Councilmembers raised concerns about inconsistent receipt of emergency weather alerts and staff explained technical and policy reasons behind the problem.

A councilmember noted they did not receive an alert during a recent heavy‑rain event and reported emails being sent to residents that listed multiple counties. Staff explained that users must opt in specifically for National Weather Service (NWS) weather alerts in the local alert system because the volume of NWS messages can be high; signing up for the city system does not automatically opt a resident into the weather channel. Staff said they will be participating in interjurisdictional discussions with neighboring counties and that the state legislature plans to address related emergency alert topics in a special session; staff indicated they will try to “get ahead” of state actions.

Staff also noted the city will budget for emergency management items and possibly split some costs with neighboring counties; a staff member mentioned a meeting with the county engineer and ongoing coordination on future alert systems and water issues.

Discussion vs. decision: this was a discussion of system behavior and outreach; staff did not adopt a specific change at the meeting but said they would participate in county and state conversations and consider adding costs to the FY26 budget if needed to ensure alert coverage.

Ending: staff will continue coordinating with partners and return any budget implications to council in the July materials.