Council debates capital improvement priorities; straw poll reallocates $76,000 to Glendale traffic calming

Councilors and administration staff debated funding priorities during a scheduled Capital Improvement Program (CIP) briefing on Aug. 12, focusing on parks projects, electric vehicle (EV) charging for city fleet, the Civic Campus Green Loop and localized safety projects.

Kate Werritt, council policy analyst, and department staff walked council members through recommended project funding and background. The administration recommended full funding for Riverside Basketball Court renovation and additional phases of EV charging at the Public Safety Building (PSB). The EV expansion was presented in three phases; staff said phase 1 required major electrical infrastructure (transformers and capacity upgrades) and phases 2–3 were progressively cheaper per charger. Werritt and Julie (capital staff) gave phase‑by‑phase cost breakdowns that showed the mayor’s recommendation added the relatively inexpensive phase 3 to the council request to complete the installation.

Council members asked for line‑item breakdowns and operational projections for fleet electrification. One council member noted officers now charge at home in many cases; staff said adding in‑lot chargers would reduce that burden.

Several council members proposed reallocations between CIP items. Council member Dugan proposed shifting $50,000 from the Civic Campus/Green Loop (project 57) to add $50,000 to a bike‑rack project (project 18); a straw poll on that idea did not receive majority support and was not advanced. Later, Council member Mano proposed moving $76,000 from the PSB EV charging expansion (the mayor’s added phase 3) to fund Glendale traffic calming (project 41). The council conducted a straw poll on that reallocation; staff and council recorded seven members in favor and no blocking majority, and the chair announced the straw poll passed, authorizing staff to proceed with the reallocation concept for the CIP.

Blake Thomas, senior adviser in the mayor’s office, cautioned that reducing the Civic Campus allocation would reduce the city’s leverage for philanthropic matching and could “compromise the project and its timeliness,” and he said the current recommended budget included roughly $60,000 for green‑bike items and $40,000 for bike rack replacements tied to the Civic Campus effort.

Council members also pressed staff about park impact fee eligibility for projects; staff explained state impact‑fee rules constrain eligible uses and that impact fee projects must appear in the city’s impact fee facility plan. Council members requested additional breakdowns on maintenance costs for CIP capital projects and asked staff to return with maintenance‑cost estimates tied to the council’s preferred funding recommendations.

Ending Staff said they will circulate detailed application materials and cost breakdowns to council members, supply fleet electrification projections on vehicle conversions, and follow up on maintenance implications. The council will consider CIP adoption at upcoming public meetings with any formal reallocations to be reflected in the final adoption vote.