[ CLOSED SESSION Conference with Labor Negotiator Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Shannon DeLong, City Manager and Stephanie Sikkema, Director of Finance and Administrative Services Employee Groups: Cypress Employees' Association, Maintenance Employees' Association, Police Officers' Association, Police Management Association and Unrepresented Employees. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation A closed session will be held, pursuant to Government Code §54956.9 (d)(2), because there is a significant exposure to litigation in two cases. ]

[ RECONVENE 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers]

[00:01:32]

EVENING. I'D LIKE TO RECONVENE THE AUGUST 25TH, 2026 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL. CITY CLERK, PLEASE CONDUCT ROLL COUNCIL MEMBER. STRONG. CARNAHAN HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. BURKE HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER. PETE HERE. MAYOR PRO TEM CHANG HERE. AND MAYOR MEDRANO PRESENT. ALL PRESENT. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA INVOCATION. THE INVOCATION WILL BE PROVIDED BY DEACON A DEACON ATWOOD. PLEASE JOIN US AT THE PODIUM. AND EVERYONE ELSE, PLEASE STAND IF YOU'RE ABLE. IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT, AS WE GATHER HERE TODAY IN SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY, WE HUMBLY INVOKE YOUR PRESENCE AND GUIDANCE. GOD BLESS THE CYPRESS CITY COUNCIL AND ALL THOSE ENTRUSTED WITH LEADERSHIP OF THIS AMAZING CITY. GRANT THEM DIVINE WISDOM, COMPASSION, AND DISCERNMENT AS THEY CARRY OUT THE RESPONSIBILITIES ENTRUSTED TO THEM. GOD GIVE THEM STRENGTH TO LEAD WITH INTEGRITY, SEEKING ALWAYS THE COMMON GOOD AND JUSTICE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL.

MAY THEIR DECISIONS BE GUIDED BY YOUR TRUTH AND INSPIRED BY YOUR ENDLESS MERCY AND LOVE AS THEY STRIVE TO BUILD A COMMUNITY WHERE ALL MAY FLOURISH. AND WE ASK THIS THROUGH CHRIST OUR LORD. AMEN. NAME OF THE FATHER AND SON, HOLY SPIRIT. AMEN. AMEN. PLEASE REMAIN STANDING. FACE THE FLAG. HAND OVER YOUR HEART. READY? BEGIN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. PLEASE TAKE YOUR

[ REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION The City Attorney will announce reportable actions(s).]

SEATS. REPORT OF CLOSED SESSIONS. CITY ATTORNEY. IS THERE A CLOSED SESSION REPORT? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE CITY COUNCIL HAD TWO ITEMS ON ITS CLOSED SESSION AGENDA TONIGHT. THE FIRST IS ONGOING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS.

THERE WAS A PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL BRIEFING ABOUT A PROPOSAL RECEIVED BY ONE OF THE EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATIONS. STAFF REQUESTED AUTHORITY TO RESPOND TO THE SAME, AND THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY AUTHORIZED THAT. THE SECOND ITEM WAS TO DISCUSS FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH COULD GIVE RISE TO AN EXPOSURE LITIGATION IN TWO CASES. AGAIN, THERE WAS A PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL BRIEFING. THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THE BRINGING FORWARD OF TWO FORMAL PUBLIC ACTIONS AT A FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CITY

[ PRESENTATIONS Proclamation Recognizing Hunger Action Month presented to Mark Lowry, Director of the Orange County Food Bank]

ATTORNEY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS WE HAVE A PRESENTATION RECOGNIZING HUNGER ACTION MONTH. WE WILL PRESENT A PROCLAMATION TO MARK LOWRY, DIRECTOR OF THE ORANGE COUNTY FOOD BANK. I'D LIKE TO INVITE MY COLLEAGUE, COLLEAGUES AND DIRECTOR LOWRY INTO THE WELL FOR THE PRESENTATION AND A PHOTO.

[00:05:14]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ A FEW WORDS FROM THE PROCLAMATION. HUNGER AND POVERTY ARE CONCERNS IN CALIFORNIA, WITH ABOUT 22% OF HOUSEHOLDS AND 27% OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN EXPERIENCING FOOD INSECURITY.

EVERYONE NEEDS NUTRITIOUS FOOD. YET 1 IN 6 ORANGE COUNTY RESIDENTS EXPERIENCE FOOD INSECURITY. THE CITY OF CYPRESS IS COMMITTED TO RAISING AWARENESS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF ADDRESSING FOOD INSECURITY. OC HUNGER ALLIANCE IS COMMITTED TO EDUCATING THE COMMUNITY, RAISING AWARENESS, SUPPORTING THE CHARITABLE FOOD SYSTEM TO ADDRESS FOOD INSECURITY AND POVERTY COLLABORATIVELY. IN 2025, THE ORANGE COUNTY FOOD BANK AND SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK PROVIDED NEARLY 73 MILLION POUNDS OF FOOD AND MORE THAN 800,000 FOOD DISTRIBUTION VISITS EACH MONTH. ABOUT FOOD CARE HELPS RECOVER MORE THAN 25 MILLION POUNDS OF EXCESS EDIBLE FOOD IN ORANGE COUNTY EACH YEAR, REDUCING WASTE AND HELPING SOURCE FOOD FOR THOSE IN NEED.

IN THE PAST YEAR, THE COUNTY RECEIVED MORE THAN 15000 CALLS FOR FOOD ASSISTANCE AND MADE NEARLY 38,000 REFERRALS TO FOOD PANTRIES. CYPRESS RECOGNIZES SEPTEMBER AS HUNGER ACTION MONTH, ENCOURAGING THE PUBLIC TO TAKE ACTION THROUGH VOLUNTARILY DONATING AND ADVOCACY TO HELP END HUNGER. FOOD BANKS AND ORGANIZATIONS THROUGHOUT ORANGE COUNTY WILL HOLD EVENTS DURING SEPTEMBER TO RAISE AWARENESS AND HELP ADDRESS FOOD INSECURITY. THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO.

I THINK. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA

[ ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA ITEMS This portion of the meeting is set aside for public comments regarding any matter within the jurisdiction of the City Council. Comments on non-agenda items will be heard at this time. Comments related to a specific agenda item will be heard following the staff report for that item and prior to the City Council action, unless the speaker prefers to make the comment during the general public comment period. The City Council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on the agenda for this meeting, but Council members may provide brief responses. Please complete a Speaker’s Card to address the City Council in-person. Please follow the instructions at the end of the agenda and wait for the Mayor or City Clerk to call on you to address the City Council virtually. Speakers providing in-person comments will be called first. Time allotted for public comment (subject to change by the presiding officer). General Public Comment (not on agenda): 3 minutes Consent Calendar (any or all items): 3 minutes Agenda Items (not on consent calendar): 3 minutes per item]

ITEMS. THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS SET ASIDE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS REGARDING ANY MATTER WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMENTS ON NON AGENDA ITEMS ARE HEARD AT THIS TIME. COMMENTS RELATED TO SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM WILL BE HEARD FOLLOWING THE STAFF REPORT FOR THAT ITEM AND PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION, UNLESS THE SPEAKER PREFERS TO MAKE THE COMMENT. DURING THE GENERAL COMMENT PERIOD, THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT DISCUSS NOR TAKE ACTION ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING. BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY PROVIDE BRIEF RESPONSES. PLEASE COMPLETE A SPEAKER CARD TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL.

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE AGENDA AND WAIT FOR THE MAYOR OR CITY CLERK TO CALL ON YOU TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL VIRTUALLY. SPEAKERS PROVIDING IN-PERSON COMMENTS WILL BE CALLED FIRST. THE TIME ALLOTTED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IS THREE MINUTES. I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME TWO CARDS. FIRST IS DOCTOR FRANCIS MARQUEZ, THEN FOLLOWED BY TOM MOORE.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS. THE LAST MEETING SUPPORTERS ALLIANCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS ASKED THE COUNCIL NOT TO CERTIFY THE EIR FOR THE LOS ALAMITOS RACETRACK PROJECT. WHY? BECAUSE THE EIR FAILS TO ADEQUATELY ADDRESS SEVERAL OF THE PROJECT'S SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, INCLUDING INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND THE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, WHICH LIKELY VIOLATE SEQUA. THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SEQUA IS DESIGNED TO INFORM ITS RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS AND THE PUBLIC ABOUT POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF A PROJECT. THE EIR IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ALARM BELL WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO ALERT THE PUBLIC AND ITS RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS TO TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES BEFORE THEY HAVE REACHED THE ECOLOGICAL POINT OF NO RETURN. IT'S A DOCUMENT OF ACCOUNTABILITY INTENDED TO DEMONSTRATE AN APPREHENSIVE CITIZEN CITIZENRY THAT THE CITY

[00:10:05]

HAS, IN FACT, ANALYZED AND CONSIDERED THE ECOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF ITS ACTION. MY FATHER DIED FROM CHEMICAL EXPOSURE. FOR ME, THE LARGEST RED FLAG IS THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SAFER, THE ORGANIZATION THAT CALLED OUT THE REPORT. THE EXPERT IDENTIFIED POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT FORMALDEHYDE, CANCER RISK AND OTHER VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FOR FUTURE RESIDENTS AND EMPLOYEES RISK. THE ERR DOES NOT ANALYZE OR MITIGATE. THIS ISN'T ABOUT POLITICS. I'M ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT THE HUMAN ASPECT OF THIS. YOU PLEASE. YOU HOLD THIS UP. THIS IS A VEST THAT CONNECTS TO A VACUUM. AND WHEN YOU HAVE LUNG DAMAGE. MY FATHER'S LUNGS WERE SCARRED. HE COULD NOT LET THE PHLEGM OFF THE WALLS OF HIS LUNGS. HIS BODY COULDN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURE. SO USE THIS EVERY DAY FOR 30 MINUTES IN THE EVENING AND IN THE MORNING. AND IT IT HAS A VACUUM THAT CONNECTS TO THESE TUBES, THAT SHAKES AIR INTO YOUR LUNGS AND SHAKES YOU VIOLENTLY. IT SHAKES THE PHLEGM OFF THE WALLS OF THE LUNGS, SOMETHING THAT HIS BODY COULDN'T DO ANYMORE. THIS VEST KEPT HIM ALIVE A YEAR AND A HALF LONGER. HE WANTED TO REMAIN WITH HIS FAMILY, BUT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. I'M JUST ASKING YOU TONIGHT TO THINK OF THE IMPLICATIONS AND TO THINK OF THE HUMAN ASPECT. DON'T THINK OF THE POLITICS OR RUSHING TO GET SOMETHING DONE.

THINK ABOUT HOW IT IMPACTS FAMILIES. ON MY BLOCK, THERE'S ALL THESE BEAUTIFUL NEW YOUNG FAMILIES, PARENTS DOING EVERYTHING EXACTLY RIGHT TO MAKE THEIR KIDS SUCCESSFUL. AND YOU KNOW, THIS KID WHO GREW UP ON THAT SAME BLOCK, YOU KNOW, I TRIED TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN BRINGING MY FATHER BACK AND IT DIDN'T WORK. SO I'M ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THE HUMAN AND THE MEDICAL ASPECTS OF YOUR DECISIONS, PLEASE, YOU KNOW, RECONSIDER AND RECIRCULATE THE AIR. THANK YOU. NEXT IS TOM MOORE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS TOM MOORE, CYPRESS RESIDENT OF DISTRICT THREE. AT THE AUGUST 25TH MEETING, COUNCIL ASKED CITY ATTORNEY BILL WINDER A SIMPLE QUESTION WHAT IS THE DEADLINE TO APPROVE THE RACETRACK EIR HIS ANSWER THAT I WITNESSED WAS ONE WORD TONIGHT, HE SAID A DEFIANTLY WITH AN EDGE, NOT AS A CAREFUL OR TRANSPARENT ANSWER TO A QUESTION. THIS IMPORTANT. THE TOWN CENTER THAT RESIDENTS VOTED FOR WAS ON THE LINE. INSTEAD OF AN ANSWER. WE GOT A DARE AND IT SHUT DOWN DEBATE.

IN FACT, A HALF A DOZEN RESIDENTS ASKED ME IF MR. WINDER WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE RACETRACK. THAT ANSWER DOESN'T STAND ALONE. MR. WINDER IS ON THE MASTHEAD OF AIL SHIRE AND WINDER. IT'S ALSO THE SAME FIRM THAT EMPLOYS FRED GALANTE, CYPRESS PREVIOUS CITY ATTORNEY.

IN 2022, GALANTE EMAILED A CYPRESS RESIDENT THAT HER FACEBOOK COMMENT WAS, IN HIS OWN WORDS, POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS, A THREAT SERIOUS ENOUGH THAT THE FIRST AMENDMENT COALITION INTERVENED AND CALLED IT INTIMIDATION, NOT DIALOG. IN SPRING OF 2025, GALANTE DID IT AGAIN, WARNING A WHISTLE BLOWING FORMER CYPRESS DEPARTMENT HEAD IN THIS CHAMBER TO STOP DESCRIBING ALLEGED MISCONDUCT BY CITY MANAGER PETER GRANT. EVEN THOUGH STATE LAW ITSELF PROTECTED THAT EMPLOYEES RIGHT TO SPEAK. MORE IMPORTANTLY, AL-SHAER AND WINDER ALSO ADVISED CYPRESS THROUGH A FIGHT OVER DISTRICT ELECTIONS, A FIGHT THAT WAS PREDICTED AND PROVEN TO BE A LOSING BATTLE. THAT LITIGATION ULTIMATELY COST CYPRESS TAXPAYERS MORE THAN $1 MILLION. THINK ABOUT THE CONTRAST THE CITY COULD SPEND MORE THAN TWO YEARS RESISTING DISTRICT ELECTIONS, INCLUDING 18 MONTHS IN LITIGATION. BUT WHEN RESIDENTS WANTED MORE TIME FOR AN IRREVERSIBLE LAND USE DECISION, SUDDENLY THE ANSWER WAS TONIGHT. AND TONIGHT DOESN'T STAND ALONE. THERE'S. THERE'S STILL AN UNANSWERED QUESTION ABOUT HOW THAT DEADLINE CAME TO BE, AND I'LL BE BACK TO ASK IT. I SPENT A LIFETIME AROUND ATTORNEYS. MY FATHER WAS A JUDGE. MY BROTHER AND MY SON ARE ATTORNEYS. THE LAW IS RARELY EXPLAINED IN ONE WORD. IT REQUIRES REASONING, AUTHORITY, AND CONTEXT. I ALSO WANT TO CORRECT SOMETHING THAT'S SAID FROM THE DAIS. THAT NIGHT, COUNCILWOMAN BONNIE PETE IMPLIED THE TOWN CENTER IS GUARANTEED BY THE MISLEADINGLY NAMED CYPRESS TOWN CENTER IN COMMON SPECIFIC PLAN 3.0 DOCUMENT. THIS IS INCORRECT, GUARANTEEING IT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A BINDING DEADLINE OR A FIRM REQUIREMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE $64,000 QUESTION IS WHETHER EITHER WINDER OR GALANTE EVER TOLD THIS COUNCIL YOU COULD LOCK IN A TOWN CENTER DEADLINE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND HERE'S HOW THE SAD IRONY THIS COUNCIL HAD A CHANCE TO CHANGE THE LAW FIRMS THIS PAST YEAR. AND THE CHANGE YOU MADE WAS MOVING COUNCIL MEETINGS FROM MONDAY TO TUESDAY. FOR ALL THESE REASONS, I'M ASKING THIS COUNCIL TO ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS AND OPEN THE DOOR TO NEW LEGAL REPRESENTATION. 28

[00:15:04]

YEARS OF HISTORY HAS VALUE, BUT A CITY ATTORNEY'S CORE JOB IS TO PROTECT THE CITY FROM LEGAL EXPOSURE, WASTED MONEY, AND ERODED PUBLIC TRUST, AND THIS FIRM HAS BECOME A RECURRING SOURCE OF ALL THREE. FINALLY, HOW IS OUR NEW CITY MANAGER SUPPOSED TO OPERATE AT FULL STRENGTH WITH THIS CLOUD HANGING OVER THE CITY'S OWN LEGAL COUNSEL? THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR. IF YOU COULD JUST HOLD FOR ONE MOMENT. I NEED TO TYPE IN A KEY REAL QUICK. JUST ONE MOMENT. I'M AFRAID I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DISCONNECT AND RECONNECT QUICKLY, BECAUSE I CAN TELL THERE'S NO SOUND ON THE AUDIO SIDE OF ANYONE THAT'S JOINING US ONLINE. I JUST KEPT.

TO ENABLE AUDIO CONTROLS. PLEASE ENTER YOUR AUDIO PIN FOLLOWED BY THE POUND OR HASH SIGN. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A PIN, JUST PRESS POUND OR HASH.

WE'RE CONNECTED. MR. MAYOR, WE ARE CONNECTED. NOW. YOU CAN START ANY TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE NO FURTHER CARDS IN FRONT OF ME. ANYONE ONLINE? THERE IS NOBODY ONLINE AND THERE WASN'T ANYONE ONLINE BEFORE I DIALED BACK IN EITHER.

JUST FOR THE RECORD. OKAY, THEN THAT CLOSES ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ON AGENDA ITEMS. WE'LL MOVE

[ CONSENT CALENDAR (Items No. 1-8) All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a Council Member requests separate action on a specific item. Council Members voting no or abstaining on a Consent Calendar item may do so without removing the item from the Consent Calendar.]

NEXT TO CONSENT CALENDAR. ALL MATTERS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE TO BE APPROVED WITH ONE MOTION, UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS SEPARATE ACTION ON A SPECIFIC ITEM. COUNCIL MEMBERS VOTING NO OR ABSTAINING ON A CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM MAY DO SO WITHOUT REMOVING THE ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR. I NEED TO ABSTAIN ON ITEM NUMBER SIX, AND I SEE THERE IS A REQUEST. COUNCILMEMBER BURKE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. FIRST, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER FIVE AND THEN I JUST I'M NOT PULLING ITEM SIX, BUT I HAVE A.

I WAS GOING TO ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS, BUT SHOULD I WAIT FOR THE MAYOR TO STEP OUT OR CAN I ASK QUESTIONS WHILE HE'S HERE? GOOD QUESTION. THAT QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER SIX.

THEN THE MAYOR SHOULD STEP OUT OF THE COUNCIL MEETING. OKAY. AND WHEN WOULD YOU WHEN WOULD YOU RECOMMEND. WHY DON'T YOU WHY DON'T YOU. IF THE COUNCIL IS OF A MIND, YOU MAY MOVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR. TAKE A MOTION ADOPTION ON THAT. THEN WE COULD PULL THE ONE AGENDA ITEM THAT YOU WOULD LIKE PULLED. AND AT THAT POINT, WE CAN TALK ABOUT YOUR QUESTIONS ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX. SO WE MIGHT AS WELL MOVE BOTH FIVE AND SIX. YEAH, YEAH. OKAY. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILMEMBER, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO STILL HAVE THE FLOOR. SO I UNDERSTAND, BUT I ONLY MENTIONED REGARDING SIX. IF WE PULL IT, THAT REQUIRES A SEPARATE VOTE ON THAT ITEM, WHICH THAT I DIDN'T INTEND THAT. SO WHAT ARE YOU THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL. YEAH. I WOULD RATHER WE GO AHEAD AND PULL IT THAT WAY. IT'S CLEAR THAT YOU CAN GO AHEAD. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND THEN LEAVE THE MEETING AND I'M GONE. AND SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION. I THINK IT'LL BE EASIER IN THE NOTES IF WE GO AND SAY THAT BOTH ITEMS WERE PULLED FIVE AND SIX. OKAY. NOW I ALSO SEE YOU HAD. DO YOU HAVE ANY ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCILMEMBER BURKE? OKAY, I SEE DOCTOR CHANG. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. I'M SORRY. I ACTUALLY JUST WANTED A QUICK COMMENT ON NUMBER SIX. I WASN'T PLANNING ON PULLING IT EITHER. OKAY.

AGAIN, WE NEED TO DO THAT WITH THE MAYOR. YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH, WE HAVE TO PULL IT BECAUSE I GOT TO STEP ASIDE. AND THEN YOU RUN THAT MEETING WHEN IT'S PULLED BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A VOTE. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, CLEANER ON THAT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER STRONG, YOU HAVE SAME QUESTION. SHALL WE MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PULL ITEM NUMBER SIX. YEAH, YEAH YEAH. SO THEN I WILL HAPPILY MAKE THAT MOTION. OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A MOTION TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF

[00:20:01]

THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM ONE THROUGH FOUR AND ITEM SEVEN THROUGH EIGHT. SO IS THERE A MOTION SECOND OKAY. AND SECOND. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE, WE APPROVED ITEMS NUMBER ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, SEVEN, AND EIGHT. NOW WE'RE

[ ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR]

GOING TO DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER FIVE. AND THEN WHEN I'M DONE WITH WE'RE DONE DISCUSSING ITEM NUMBER FIVE. I'M GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF AND THE MEETING OVER TO MAYOR PRO TEM. AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER SIX. SO ITEM NUMBER FIVE YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING. CITY MANAGER? NO.

OKAY. OKAY. NO FURTHER COMMENT. OKAY, THEN I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE DAIS. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE? COUNCILMEMBER BURKE EVER. THANK YOU. SO WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS ITEM PREVIOUSLY REGARDING THE LOAN BETWEEN THE CITY AND AND THE PARKS DISTRICT, BUT I DID FEEL LIKE IT GOT A LITTLE RUSHED AT THE END WITH THE DEADLINE OF THE REGULAR MEETING. AND I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF. I THINK SOME THINGS DIDN'T OCCUR TO ME UNTIL AFTER THE MEETING. AND SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS AND SUGGEST AN ALTERNATIVE. FIRST, I HAD SOME CONFUSION BASED ON THE PROJECTIONS OF WHETHER WE WERE FORGET, WHETHER THEY INCLUDED FORGIVING THE LOAN INTEREST OR NOT. AND THEN THE TWO THINGS THAT OCCURRED TO ME AFTER THE MEETING WERE, ONE, I REALIZED THAT BY NOT FORGIVING THE INTEREST ON THE LOAN, WE WEREN'T PROVIDING THE DISTRICT WITH FINANCIAL RELIEF IN THE LONG RUN. SECOND WAS THAT BY EXTENDING THE PAYOFF INDEFINITELY, THE DISTRICT MAY ACTUALLY BE STUCK WITH THE LOAN FOR LONGER THAN ORIGINALLY. THE DISTRICT COULD THEORETICALLY TAKE 50 YEARS TO PAY OFF THE LOAN, WHICH I CERTAINLY DIDN'T INTEND. AND SO AT THE VERY LEAST, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE WHAT WE DID PREVIOUSLY, BUT MODIFY THAT PROPOSAL TO FORGIVE THE INTEREST ON THE LOAN. THAT'S WHAT I HOPED WE'D DO ALL ALONG. THAT WOULD PROVIDE THE DISTRICT WITH SOME FINANCIAL RELIEF, AND I BELIEVE WOULD ALSO SHORTEN THE PAYOFF PERIOD AS WELL. SO I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT, BUT I'M HAPPY TO HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES ON THAT MATTER. SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, COUNCILMEMBER, THEN YOUR MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM, DELETING ALL REFERENCES TO INTEREST FROM THE NOTE OR FROM THE INSTRUMENT. WELL, I'LL DEFER TO YOU ON WHATEVER IT TAKES TO MOVE FORWARD. WE CAN JUST DELETE FORGIVING THE INTEREST. WE THINK WE CAN JUST DELETE THE INTEREST LANGUAGE AND ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH. THEN THAT SOUNDS IN LINE WITH WHAT I AM PROPOSING, IS THAT A MOTION I WANT TO GIVE MY COLLEAGUES A CHANCE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME, IT'S NOT QUITE A MOTION YET. WE STILL HAVE MORE PEOPLE WANTING TO SPEAK, SO.

MAYOR PRO TEM CHEN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. AND TRUTHFULLY, I HAD SIMILAR CONCERNS ABOUT THE STATE OF OUR PARKS DISTRICT AS A RESULT OF THE ORIGINAL PAYMENT, ORIGINAL COST OF THE OF THE PARK AND ALSO OUR REPAYMENT PLAN. IT'S A $32.5 MILLION PARK, I IMAGINE MAYBE 15 YEARS FROM NOW, 20 YEARS FROM NOW, IT'S GOING TO COST A LOT MORE TO HAVE TO RENOVATE AND REFINISH THIS PARK. IN OUR TYPICAL PARKS, THAT MIGHT BE ONLY ABOUT HALF $1 MILLION, $1 MILLION. I IMAGINE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT COST WILL BE RELATED TO THE SPORTS FIELDS AND THE UPKEEP. THE PICKLEBALL COURTS, WHICH I PLAYED FOR THE FIRST TIME ACTUALLY. AND THANK YOU GUYS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JEFF MASON. THOSE COURTS ARE CROWDED. I CAN SEE THEM WEARING DOWN FASTER THAN OTHER COURTS. YEAH. THE LIGHTING SYSTEM, THE UTILITIES DRAINAGE, THE PARKING LOTS. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PARK DISTRICT IS IN A GOOD POSITION TO BE ABLE TO PAY OFF THAT LOAN WHEN IT COMES TIME, AND ALSO TO MANAGE THE RENOVATIONS AND UPDATES TO THAT PARK. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER PEACH, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. I'M NOT PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT THE INTEREST. I WAS IN THE LAST MEETING BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF A BIGGER PACKAGE, BUT SINCE WE ARE KIND OF BRINGING THAT INTO IT, I'M GOING TO ASK STEPHANIE, IS IF WE WERE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING, WOULD THAT BE A CONFLICT WITH YOUR END STUFF THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE? I REALLY IT WOULD BE BEST THAT WE COULD FINALIZE

[00:25:02]

THIS, THIS MEETING SO WE CAN CLOSE OUT OUR FISCAL YEAR. AND I CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH A QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE END OF THE YEAR AT THE NEXT MEETING IN ORDER TO STAY ON TRACK FOR OUR AUDIT. BUT IF NOT, THEN OF COURSE, THEN IT GETS MOVED. YEAH, I GUESS THE CHALLENGE I HAVE, WE SPECIFICALLY APPROVED IT WITH WITH THE IN INTEREST IN THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT STEPHANIE CLEARLY TALKED TO US ABOUT AND SAYING, JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING AND NOW WE'RE REVERSING THAT. I'M NOT PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO THAT NIGHT. SO I GUESS I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GO FORWARD BECAUSE I'M NOT PREPARED, BECAUSE I HAD A LOT OF COMMENTS ON THE INTEREST ITSELF IN TERMS OF HOW WE SHOULD ADDRESS THAT. SO I KIND OF WONDER BACK TO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION FROM THE LAST MEETING, IS, DO WE JUST SAY CONTINUE BUSINESS AS USUAL FOR THE CLOSE OF THE FISCAL YEAR? AND NOW LET'S LOOK AT HOW WE GO FORWARD AND THEN HAVE IT AS A CONTINUED ITEM FOR NEXT. IT'S NOT GOING TO MATTER. MY OPINION. MAYBE I'M WRONG. IT'S NOT GOING TO MATTER THAT MUCH THAT WE JUST SAY, LET'S CONTINUE BUSINESS AS USUAL FOR LAST FISCAL YEAR, AND LET'S FIGURE OUT HOW WE WANT TO GO FORWARD FOR FUTURE YEARS. AND THAT WOULD RESOLVE HOW YOU HANDLE THE YEAR END. RIGHT? AND THEN WE CAN DEFINE AND HAVE A MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION, INCLUDING COMING BACK TO THE SCENARIOS THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED BEFORE, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S AS SIMPLE AS SAYING, LET'S JUST TAKE THE INTEREST OUT. I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS YOU HAD BEFORE WITH THAT IN MIND, TO REALLY HAVE A MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION. SO SO I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT, BUT I'M NOT PREPARED WITHOUT HAVING A MORE IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION ABOUT ALL THE ELEMENTS THAN JUST SAYING, LET'S REMOVE INTEREST. SO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER PETE, I'M GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT. I REMEMBER WE WENT THROUGH THIS. I RECALL OPTION NUMBER TWO FROM THE CHOICES WAS THE ONE THAT WHEN YOU GAVE THE PRESENTATION LAST, THAT WAS THE ONE THAT SAID NO INTEREST. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THAT WAS WHAT I VOTED FOR AND WANTED. I KNOW IT WAS. INSTEAD, WE WENT WITH THE OTHER OPTION, WHICH IS NOW SHOWING UP HERE. WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS CHANGE THINGS AND CAUSE POTENTIAL ISSUES. SINCE WE ARE CLOSING OUT THE BOOKS, CLOSING OUT ANNUALLY, I DO.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE, WAS NOT TO HAVE INTEREST AND I WAS VOTED NO. AND SO NOW WE'RE SWITCHING IT. AND MY OPINION IS I WOULD SAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND APPROVE IT THE WAY IT IS SO THAT FOR PLANNING PURPOSES AND SO FORTH, WHAT WE DISCUSSED, WE AGREE WITH IT. AND THEN OPEN THIS TOPIC UP FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT MEANINGFUL A DIFFERENCE IN ONE YEAR, BUT I DO. I'M FUNDAMENTALLY AGREE WITH THE INTEREST REMOVAL, AS I MENTIONED DURING THE MEETING WITH MY ORIGINAL INTENT TO HAVE NUMBER TWO. BUT DIRECTOR FINANCE, ANY ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN PRESENTED TO YOU, THE OPTION THAT YOU WENT FORWARD WITH, IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE WITH OR WITHOUT INTEREST DURING THE TERM THAT IT WAS PRESENTED, DIDN'T MAKE AN IMPACT TO WHERE IT LED, WHERE IT STOOD ON THAT GRAPH, BECAUSE IT WOULD JUST MOVE THE INTEREST OUT. THE DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF THIS FISCAL YEAR IS $614,000, ROUGHLY, WHICH IS A LITTLE SIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF WHEN WE LOOK AT THE SIGNIFICANCE IN RATIO TO THE DISTRICT'S FINANCES. SO I DO ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT BECAUSE IT'S I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE THINKING, OH, WELL, WE'LL JUST GO AS IS THIS YEAR. BUT IF YOUR INTENT IS NOT TO DO THE INTEREST, THEN SAVING $614,000 TO THE DISTRICT IN ONE YEAR MAY BE SIGNIFICANT. YEAH, I CONCUR, THAT'S WHY I SUGGESTED THAT WE GO THAT ROUTE. AND I WAS VOTED DOWN. AND NOW WE'RE SAYING LET'S GO THAT ROUTE. AND SO I'M KIND OF SCRATCHING MY HEAD SAYING I CAN SEE WHERE THERE'D BE SOME FRUSTRATION IF I WAS ON THE FINANCE SIDE PLANNING THIS OUT. MANY TIMES I HAVE BEEN AND I'VE BEEN IN BOARD MEETINGS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE CHANGED THEIR MIND AND I'M LIKE, WAIT, YOU REALIZE THERE'S ALL THESE IMPLICATIONS? WE HAD A WHOLE HOUR MEETING AND NOW YOU'RE JUST ALL OF A SUDDEN CHANGING IT. AND SO THERE'S SOMETHING INSIDE ME THAT SAYS ARE, WHAT DO WE MISS? THE FIRST TIME WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, ARE WE MISSING SOMETHING NOW, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF US NOR THE OPTIONS. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE WE'RE GOING OFF OF MEMORY.

AND THAT WAS HOW LONG AGO CAN ANYONE EVEN REMEMBER HOW MANY OPTIONS THERE WERE AND RANKED THEM? SIX, SIX, I WANT TO SAY SIX. AND WE WENT WITH NUMBER 5 OR 6. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER.

YEAH, WE WENT WITH NUMBER 5 OR 6. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHICH ONE WE WENT WITH SIX EXCESS FUND BALANCE. YES, I WAS FINE WITH SIX BUT I WANTED TO. AND NOW WE ARE SAYING NO TO SIX AND WE WANT TWO. SO I'M KIND OF TWO. WAS WAIVING INTEREST FOR THIS YEAR RIGHT. FOR ONE. AND I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN BURKE'S PROPOSAL WAS SIX. BUT JUST CLARIFYING WITH NO INTEREST, WHICH AS PRESENTED, IT COULD HAVE GONE EITHER WAY. RIGHT. AND SO IT BRINGS UP A REALLY

[00:30:05]

GOOD POINT BECAUSE AND THE CLARIFICATION, WE WENT THROUGH IT, WE DISCUSSED IT. IT IS A MEANINGFUL AMOUNT. I KNOW SOME OF THIS DISCUSSIONS WERE WHETHER OR NOT TO LOCK IN FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS INTO OUR DECISION BY WAIVING ALL THE INTEREST. SO I, I WAS OF THE OPINION WAIVING IT FOR 1 OR 2 YEARS WAS FINE, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO NECESSARILY MAKE DECISIONS FOR FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FUTURE DIOCESE. THAT'S WHY I WAS OF THE OPINION ONLY FOR A LIMITED TIME. BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE. COUNCIL MEMBER BURKE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. YEAH. THANK YOU. IT'S HONESTLY, IT'S KIND OF FUNNY BECAUSE MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER IN THE TIMES WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS, WE ALL SAID WE WERE OKAY WITH FORGIVING THE INTEREST. AND THEN SOMEHOW WE VOTED ON AN OPTION THAT DIDN'T DO THAT. I, I DO BELIEVE THIS IS THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS. I KNOW STAFF GAVE US A TABLE, WHICH I HAVE PREVIOUSLY THAT SHOWS THE INTEREST AND THE PRINCIPAL. AND SO I'M. I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT A NUMBER OF TIMES. I'M COMFORTABLE MAKING A MOTION AND SEEING WHERE IT LANDS, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS BEING RAISED ABOUT LOCKING IN A FUTURE COUNCIL.

WELL, HONESTLY, THAT'S WHAT THE PRIOR COUNCILS DID WHEN THEY PUT THIS DEBT ON OUR PARKS DISTRICT. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE LOCKING IN A BETTER FINANCIAL SITUATION FOR OUR PARKS DISTRICT IN THE LONG RUN. SO I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM SETTING IN A SETTING, A PRECEDENT IF I THINK IT'S A GOOD ONE. BUT I'M PREPARED TO, SO I WILL I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ITEM SIX, WITH THE CHANGE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY, AS HE DESCRIBED IT, TO FORGIVE THE INTEREST. MOTION. YES, THAT WOULD AFFECT THIS YEAR'S BALLOT BOX TWO FOR THE 600 WOULD BE CORRECT. I WOULD SECOND THAT. OKAY. SO SO AS PRESIDING OFFICER, WE HAVE A MOTION. IT'S BEEN SECONDED. AND THIS IS THE KIND OF THE SAME QUESTION WE HAD LAST TIME. ARE WE TALKING INTEREST FOR ONE YEAR OR ARE WE TALKING INTEREST FOR THE ENTIRE HOW LONG ARE WE TALKING? BECAUSE I DIDN'T HEAR THAT IN THE MOTION. SO IF WE CAN CLARIFY WHAT WAS THE INTENT OF THAT MOTION. THANK YOU. GOOD POINT. I INTEND TO FORGIVE THE INTEREST FOR THE DURATION OF THE LOAN. YES. OKAY. WELL, I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. DO YOU WANT TO VOTE NO FIRST AND SECOND. RIGHT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS, AS PRESIDING OFFICER, NOW THAT WE'VE HAD A MOTION THAT'S BEEN SECONDED, DO WE VOTE OR CAN WE HAVE A DISCUSSION? WELL, YOU HAD YOUR DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU MADE YOUR MOTION. SO I THINK YOU'RE. BUT IT'S OKAY. YEAH. BECAUSE THE MAYOR, IF YOU WANT TO INVITE. BECAUSE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS HERE IN INTEREST PAYMENTS. WHAT'S THE SUMMATION OF ALL THE INTEREST PAYMENTS? RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? YES, IT IS A $6,381,285.45. OKAY. SO THE MOTION INVOLVES MULTI MILLION, $6 MILLION WE'RE VOTING ON. SO YEAH, I DO THINK IT INVOLVES A DISCUSSION HERE BEFORE WE GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IT. SO I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. DOES ANYONE WANT TO DISCUSS. I DON'T SEE ANY SPEAKERS IN THE QUEUE. OKAY THEN I GUESS WE'RE VOTING FOR IT. AND THAT MOTION PASSES WITH THREE YES VOTES AND TWO NO VOTES FROM MAYOR MEDRANO AND COUNCIL MEMBER PETE. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS POINT, MR. MAYOR, WILL RECUSE YOU FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING, AND WE WILL TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX. AND TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS HAD QUESTIONS, APPARENTLY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S BEGIN. COUNCILMEMBER BURKE, DO YOU WANT TO ASK YOUR QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. JUST A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS. I, I KNOW THIS IS A BIG PROJECT. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT A LOT. I FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET RESIDENTS QUESTIONS ANSWERED. I DON'T THINK WE CLARIFIED THIS LAST TIME, MRS. VELASCO, BUT VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IS, YOU SAID, NOT A MEASURE OF CONGESTION. IT'S A MEASURE OF DISTANCE COVERED BY COMMUTERS OR RESIDENTS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT. IT'S THE AVERAGE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED. EVERY TIME A PERSON GETS INTO THEIR VEHICLE IN ORANGE COUNTY WITH THE STATE'S TARGET OF REDUCING THAT BY 15%. SO, MR. MAYOR PRO TEM, I DON'T MEAN TO

[00:35:07]

OKAY. BUT YES, IT'S A CONVERSATION THAT WE CAN HAVE WITH THE FUTURE BUILDER. OKAY? BECAUSE IN PART, THERE ARE NOT INDOOR BUILDINGS AS PART OF THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE. RIGHT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. AND, AND MY COMMENT WAS ACTUALLY ON THE AIR. SO IT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO ITEM SIX. BUT I DID WANT TO THANK ALL THE COMMENTERS THAT HAVE COMMENTED ON THE COUNCIL MEMBER STRONG CARNAHAN. SO, MR. MAYOR, IF I CAN JUST CHIME IN, JUST FOR THE RECORD, I THINK THE COUNCIL KNOWS THAT I SENT YOU A PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL MEMO EXPLAINING WHY WE WERE UP AGAINST A DEADLINE AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. IF I SAID IT A LITTLE GRUFFLY, I APOLOGIZE. I WILL TRY TO BE KINDER AND GENTLER IN MY RESPONSES TO YOUR QUESTIONS IN THE FUTURE, AND AT THIS TIME, I WILL TAKE A MOTION TO. APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. SEEING NO HANDS, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION MYSELF. I'LL SECOND. WHAT MAYOR IS NOT ON THE DAIS. I'M ACTUALLY. I WAS GOING TO CANCEL THE VOTE AND AND I'LL MARK HIM AS ABSENT AND THEN WE CAN REVOKE. OKAY. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE NOW. THAT MOTION PASSES WITH THREE YES VOTES. ONE NO VOTE FROM COUNCIL MEMBER STRONG CARNAHAN AND A RECUSAL FROM MAYOR MEDRANO. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, CAN WE INVITE MAYOR MEDRANO BACK INTO THE ROOM?

[9. Approve Playground Design Standards Prepared by: Jeff Draper, Director of Recreation and Community Services Recommendation: Approve playground design standards for the design, construction, accessibility, safety, and durability of all new outdoor publicly accessible playgrounds within the City of Cypress.]

THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. NEW BUSINESS FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE. APPROVE PLAYGROUND DESIGN CENTERS. CITY MANAGER DELONG. IS THERE A STAFF REPORT? MAYOR MEDRANO, THERE IS ACTUALLY YOUR NEXT TWO BUSINESS ITEMS. BOTH PERTAIN TO PARKS. IT'S A VERY PARK HEAVY NIGHT THIS EVENING. SO YOUR RECREATION DIRECTOR, JEFF DRAPER, HAS THIS PRESENTATION

[00:40:03]

FOR YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR, HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TONIGHT, WE'RE HERE TO RECOMMEND PARK DESIGN STANDARDS AS OUTLINED IN THE CITY'S STRATEGIC PLAN. THESE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY YOUR RECREATION AND PUBLIC WORKS TEAMS, AS WELL AS THE RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION. WHILE MOST PLAYGROUNDS ARE ALREADY SUBJECT TO THE SAFETY REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE PROPOSED PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, SAFETY, ACCESSIBILITY, AND DURABILITY OF ALL NEW OUTDOOR, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUNDS. AS PART OF THE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS PLAYGROUND PLAN WILL NOW BE REQUIRED FOR ALL NEW PLAYGROUNDS. PRIOR TO GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A PLAYGROUND, APPLICANTS MUST SUBMIT A DETAILED PLAN FOR THE PLAYGROUND, INCLUDING A SITE PLAN, FALL ZONES, EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS AND EVEN SURFACING MATERIALS. THE DETAILED PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE RECREATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BEFORE A PERMIT WILL EVEN BE ISSUED. AFTER A PERMIT IS ISSUED AND CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED, THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT A LETTER OF COMPLETION VERIFYING THAT THE PLAY EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN INSTALLED BEEN IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED, INSPECTED AND CERTIFIED BY A QUALIFIED INSPECTOR AUTHORIZED BY THE MANUFACTURER. THE EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN INSTALLED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THE MINIMUM SAFETY REGULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS ALSO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO ENSURE PLAY AREAS ARE DESIGNED WITH SAFETY IN MIND, INCLUDING SPATIAL LAYOUT, EQUIPMENT AND SURFACING CONSIDERATIONS. FIRST, WE'LL LOOK AT THE SPATIAL CONSIDERATIONS. TYPICALLY, PLAYGROUNDS HAVE TWO AREAS FOR PLAY. THEY HAVE AREAS FOR THOSE AGE 2 TO 5 AND THEN FROM 5 TO 12. SO THAT'S IF YOU'RE LUCKY ENOUGH TO HAVE A BIG ENOUGH PLAYGROUND TO BE ABLE TO SEPARATE THOSE TWO AREAS. IF NOT, THEY ARE COMPOSITE PLAY AREAS WHICH COMBINE THOSE. SO WE ARE GIVING SIZE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THOSE PLAYGROUNDS. AND THE REASON WHY WE'RE DOING A RANGE IS BECAUSE YOU HAVE LARGER COMMUNITY PARKS VERSUS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OR EVEN MINI PARKS. SO WE'RE ABLE TO ADJUST THE SIZE TO FIT THE PARK THAT IT'S GOING INTO. STANDARDS ALSO ENSURE THAT THE SAFETY, THAT SAFETY IS A TOP PRIORITY. AND IT GIVES US SOME SPECIFIC GUIDANCE ON SEPARATION OF PLAYGROUND FROM DIFFERENT RECREATIONAL AREAS. SO IF YOU LOOK, THERE'S SEPARATIONS FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, ATHLETIC FIELDS AND THEN RECREATION AREAS. AND IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO MEET THOSE DISTANCES, PLAYGROUNDS CAN USE OTHER AREA, OTHER TYPES OF WAYS TO SEPARATE THOSE, INCLUDING FENCES, NETS OR OTHER BARRIERS TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THEM AWAY FROM THOSE DIFFERENT AREAS. AND THEN WE ALSO LOOKED AT SHADE COVERAGE OVER THE PLAY EQUIPMENT. AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE SUPERVISING THE PLAY AREAS, SO SHADE STRUCTURES CAN EITHER BE FREESTANDING OR ATTACHED TO THE PLAY EQUIPMENT AND SHOULD COVER A MINIMUM OF 50% OF THE PLAY AREA. AND THEN IN ADDITION, SHADE IN THE FORM OF TREES, SHADE CANOPIES OR OTHER PICNIC AREAS SHOULD BE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL AREA FOR THE SUPERVISION OF PLAY FOR PARENTS THERE. AS FAR AS LAYOUT CONSIDERATIONS, APPROPRIATE AGE DESIGNATION SIGNAGE AT EACH ENTRANCE SHOULD SHOULD BE THERE.

WE ALSO HAVE ADA COMPLIANT ACCESS, INCLUDING COMPLIANT RAMPS NEAR PLAY EQUIPMENT TRANSFER DECKS, ZERO INCH CURB FACE BETWEEN THE FINISHED POUR IN PLACE SURFACE AND THE TOP OF THE ADJACENT PLAY EQUIPMENT CURB, SO THAT WAY IT'LL PROVIDE A SMOOTH BARRIER FOR ANYBODY IN A WHEELCHAIR BEING ABLE TO ROLL OVER. AND THEN WE ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT SWINGS ARE ORIENTED AWAY FROM THE ACTIVE PLAY AREA. SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT A SWING RIGHT NEXT TO THE IN OR THE EXIT OF A SLIDE. YOU WANT TO AVOID COLLISIONS THERE. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT FALL ZONES. WE WANT TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET OF FALL ZONE AREA FOR ANY OF THE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT TO THE END OF THE PLAYGROUND. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE DO INSTALLATION, WE WANT TO LOOK AT DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND FOOTINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE DONE BY A CIVIL ENGINEER, BUT ALSO MEET THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.

AND THEN ANY ANY ITEMS THAT WE MAY HAVE HERE. EVERYBODY KNOWS CYPRESS HAS A HIGH GROUNDWATER TABLE. SO WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE COMMENTS BACK TO ANYBODY WHO'S INSTALLING THESE. NEXT, WE'LL LOOK AT THE EQUIPMENT CONSIDERATIONS. AND ALL THE EQUIPMENT MUST COMPLY WITH ALL

[00:45:02]

FEDERAL, STATE, CITY GUIDELINES. THE US CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION GUIDELINES, AND IT MUST MEET OR EXCEED THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING MATERIALS STANDARDS. SO THOSE ARE ALL PRETTY, PRETTY STANDARD FOR PLAYGROUND LIFE. THE INSTALLED EQUIPMENT MUST ALSO COMPLY WITH THE LATEST REQUIREMENTS FOR ADA FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES, WHICH INCLUDE BOTH ELEVATED AND GROUND LEVEL EVENTS. SO WE WANT PLAY TO OCCUR ON MULTIPLE LEVELS, AND THEN WE WANT DURABLE MATERIALS. SO THE AVERAGE LIFESPAN OF A PLAYGROUND IS ROUGHLY ABOUT 20 YEARS. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE USING THE DURABLE MATERIALS TO MAKE THEM LAST THAT LONG. AND THEN WE ALSO WANT TO PROVIDE A DIVERSITY OF PLAY EXPERIENCES. SO ANYTHING FROM SWINGING, SPINNING, CLIMBING, BALANCE, SENSORY, ANY TYPE OF ELEMENT THAT WE CAN ADD INTO A PLAYGROUND THAT WOULD INCREASE THE PLAY VALUE IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, INCLUDING IN THERE. AND THEN ALSO WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE INNOVATIVE AND UNIQUE DESIGNS AS WE KNOW THAT THAT DEFINITELY MAKES THE PARK EXPERIENCE MUCH BETTER FOR OUR PARK USERS. AND THEN THE FINAL CONSIDERATION THAT WE HAVE IN THERE IS OUR SURFACING CONDITIONS. AND THESE ARE THERE BECAUSE WE RECOMMEND THE POUR IN PLACE RUBBERIZED SURFACING, ALL OF THE PARKS IN THE DISTRICT'S INVENTORY HAVE THOSE. AND THE REASON WHY WE HAVE IT IS IT INCREASES THE ADA ACCESSIBILITY. IT HELPS US MEET THE FALL ZONE COMPLIANCE, AND THEN IT CAN BE USED TO CREATE SHAPES OR PATTERNS THAT ARE INTERESTING WITHIN THE PLAYGROUND AS WELL. ALSO TO THE SURFACING CAN BE EASILY PATCHED WHEN IT DOES FAIL FOR FOR THE THE MAGNITUDE OF USE THAT IT'S GETTING. SO WITH THAT, THESE ARE THE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS BEFORE YOU. TONIGHT, THE STAFF AND RECREATION COMMISSION ALL RECOMMEND THESE TO YOU, AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, ACCESSIBILITY, SAFETY AND DURABILITY OF ALL NEW OUTDOOR, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUNDS WITHIN THE CITY OF CYPRESS. AND WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DIRECTOR DOCTOR CHANG, YOU HAVE FOUR. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR DRAPER, AND THANK YOU TO PARKS COMMISSION TO. I HAD SOME COMMENTS, BUT JUST ONE QUESTION. DO YOU SEE THIS AS MORE OF A A GUIDELINE, OR IS IT MORE OF A RULE THAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW? SO WITH THESE BEING THE STANDARD, THIS IS THE RULE THAT THEY WOULD FOLLOW A LOT OF THEM. THERE IS FLEXIBILITY WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT. MOST OF THEM MEET CURRENT STATE OR FEDERAL GUIDELINES. BUT THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY. THERE ARE AREAS THAT WE REQUIRE. SOME DIFFERENT METHODS. SO LIKE WITH THE SIZING OF THE PLAYGROUNDS, WE DO OFFER A RANGE WITH THE AMOUNT OF SHADE THAT'S PROVIDED.

WE SAY THAT THERE'S A MINIMUM OF 50%. SO IT'S NOT 100%. SO THAT ALLOWS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE PLACED UNDER THE SHADE. SO WE DO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN IT. BUT THESE ARE WHAT WE WANT ALL NEW PLAYGROUNDS TO, TO LOOK LIKE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I DON'T MIND A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO TRYING TO GET MORE DIVERSITY AND MORE UNIQUE PLAYGROUNDS. I'M THINKING OF STAUNTON CENTRAL PARK, THEIR BIG STRUCTURE. IT'S IT MIGHT NOT FIT THAT 50% SHADE REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, THREE STORY GIGANTIC STRUCTURE, BUT IT IS IT IS VERY UNIQUE. AND I DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE THOSE KIND OF STRUCTURES. SO WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN THINGS, I DON'T MIND IF WE'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBLE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. I DO HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS, BUT I'LL WAIT TO, AFTER THE QUESTIONING PERIOD TO DO MY COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER PETE, DO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THIS IS A REVISION TO A PLAN, RIGHT? I DIDN'T SEE A RED LINE, BUT THIS IS A CHANGE TO SOMETHING WE ALREADY HAD IN PLACE. OR IS THIS BRAND NEW? THIS IS BRAND NEW. WE'VE NEVER HAD PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS BEFORE. OH, OKAY. OKAY, THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. ALL RIGHT. HOW DID YOU COME UP? DID REFRESH MY MEMORY. HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THE STANDARDS? SO IT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN. SO WE WORKED WITH THE RECREATION COMMISSION. THEY FORMED AN AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE, AND WE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT CITIES WHO HAD THE DESIGN STANDARDS. SO WE KIND OF TOOK A LITTLE BIT FROM ALL THESE OTHER CITIES, AND WE ADAPTED IT TO CYPRESS'S NEEDS.

AND THEN HOW DOES THE SEGMENTATION COME ABOUT FOR THE DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS? YOU SAID IF A PARK IS LARGE ENOUGH, YOU'RE ABLE TO SEGMENT. HOW IS THAT? IS IT SIGNAGE OR HOW DO

[00:50:04]

YOU DO THAT? SO IF YOU LOOK AT LIKE THE NEWEST PARK, ARNOLD CYPRESS PARK, SO THERE'S DEFINITELY TWO DISTINCT PLAY AREAS. YES. SO ONE IS FOR THE YOUNGER GROUP, ONE IS FOR THE OLDER GROUP. THAT BEING SAID, MOST OF OUR PLAYGROUNDS CURRENTLY HAVE ELEMENTS FOR BOTH FOR BOTH AGE GROUPS IN THERE. SO IT'S IT'S KIND OF A COMPOSITE PLAYGROUND. SO IT DOESN'T SERVE JUST 5 TO 12 OR 2 TO 5 AND THEN 5 TO 12. IT HAS A MIXTURE OF EQUIPMENT IN THERE.

SO BACK TO, I'LL CALL IT INCORPORATION OR HOW WE DO IT FOR COMPLIANCE OR WHATEVER. WE DON'T MIND IF A 12 YEAR OLD IS IN A THREE YEAR OLD AREA. CORRECT. WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYGROUND POLICE OUT THERE. WELL, THAT'S WHAT I KIND OF ASSUMED. SO I'M LIKE, IT DOESN'T MATTER. I WOULD LEAVE IT UP TO THE PARENTS AND OTHER OTHER THINGS FOR THAT. SO.

CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NICE JOB. COUNCILMEMBER BURKE, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. DRAPER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO OUR COMMISSIONERS. AS YOU SAID, THIS WAS A NEW PROJECT THAT WE GAVE THE COMMISSION, AND AS USUAL, THEY CAME THROUGH WITH A GREAT RESULT. A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS, AND SOME OF THESE ARE A LITTLE ODD. IT'S OKAY IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS. WELL, THESE NEW STANDARDS PREVENT US FROM WORKING WITH ANY OF THE VENDORS WE'VE USED BEFORE FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, LIKE THEY MIGHT PRODUCE EQUIPMENT THAT DOESN'T MEET THESE STANDARDS, OR SHOULD IT NOT HINDER US, IT REALLY SHOULDN'T HINDER US. MOST OF THEM ARE ALREADY STATE AND FEDERAL GUIDELINES, SO THE PLAYGROUND MANUFACTURERS ARE WELL AWARE OF THESE. AS I MENTIONED, SOME OF THE OTHER CITIES HAVE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS AS WELL. SO THE PLAYGROUND MANUFACTURERS ARE USED TO WORKING WITHIN THESE. OKAY. AND THEN HAVE WE DO WE KNOW IF OUR CURRENT PARKS MEET THESE STANDARDS OR SOME OF THEM OR ALL. SO WE WILL BE WORKING ON THAT. SO IN THE CIP, WE HAVE PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENTS SCHEDULED FOR THE ONGOING FUTURE. SO IF THEY DO NOT MEET THEM AND MOST OF THEM DO NOT MEET THEM, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE 50% SHADE RULE, WE WILL BE UPGRADING THOSE PARKS AS WE GO THROUGH THE CIP AND REPLACING PLAYGROUNDS. OKAY.

AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION THAT'S PERHAPS MORE FOR OUR STAFF OR CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY MANAGER. SO IT SOUNDED LIKE MAYOR PRO TEM CHANG HAD SOME SUGGESTIONS. I HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS WHERE PERHAPS I'D LOVE TO GET ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ON A FEW FEW AREAS, OR HAVE THEM DRILLED DOWN A LITTLE MORE. SHOULD I SAY THOSE SUGGESTIONS NOW? SHOULD I? YEAH, OKAY. I GOT A THUMBS UP FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY. I THINK I DO JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE IN THESE PLAYGROUND DESIGN STANDARDS, WE'RE NOT ONLY REQUIRING OUR OWN PUBLICLY FUNDED, PUBLICLY CONSTRUCTED PLAYGROUNDS TO CONFORM TO THESE, BUT IN OUR STAFF REPORT, WE ALSO TALK ABOUT A PLAYGROUND THAT MIGHT BE DESIGNED AND AVAILABLE AT A DAYCARE CENTER OR AT A CHURCH, OR IN A PRIVATE HOA THAT IS AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. SO THESE STANDARDS WILL APPLY IN THOSE CASES AS WELL. ESSENTIALLY, ANY PLAYGROUND THAT DOESN'T COME UNDER THE DIVISION OF STATE ARCHITECTURE THAT THAT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. SO IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO PRESCRIBE SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC PARKS, WE SHOULD DELINEATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO IMPOSE ON ALL PARKS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE THROUGHOUT THE CITY, REGARDLESS OF OWNERSHIP, AND THOSE THAT WE WANT TO HOLD OUR OWN CITY PARKS TO. OKAY. AND CAN YOU JUST REITERATE AGAIN, THERE'S THE PUBLIC PARKS, WHICH ARE THE 20 ISH THAT WE CONSIDER OUR CITY PARKS. AND THEN WHAT'S THE OTHER CATEGORY THAT THESE ALSO MIGHT APPLY TO THE PARKS THAT ARE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE? SO SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE CONSTRUCTED IN AN HOA, SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE, ACCESSIBLE TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT'S ON A CHURCH SITE OR AT A DAYCARE CENTER. THOSE ANYTHING THAT WOULDN'T BE SORT OF SECURED ON A SCHOOL GROUNDS ONLY AVAILABLE TO SCHOOLS THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THE CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF STATE ARCHITECT BECAUSE IT'S A SCHOOL. ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC THAT SOMEONE WOULD NEED TO GET A PERMIT FROM THE CITY TO CONSTRUCT THESE WOULD APPLY TO THEM. OKAY. WELL, SO THAT'S INTERESTING. AND I, IT WAS NEVER, I GUESS, OUR INTENTION OR MY INTENTION TO IMPOSE REQUIREMENTS ON AN HOA, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MIGHT BE TOUGH FOR THEM TO MEET. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE WANT THE COMMISSION, COMMISSION NURSE TO TAKE INTO FURTHER CONSIDERATION. IF THEY HAVEN'T, HAVE THEY ALREADY, OR IS THAT AN ADDITIONAL WRINKLE? THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE KIND OF DID DISCUSS, ESPECIALLY WITH, YOU KNOW, THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RACE COURSE.

IF THERE IS A PARK THAT IS THAT IS DEVELOPED BY THE HOA, WE WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SUFFICIENT CONTROL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GETTING A PARK THAT IS OF CYPRESS QUALITY.

OKAY. AND SO, SO THE SUGGESTIONS I'M ABOUT TO RAISE, I, I INTEND THEM TO APPLY TO

[00:55:02]

THE, WHAT WE CALL CONSIDER THE CITY PARKS. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT ATTEMPTING TO PRESCRIBE AN ANSWER. I MORE WANT THE COMMISSION TO EXPLORE THESE AREAS A LITTLE FURTHER. AND I'M CURIOUS WHAT THEY FIND OR RECOMMEND. SO ONE IS I'M THRILLED THAT WE HAVE THIS ADDITIONAL SHADE PROPOSAL. MAYBE THIS IS A LITTLE NITTY GRITTY, BUT I SPENT A LOT OF TIME AT OUR PLAYGROUNDS WITH MY KIDS. I'D BE CURIOUS IF THE COMMISSION CAN EXPLORE LIKE CERTAIN PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO HAVE SHADE OVER THAN OTHERS. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, SLIDES, IF THEY'RE HOT, ARE TOTALLY UNUSABLE. AND SO IF THERE WERE A PLAYGROUND THAT HAD 50% SHADE, BUT IT WAS ALL OVER LIKE A SWING AND SOMETHING ELSE YOU RUN ON IN THE SLIDES SUPER HOT. THAT'S NOT IDEAL. SO I'D BE CURIOUS IF THERE'S ANY POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRIORITIZING WHERE SHADE IS, FOR EXAMPLE. MAYBE NOT. THAT'S JUST A SUGGESTION. SECOND, WE HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SWINGS IN OUR PARKS. MY KIDS REFER TO THEM AS THE BABY SWINGS AND THE BIG KIDS SWINGS. AND SO I'D BE CURIOUS IF THE COMMISSION THOUGHT IT MADE SENSE TO HAVE A STANDARD. THAT'S ANYTIME THERE'S SWINGS, THERE SHOULD BE BOTH TYPES FOR KIDS WHO ARE 2 OR 3 AND KIDS WHO ARE 5 OR 6 OR OLDER. AND THEN ON A RELATED NOTE ABOUT SWINGS, AND THIS IS MY LAST ONE, WE ALSO HAVE IN A FEW PARKS, THEY'RE CALLED ADAPTIVE SWINGS, WHICH ARE, I GUESS, ACCESSIBLE TO KIDS OF ALL ABILITIES. WE HAVE THEM IN VETERANS PARK, WE HAVE THEM IN MACKEY PARK AND MAYBE 1 OR 2 MORE. I'D BE CURIOUS FOR THE COMMISSION TO EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF PUTTING THOSE IN MORE PARKS, OR AT THE VERY LEAST, SOME STANDARD RELATED TO CAN WE AT LEAST PUT HAVE SWINGS LIKE THAT IN, IN LIKE ONE PLAYGROUND AND DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CITY SO PARENTS DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE CITY TO VISIT A PARK LIKE THAT. SO AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL MAKE SENSE, BUT I'D LOVE FOR THOSE AREAS TO BE EXPLORED FURTHER. AND I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE COMMISSION WOULD RECOMMEND. THAT'S ALL.

MAYOR PRO TEM CHEN YEAH, THANK YOU. I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE ADAPTIVE SWINGS. I'VE HEARD SOME PEOPLE HATE THEM, BUT PEOPLE THAT REALLY LIKE THEM, REALLY LIKE THEM JUST BECAUSE THEY FULFILL A UNIQUE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT OR A CERTAIN PHYSICAL PROFILE WHERE THEY'RE NOT ABLE, THEY MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DO A REGULAR SWING, BUT THEY ARE ABLE TO DO THE THE ADAPTIVE SWINGS AT VETERANS PARK. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. MY IDEA CENTERS AROUND THE DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF PARKS THAT WE HAVE. WE HAVE THE BIGGER COMMUNITY PARKS. THEN WE HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS WITH PARKING SUCH AS VETERANS PARK, AND THEN WE HAVE THE SMALLER NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS. AND I WOULD LIKE FOR OUR BIGGER PARK, OUR BIGGER PARKS TO HAVE THAT DELINEATION BETWEEN THE 2 TO 5 PLAYGROUND TYPE AREA AND THE 5 TO 12 YEAR OLD TOT AREA.

SO ARNOLD CYPRESS PARK, THAT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE OF HAVING THAT 2 TO 5 TOT LOT. AND THEN THE, THE FIVE SEPARATE 5 TO 12 LOT LEXINGTON PARK. THAT'S, THAT'S PROBABLY A GOOD EXAMPLE OF NOT HAVING THAT WHERE MOST OF IT IS GEARED TOWARD OUR OLDER, OLDER KIDS. I ACTUALLY LIKE LEXINGTON PARK. MY DAUGHTER REALLY LIKES LEXINGTON PARK. AND NOW THAT WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF ADDING THAT ONE ACRE SPACE NEXT TO LEXINGTON PARK, THAT MIGHT BE A NICE ADDITION TO HAVING THAT LITTLE TOT LOT THERE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH THE REST OF THE ONE ACRE LOT. SOME OF THE OTHER PARKS THAT I, THAT I, THAT I MENTIONED THAT ARE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS WITH PARKING, SUCH AS VETERANS PARK, MACKEY PARK, EVERGREEN PARK, THEY'RE KIND OF MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. HAVING THAT 2 TO 5 ZONE AND THEN A SEPARATE 5 TO 12 AREA. AND I, THE 2 TO 5 AREA. I. I ALSO WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER ADDING A LOT MORE SHADE TO THAT 90%, 100% SHADE TO THAT AREA. KIND OF WHAT LIKE WE HAVE AT ACP. I THINK THAT'S A, I HAVE A THREE YEAR OLD AND I, I LOVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WHEN THERE'S SHADE COMPLETELY COVERING THE TOT LOT, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY FOR THE BIGGER PLAYGROUND STRUCTURES, BUT I LIKE HAVING THAT FOR THE, THE 2 TO 5. SO THAT, YEAH, THE BIGGEST DELINEATION WOULD BE THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE PARKING LOT AND ALSO THE SIZE OF THE PARK. ONE THING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE IN THE PAST IS SHADE STRUCTURES.

[01:00:06]

SOME OF OUR PARKS HAVE THE SOLID SHADE STRUCTURES, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE THE SOFT SALES, LIKE THE, THE, THE HARDER ONES I'M THINKING ABOUT LIKE VETERANS PARK HAS IT AND THEY'RE ALSO RENTABLE. SO I LIKE THAT IDEA OF WHATEVER WE HAVE THAT'S RENTABLE, HAVING THAT HARD STRUCTURE LIKE ACP VETERANS, LEXINGTON PARK. THEY ALL HAVE THAT SAGE, THE HARD SHADE STRUCTURE. I THINK THE EVERGREEN MIGHT BE AN EXAMPLE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE HARD STRUCTURE, BUT MACKEY PARK ALSO HAS THE HARD STRUCTURES THAT'S ALSO RENTABLE. SO AND SO. THE OPPOSITE WOULD BE TRUE TO I THINK IT'S OKAY JUST HAVING SOFT SALES FOR ANY OF THE PARKS THAT DON'T HAVE RENTABLE STRUCTURE, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU TO IF YOU WANT TO UPGRADE TO HARD STRUCTURE OR KEEP IT UP AT THE SOFT SALES. THE REASON I BRING THIS UP IS I IMAGINE IT'S MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO HAVE THE HARD STRUCTURES AT ALL THE PARKS. IT MIGHT NOT BE FINANCIALLY PRUDENT, SO I, I'M FINE WITH JUST HAVING THE SAME STRUCTURE FOR LIKE THE, THE I'M SORRY, I'M TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE, THE, THE EATING AREAS AND THE RENTABLE SPACES THAT, THAT WE HAVE AT THE PARKS. YEAH. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. IF I CAN JUMP IN JUST REAL QUICK BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALL GREAT COMMENTS WHEN WE DO THE PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENTS, AS WE UPGRADE PLAYGROUNDS, EVERYTHING WILL GO THROUGH THE RECREATION COMMISSION BEFORE IT COMES TO CITY COUNCIL. SO THEY'RE ABLE TO CONTEMPLATE PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THESE ISSUES OR ALL OF THESE SUGGESTIONS THAT THAT WE WANT THEM TO CONTEMPLATE. AND, AND BY DOING SO, WE CAN DO IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, ON A PARK BY PARK BASIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT THEY ARE CONTEMPLATING IS, IS APPROPRIATE FOR EACH PARK SITE. SO REALLY GOOD SUGGESTIONS. SO THIS IS KIND OF AN OPEN ENDED QUESTION. AS PRESIDING OFFICER, WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IDEAS. WE DON'T HAVE A MOTION YET. WE HAVE THE REPORT. THERE WERE SOME SUGGESTIONS TO DO FOR CHANGE. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE KIND OF CAPTURING IT, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME HAVING A VOTE ON SOMETHING. SO PROCEDURALLY CITY MANAGER, SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THIS AND THEN HAVE SOME CHANGES, OR SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND HAVE A WORKSHOP, OR SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND HAVE A MOTION? BUT THE MOTION WITH THE SPECIFIC THINGS LINED UP, OR DO YOU NEED MORE TIME TO GO AND DO YOUR THING? WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD BE THE BEST PATH FORWARD? SO I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO CLARIFY WHETHER YOU'RE HAPPY WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ALL PARKS THAT ARE COMING TO THE CITY FOR APPROVAL, WHETHER THEY'RE PRIVATE OR PUBLIC. AND THEN IF, IN ADDITION, YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THE RECREATION COMMISSION WITH SOME ADDITIONAL TALKING POINTS FOR FOR POTENTIAL STANDARDS TO IMPOSE SPECIFIC TO CITY OWNED PARKS. SO DO YOU DO YOU WANT TO SEPARATE THOSE TWO CONVERSATIONS? AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, YOU CAN APPROVE WHAT WOULD APPLY TO EVERYTHING AS A BASE LEVEL AND THEN HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION HELD AT THE RECREATION COMMITTEE FOR SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS AND IDEAS THAT YOU BROUGHT UP TONIGHT, IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

OKAY, THEN THAT FURTHER DISCUSSION WOULD BE A SUBCOMMITTEE. WOULD IT BE JUST GOING AHEAD AND ASKING THE COMMISSION TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD BASED UPON WHAT WE DISCUSSED? WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST AVENUE TO APPROACH THAT? I THINK WE'VE BOTH BEEN TAKING NOTES, AND WE CAN TAKE THAT BACK TO THE RECREATION COMMISSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THEY WILL OR HOW THEY SEE BEST IMPLEMENTING THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND THOSE SUGGESTIONS FOR CITY OWNED PARKS. OKAY. IF IT'S THE COUNCIL'S DESIRE TO SEPARATE THAT AND TO NOT MAKE THE THE QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS THAT CAME UP IMPOSED UPON PARKS THAT ARE BEING DEVELOPED BY PRIVATE ENTITIES. OKAY, SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A BIFURCATION. TWO STEP SUGGESTION IS REVIEW AND APPROVE WITH EMOTION AND THEN TAKE A SECOND ACTION ITEM. CITY MANAGER CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE INFORMATION PRESENTED. IS THAT AND I'M NOT SEEING ANYONE IN THE SPEAKER QUEUE. SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT SOUNDS FINE. BUT IF ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT, GO AHEAD. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER BURKE, I THINK THAT SOUNDS FINE TO ME. I JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WERE I WAS TOTALLY AWARE OF THE CITY PARKS VERSUS PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PARKS ISSUE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL THINK THAT THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO APPROVE THE EXISTING PROPOSAL AS TO ALL PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PARKS, AND THAT TO GIVE THE COMMISSION MORE TIME TO COME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING CITY PARKS BASED ON MAYOR PRO TEM CHANG'S AND MY FEEDBACK, IF YOU ALL THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. SOUNDS GREAT TO ME, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU FEEL THAT WAY. HEAD NODDING AT OUR DIRECTOR. YES.

[01:05:03]

COUNCIL MEMBER CORRECTION. DOCTOR CHANG, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY WOULD PREFER THAT WE DO IT ALL TOGETHER, JUST IN CASE. IF THERE'S CHANGES DOWN THE ROAD THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE ON THIS CURRENT POLICY, WE CAN ALL SEE IT ALL TOGETHER. AND THAT WAY WE CAN. I THINK RIGHT NOW IT'S HARD ALSO TO GET AN IDEA IN MIND FOR EVERYTHING WE'VE SAID TODAY, PLUS WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE. SO JUST SEEING IT ALL AT ONCE IN WRITING MIGHT BE HELPFUL. AND THAT MIGHT GIVE US, I ALSO WOULDN'T MIND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME IN CASE THERE'S ANY OTHER GREAT SUGGESTIONS THAT WE MIGHT GET FROM THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO INCORPORATE THOSE INTO WHAT WE HAVE TO. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF POSSIBLY CONTINUING THIS ITEM.

OKAY, SO PROCEDURALLY, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT AVENUES OF APPROACH. UNLESS YOU THINK OTHERWISE. CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SAY I'LL TAKE A MOTION FROM SOMEONE. ALL RIGHT. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM. WELL, IS THAT THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT A MOTION, RIGHT. YEAH. THAT THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. IT WOULD BE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE ITEM WITH INSTRUCTIONS THAT THE RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION AND STAFF ADDRESS. THE ISSUES THAT YOU AND COUNCIL MEMBER BURKE HAVE RAISED. OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS THAT THE STAFF ADDRESS WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BURKE AND I HAVE PROPOSED TODAY. THANK YOU. I WHOLEHEARTEDLY. SECOND MAYOR PRO TEM CHANG'S MOTION. NOW WE HAVE A DISCUSSION, I'M ASSUMING.

OKAY, THEN I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION. I HAVE ONE QUESTION, AND THIS IS FOR THE DIRECTOR AND CITY MANAGER. BY US ADOPTING THIS MOTION THE WAY IT IS, I'M ASSUMING WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE MESSING UP ANY TIMELINES. IS THAT CORRECT? OR ARE WE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND EXTEND, HEY, BY DOING THIS, WE'VE JUST EXTENDED SOMETHING BY SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR UNKNOWINGLY. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO NEGATIVE RAMIFICATIONS BY US APPROVING THIS MOTION, THE WAY IT'S BEEN PRESENTED. THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE. THE NEXT TIME YOU WILL SEE THIS THAT WE ANTICIPATE WILL BE THE VETERANS PARK PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT. THAT BEING SAID, THE REC COMMISSION, THEY DO GO DARK IN OCTOBER. THEY DO HAVE A NOVEMBER MEETING AND THEN DECEMBER THEY GO DARK AS WELL.

SO IT MAY BE A LITTLE WHILE BEFORE YOU SEE THIS BACK. SEEING NO OTHER SPEAKER REQUESTS, PLEASE VOTE. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER TEN. THE

[10. Baroldi Sycamore Park Outreach Efforts Prepared by: Jeff Draper, Director of Recreation and Community Services Recommendation: Receive and file the Baroldi Sycamore Park outreach results.]

PARK OUTREACH EFFORTS. CITY MANAGER, IS THERE A STAFF REPORT? WE'RE GOING RIGHT BACK TO DIRECTOR DRAPER.

BUT WE'LL GET RIGHT BACK AT IT. SO SYCAMORE PARK WAS CREATED IN 1970 WHEN THE BARALDI FAMILY DONATED SOME LAND FROM THEIR 22 ACRE DAIRY FARM. IN 2023, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE PURCHASE OF A 3900 SQUARE FOOT LOT THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE PARK THAT WAS STILL ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE BARALDI FAMILY. AND THE INTENTION OF THE OF THE PURCHASE WAS TO EXPAND THE PARK BY 88% TO 2.2 ACRES, AND THE EXPANSION IS PART OF A STRATEGIC PLAN ITEM. AND IN JANUARY, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND DESIGN FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE PARK. AND THEN IN MAY 2026, CITY COUNCIL AWARDED A CONTRACT TO MIG FOR THOSE SERVICES. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROCESS FOR EXPANSION HAS FIVE DIFFERENT PHASES, ALONG WITH MIG PHASE ONE. THE PROJECT INITIATION AND SITE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND WE ARE CURRENTLY IN PHASE NUMBER TWO, WITH THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH HAVING BEEN COMPLETED AND WITH YOUR DIRECTION, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COMPLETION OF PHASE TWO. THE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT, THE RECREATION COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEE THE CONCEPT PLANS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON THE PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN BEFORE WE MOVE INTO PHASE THREE, WHICH IS THE MASTER PLAN. SO WITH THAT, I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO HOLLY DE LA TORY FROM MIG, WHO WILL BE PRESENTING THE RESULTS OF THE OUTREACH EFFORTS FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE SYCAMORE PARK. HOLLY DE LA TORRE. I'M A PROJECT MANAGER AT MIG AND I AM HERE TONIGHT WITH OSCAR JOHNSON, WHO'S THE PRINCIPAL OF OUR FIRM.