LIVE OAK, CA (MPG) - During the Feb. 5 Live Oak City Council meeting, Finance Director James Ramsey submitted the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), completed by the certified public accountant firm Rogers, Anderson, Malody, and Scott LLP. 

Ramsey summarized the findings, stating that as of the end of the last fiscal year in June 2024, “the city’s net position overall is at $81 million, which is a decrease of about $3.1 million.” Ramsey said that position includes $59.7 million is capital assets, “which cannot be used to pay any expenditures or debts of the city.” 

The city’s General Fund balance decreased by $812,436 due to expenditures greater than actual revenues received, ending with a fund balance of $2.3 million. Ramsey said that the majority of those funds are assigned but some reserve funds could be reallocated. 

Across all governmental funds, fund balances ended at $6.1 million, a decrease of $1.1 million due to “a number of capital projects that were recorded during the fiscal year,” according to Ramsey. 

Some significant decreases were recorded in the water fund, which decreased by $1.5 million due to capital contributions, and the sewer fund, which decreased by $1 million due to an increase in net pension liability and operating expenditures greater than revenues. 

Councilmember Nancy Santana wanted to know if any of the reserves can be reallocated to cover the deficit in the water fund. 

Ramsey explained that the water fund is an enterprise fund, which is supposed to be supported by charges for services.

“If you use the reserves from the General Fund to make the deficit in the water fund whole again, that’s a gift of public funds to the water fund,” said Ramsey, adding that he would not recommend making such a gift.

Vice-Mayor Aaron Pamma asked if the funds could be loaned to the water fund. Ramsey replied that was a possibility, with required interest and a repayment plan, so he was working on bringing a proposal to council at the mid-year budget review. 

The Live Oak City Council voted unanimously to accept and file the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. 

Mayor Jeramy Chapdelaine then made his recommendation for appointments to the Live Oak Planning Commission, which currently has three open seats on the seven-member board. 

The city received eight applications and Chapdelaine said two were qualified to serve. He suggested that City Council re-appoint Michelle Serpa as a returning commissioner to serve a four-year term and appoint Harry Sidhu as a new commissioner serving a two-year term. Chapdelaine also asked that the application period be extended to gather more applicants to consider for the third open seat. 

Councilmember Santana asked why City Council wouldn’t fill the last seat from the available applications and why the applicants were not at the meeting to share their qualifications with the council: “Did we invite them?”

Chapdelaine answered, “No, we didn’t. I did not feel that it was appropriate or fair to actually invite five to six other people that at this point weren’t being considered for this seat.”

Councilmember Bob Woten said he “just made a recommendation for appointment based on the applications” when he was mayor.  

But Santana said when she served as mayor, the applicants were “always invited” to speak before they made any decisions.

Legal counsel advised that the code does not specify a process and that the council votes on the mayor’s recommendation. 

Vice-Mayor Pamma, who recently vacated a seat on the Planning Commission, said he has been through both types of selection processes and that it’s important for the candidates to speak to the City Council: “We’ve got to understand who’s making decisions for our city moving forward. … It’s important to have people in place whose views align with what we’re talking about and trying to push for this town.” He noted that only Commissioner Michelle Serpa was at the meeting. 

Councilmember Santana suggested moving this item to a later date and to “be fair and equal and invite all the applicants instead of just discard them and repost it.”

“We work for the people. We’re elected by the people,” Santana said. “It’s not just about one councilmember or one mayor and who they want. It’s really not fair to these applicants.”

“I think it’s really wrong not to invite them to be here,” Santana said. “You applied and the mayor doesn’t like you. So sorry, you’re out.”

The other councilmembers were offended by her implications, with Councilmember Woten saying she was “out of line.” 

Vice-Mayor Pamma said, “We need to keep cohesion here and professionalism, please. That’s not the way it should be conducted.” He said that the mayor has made a recommendation and it needs to be voted on, and if the majority don’t agree, then City Council will move forward on a different course. 

Chapdelaine repeated his recommendation, which was motioned for approval by Woten. The motion failed 2-2, with Pamma voting no and Santana abstaining, which was counted as a no vote. 

Pamma made an alternate motion to re-appoint Serpa to the four-year term, which passed 3-1, with Santana abstaining. 

Chapdelaine said his fellow council members made valid points and he appreciated the comments. Council directed staff to readvertise for Planning Commission applicants while retaining the existing applicants in the pool for consideration. All applicants will be informed of the meeting when City Council next considers the appointments.

A written public comment by resident Dale Carlson said emails from the public are going into the city’s spam email folder. Issues brought up by the public are not being addressed, Carlson said, and the city is not meeting its responsibility to citizens. 

The next Live Oak City Council meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. Feb. 19.