[VI.A. UC Merced Annexation to the City of Merced (LAFCO File No. 0701) – The proposal involves the annexation of the University of California, Merced Campus into the City of Merced, along with a two-mile length of the Bellevue Road right-of-way which serves as the physical connection with the current city limits located at “G” Street. The complete annexation area including the campus and the roadway is approximately 1,140 acres. The UC Merced Campus is located on the east side of Lake Road, to the north and south of the intersection of Lake Road and Bellevue Road.]

YOU SEE MERCED ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF MERCED.

LAFCO FILE NUMBER 701.

PROPOSAL INVOLVES ANNEXATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, MERCED CAMPUS INTO THE CITY OF MERCED, ALONG WITH A TWO MILE LENGTH OF BELLEVUE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH SERVES AS A PHYSICAL CONNECTION WITH THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS, LOCATED AT G STREET.

COMPLETE ANNEXATION AREA, INCLUDING THE CAMPUS AND A ROADWAY, IS APPROXIMATELY 1140 ACRES.

YOU SEE, MERCED CAMPUS IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKE ROAD TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF LAKE ROAD AND BELLEVUE.

THE ACTIONS REQUESTED ARE TO MAKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE ADDENDUM TO THE MERCED VISION 2030 GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE UC MERCED ANNEXATION PROJECT PREPARED BY THE CITY OF MERCED AND TO APPROVE, DENY OR MODIFY THE ANNEXATION AND MAKE THE DETERMINATIONS.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PHIL NICHOLSON, TURN IT OVER TO YOU TO I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 1005.

AND WE'LL START WITH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NICHOLSON'S PRESENTATION, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE ANY COMMENT OR FROM THE AUDIENCE AFTER THAT.

OKAY. OKAY.

THANK YOU. AND I DID WANT TO SAY THIS IS RATHER LENGTHY PRESENTATION.

IT'S A COMPLICATED PROJECT, OF COURSE.

SO I WANTED TO WELCOME ANY COMMISSIONERS.

IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ALONG THE WAY, TO GO AHEAD AND STOP ME AND ASK A QUESTION.

DON'T YOU HAVE TO SAVE IT AND WAIT UNTIL I'M ALL DONE.

OKAY, SO THE PROJECT IS, OF COURSE, THE LONG AWAITED ANNEXATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, MERCED CAMPUS WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 1040 ACRES.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE SPECIAL LEGISLATION WHICH I'LL GET INTO THAT ALLOWS THIS ISOLATED ANNEXATION OF THE CITY IT ALSO INCLUDES THE TWO MILE LENGTH OF BELLEVUE ROAD AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION.

SO BELLEVUE ROAD WILL GO IN THE CITY.

SO THE TOTAL AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 1140 ACRES.

AND AS MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION BY THE CHAIR FOR THE ITEM, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE CITY ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKE ROAD AND AT THE INTERSECTION OF BELLEVUE ROAD AND LAKE ROAD.

THIS IS AN AERIAL PHOTO.

JUST GETTING AN IDEA OF THE CAMPUS AREA BEING ANNEXED.

AND THEN THE LOCATION NEXT TO LAKE YOSEMITE TO THE NORTH AND THE FARMLAND TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST

[00:05:02]

PROPERTY WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

AND THEN TO THE WEST IS MOSTLY OPEN GROUND.

NOW. IT'S A LOT OF, IT'S DESIGNATED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY FOR ONE ACRE LOTS, BUT IT'S ALSO IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OVER TIME.

AND THEN YOU GO ALL THE WAY TO THE WEST SIDE, TO THE LEFT OF THE SCREEN, WHERE IT SAYS ATTACHMENT ONE, AND THAT'S THE CITY LIMITS IN GRAY.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS IS APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES DOWN BELLEVUE ROAD.

AND THIS IS MORE SPECIFICALLY THE RED OUTLINE IS THE ACTUAL ANNEXATION AREA.

SO, THE BELLEVUE ROAD JUST SHOWS UP AS A RED LINE, BUT IT'S BASICALLY A 60 TO 80.

IT MIGHT EVEN BE 90FT AT SOME SPOTS OF RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IT'S ONLY THE ROAD BEING ANNEXED.

NOT NOT ANY HOMES OR PROPERTIES FRONTING ON BELLEVUE ROAD.

AND THEN OF COURSE, THE ENTIRE UC CAMPUS AREA.

SOME OF IT'S FOR PRESERVE AND ALL THAT.

IT'S NOT ALL FOR DEVELOPMENT.

AND THIS IS THE ACTUAL ANNEXATION MAP FOR THE CAMPUS AREA.

AND I INCLUDED THIS WITH A LITTLE HIGHLIGHT OF THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST PROPERTY, WHICH WILL BE FOLLOWING ON THE TAILS OF THIS ANNEXATION.

WE HAVE THE PAPERWORK IN AND GETTING STARTED ON PROCESSING THAT, AND WE'LL BE BRINGING IT TO THE COMMISSION IN A FUTURE MEETING.

SO UNDER THE ANALYSIS FOR LAFCO, FOR ANNEXATIONS, WE'VE TAKEN THE STATE LAW AND WE'RE AUTHORIZED TO ADOPT LOCAL POLICIES TO IMPLEMENT THE COURT'S HERTZBERG ACT.

AND WE'VE DONE THAT UNDER LAFCO OBJECTIVE 3A FOR CITY ANNEXATIONS SPECIFICALLY.

SO THIS PRESENTATION FOLLOWS THE OUTLINE OF THE FACTORS THAT WERE THERE TO CONSIDER.

SO THE FIRST FACTOR IS THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE REORGANIZATION BOUNDARIES AND POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES.

AND SO, WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, BUT THE BOUNDARY OF THIS ANNEXATION IS UNUSUAL.

IT'S CONTRARY TO NORMAL LAFCO LAW.

ACROSS THE STATE, IT'S SOMETHING YOU WOULDN'T TYPICALLY DO.

YOU WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO ANNEX LAND TO A CITY WITHOUT IT BEING CONTIGUOUS TO EXISTING CITY AREA, EXCEPT FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES LIKE A SEWER PLANT OR MAYBE A LANDFILL OR SOME OTHER FEATURE OF THE CITY.

AND THIS IS A UNIVERSITY, SO IT'S A PUBLIC FACILITY, BUT IT'S NOT IT'S NOT A CITY FACILITY.

SO THE OTHER FACTORS THAT WE HAVE IS THAT PROXIMATE TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE ANSWER IS NO. IT'S BY ITSELF OUT HERE.

AND CITY SERVICES ARE BASICALLY TWO MILES AWAY FOR POLICE AND FIRE AND OTHER THINGS.

THEY DO PROVIDE SEWER AND WATER ALREADY.

SO, SOME SERVICES ARE PROVIDED ON SITE.

SO THE AS WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE, THE ONLY REASON WE'RE ABLE TO PROCESS THIS IS THE PASSAGE OF ASSEMBLY BILL 3312 IN 2020 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER GRAY ADAM GRAY, AND THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY PASSED FOR THE UC MERCED CAMPUS.

IT DOESN'T APPLY TO ANY OTHER LAFCO IN THE STATE.

AND IT WAS THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF UC MERCED THAT WERE TARGETED.

IT ALLOWED THE ANNEXATION OF THE CAMPUS, AND THEN IT ACTUALLY ALLOWED SUBSEQUENT ANNEXATIONS TO THE CAMPUS FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE CONTIGUOUS TO THE CAMPUS PROPERTY.

AND I TOOK THIS SLIDE FROM THE CITY PRESENTATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL WHICH TALKS ABOUT AB 3312.

A LITTLE BIT MORE.

AND BESIDES ANNEXING THE CAMPUS IN BELLEVUE ROAD, IT HAD PROHIBITIONS THAT THE CITY COULDN'T START ANNEXING ALONG BELLEVUE ROAD RANDOMLY.

THERE'S A LOT OF PARCELS THERE.

A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE DEVELOPMENT IDEAS OR GOALS, BUT THE LEGISLATION WASN'T TRYING TO CREATE A LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT AND A SCATTERED CHECKERBOARD OF DEVELOPMENT. IT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE UC, THEN PROPERTIES CONTIGUOUS TO THE UC AND OTHERWISE LONG BELLEVUE ROAD.

YOU CAN'T ANNEX UNLESS YOU'RE ADJACENT TO THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS, WHICH IS ALL THE WAY OVER AT G STREET.

AND THERE WAS SUPPORT FOR THIS.

IT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE ASSEMBLY AND THE SENATE, AND THE GOVERNOR SIGNED IT BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF 2020.

SO THERE'S OTHER FACTORS THAT WE LOOK AT FOR APPROPRIATE BOUNDARIES THAT THIS PROJECT DOES SATISFY.

UNDER SUB POLICIES D AND E.

SO POLICY D IS REQUIRING THE COMMISSION TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES, WHICH WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH OUR EARLY GROWTH.

AND THE SITUATION HERE IS THAT THE 10TH CAMPUS OF THE UC IS ALREADY THERE.

IT WAS CHOSEN BY THE STATE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THE LAND WAS DONATED BY THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST, AND THE CITY AND COUNTY WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE UC TO PLAN FOR THE CAMPUS, PLAN FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE WORK ON THE CAMPUS, PARKWAY ACCESS, ROAD ACCESS.

SO IT'S BEEN A COOPERATIVE EFFORT FROM THE BEGINNING TO PLAN FOR THE UTILITIES THAT ARE NEEDED UNDER POLICY, YOU KNOW, ASKS THE

[00:10:08]

COMMISSION TO CONSIDER IF THERE'S ANY COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST FOR THE ANNEXATION AREA THAT MAY AFFECT THE AREA AND COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST IN THIS CASE ARE IT'S THE DENSE CAMPUS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, ONE OF THE MAIN DECIDING FACTORS FOR THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE ALTERNATIVE SITES FOR THE 10TH CAMPUS UP AND DOWN THE VALLEY.

WAS THAT THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST DONATING THE PROPERTY FOR THE CAMPUS AND THEN DEVELOPING THEIR OWN LAND TO THE SOUTH WOULD GENERATE SCHOLARSHIP MONEY FOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES ORIGINALLY WITHIN THE CITY.

NOW IT'S BEEN EXPANDED TO THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

ANY HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE ACROSS THE COUNTY.

[INAUDIBLE] WANTS TO GO TO COLLEGE THAT'S ELIGIBLE.

COULD APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS AND SO THAT THAT HELPED SELL THIS PROJECT FOR THE REGENTS.

SO THERE'S ANOTHER COMMUNITY OF INTEREST ON WHY THIS PROJECT IS, YOU KNOW, REAL AND VALID.

AND BEING IN THE CITY IS A POSITIVE.

AND AGAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF IT NEEDS CITY SEWER AND WATER AND OTHER SERVICES.

SO WITHOUT IT BEING ANNEXED, IT'S BEEN HELD UP ALL THESE YEARS, SINCE THE 15 YEARS SINCE THE CAMPUS HAS BEEN BUILT.

SO THIS ANNEXATION WILL HELP LEAD TO THAT THE STEP OF THE CITY LIMITS BEING CLOSE TO THE VEST AND THEN THAT ANNEXATION WILL FOLLOW COMING UP IN A FUTURE AGENDA.

AND THEN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN IS ANOTHER FACTOR.

SO CITY, MERCED SAID, HAS SHOWN THIS IN THEIR GENERAL PLAN FOR MANY YEARS.

IT'S WITHIN THEIR GROWTH AREA AND THEIR ADOPTED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE.

THEY'VE DESIGNATED THE TERRITORY OF SCHOOL, WHICH IS APPROPRIATE, AND THE GENERAL PLAN, AND THEY HAVE IT ZONED OR PRE ZONED FOR THIS ANNEXATION IS PUBLIC FACILITY.

AND THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET 23 DASH 78 IDENTIFIED THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND LOCATED WITHIN THE SPHERE. SO THE CITY WAS WELL AWARE OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

THIS IS ANOTHER SLIDE FROM THE CITY'S PRESENTATION, WHICH SHOWED THAT THE OUTLINE OF THE CITY'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE IN THE NORTH PART OF THE CITY, AND YOU CAN SEE INCORPORATES THE ENTIRE UC MERCED AREA FOR THIS ANNEXATION.

AND THEY HIGHLIGHTED THE VST PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.

IT ACTUALLY IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE, BUT THEY ALSO HIGHLIGHTED THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT WERE ELIGIBLE TO BE ANNEXED IN THE FUTURE UNDER AB 3312, WHICH ARE THE PROPERTIES WEST OF LAKE ROAD, WHICH IS THE WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THE UC.

AND IT'S HARD TO SEE HERE, BUT THERE'S LAKIREDDY PROPERTY, WHICH IS RIGHT BELOW THE BELLEVUE ROAD LAKE ROAD INTERSECTION, AND THERE'S OPIENSKI PROPERTY FURTHER SOUTH.

ALSO, IT'S LIKE THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE UC, AND THEN FURTHER TO THE NORTH IS GALSTER RUCKER PROPERTY, WHICH THE NORTH SIDE OF BELLEVUE ROAD AND WEST OF LAKE ROAD.

SO THOSE ARE THE MAIN THERE'S A COUPLE SMALLER PARCELS, BUT THOSE ARE THE MAIN AREAS THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO CONSIDER FOR ANNEXATION IN THE FUTURE.

AND RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, THE CITY HAS ALREADY APPROVED THE VST ANNEXATION PAPERWORK AND SUBMIT IT TO THE COMMISSION.

SO THE NEXT FACTOR WE SEE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVICES.

AND THIS THE CITY'S APPLICATION PACKAGE GAVE A VERY GOOD DETAIL OF ALL THE SERVICES THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING OR PLAN FOR THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE IN THE FUTURE.

AND THAT INCLUDES THAT THEY HAVE A CONTRACT FOR WATER, SEWER AND OTHER SERVICES ENTERED WITH THE UC, AND IT'S BEEN AMENDED OVER THE YEARS, MOST RECENTLY IN 2019.

AND AGAIN, THE WATER AND SEWER ARE ALREADY SERVING THE CAMPUS.

THEY ALSO HAVE A TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AGREEMENT THAT WAS AMENDED MORE RECENTLY IN 2023.

SOME OF THIS WAS NEGOTIATIONS THAT HELD UP THE ANNEXATION BECAUSE THE CITY HAD TO WORK THINGS OUT WITH THE UNIVERSITY BEFORE THEY COMPLETED THIS, THIS EFFORT TO BRING IT TO LAFCO.

SO IT HAS IT INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS ON BELLEVUE ROAD AND LAKE ROAD AND THEN THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE UNIVERSITY TO THE EXTENSION OF CAMPUS PARKWAY. ON THE EAST, YOU KNOW, COMING UP ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE CITY, COMING UP TO THE CAMPUS.

AND THEN ALSO THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES FROM THE COUNTY AFTER THE ANNEXATION.

AND THEY'VE INDICATED THAT THE CLOSEST STATION TODAY IS STATION NUMBER 55 OVER ON PARSONS AVENUE, WHICH HAS A RESPONSE TIME OF ABOUT 5 TO 8 MINUTES.

BUT I THINK I COVER THAT NEXT SLIDE.

THERE IS A.

COVER HERE. THERE'S A FUTURE SITE FOR FIRE STATION BEING PLANNED ON THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE RIGHT NEXT TO THE CAMPUS.

[00:15:03]

SO IN THE FUTURE THERE WOULD BE WITH DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES, THERE WOULD BE ANOTHER FIRE STATION MUCH CLOSER.

GOING ON TO OTHER SERVICES, ALL STORM WATER.

I'M SORRY, THIS SLIDE IS SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY THE UNIVERSITY.

SO IT'S SOMEWHAT UNIQUE BEING A STATE INSTITUTION THAT INSTEAD OF A PRIVATE DEVELOPER, THEY'RE PROVIDING OTHER SERVICES ON THEIR OWN SO THEY MANAGE THEIR OWN STORM WATER MOST OF IT'S RETAINED ON SITE, BUT IF THEY HAVE TO DISCHARGE DUE TO HEAVY RAINFALL, THEN THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT TO DISCHARGE INTO THE FAIRFIELD CANAL. AND THEY ALREADY HAVE AN AGREEMENT FOR THAT.

FOR POLICE PROTECTION THAT THE UNIVERSITY HAS THEIR OWN POLICE FORCE.

SO THEY DON'T RELY ON, YOU KNOW, MAYBE BACKUP SUPPORT BY THE COUNTY SHERIFF.

BUT THE CITY, THE CITY POLICE AREN'T NEEDED TO SERVE IT DIRECTLY.

THE UNIVERSITY WILL CONTINUE WITH THAT SERVICE.

AND THEN IT'S SOMEWHAT RELATED TO PUBLIC SERVICES, BUT THERE'S ALSO FACTORS FOR LAFCO ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND THE UNIVERSITY IS UNIQUE AGAIN, ALSO THAT THEY ALREADY THEY HAVE 10,000 STUDENTS THAT COMMUTE TO THE CAMPUS, BUT SOME LIVE ON THE CAMPUS IN DORMITORY HOUSING THAT THE UNIVERSITY PROVIDES.

MAJORITY OF THAT IS FOR INCOMING FRESHMEN AND SECOND YEAR STUDENTS, WHICH CURRENTLY IS 3178 BEDS OUT OF THE TOTAL OF 4341. SO, THERE ARE SOME GRADUATE STUDENTS AND OTHER STUDENTS THAT THEY PROVIDE SOME BEDS FOR.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY HAS TO EITHER COMMUTE FROM HOME OR THEY RENT PROPERTY IN MERCED OR SURROUNDING TOWNS.

THE NEXT FACTOR IS THE OPEN SPACE AND AGRICULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS.

AND THE CITY COMPLETED AN EXTENSIVE ENVIRONMENT.

THE UNIVERSITY HAD EXTENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR BUILDING THE CAMPUS AND THEN THE CITY, TO AMEND THEIR GENERAL PLAN, PREPARED AN ADDENDUM TO THEIR 2030 GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM, EIR, SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS ANNEXATION AND THAT THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AS DOCUMENT G.

THE IN TERMS OF AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE, THE ANNEXATION OF THE CAMPUS WOULDN'T CONVERT ANY ADDITIONAL IMPORTANT FARMLAND, IMPORTANT FARMLAND TO NON AG USE.

IT'S BASICALLY TAKING THE CAMPUS AND PUTTING IT IN THE CITY.

AND THE CITY HAS THE CAMPUS HAS ITS OWN GROWTH PLANS THROUGH THEIR LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

BUT IT WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED IN THIS IN THE UNIVERSITY'S EIR.

AND THE ENTIRE BOUNDARY OF THE CAMPUS HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, THEIR 2030 GENERAL PLAN.

AND IT WAS ANALYZED IN THEIR EIR AS WELL.

AND THEN THIS WAS DETAILED IN THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW THAT THE UC MERCED SAID HAS PLACED ENOUGH IMPORTANT FARMLAND UNDER PERMANENT CONSERVATION EASEMENTS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE CONVERSION OF ANY IMPORTANT FARMLAND THAT WILL BE CONVERTED FROM THE CAMPUS.

AND GENERALLY, THE AREA WAS MORE GRAZING LAND AND NOT CULTIVATED AGRICULTURE IN THE PAST.

SO THERE'S THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF EASEMENTS PUT ON LAND, ALL AROUND EAST OF THE UC MERCED AND TO THE NORTH.

AND THE PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN A MARKED AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE, SO THERE'S NO ISSUE THERE.

AND THEN THE LAST FACTORS IT'S UNDER THAT LAFCO POLICY IS ANY CORRESPONDENCE.

AND THERE'S THE MAP.

WE'VE CLEANED UP SOME ISSUES WITH THE DESCRIPTION, THE LITTLE DESCRIPTION.

THERE WAS A RECENT PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT THAT CHANGED SOME OF THE UNIVERSITY'S PROPERTY BOUNDARIES, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALL THEIR PROPERTY.

BUT THEY RECONFIGURED IT AND IT CHANGED THE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER SO THAT BEFORE THE MAPS CAN BE RECORDED, THEY HAVE TO BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THESE VERY NEW ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS.

AND SO THAT'S JUST A MINOR, A MINOR CORRECTION THAT'S NEEDED.

AND THAT ENDS UP BEING A RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT THE PROJECT NOT BE THE COMPLETION OF THE ANNEXATION NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL WE GET THE UPDATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION, WHICH IT WON'T BE A PROBLEM.

IT'S JUST A MATTER OF MAKING SURE ALL THE ALL THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT.

SO AGAIN, UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, WHICH WE HAVE SEPARATE FACTORS FOR, WE'RE RELYING ON THE ADDENDUM OF THE MERCED VISION 2030 GENERAL PLAN EIR.

AND THE CITY CONCLUDED THAT THE ADDENDUM WAS NECESSARY TO REFLECT EVOLUTION AND CHANGE IN THE CAMPUS THAT HAS HAPPENED OVER TIME, AND MOST RECENTLY REFLECTED IN THE 2020 LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, OR LRDP, IS THE TERM THE UNIVERSITY USES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CAMPUS.

THE. THE 2020 LRDP WAS TARGETED ON THE UNIVERSITY'S PLAN, WHICH THEY MET WITH TO REACH 10,000 STUDENTS BY 2020.

BUT THE ORIGINAL LDP WAS FOR THE FULL BUILD OUT OF THE CAMPUS OF UP TO 25,000 STUDENTS, WITH AN ESTIMATED TIME TIMELINE OF 2030 OR

[00:20:06]

BEYOND. SO THE LRDP UPDATE WAS NARROWER, FOCUSED OF PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND BUILDING TO REACH THE 10,000 TARGET.

BUT THE OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL COVERED THE LONG TERM, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE BOUNDARY OF THE ANNEXATION.

AND THERE ARE 20 AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THAT WERE STUDIED AND DIFFERENT MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED.

BUT THE CITY IDENTIFIED A UNIQUE SITUATION WHERE THE UNIVERSITIES BASICALLY A BRANCH OF THE STATE AND, AND THEIR HIERARCHY AND STATE LAW.

IS THAT A CITY OR A COUNTY CAN'T DICTATE TO A STATE AGENCY HOW THEY'RE GOING TO MITIGATE IMPACTS EXCEPT FOR COMMENTING ON ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, BUT THEY CAN IMPOSE THEIR MITIGATION ON THE UNIVERSITY.

SO, THERE'S AN IMPORTANT STATEMENT IN THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND IN THEIR APPLICATION WHICH STATES THAT BECAUSE THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IS A CONSTITUTIONALLY CREATED STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION WITH FULL POWERS OF ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENT, AND THEY REFERENCE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE NINE, SECTION NINE, UC MERCED WOULD NOT BE OBLIGATED TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM, EIR.

UPON ANNEXATION.

SO WHILE THEY IDENTIFIED MITIGATION, THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO ENFORCE THOSE.

SO THEY IT'S FOR PUBLIC RECORD.

BUT THE UNIVERSITY IS FOLLOWING THEIR OWN MITIGATION UNDER THEIR OWN CAMPUS.

LRDP. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.

SO FOR THE LAFCO SAKE, WE RELY ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT TO TAKE OUR ACTION ON AN ANNEXATION AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY.

SO YOUR STAFF REPORT AND THE RESOLUTION REFLECTS THAT.

WE'VE REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND THERE'S NO MITIGATIONS UNDER LAFCO AUTHORITY TO ADOPT OR MONITOR, SO THAT THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ACTION ON THE SECURE SIDE OF IT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE.

AND THEN THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF IS TO MAKE THE TEN DETERMINATIONS THAT ARE IN YOUR EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT AND SECTION FIVE B, AND IT INCLUDES A SPECIAL DETERMINATION BECAUSE THE UNIVERSITY IS INHABITED, MEANING IT HAS REGISTERED VOTERS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES.

IT WOULD BE NORMALLY CIVIC TO A PROTEST PROCESS, NOT NECESSARILY A PROTEST HEARING, BUT YOU COULD RECEIVE PROTESTS, AND IF YOU GOT ENOUGH PROTESTS, YOU WOULD CAUSE YOU TO HAVE A HEARING.

WE IN ANTICIPATION OF THAT AND BECAUSE OF THE OVERWHELMING LOGIC THAT THIS PROPERTY BE IN THE CITY WE INCLUDED IN OUR NOTICE AS LAFCO SENDING IT OUT TO ALL THE REGISTERED VOTERS THAT UNLESS WE RECEIVED ANY WRITTEN OBJECTION TO THIS ANNEXATION BY THE TIME BY THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING TODAY, THEN UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 56663, WE WOULD HAVE THE COMMISSION WOULD WAIVE THE PROTEST PROCEEDINGS, WHICH IS AUTHORIZED IN THE LAW.

SO I JUST REPORT THAT AT THIS POINT WE HAVE RECEIVED NO COMMENTS.

IN FACT, I'VE ONLY I ONLY RECEIVED ONE PHONE CALL ON THIS PROJECT FROM A PROPERTY OWNER ALONG BELLEVUE ROAD THAT WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE WIDENING OF THE ROAD AND HOW CLOSE IT WOULD BE TO THEIR HOUSE, BUT NOTHING ABOUT OPPOSITION TO THE CAMPUS.

SO, RIGHT NOW THERE'S BEEN NO OPPOSITION, AND WE'LL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING TODAY, BUT THERE WOULD BE NO REASON, I THINK THE COMMISSION COULD COMFORTABLY DETERMINE THAT.

THERE'S NO THAT THEY COULD WAIVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THERE'D BE NO REASON TO HOLD.

EXCUSE ME, WAIVE THE PROTEST HEARING.

THERE WOULD BE NO REASON TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT DOING THAT.

SO WITH THAT THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION HERE IS TO ASSIGN THE ORGANIZATION OR THE ANNEXATION, THAT SHORT FORM DESIGNATION, YOU SEE, FOR SAID ANNEXATION TO THE CITY MERCED AND APPROVED THE ANNEXATION, SUBJECT TO THE ONE CONDITION OF APPROVAL ON PAGE 12 RELATING TO THE CORRECTIONS TO THE MAP AND LEGAL ESPECIALLY WITH REFLECTING THE UPDATED ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS.

AND WITH THAT, THAT COMPLETES MY PRESENTATION.

SO MAYBE I'LL GO BACK TO A MAP AND LEAVE A MAP UP IF THAT HELPS REDUCE THAT ONE.

THANK YOU, MR. NICHOLSON.

ANY INITIAL COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER SILVEIRA? NO, I HAVE A QUESTION OVER HERE.

OKAY. BILL, THIS IS FOR YOU.

SO ALONG BELLEVUE ROAD DOES THIS.

YOU SAID IT JUST THE ROAD.

BUT THAT'S ALSO THE COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD AS WELL.

BASICALLY TO THE FENCE LINE.

YEAH, IT'S THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THAT THE COUNTY OWNS.

AND AGAIN OVER TIME THERE'S BEEN MAPS OUT THERE.

[00:25:03]

SO MOST OF THE ROAD IS 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY.

SO THERE'S PAVED ASPHALT THAT MAYBE 40FT.

BUT THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE SIDES OF THE ROAD GO FROM 60FT TO 80FT.

THERE MIGHT BE ONE AREA THAT'S AT 90FT.

SO IT VARIES IN THE WIDTH.

BUT THAT'S ALL. THAT'S ALL INCLUDED IN IT.

IT DOESN'T TOUCH THE PRIVATE PROPERTY WHATSOEVER.

OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU, MR. SILVEIRA. YEAH, I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE TIME, BUT AS YOU WERE GOING THROUGH YOUR REPORT WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT FIRE SERVICE.

SO IF APPROVED, HOW SOON WOULD THE FIRE SERVICE TAKE EFFECT? IT SHOULD BE UPON ANNEXATION.

BUT ON THE DAY THAT WE RECORD THE ANNEXATION HAPPENS ON THE DAY WE RECORD THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION.

AND YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

THERE'S A 30 DAY PERIOD FOR RECONSIDERATION.

SO THE PROTEST PROCESS WAS ALLOWED ONLY BY REGISTERED VOTERS.

BUT RECONSIDERATION COMES IN ON EVERY ANNEXATION.

AND ANYBODY THAT'S AGGRIEVED BY IT, IT COULD BE ANOTHER CITY.

IT COULD BE SOME OTHER ENTITY.

SAY, WE WANT YOU TO RECONSIDER IT.

SO IT'S NOT AN APPEAL, BUT IT WOULD BRING IT BACK TO LAFCO TO HAVE ANOTHER HEARING AND RAISE WHATEVER OBJECTIONS THEY HAVE AND RECONSIDER IT.

SO, WE CAN'T RECORD THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION AND PUT IT IN THE CITY LIMITS FOR 30 DAYS FOR THAT PERIOD TO LAPSE.

SO BASICALLY 31 DAYS FROM TODAY.

I ANTICIPATE WILL BE READY TO RECORD THE ANNEXATION AND THEN THAT'S WHEN.

THAT'S WHEN THE CITY.

IT'LL BE IN THE CITY LIMITS.

SO THEY HAVE A FULL RESPONSIBILITY.

AND WHETHER THE COUNTY FIRE STATION, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE ANYMORE.

WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT FOR THE CAMPUS, I GUESS.

PERFECT. AND THEN ANOTHER FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

I GUESS THIS IS MORE OF A COMMENT THAN IT IS, IS DO WE THINK IT'S FAIR THAT I TALKED ABOUT THAT POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD HERE WE'RE GOING TO SEE THE VST ANNEXATION. IS IT IS IT FAIR THAT THROUGH IMPACT FEES THAT THOSE THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT IS PAYING IS GOING TO NOW BUILD A FIRE STATION THAT'S GOING TO SERVICE THE UC? IT WILL SERVE THAT DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS UC.

SO FOR THE CITY AGAIN, THEIR FIRE STATION ISN'T VERY FAR FROM THE COUNTY'S CURRENT FIRE STATION.

SOUTH OF YOSEMITE AVENUE.

SO THEY WOULD NEED A FIRE STATION THERE FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO THAT IT THAT IT SERVED THE UC JUST LIKE ANY DEVELOPMENT BUILDING A FIRE STATION, IF YOU GET ENOUGH MONEY AND YOU CAN BUILD IT, IT'S GOING TO TAKE ANY CALL IN RESPONSE TO THAT COMMENT REALLY COMES FROM PLACES.

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, THE UC HAS NEVER REALLY PAID THE FAIR SHARE FOR THEIR FIRE SERVICE, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IF THIS GOES THROUGH, THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO INHERIT THAT PROBLEM AS WELL, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A GOVERNMENT ENTITY, A STATE GOVERNMENT ENTITY IS GOING TO PUT EVEN MORE BURDEN ON THE LOCAL TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR SERVICE THAT I BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD BE PROVIDING.

BUT THAT'S JUST MORE OF A COMMENT.

THANK YOU. OH, THEN I'M SORRY.

ONE MORE QUICK QUESTION IN THAT LIGHTLY BLUE HIGHLIGHTED AREA AROUND THERE.

DOES THE STATE LAW THAT WAS PASSED THAT ALLOWED FOR THE UC TO BE ANNEXED? IT ALLOWS FOR THE PROPERTY CONTIGUOUS TO THE UC TO BE AROUND THERE.

FAST FORWARDING I'M GOING TO USE VST FOR AN EXAMPLE.

THEY GET ANNEXED.

DOES THAT MAKE THE PROPERTY? AND BY THE WAY, BY LOOKING AT THE MAP DIRECTLY BELOW THEM, NOW ELIGIBLE TO BE ANNEXED BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE REST OF THE CITY? NO, IT DOES NOT THAT THAT WAS THE LIMITATION RATHER THAN HAVE.

AND IN THIS MAP, IT'S YOU CAN SEE IT'S A MUCH LARGER AREA.

BUT THE ORIGINAL IDEA IS LIKE KNOWING BELLEVUE ROAD WOULD BE THE CONNECTION.

YOU'D HAVE KIND OF A BARBELL.

YOU HAVE DEVELOPMENT ON ONE END OF THE BARBELL, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE CITY ON THE OTHER.

AND IF YOU'RE GROWING IN BOTH AREAS, SLOWLY YOU GROW TOGETHER.

BUT THE IDEA HERE WASN'T THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN, THAT THIS THIS IS A LIMITATION OF THE ANNEXATION ON THE EAST SIDE.

AND THEN THE CITY'S GOT TO GO BACK AND ANNEX IN A CONTINUUM.

THEY GOT TO WAIT. SO, IF YOU WORK THEIR WAY NORTH, IF ALL THOSE PIECES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THAT LIGHT BLUE COLOR, WE'LL CALL IT THOSE GET ANNEXED.

ANYTHING ELSE PAST THAT HAS TO GROW FROM THE CITY OUT, NOT FROM THE UC AND THOSE ANNEXATIONS IN.

EXACTLY. AND AGAIN, THIS THIS SPECIAL LEGISLATION WAS DIFFICULT.

IT WAS IT HAD TO BE APPROVED, YOU KNOW, STATEWIDE IN THE STATE ASSEMBLY AND LEGISLATURE, YOU KNOW, SENATE.

EVEN IN OUR CAL LAFCO, OUR STATE ASSOCIATION, LAFCO DIDN'T REALLY LIKE IT BECAUSE, OH, ANY DEVELOPER THAT'S GOT ENOUGH PULL COULD, COULD APPLY FOR THIS IN BUTTE COUNTY OR IN RIVERSIDE. AND THIS IS ANTI-PLANNING WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THESE SERVICES SO REMOTE.

SO THE IDEA WAS THE UC BEING IN THE CITY DOESN'T MEAN A WHOLE LOT.

AS YOU MENTIONED THE COUNTY HAS ISSUES WITH THE UC ON SERVICES.

THE CITY WILL GET TO PLAY THOSE GAMES NOW.

BUT IT'S THE DEVELOPMENT NEXT DOOR THAT WAS ALWAYS PLANNED AND DESIRED, AND IT COULDN'T HAPPEN UNLESS THE CITY GAVE SEWER AND WATER TO THE COUNTY, WHICH THEY WEREN'T WILLING TO

[00:30:07]

DO. SO NO DEVELOPMENT HAS HAPPENED NEXT DOOR.

SO THIS THIS LEGISLATION WAS ALLOWING THE CAMPUS TO GET ANNEXED AND THEN THE ADJACENT LAND NEXT DOOR.

THAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED SO THAT THE CITY WOULD ACTUALLY PROVIDE THE SERVICES TO IT.

SO THAT WAS WHAT IT WAS ALL ABOUT.

IT WASN'T ABOUT CREATING A LEAPFROG AND THEN ALLOWING GROWTH TO JUST NON-UNIVERSITY RELATED GROWTH JUST TO HAPPEN WILLY NILLY.

NOW THEY HAVE TO GO BACK AND EVERYTHING ELSE BE CONTIGUOUS TO THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS, TO THE HISTORIC CITY LIMITS.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. OKAY, I HAVE JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS.

NUMBER ONE QUESTION.

IS THERE A MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT BETWEEN MERCED COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MERCED FOR FIRE PROTECTION? DOES ANYBODY CAN ANYONE ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR ME? BECAUSE IF THEY HAPPEN TO HAVE A BIG FIRE OUT THERE AND THE COUNTY, THE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT COULD GET THERE SOONER, WOULD THEY RESPOND TO THAT? I WOULD SAY, KNOWING A LITTLE BIT, YES.

THE SHORT ANSWER IS, I THINK WE ALL HAVE MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS WHERE IT STARTS TO GET TRICKIER WHEN IT'S AUTO AID AGREEMENTS, BUT BASICALLY ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY, IF THERE'S SOMETHING OR IN THE CITIES, IF THERE'S SOMETHING BIG, THEY.

A QUICK RADIO CALL AND THEY'RE SENDING RESOURCES.

OKAY. THEN THEY THEY'D HASH OUT BETWEEN EACH OTHER FOR PAYMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

YEAH. OKAY.

THE OTHER THING IS KIND OF ON THE CUFF OF YOUR COMMENT SCOTT.

THESE ARE THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED, NOT THE NOT THE SMITH TRUST, BUT THE OTHER TWO.

SO THERE MUST HAVE BEEN SOME INFLUENCE APPLIED TO THE STATE TO GIVE THAT GET THEM INCLUDED IN THAT LEGISLATION.

YES. AND THE IDEA WASN'T JUST THAT THE MAIN IMPETUS WAS THE VST, BECAUSE THEY DONATED THE LAND FOR THE CAMPUS.

SO THEY GAVE SOMETHING UP TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

AND THEN THEY'RE NOT A PROFIT-MAKING ENTERPRISE.

SO THEIR MONEY GOES TO SCHOLARSHIPS, WHICH IS A CUMULATIVE BENEFIT FOR STUDENTS GOING TO ANY COLLEGE IN CALIFORNIA.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO TO UC MERCED, OR THEY GO TO STATE COLLEGES OR JUNIOR COLLEGES.

SO THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST WAS JUST REALLY LOGIC THAT IT'S FRONTING THE CAMPUS AND YOU'RE LIKE AT THE FRONT DOOR ACTUALLY FOR BELLEVUE ROAD ENTRANCE. AND TO KEEP THAT OPEN AS AG OR, YOU KNOW, PASTURE WHEN, WHEN IT COULD DEVELOP IT.

THE LOGIC WAS TO HAVE THE DEVELOP CONTIGUOUS.

SO I DON'T THINK IT TOOK A LOT OF EXTRA ARM TWISTING FOR THAT.

IT WAS MORE IT WAS DEVELOPED NEXT TO THE CAMPUS WOULD BE HELPFUL AND USEFUL, AND IT WOULD TAKE YEARS, YEARS, YOU KNOW, DECADES, POSSIBLY FOR THE CITY TO EVER REACH OUT THERE WITH CONTIGUOUS DEVELOPMENT.

SO YEAH.

SO IT WAS KIND OF LOGICAL THAT, THAT YOU'RE RIGHT ACROSS RIGHT ACROSS THE FRONT DOOR TO THE CAMPUS BASICALLY.

YEAH. YEAH. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

ONE MORE QUESTION.

WE GOT TO MOVE ON. YES, SIR.

THANK YOU. ON THE VST TRUST, WHERE THE SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LINE IS, I'M JUST NOW KIND OF NOTICING THAT THERE'S THAT LITTLE CORNER PIECE RIGHT THERE THAT IS NOT WITHIN THE SPHERE.

WELL, HOW? WHAT OPINION? HOW DOES THAT AFFECT.

YEAH. THE SPHERE LINE HAS, HAS WAS ESTABLISHED THROUGH THE FIRST THE CITY OF THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.

AND THEN LAFCO UPDATED THE SPHERE IN OUR MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW.

SO THAT WHOLE KIND OF BITE THE AREA TO THE SOUTH WAS PART OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN.

THAT'S THE HUNT PROPERTY.

THEN VIRGINIA SMITH AND YOU SEE, SO IT WAS ALL PART OF A PLANNING EFFORT ALL TOGETHER.

AND YOU HAVE UNIVERSITY LAND ACTUALLY GOING TO THE EAST, MILES AND MILES.

SO THIS WAS FOLLOWING A WATER FEATURE, A MID-CANAL FOR MOST OF IT.

AND THEN WHEN YOU GET UP THERE THERE'S A CREEK.

IT MIGHT BE COTTONWOOD CREEK.

SO IT WAS JUST PART OF THIS SPHERE.

THERE'S ALL THIS LAND TO BE PLANNED FOR GROWTH.

AND IT'S OWNED BY THE VST.

THERE'S A PROPERTY LINE, BUT IT'S NOT WITHIN THE SPHERE.

SO JUST THE PAPERWORK JUST CAME IN.

USE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AS A BOUNDARY, AND IT'S NOT WITHIN THE SPHERE, SO YOU CAN'T ANNEX WITHOUT AMENDING THE SPHERE.

AND THE CITY DIDN'T AMEND THE SPHERE, SO WE WOULD BE LEAVING THAT OUT.

AND IT'S TALKING BEFORE THE MEETING WITH MR. TIETJEN AND THE UNIVERSITY.

EXCUSE ME? THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST.

THAT AREA IS TOTALLY PRESERVED FOR HABITAT LONG TERM.

THEY MIGHT EVEN USE IT FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES WITH STUDENTS, YOU KNOW, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO GO EXPLORE, YOU KNOW, VERNAL POOLS AND WETLANDS.

SO THEY NEVER INTENDED TO DEVELOP IT.

SO, IT'S A MATTER OF IT'S STILL ONE LEGAL PARCEL.

AND I, I HAVE A REQUEST TO THE ASSESSORS TO SEE.

IS THERE ANY PROBLEM HAVING ONE LEGAL PARCEL? PART OF IT'S IN THE CITY AND PART OF IT'S IN THE COUNTY.

YOU JUST PUT A DIFFERENT ASSESSOR'S NUMBER ON IT BECAUSE THE DIFFERENT TAXING ENTITY.

BUT IT WOULDN'T BE SOLD SEPARATELY OR USED SEPARATELY BECAUSE IT'S ONLY IT'S ONLY APPROXIMATELY SEVEN ACRES, I THINK.

SO IT'S TOO SMALL TO BE AN AG PARCEL, YOU KNOW, 20 ACRE MINIMUM.

[00:35:02]

SO, IT'LL JUST BE A LITTLE TAG ONTO THEIR PROPERTY OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

THANK YOU. GOOD QUESTION THOUGH.

OKAY. YEAH. IF I COULD JUST DO A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITY OF MERCED.

LAKE YOSEMITE'S RIGHT THERE.

YOU SHOULD BRING THAT INTO YOUR SPHERE.

AND I DO A RECOMMENDATION OF CP 43.

OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION AS THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN OPENED EARLIER? I'M GOING TO CALL NOW ON MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP AND MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS PROPOSED ANNEXATION.

I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A FIVE MINUTE TIME LIMIT, BUT I WILL GIVE YOU MORE TIME IF IT'S PERTINENT AND NOT REDUNDANT.

SO IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

I'M GOING TO TURN THIS ON.

IDENTIFY YOURSELF, AND LET'S BEGIN.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M KIM ESPINOZA.

I'M THE TEMPORARY DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF MERCED.

I WANTED TO THANK BILL FOR HIS PRESENTATION.

I WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR CONSIDERING THIS APPLICATION.

JUST ON A PERSONAL NOTE, I CAME TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF MERCED IN 1987.

SO I WAS HERE FROM THE BEGINNING.

AS FAR AS THE THERE WERE 70 SITES THAT THE UNIVERSITY IDENTIFIED THAT THEY MIGHT LOOK AT UP AND DOWN THE STATE, AND IT GOT NARROWED DOWN.

AND WE FINALLY WOUND UP WITH THE WITH THE CAMPUS HERE.

AND OF COURSE, THE CAMPUS GOT BUILT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO DO BEFORE I RETIRED WAS TO SEE THE UC MERCED ANNEXATION TAKE PLACE.

I ACTUALLY RETIRED IN MARCH OF 2023, AND WE HADN'T QUITE MADE IT THERE.

SCOTT LURED ME OUT OF RETIREMENT FOR A WHILE, AND SO I'M VERY, VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY.

THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH IN COMING BACK.

SO AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR CONSIDERING THIS, AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANYONE.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANYONE ELSE? GOOD MORNING. I'M SCOTT MCBRIDE, THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF MERCED.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THIS MORNING.

REALLY GOOD QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.

THERE'RE THINGS WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH WITH THE COUNTY RELATED TO FIRE SERVICES.

ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK DONE BY LAFCO STAFF IN THIS PROCESS.

AND AS WELL AS THE CITY, WE HAD ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS.

WE HAD A LOT OF COMMUNITY INPUT IN THIS PROCESS.

THIS IS REALLY KIND OF THE CULMINATION OF DECADES OF WORK, AS KIM NOTED, AND THIS IS, AS YOU'VE ACKNOWLEDGED, THE BEGINNING OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COME YOUR WAY.

BUT TODAY IS REALLY THE FIRST STEP OF THAT PROCESS.

SO TODAY WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY.

WE CLEARLY HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE COME YOUR WAY FOR CONSIDERATION LATER ON.

IT'S BECAUSE OF THE LEGISLATION THAT'S UNIQUE AND HOW IT'S STRUCTURED.

I DID WANT TO ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE OUR PARTNERS IN THIS, WHICH IS THE UNIVERSITY, THE BOARD OF REGENTS, CHANCELLOR MUNOZ AND HIS STAFF.

THEY'VE BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH THROUGH THE PROCESS.

THEY'RE FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, AS IS THE CITY, THE MAYOR OF THE COUNCIL.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE ALL HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

YOU MAY HAVE TECHNICAL ISSUES, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, BUT WE REALLY HOPE THAT YOU'LL CONSIDER THIS.

AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND SUPPORT OF THIS TODAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MCBRIDE. ANYONE ELSE? PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.

AND. GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY.

MY NAME IS MAX MADAYAG.

I LIVE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BELLEVUE, AND OUR CONCERN IS THAT THE SPEED LIMITS AND THE TRAFFIC THAT GOES UP.

UP TO THE UC AND BACK TO G STREET.

WE'VE HAD FOUR ACCIDENTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE, INCLUDING MY WIFE GETTING REAR ENDED, PULLING INTO OUR DRIVEWAY.

SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC CONTROL.

ARE YOU PLANNING TO PUT IN A STOP SIGN THERE OR SOMETHING? I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE, I CAME IN LATE.

I DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING, BUT THAT'S OUR BIGGEST CONCERN.

AND I ASSUME YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO WIDEN BELLEVUE AT SOME POINT.

IS THAT GOING TO INCLUDE A SIDEWALK BIKE TRAILS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN.

THE ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS AFTER THIS ANNEXATION HAPPENS WILL BE BETWEEN YOU AND THE CITY OF MERCED.

SO NEXT.

GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS DAN OKOLIE.

I'M VICE CHANCELLOR AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AT THE UC MERCED.

AND SO I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO EXPRESS UC MERCED SUPPORT FOR THESE ANNEXATION APPLICATION.

[00:40:08]

I'D LIKE TO THANK BILL FOR HIS PRESENTATION.

AND THIS IS THE CULMINATION OF A LOT OF MANY MONTHS AND YEARS OF WORK AND SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY BENEFICIAL BOTH TO THE CITY AND TO THE UNIVERSITY AS IT HELPS THE UNIVERSITY TO GROW AND ATTRACT THE KINDS OF THE STUDENTS AND THE STAFF AS THE UNIVERSITY GROWS AND WE SEE SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME IN THE AREA.

THAT IS AGAIN OF BENEFIT TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

AND SO WITHOUT GOING INTO THE DETAILS, I'M JUST HERE TO SAY THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT.

AND, AND I ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AS WE MOVE THIS PROCESS FORWARD.

AND IT'S APPRECIATE ALL THE COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY.

AND WE'VE WORKED WELL WITH THE COUNTY AND CONTINUE TO LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUED COOPERATION AS THIS PROCESS MOVES FORWARD, EVEN AS WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS, VST AND ALL THE OTHER DEVELOPERS IN THE AREA.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU.

AND ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS APPLICATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

ANYONE ELSE? GOOD MORNING, CHAIR BERTAO AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS STEVEN PECK WITH PECK PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, AND I REPRESENT THE VIRGINIA SMITH TRUST.

FIRST, LET ME ADD MY THANKS TO YOU AND THE CITY AND THE COUNTY AND EVERYBODY ELSE WHO'S BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.

THIS HAS BEEN ABOUT A 40 YEAR LIFT STARTING IN THE MID 80S WHEN THE IDEA WAS FIRST FLOATED.

AND WE'VE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS.

I HAVE SOME CORRESPONDENCE IN YOUR PACKET THAT I WON'T REPEAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO HIT SOME HIGH POINTS ON THAT.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT THIS ANNEXATION STARTS A PROCESS OF COMPLETING THE HOLE THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY PLANNED IN THE MID 90S.

AS ORIGINALLY PLANNED, THE UNIVERSITY WAS TO BE DEVELOPED CONCURRENTLY WITH THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN.

THERE WAS A PLAN PUT FORWARD THAT THE COMMUNITY WORKED ON QUITE STRONGLY.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY PLAN LAGGED BEHIND THE UNIVERSITY.

IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A CONCURRENT DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT HASN'T OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE ANNEXATION.

SOME OTHER ISSUES.

YOUR ACTION TODAY WILL SET IN MOTION COMPLETION OF THE ENTIRE PLAN BY APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TODAY, THE UNIVERSITY VST CAN BE ANNEXED, AND SO THOSE TWO INTEGRATED PIECES CAN NOW GO CONCURRENTLY AND REMEDY SOME OF THE ISSUES, QUITE FRANKLY, THAT HAVE OCCURRED BECAUSE THE UNIVERSITY HAS NOT HAD THE BENEFIT OF THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES THAT WERE PLANNED TO GO ALONG WITH IT.

SO AS YOU MOVE FORWARD, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE COMMENTATORS SAID, THIS IS KIND OF THE FIRST STEP.

WE EXPECT TO BE BEFORE YOU IN SEPTEMBER WITH THE VST PROPERTY.

AND WHAT THAT WILL MEAN IS WE WILL VERY QUICKLY START BUILDING THE HOUSING THAT'S NECESSARY TO SUPPORT.

IT WILL BE PREPARING SITES FOR POLICE AND FIRE STATION, A NEW WATER WELL, LOTS OF FACILITIES THAT ARE NEEDED BY THE UNIVERSITY.

TO COMMISSIONER SILVEIRA COMMENT IS THAT WE ARE PREPARING A FIRE STATION SITE, BUT WE ARE ALSO BEING REIMBURSED BY THE CITIES FOR FEES THAT WILL BE SUPPORTED BY THEIR PHP PROGRAM.

WE'RE NOT CONTRIBUTING THAT AS PART OF AN EXACTION.

SO IN OUR MINDS, THAT'S A PRETTY FAIR DEAL.

WE THINK THIS IS AN ORDERLY PROCESS, SPEAKING IN TERMS OF LAFCO PRIORITIES, BECAUSE NOW WE CAN DO THE WHOLE PROJECT RATHER THAN JUST A UNIVERSITY.

WE THINK THAT IT ALSO HELPS WITH MERCED ACHIEVING ITS RHNA OBJECTIVES.

ACCORDING TO THE DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT, THE CITY HAS APPROXIMATELY 85 REALISTIC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY OF ABOUT 8500 DWELLING UNITS AND HAS A NEED FOR 10,500.

WITHOUT THE VST PROJECT, THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH HOUSING TO GO TO MEET THEIR HOUSING OBLIGATIONS.

SO UPON ANNEXATION OF THE VST PROJECT, THEY WILL HAVE ABOUT 10,100 HOUSING UNITS TO MEET THEIR 10,500 UNIT DEMAND.

AND ON TOP OF THAT, THEY ALSO WOULD HAVE APPROXIMATELY 2000 OF THOSE HOUSING UNITS ON THE VST PROPERTY WOULD BE AT DENSITIES THAT THE STATE RECOGNIZES AS ADEQUATE FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING.

AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE THE VST BEST HAS AN OBLIGATION TO DO ABOUT TWICE AS MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON ITS SITE AS OTHER SITES.

[00:45:05]

SO I'D LIKE TO AGAIN THANK THE STAFF.

WE OBVIOUSLY STRONGLY CONCUR WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ANNEXATION, AND WE'D BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY COMMENTS THAT OR ANSWERS TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE? GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER STEVE TEACH AND MERCED COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS AND ADVISOR TO THE TRUST.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD MY THANKS AS WELL TO THAT.

THANKS. THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SHARED, BOTH FOR MR. NICHOLSON, YOUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND HIS HARD WORK OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, AND OF COURSE, THE CITY, COUNTY STAFF AS WELL AS THE UC.

THIS WAS A BIG LIFT, MUCH BIGGER THAN I ANTICIPATED IN 2016 WHEN I STEPPED INTO THIS ROLE AND HEARD ABOUT THIS WONDERFUL LEGACY THAT COULD BE CREATED.

BUILDING SCHOOLS IS EASY COMPARED TO THIS.

BUILDING SCHOOLS ISN'T EASY.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANKS AGAIN FOR THE HARD WORK AND EFFORT YOU'VE PUT INTO IT.

THE DILIGENCE AND CONSIDERATION YOU'RE USING THIS MORNING TO CONSIDER EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN DONE TO PREPARE THIS PROPERTY, TO MOVE INTO AN ANNEXATION ROLE AND HAVE THE UC MOVE IN FIRST AND VST WILL BE CLOSE BEHIND IN ANOTHER MONTH OR TWO.

AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

AND I ASK FOR A YES VOTE ON A MOTION.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? OKAY, IF NOT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 1045 AND RETURN IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION. THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

MR. CHAIR. YES, MR. SILVEIRA. THANK YOU.

SO JUST OFFER A FEW MORE COMMENTS.

ONE IS.

I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE BOARD, AND I WANT TO THANK DOCTOR TIETJEN AND THE VST FOLKS FOR REALLY TAKING THE TIME TO REACH OUT OUTSIDE OF A MEETING AND REALLY WALK US THROUGH THE BENEFITS OF, OF THE VST ANNEXATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOWN THE ROAD.

FOR ME, THIS WAS ALWAYS KIND OF DESIGNED THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE IN THE CITY.

THIS IS JUST US FINALLY GETTING TO THE STEP WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY MAKING THAT MAKING THAT A MEMORIALIZING THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH AND HAVING IT FILED PROPERLY AND WHATNOT.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING.

AGAIN, I STILL, I THINK THAT THE CITY'S GOING INTO THIS EYES WIDE OPEN, KNOWING WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO.

ALL GOOD THINGS, BUT STILL A LOT OF THINGS, IN MY OPINION, THAT NEED TO BE WORKED OUT.

AND I ONLY SAY THAT IN COMING FROM A PLACE IS WHILE IT WAS IN THE COUNTY.

I'M FRIENDS WITH THE UC.

I BELIEVE IN WHAT THE UC STANDS FOR.

I THINK THE THINGS THAT IT BRINGS TO OUR COMMUNITY ARE GREAT.

WHERE I STRUGGLE SOMETIMES IS THEY'RE THE NEWEST UC.

THE RULES ARE VERY DIFFERENT TODAY THAN THEY WERE WHEN THEY BUILT ALL THE OTHER UCS AND IT'S THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO, YOU KNOW LIFT MERCED COUNTY . BUT UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE A POOR RURAL COUNTY THAT'S JUST THE FACTS OF IT.

AND WHEN THE UC COMES IN AND IT IS THE BIG ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, IT JUST TO ME, IT'S NOT ALWAYS FAIR THAT THAT THE LOCAL TAXPAYERS WHO ALREADY WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO PROVIDE THE SERVICES SOMETIMES GET ASKED TO EVEN PROVIDE MORE.

WITH THAT ALL BEING SAID, I STILL THINK IT MAKES SENSE.

I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR A LOT OF REASONS THAT THE UC SHOULD BE IN THE CITY OF MERCED AND THEN THE PIECES AROUND IT, ESPECIALLY THE VST, TO BE A PART OF THAT.

SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS I'M GOING TO TRY TO FOLLOW, THERE'S A LOT IN THIS ANNEXATION MORE SO THAN WHAT WE NORMALLY HAVE AS FAR AS RECOMMENDATIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. SO I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER COLLEAGUES OR WANTING TO PIPE UP RIGHT THIS SECOND.

I MEAN, OVER HERE.

GO FOR IT BEFORE YOU MAKE A MOTION.

NO, I WANT TO SAY WORKING ON THIS FROM WHEN I WAS AT THE STATE SENATE TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, TO THIS THIS IS A GOOD DAY FOR THE CITY OF MERCED AND THE COUNTY OF MERCED. AND LOOKING VERY FORWARD TO THIS.

DR. TYSON, YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB ON THIS SINCE YOU'VE TAKEN OVER THE REINS.

KEEPING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS UP TO DATE AT ALL TIMES.

AND IF THERE WAS ANY HICCUPS BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION.

AND WE COULD WORK THROUGH THIS.

BUT I APPRECIATE THIS WORK.

LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THE MOTION TO BE MADE BY MR. SILVEIRA. I WOULD MAKE IT AS A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF YOU WANT TO GET IN THE WEEDS, YOU CAN.

I WILL I'M GOING TO TRY AND DO THIS RIGHT.

SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIONS WITH ONE FIND THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE ADDENDUM TO THE MERCED VISION 2030 GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE UC MERCED ANNEXATION PROJECT, PREPARED BY THE CITY OF MERCED IN 2022 FOR THIS ANNEXATION

[00:50:01]

IN THE COMMISSION'S ROLE AS RESPONSIBLE AGENCY UNDER SEQUA, THERE ARE NO MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE COMMISSION TO ADOPT OR MONITOR.

FIND THAT THERE'S THE TEN ANNEXATION DETERMINATIONS THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION AS WELL.

ON PAGE TEN OF THE STAFF REPORT.

I'M NOT GOING TO READ ALL OF THAT.

AND THEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COURT'S EXPERT HOLD ON, I WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WHERE'S THE PART, BILL? WHERE IT SAYS WE GOT IT, WE NAME IT.

NAME IT. YOU SEE ANNEXATION TWO.

YEAH. PAGE. IT'S ON PAGE 12.

IF YOU GET TO THAT IT'S ITEM NUMBER THREE ASSIGNED.

OKAY. ASSIGN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION TO THE SHORT FORM DESIGNATION UC MERCED ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF MERCED.

AND ITEM FOUR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000, THE COMMISSION APPROVES THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AS DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT A AND AUTHORIZES THE LAFCO STAFF TO COMPLETE THE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION WITHOUT NOTICE, HEARING, OR ELECTION, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

A. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER IS INSTRUCTED NOT TO RECORD THE CERTIFICATES OF COMPLETION UNTIL THE COUNTY SURVEYOR HAS CONFIRMED.

THE MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ACCURATELY DESCRIBE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE ANNEXATION TERRITORY, WITH THE CORRESPONDING UPDATE APN REFERENCE.

I SECOND THAT MOTION. OKAY.

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SILVEIRA.

SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL THAT THE ANNEXATION OF THE UC MERCED BE APPROVED. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED.

WELL, YOU SEE, MERCED, YOU'RE IN THE CITY.

OKAY. THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR COMING.

YOU'D LIKE TO STAY AND WATCH THE REST OF THE MEETING.

YOU'RE WELCOME. YEAH. WE HAVE MORE BUSINESS.

YEAH. HERE WE GO.

ON THE ROAD. OKAY.

LET'S SEE. OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS.

[VII.A. Information on the upcoming CALAFCO Annual Conference, October 16 through 18, 2024, at the Tenaya Lodge, in Fish Camp adjacent to Yosemite National Park.]

GENERAL BUSINESS.

A INFORMATION OF THE UPCOMING CAL LAFCO ANNUAL CONFERENCE FROM THE 16TH TO 18TH OF OCTOBER AT TENAYA LODGE.

MR. NICHOLSON. ALL RIGHT.

YES. SO BACK TO MORE FUN, FUN THINGS IS OUR ANNUAL CONFERENCE.

YOU KNOW, THEY ROTATE AT CAL LAFCO TO FOUR LOCATIONS.

THREE OF THEM ARE THE SAME EVERY YEAR OR EVERY YEAH, EVERY THREE YEARS.

AND THEN THE FOURTH LOCATION, THEY PICKED SOMETHING NEW, BUT THE TENAYA LODGE UP IN FISH CAMP, ON THE EDGE OF SOUTH EDGE OF YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK, IS ONE OF THEIR STANDARD LOCATIONS. SO IT'S THEIR TIME RIGHT NOW IS TO GET HOTEL RESERVATIONS SO THAT IT CAN FILL UP WITH ISOLATED SPOTS.

SO THERE'S IF YOU DON'T STAY AT THE HOTEL, YOU GOT TO COMMUTE.

AND THEN ALSO REGISTRATION FOR THE CONFERENCE.

THEY HAVE A LOWER RATE THAT THAT EXTENDS UNTIL SEPTEMBER 15TH.

AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COUNTY STAFF.

WE CAN MAKE THE ARRANGEMENTS AND DO THE RESERVATIONS IF WE GET THE FORM, APPLICATION FORMS FILL OUT.

SO I SENT OUT AN EMAIL ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO WITH THE INFORMATION.

SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN GOING WE'RE WE HAVE THE FORMS ALREADY PROVIDED TO YOU.

AND THE COSTS WERE IN THAT EMAIL, AND I DON'T NEED TO REPEAT ALL THAT NOW, BUT THE SOONER YOU MAKE THE COMMITMENT, THE BETTER.

AND WE'LL. WE NEED TO RESERVE THE HOTEL ROOM ASAP.

SO I GUESS THAT'S ALL I NEED TO SAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONERS WHO'VE BEEN UP THERE BEFORE.

ANY COMMENTS? SOMETIMES. SOMETIMES IT SEEMS LIKE WHENEVER WE DO, YOU KNOW, WE GET THE INFORMATION.

WE MIGHT DRAG OUR FEET A LITTLE BIT.

THEN WHEN WE DO CALL THEM, THEIR ROOMS ARE AVAILABLE, BUT SOMETIMES THEY'RE NOT GIVING YOU THE TYPE OF ROOM ONE WANTS.

YOU KNOW, AND SO WE'RE AT THE RATE, YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY THE RATE, BUT, I MEAN, IF YOU WANT A CERTAIN ROOM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT A KING ROOM, FOR EXAMPLE, INSTEAD OF A DOUBLE BED, THEY'LL HAVE MORE DOUBLES AVAILABLE THAN KINGS BECAUSE IT'S A GROUP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I KIND OF KIND OF WISH THEY WOULDN'T DO THAT.

BUT THAT'S THE WAY THESE GROUP THINGS ARE, RIGHT? SO THEY GET A PACKAGE.

I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW.

SO WE'LL HAVE TO IF PEOPLE WANT ROOMS, IF YOU WANT TO GO, BETTER ACT, MR.

[00:55:02]

CHAIR? YES, SIR. I COULD JUST TELL YOU I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THIS YEAR'S CONFERENCE, SO I'LL JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE.

OKAY. YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO KNOW DURING THE WEEK I CAN'T GO.

OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS OVER HERE IN LOS BANOS OR LIVINGSTON? CAN YOU GO I DON'T KNOW, IS IT OKAY, DARREN.

ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT? I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT THIS YEAR, BUT I RECOMMEND IT FOR OUR NEWER MEMBERS BECAUSE THE CLASSES ARE SO GOOD.

IT BRINGS YOU RIGHT UP TO SPEED OF WHAT WE'RE DOING OVER HERE, RIGHT? RIGHT. YOU SHOULD. YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD AT LEAST GO FOR A DAY OR TWO.

IF YOU CAN'T GO TO STAY FOR THE WHOLE THING, YOU KNOW, AND STILL COSTS FOR THE REGISTRATION, WE'VE STILL GOT TO PAY THE FULL REGISTRATION WHETHER YOU GO ONE DAY OR THE THREE DAYS. RIGHT.

YEAH. BUT YOU KNOW, IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO GO, IT'S IT'S DIFFERENT.

I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND OUT YOU'LL WE'LL FIND OUT THAT WE'RE LITTLE FISH IN THE BIG POND.

ALTHOUGH WHEN SINCE THEY BROKE THE MEETINGS DOWN TO REGIONS, IT'S A LITTLE BETTER.

BUT STILL, THE THE, THE BIG COUNTIES, THERE'S A LOT OF POPULATION.

IT'S JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE STATE.

THEY'RE. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE IN CHARGE.

IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY; WE ALL HAVE OUR VOICE.

UB&K ALWAYS DOES A REALLY NICE DINNER, THOUGH.

UB&K ALWAYS DOES A REALLY NICE DINNER.

YEAH, THEY'RE GOOD.

THEY'RE VERY GOOD FIRM TO HAVE.

AND YOU'LL FIND OUT AS ALL OF US UP HERE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND WE DON'T HAVE SPECIAL DISTRICTS ON OUR BOARD.

YOU GO TO CAL; YOU GO TO CAL LAFCO CONFERENCE.

AND THE BIGGER COUNTIES THAT HAVE SPECIAL DISTRICTS LIKE THIS IS THEIR JAM MAN.

THEY TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY A LOT A LOT OF TOPICS, A LOT OF DISCUSSION TOPICS AND TIME ARE SPENT ON SPECIAL DISTRICTS, ESPECIALLY FIRE DISTRICTS.

YEAH. OKAY.

ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS? THE B OF THE OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS IS THE BOARD DIRECTORS' NOMINATIONS APPOINTMENT OF A VOTING

[VII.B. Board of Directors Nominations, Appointment of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the CALAFCO and to solicit nominations for a County Member if any Commissioners from Merced LAFCo are interested in running for office. ]

DELEGATE AND AN ALTERNATE FOR THE CONFERENCE.

SO, YEAH, I JUST GIVE A QUICK OVERVIEW.

WE'VE HAD FOR THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HAD REPRESENTATION ON CAL LAFCO BOARD, AND RIGHT NOW IT'S RODRIGO ESPINOSA'S ON THE BOARD, AND HIS TERM WILL BE ENDING.

AND HE'S ENDING HIS TERM ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AS WELL.

SO HE'D HAVE TO GO OFF THE BOARD.

IT WE ARE IN THE CENTRAL SECTION.

SO IT GOES FROM THE SACRAMENTO DOWN TO BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY.

SO IT'S NOT LIKELY THEY WOULD ELECT ANOTHER MERCED REP AFTER ALL THESE YEARS.

SO, EVEN IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GET NOMINATED, WHICH THE COMMISSION HAS TO NOMINATE WE'VE HAD WE'VE HAD TWO IN A ROW FOR, YOU KNOW, A LONG TIME AND YOU KNOW, DARREN SERVING HIS COUNCIL TERM EXPIRING OR NOT.

I DON'T THINK IT IS. IT'S YOUR FOUR YEAR OR THEIR TWO YEAR TERM.

SO IT'S EXPIRING. YEAH. SO IT'S EXPIRING ANYWAY, THE SECOND ONE AND SO IT'S UP AGAIN FOR A COUNTY SEAT.

THERE'S AN OPEN COUNTY SEAT ON, ON AND THEN A SPECIAL DISTRICT SEAT, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE SPECIAL DISTRICTS.