,
we
cannot
lose
sight
of
the
challenge
that
is
before
us.
It
is
not
a
today
challenge.
It
is
not
a
yesterday
challenge.
D
D
We
have
we
stretched
off
that
time
period
for
27
years
and
not
increasing
the
fee,
and
then
when
we
did
that
it
was
not
successful,
but
the
need
for
the
30
million
dollars
of
improvements
is
not
going
away,
and
even
if
you
take
that
away,
the
the
current
fee
does
not
cover
just
operating
costs
with
maintaining
the
system
we
have
an
hour.
So
we
have
to
continue
to
have
conversations
about
it.
F
Thank
you.
So
I've
got
a
brief
question
on
slide.
Number
eight.
The
the
long
range
financial
plan
slide.
I
just
I
just
want
to
get
an
understanding
of
how
this
how
this
works.
The
obviously
we
see
that
we
see
the
one
million
dollar
deficit
there
in
I
don't
know
you're
bringing
up
but
I'll
start
talking
anyway,
for
instance
sometime
we
see
the
one
million
dollar
deficit
there
in
in
this
coming
fiscal
year
and
then
it
then
it
continues
to
build.
F
Obviously
we're
going
to
be
funding
that
we're
going
to
we'll
talk
about
how
we're
going
to
fund
it,
but
obviously
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
to
fund
that
when
that
gets
funded,
do
each
of
the
next
four
boxes
reduced
by
a
bit
over
a
million
or
do
those
did
each
of
those
out
years,
also
assume
that
we
have
to
fund
it.
So
that's
what
that
that's,
what
the
operating
deficit's
going
to
be
in
2223.
D
D
D
You
could
cover
it
with
another
funding
source
like
the
general
fund
or
measure
g
on
more
of
a
ongoing
basis.
I
think
the
challenge
with
that
is
it
pushes
off
other
programs
and
services
and
improvements,
and
that's
a
balance.
The
city
council
could
fund
it
in
a
way,
and
potentially
there
is
a
a
loan
payback
right
where
you
may
fund
it
from
a
source,
but
the
fund
still
becomes
negative,
because
when
the
fund
is
healthy
enough
to
recover
itself,
it
pays
back
that
funding
source.
F
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
my
my
other
question
is
regarding
measure
g.
You
know
the
the
vote
count
was
last
wednesday.
The
measure
g
committee
had
their
meeting
on
friday.
I
understand
that
there
was
there
that
they
couldn't
make
any
kind
of
a
formal
recommendation
or
anything
because
we
would
have.
I
think
we
would
have
seen
that,
but
did
we
get
any
sense
from
the
measure
g
committee,
what
they
would
think
of
about
using
measure
g
funds
for
this?
I
know
the
timing
didn't
work
out
very
well
for
for
that.
D
Sure
there
was
a
brief,
very
brief
conversation
about
that.
But
in
reality
I
would
say
the
committee
did
not
delve
down
into
that
topic
significantly.
But
there
was
a
comment
made
by
one
commissioner
that
in
looking
at
all
of
the
proposed
funding
requests,
there
was
a
recognition
that
the
one
million
dollars
was
a
sort
of
immediate
problem
and
maybe
a
interest
in
looking
at
that
before
some
of
the
other
recommendations.
D
But
I
would
say
that
the
committee
did
not
have
a
full
discussion
on
that,
but
the
committee
did
make
extremely
clear
that
measure
g
in
their
using
their
words
was
the
community
articulated
the
need
to
improve
rules
and
because
of
covet
that
that
has
not
happened
significantly
or
at
all.
We
did
no
world
projects
with
the
metro
g
money
last
year
and
while
we
are
allocating
1.4
million
from
energy,
they
would
like
to
see
road
projects
and
other
things
that
directly
align
to
that
ballot.
D
F
G
G
G
A
G
G
It's
timely
in
that
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
budget
in
in
an
hour
and
a
half
or
so
so
for
the
time
being
I
in
support
of
getting
us
through
this
year,
preferably
with
arpa
funding.
I
did
a
little
tiny
bit
of
research
on
what
other
california
cities
are
doing
to
fund
their
stormwater.
There
are
other
things
that
are
possible
and
we'll
need
to
have
that
discussion.
G
I'm
hoping
that
what
we'll
see
is
our
residents
have
fatigue
in
in
feeling
that
they're
they're
always
paying
more,
but
but
the
truth
is
in
stormwater,
we've
been
paying
the
same
since
1994
and
that
money
doesn't
stretch
out
anymore.
So
those
are
my
comments
for
now.
My
last
question
would
be
for
a
city
clerk
for
the
for
the
ballots
that
are
that
have
been
received
late.
G
B
E
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
whether
there's
plans
to
send
a
survey.
I
know
in
the
past.
There
have
been
surveys
by
the
city
done
pretty
quickly
and
if
we
would
be
able
to
get
a
survey
out
as
soon
as
possible,
since
it's
still
re,
it's
still
quite
new
and
ask
questions
like
would
a
sunset
have
made
a
difference.
What
the
annual
increase
you
know,
I
don't
know
at
a
lower
rate,
made
a
difference.
Would
a
phase-in
approach
during
a
pandemic
year
made
a
difference.
E
I
think
that
you
know
this
all,
even
though
it's
been
waiting
for
years,
I
think
that
this
came
to
this
council
quite
quickly,
and
I
think
it
was
okay
that
we
asked
the
public.
That's
what
we
said.
Let's
see
what
the
property
owners
decide,
but
I
think
it's
also
worth
it
to
step
back
now
and
reflect
on
what
tweaks
may
make
a
difference
for
the
future
success.
Thank
you.
A
A
B
That
is
a
good
question.
This
is
melissa,
thurman
city
clerk.
That's
a
good
point
that
I
hadn't
considered
I'll
need
to
probably
discuss
that
with
our
city
attorney
to
see
how
best
to
proceed.
Only
because
I
myself,
I
feel
uncomfortable
opening
any
ballot
outside
of
a
public
forum,
and
yet
I
can
also
see
if
we
are
returning.
Yes,
we
did
have
multiple
ballots
that
had
checks
enclosed,
because
I
think
people
looked
at
them.
B
They
saw
they
looked
at
it
as
an
amount
due,
and
so
they
included
a
check
and
marked
yes,
and
it
was
a
little
confusing
there.
So
we
have
returned
the
checks
with
a
note,
letting
them
know
yeah
I
would
need
to.
I
would
need
to
check
that
with
council
and
outside
counsel
before
I
would
be
able
to
give
you
an
answer.
A
F
C
My
my
concern
with
with
the
one-time
funds,
is
that
we
have
a
large
number
of
allocations
coming
from
our
one-time
funds,
both
measure
g
as
a
sort
of
a
a
seed
account
and
then
everything
we're
doing
with
arpa
and
the
way
the
budget
has
been
laid
out.
It's
it's
sort
of
a
transition
where
it
has
implications
for
long-term
commitments
to
the
general
fund,
and
I
see
this
current
dilemma
that
we
have
now
not
as
a
one-time
one
million
dollar
hole,
but
as
an
ongoing
commitment
to
our
general
fund.
C
Now
I
I
don't
anticipate
based
on
everything.
I've
heard
that
we
would
be
going
back
out
for
another
one
of
these
ballots
anytime
soon,
and
so
I
would
anticipate
that
at
least
for
a
few
years
we
would
be
funding
at
a
minimum,
the
800
000,
operating
and
and
some
considerable
amount
of
infrastructure
projects
that
are
associated
with
this.
C
C
This
very
significant
demand
on
the
general
fund
going
forward,
and
so
now
I'm
no
longer
as
comfortable
making
those
commitments,
even
though
it
was
a
transition,
and
we
understood
that
everything
else
was
stable,
but
now
we're
looking
at
a
minimum
million
dollar
ongoing
commitment
from
the
general
fund
just
to
keep
storm
water
all
alive.
That's
without
any
cip-
and
I
I
know
through
ccag
there
there's
a
number
of
efforts
going
on
to
try
to
fund
these
types
of
projects
across
the
county.
C
My
understanding
is
that
only
burlingame
has
a
stormwater
fee
that
that
increased
recently,
I
believe,
last
year
or
maybe
2019,
but
no
other
city
has
been
able
to
do
this
or
has
taken
the
step
to
do
this,
and
so
most
of
our
neighbors
are
going
to
be
in
the
same
boat
and
there's
probably
going
to
be
some
significant
effort
to
use
either
regional
or
county
dollars.
Perhaps
state
dollars
to
start
trying
to
address
these
these
shortfalls,
but
in
the
meantime
I
think
this
will
be
a
multi-year
effort.
C
C
And
now
we
don't
so
I
mean
we've
identified
some
of
the
bigger
projects,
but
there
is
a
ton
of
other
projects
out
there,
including
you
know,
what's
going
on
there
on
desoto
and
they've,
been
waiting
patiently
all
these
years,
and
so
I'd
like
us
to
to
make
a
commitment
to
start
moving
forward
on
those,
but
that's
not
going
to
happen
with
a
one-year
allocation.
So
I
have
greater
concerns
than
this.
C
A
C
So
so
I
I'll
agree
with
my
colleagues
that
using
the
arpa
funds
is
is
appropriate
for
the
the
projects
that
were
identified,
but
I
also
wanted
to
lay
out
the
bigger
concern,
because
I
think
this
this
it
creates.
We
can't
address
this
in
a
vacuum,
and
so
I
wanted
to
put
this
out
there,
so
so
staff
has
some
time
to
digest.
I
know
we'll
dig
into
this
more
during
the
regular
meeting
later
tonight,
but
I
I
you
know.
F
F
I
wouldn't
I
would
like
to
participate
in
some
capacity,
as
I'm
sure
my
colleagues
would
in
that
postmortem,
because
you
know
I
did
and
I'm
sure
my
colleagues
did
spend
a
lot
of
time
talking
to
people
and
hearing
their
concerns,
and
we
need
to.
You
know,
make
sure
that
that
all
that
information
is
is
available
for
women.
For
so
that
we
know
when
you
know
when
and
if
we
go
back
out
with
this
question
again
in
a
couple
of
years
that
we
know
that
we're
better
armed.
For
that.
E
A
I'll,
let
the
our
city
attorney
and
our
city
manager
not
now
but
take,
take
council
comments
on
that.
I'm
gonna,
you
know
I
think
city
manager
already
indicated
it
at
the
beginning,
as
he
talked
about
having
time
to
reflect,
going
back
and
analyzing
that
so
didn't
have
specif
he
didn't
specify
as
to
when
and
or
how,
but
that
that
would
be
occurring,
obviously
not
not
in
this
forum,
but
it
would
be
so
that
he'd
already
committed
to
the
management
correct
me,
but
that
would
be
happening.
A
They've
already
had
some
initial
dialogue
on
this.
I
concur
with
my
colleagues
as
far
as
where
the
money
shakarpa
could
come
from
in
the
media.
I
certainly
confer
with
council
member
salazar
as
far
as
the
ongoing
concern,
because
this,
if
it
wasn't
for
the
federal
government,
this
money
wouldn't
be
here
and
it
was
through
the
covet
19
not
a
way.
You
want
to
get
it
so
in
essence
going
forward
it
does
it.
It
helps
us
leg
along,
but
it
doesn't
get
us
by
how
we
need
to
so.
A
D
D
I
do
think
there's
a
number
of
discussions
that
need
to
happen
with
the
city
council
in
regard
to
council
member
mason's
request
to
take
a
look
at
the
top
20
largest
property
owners.
We
have
not
gone
through
and
done
a
examination
of
who
voted,
which
way,
and
I
think
we
want
to
have
a
conversation
about
that
and
understand
really
how
we're
gonna
put
together
that
information.
A
F
A
Well,
I
think
the
city
manager
had
addressed
that,
but
I'm
going
to
circle
back
if
it's
okay,
councilmember
hamilton
city
manager,
you
want
to
do
a
study
session
and
I
understand
what
you
just
said:
let's
have
a
study
session
or
articulate
a
plan
and
how
we're
going
to
get
information
or
survey.
You
can
use
the
word
survey.
So
please,
city
manager,.
A
A
D
I
know
time
is
of
the
essence.
My
recommendation
would
be
that
we
return
to
the
city
council
as
soon
as
possible
with
that
study
session,
possibly
even
in
the
july
time
frame.
So
we
have
time
to
undertake
the
survey
as
well
as
other
tools
that
will
help
examine
why
the
effort
wasn't
wasn't
successful.