June 19, 2023 — Clovis City Council
Documented by Rachel Youdelman
Here’s what you need to know
- The Clovis City Council voted unanimously to accept the 2023-2024 budget. There was much anxiety expressed by city department heads and council members over potential future loss of Measure C funds if rejected in the 2024 election. A significant amount of money from Measure C figures in the budget.
- The council accepted the results of a vote by residents of Area 1 of Blackhorse Estates, a gated assessment district. The residents’ vote rejected an assessment increase, so they will now have insufficient funds for street and landscape maintenance and repairs. The council proposed discussing the dismantling of the assessment district, as it has always been problematic. Several residents were present to complain about the city’s role in the district’s management.
- The council approved a new fee schedule for rental fees at the new senior center and a $25 annual use fee for nonresidents.
Council and Staff
Lynne Ashbeck, mayor
Vong Mouanoutoua, mayor pro tem
Drew Bessinger, council member
Matt Basgall, council member
Diane Pearce, council member
John Holt, city manager
Andy Haussler, assistant city manager
Scott Cross, city attorney – ABSENT
David Wolfe, city attorney
Karey Cha, city clerk
The Scene
The Clovis City Council met on June 19, 2023, for the last meeting of the month, despite the day being a federal holiday, Juneteenth. No acknowledgement of the holiday was made at the meeting. Opening the meeting at 6:02 p.m., Mayor Ashbeck cordially welcomed attendees. “Thank you all for being here,” she said; her tone was consistently affable throughout. Council member Mouanoutoua led the flag salute, during which there was no audio for virtual attendees. Clerk Cha called the roll; all council members and staff were present, apart from City Attorney Scott Cross, who was replaced by David Wolfe for this meeting. The meeting lasted about 3½ hours and was notable for the many questions asked by Council member Mouanoutoua. Council member Pearce spoke rarely and when she did it was to note that she was “new” and had no knowledge of the matter under discussion, as she frequently does.
Council member Basgall, while also new, does not draw attention to that fact. There were 35 attendees via YouTube and one via Webex. In-person attendees were about 15. Only one member of the public was present to discuss a matter not on the agenda. City Manager Holt requested that the consent agenda (items 5-28) be addressed after item 2, so this portion of the agenda was taken out of order.
There are several ways to participate in the council’s meetings: in person, you may comment on specific agenda matters as they are discussed, or on those not on an agenda at the scheduled time. Just show up. Commenters are limited to five minutes each. Note that laws regarding public meetings preclude council members from making definitive responses about matters that are not on the agenda. You can also call in to a Webex when the meeting is in progress, or you can submit a written comment. Easy instructions are found here.
All council members are elected at large; none represent specific districts of Clovis. To contact any of them with questions or to comment about issues, phone 559-324-2060 (one phone for all) or email:
Lynne Ashbeck lynnea@cityofclovis.com
Vong Mouanoutoua vongm@ci.clovis.ca.us
Matt Basgall mbasgall@cityofclovis.com
Drew Bessinger drewb@cityofclovis.com
Diane Pearce dianep@cityofclovis.com
Members of the public may attend meetings at the Council Chamber, 1033 Fifth St., Clovis, CA 93612, or online via Webex. The next meeting is June 19 at 6 p.m. Videos of past meetings and agendas are available here.
Public Comments regarding items not on the agenda. A Clovis resident and frequent commenter, Brent Burdine, said that there would be a fundraiser for a scholarship fund for the Fresno-Clovis Junior ROTC and that it would entail a wide variety of games, especially board games, which he said were far better than video games because they were “more healthy.” There were some jocular comments from the council about Monopoly and Risk. Ashbeck asked if there was a game that the five council members could play and Council member Basgall interjected, laughing, that it would be called “Brown Act Violation!” Burdine leaned on the lectern in a relaxed manner and talked some more. Six minutes passed. There were no other public comments.
Item 1 The council voted unanimously to accept the results of a vote by residents of Area 1 of Blackhorse Estates, a gated assessment district comprising two areas, one with 45 households and the other with 81; the Area 1 residents’ vote rejected an assessment increase. Of 29 ballots received, eight supported the proposed increase and 20 opposed it. The engineer’s report was accepted 5-0 by the council.
Rather than participate in city services as most residents do, each gated area of Blackhorse Estates is assessed an annual amount by the city to pay for its street and landscape maintenance, including sidewalks, pavement, gutters, entrance gates, median island landscaping, drainage inlets and streetlights. Per the engineer’s report, costs have been increasing and a vote was necessary to approve an increase in fees so the city can provide services. The fee increase proposal was $219 per household annually.
Supervising Civil Engineer Sean Smith gave a presentation. A discussion of about an hour took place among the council members and some of the residents of Blackhorse Estates’ Area 1. Residents were present to complain about the city’s management of the assessment district. A resident named Sam Reed said that he and other residents have been paying for water based on a meter which does not serve their area. Smith said that city staff was working to reconcile discrepancies and that overcharging had been ongoing for four years. Reed questioned where residents’ money was going and cited several line items in the budget that he challenged as unnecessary. He did say that Smith had gone “above and beyond” in giving his help, and expressed appreciation for it. Ashbeck said that the city would “continue to be transparent on all items charged in the budget.”
Another resident in a blue T-shirt who did not give his name thanked the council for being there on a holiday. He said he wanted data to support the spending, but got none. Items were “made up” to balance the budget, he said, and told the council not to do that. He wanted to solve problems and move on. “I don’t even know why I’m frustrated,” he added.
A woman who said she has lived in the development since 1996 (she did not give her name), said that there was “no accountability” on the part of the city, and that at a previous council meeting, she was told by the council member who sat where Bessinger now sat that she “wanted to have her cake and eat it, too,” and she was affronted by that. (Bessinger is seated where former council member Jose Flores sat when he was not serving as mayor.) “I don’t hear a plan” to address problems, she concluded.
Bessinger asked Smith if “folks” were asking for a breakdown in the budget. “Yes” was the answer, and Smith added that some of the items from the area’s management company, Regency, were “not showing up” and that it’s “their money” and they deserve to understand how it is spent. Bessinger said that “we don’t want to have to deal with this” and that “we don’t want staff involved, but if we are, we’re going to charge you — we’re not doing it for free.”
Most of Mouanoutoua’s many remarks began with “in regards to” and were rambling and hard to follow. He suggested having an auditor look at the situation: “Can we direct an auditor to go, ‘Hey, look at this’?”
Pearce said she was following up on what she was “hearing from the public,” referring to the three residents who were present to speak. Can they see invoices? Smith said he could help them to do that. Then Pearce forced a sheepish laugh and repeated what she has been often repeating since joining the council after the November election: “I’m new still, but is there an option for residents to shift away” from an assessment district to a public one? Smith explained that since the establishment of the district in 1996, the process for shifting to a public mode of administration exists, but they would have to give up their gates. Pearce said that they chose to live as they do “for the gated aspect” and now there are issues.
Ashbeck said that it was not possible to assuage the distrust of residents and that it was better to dismantle the assessment district. It’s never worked, she said, and that “all you’d lose is your gate.” Clovis was not designed to be a private-sector vendor, she said, adding that “the cost outweighs what we can deliver.” Director of Planning and Development Renee Mathis said that for that to happen, “a much larger conversation” is required. Ashbeck said that it’s been “a 20-year problem” with “built-in dissatisfaction.”
A 15-minute break was called while ballots were tabulated. Of 29 ballots received, only eight supported the assessment increase. Ashbeck said that the Area 1 fund was now insolvent and that there would be no money for repairs. The cost of landscape maintenance would go from $9,000 to $3,000 annually, and there would be no street sweeping. Another hearing would be held in a year, with a check-in mid-year. Ashbeck asked staff to try to find a resolution to residents’ frustrations while exploring the possibility of “unwinding” the assessment district. Ashbeck thanked everyone and added that “we’ll find a resolution one way or another.”
Item 2 The council voted unanimously to accept the 2023-2024 budget. The presentation was continued from the May 15 and June 5 meetings, and at this one, the heads of five departments — fire, public utilities, planning and development, general services and economic development — spoke about their budgets. Holt explained that the budget needed to be approved by June 30.
Several department heads spoke about “succession planning” when speaking about staffing, and they all talked about Measure C, a half-cent sales tax that funds Fresno County transportation infrastructure, and the consequences that would ensue if the measure fails at the polls at the 2024 election. Loss of revenue based on election failure would be “catastrophic,” said more than one person, because the funds it generates allow the building of many infrastructure projects. The measure, a 30-year spending plan, failed at the last election, after widespread criticism about planning priorities and allocations, which skimped on public transportation and sidewalks.
Some department heads groused about state environmental laws: Public Utilities Director Scott Redelfs said that funding would be needed for a zero-emission fleet “whether we like it or not,” and that the enforcement of green waste refuse disposal and collection was a “behemoth” with a goal “no one can reach.” Water mandates were “coming down” and nonfunctional turf cannot be watered on city property.
Mouanoutoua wanted to know if there was a reduction of volume of trash in “gray bins” since the green waste, now including kitchen and food scraps, are now supposed to be disposed of in the city’s green trash bins (the city’s gray bins are for trash other than recyclables and organic waste). Redelfs said that “education, education, education” was still needed so that residents will comply consistently and that the state wanted “penalty, penalty, penalty.” Then he said that when the law stipulates that penalties will be enforced for disobeying the law, “the state will make the city its punitive body.” Mouanoutoua went on about his own household. Redelfs said, “Green waste is green waste; put it in your green can. It all becomes mulch and compost.”
More questions from Mouanoutoua followed. Ashbeck noted that publicity was needed about why city lawns were not being watered and the like. Though it’s an opportunity for a social media campaign, why not just post signs that say that a lawn is brown because there is a water shortage, Ashbeck suggested. Redelfs alluded to Fresno, often framed as a threatening shadow version of Clovis, saying that “we don’t want to look like our neighbor to the west” and that “we can’t have green grass but it’s not our choice.”
Chad McCollum, director of Economic Development, Housing and Communications, was more upbeat than others. Showing a drone video of Old Town, he remarked that “the roofs are as clean as the streets.” He mentioned housing and said that “we want to comply,” likely referring to the recent lawsuit lost by the city over its failure to meet state requirements for affordable housing. McCollum said that a new staff position would be added to facilitate compliance. Mouanoutoua said that “in regards to” the housing issue, “I’m on the committee,” but he did not identify which committee or entity. He added that the new staff position was important because “we need someone who knows how money gets divvied up.” But more important to Mouanoutoua was commercial real estate development, to which McCollum replied that he was meeting with commercial developers daily and that “it’s about to come to reality,” though he didn’t divulge specifics.
Ashbeck mentioned the potential for development in the “medical space” and raised the issue of providing recreational amenities such as swimming pool, golf course and pickleball courts; she said the latter would be introduced as a subject for discussion far in advance of the next budget.
Consent Agenda, Items 5-27 Holt wanted to address these items out of order since some staff were in attendance and were waiting, and it was getting late — it was after 8:30 p.m. by that point. The “consent agenda” is a group of items considered routine and not warranting examination unless they are pulled for discussion by a council member or a member of the public. Mouanoutoua recused himself from item 21, and Bessinger recused himself from item 24. All others passed 5-0; 21 and 24 passed 4-0, one recusal each.
Item 3 The council voted 4-1 to approve a new fee schedule for renting the new senior center and an annual use fee for nonresidents. General Services Manager Amy Hance made a presentation, after which discussion followed. Mouanoutoua asked questions. For example, he wanted to know why nonprofit groups would be charged a lower fee than private groups to rent the same space, because, as he put it, “nonprofits get a lot of grants.” He would make an exception, however, for military veterans’ groups, he said. Hance explained that the nonprofit rate is for small community groups such as the Boy Scouts, bonsai clubs and the like, and such groups have never rented the bigger spaces. She then noted that half of the regular senior center participants are nonresidents of Clovis, hence an annual membership fee of $25 was proposed for nonresidents. Bessinger said he had seen some social media criticism of the proposed fee.
Mouanoutoua wanted to know how much revenue the fees would generate. It was not intended to be a revenue-generating fee, Hance said; it would amount to just about $20,000 per year. A scholarship fund was available, she said, for anyone who could not afford the $25 per year. Mouanoutoua launched into a rambling speculation about what could possibly happen if someone were shamed by being asked to show a membership card, and the like. Hance said that she did not anticipate any problems. Mouanoutoua said he was “leaning toward doing something great” and that if “you shopped in Clovis, why should you pay” a membership fee? No matter where they come from, “our seniors” should be permitted to participate in the Clovis senior center without any annual fee, he said.
Ashbeck asked Hance if the fees weren’t supposed to be introduced after the opening of the new senior center. Hance said that was the case for class fees, not space rentals or annual fees for nonresidents.
There was no public comment on the matter. Bessinger moved to approve the proposal with the caveat that the annual fee could be reconsidered if necessary. Mouanoutoua was the sole “no” vote.
Agenda Item 4 The council voted 5-0 to approve a cleanup of the municipal code, addressing errors, address changes and deletions. Senior planner George Gonzalez made a brief presentation. Issues such as flagpole height, cottage industry food businesses and sign ordinances are affected. Ashbeck asked if neighbors’ consent or approval was necessary for a home-based business; no, not required to let neighbors know, Gonzalez said. The issue came up recently when neighbors complained about a group home in their neighborhood. “If it’s not a problem, we don’t need to solve it,” said Ashbeck.
On this item and every item since January this year, a caveat appears about the need for a council member’s recusal based on campaign contributions received: “CONFLICT OF INTEREST Councilmembers should consider recusal if a campaign contribution exceeding $250 has been received from the project proponent (developer, applicant, agent, and/or participants) since January 1, 2023 (Government Code 84308).” At this point in the meeting, Mouanoutoua asked why it was on every agenda item. Holt said that the city didn’t want to inadvertently omit it.
Item 28 The board approved with a 5-0 vote a change in the meeting schedule: the July 3 meeting was canceled, and a meeting was added on July 10. Summer break follows for four weeks; the next meeting after that will be Aug. 7.
City Manager Comments Holt had none.
Council Comments
Basgall had none.
Pearce said that she attended a Flag Day ceremony, and it was an “inspirational deal.” She learned about the history of the U.S. flag and even how to “retire” a flag.
Bessinger said that he recently noticed a 60-foot microwave tower at Herndon and Armstrong avenues. “It’s awful,” he said. Was it new, or did he just not notice it before, he asked. Holt said that it’s been there a long time and that they would “take a look at it.”
Mouanoutoua had a long list of events he attended recently: graduations, retirements, memorials, birthdays and a police awards ceremony. At the police awards ceremony, he said he was very impressed with “the quality of the women officers.” The officers recognize how great “our women” are, he said. Next, he discussed potholes and asked who he should call to notify about any he notices.
Ashbeck said she attended a Fresno County Transportation Authority meeting, which was routine. There is a small group that meets about Measure C as well, she said.
There was no closed session. The meeting adjourned about 9:35 p.m.
If you believe anything in these notes is inaccurate, please email us at fresnodocs@fresnoland.org with “Correction Request” in the subject line.
