[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6539803,"mediaKeyId","3570956-94138044fe6e3be770cec8b9192b8044","parentId",3570956,"title","Measure Q oversight committee hears proposed FY25–26 spending plan; staff recommends street repairs, fire equipment and police fleet/technology","audioSeconds",1182,"startMs",1588000,"endMs",2770000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3570956-94138044fe6e3be770cec8b9192b8044&start=1588&end=2770","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3570956-94138044fe6e3be770cec8b9192b8044/thumbnail_1588000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6539803/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/Measure-Q-oversight-committee-hears-proposed-FY2526-spending-plan-staff-recommends-street-repairs-fire-equipment-and-police-fleettechnology","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539803-92e93b528826a7c29785544891fe7938/orig.mp4?Expires=1775409043&Signature=b~z16sIjZRKqG6umz03g34s-q7kSwjhBjziQeHpssvJsPzckuF3666kbdGvnxioPjzUWNy8bts2dgxh8TBfsdxtHUSFheQZ2HDjG7DCE8oKjIrEf~omOSMkLI-kJJfQXaJYH5xuQiz5ul4qUOLarIKTD83~89atHloto31xChIaG5v6CZ2ct1MPKACktkVmc3CjqVjo0~g5ZkePqaDf4FiFw-Um7wn4dqxfKQtVRnPJEvebUWdmrSFzeJ67wfRJtPaSG6hNS9ak7c806NvVFvmzxzRG~mQGCeUT7IfUr4B2VjyfGc4j7qRn3QRmF5Ang0zPLPEE~F7cEpqsaWovBBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Manteca City","date","2025-05-28T00:00:00Z","article","City Manager Tony Lundgren and senior staff presented the Measure Q proposed fiscal year 2025–26 spending plan to the Measure Q Citizens Oversight Committee on May 28, outlining one‑time capital purchases for public safety, prioritized street repairs and a conservative reserve strategy.

Lundgren told the five‑member advisory panel that staff expects Measure Q to generate roughly $10 million to $13 million annually and said the administration used a conservative $12 million projection for planning. “If we hit that $12,000,000, then we’ll have a little bit of a fund balance,” he said, and recommended setting aside reserves while funding high‑priority one‑time public safety purchases.

Staff recommended a year‑one allocation package that, as presented, includes $2.5 million earmarked to shore up street funding tied to declining gas‑tax revenues; an additional $2.0 million for specific street projects; about $3.65 million to purchase two type‑1 fire engines and to replace aging self‑contained breathing apparatus (SCBAs); and roughly $2.5 million for police fleet replacements and technology upgrades. Staff said the remainder would be held in reserves until revenues and project timing are more certain.

Interim Police Chief Stephen Schluer described police requests as a mix of vehicles and technology: a request for 15 new police vehicles (marked and unmarked), replacement of aging Axon equipment, and an add‑on to the Axon suite called \"Draft 1,\" an AI‑assisted draft‑report tool that staff say will reduce overtime spent on report writing. “We’ve done a test run period and it will cut down the amount of overtime needed to actually write the reports tremendously,” Schluer said.

Interim Fire Chief Dave Rudette told the committee the department’s nearly obsolete breathing apparatus are about 18 years old and increasingly difficult to maintain; he said replacing the full complement of SCBAs at once avoids training and operational problems caused by mixed model years. Rudette estimated the SCBA replacement at roughly $1 million and described a multi‑year delivery timeframe for new large apparatus: “Apparatus are now taking 3 to 4 years to be delivered,” he said.

Interim Finance Director Matt Boring and staff emphasized a conservative approach for year one: hold some funds as reserves rather than bond immediately for a new police headquarters. Lundgren said staff will continue updating fee structures (development impact fees and facility fees) to help pay a portion of long‑range projects such as a new police facility and fire stations.

Committee members sought clarifying detail and pressed staff on sequencing and fiscal sustainability. A recurring theme: Measure Q was not intended to be the sole funding source for large capital projects. “Measure Q will not be able to bear all of these costs,” Lundgren said, and staff described plans to combine Measure Q with updated fees, development agreements and other revenue sources.

Committee members also asked about timelines and where future fire stations might be sited. Rudette said the department is updating its standards‑of‑cover study and a separate fire‑facility fee study; staff told the committee that siting and staffing decisions will follow those studies and additional council direction.

Members offered near‑term procedural feedback and were invited to comment again when the city council considers the broader budget on June 3. The panel did not vote on the Measure Q allocations at the May 28 meeting; staff sought the committee’s feedback and urged members to attend the June 3 council meeting where the budget will be presented.

Separately, the committee approved a set of future meeting dates and elected its officers. The panel voted 5‑0 to set regular meetings for Oct. 1, 2025; Jan. 28, 2026; and May 27, 2026. The committee also appointed Judy Blumhorst as chair and Ben Cantu as vice chair; both appointments were adopted unanimously.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Manteca City - Citizens Oversight Committee Special Meeting - May 28, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","City staff presented a proposed first‑year Measure Q budget on May 28, projecting $10–13 million in annual revenue and recommending allocations for street maintenance, two fire engines and SCBA replacement, police vehicles and technology — with the remainder placed in reserves.","taxTitle","Manteca, San Joaquin County, California","taxId",4536,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6539807,"Manteca city attorney briefs Measure Q oversight panel on Brown Act rules, social media and records",504,156000,660000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3570956-94138044fe6e3be770cec8b9192b8044&start=156&end=660","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3570956-94138044fe6e3be770cec8b9192b8044/thumbnail_156000.jpg","/articles/6539807/Manteca/San-Joaquin-County/California/Manteca-city-attorney-briefs-Measure-Q-oversight-panel-on-Brown-Act-rules-social-media-and-records","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6539807-4cb49d2faf1e65090e7bcb15105da858/orig.mp4?Expires=1775409043&Signature=BE-MnfP9wtIINnJ4eS3AaqO8hGP6Uy0txfu7KWzqvIM8Ay-q1x13oTG35vFPhacwHl2u9nJOW~cQ3KOK2axR42VjoiSFiqsVurFpo3twQAlBNmPqJozrwAeHj9tKq7719ID6UHSN2MDsnzT4i8yqCALk1oho34rvaV9GjyHKRf1c96-~XRwQg2cwMcnZyKVIr2Nosz4mLIQ7WtDin9h6z3lv2-fJ~lpjpUw8P3cEFAWHLRKsZX7Bn0Er9lbslvGehdGppVG4mUnFuBrLicrz7stjgrz0ljtovTArWYZyKjQEEJ-~WNgSRFIcadCwlIs28kd5JFelc2pyzikfZbZI0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Attorney David DeFusi told the Measure Q Citizens Oversight Committee on May 28 that the Brown Act’s basic purpose is to give the public notice of and an opportunity to be heard at meetings of legislative bodies.

DeFusi, the city attorney for the City of Manteca, led a slide presentation that reviewed quorum requirements, what constitutes a meeting under the Brown Act, limits on serial communications and the public‑records implications of electronic messages. “For purposes of members of the public it’s providing them notice and an opportunity to be heard,” DeFusi said. “That is what it is, bread and butter.”

The training was aimed at three goals: explain how to avoid inadvertent Brown Act violations, outline what members should disclose to staff before recusing themselves or accepting ex parte contacts, and review procedural rules for public comment and meeting notice. Committee members asked clarifying questions about community presentations and appropriate responses to constituent email threads.

DeFusi emphasized that a quorum is required to take official action and that a majority of the five‑member committee (three members) constitutes a quorum. He warned that a series of individual contacts by members that together involve a majority — including reply‑all email chains or sequential online comments — can create an illegal “serial meeting.” “If you guys all happen to be members of this committee, guess what? You just did a Brown Act violation,” he said, giving an example of successive online comments turning into deliberation without public notice.

The attorney outlined practical limits: regular meeting agendas must be posted 72 hours in advance, special meetings may be posted 24 hours in advance, and meetings must occur within city limits unless state law allows otherwise. He also reviewed accepted exceptions such as ad hoc “2 by 2” subgroups (no quorum) convened for a limited duration and scope and said members may attend conferences or other public meetings together so long as they do not deliberate outside noticed meetings.

DeFusi told members their communications about committee business — including texts, personal emails and city email — are presumptively subject to the California Public Records Act when they concern city business. “Basically, your records are presumed … to be subject to the public if they were to make a request for those records,” he said, explaining why members should avoid informal side conversations during breaks and after meetings.

On public comment, DeFusi reiterated that the committee should provide equal time to speakers, avoid debating members of the public from the dais and treat decorum policies consistently. He recommended that members who anticipate a conflict or an ex parte contact notify the clerk or the attorney’s office in advance so staff can note the disclosure.

Committee members tested application scenarios. One asked whether it was permissible to summarize committee activity at neighborhood meetings; DeFusi said members may describe information that was presented in public meetings but should avoid lobbying or coordinating positions with a quorum. He advised replying to constituent emails with a direct reply (not reply‑all) when appropriate.

The briefing closed after members asked procedural questions about the committee’s role and expectations. DeFusi offered to answer follow‑up questions individually for members who preferred not to ask in public.","City Attorney David DeFusi gave the Measure Q Citizens Oversight Committee a step‑by‑step briefing on the Brown Act, focusing on public notice, quorum rules, limits on serial communications and public‑records exposure for messages and texts.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Measure Q oversight committee hears proposed FY25–26 spending plan; staff recommends street repairs, fire equipment and police fleet/technology

Manteca city attorney briefs Measure Q oversight panel on Brown Act rules, social media and records