Datasets:

huuuyeah

/

meetingbank

like 9

On the message and order, referred on March 2, 2022 Docket #0314, for your approval for a short term extension of nine (9) of the fourteen (14) remaining urban renewal plans in Boston, the committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass in a new draft. Councilor Baker moved for substitution. Motion prevailed.

BostonCC_03232022_2022-0314

Using planning and land use tools for public good and docket number 0314 Message in order for your approval in order for a short term extension of nine of the 14 remaining urban renewal plans in Boston. Thank you. The chair recognizes Councilor Baker, chair of the Committee on Planning, Transportation Development Council. Baker, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you for allowing me to merge these these two docket numbers. The first 10192 was filed by Council BLOCK and co-sponsored by Council of Louisiana. It was to discuss land use tools for public good, basically urban renewal tools that we have that are available to us. And I believe Council will get up and speak about some of those. So we had two separate two separate panels. The first panel was from the EPA and they spoke on 0314, which was the extension for 14 urban renewal areas. And in so we were able to dig into a lot of content. We talked about elders quite a bit. Land disposition, land disposition agreements. We talked about land trusts and a whole lot of there was a whole lot of content content there. But what we came up with, with the 14 with the 14 urban renewal areas six years ago, we took a vote to extend it to this April. So basically, if we don't take a vote on this, all 14 of these go away. And within those districts, there's there's a number of tools that we use that help us in development and also protect the LDA, protect affordable housing. They protect open space, they protect a whole a whole wide range of different things. So what we come up with out of the 14, I believe we're going to take votes on on extending nine of them. And we're thinking about we're not going to we're not taking a vote on this today. We're looking to bring it to a vote next week. So councilors have a have a a week to talk about it, see what's within their districts. I know Councilor Warrell has some changes, so we want to give different people different times, but we're looking to extend nine of them. Ten of them extend extend ten of them because we added park plaza in the park plaza was on was on the list that we would sunset. But there are some major concerns around height issues and things like that around Park Plaza. So we will have the vote on that hopefully next week. And Council of Clarity came up with wanted to extend it two years and do a six month check in every two years. So what I think we're looking at doing and we're open to it is extended a year into a six month check in, which would be , I believe, in the end of September. So these will remain in committee and we will vote on them, will vote on 031 for next week. And with that, I'd like to turn it over to the to the to the lead sponsor of 019 to council. BLOCK Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Baker The chair recognizes counsel via counsel. Walk. You have the floor. Thank you so much, Mr. President. Thank you to Councilor Baker for running such a thorough hearing yesterday and to my co-sponsor, Councilor Louie Jan. We appreciate it. Everybody's indulgence letting us combine these two things, because in some ways they were kind of two sides of the same coin. On the one hand, we've got the long and difficult legacy in the city of urban renewal. As I mentioned there, I represent the West End, which is one of the many parts of the city that bore the brunt of that. And I think that the mayor's administration is laying out a path for us to really transform the city's relationship to planning into these tools and and looking at places where it's appropriate to sunset. At the same time, some of the stuff we were talking about yesterday was how do we think about like using some of these tools that we have for things like community land, trust, for things like building social housing on public land. And I think we had a really good second panel with some of the advocates in those spaces. Thinking about on the climate mitigation side, how do we assemble land parcels where we might need them to protect the fringes of the city? So I think it was a really productive conversation. And as councilor, as Councilor Baker said, I think, you know, the first part came out with some kind of good, good trajectories for the immediate decision at hand. But I'm very optimistic about the opportunity for the Council to be part of a real re-envisioning of how we use land use tools and public land for public good in the city. So thank you so much to everybody who came. Thank you, counsel. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Docket 019 will remain in committee. Docket 0314 will remain in committee motions. Order in resolutions. Mr. Clerk, please read Docket 04090409.

On the message and order, referred on March 2, 2022, Docket #0313, for an appropriation order in the amount of Twenty Seven Million Two Hundred and Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Four Dollars ($27,205,854.00) from Fiscal Year 2022 community preservation fund revenues for community preservation projects at the recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee, the committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_03022022_2022-0313

Thank you. Dr. 031 child will be referred to the Committee on Government Operations. Mr. Clarke, please read. Dr. 0313 Duncan Number 0313 message in order for an appropriation order in the amount of $27,205,854 from fiscal year 2022. Community Preservation Fund Revenues for Community Preservation Projects. At the recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee. Fed chair calls on At-Large City Council Michael Flaherty Council. Rates to look forward to sharing an expedited hearing. Hope to get something on the council chamber calendar very soon. Prior to the beginning of a budget process so that there are no delays and backlogs to funding these very worthwhile projects. So we get 27.2 million, 14.6 for housing, 6.1 for historic preservation, and 6.5 for open space and recreation. So I'll make sure we get notice out to other colleagues so they can attend and advocate and learn about projects that are happening in their in their respective districts. Thank you, Ms.. President. Thank you, counsel. Clarity. Docket 0313 will be referred to the Committee on Community Preservation Act. Mr. Clerk, please read Docket 0314.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Sections 5.90.030 and 5.90.060, by adding Section 5.90.310; and, by amending and restating chapter 5.92, all relating to the regulation of cannabis retail storefront (dispensary) business licenses and the Cannabis Social Equity Program, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05242022_22-0515

Item 33 is a report from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to the regulation of cannabis, retail, storefront business licenses and the cannabis social equity program read and adopted as read. City Grade has been moved and seconded. Is there any public comment on this? We have Rena McLendon and Edgar Cruz. Please approach the podium. Reports must be. Hello. My name is Raina McLendon, and I'm a social equity applicant. First of all, I want to thank you all for allowing me to speak, to express my situation. I think it's unfair to disqualify me from the social equity program because another member of my household is also a social equity applicant. When I first applied, I was told by the campus oversight that I would be able to apply for a dispensary and delivery license. I have fully participate in the program. I was awarded the location grant. I attended the Entrepreneurship Academy classes and was given a certificate from the mayor's office. I do understand that I'm not going to be able to receive any more grant funding due to the state's new policies. But if I have my own investor and put my own money into the licensing process and the property buildout, I should at least be able to have the opportunity to present to the RFP and apply for dispensary and delivery license. I just want to say I just want the same opportunity as all the other equity applicants to go forward and put in a proposal to the RFP. I have spent a lot of time and money getting ready for the the cannabis dispensary license to be available. I have hired a consultant and spend long hours on my business plans and supplies. So what I'm asking today is for the City Council to change the ordinance from only one equity applicant per household. That is on page 147 and to proposal number three. A proposal may only be submitted by one equity applicant per household as defined in BMC Chapter 5.92 to all equity applicants can apply for dispensary license me and the other applicant in my household when I joined at the hip and I just want equal opportunity. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Catherine. Steph. My name is Attica Cruz, social equity recipient and founder of the Cannabis Companies Council of Long Beach, where we focus on cannabis, social equity, community redevelopment within our jurisdiction. For the past two weeks, I have seen transparency within Council City staff as well as divisions that focus and handle the equity program to ensure retail opportunities move forward in a timely manner. Within the past couple of years, I've also witnessed and been part of the creation and achievements of new growth initiatives for equity entrepreneurs and the community within the City of Long Beach to provide accessibility within the cannabis space. What I ask, what I have also seen within these past recent council meetings is frustration, raise concerns and anger from our community, social equity advocates and recipients within the program. As we are moving forward with eight wonderful opportunities for individuals like myself, I also would like to address that we continue our work and create new initiatives beyond the retail aspect and also focus on licensing opportunities. Equity applicants already have and still find many barriers to reach those opportunities, such as Green Zone expansion for all license types of suitability for equity. There are many initiatives we as a city can introduce to establish a more solid foundation for the equity program. As we see, unfortunately, Emily Armstrong will no longer be with us effective May 27th. I would challenge our councilmembers and staff members to continue to provide transparency and dedication to the progression of our social equity program. I would also like to add, while some unintentionally impede on our programs progression, I share that there are some that will continue to do the work and continue to make obligations ensuring that we can move forward, understanding that accountability, transparency is our focus. I would like to point out and appreciate the work and efforts cannabis oversight has done within these past couple of months, as well as city and staff and economic development. On behalf of L.B. Tripathy, we would like to personally thank Emily Armstrong for being part of this journey. Thank you guys for your time. Thank you, Mr. Crews. So that that public comment. Conclude the public comment. That concludes public comment. I'm taking it back behind the rail. Any comments from the council? This is our opportunity. This is the last reading, final reading of this ordinance that will pass members less vote this. The motion is carried. Great. Moving on to the next item. 39.

A bill for an ordinance establishing the Office of Climate Action, Sustainability, and Resiliency. A bill for an ordinance establishing the Office of Climate Action, Sustainability, and Resiliency. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-13-19.

DenverCityCouncil_08192019_19-0805

Madam Secretary, please close the voting, announce the results. 756786 nails Constable zero three has been ordered published final consideration with a courtesy public hearing will be Monday, August 26th. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and cancel them, can you please put Councilor 805 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 19 805 be published. This be ordered. Published has been moved and seconded. I didn't see any broad questions on this one, so I'm going to jump right into the First Amendment. So I would like to move that Council zero five be amended in the following particulars. One On page ten, line one Strike Board and Substitute Board. Executive Director of the Office of Climate Action, Sustainability and Resiliency two. On page 17, Line 33, Strike Section ten does 301a and substitute Section ten, that's 301a, Sections 11.5 Dash 19 A on page 18, line 22 straight year and insert year comma effective for on page 18 , line 31 strike section 11.5, dash 20 A and substitute section 11 start five Dash 19 A comma on page 20, line 20 Strike Board of Public Health and Environment and Substitute Board of Public Health and Environment. Office of Climate Action, Sustainability and Resiliency on page 22, Line 33 After Resiliency Insert or their designees on page 24, Line nine, strike Article 13 and Substitute Article 13, Article three on page 24, Line 11 Strike the Department of Public Health and Environment and substitute the Department of Public Health and Environment, the Office of Climate Action, Sustainability and Resiliency. The motion to amend has been moved. And second again, this is the purpose of these amendments are to correct some conforming language in the Bill of the Office as it pertains to some of the duties related to benchmarking in green roofs to clean up some clerical mistakes that were not referencing the correct things and the movement of those pieces of the bill. Are there any questions or comments on this amendment? All right. Seeing no, no. Ask for a yes vote. And, Madam Secretary, recall. Black. I see tobacco. Yes. So when I Gillmor I Herndon Hines I. Cashman I. Coinage I. Ortega, I. Sandoval, i. Sawyer. Torres. I. Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results. 12 hours. 12 hours. Comfortable. 805 has been amended. Councilwoman, can each you also have an amendment? So go your go ahead with your motion to amend. Thank you. I move that council bill 19 dash 805 be amended in the following particulars on page 24 after line 26, insert the following subsection H Prevailing Wage Subsection one Payment of Prevailing Wage. Every city contract in excess of $2,000 that requires or authorizes covered work on noncommercial property and every city contract in excess of $5,000 that requires or authorizes covered work on commercial property, whether for an individual contractor subcontract or in aggregate where a contract or subcontract may require or authorize covered work across multiple properties. Expanding green building fund moneys must require that every worker, mechanic or other laborer employed by any contractor or subcontractor for covered work must be paid the prevailing wage , as described in Section 20, Dash 76 GRC Subsection two covered work. For purposes of this subsection H covered work shall mean drainage or construction, alteration, improvement, repair, maintenance or demolition, and the work of a doorkeeper caretaker, cleaner, window washer, porter, keeper, janitor or similar custodial or janitorial work. This subsection eight shall not apply to any person excepted from prevailing wage coverage by 2276. A DRC Subsection three Record Retention. A contractor or subcontractor that is required to pay prevailing wage in connection with a contract in accordance with paragraph one of this subsection H must keep and preserve for a period of at least three years payroll records and other suitable books and records as may be necessary to determine the prevailing wage to workers for covered work. The auditor shall be entitled at any reasonable time to examine the books and payroll records of a contractor or subcontractor related to such a contract and to make copies of their content. Subsection four Certified Payroll A contractor or subcontractor performing covered work and receiving compensation from the Green Building Fund in excess of $50,000, whether for an individual contractor or in aggregate must furnish to the auditor each pay period during which work is in progress in connection with the contract. A true and correct electronically certified copy of the payroll records of every person performing work related to the contract. The certified records must show the number of hours worked hourly pay and deductions made from pay and the net amount of pay received by each worker for the period covered by the payroll. Subsection five Enforcement. The auditor has the authority and duty to enforce the provisions of this subsection H. The penalty complaint and review provisions of Section 2276 E, F, and G apply to violations of this paragraph h. Thank you. Councilwoman, can each the motion to amend has been moved and seconded comments on this amendment. Councilman Kit. Thank you. This is to make sure that if there is the creation of a fund, that any new dollars that flow into the community where the city isn't the direct contractor for those contracting construction dollars would still be covered by prevailing wage standards to ensure that we are meeting the equity goals of the ordinance to make sure that these are good jobs and not just low road jobs. So the certified payroll is the typical way the city does prevailing wage, but it's a it's a new computer system. And we didn't want to make sure that, you know, newer contractors or smaller contractors who don't typically do business with the city would have to do that full reporting system. So the majority system established in this amendment is a complaint system where you have to keep the records as the contractor. If a worker complains that they were not adequately paid, then you have to furnish those records to the auditor. But for large contractors, if you're doing work over $50,000, you probably know how to do certified payroll because you've probably done some government work before. So there's two systems here. And then the enforcement provisions that are referenced include penalties and back wages and things like that so that we can make any workers who are underpaid. Hold thinking. Oh, just if I may add, I did work. We had short time, but we worked with the auditor and did share this with some of the individuals in the construction industry who work to advance the protection of workers wages. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman, can you see no other questions or comments on this? I'll just add, I thank you. I appreciate you bringing this forward and in helping, I think, make our bill better. And I think this is very much in line with the vision to lift up our communities and our workforce as we tackle this climate change . So thank you very much. I will be supporting today, Madam Secretary, roll call on the amendment. Can each I black I see tobacco. Yes. Flynn, I Gillmor I. Herndon, I. Hines yes. Cashman, I. Ortega I. Sandoval, I. Sawyer I. Torres, I. Mr. President. I. I'm secretary. Please close voting. Announce Results. 13 Eyes 13 Eyes Council will 805 has been amended. I didn't see if I called this out specifically for comments, but I still see you in there. Councilman Kennedy, did you have comments on this bill before we vote? I did. Go ahead. Thank you. Before we discuss this bill further, I wanted to take a moment to direct us to our council rules. Rule 9.6 is our rule for decorum. And one of the things that that rule asks for is that members not question the motives of other council members or disparage other council members. I believe that this is a very important debate we're having, and I believe that everyone up here cares about the climate. I have serious concerns that I outlaid, but I believe that some of the debate we had on the prior bill violated this rule or came very close to it by disparaging the intent of individuals who believe that a different method or in a different approach might be better. I think we are strongest when we have disagreements and we find common ground, but I do not believe that we need to disparage each other, to disagree. I care about equity and I believe that there are ways to address that equity through rebates. I think the fact that I'm interested in different approaches does not mean that I don't care about equity. And I certainly don't believe that some of the other comments that were made were necessary for us to degree disagree on the policy . So I invite our President as the presiding over this meeting, to think about our Rule 9.6 and help hold us all to it. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman can. All right. See no other comments. Madam Secretary, please call on accountability. Zero five. Black. I see tobacco. I swim. Hi. Gilmore. Herndon. Hi. Hi. Hi. Cashman. Kenny Ortega. Sandoval. Hi. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Mr. President. I. I'm secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results. 13 eyes. 13 eyes. Comfortable. 805 has been ordered published. Final consideration with courtesy. Public hearing will be on Monday, August 26th. I believe, Madam Secretary, is that okay? That concludes the items to be called out. All bills for introduction are ordered published, were now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise this is your last chance to call an item for a separate vote. Councilwoman, can you please for the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor?

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending and restating in its entirety Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan (SEADIP) (PD-1), read and adopted as read. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_10092018_18-0855

Thank you. Congressman Soprano, fine is the only public comment in this. I see. I have a first and second to please cast your vote. I am 27. Report from Development Services recommendation to declare ordinance amending and restating in its entirety. Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan Read and adopted as read District three. Should you like to have a report on that? Okay. Now this one. If not, we could. Suggest second reading of the ordinance. Okay, fine. Okay. Any public comment on this? Yes. Please come forward. Very good you Kirk. As the address as a is the tapes from last week's council meeting will reflect. And as the commanding officer of the commanding general of the Corps of Engineers for this area. We'll see when he reviews that tape. And my testimony last week is that I received from the city, from Craig's shelf on a letter indicating that this was going to be held last week and it was not. To this date. To this date, the city of Long Beach has not held one single meeting that will meet the Corps of Engineers. Guidelines. Period. I tried to find out where that at the time I had heard about a rumor. About a meeting being held sometime in the next couple of weeks. It's way up east, Jesus miles from any homes that would be impacted by any change. In the breakwater period. What this council needs to do is commit to having here in this chamber next week. A well noticed meeting dealing with sea dip period. Those that doubt that. You turn and look at what has happened to the houses on the peninsula and other areas. You're is clearly the Corps of Engineers is not going to approve it. So you've got to step up to the responsibility that you should have that parenthetically, the first meeting the city had. Unfortunately. Who the individual that was in charge of scheduling the meeting did not realize that that building was not ADA compliant. It was on the second floor. No escalator, no elevator. The Corps wouldn't touch any any program. Where. That was part of the public process. So what this council needs to do is step up to its responsibility. Issued a clarion call. Let people know that in this chamber next week. There will be a full, complete hearing. On their breakwater issue. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gardner. Oh, and parenthetically, parenthetically, when the mayor returns, if he's not in prison by then. The mayor and Pat West will not sit behind the rail. Rather, they will sit in two of the broken seats up there that they refuse to get fixed. Period. City Staff Thank you, Mr. Clinton. City staff can make them very easily. Yes, thank you. Mr. Price, that you want to speak on this. Any more people coming? Despised by Mrs. Pierce fine people in its colorful workplace.

On the message and order, referred on March 2, 2022, Docket #0313, for an appropriation order in the amount of Twenty Seven Million Two Hundred and Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Four Dollars ($27,205,854.00) from Fiscal Year 2022 community preservation fund revenues for community preservation projects at the recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee, the committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_04062022_2022-0313

0295.0313 message in order for an appropriation or in the amount of $27,205,854 from fiscal year 2022. Community Preservation Fund Revenues for Community Preservation Projects at the Recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilor Slattery, chair of the Committee and Community Preservation Act Council, for clarity of the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. And last night we held a great hearing on docket 0313, the appropriation for the 27 plus billion for the CPC. I want to thank my colleagues that would join me in obviously a special thank you to the Vice Chair of Council Kinsey by click on finish of the hearing with the Zoom testimony as well as central staff who worked late to accommodate the evening hearing. As someone who led the efforts on this body to help get CPA passed, along with some of my colleagues and many, many constituents and advocates and voters across the city, this hearing is my favorite hearing. Each year, it's the opportunity for us to see a great program evolve and continue to grow and you see more folks get excited about it. I think you referenced it last night after you had left other folks that spoke and referenced your comments about talking about something that just brings people and brings communities together. It's it's the CPA, as I believe, envisioned. With that said that we heard following testimony from a Maureen guy. So we heard from Chief Dillon, Deputy Director Jessica Boatwright, Chief Merriam Hammond, Ryan Woods, the Commissioner of Parks Courtney Whalen, and Jillian Lang from Historic Preservation. And last but not least, is dating Brown, deputy director of the Community Preservation. And she did. She does a phenomenal job is referenced. And also the folks that testified talked about how they need makes them feel like they're the only applicant. And she goes to great lengths to make sure that they have all the information and ducks in line and in that whatever is missing or her outreach as well. Can we do better always? We can always do better. But if any program in the city is working and is reaching out as best they can, it's this group and they'll continue to do so as referenced by our colleagues questions last night. Now the breakdown is as follows 27 million and change will go 14 million, 660,000 hundred $59 will go to affordable housing projects. 6 million hundred $41,357 will go to historic preservation projects and 6,404,338 in recreational use in open space project. So that to date that over 92 million has been awarded to 198 projects spanning across the city. And with the approval of this appropriation, we'll be awarding 119 million over 2 to 250 projects since the funding began in 2018 . So during the course of the hearing, we had robust public testimony in favor of the of the proposed project, although the very deserving, including testimony from some of our youngest residents in the city advocating for projects that impacted their school, their community and others. As chair of the committee like this matter remaining committee just to allow for some further public comment given that the hearing went late. And we want to make sure that folks at one of the opportunities to advocate on behalf of these free these three buckets of affordable housing, historic preservation and open space have the opportunity to do so. In which case I look forward to putting a committee report together for this body to consider to vote on next Wednesday. And if any of my other colleagues from the Chair would like to speak have been happy to accommodate that. And we'll have this thing turned around by next Wednesday. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, counsel, for any of our colleagues like to speak on this matter. Just want to say thank you to counsel, clarity and counsel involved and central staff. The mayor's office that was here last night working late. We appreciate everything and your leadership on this important issue. As counsel clarity highlighted, the Community Preservation Act is an opportunity for neighbors to come together, work with city officials, learn about city government, and also improve. The quality of life of their neighborhood. So it's a tremendous program. Thank you, counsel. Clarity Docket 0313 will remain in committee. We're moving on to. Counsel Fernandez innocent. Mr. Clerk, can you please read docket 0295, please? Duncan number 0295. Order for a hearing to explore municipal bonds and other fiscal options to increase affordable housing and community investments.

A bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at a special municipal election to be held on Tuesday, November 2, 2021, the question of whether the City shall be authorized to issue or incur general obligation debt for the purpose of financing and/or refinancing the cost of repairs and improvements to the National Western Campus Facilities System; providing the form of the ballot question; providing for other details in connection therewith; and ratifying action previously taken. Refers a question to the November 2021 ballot to allow the City to issue general obligation bonds for the purpose of financing and/or refinancing the cost of repairs and improvements to the National Western campus facilities system. Councilmember Black approved filing this item on 8-12-21.

DenverCityCouncil_08232021_21-0924

Ten Eyes Counsel build 20 1-863 has passed. Madam Secretary, would you please put the next item on our screens as the Madam Secretary, is the council secretary is doing that? It looks like we're going to go ahead and go back and clean up the bill for introduction eight, five, five. And so we're drafting that amendment right now for that bill on introduction, but we'll go ahead and proceed with our next item. And so, Council Member Sandoval, will you please put Council Bill 9 to 4 on the floor for final passage? I move that council. I move that council bill 9 to 4 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of Council on Council Bill 20 1-924 Council Member Kenny. Thank you. Council President we had an extensive conversation last week. I this is the question related to the National Western Center campus facilities. I'm sad to be voting no tonight. I believe these are necessary facilities. And perhaps if we had started a collaborative conversation with some of the things that have been talked about over the last week , if we had started that as soon as this idea came forward, perhaps we wouldn't be here. Perhaps we could continue those conversations and have greater certainty that we've ruled out all other funding sources and that this is the true full amount required from this particular source, that there is no other source that could pair with it, there's no other source that could replace it. And that that we have the right balance between this and other projects, including in the future of this site. This might be the most important and an integral piece of the site and therefore perhaps the most fundable. And we have facilities that might be tougher to find in the future. And now we've used a very precious resource. Those are the types of questions and concerns they have. I anticipate this will pass tonight and it will be in the hands of the voters. I hope that we respect the conversation about maximizing sources, maximizing equity, regardless of whether this is referred to the ballot. I don't think this being referred to the ballot or even passing on the ballot relieves our city of the responsibility to seek all sources, potentially substituting for this most precious resource of property tax dollars and potentially better preserving funding for other projects for future phases of this project. So I appreciate the dialog bringing the record out over the last few meetings. It's been long, but I think it's important that all those questions were asked and I respect those voting on on various sides of it. But for me, I cannot be sure that we ruled out every opportunity and option yet, so I can't support it tonight. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Councilmember Finch. Councilmember Hines. Thank you. Council President. I wasn't here last Monday and I apologize for having to leave early. I did want to put a couple of comments on the record. I want to thank the mayor's office. I want to thank the mayor's office for the citywide survey about the sentiment behind the national Western complex and the proposed arena. Based on the survey, it appears that there's broad support for the national western complex in the arena. That said, I. Heard something as important as I. Receive a personal. Sir. We ask that you not disrupt our debate, sir. Thank you. QUESTION Thank you. That said. Gentlemen didn't stay for the counterpoint. That said, the survey only asked about the National Western on its own. The survey didn't ask any questions about that, compared that any questions that compared spending funds on national western versus other purposes. Other purposes I've heard about include housing, homelessness and transportation infrastructure. So we perform some of that outreach on our own. District ten residents are split on strong support and opposition to the National Western funding. That suggests to me that this is an ideal question for the voters to weigh in on in November. So should the people of Denver accept the funding for National Western great. Otherwise I will be very interested in lifting up the alternative funding suggestions brought by my constituents generally concerning housing, homelessness and transportation capital projects. Thank you. President. Thank you. Councilmember Hines. And not seen any of our colleagues online cueing in as well. We'll go ahead and move on. Not seeing any other speakers. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 21, Dash 924, please. Cashman? No. Ortega. I. Can each. No. Sandoval No. Sawyer. I. Torres. I black. I see tobacco. No, Clark. All right. So when. I. Herndon, I. Hines. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. So you don't have tourism in here. And Sandoval with a name. Okay. Thank you. For Nine Eyes. Nine eyes. Counsel Bill 20 1-924 has passed. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. And that looks like it's going to be the the black vote. Councilmember Sandoval, would you please put council bills? 864865, eight, six, six, eight, six, seven and 868 on the floor for final passage.

Recommendation to direct staff to work with City Attorney and the Planning Commission to review the implementation of the recently adopted Alcohol Beverage Manufacturing ordinance and provide a written report on the progress of permitting breweries and brew pubs under the terms of the ordinance. The report should also consider adding language to LBMC Section 21.45.114 to provide staff the ability to recommend waivers of special development standards based on findings.

LongBeachCC_08232016_16-0801

Okay. Motion carries. I will be able. We'll be back to discuss that. Let me go ahead and take item 21. We take a couple of items before we do the budget. So we're going to take item 21, please, Madam Kirk. Communication from Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Gonzalez and Councilmember Pearce. Recommendation to direct staff to work with the city attorney and the Planning Commission to review the implementation of the recently adopted Alcohol Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance and provide a written report on the progress of permitting breweries and brewpubs under the terms of the ordinance. Thank you. Back. Back when I was on the City Council, I had authored legislation to facilitate the opening of craft breweries of brewpubs of that type of establishment in the city and that kind of grow the local beer economy, which has been doing so well in other parts of of the country and in California since since then and because of efforts of our incredible staff and really the the groups like the Deal IPA and groups like the the Belmont Shore Residents Business Association and others, we've seen a dramatic increase of these establishments. We want to continue to to promote more. There's some coming, exciting things happening in North Long Beach, as you probably heard, with some of these some of these as well. And so this is a request that we work with through staff. Staff wants the ability to kind of look at the ordinance and even make it even better. So we continue to recruit these fine establishments and support their work throughout the city of Long Beach. And so this is the it gives the ability to staff to do that. And one, I also think Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilman Pearce fought so that we can take a look at tweaking this and making it even stronger. Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. Agreed on all levels. I know there's been an increased interest in breweries coming to the downtown area and just in in general and in the city. And so it's exciting to know that this investment will will continue to grow. Is there a quick staff report on this? I know we're looking will be coming back in 90 days, but I'd like to know if there's more information we can hear. Certainly. We can have our development services director, Amy Bodak respond to that. Mayor, members of the city council. Thank you. As mayor said, this is an item that was new to planning when we brought this forward a year ago. And we do have a number of applicants that are in process and we have discovered that we'd like to be a little bit more flexible than we currently are. And so this would allow us to take a second look at some of the restrictions and requirements that are in place to make sure that they they still meet the intent and spirit of what the original ordinance was meant to do. Okay. Great. And the timeline right now we have is 90 days. Is that possible? Is it possible to speed up that process or are we looking. You're going to do the best we can to to meet that deadline. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you very much, sir. And I imagine that the the the brewpubs that are out there that are trying to go through the process currently will be aware that we're trying to work out any other issues in the future. We actually have two in process that are already cleared through the ordinance and we have another one that we're working on right now. So we we do think that we'll make those folks aware of it as well. Thank you, Councilman Pierce. Yes. I want to thank the mayor and Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this issue forward. I think we've seen a lot of great development happen in our downtowns and in our business corridors and seeing something like this where we can be a little bit more flexible. And we can also make sure that we're engaging our local business owners and people that are a part. We have a local brewers organization here that has over 100 local homebrewers that are the ones that are starting to open up some of these brewpubs. And so a great opportunity to support local businesses and thriving. Really looking forward to your report. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mayor Garcia. I want to I want to just ask a question. Do we have any distilleries in Long Beach? And do we have an ordinance that that talks about the distilleries. The alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance actually covers distilleries as well. That's why we specifically did not distinguish between beer versus any other kind of alcohol. So we do have the opportunity to bring a distillery in. To my knowledge, we do not have one in the city right now. So I needed to hear. Thank you. Councilmember Herring. Maybe not now, but one is coming. And I totally support this ordinance that we have some that are looking at the distilleries and manufacturers in the seventh District to hopefully support this item. Thank you. And Councilman Andrews. Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I like also thank our two woman, Gonzalez. And I am here because the fact that, you know, alcohol beverage manufacturers are becoming a booming industry in what is. I'd like to congratulate all of those who are being to bring this issue up for discussion and special consideration. You know, but I know realize in this state that there's a current bill advocating for alcohol consumption and at least in places such as beauty barbershops. And it goes to show that the change is happening, as is happening in society. So we're certainly moving along with charters that I, you know, hope that we can review a newly adopt ordinance and we'll look in special use it, such as warehousing and beer distribution. And I want to thank both of you guys again for bringing this issue to the diocese. Great. Thank you. Any public comment on this? I actually know. Is there any public comment on this. Ah, this ordinance saying non members please go and cast your vote. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. We are going to hear now. On second. Item number 13.

AN ORDINANCE relating to facial recognition, prohibiting the acquisition and use of facial recognition technology by County administrative offices and executive departments, including the department of public safety; and adding a new chapter in K.C.C. Title 2.

KingCountyCC_05192021_2021-0091

All right, then we will move to item nine. The final item on today's agenda is an ordinance that would prohibit county administrative offices and executive departments from using using facial recognition technology. And we've had two briefings on this legislation previously. And you should have I received an email from Nick Bowman of council staff Monday afternoon, which contained follow answers to follow up questions from the last meeting necessary to answer any additional questions you might have. Does anybody have any questions of Nick? Councilmember Caldwell's. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will propose to ordinance 2020 1009 will be given a pass recommendation. Council member calls has move that we give a to recommendation on to ordinance 2020 191. Gentlemen, brick walls. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you will grant me a few minutes to just give an overview of all of this. And again, it's been very complicated. And even though we have discussed to have briefings a couple of times, I do think it's important for me anyway to go over some of the salient points. Okay. So as you know, this ordinance before us would ban the use of facial recognition technology in code for King County, and among that would be for King County Sheriff's Office and other agencies. And again, it's very important to remember this is only for our King County government, our agencies. It does not do anything for the private sector use, and it does not prohibit usage of facial recognition technology for any other governments. In King County, the county administrative offices and executive departments would also be prohibited from issuing any permit or entering into any agreement, which is a third party, to use facial recognition technology. And I think for simplicity, I'm just going to say f, r, t for the time being, and it would be unlawful to obtain facial recognition information on behalf of the county. Now, as we have heard repeatedly, the rapid advancement and sophistication of our party in the last several years has raised concerns over issues such as those that primarily focus on the accuracy of the technology, the demographics of biases and encroachment on civil liberties, racial biases in particular are prevalent within this technology. A 2018 study testing three commercial facial analysis services found that the data sets were overwhelmingly composed of lighter skinned subjects. Black women in particular are mis identified and significantly higher rates nearly 38% compared to those of other lighter skinned individuals. And with white men having misidentification at a very low point 8%. This technology is simple and less reliable when identifying transgender individuals and entirely inaccurate when used are not non-binary people. But apparently it also is more inaccurate or less accurate when used with children or with older people. And multiple studies have demonstrated that it is actually 100 times more likely to identify black or Asian faces compared with white faces. Now, when we look at this more demographically, it's really interesting and this is included in the staff report. In Asian countries, the technology is more likely to misidentify non-Asian individuals. In more European countries, it's more likely to misidentify. Asians are darker skinned individuals and corporations. Now we've heard the harrowing stories. Some of them I think there are many we don't know about, about a few individuals who were misidentified based on facial recognition therapy technology. Rather, Robert and Bart Chuck Williams went to jail for 30 hours after the Detroit police arrested him in front of his wife and children did share. Parks, was jailed in New Jersey for ten days and spent over $5,000 in legal fees to defend himself. Michael Oliver lost his job and car while being held in a Detroit jail for three days on a felony larceny charge. These three black men were wrongfully arrested due to false facial recognition technology that had been used for crimes that they did not commit. BARBER Jillian Burch, Hank Williams is now suing for damages. So government agencies using this are to really place our civil liberties. Much more harm in jeopardy than should be the case. We know that they can that can particularly be the case when surveillance is used, when there are protests, even riots, but when there are peaceful protests with people being able to use their right to participate, to protest something that they believe that's wrong, they can be surveilled, picked out of a crowd. There are facial features used and data that is being that are being kept and I don't know how they would be used. Again, we know from evidence that has come out in research that individuals in minority communities, underrepresented, marginalized communities, people who have a bipoc. Demographics are much more likely to be over surveilled and overpoliced anyway. Even without years of effort, this legislation reflects the consensus of M.I.T. Computer science researchers implies that technology companies, scholars and even corporate shareholders and for me, facial recognition mission technology is not a good idea for use by government governments. Now we know that even here in Washington State and Puget Sound, there are law enforcement agencies using such technology, including the U.S., Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, the FBI and even the Seattle Police Department. Government entities such as the Port of Seattle have worked with the US Customs and Border Protection to implement facial recognition tech. International Airport. And this is worth something that's anecdotal that I've heard. It's not hard data, but that the plans are for our airlines to use facial recognition technology for identifying passengers as they're boarding flights. Now, is that needed? I don't think so. And the question for me is, what is used with that data? Later on, we know that some private retailers, such as Rite Aid, have also installed facial recognition technology across the country, larger, apparently in lower income and nonwhite neighborhoods. But last year, and I give Riley credit for this, said that it was discontinuing its use of such technology, and this was according to Reuters, from an investigation. Use of facial recognition technology can fuel police power and can increase the possibility of monitoring of marginalized communities, even if the technology is perfect and its use is increasing. But. Apparently also its reliability. But even if it were perfect, this is something that we would want. Do we want to be monitored at this level? And what if corporations and governments were housing the data with our facial expressions, our hacked? And I mentioned this at the last briefing. I have been notified by my credit card companies that their data have been hacked from something, an event that I attended. Well, what if it's are facial features, not our credit card number or Social Security number? What how is that used? Proponents of facial recognition technology have argued and argued today with a couple of people that it is needed to track down missing children. I take that concern very seriously, and this is something I worked on as a public policy maker for a long, long time. But as such, we have included language in this proposed ordinance to ensure that our government, our share, is not prohibited to comply with the National Child Search Assistance Act. And keep in mind, according to our executive, No King County agencies, which will be affected by this legislation if it were to pass, use this effort. This includes the King County Sheriff's Office. So it would appear that the sheriff's office did not use any of the tools listed that people have cited. Furthermore, the biennial budget included an expenditure restriction which prohibited the use of any King County Sheriff Office appropriations for our party. So we've already, in effect, banned this by the sheriff's office, albeit for only two years. But the hard truth is that security and tech companies around the world stand to profit greatly from the development and use and purchase of this product. And that's why some oppose the ordinance, and that is why all of us on the council have been receiving contacts from one of these large corporations in our area opposing this legislation. But I believe that we as a county government have a policy to lead with racial justice and equity as the driving force for how we develop laws and policies. This is an ordinance that puts equity into action. This is a technology that I believe is fraught with potential risk and the harm to all of our population, and especially to our most vulnerable and already marginalized communities that suffer already disproportionately from its application. I ask for your support and keep in mind we can always make a change through legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Q Further discussion? Seeing none. Councilmember Caldwell's. Anything to close. Mr. Chair? I'm sorry. Councilmember Balducci. Yeah, I was. I was expecting that there might be others who had thoughts, but I'll share some. I've listened to and read a lot of a lot of things about this proposal. I listened to Councilmember Caldwell speak quite eloquently on a number of occasions. Now I have heard from the public and advocates and read a lot of a lot of email, including email from constituents. And I've learned a lot about this technology. I know that it's not something that I had spent a lot of time studying prior to this proposal being made. And I think it's very timely and important topic to be giving our time and attention to as a council. And so as I as I listen to the arguments, I think I said this last time, I it's it makes sense to me, too, to pursue a protective principle here, which is that rather to not use or go slow in using something until you figure out how to do it well and safely and get the benefit of the beneficial uses while eliminating the risk of. Harmful. Uses then to just kind of let the horse out of the barn, if you will, because it's very, very difficult for law to catch up to technology in the market. And it would be very hard to try to catch up and control something that's being misused once it's once it's out there, especially something that that depends on large accumulations of data and databases like this process does. However, I do want to say, just for the record here today, that I always a little red flag always goes up for me whenever I hear arguments on any topic that are 100% one sided. And a mentor of mine once told me there are very few angels or devils in this world and and that probably applies to technology as well as people. There are pros and cons to almost any proposition. And so I listen for those and I try to compare them and I try to think one of the ways to navigate the pros and cons. There. We heard today a fairly lonely voice, but a passionately lonely voice in support of some beneficial uses that this technology could be put to. And there certainly are beneficial uses for almost any technology, just as there are harmful uses for almost any technology. And so I think this step makes sense. It makes sense for us to go slow. It makes sense for us to be cautious. I echo Councilmember Caldwell's when she reminds people because it's often when we when we change a policy for our own government, we call it an ordinance. It is it is a law. And so it's very common. And I've already seen reporting on this ordinance that doesn't make it clear that we are not banning facial recognition technology for everybody, for all uses in all of King County, we don't have that power. What we're doing is we're adopting an ordinance that sets policy for King County operations ourselves, saying what we will not do. And I think it's very important to just remind people that that's what this does and doesn't do. I could wish for a more nuanced approach, but I also feel that this is the right order, a protective first figuring out beneficial uses allow beneficial uses later. But I think there are beneficial uses. And I think I just wanted to be somebody who said that any technology can be used for good or for ill. It's how we use it that matters. And I hope that we don't just passed an ordinance like this and have that be the end of the story forever. I really think that there's a path forward to get the benefit of technological advances while protecting against. Risk in. Moving forward. So thank you for coming along to share my. Fairly wooly thoughts. Thank you. Mr. Chair. Council Member Coles. And it looks like we have another council member who wishes to speak. But I do need to remind you that we do have a technical stroke in amendment to address. Councilmember de Maskey. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to kind of align myself with the remarks of Councilmember Bellevue. Gee, I'm an original co-sponsor of this legislation, and I view it as kind of a pause and first approach, and it is an internal approach to our government. We did something similar on the last APHIS automated fingerprint identification system where they renewal regarding biometric technology, which is a broader phrase for any kind of technology used to identify kind of human characteristics, fingerprint being kind of the the early one. But the technology's out there. Facial recognition technology is another. But we're also looking at how people move, you know, their body movements. And there's a it's a growing science area. It isn't perfect, as we've heard. It's got some problems. And I kind of have come down on the side of let's let's let's not do it here at the government until we have an opportunity to work through a lesson, until we have an opportunity to work through the concerns, legitimate concerns that have been raised. I do think that there could be some valuable and appropriate purposes to put this technology to use at some point if we can work through the issues around it. I have a secondary concern and that is kind of the the government collection of and retention of personally identifying information and all of the risks that kind of go with that. And I've had that concern for some time. I raised it when we were looking to build even a customer service database which would span the government. So if you entered for service over in the Health Department, the folks over in permitting might also have, you know, information. I just have. I think we need to be careful watchdogs on how much data and information the government collects on folks in the community because it can sometimes intentionally or unintentionally lead to a bad outcome. So I think Councilmember Coles has advanced at this stage and at this time an appropriate policy for our internal government and that is we're not going to use this. It doesn't mean we won't explore whether there are other opportunities to bring it forward in a way at some point in the future with appropriate protections and where there's a consensus around its use. So that's where I'm at today, and I appreciate everybody that's reached out to me on all sides of the issue, and I've given that careful consideration and to independent research and reading as well. That has led me to being a continued supporter of the legislation. So thank you, Mr. Chairman, trying to share those thoughts. Councilmember Caldwell's. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would appreciate the comments that have been provided, and I would like to remind individuals that nothing in this proposal would prevent any organization from continuing to work on helping locate missing children or King County Sheriff's Office does engage and that they do not oppose this legislation. And we want to make sure that we, of course, comply with all the federal requirements, none of which require any governmental entity to use facial recognition technology. And with that, I unless there's anybody else who would like to comment, I would like to move our striking amendment S1, which makes technical corrections to the body of the ordinance and could explain. This is before us. So there are questions regarding this one. Would we like a briefing from Mr. Bowman? Mr. Bowman, if you could outline the effects of the strike in the moment. Oh, absolutely. So the strike simply makes structural and language changes as recommended by the code revised. It is purely technical. Seeing no questions of Mr. Bowman. All those in favor of striking Amendment one please signify by saying I am opposed. Nay. The ayes have it. The striking amendment S1 is adopted. Further discussion on ordinance 2020 191 as amended. To close Councilmember Caldwell's. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think that's all been said again. The last thing just to reinforce that if there were any time in the future where it seemed like it would be beneficial to our government now to to amend this law, given that it would pass, then we can do that. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Taguchi, Councilmember DEMBOSKY. Councilmember Dunn, Councilmember Coles. Councilmember Lambert, High Council member of the Grove. Councilmember Underground. Councilmember Yvonne regular. I are council members online. I. Mr. Chair. All right. Mr. Chair, the vote is ADA. Is Jonas Councilmember from excused? Thank you. By your vote, we have given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 191. We will send that to full council on the regular course and on regular agenda. Council member at the Grove. Are you with us?

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP HR17-104 and award a contract to Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA, for healthcare, employee benefits consulting, and actuarial services, in an annual amount not to exceed $350,000, for a period of five years with the option to renew for three additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to issue a Blanket Purchase Order to Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA, for healthcare, employee benefits consulting, and actuarial services provided during the procurement process and additional months of transition, in the amount of $140,000. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05222018_18-0444

Motion carries. Item 13. Item 13 is a report from Human Resources and Financial Management. Recommendation to award a contract to Alliance Insurance Services for health care, employee benefits, consulting and rental services in an annual amount not to exceed three in 50,000 citywide. Case or any public comment on this item signal, please cast your votes. Councilman Mangas. Oh, I'm sorry. Let me back up, councilman. Did you come in to speak to us? Yes, but I think we had already. They had. It's okay. Councilman, do you have anything to say or no? Nope. And Councilman Price, you have any comments? I'd like to request that we move this item so that we have some time to answer some questions that have been presented to us from some of the employee groups. When you say move this, I mean you mean postpone. You mean move to another. Okay. Mr. Mayor, council members. We believe we've addressed all those items. If I can have Alex Vasquez respond to that. So there was a miscommunication earlier today and I believe the IAM group is comfortable with this item right now. Okay. Well, they were here when they left because they're comfortable. Okay. Well well, just to the makers of the motion, do you want to just hear this or you want to move it? Okay. If we could hear from them. There was no update before we started the meeting. So. Alex. Yeah. Good evening, mayor and city council members. Before you, you have a recommendation toward a contract to Alliant Insurance Services. This is a result of as a result of an RFP process. This contract will provide the city employee benefits, consultant consulting services and actual services. The annual contract amount is not to exceed 350,000, and we're recommending a period of a contract period of five years with the option to renew for three additional years. As a point of clarification, this contract is, as I indicated, for consulting services. It's it's not I think there was a miscommunication. It is not for our insurance carriers that provide medical, dental, life or disability insurance benefits. We're not proposing any changes with this action here to to those benefits. And on an annual basis, we come before the Council with our recommendations for. The annual renewal of. Those benefits and the costs. So I did have a conversation with Richard Suarez regarding this particular item and of particular concern was and the union sponsored benefits. And again, this is not going to change any of the union sponsored benefits and in any way. And if we were to propose to make changes to benefits, we would do that through our HAJEK process or any meet and confer requirements that we're obligated to enter into. So I understand and I appreciate that report. Unfortunately, I made a commitment before we started this meeting that I would do everything in my power to give additional time to our the workers that are concerned about this. So I'm going to honor that commitment. I'm requesting that we continue this to one week, and I'd ask my colleagues to support me on that. Councilman Andrews We find that motion will be. A couple of weeks because we're dark. Days. So I just said to the next council meeting, Yes. Okay. So this was a motion to continue to the next council meeting. There is a motion in a second. Councilman Gonzalez. I just wanted to concur with that as well. So I think you can comment on this item. CNN Please cast your votes.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Chapters 5.81 and 8.68, relating to electronic cigarettes and similar devices, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02182014_14-0123

As an ordinance, the recommendation declaring orders amending the municipal code relating to electronic cigarets read an adopted as read. So moved by any public comment and item number 26. My name is Mike Schack, the image owner of Essex City, Long Beach. I was here last week and there's a couple of points that I would like to make. One, everything else is right now. I'm going to go ahead and try to make you all Instagram famous. Yeah. I want to publicize this on the Internet. And my point being is that technology trumps tradition. And we have the ability today that technology trumps the tradition of old cigarets the old ways. Okay. I have an electronic cigaret in my pocket which automatically demonizes me. Apparently that it's bad. It's the same thing as a cigaret, even though there is no studies clarifying that. There is no proof of that. I have studies showing otherwise. So as I take a head. It's still legal. In this council member. I don't understand what the issue is. I have over 700 signatures asking that electronic cigarets be classified as electronic cigarets and not as tobacco. This is where the problem lies because later in the future, when you classify tobacco as illegal or something else, then electronic cigarets has to fall in that place. I believe it's lazy of the city council not taking the time of something so popular. It is not a fad, it's a lifestyle. People want to become healthier. Last week, Dr. Garcia mentioned that he knew somebody that helped was helped by electronic cigarets. And I think that really needs to be considered by the entire city council. It's not going anywhere. It's the reality. I think that you guys have a very old school mindset and that you need to embrace it and learn more. And I invite you all to come to my shop and any other shops because I believe it. Yeah, there's a few owners here. We would be more than happy to show you what is in electronic cigaret. Can you guys name what's in a cigaret? I can name all four ingredients in electronic cigaret and two of the four are optional. All of them are USDA grade. You make em like tobacco. You tell me that I can't vape in my own shop. You want to put me out of business? I'm a small business. How dare you? Please reconsider the legislation. Please reconsider not classifying electronic cigarets as tobacco because it is not. Thank you. Sir. Thank you. Hey, could you just restate your name for the record? I'm Michael Schachner, owner of E-Cig City, Long Beach. Thank you. My name's Ken. Attorney. Born and raised Long Beach, California. I'm also the owner of an e-cigarette store. First of all, I'd like to say that this is a huge industry that we're taking on, which is big tobacco. It is a multibillion dollar corporation in which we are already turning people away from them, saving people's lives. I've. Personally have had people come to me and and say, after 35 years of smoking and trying everything to quit, this is the only thing has helped me. And to throw this in a category with something that's not even relevant to it. The thing is, electronic cigarets are not cigarets. As a matter of fact, everybody in this building right now is vaporizing. You are breathing water in and out of your mouth. Okay. Which is exactly the product that comes out of an e-cigarette. Nicotine is not a tobacco product. As a matter of fact, inside of a 150 gram potato, there are five five micrograms of nicotine. Nicotine is an F, almost every vegetable and some fruits. Okay, that that's that's a fact. Okay. To categorize this as a cigaret and put this as in and apply the laws to e-cigarettes as the laws are to cigarets. Well, why don't we do that with pot? Why don't we do that with with other substances? You can't because everything needs to be treated separately and differently according to the situation. And then on a second note, to categorize it, because you can smoke pot out of it or children smoke it. 20% of high school kids have tried e-cigarettes. And that is a fact. And the other fact is the majority of those 20% of those high school kids that have tried e-cigarettes are also smokers looking for an alternative and then for the use of illegal drugs in it. And you can use illegal drugs. In tin foil cans. Baseball bats. I mean, anything. This poll right here, I mean, it's so to to to justify categorize it as. A tool of of. Drug use is preposterous. Also, as my time's up. Thank you very much. Good evening, council members. My name is William Skidmore. I am not a representative of any organization, but I am a representative of 625 online petitioners that I started on Thursday. I sent you copies of the elongated version of our reason for the opposition of these proponents to all of your emails. And I have a copy of all of obviously the signatures here. I will summarize briefly for you. Because of time, we are opposed to chapters 581 because of its improperly linking the nicotine to tobacco products. This is not done with nicotine gums or nicotine patches. If we're concerned about minors, we took steps against that for things like compressed air or cough sirups. It was not classified as a tobacco product as it as it is requested to be amended in 581. The second aspect is 8.68, where we are having the same rules applied for smoking. There is no studies that show that these there is any harm that comes from electronic cigarets and because of this you're in out forcing people who smoke electronic cigarets and could possibly be ailing from these illnesses to be exposed to the same secondhand smoke, which there is plenty of studies, obviously, that there is that problem of exposing them. So that's all that I have at this time. Thank you very much. Hi, I'm James Pappas from the fifth District. I have a residence and a business in that area. A lot of these guys have already touched on some of the points that I wanted to make. But, you know, the state Senate has looked into regulating e-cigarettes with SB 648 and they showed that the FDA was supposed to hand. Down its findings. On October 31st, and they have yet to do that. So I think it's a little premature to be discussing regulating e-cigarettes in this manner. And just for the record. I am in opposition. Thanks. Hi. My name is Jenny Warner, and I'm going to be quick speaking as a health care representative. I can tell you that four years ago, all the hospitals in. L.A. that I worked with and knew of were all banning. Anything called a smoking. Device. And we were citing a lot of things that. Some of the supporters were citing that you can put wax in it and it can be pretty much. Any substance. We didn't want that in our buildings. We were promoting health. And there's numerous studies and documents about how there's been an increase in the wax and explosions and it's like more prevalent now than meth labs. So bringing that back home, e-cigarettes, we decided they were toys. They were not something that we needed to promote in the public spaces, and it was not conducive to. Our smoke free. Campuses. So we banned. Them. Thank you. Hello. I'm Jeff Miller. E-cigarettes are about nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive substance. One of the speakers said that potatoes contain some nicotine. Well, it may be, I don't know. But until the FDA declares that these devices are as safe as eating a potato, I don't think it should be something we want to promote. And it should be noted that young people, teenagers, adolescents, junior high school students emulate what adults do. NPR had a report today indicating the alarming rise in usage of e-cigarettes by this cohort of junior high school students. Well, we don't need any more encouragement of using an addictive substance. Yeah, they're not all smoking bubble gum flavors. There's nicotine, and that is addictive. We don't need to give anymore chance for junior high school students to become addicted. So let's regulate these as we do other products containing nicotine. That's all that's necessary. Thank you. Good evening. And again. I'm sorry. I hope I'm not wearing out my welcome. Melinda Cotton. I live in Belmont Shore, and I'm a member of the Coalition for a smoke free Long Beach. And we appreciated the council vote last last week to on the first reading to approve this with aid to Andrews for bringing forward Mr. Shad , which I believe the e-cigarette store who just demonstrated e-cigarettes with all the chemicals that are in that vapor. I sat behind him last week and he periodically puffs that in and practically in my face. So if the council fails to pass this ordinance tonight, this kind of demonstration will be prevalent not only in city council chambers, in bars and restaurants, every public place. And I don't think we want this. These are dangerous chemicals in there. And just to remind everyone that we're not preventing people from using these if they feel they help them quit actual tobacco cigarets. We're only saying please don't smoke them in public places. Please don't glamorize them for our children. And until we hear from the public health people all around the world, there are a lot of studies that show great concerns about this and the other things that can be smoked. You can put almost anything inside these e-cigarettes and smoke them. So please support this on the second reading and we appreciate your support of public health. Thank you. I stayed to the end. Evan Brownie. My name and address is on file. I've been involved in the tobacco issues and related issues for since I've been on the council. And excuse me, I'm a back surgery last Wednesday, so I'm still a little difficult to walk around quickly. But I wanted to this is an important issue to me. It's an important issue, I hope, for the for the city and for our health health conscious people. My biggest concern I mean, I think they've stated a number of things here and I may or may not be true. What what's inside is are healthy or not healthy. My my concern is when I hear a radio broadcast from, you know, legitimate journalists who are telling us that these places are being bought up, that companies are being by the by the tobacco companies that we have have not been our best friends over the years, at least, certainly not to our kids and and to our the health of our community. And they seem to be buying more of them and more of them to match their to increase their bottom dollar. I'm concerned about what they plan to do with them. And that's and I think that has to be we have to be careful about the future and at least for now, protect our community. And this would go away a ways to do that. Thank you. My name is Paula Wood, and I am chair of the Smoke Free Long Beach Coalition. I'm here to ask you to again support this on the Second Amendment voting. We feel that this is something that is very critical to particularly our youth of the community. I also work and run a nonprofit organization, and what I hear in talking to our youth is this is a serious issue that many of the young people, from what I hear, have not smoked in the past, but are trying these candied this candy vapor e-cigarettes. And they're you know, they're just becoming more and more prevalent all over middle school as well as high school. And I just feel that we need to make sure that this does not pass, as we can see if he's allowed the vapor here in the city hall. You know, I've also been in restaurants where it's happened. I understand that, you know, some of the college campuses that there's been some vaping in the classroom. And this is very, very a serious matter. And the concerns those of us who are concerned about the health of others. So I just hope that we can ask the city council to do what we have done in the past and support us on this tobacco issue. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Sheepskin. Yes. I'd like to actually make a substitute motion that we lay this over until the next council meeting, because I do not think it's fair. We've got three council members who are not here to vote on this. And I think it's very important. This is an extremely serious ordinance that we're taking into consideration and like the medical marijuana ordinance that we laid over so that there was all full participants, I would I would ask that we do that until March 4th. Seconded by Councilmember Neal. Mr. City Attorney can ask your question. This needs five votes in the motion. To lay over does not need. Five votes. The motion to pass the second reading would need five votes. So if I have six people and I have two indicating they're not going to support through the ordinance, if we get to the vote in the ordinance, the ordinance dies. That's correct. You need five votes for your second reading to pass the ordinance. You need to be. So. Okay, so. The practical impact or effect of voting to delay this would just delay it for two weeks. That's correct. You'd come back for your second reading again in two weeks. Thank you. You don't want to hold it over two weeks. Okay. The vote here is to hold it over for two weeks till the next council meeting. Till here? Yeah. So. Well, that would be. I'm. He's opining on her substitute motion this week. Okay. So any, any any further council comment on this item? Members cast your vote. The substitute motion is to hold the item over till the next council meeting. O'DONNELL Yes. Motion carry six votes? Yes. Councilmember. He has a question for the city. Yes. And Mr. Parking, I think this is the first time that I haven't really gotten a clear answer. Is there any way I know, because of the nature of the fact that people can put in these things any any kind of item? Isn't there a way, though, that can be ferreted out between the difference between because we're putting them under the classification of tobacco, which absolutely this city is is really committed to being smoke free with tobacco. Again, my concern down the line is our our vulnerability. I know other cities have done this, but our vulnerability of including things in a category that really don't belong there. So it. Becomes a policy decision. Obviously, for the city council. I think from an enforcement perspective it becomes, if will be our officers position would be almost unenforceable because you'd have no way to tell what product is in the e-cigarette that's being vaped unless you were able to test it. And I don't think we could enforce that. So the other cities, I think that we're following what they have done is that they have treated all of the product as a cigaret, as we're proposing to do in the second reading this evening. And are we distinguishing between, you know, in the first generation of the e-cigarettes, it was a device that lit up and simulate it as if you were smoking. And this these devices are much different. These vapor devices are different. So we're throwing everything in the same category. That is correct, in that we are treating. Them all similarly. I think the the other issue would be is if you adopted the ordinance as it's proposed at a future time, after some other technology advances or studies come out, the council could certainly amend the ordinance to address that issue. If that was a desire of the council. You know, what's the penalty for. You know, council memberships? You know, you're talking about altering the policy, not I'm not in the request to it. Well, not on the court. Your request was to hold it over until the next council meeting, which is really what our conversation should be specific to right now. Mr. Klein. Can I get that information? Jim McCall. Thank you. But right now, let's let's let's vote and move forward where he did so. Mr. City Clerk, that that is our last item, correct? Yes. Okay. New business people. We need to vote. We did not vote. Okay. You said we voted. Well, odor. And did we vote yes or no? Just hold on. Hold on. That's correct. Okay. We did vote yes. Sorry about that. Okay. Councilmember Lipski. No, no, no, no, no business. Councilmember Neal.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 301, 303 and 327 South Harrison Street in Belcaro. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at 301, 303 and 327 South Harrison Street from B-4 with waivers, UO-1, UO-2 to C-MX-5 and C-MX-8 (former Chapter 59 zoning code to urban center, mixed-use) in Council District 10. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 2-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_04092018_18-0172

Seven eyes, one nay. Count for 170 has passed. Okay, now, Councilman Nu, will you please put Council Bill 172 on the floor? Yes, Madam Chair. I move that the council bill 172 replace from for final consideration and do pass. Thank you, Councilman. It has been moved and seconded. Councilman, New Year motion to postpone. Yes, I move that. The final consideration of Council Bill 172 with this public hearing be postponed to Monday, April 16th, 2018. It has been moved. I'm waiting on a second. Then there is one comments by members of council councilman who. Yes, as you know, never had in my district ten and had several of the applicants have come to me and just asked for a postponement. So this is directly coming from the African themselves. And so I encourage my colleagues to vote for the postponement. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary. Roll call. New Ortega, I. Flynn I. Gilmore. Cashman, Canete, Lopez. All right. Madam President. All right. Madam Secretary, close of voting. And now it's the results.

A bill for an ordinance extending the existing .12 percent sales and use tax (the “Denver Preschool Tax”) through December 31, 2026 and increasing the rate to .15 percent, dedicating the revenue derived from the tax to fund the Denver Preschool Program, subject to the approval of the voters at a special municipal election to be conducted in coordination with the state general election on November 4, 2014; and making certain changes to the Denver Preschool Program. (GOVERNMENT & FINANCE) Asks voters to reauthorize the Denver Preschool Program for 10 years, increase the sales and use tax supporting the program by .03 percent, and approve specified programmatic changes. The last reguarly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 8-25-14. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 7-17-14.

DenverCityCouncil_08112014_14-0574

If you are here to answer questions only when your name is called, come to the podium, state your name, and then note that you are available for questions of council. Each speaker will have 3 minutes. There will be no yielding of time on the presentation monitor on the wall. When the other light comes on, you will have 30 seconds to conclude your remarks. And when the red light appears, your time is up. Speakers must stay on topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to council members. Speakers are prohibited from using profanity or making personal attacks during their comments. Audience members Please understand that council members do use electronic devices of various kinds to access the materials relevant to the public hearings before us. Be assured, however, that by mutual agreement in common practice of the City Council, these devices are not being used for texting , emailing or other communications during the public hearings. Councilman, that it will you please put council bill 574 on the floor? Certainly, Mr. President, I move that council bill 574 be placed on final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Councilor Bill 574 is open. May we have the staff report? Council Member. Thank you, Mr. President. Council Bill 574 is a ballot language and also ordinance language that changes some of the configuration of the program. The ballot language is an expansion and reauthorization of the Denver Preschool Program. The increase dedicated sales tax. The proposed increase dedicated sales tax will go from point one 12% to 0.15% for three reasons one to to reinstate and sustain summer programing for the Denver preschool program to keep up with rising preschool and tuition costs for the program. And three, to respond to the growing demand of full and extended day programing in the city of Denver. There are also be three proposed ordinance changes for the program. One is going to be a collapse of the board of Directors and the Board of Advisors to a single mayor appointed governing board with one seat selected for City Council as it is now. We will also have an increase of administrative cap from 5% to 7%, which is in line with most Colorado nonprofit association and also allow for the program to serve younger children as revenues allow. Some of the highlights of the Denver preschool program since originally passed in 2006 are as follows DPP has delivered over 55 million intuition credits to Denver families, over 9 million just this year alone. Nearly 32,000 children have participated in the Denver Preschool Program. Actually, the correct number here is the accurate numbers 31,816, which you've heard me say over and over again. DBP has invested over $8 million in quality improvement. 1.3 million just this year. And I like to share some of the results from the kindergarten readiness, which is one of the biggest reasons to reauthorize this program. 89% of Denver preschool kids are receptive and vocabulary tests and receptive vocabulary. 98% are testing in literacy. And 99% in math. These and several other reasons which you'll hear from the individuals who will come and testify are reasons that we need to reauthorize and expand this program. Thank you. Thank you. Council members, we have nine individuals signed up to speak this evening. I'm going to call the first five speakers if you can. Please make your way to the bench here at the front. That will help speed up the proceedings. And our first five speakers are that Tex Gloria Higgins, Joe Maria Garcia, Amber Monk and Cheryl Caldwell. So if you five could please come up and Mr. Tex said, when you are ready, you can go ahead and proceed. And convince the president that Texas. 4535 Julian Street, Denver, Colorado. Hubert Humphrey, who I may be the only one here, are old enough to remember once stated The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life. The children those are in who are in the twilight of life, the elderly, and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick and needy and the handicapped. Tonight, you move to meet the needs of one of those groups, and I applaud that. But it is very unfortunate that you are nearly is not nearly as vigorous in meeting the needs of another the homeless who are equally deserving but are nearly as politically but are not nearly as politically advantaged, advantageous to support. I apologize for my delivery and hope that in the future you will be as vigorous in your support of the homeless as you are of the children of the city. Thank you, Mr. Texar. Gloria Higgins. My name is Gloria Higgins, 1931 South senior, Denver, Colorado. I'm president of an organization called Executives Partnering to Invest in Children. And also a board member for the Denver Preschool Program. And as a representative of the children and the board and all of the individuals here to support us, I'd like to ask all the individuals to stand up that support the Denver preschool program. And then I'd like to thank the City Council for considering our request for reauthorization on this year's ballot. The as is Councilman Brooks said the ballot initiative is to reauthorize the Denver Preschool Program and expand the program since 19 or since. Oh, my goodness. Since 2007, when the program first began, we have had a lot of families and a lot of children that have been served by this program. And Councilman Brooks has given you the numbers. I think what I would like to say, as one of the founding board members and the founding board chair is to say we had three responsibilities. One was that we not supplant already existing dollars that were there to serve the children, the four year olds. The other was to create an evaluation program so that as reauthorization comes up, we know that we're serving the kids in the right way, and there are results that are being proven. And then the third is to make sure that the quality of the Denver preschool, the programs that are supporting and serving the Denver preschool program, are increasing in quality so that the quality of the education that the kids get has improved by the use of these dollars. And I feel very comfortable in saying that that has, in fact, occurred. I think the next part that is most important is the fact that the tax will be the tax that we're requesting is $0.15 per $100 of spending. That's a 33 cent increase. We acknowledge that that may is not always an important factor to increase the tax, but the kids that are being served and the families that are being served will be much broader if we have this increase tax. So we're asking the Denver voters to support our works because we know it works because it prepares young children for kindergarten, because it helps parents in the community work through the expansion of the summer program and the extended day, and because it supports the community to graduate a better prepared workforce through its commitment to early learning. Thank you very much. Thank you, Michigan. Joe Marie Garcia. My name is Jerry Garcia. I live in 1180 Yosemite Street. I am a single mother. Of a six year old daughter who three years ago was enrolled with the Denver Preschool. Program as a single mother. This program really helped me greatly. As you know, Denver preschool tuition is at $800 a month. That is something on my income alone I could not afford. The program has not only helped me through tuition, but also to being a who's my daughter. Being a single child, it taught her how to share, how to meet new friends. Among other things, as far as shapes, colors, patterns, little things like that, minimal that I wasn't able to teach her in the time I was at home with her. She actually went into kindergarten and she started to learn how to sound outwards. She will actually she went into preschool, learning how to sound out words. She went into kindergarten already reading because of the. Denver preschool program. Let's see. Sorry. My daughter Tasia now more than. Knew more than most kids going into kindergarten. She was helping out the teachers greatly in like helping, you know, help the kids understand some of the things she already knew. Every time I'd pick her up from school, I. Got so many compliments on how great she was in class. And I have the Denver Preschool Program to thank for that. And that's why I'm here. And I believe it's a great program, and I hope that other parents get the opportunity to have the same the same opportunity me and my daughter did. My daughter is now. Headed to first grade, and I am confident that she will do extremely well going forward in school. She has great confidence and is excited more than ever about. School that I. Never thought she'd be this way. And I have that to thank the Denver Preschool Program. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.. Garcia. Amber Monk. Good evening. My name is Amber Munk. I live in northwest Denver. I am here as. A mother and as a conscientious. Member of the community. I am one of thousands of women and men who call ourselves heroine mommies. And I'm one of hundreds of families in Sunni northwest Denver community. And I can tell you as a member of both that the education of our youth is the single most important issue. It comes up day in, day out, on the forums, at meetings, and at every gathering that we have. It is absolutely critical from our. Viewpoint as parents. As community members, as property owners, as consumers to keep pushing this project forward. Right now, Denver is, in fact, leading the nation in its education of youth. And I would ask and beg that we continue to do that. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Monk. Cheryl Caldwell. And as Cheryl comes up, I want to call the next four speakers who are Paul Asper, Pamela Harris, Stephanie Romero and Mike Yankovic. You all can come up to the podium and Ms.. Caldwell, you can begin whenever you're ready. Good evening, council members. I'm Cheryl Caldwell. I'm director for Early Education for Denver Schools. I live at 2707 South Newark Court. I thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight in support of the Denver Preschool Program. This program has been valuable to Denver public schools in a number of ways. When it was first passed, it allowed us to greatly expand our offerings, especially to create more full day programs for students previously and half day classes for the 20 1415 school year. We will serve 3344 four year olds in full day and 1000 in half day. In addition, we serve 1382 three year olds, mostly in half day classes. And that's partly possible because we could use our our Colorado preschool program dollars to go to three year olds in great need of preschool because the dollars were freed up by Denver Preschool Program. We've been able to have our preschool classrooms for four year olds rated by DPI through Costar, and this helps us strengthen our message of developmentally appropriate practice for our youngest students. It also provides information for parents regarding the quality of our schools. The addition of the class instrument for assessing classroom interactions has been particularly helpful. The quality improvement dollars that have been provided have helped strengthen our professional development, planning and activities. As one example, all of the paraprofessionals in every preschool classroom were able to attend 15 hours of training throughout the year on a variety of topics at no cost to the district. All are supported by the quality improvement dollars that we have. These trade trainings were all very high quality and have increased the skills of these paraprofessionals. We see our relationship with DPI as a partnership to strengthen the quality of preschool programs. One of their main goals and to increase the availability of preschool to all families, but particularly to those in greatest need of their of these important educational services, which is our population mostly. Our agency visions are aligned in the desire to have any four year old whose parent want parents, want preschool for them to be able to attend a high quality program. Our school district benefits greatly by having all the all children who participate in this program enter kindergarten ready to succeed. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Ms.. Caldwell. Paul Asper. Good evening. I'm Paul Aspirate live at 515 Milwaukee Street and Denver. I had the privilege of sitting on the Denver Preschool Program Board of Advisors and I am also a proud citizen of this Denver community. I'm an even prouder father of a little two year old girl who will one day be in Denver preschools in my non daddy time. I'm a regional operations director at DaVita, where I run a $50 million piece of our business and employ 235 skilled health care providers, nurses, patient care technicians, social workers, dietitians, managers, and others, the vast majority of whom live in our greater Denver area. I stand before you today to advocate for the reauthorization and expansion of funding for the Denver Preschool Program. To be clear, I am not an advocate of blindly throwing dollars at our education system, but I am a huge advocate of smart investment. And as a member of the business community, as an employer, as a father, as a citizen of this wonderful, forward thinking Denver community. Investing in early childhood education and specifically investing in the Denver preschool program is about as smart of an investment as it gets. There's mounting evidence that for every dollar that a community invests in pre-K pre-K programs like the Denver Preschool Program, that communities like ours get back $2 or $4 or even $10 down the road. Kids with strong preschool options are more likely to be ready for kindergarten to not need costly remediation by the fourth grade. To avoid teen pregnancy, to stay out of jail, to graduate high school, to go to college, to have higher earning potential over their lifetime. And ultimately, they're more likely to be productive members of our Denver community for just three additional pennies out of every $100. And we can continue to ensure that all Denver kids have access to the same high quality preschool options that my daughter and Alyssa want to one day have access to. We can ensure long term savings to our communities, taxpayers for that tiny investment. We can ensure a more robust community for our economy, for our community, long term and selfishly, a better educated and more highly skilled workforce works to ensure that for people like me and for others and employers around our community, that we have a better educated and more highly skilled workforce. I'm a huge advocate of smart investment and for the long term prosperity of our citizens, citizens and our community. The Denver Preschool Program is about as smart as it gets. As a businessperson, as an employer, as a father, as a proud citizen of Denver. I implore this council and this community to get behind this smart investment and to allow voters the chance to reauthorize and expand funding for the Denver Preschool program. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Asper. Pamela Harris. Good evening. I'm Pamela Harris. 1090 Cherokee. It's about four blocks that way. I'm the president and CEO at Mile High Montessori Early and learning centers. And for those of you who don't know my compatriot here, one of the things she is is president emeritus at Mile High Montessori. I also have the privilege of being the chief operating officer for the Denver Preschool Program when it first launched. So I can't tell you how excited and happy I am that we're here and ready to reauthorize. I'm here to talk a little bit about my program and the benefits that we have through being a member of Denver , a preschool program. Mile High Montessori. We're the largest and oldest provider of subsidized child care in Denver. So the families that we're serving are low income families, their working families. And what deep tuition credit has enabled them to do is to attend quality preschool programs that their children can have the same benefit regardless of their economic background in order to be ready for school. We over the years in quality improvement, I still say we $8 million to providers, a little over 1 million this year for 268 providers. I still remember when we had five providers and just 68 kids. So the impact that this has had on the community as well as our families is immeasurable. We do, as I said, serve working families. So this tuition credit, the reauthorization would give our families an opportunity to have the extended day program. So that is meeting the needs. The summer program that we did have in the beginning and had to pull back at the time. So to reinstate that again would be a wonderful benefit for the families that were serving in the community. So thank you for your support. And here's to Denver Preschool Program. Thank you, Miss Harris. Stephanie Romero. Good evening, members. My name is Stephanie Romero and I've been teaching for eight years, one year in first grade and seven years in kindergarten. And I fully support the Denver preschool program because I can see a noticeable difference in the students that do not attend preschool. Students that have not attended preschool show up in the classroom being unfamiliar with school structure, any routines or rituals. In most cases, they struggle with holding tools, and they are usually the ones who try to escape the classroom with tears in their eyes. In my experience, I would say it takes anywhere from weeks to months to get these students to a place where they are comfortable with school. During that time, valuable instruction is being lost and their needs are sometimes taking attention away from other students. Most students who have not had the opportunity to attend preschool are lacking a number of prerequisite skills, such as book handling, being able to hold and manipulate writing tools, letter sound knowledge, being familiar with their printed name and writing it, limited numeracy knowledge. But most importantly, they lack the confidence that they need to become independent learners by the end of the year. A few of these students are not where they need to be, and it breaks my heart to have to tell a family that their student needs to do kindergarten another year. In the case of one of my previous students and his family, we communicated on a daily basis and I informed them of strategies they could work on at home. But the extra year of schooling was just what he needed when he went through kindergarten again. Little by little, he became more familiar with the routines. And by the end of the year, his confidence made him walk like he was ten feet tall. Had he attended preschool, he would currently be attending a school with his age like peers. I wholly support the Denver Preschool Program and pray that it will continue as students are expected to perform at higher levels at early ages. It is very important that all students are given the gift of time to develop in an excellent preschool environment that will prepare them for kindergarten and beyond. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.. Romero. Mike Yankovic. Good evening. My name is Mike Yanukovich. I'm the president and CEO of the Children's Museum of Denver. I'm also excuse me, I have a back injury, so I'll try and make this work up here. I'm also on the call star board and I'm a proud member to be a co-chair for this campaign, in addition to Councilman Brooks and Mario Cabrera. I just wanted to give you a few key elements of why I'm so excited and passionate about this campaign and also being a co-chair for it. We're educating young children at a time when actually most of the brain development is happening. We know this from science and research. We're also encouraging parents to place their kids in a high quality program with significant impact and proven outcome. Many of these were a few of you may not know this, but the Denver Preschool Program is actually a national model, and there's a lot of interest in what we're doing right here . Seattle and Cincinnati are two municipalities in cities that are learning about the program and like to bring this home and replicate it in their communities. We've seen the proof that the Denver Preschool Program works and the Denver Preschool Program, children in the program are outperforming their peers. Lastly, and I think really importantly to me is we need to expand this program to help families to know that their children are in a really safe learning environment, particularly when they're all day at work. And what this does is it provides the opportunity for a productive workforce today, but most importantly, for a highly well-educated workforce and productive workforce in the future. So I thank you for your consideration, and I appreciate all of your support on this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Yanukovich. That concludes our speakers is now time for questions from members of Council. Do we have any questions, Councilwoman Ortega. No, thank you, Mr. President. I do have a couple of questions. Cheryl Caldwell, if you wouldn't mind coming to the microphone, I wanted to ask a couple of questions about how many four year olds are in the Denver public school system. The number that I said was the total number 33. Wait. This is our capacity for next year 3344 in four day programs, 1002 and a half day for a total of 4346. And last year, 3000 were served. Is that correct? So not all. So it was it was not quite that low? No, it was probably very close to 4000 last year. This past year. That's just past. Okay. And can you tell me of those children, how many of them are children with disabilities? How how is the program serving children with disabilities? So we serve any children who are identified with disabilities and either with three and four year olds in inclusive classrooms. So 60% typical kids, 40% with disabilities. In some particular models of programs. Or if the if the disability is very mild, it would be in a regular classroom with an itinerant person who came and provided services like speech language or occupational therapy, that kind of thing. I don't have the exact number right off the top of my head. I would say it is about 7%. Okay. Great. So my next question is for someone with the Denver preschool program is Jennifer. Jennifer's here. Okay. Jennifer, what I would like to know is what is being done to identify the students that Stephanie Romero talked about that come to school totally ill prepared because they didn't have this head start to identify them and try to get them into the program. And mean I know DPS in the past can't share their lists, but is there a way that you all are trying to identify who are those kids so that all of the kids have an opportunity to start school and be at that same level playing field? Thank you. Jennifer Landrum with the Denver Preschool Program. The Denver Preschool Program. Because it is a universal program, we work to provide outreach to every four year old in the city and county of Denver, rather than focusing currently at a specific target group of children, such as children with special needs. Many children with special needs are identified through early intervention when the between the time that they're birth and three years old, and then when they turn three, they begin to be identified by their preschool provider, by a physician, by the public school system, and that is how they are identified. That said, I think that we in the city and county of Denver have a gap of about 25% of our kids, approximately, that we're not reaching. And so I think one of the things that we need to do a better job of is hone in on on those more difficult to reach children, to bring them into the program. So my letter question was not particularly about children with disabilities, but children who are not being reached. Right. And I mean, we can absolutely play a role in getting the word out through our newsletters and that kind of thing. I don't know that that reaches everybody, but those are the kids I'm concerned about because they're showing up to school, not being prepared and, you know, maybe through the churches other ways, you know, we can help get that word out as well. So currently what we are doing is this year in particular, and we have increased our public outreach, public awareness campaign through billboards, bus shelters. We're doing a little bit of radio, a little bit of TV. We're doing ads in community newspapers. We're at community outreach fairs talking with parents. One of the things that the Denver Preschool Program Board has spent some time talking about together is the children that we aren't reaching are the more expensive and difficult to reach children. And we're thinking through very carefully how we might reach them, whether it's, as you said, in churches going to as Amber talked about, reaching out to some of the mom groups and in part being in the neighborhoods. And so I. Think that that is something that we need to do in partnership with people who worked more deeply into the neighborhoods to help us reach them. And it is something that I do agree that we need to do together. Thank you. I appreciate that. You're welcome. Thank you for the question. Thank you, Councilman. No comment. Yeah. Councilman Ortega, this is this is my heart as well in this program. And the board and I and all of us have have gone and had these really intense discussions. But we know one place where all these kids and their parents are coming through on their through them are human services. And it's it's starting to see how can we begin to partner with other agencies that are already at the city, that are already serving some of our most vulnerable population in the city, and see if there can't be a component of an educational component there as well. And so I appreciate you asking that question. And it's something where there there are certain board members and even Jennifer, just as she stated, are focusing on some of those issues. Councilwoman Lemon. Thank you. I just want to make a comment. Okay. Well, we. Will allow a. Moment now for the comment section. Councilwoman Montero. Thank you, Mr. President. I know this is going to sound like a very basic question, but I think we probably need to go over it. Please go over again. Whoever wants to do this. Why? We need to reauthorize the Denver Preschool Program. They know it's been in existence for ten years. But, you know, the population of Denver has changed. Kids grow, families move away. And so can someone come up and talk about that? And then also tell me how many? I'll tell it. I'll say the the number of kids that are the statistics that I have. But I have hear that there are probably 18,897 three and four year olds in Denver, and there is a projection of 21,711 by 2019. And so that's why I just need for you to just lay the groundwork someone as to why we really need to reauthorize it. Anybody can remember if you want to. You know, what I want to do is let Jennifer answer that because she's a CEO. But I'll just say the very basic reason is that this program sunsets in 2016 of January. And we as a board have been working for the last year of saying when is a good time to go into the public and reauthorize this program? Just recently this spring, we looked and we went into the field and we had tremendous support to go in November. But there's some other reasons of why and I'll have Jennifer answer is. Are. You going to continue? This program is very important to me. This is our time to get as much basic information out as we can. When you talk about Sunset in 2016, that means that it will go away. Is that correct? That's correct. It will go away. It will not be in existence any longer. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember X Councilwoman Monteiro. So I think one of the reasons that we want to reauthorize this program is just exactly what you were talking about, which is the the boom that we're going to see and the number of three and four children in the future. So if we just look at four year olds, which is who this program is charge to care for, I you you said some numbers. And right now we are serving around 5000 children. Our population is around 9000. The increase that you're talking about sounded like it was almost doubling. So if we don't continue this program, not only we won't will we not be serving the four year olds that are coming up this coming year? Actually, in 2017, 2018, business, the program ends in 2016. We don't have a hope of continuing to serve the numbers of children that we're currently serving in the city and county of Denver. And I think that that's incredibly important for us to do. In addition to that, I think when we think about the income levels of our children and I'm taking a look at what our our Denver population is. We have. Looking at about 50% of our children are below the at at the poverty line or below. And then we have another group of children that are free and reduced price lunch. The Denver Preschool Program really reaches out and serves our children at the poverty level and at free and reduced price lunch, which as you know , is 185% of FPL. And it's those children that we're able to provide higher tuition credits and make sure that they're in high quality programs. And this preschool program gets them ready for kindergarten so that we can hand them off to Denver Public Schools or they're already in Denver Public Schools being funded in part through CDP and help them be successful that third grade, help them graduate from high school ready to go on to college. And I think it all begins at our youngest kids and at four and and has we all know one of the changes in the ordinance that we've talked about is when we are able through revenue and different other policy changes to serve younger. So I think it becomes very important and I think and I've said this before, I think it's a jewel of the city and that Denver was very forward thinking in 2006 to create this program. And it's something that I think we need to sustain. Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilwoman Arroyo. Thank you, Mr. President. Jennifer. Jennifer, you can stay there. I'm a strong supporter of this program. Denver tried at least one other time before 2006 to put in place a preschool program. And I think we just indicated by what other city, how other cities are looking at us. I think we got this as close to right as we could. But on behalf of a constituent query, I want you to talk a little bit about administrative costs, because the program that we passed had a cap of, I believe, 5% for salaries, office expense insurance. And in this reauthorization, we're taking that to 7%. So could you talk about the number of staff you have and the needs of the program going forward from the administrative level? Sure. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Robb. Yeah, the program does have a 5% administrative cap. And as we go forward, we have asked for an additional 2%. And the admin does cover salaries, accounting benefits, office space. And one thing that that you did not mention, which is with our legal costs. So it's the kind of wraps up basic admin. Right now, our city revenues are $13.4 million, 592,000 of that is the administrative portion. The 2%, if we look just at this year, 2% would drop in an additional $346,000 into the program, bringing us to a total of 938,000. I think the Denver preschool program right now consists of four staff and a part time office manager, a 40% office manager that we sell we share with the Urban Land Conservancy. I think one of the primary reasons that we are asking for a 2% increase is is not to go out and go crazy and spend an additional $346,000. But it's really two things. We need to be able to recruit and retain highly qualified staff. And we we have struggled with that. And this past year, we needed to hire a director of operations. And we we had to not have that salary at the place that would have really been competitive in our community. We also want to be able to have equity equity across salary positions. And right now it's not we don't necessarily have an equity across all salary positions. Our plans and we've taken a deep look at what we would like to do. We do feel we need one extra staff person to really manage this program well. The majority of our program is managed through contractors, and I think if we had one extra staff person, that was a really strong support for the three directors. In addition to myself, I think we could do a better job. The other just very basic reason that we've asked for this is when we have the economic downturns. If that is, it becomes another reason why it's difficult to recruit and retain staff just because of the fluctuations, the dips in salary if they were to happen, if we had. Bad ones that such as the one we had in 2010, we would actually lose a staff person. What we don't lose are the numbers of children that we're serving, the number of families we're trying to reach, the number of contractors we're trying to manage, the evaluation that we're trying to undertake. So I think it's a very small investment to create greater stability in the program. And I hope that answers your question thoroughly. Could you just you did bring up one other thing. You talked about you work with some contract folks. Are they considered administrative or are they people doing outreach perhaps, or other jobs that fall outside of that category? So our contractors fall in in a very variety of places. We have customer service and enrollment. We have evaluation. We have communications and outreach. Quality improvement and quality rating contractors. And then, of course, the majority of our dollars go into tuition credits. I took a look at this. I had a conversation with one of one of the council members who who she and I had a very rich conversation around this. So I went back and I looked at it. And if we added in customer service and enrollment and evaluation, which I could make the case would be administrative costs . Our admin, our current admin is 10.3%. Okay. I heard that in committee. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Thank you, Jennifer. Do we have any other questions from members of council, steve. None. The public hearing on 574 is closed now. Time for comments of members of council Councilman Brooks. Thank you, Mr. President. When I I got elected four years ago, I had all these grandiose dreams of of all of the promises that I talked about on the campaign trail. And preschool was not one of them. And Carol Boykin, who was the council representative, had moved on. She was no longer she was term limited and she wasn't term limited for she term. She ran for mayor. That's right. Which limits terms. And so she was no longer on council. And the Denver preschool program found out that I had two kids that I lived in northeast Denver and asked if I'd be a part of the board. And at that time, my thinking was, well, you know, there's a lot of other things that I'm doing. I want to, you know, kind of focus my area on economic development, some other things. And little did I know that this was the main indicator of a good job force a good workforce in our city. And it was one of the most important decisions that I made four years ago. And I'm excited that I did, did it. We're here today because we're at a crossroads in America and all over this country. We are finding that we have third graders that are not that can't read, that are not doing well in math in the third grade, not testing well at all. And that is a 97% correlation to graduation rates in high school. 97%, if you are not if you cannot read, if you if you are not up to your skills in math by the third rate, that is a 97% correlation that you and I graduate. And then if you are not graduate from high school, there's a 99% correlation that you'll go right into the justice system. And so this is a serious issue that we're facing. And we see that data shows that early childhood education is the key. It's the foundation to begin to change this horrible trend that's going on in America and even in Colorado and in Denver. And so I'm excited to support this. Couple of weeks ago, we were in mayor council in the mayor said this was his most important vote on his eight short years on council. And I kind of sat there and looked at him, you know, because you never know. You know, we're all political leaders here, you know. Did he really mean that? And you could look in his eyes and I talked to him a little bit after and he really meant it. And as I think and I began to reflect on on what this means for our city, how this can really turn the trend around in education in our city, our city, I would say the same thing. Each council person will have to assess that for themselves. But I would say the same thing. This is the most important vote since I've been on city council. I think it's the most important thing that we have to do. My kids care is to Kenya is five and Mochi is seven. Kenya and Mochi have both been through this program and they're doing great and and Kenya is going to host center next year. Really excited about that. And she'll eventually be in the different preschool program. I'm not here because of my kids because at the end of the day, they're their parents are going to read to them every night. We're going to make sure that they're going to succeed. I'm here because of their friends, all of their friends in the coal neighborhood who are living below the poverty line, who aren't going to class, who aren't in school, who aren't doing well, whose parents aren't investing in them. I'm doing this because at the end of the day, if we can get those students engaged, if we can get those students a part of that 99% kindergarten ready, a part of that 64% testing, well, in third grade, that will begin to see a change in this city. And I believe that as we begin to grow this program, as we begin to invest in our future, we're going to see a tremendous change in the city. I want to I want to give a special thanks to Councilwoman Lehman, my sponsor, on this bill. She has a tremendous heart for for early childhood education. And you'll hear her remarks and also want to give special thanks to Jennifer Landrum, who is the CEO of this program and who we as a board hired less than a year ago to make sure that she would reauthorize this this program. And you've done a fabulous job. You know, you're good when when David Broadwell comes up to you after after a committee and say that was one of the best committee presentations I've heard in a long time. So job well done, Jennifer. Tomorrow starts now. Tomorrow starts now. And I want to encourage all of my city council colleagues to vote in this way and support this and send this to the ballot and send a strong message to the city of Denver that we need to reauthorize this program. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Brooks, Councilwoman Lemon. Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to take a moment to recognize. The queen of early. Childhood education and a Joe Haines. Would you just stand up and actually. She has been my guiding light through all of this. And I think she just perseveres and perseveres. And we are here. Today because of the ANA Jo's insights and efforts. So thank you. I'll be very quick when I'm just going to go down the things that I think are really great about this program. It's number one, it serves all families. Any family that. Wants hears about it, knows about it can get served by this program. Number two, there is an evaluation process, a strong evaluation process in the program so that the schools that are serving these children are graded and evaluated so that our children go to very, very good schools because we work with them to be very, very good schools. And therefore, it. Addresses the kind of education that they are getting. And finally. They serve as such a base, as you have heard tonight for the Denver Children's Future, that how can you not support this? So I ask all of you to be strong supporters. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Lehman and Councilwoman Kim each. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you to all of the speakers who came out tonight and who many of you serve on boards and volunteer with this program. Our Serve Children. And Raise Children. I have a graduate of DPI. In two short weeks he'll be entering kindergarten. And so one of the things I wanted to emphasize is I think that it's a really smart move that we are collectively saying and doing this program. We had some conversation about this at the committee. It's not just about helping individuals who are struggling pay for preschool. It is that and that's really important. You heard $800 a month as one price tag DPS. My son's a Denison Montessori DPS school. It's a little bit less a month, I think 660 a month. But it's not easy even for middle class families to be putting out that much cash on a monthly basis. So it is about the financial assistance, but by virtue of having it collective and having the evaluation and the rating system, quality is improved for every parent , whether or not you needed the financial resources or not. And that's really important. Our schools are one of the places where we do still have some mix of incomes. In some places I realize it's not always is as distributed as we would like it to be, but every time you have an improvement in quality, it benefits those who need it. The financial assistance is the as well as those who do not. And so for me, that's really critical. You know, having watched particularly the DPS deliver this program within. A school. Was really quite astounding in terms of the quality of the staffing, the services that they had. I remember talking to one of our instructors, one of the paraprofessionals, and saying, I spent the day learning about how to talk about science with preschoolers, you know, so it was really quite, quite impressive. So so I want to just remind our public about these benefits, about whether or not you actually need this financial assistance. And it makes the difference between going to school or not, which many of these families do or the benefits that we all receive as parents and. As these kids. Grow into our community. So thank you for what you do, and I'll be proud to support this and thank Councilman Brooks for his leadership. Thank you, Councilwoman Canete. Councilwoman Fox. Thank you, Mr. President. I know for many of the enthusiasts that have come tonight and who believe so just so firmly in this program, that it may be hard to believe that a person who really has worked for children all of her life and who worked at the state level to enhance the Colorado preschool program year after year would not be supportive of this program. But I am not and I want to explain some of the things that come into this from my point of view, so that people can understand why is it that perhaps a city program is not seen as the answer to me? First of all, it was talked about children who outperform those who have not gone to preschool. I have no quarrel with that comment. The only thing that I have discovered is that the data cannot break out the program that is actually dealing with the child. They can't work out data from the Denver Preschool Program versus the Colorado preschool. Program versus C cap versus Head Start. All of the data is lumped together. And so when you talk about the advantages that children have, the number that you have is that collective amount of advantage. I don't know what extent Colorado Preschool or Denver Preschool Program has in that, nor any of the others. But I do know that all the people I have talked to have confirmed the fact that the numbers are smushed together. And you can't say that this is a great success for one of the programs versus another of the programs versus another of the programs. I do want to comment on the administrative costs because I can't as I say, I've been a strong supporter of the Colorado Preschool Program, is primarily an at risk program, which I have felt money was certainly well spent on. And when I was in the state legislature, I always tried to increase that line item because so much of that money came to Denver. We did get by far a large, disproportionate amount when you looked at the state. So it's a good way to funnel money. Here are administrative costs of what they're actually finding is administrative costs are about the same as running the Colorado preschool program, $70 million program, versus a $15 million program. So the economy of scale is something that's important to me. I would have far rather had the Colorado Preschool Program expand than to add another entire level. And I have talked about my concern about the administrative costs. I'm pleased to hear that that we are talking about adding other things in. But 10% still doesn't get there because to me, when you take a look at the budget, I do have the budget and the numbers of things that are not included in administrative costs come up to about 10%. Part of that would actually then be 12% if we take a look at this increase in the media contracts that have just come up. Now, I'm pleased that you explained that we're not reaching a certain number of children. And that's part of the reason, because I was going to ask, what is the reason for a 43% increase in media contracts this year? I mean, surely it isn't because there's an election possibly coming up. So what was the reason? Those are those particular programs that they're contracting with CBS Outdoor Billboards, RTD, Comcast Radio. I personally like the idea that Councilman Brooks raised. Of working with our human rights are always human services. That's where you're going to meet more of the kids that are going to be needing the service, not the parents and kids who read billboards or who happen to try to read all the advertising in the RTD shelters. You have to spend the money wisely. Now, 43% this year. Increase in that makes me concerned about this economy of scale and what we are spending on overhead. When you put it all together, I add without that extra 2%, it was going to be with an increase in in the cost, there's going to be 17% now could be up to 19% if you keep that kind of spending on media contracts. So that's just too high for a program that right now has a $15 million pot. And you're hoping with this increase to get a $19 million pot. I don't believe it's the best way to go about it. If the voters were to decide they did not want a tax increase and they did not want higher administrative costs, they could say no this year. And yes, I realize people will back to reauthorize the program. They still have time. It doesn't end till the end of December 2016. So the the future of the program is not at stake. It's whether you want to increase the tax and whether you want to increase administrative expense. I do not want to do either. And I will be voting against it. Thank you, Councilwoman Fatima and Councilwoman Shepherd. Thank you, Mr. President. I was hoping that Ms.. Romero was still here because I just wanted to compliment her on her testimony tonight. She was the I believe she was a preschool teacher. Correct. That offered her testimony. And I thought, you know, we talk a lot about kindergarten readiness, but nobody really knows what that means. But she spelled it out very clearly in her testimony tonight. You know, you might think that, you know, picking up pens or colors, you know, and drawing with them comes naturally to all children, just to name one of the skills she mentioned or even book handling. But the truth is that that's not the case, and it's not necessarily a matter of income or intelligence or anything of that nature. I like to speak about this from a personal level. My son had, as a young child, displayed what I would call a tactile phobia and really did not like to pick up lots of different kinds of things and touch them and manipulate them, as most children do. Consequently, he never picked up things like Play-Doh and learned the strength and the dexterity skills that you get from playing with a substance like that. Consequently, he did not develop pinching skills very well for a long time, so he started in the preschool program actually at age three, and then also of course took advantage of the Denver preschool program activities at age four. But it wasn't until about halfway through kindergarten that he really mastered, you know, that ability to grasp an object, pinch an object like this, to put it to paper and actually, you know, write something that we might recognize as letters. That is just a very personal story about, you know, how I experience this path to kindergarten readiness in my own home. And we cannot a lot of those things that Ms.. Romero described, you know, I think we take for granted that, you know, most children are just going to naturally develop those, you know, those skills on their own. But they don't that doesn't happen naturally in all households, which underscores so much why we need these educational opportunities so that people like Ms.. Romero are not having to have a kindergartner repeat the class again just to gain those basic skills, not to mention all the good testimony that we've heard tonight about how mastering the , you know, these these very basic beginning skills at a young age creates a foundation on which we can build all these other skills, which leads to, you know, folks actually graduating from college and being ready in the market, you know, as Councilman Brooks has so eloquently expressed tonight, you know, and then ready to, you know, become like what we call a contributing member of society. So all of those steps are just tiny building blocks that we that we build on. And they need to be available to all children equally to help level that playing field and give kids that best leg up like, you know, from the gate straight out of the chute. So, you know, I really get this in a very real way, having experienced some of these issues at home. And I am very happy to support this tonight and recommend that it be put on the ballot so that all our Denver residents can vote on this, this evening. And I thank you all for all your testimony this evening. And if someone should see Ms.. Romero, please tell her my gratitude on helping to really explain what it means to be kindergarten ready. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Sheperd. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank my colleagues for working on this. I want to thank the group for actually, you know, coalescing identifying this as a priority in moving forward with this. I, too, am the proud papa of a of a now second grader who went through the program and, you know, started very little. She started reading when she was three years old. She started reading and she was three. I didn't start reading in 2 hours. My wife, kindergartner, first grade, maybe 14. But no, I education is it's as a human right. This is something when you go on and you take this on a global scale and you ask folks a question like this, like we're talking about putting on the ballot tonight and it's a no brainer. It's a no brainer. Who does not want an educated society? We as a country have we have a lot to catch up on. This is a this is a standard that we are not holding the flag on. We're not holding the standard when it comes to this. We are no longer the standard. Right. And I think for us, we have to snap out of that mentality. We have to snap out of the mentality that will pay an arm and a leg for a football stadium in a jail. But we won't educate our children. We'll tax ourselves to put a half a billion dollar stadium in our city boat. We're penny pinching when it comes to the education of our children. We're so happy to build jail and courthouses, but we penny pinch when it comes to the education of our children. Think about that. And I think, Councilman Brooks, you're absolutely right. The mayor, I've heard the same thing. They look at I think they measure second or third grade beds, the amount of kids in terms of their reading level and how they're performing on tests, that's how they measure the amount of beds they need in jails. That's ridiculous. So when it comes to this, is this is the investment, the best investment we can make. And, you know, does this build a shiny new granite building with gold trim and something we can say, aha, look what our tax dollars built overnight? No, but over time, it's the best investment we can make. Thank God for the folks like Anna, Joe Haines, and for the other folks that have worked, those teachers in our classrooms as preschool to high school and college professors that have worked and worked over time, even though they didn't have budgets, seem like to pull from their own pockets to pay for their supplies in their classrooms. Thank God that 30 years ago, 40 years ago, that they invested because a lot of us in this room wouldn't be here if it were not for that investment. We need to do more and we need to regain that flag. We need to capture that flag back. We need to be the standard in the world when it comes to preschool education in this country, in this city and in this world. And this is one of those first little steps that we can take. Think about it. Think about what we have spent our money on. You know what? We can be strong. I support this move forward onto the ballot and I hope this gets adopted by voters in November. Thank you. Thank. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Councilman Nemeth. Thank you, Mr. President. When we embarked on the preschool program eight years ago, we weren't we weren't buying a pig in a poke. There was good scientific data that suggested that we were making the right move, doing the right thing, but we were taking a risk. We were somewhat on the cutting edge. And so there's a there's a a gamble there that we took. And the voters of Denver took. But eight years later, the data is in the the you know, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And that meal has now been served, or at least the first course of it. And it's delicious. It's it's good. It's it's it's proving its value. And so it's certainly no longer a pig in a poke. It's it's a sure bet. And I appreciate Mr. Aspas reference to it as an investment, not just the right thing to do, but a good investment in the future. And I think the value of this investment is being borne out in spades. So I'll be voting to put this on the ballot. I'll certainly be encouraging my constituents and other citizens in the city to to vote for this. If you care about the future of our kids, this is the right thing to do. And if you care about the future of our city, it's the smart thing to do. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Monteiro. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you all for coming out tonight and testifying and being volunteers. I'm sure that it's a labor of love and share commitment to the children of Denver. What I want to say is that in listening to the testimony tonight and just following the the thought of Councilman Ebert is that we know that it works. We know that it's been proven. You've talked about it, Councilman. Never talked about the data. And how often are we able to say that we know something works? Shoot. Even public works. Sometimes they're over there working on some kind of sewer and they're hoping that it works. And maybe it will. And maybe it'll sprung a leak. But we know, we absolutely know without a shadow of a doubt that this program works for it works for our children. And so this November, should this pass, should the proposal pass? Should it pass council tonight? I'm a yes vote. But this November, Denver voters will have a great opportunity to re pledge their commitment to our children and also to our to our families. I'm just going to digress really quick here, but one of the really big things that I think is so nice should this pass, is the idea that the summer programs would be reinstated. I got to tell you, my daughter now is 14 and this is the first summer that I've actually counted. Okay? There's only 15 more days until school starts. And so, you know, I think of her now as a teenager, but when you have three and four year old four year olds, it's so important for parents to have the predictability. We're going to do this today. We're going to go here and there. It helps the children to continue their learning and all the cute little things that they do. But it also really helps to eliminate stress for a family, which at the end of the day, we're all happy. If, you know, did they get did they get up on time? Did they eat right? You know, how am I feeling today? You know, just to be able to have a day that a family has truly enjoyed without all the other things that go with just life in general. And for this particular program, just to lift a family up one more day as their parenting or as kids are going through, learning all these little things, you know, building self-confidence , wanting to, you know, wanting to be a self advocate, wanting to read, wanting to throw stuff, you know, wanting to do anything that we watched them do as children. It's so exciting. And watching three year olds, just their little you can actually see their little brain sort of, you know, it's on fire because they're so excited about life and the things that they want to do. And so I just want to say that I am very, very excited to be. Able to cast a yes vote so that we could get it on the ballot. And let's go forward and let's have fun and have our kids see how excited and are all the people that work with children every day and have them see how excited we are to be able to prop up our families and our children and to be proud of this particular program. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilman Brooks. Yeah, just I just had some housekeeping real quick that I wanted to clear up, just just for our council members and the thousands of people who are watching and the folks who decide to show up tonight. And Mr. Slattery, just make sure that I'm right on this. But on the ordinance changes, the ordinance changes will go to it to effect as soon as the mayor signs them. So that won't take too long. But the ballot the ballot question, if should this pass the ballot question goes into effect January 1st, 2050. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. So I just wanted all of our counsel folks to be aware of that and that will reauthorize in 2026. Okay. All right. Thank you. Councilman Brooks, do we have any other comments from members of council? I would just like to add, I come from a family of educators. Mother is a teacher and I know several educators. And I just think about the great deal of work and that they put into mentoring that our kids get a quality education. And I remember a conversation I had with a kindergarten teacher and she's talking about struggles. And she she mentioned one student in particular who at kindergarten had never opened a book. And the only way to describe that is a tragedy. And when I was growing up in Missouri, when we talked about early childhood education, I didn't participate because at the time they thought early childhood education should be solely for those children with special needs. And thankfully, science and history have proven how vital that is. And now as a country, we're seeing the emphasis of it. And programs that are coming to fruition like the Denver Preschool Program. And the success that it has had, I think, is not is unquestionable. And for that matter that we're simply doing here is to ask, should Denver voters have the opportunity to reauthorize that? It's just certainly a no brainer. I mean, the proof is in the pudding what has occurred. And I think that the best thing we can do is make investments. And those investments should be in people because as I believe, as Mr. Asper said, the returns you can get out of those investments are tenfold that have a max . And I think about this, too, if we can come to a point as a son of an educator where all the children come in and they even level even keel, how much of a more of a quality education can our teachers give those students versus having them focus on those that are behind trying to bring them up to the same level as their peers? I mean, that's certainly an ancillary benefit of this, but I think that's just another gain of this program. Does that bring everyone on an even keel? So I certainly think it's very easy to vote yes that the Denver voters should have the opportunity to make this decision on the November ballot . So. Madam Secretary, roll call. Brooks. I. Brown. Fats. No. Can eat. Damon Lopez. Monteiro. Nevitt. Hi. Ortega. Hi, Rob. Sheppard. Hi, Mr. President. Hi. Madam Secretary. Please close the vote and announce the results. Ten 192918 Is Council Bill 574 been placed upon final consideration and does pass saying that there is no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Sections 5.90.030 and 5.90.060, by adding Section 5.90.310; and, by amending and restating chapter 5.92, all relating to the regulation of cannabis retail storefront (dispensary) business licenses and the Cannabis Social Equity Program, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05102022_22-0515

Thank you very much. That concludes the Open General Comment section. So we're going to move on to item 28, which is an ordinance and I know there's a staff presentation on it. So we will go ahead and have the item read and then move on to staff. Report from City Manager Recommendation to clear ordinance relating to the regulation of Cannabis Retail, Storefront Business License and the Cannabis Social Equity Program. Read the first time and later to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and to adopt a resolution to establish a request for proposals for cannabis retail storefronts citywide. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an item that came from the Council to provide direction to bring additional dispensaries for equity applicants to the Council for consideration. There's been a lot of work, a lot of research and a lot of outreach. And I will turn it over to Emily Armstrong to walk us through this fairly complex presentation of a very important subject. Thank you, Emily. Thank you. All right. So good evening, honorable mayor and members of the city council. Tonight, I'm happy to present to you the equity dispensary ordinance and resolution for your approval. So to provide some history on this item. In October of last year, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance allowing up to eight new dispensary licenses to be issued to verified equity applicants. The City Council directed staff to focus on a merit based RFP process that did not include a lottery to select the eight applicants eligible for a license, as well as expand the Green Zone for dispensaries in Long Beach by reducing certain sensitive use buffers. In addition, the City Council also directed staff to prepare an ordinance to allow equity delivery businesses in the city. That ordinance will be presented to the City Council after the zoning amendment has been approved by the Planning Commission in the next few months. So to start, I will be providing an overview of the key provisions in the Equity Dispensary Ordinance. To prepare the ordinance and resolutions staff researched best practices and consulted other cities, as well as held discussions internally and with equity applicants in the program. The outreach to equity applicants included an online survey, an in-person interactive workshop and an in-person town hall meeting. The key pieces of the ordinance include adding up to eight new dispensary licenses issued to equity applicants, which will be selected through a competitive RFP process. These dispensary licenses will be able to hold both a medical and adult use license, similar to the existing 32 dispensary licenses. Lastly, to expand the Green Zone for these dispensaries, staff has identified buffer amendments to certain sensitive uses as part of the expansion. Staff is recommending a six month moratorium on the existing 32 dispensaries being able to move locations into a newly expanded Green Zone area to allow the equity dispensaries time to find a viable location without additional potential competition. The buffers that are being reduced in the ordinance include buffers for schools, parks and beaches. However, these will be replaced by buffers for playgrounds and community centers, which will continue to buffer cannabis dispensaries from some parks and beaches in the city. Continuing our focus on the equity dispensaries, I would now like to discuss the resolution which establishes the guidelines and procedures for how the eight equity dispensary applicants will be selected through the RFP process. The intent of the RFP process is to create a fair and equitable process that utilizes criteria that evaluates the ability for the applicant or applicants to successfully apply for and operate a dispensary in Long Beach. To be eligible for the RFP process, you must either be a current verified equity applicant in the equity program or you must qualify for the equity program under the eligibility criteria that is in place as of the date that the RFP is advertised. Individuals that are not currently in the program will be able to submit their verification application documents along with their proposal for the dispensary license. If an individual meets the equity program eligibility criteria, they will be verified as an equity applicant during the RFP process by staff from the Office of Cannabis Oversight. If an individual does not meet the equity program eligibility requirements, their proposal will be deemed non-responsive and they will be disqualified from the RFP. Proposals may be submitted by one applicant or a group of equity applicants. However, no individual may be identified in more than one proposal. In addition, only one equity applicant per household may submit a proposal. The RFP will be reviewed and scored by a panel similar to a traditional RFP. However, members of the panel will be voluntary, anonymous and will not consist of panelists from Long Beach. Panelists will consist of individuals who have expertize in economic or business development, involvement in social equity matters, and or cannabis business regulators in another jurisdiction. The panelists will be selected by members of the Economic Development Department to reduce any bias in the process. The proposals will be evaluated by the panelists based on the categories you see on the screen. The specific evaluation criteria is currently being developed by staff from the Office of Cannabis Oversight, Financial Management and Economic Development and will not be made public until after the RFP process has concluded. As part of the RFP, applicants must also certify in their proposals that they will remain equity owned and will not transfer ownership to a non equity business for a period of five years from the issuance of the dispensary business license, as well as certify that they will obtain the license within three years from the date they are selected to move forward in the licensing process. Now that we've gone through the guidelines, I would like to walk through the steps of the RFP process. So first staff will conduct a stakeholder meeting to provide details on the RFP process, go over how to submit proposals and answer any questions applicants may have about the process. Next, the RFP will be posted on the city's procurement portal for 30 days, where applicants can submit their proposals. Unlike a traditional RFP, this RFP will pose questions and include response fields to make it easier for equity applicants to submit their proposals. Then once all proposals have been submitted and the submission period is closed, staff from OCA will evaluate the applicant's eligibility in the equity program. Individuals that do not provide the appropriate documents and who do not meet the eligibility criteria will be disqualified from the process. Anybody who does qualify will be able to move forward. For those that are deemed eligible, their proposal will be forwarded to the panelists for review and scoring, using the evaluation criteria and rubric established by staff. Scores will be compiled by OCO staff and the 16 proposals with the highest scores will move on to the interview phase of the RFP. They will be interviewed by the RFP panel using standardized questions to gauge their fitness to open and operate a dispensary. The RFP panel will then select the top eight equity applicants using a forest ranking process. Once the top eight are selected, the city will post the intent to award at least ten days before the award is made. Applicants who are not selected are able to submit a protest with the city's purchasing agent, who will evaluate the protest to verify if there is merit. Once the protest period has concluded, the eight equity applicants awarded will be able to move forward in the dispensary licensing process. During the RFP process, the equity applicant will not be required to have a property identified. Staff will assist and provide resources to the eight equity applicants to help find a viable location for their dispensary business. Once they have been awarded to move forward. This slide outlines the proposed timeline for the process. Staff anticipates releasing the RFP shortly after the ordinance takes effect in July, and the process is anticipated to take approximately 4 to 6 months to complete. The eight equity applicants will likely be selected around November to begin the licensing process. In addition to the equity dispensary process, the ordinance also outlined some updates to the equity program. So first off, is proposing to strengthen the equity program criteria to ensure the grants and assistance are provided to individuals most impacted by the war on drugs. Currently, individuals must have a family income below 80% of the area median income, and they either have to have lived in an eligible language census tract for at least three years or have a personal cannabis arrest or conviction. And up until July of last year, individuals could also qualify if they were currently receiving unemployment benefits in addition to meeting the income requirement. As you can see on the screen, under the current criteria, the majority of equity applicants have qualified under the residency criteria and or the unemployment criteria, and very few have qualified under the cannabis arrest or conviction requirement. Therefore, Staff is proposing to amend the equity program eligibility criteria to require individuals to have a family income below 80% of the army and to have lived in an eligible Long Beach census tract for at least five years. And to either have a personal cannabis arrest or conviction or have an immediate family member with a cannabis arrest or conviction. In addition to the eligibility criteria, the ordinance also includes a requirement that all equity businesses remain equity owned for a period of five years from the time they submit an application before they can transfer ownership to a non equity business as well as a one member per household policy. So that grant funds and assistance can be evenly distributed to applicants across the equity program. That concludes my report and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. And I just want to also just thank you and the staff for the presentation and the work to get us here. Another still council discussion and we want to hear from the public. Unless there is any objection, I'm going to have public comment and then we'll go back to the council. So we will read the first five members of the public who are set to speak, and then we'll do the next set. Just as a reminder for council rules, if ever we hit over ten people on any specific item, the 90 seconds gets gets gets hit because of the length of items. So as a reminder, I think there's there's a more than ten on this item as it probably will be for a few others. And so I'll turn it over to the clerk to get us through public comment. Well, the first. Five speakers, please line up first. Anthony Souza. Jovi. Davis. Eliot Lewes Sinai campaign and Tamika Boyce. You have 90. Seconds. Mr. Mayor, city council members, staff does a great job. You put together I know you guys been working really, really hard on it. We've been following it and it feels like we're getting a lot closer. First of all, my name is Anthony Souza, and I've been part of the city of Long Beach my whole life. I went graduated here from St Anthony's High School. I own businesses here. I own commercial, retail and residential properties here. My my kids live here. My grandkids live here. My nieces and nephews live here. So I've been part of this. I'm also currently an owner of a dispensary here in the city of Long Beach. I'm here today to briefly talk about the social equity program that's being considered. I have four points and that's it, I think. And the criteria should be as objective as possibly can. I feel is very important that the criteria as objective there should be not be a subjective inherent bias and be an objective that the applicant should have requirements which would include a minimum site location along with the business plan. I feel that it's hard and I went through the last application. Yeah, it's hard to qualify everybody and rank everybody. And I think the lottery is a very subjective way to process after. And so basically my second point is a lottery. If the applicants meet the requirements or applications would be eligible for a lottery when the eligible applicant. Thank you. What? I'm done. Okay. I didn't realize it so quick. Okay. Two more points and all. I won't. I won't go buffer zones. I think it should be a thousand feet from Kate K to 12 and 15, 1500 feet from dispensary. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Okay. Jodi Davis. Hi, everyone. My name is Jovi. I am a social equity applicant that you're speaking about. I just want to bring to the council's attention the obstacles facing social equity applicants in the city when it pertains to lack of capital and obtaining in a location. There's currently 32 dispensaries in the city, and most of them are multi-location or multistate operators with deep pockets, and they have all of the prime locations in our city. And what I'm asking is for the city's assistance with helping social equity applicants differentiate ourselves from these other competitions. I'm asking that you grant us the exclusivity to host consumption events. I feel that there is a demand for that. I feel that people are asking for these things, and I feel that this is a way for us to connect with our community. I feel that it would bring in a lot of the tourism that you're looking for, for coming in the city. And I feel that this should be exclusive to social equity applicants. We oftentimes when we're looking to investors and we're asking them for money, they're asking us, well, how are you different from the competition? How are you different from the other 32 dispensaries in the city that have money? They had the location that have all of the the brand deals. And I think that being able to host events and connect with our community would be a great way for us to boost our businesses. So thank you. Thank you. Elliot Lewis. Elliott Lewis, owner of Cannabis Cannabis Co. Look, you know, I can't get it all in a minute. Throw. Everybody who knows knows. Cannabis has been supporting this item since day one. So we're glad to see City Council move it through. I'm also really happy that we're moving on the tax issue. Great job. In addition to that, the letter to the state. I do want to say one thing. The cities are starting to move and that's great. And we're moving on social equity and we're moving on taxes. But at the end of the day, who's really sticking it to us is the state. And if we want to make any progress in this fight for cannabis businesses, not just social equity businesses get equal treatment under the law. We need to go down and chase down our state representatives. Senator Gonzalez needs to step up and get into this fight. Patrick O'Donnell needs to step up and get into this fight. The letter is a first step. I appreciate it. But if we move taxes from 8 to 6, we're going to take that entire hit. The state is the one that's oppressively taxing us. They have a $60 billion surplus and the taxes on cannabis is less than $1,000,000,000. It doesn't make any sense. We need equal treatment under the law. We need you guys to put the pressure on the state representatives. All this is great. I love Long Beach being progressive on cannabis. I tip my cap to everybody who's been involved that move this issue along. As you know, we support social equity. But none of this is going to work if we don't do the work at the state. They're the ones sticking it to the industry. Will the next few speakers please line up? James Marx, Julien Xavier, Muriel Burrill, Nate Boles and Dmitri Woodard Sunday Campaign. Um, I think a great staff presentation. I have to say respectfully, I don't know if the office of cannabis oversize appropriate administrator for this program. Um. Respectfully I think that it should be a DTI certified firm that is going to be run in that RFP panel. Um, economic development has some great people on the team, but I don't necessarily know if there's an equity lens inherent within that body. So if there is to be an emphasis on, you know, creating more opportunities for people that were being afflicted by the war on drugs, then I think we we as a city have to do a better job in actually facilitating that. We just had an applicant just so eloquently. She she, you know, brought forward the adversities that a lot of these businesses are dealing with. I would be curious to see or know how many people who have gone through the social equity program here in the city of Long Beach, who are a dispensary owner today or even in remaining in the cannabis space. I know for me in the six district we have a we already have a buffer zone being impacted by on the on the Pacific Avenue cultivation, people who are just across the street from YMCA. So I just think that if equity is to be taken serious, the city has to step up. Thank you. To meet the. Voice. Good evening, City Council. One of the things that I needed to get up and speak about after watching the resolution that Emily just presented is that we have to note one of the key points in it is that people will be allowed to enter into the RFP and the dispensary application process without being a verified social equity applicant on the front end. That absolutely flies in the face of every other social equity applicant who has been in this process since 2018, two current that have gone through the process and been waiting and trying to find the barriers and to lower the barriers to entry into to get into the business. I think it's absolutely ridiculous to even consider letting other people come and just jump the line. Now that there's an opportunity for retail dispensaries, additional retail dispensaries within the city, please reconsider that piece of the resolution. Thank you. James Marks. The. 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution is an amendment to the United States Constitution that was adopted in 1868, granted citizenship, an equal set of civil and legal rights to African-Americans and enslaved people who have been emancipated after the Civil War. And it read Section one. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which celebrates abridge. The synonym is curtailed to less and reduce or decrease the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. Nor shall any state deprive any persons of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor denied to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. So what we are asking under the Constitution of the United States, under the 14th Amendment, is an opportunity to play on an equal playing field, along with the immediate dismissal of Emily Armstrong, who was in Office of Inequity, due to her continued guardianship of past institutionalized racism and our current recent implementation of practices that are blatantly racist . And her disregard for the impact that the war jurors have had and still had on black communities in the city of Long Beach. We request someone who fully innocence the devastation of the war on black people in the black community here in the city of Long Beach. By removing Emily Armstrong from that office. We can surely start the journey of writing many wrongs by remaining true to the spirit of the unanimous City Council vote and other departments citywide acknowledging racism as a public health crisis. We can begin. And then can we? Only your time. Thank you. It all starts with accountability. With that comes a great deal of responsibility, which is the ability to respond. Also, yes. The responsibility for. Thank you very much, sir. Gillian Merry. Jillian Xavier is next. Mary Ellen, speak first and then I'll go. Joanne, I'll go next. Thank you. Great evening, everyone, with giving all glory and honor to God. I have a letter here written by the LBC, which is a Long Beach social equity entrepreneurs, and that would be who was standing behind me this letter to notify the city of Long Beach and other authorities responsible for the licensing and regulation of social equity cannabis businesses in the city, that they are not in compliance with the previously written policies or the framework for reconciliation. We seek accountability and amendments to recent policies enacted by the Office of Cannabis Oversight regarding cannabis technical assistance, funding the regulation regarding who is eligible to apply, and privacy protection for the intellectual property of each applicant in the form of an NDA signed agreement. The US and the City of Long Beach have a history of racist policies and practices that have hurt black residents and other communities of color. The city of Long Beach is currently guilty of this ongoing practice. We are requesting a full independent investigation into the aforesaid and requesting additional amendments to your current policies and procedures that further exacerbate the progression of black people. Systemic racism occurs when institutions and organizations such as municipalities and government agencies and their officials adopt and maintain policies that routinely produce inequitable outcomes for people of color and advantages for white people such as past redlining and the current policies and procedures that are in place by the Office of Equity, which is also the Office of Inequity . Before I continue this letter, I want to address an elephant in the room. So we were at the town hall meeting and you guys said, Well, we're going to do changes to the equity grant program. We're going to go from 445 to 80000. Right. The question was asked them as Emily Armstrong, any applicant put in the application prior to April 1st, would they be grandfathered in? The woman repeated. The question that we asked disappeared for a week and came back and said, Oh, Jillian, you know, I misunderstood the question, but you repeated the question. You can't just insult us. We've been here since 2018, and you bring in other people to come. And do what? The application process for our dispensaries is closed. You've got more than enough. You got 40 people in the room. 32 people not going to make it. You got to give us a chance to make it. Give us what we need, and here's what we'll do in exchange. You give us the funding. In exchange, we will donate back into the program to help the next person. That's an even exchange of services, right? That makes more sense than having $1,000,000, giving ten people a hundred thousand and half a million to get into the business to a million. So ten people failed. That's ridiculous. That's a failing grade. That's a f. You lied. Thank you. Your tongue said get rid of her. For the next few speakers, line up. Jose Hernandez. Danielle Lopez. Carlos Cepeda. Good evening. City Council members. My name is enables. I'm a social equity applicant here in the city of Long Beach and owner of the Good Smoke Company Cannabis brand based out of Long Beach. The city needs to get it together as far as social equity and creating a process to see these licenses through. We need to create a common sense approach and to continue the letter from my colleagues in the Long Beach. Social equity entrepreneurs matters such as current policies passed or not passed funding invested or not invested directly affect the quality of life in Long Beach neighborhoods that have been and are still being grievously targeted and impacted by such policies. Overpolicing and racism. All one has to do is a data check, a fact checked on the arrest and convictions when it comes to neighborhoods of color. Although cannabis is legal, it's almost as though being black is not, according to citywide data and statistics. On June nine, 2020, the Long Beach City Council engaged in earnest conversations about racism and unanimously declared racism as a public health crisis with the need to restore public trust in the city government and how to reconcile a gap in the experiences of impacted around black people within the current city policies, especially the black community. The City Council called upon city staff to prepare a report that would put the City Council in a position to enact policy and make decisions to change the system. The palpable, disrespected presented recently in city public meetings, city officials, especially those in the Office of Cannabis Oversight and a staff, is ethically and morally unacceptable. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Demetrius. Hi. My name is Demetrius Woodard, an original lottery winner back in 2010. And I can write a book. What Happened to us? We would like for you to open share use manufacturing of paper for equity applicants in addition to social equity delivery licenses. Immediately please revise grant application process to be less redundant and simplified for equity applicants as previously done to receive your funding without any delays, setbacks and or unnecessary repudiation while ensuring applicant protection with necessary privacy policies and NDAs in place if not a book. The City of Long Beach and its council in all other municipalities with its jurisdictional metropolis, are supposed to be aligned under these three key goals, according to the Framework for Reconciliation Goal number one within systemic racism in City of Long Beach and all local government and partner agencies to internal transformation, go to design and invest in community safety and violence prevention. GOAL three Improve health and wellness in the city by eliminating social and economic disparities in the communities most impacted by racism. The above goals and recommendations represent the LPC believes can be reasonably accomplished within the existing power and the governing authority of the City of Long Beach. Please make a motion to discuss and adopt and approve the above recommendations. Thank you. You'll see. Good evening, Mayor. Council members my name is Jay-Z Mendes. I'm the political director for Catalyst Care, which is the Community Service and Policy Advocacy Branch of Catalyst Cannabis Co. And I'm here to speak in favor of the three items that are here tonight. We've spoken about this issue before, folks. Many folks have spoken about this for months and years. And so I'm very happy to hear that this council is in unison in support of the three items, of course, lowering local cannabis taxes, making sure that we have a chance to fight against the black market and really have a chance to thrive. But of course, as was mentioned, the state taxes are really what's holding us under. They don't tax liquor like they do us. They don't tax oil like they do us. But for whatever reason, we're, you know, overtaxed. And so our rallying cry is this lowered taxes, higher access. And so I would definitely want to uplift Mary and the council members and their House and Councilmember Cindy Allen for championing these issues. You know, you're on the right side of this, and we thank you. And most importantly, the social equity applicant situation, our communities, Latino, black, brown communities, minority communities we would think were impacted by years and years. Folks are still in prison for something that affluent folks are benefiting from. So people that are in the game that are supporting social equity applicants, as we've been building up for this moment, to pass the ordinance to allow for more people to benefit from this, that's who we want to be with and that's what we uplift. And thank you so much. And please do the right thing. Thank you. Carlos. Oh. Good evening. Mayor and City Council. The city's slow action has contributed to the social equity dilemma by restricting the competition in line. Most of the non social equity dispensaries to build and protect the market power illegally. Current city ordinance aims at maintaining an operational footprint primarily, primarily limited licenses with high natural barriers to entry, resulting in a limited market participation which benefits, you guessed it, those resources. And again, we start in the back of the line. Given the significant diversity of the city's population, it is appalling that out of the 32 operating dispensaries in the city, not one is owned by a black, brown or Southeast Asian individual. We are better than that. This is not indicative of who we are as a city. Collectively, minorities are the backbone, foundation, soul, seasoning and energy of the city. While delivery licenses and social equity dispensaries are an acceptable start, it is far from equitable. A disparity will still exist. We must push ourselves and talk about licenses for cannabis consumption lounges and special events for social equity applicants. My only concern is who we deem Long Beach residents. Let's be more selective about who we consider. Three years of living in the city does not make you a Long Beach resident. I use myself as an example. Horace Mann. Jefferson Middle School. Wilson Reed. A continuation and to Cal State Universities to complete an undergraduate and graduate degree all while remaining a resident and active member. Thank you. All right. Thank you. The last speaker is Danielle. Hello. My name is Danielle Lopez and I live. In District one. I am a community and digital organizer for Catalyst Cares from Catalyst Cannabis Company. And like you, I'm here to work to help enrich the lives of our community. That's what Catalyst for Change is. I support Agenda Item 17, 28 and 33. Outrageous and unfair. State and local taxes are driving the cannabis industry to fall before it's given the chance to rise. Because of high taxes, thousands of. Union paying jobs with benefits will be gone. I support the social equity applicant program. There are hundreds of folks who are victims of the war on drugs. For years, when cannabis was illegal, that could have built generational wealth by creating and owning a stake in the legal cannabis industry. Long Beach must move to right the wrongs of the past by giving more licenses. To bipoc groups in retail for retail ownership. I once again call on my city to action and have lower taxes and higher access support social equity applicant ordinance and urge the state to lower the state cannabis tax. And thank you, Councilmember Cindy Allen and marrieds in the House for leading these initiatives for the people. Thank you very much. I want to thank everyone that spoke on this item on on this, particularly on the social equity ordinance. And we also have two other additional cannabis items that we'll be hearing as well. But I just want to thank you for for those that made comments. We do have a motion and a second on this item. So go through the folks that have that are to send it to Q and I'll make some comment as well, but I'll let the council go first. I will start with Councilman Austin. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank all of the those in the public who came out to speak today on this particular item. This is a, I think, a great day for the city to move social equity forward in cannabis industry. This is a long time coming, and I'm glad we're finally here at this critical point. It's not perfect, but I for the sake of moving the agenda forward, I think it's important that we move in, vote on something tonight to get social equity. I'll make that a reality in our in our city. Today, we are again moving the bar toward a more equitable future for cannabis retail in our city. Eight new licenses will represent at least 20% of the retail market in the city, and that could be as soon as within, within months from now. In a feedback from this process, I want to just say compliment staff and command everybody in the public who participated, because much of what you have seen before you has been a result of comment from city council coming from subject matter experts, comment from folks in the industry and the public who helped really frame this process. I know one of the the when we when we brought this item forward, when I brought this item for several months ago, it was, hey, we want to make sure that the process is fair. And so I kind of want to ask a couple of questions regarding the fairness of the process. You know, there was there was conversation about, you know, potentially making it more subjective and going toward a lottery. Can you tell us why why we didn't move forward and make that a recommendation? Why was staff hasn't made that a recommendation. Yeah. So back in October when we released the feasibility study, that was an option and that was actually the recommendation by staff was to include a merit based process similar to an RFP. But at the very end, select those who kind of meet the top using a lottery. And at that meeting in October, it was clear from community input that the lottery was not the way to go and that you should really just focus on the merits of the business and the application. So I believe Council at that time decided to take away the lottery aspect. Thank you for clarifying that. And also so we heard from a number of people who said, hey, you know what, we've been in the system for many years and now we are going to, you know, number one, how many applications do we have? If you could tell us that? And and is there a cutoff is there a moratorium on new applications during this process? So we have currently today 156 verified equity applicants. The the involvement is unclear. But for this process, we don't have a cap and we don't have a cap on the number that we're allowing into the program. Okay. Well, I'll just tell you from my concern that that's a high number. I would I understand the apprehension of anybody who has been waiting for four years in the process to get there. And if there is a way to, you know, to put a moratorium on on on on applications, I'd be happy to to support something like that. Is that something that we could do tonight? Mr. City attorney. We can, and it would have to come back again for a new first reading, but we could change it and make that change. Okay. Or we could bring an item next week to do that as well. Right. We. I'm sorry, I think but we can we can make the change a required and bring it back next week if that would be how we would do it. It's it is a substantive change to what's before. It's a substantive, substantial change. Yes. But if we were to bring it back as an individual item next week and layer it on top of this, we could pass something tonight. Is that correct? You could you could start that process. You could request us to prepare it next week. Then it'd be another week for us to bring it back for a first reading to amend what we're doing. So you couldn't you couldn't do it next week. Okay, you have to request it. Then it would come back for first reading and a second reading. So it wouldn't it wouldn't be able to happen next week. No, there's a second on his motion, but would you be open to supporting that as well? Council Member Yes, I would. Okay. Well, that is an amendment that I like to put in. And just to be clear. Councilmember Orson, are are you putting a moratorium on the program as a whole, allowing new or just the dispensary process. The dispensary, the retail applications? Okay. To ensure that, you know, we're talking about 156 and only eight people are going to get get applications tomorrow. Once we this is announced, you probably get another 50 more applications. I want to say, hey, you know, the people that have already been in this process should should be awarded the given the opportunities. Okay. And then and then I did decide I gave a significant amount of my time to a staff here. But there was also something that was very, very interesting to me, because I heard from one applicant that said that they won in the original lottery process. Right. That to me, that should be a priority in terms of an award as well. And, you know, and I'd be interested, I did 150 cents applicants. How many of them were awarded in the original lottery process? Yeah. I don't have that data, but we can look into that. Okay. Because that shouldn't be an extreme number. And again, we we have folks who went through the process, got the lottery award to begin with, lost their their businesses for whatever reason. And now they're coming back to to to be in the back of the line for. For an application process, I think is is a little counterproductive and unfair as well. And so I'd like to give some priority to any social equity or applicant who had previously been awarded a business license through a lottery process here in the city of Long Beach. Those are my comments. And I would ask my colleague support on those two items. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Allen? Yes. I definitely like to think staff on all of your hard work on these ordinances. I know that we requested some changes, and it's great to see that our social equity program is expanding today. I do appreciate the expansion of the Green Zone and updates to the eligibility criteria. I think that was really helpful. I do have some concerns about the ownership requirements in this ordinance. It says that applicants must certify 51% ownership for a period of five years. And it is my understanding that after five years, the business can be sold to a non-equity entity. I understand that these folks may want to sell the business at some point in time, but I am concerned that immediately allowing non equity businesses to buy these licenses after five years will compromise the viability of our equity program. I also like to make a note. This is not a motion that my office is exploring innovative ownership structures and will be working with staff to bring these ideas to council when it's appropriate. But I would like to make a motion at this time that applicants submit a ten year business plan instead of a five year business plan, and that staff. Bring back a report to Council on the Status of our equity businesses in five years to determine if these entities should be sold to non equity owners after the completion of the submitted ten year business plan. Also. I appreciate Councilman Austin. I agree with everything that you said. I I do believe that people, you know, already in the process should get those licenses. So I support all all of the the items that that you that you recommended. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. May I ask a question? I'm sorry. The city attorney. I wasn't actually going to ask to make sure that those were accepted by the maker of the motion as part of a master motion. Okay. And the city attorney. Did you have a comment? Just a question. Councilmember Allen. On your motion for the five year plan, you've asked to amend the ordinance to make that a ten year plan and a ten years before it could be sold. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Sorrell. Thank you, Mayor. I'll add my support to both amendments and also add that, you know, I just want to make sure there's a little more clarity around the review panel as far as the criteria in participating it to ensure that there is fairness and impartiality, impartiality, excuse me, impartiality in how it's scored. So when it asks that if they are scoring the applicants, that maybe the name is not shown, but everything else can be as far as their description, so that there isn't kind of this kind of set up with, you know, because it's hard to tell if there's a relationship connected to the applicants. So that's one request I like to make as we maybe get a little more clarity about what that that would be the process. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, I want to thank and acknowledge staff for bringing this back and thank all the community advocates for being at the table for this entire process. Some things stood out to me from what I heard today. One that stood out was lower taxes, higher access. I think the package of things that are on the agenda today certainly speak to that. I think it's we just have to acknowledge that it's an economic imperative that we continue to invest in this industry. And we've seen, particularly at a time when sales tax has gone down, transit occupancy tax has gone down during the pandemic that we were able to continue services because cannabis demonstrated its resiliency at a very difficult time during the pandemic. And so it's an economic imperative, I think, in order to continue to provide services and come out of this recovery, that we double down on what works. And so this step, adding eight additional dispensaries, is actually smart business for the city. We've shown and we've learned from the beginning of the cannabis process how to refine it, make it better on the cannabis equity process. You know, hasn't it hasn't worked. And I think what we see here are some examples of how we've learned on what doesn't work and made it better. I think even looking at like I remember the first lottery when the balls didn't even fit in the machine when I was working for a previous councilman, Steve Neal. And now we have a it looks like an evaluation process that really built on independence, a panel where no one's from Long Beach. And it's all people who don't have a, you know, any bias and are going to look at the merit of the process. I think that's good. One other thing that I heard today was someone talked about the barrier of the lack of capital to enter the market. And, you know, I was you know, I was curious and I know we got a big grant to help with this. But if you could walk us through the resources that are that are actually available today to help people, I think that's important to make sure local folks actually have support and capital to get into the marketplace . Yeah. So just to give an update on kind of where we're at with the grant funding that we have, we have two grants. One has not yet been received. That's the latest round of GOPers funding, which was $3.2 million. So we're just waiting for that check to come from the state. But right now for round two, we have about $50,000 remaining in that fund and that's supposed to last through October of this year. So we're trying to space it out and make it more equitable and be able to give funding. And I'm looking forward to getting that 3.2 million. Okay. I mean, 3.2 million is is definitely good when you spread it out across applicants. You know, we certainly are going to need to do better and identify more resources to help people make it through. I like the idea of figuring out how to make sure that, you know, there's some longevity with the program, that it doesn't disappear in three years. I think there may be other ways to achieve that. You know, I'm supportive of, you know, what's in front of us today, but maybe a covenant on the licenses. People can sell it, but they need to sell it to a cannabis offering. So it continues to be a cannabis person. That's something to explore. But what's in front of us, I think makes sense. I'm happy to support it. I think we need to again. I think it's just an economic imperative that we continue, you know, to invest in this market so we can continue to get resources and revenue from this market, particularly so we can invest in homelessness and some of the quality of life issues that are really impacting our city right now. And so I want to see those revenues continue to grow. So this has my support today and I encourage the council to support it. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I want to thank everyone for coming tonight. I really appreciate all the input. I want to acknowledge that this has been a long process, but I do want to also acknowledge that when we were prioritizing a lot of these different components of equity applicants, I'm really a councilmember Austin championed pushing forward a a parallel track so we would be where we are today. And so I know that that is difficult on the staff when you have multiple things going on. And I know there was a little bit of frustration for the lack of resources, but I want you to know that everyone here tonight and those of us on the dais really appreciate the extra hours that it took to make sure that both of those things came forward at the same time. Because really, the standalone dispensaries is where there's a lot of opportunity at this time. I'd also like to state that sometimes people want to come and bring an item to council and not have any changes. And I think that listening to the community and really thinking about the things that you've said can change things in a meaningful way. And so I appreciate sometimes when we make changes, there's a lot of frustration and the audience because they want it right now. And I hear something different from all of you. You want to get it right. And I really, really appreciate that. And so for that and because we do have great relationships, I'm just going to throw something out there. Councilwoman Allen and Councilmember Austin, I know that you're really committed to finding a way to maintain equity in the city. As someone who has been involved in investments in the past and sometimes found out that I'm the person that I was in an investment with, might not have been the right partner at the time. I never want to lock someone into something that they can never get out of. So I'd love to add something where, if you would like to sell your share in advance of the ten years, it would need to be to another equity partner. Therefore, we maintain the equity, but we really talk about you and your freedom. If you have an opportunity to capitalize earlier than ten years, we don't want you to have to wait for ten years to realize that that that revenue. We want you to be able to have that flexibility and bring that forward at any time as long as it still benefits another equity member. Is that something you'd be open to? I'm absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman in the house. Thank you very much. I think we've come a long way in this council since since I first got on this council. And thank you council member Austin and council member Allen for bringing this very important item forward. I love it when we create policy and draft policy and launch policy that is guided with the community's input and listening to the community because they are the ones that are living it every day, day in and day out. And so I want to thank the staff for being so flexible and so open and so willing to really work and really try to make this equity program work. I feel that we are not there yet, but we're headed in the right direction and it's all because we all come together and work together. So for that, I'm very thankful. Thank you. Very happy to support this item. Think it, Councilwoman. So I'm just going to just say a few. I think I think most has already been already been said. I just want to first really think of just the team. I know this has actually been a very difficult process to kind of get where we are today. This is a actually significant amount of work that has gone into creating not just this city's first social equity program related to cannabis, but really one of the first that is happening across this city and across the country in a way that actually is going to make an impact and is meaningful. So I just want to thank the city for leading on this issue and acknowledge that we wouldn't be here had it not been for the folks that are actually here in the audience. And I've actually been pushing not just this issue, but organizing, working with elected officials, uplifting the issue at the council and in the community, and keeping folks accountable every step of the way to ensure that the city adopts a program that is really centered on equity, on access, and one that we can be walk away and be proud of to have developed in this in the city. I it's important to recognize I mean, any time that we have a discussion or debate about about particular about cannabis or cannabis policy or or tax regulations, I'm reminded that we have we have figured so much of this out together in a process that has been in many ways two so still very new as a legal economy in the city, in the state. And so to get here and going through this process has been difficult. But I am also really proud to be in a city where so many folks are fighting for equity and on this issue especially, that has damaged so much of our black community, of people of color and the injustices that have happened and the racial inequities that have happened around the drug war, around marijuana convictions, has has damaged so much of our community today, and especially the dialog around around cannabis. And so I think that what we're doing today is such a great and positive step. I agree. It's not a perfect policy. I don't think anything we've done around cannabis has been perfect the first time we've done it, whether it's our tax structure or the regulations or the buffers, it's we have we have tried to fix things as we go because we're actually this is the first time that we're actually doing this type of this level of work on this issue. And so I'm glad that we're doing it and I'm glad along which is leading the way and things that aren't working. We're going to have to tweak and we're going to have to fix and we have to improve as we go along like we have on every other issue related to cannabis and and the marijuana economy. I also just want to note, and I know we're going to talk about this soon on the on the tax side, but I do want to thank folks who have brought this issue up that it's pretty clear to to to most of us that in the development of whether it's been social equity policy or whether it's been our own marijuana ordinance that was on the ballot that voters voted for, whether it was the initial tax structure that was put on the ballot that voters voted for. You know, we have learned along the way, and I think tonight is a great reflection of the city on making adjustments to be better and to hopefully center more more equity, to support more people and to really shine a light on just the the misconceptions and the prejudice that still exists out there around cannabis and around what I think all of you are trying to do in trying to uplift to the community and to the country. So I just want to thank you for your work. And with that, we do have a motion and a second in front of us. That's by Councilman Ashton and Councilman Allen. We have all of the amendments that are in place. Again, a big thank you to Emily and the. And the team. I know it's a lot of hard work and no, not everything is perfect. But I just want to thank everyone and what that will do, we will do a vote. Motion is carried. Great. Thank you very much. We're going to move right into item 17, which is the tax reduction report.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP GO-14-136 and award a contract to Energy Experts International of Redwood City, CA, to provide consulting services related to natural gas distribution federal regulatory compliance to update U.S. Department of Transportation required manuals and plans, in the amount of $542,526, and authorize a 5 percent contingency in the amount of $27,126, for a total contract amount not to exceed $569,652, for a period of two years, with the option to renew for one additional one-year period, and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_01202015_15-0056

Item 13. Item 13. Report from Long Beach Gas and Oil in Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Energy Experts International to provide consulting services related to natural gas distribution. Federal Record Regulatory Compliance to update U.S. Department of Transportation requirement manual and plans for a total amount not to exceed 569,000 citywide. There's been a motion by Councilman Andrews and a second by Councilman Austin. So any member of the public that wishes to address council on this item. Actually, Mr. City managers or staff report you'd like to provide. Yes. We have a quick one from Chris Garner again. Thank you. As you know, we have 1900 miles of natural gas pipeline in the cities of Long Beach and Signal Hill. We're under constant. Regulation by the federal government, the Department of Transportation, to maintain and operate those. Pipelines professionally. And safely for our customers. And this is there's an increased focus on the federal government on these distribution pipelines across the country. And what we need help on and we're hiring this company to help us with is if you look at the scope of work, our operations and maintenance manual needs to be updated. A new program, the Distribution Integrity Management Plan, or did we need that updated? The Emergency Operations Plan, the damage prevention public awareness. Plans, the qualification plan, and then to help us with the long. Term pipeline operations plan. The idea here is. In the past, the audits that we periodically undergo with the DOT, we focused more on how we did the job with. The incident up in San. Bruno with the gas explosion. There's been increased focus on actual paperwork and the documentation that occurs that documents how you do your job. And so that's what we're hiring this company to help us with. It's a two year process. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gardner. So any member of the public that wished to address the council on this item, item 13. SINGH None. Members, please cast your vote. Motion carries eight zero.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Lease Agreement between the City and County of Denver and the State of Colorado Department of Revenue, Division of Motor Vehicles, to lease office space for driver licensing and related services at the Arie P. Taylor building at 4685 Peoria Street. Approves a lease agreement with the State of Colorado Department of Motor Vehicles for $356,531.49 and for five years for approximately 2,583 square feet of office space for driver licensing and related services at the Arie P. Taylor building located at 4685 Peoria Street in Council 8 (FINAN-201841987). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 11-19-18. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 10-16-18.

DenverCityCouncil_11052018_18-1146

Under spending, no items have been called out to limit anything. All right. Madam Secretary, will you please put the first item on our screens? Councilwoman Gilmore, will you please put Council Bill 1146 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move. The council will 18 dash one one for six be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded questions or comments by members of Council Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, Mr. President. Per the request of the administration, I'm asking my colleagues to vote no to defeat this bill. Revisions need to be made to the agreement, and the modified agreement will be forthcoming before City Council at a later date. Thank you comes from Gilmore saying no other questions or comments. Council members. Just a reminder that this is a request to vote no. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black Knight. Brooks. Espinosa. I mean, sorry. No. Gilmore. Herndon. No. Cashman. Kinney. Lopez knew. No. Ortega. Sussman. No. Mr. President. No. Madam Secretary, please close the voting in no results. 12 nays. 12 nays comfortable. 1146 has been defeated. This concludes the items to be called out. All other bills for introduction are ordered published and we are now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration council members. Remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilwoman Gilmore, would you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that resolutions be adopted in bills on final consideration, be placed upon final consideration, and do pass and a block for the following items. 1178117911911192109411261127112811291130113111761177118111821183118611901184119411931 and sorry 1202 1189 1160 9117011651167 and 1103. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye brooks. I. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn. I. Gilmore. Herndon. I. Cashman. Can reach Lopez. I knew Ortega, I. Susman. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting. Announce results. 1212 to the resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 1160. Designating 6302638 East 16th Avenue, the Essex Apartments as a structure for preservation. Anyone wishing to speak on this matter must see the Council Secretary to receive a speaker card to fill out and return to her during the recess of council.

A MOTION requesting the executive establish an equitable development initiative and prepare an implementation plan.

KingCountyCC_02022022_2021-0467

I'm so excited to work with all of you and excited to get to work. Thank you so much. Okay. And we're I'm very excited to work with you. Okay. With that, we will go on to our last agenda item number seven, which is a proposed motion 2020 10467 requesting the executive to establish an equitable development initiative or II and prepare an implementation plan with a priority on unincorporated area communities. Now, we heard a lot about this motion during public comment today, and I did mention that we are going to have a discussion on it, a staff briefing, an opportunity to have a briefing on the amendments that have been submitted by the council members that the Grove and Dombroski. We will not take this up for action today. There have been requests to hold that so we can see if there's anything else that we need to do on it before taking action. So it likely will be on the next committee agenda. The motion, as I mentioned, does pertain to our having an implementation plan over two phases which we were here about. And equitable development initiatives generally provide investment programs and policies that take into account past policy decisions, as well as historic inequities and current conditions to prove access to opportunities for the most affected communities and to allocate resources to communities at risk from displacement. Jenny know from my central staff will provide the briefing on this item as well as the amendments. We also have with us woman, seconded staff, current girl and copywriter. So if you have any questions for them, they will be available with that. Jenny Thank you. Chair Goals China Central Staff. The materials for this item begin on page 14 of your packet. Oppose Motion 2020 10467 would request executive to establish a wide a global development initiative, also known as CDI, with a priority on unincorporated area communities. The motion also requests that the executive prepare an implementation plan in two phases. This developed in conjunction with the planning workgroup. Equitable development can be defined in a number of ways. The city of Seattle, whose program this motion is modeled after, defines equitable development as public and private investments, programs and policies. In neighborhoods to meet the needs of marginalized people. Enter these disparities, taking into account past history and current conditions so that quality of life outcomes, such as access to quality education, living wage, employment on the environment, affordable housing and transportation are equally distributed for people currently living and working here, as well as for many people living in the City of Seattle establishes a global development initiative and 2016 Page 15 of your packet includes information on Seattle's CDI program, including background in context of the development of the program. In summary, Seattle's EDI program is primarily primarily known for its fund, which awards money to community organizations, organizations to fund projects, site acquisition and capacity building in high displacement risk communities. The FBI distributed $49 million in 2017 in the area also includes equity indicator monitoring, which evaluates displacement risk within the city, as well as incorporating equal development principles into city work and planning. Turning to the proposed motion for a hear, this motion would request the executive to create a King County EBI and to prepare an implementation plan in two phases. The motion identifies that the idea should be countywide in scope in prioritizing urban areas or excuse me, urban area communities, particularly historically in marginalized communities. The motion states ideas should be guided by a framework with the following principles one Advancing Economic Mobility and opportunity for residents. Preventing Residential, commercial and cultural displacement, building upon and protecting local cultural assets and communities. Supporting organizational capacity building, promoting transportation mobility and connectivity and enabling equitable access for all communities. Further, the motion identifies a set of principles that would guide development of a framework including well, excuse me, the motion identifies that phase one of the implementation plan should include a developed idea for more consistent with the principles I just mentioned. Information on how the initiative would guide the best starts capital program. Recommendations for county and community structure, capacity and resources to implement the program in this first phase would be due June 30, 2022. Phase two would include objectives and strategies to reduce disparities. Utilize data of displacement, risk and other metrics to determine programs and policies, including metrics for monitoring and evaluating outcomes. Describing partnerships with outside agencies such as community based organizations or regional partners. Identify funding sources that could be leveraged. Propose strategies to coordinate across county agencies and programs. Identify community outreach and collaboration. Utilize the community direct action level of engagement. Propose next steps in a timeline and recommendations for a permanent advisory board. In the second phase would be dated June 30th, 2023. The motion requests that all work done under these two phases be completed in partnership with the planning workgroup, emphasizing black, indigenous and people of color, leadership and geographic requisite representation that includes unincorporated county. There are some amendments to this proposed motion, and Madam Chair, that completes my staff report. But I'm happy to accept the amendments, if you wish. Thank you very much. Good job. Turning a reminder that we do have Kelly Rider and Karen Gill here with us today. We have questions for them before Jenny does and two of the amendments. And by the way, you all should have received the packet, I think it was this morning or maybe last yesterday from staff with regard with the amendments in the packet. Does anybody have a question at this point for Jenny? Okay. I'm sorry. Just to clarify, this idea of sport is expressly for county wide, but it's got a priority on certain communities. All right. Okay. Any questions? I'm sure. Yes. Councilmember Belding, I'm going to have some comments and a number of questions, but I kind of just wanted to wait until after we briefed the whole amendments and everything. If that's all right with you, I can do it. When you. When do you think best? No, that's fine. If you have a question of Charlie pertaining to what she went over. No, not this time. Thank you. Councilmember at the end. We cannot hear you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would ask Staff what it means that we're going to prioritize funding in the unincorporated areas. What does it mean to prioritize? And you want to check that? Sure. Actually, I would defer to the sponsor to get an answer to what he means by prioritizing this lead sponsor. And this is Councilmember Dombroski was to comment on that. Well, thank you. I'm sure. Would you. Can I make a few opening remarks first? Whatever you would like, there is a question for. I'd like to just set the table a little bit, and I'd be happy to answer that, because that's an issue that we should have a good dialog about. So thank you for hearing this. A motion before us today just by way of background. This idea and proposal came from folks who are interested in seeing this kind of work done on a more countywide basis. And they came forward in the context of our best efforts for Kids Capital Grant program, which was added, you'll recall, and I came to the Council and the Regional Policy Committee and as defined in terms of its implementation in the plan over there. And they were interested in maybe looking at those dollars to start an equitable development mission at the county. And I, I thought that, frankly, that was too small. We have a a big county, and that's a limited set of funds. And the vision there had kind of gotten started on a different path. And so I encouraged folks to take a more holistic approach and develop a standalone initiative that would develop an equitable development initiative countywide and look at sustainable effect, effective and adequate funding for the initiative that wouldn't just be limited to that one bucket. So that was kind of the genesis of it. This really has been in terms of its formation, community led. And I, I think it's really important work. I think for years the county, frankly, we've dialed back our economic development work. It's been a small function, frankly, squeezed by the general fund. But in more recent years, it's popped up in different spaces, communities of opportunity and some of our other work around the county. This would be, I think, a holistic approach that would recognize the true that the impacts of the tremendous economic growth here in the county that has not been equally shared. And in fact it has had some adverse consequences to a lot of our at risk communities in terms of gentrification and loss of historic communities as people have been pushed out by big money. To put it in plain English. And the question is, is there a role for King County to come in as a partner, as a partner with communities to ensure that they are not displaced and to run with that, that's a defensive notion. But put a ladder down, put many ladders down to help folks climb the ladder of economic opportunity that's here in King County. That may have disadvantages, too, and barriers to those economic opportunities. And you do that with the principles laid out here. Now, I said this is community led and it is on this question of prioritizing certain communities. I will tell you, I had hoped and my vision was, well, you do it countywide and maybe we don't have that prioritization. But this was a this was a policy compromise. And this was a space where I had to listen to those who had more experience and are more directly affected. And that was a priority for them and for a couple of, I think, of the co-sponsors. So I think there's a reasonable debate there. But in this work and this work in particular, the equitable development notion and the centering communities and those most impacted, I deferred because I thought that their voices were more informed, the impacts were more direct. And frankly, it spoke to me a little bit when I first came to the county. We had an actual policy and practice with respect to our urban unincorporated areas that were within prior years potential annexation for cities of disinvested. So, Councilmember Rizal, I take Skyway, West Hill. You know this. Our policy was don't invest in a community center, don't invest in parks, don't invest in the roads. We wanted to. I'm going to be real blunt here. We but the county policy was essentially just to walk away and encourage by doing so, those communities to annex to in that case, the city or revenue. Well, I didn't like that. And we began to turn the tide on that. We put $1,000,000 into the park there and we realized, I think, that that was wrong. But that history shows why an initiative like this is important. And you heard in the testimony there has been an underinvestment in our urban unincorporated communities, some of it by actual design. And I think to some degree, we see the error of our ways there in which we should be making those investments in partnership with the community. So that's a little background on it. Madam Chair, I think that the county with our. Equitable and just principles that are our philosophy and how we do business as codified in our own code is the right place to do this from a regional perspective. There is this notion that, well, some local jurisdictions like the city of Seattle have their own, and so maybe we shouldn't engage in that space. I don't know that we should have bright line rules. Some communities, even though Incorporated, may have more needs. I think we are a regional government and we can work in partnership with community in our cities to make these investments when they're most needed. I think that the language with respect to prioritization is flexible enough that would allow the work to go forward and come back with more specificity. But that's some background, and I think that this is a tremendous opportunity for the county to engage in a in a serious undertaking, a partnership with Communities and Central, those voices most impacted and partner with them. So looking forward to the dialog and working with colleagues to get this into acceptable form. Thanks, Madam Chair. Thank you. I appreciate your comments. We've obviously dealt with issues relating to what does prioritization mean. I remember that in our cultural access legislation discussion and there have been many others relating to coded budgets. Our concern about the. Was your question answered? So I have comments on the topic, but I don't know if you want them now or with. I don't know how you want to structure things. I think it might be helpful for Ken to brief us on the amendments. Councilmember DEMBOSKY also has an amendment. Councilmember Sarai has a question based on what his own work was presented by staff. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to add one more point to Councilmember up the Grove's question. I think Councilmember Taberski touched on everything that I would touch on, especially with respect to motive. I've spoken to many times at this Council about the historical disinvestment in Skyway, and there are special obligations unincorporated King County as its as their only local government. So I'll spare you all the spiel there. But in terms of not just motivation, but mechanics, how do you what does priority mean? I think a lot of that would be figuring out at the executive branch. You know, we get a high level directive and then the executive branch kind of puts the rubber to the road and figures out how we do prioritization. But it could look like a system of giving more points to urban, unincorporated or unincorporated high displacement areas that present a project. It could look like more intentional outreach in those neighborhoods to make sure that they apply for these kinds of funds. But more than happy to listen to the thoughts and concerns. Because I completely hear Councilmember up the group's concern around making sure that. There are cities and neighborhoods that are unincorporated areas that also have very high needs and have high displacement risks. And this motion should not exclude them, should not, you know, should not make it harder for them to apply or make it less likely that they'll qualify. So if my intention is that we put intentional emphasis and priority in the neighborhoods where both there's a high displacement risk and King County is the local government because of our special obligation to those areas. But it is not to exclude those neighborhoods that are in incorporated cities that are high displacement risk. Going. To. Councilmember McDaniel, did you hear something? Go and see them meeting. So I'm wondering. Okay. Is there any other question of general or the sponsor? And by the way, as was mentioned, councilmembers online and some sponsors and sponsors, I believe in this legislation. Okay. At this point, Jenny, I'd like you to give us all of the amendments. And again, you can look at what was sent out to us with the actual chart and the amendments and the amendments themselves. Or look at the staff notes on page starting 17. And I don't think not all the amendments were done at that time going here. Ten So we as chair goals measure the amendments are in the additional packet that was sent to you yesterday around 430. There is one SCHRAGER and five amendments that I will go through. Striker S-1, beginning on page two of the additional packet, would revise the two phase implementation plan to a single seat feasibility analysis with additional work from an advisory committee. Page two No, excuse me. Page eight of your supplemental packet shows the comparison table. The well lays out the similarities and differences between the motion and the striker and will quickly walk you through that to orient you to the differences between the two. In summary, S-1 changes the scope of the Equitable Development Initiative that will be changed to reduce disparities and achieve equal outcomes for more marginalized populations. The initiative would be county wide in scope and designed to reduce disparities in communities that are at highest risk of displacement based on race indicators in in areas where there aren't other ideas in place, as one would require the development of a feasibility analysis similar to the concept of phase one in the motion that would be developed by the executive, but without expanding worker when compared to the underlying motion, the striker would not require a developed framework. It would rely on what's on in the motion. Information on basic capital grants and nor would it require recommendations of next steps for County H community structure customer resource needs. The striker would ask the committee to make recommendations on potential policy and programmatic changes to reduce displacement and to create and preserve community stability, as well as make recommendations on a capital grant program through the incorporation of displacement, risk data and metrics to determine project eligibility. MRA. The striker would also require an analysis during the feasibility report stage that looks at current county efforts to prevent displacement. In an analysis of risk indicators, the striker would remove a requirement regarding describing potential partnerships as well as coordination across county agencies. It would maintain a report requirement to identify funding sources and identify a community outreach process, including outreach to potential applicants. The striker removes requirement about using the community direct action level of engagement that's currently in the underlying motion. The striker modifies the advisory group. The underlying motion discusses composition, emphasizing Bipoc leadership and geographic representation. The striker leaves the makeup to the executive and to each councilmember, where the executive chooses three representatives in the council member offices choose one each. And lastly, the striker would change the report requirement to December 31st, 2022, with no requirement for a second phase. Thank you, Kenny. Are there any questions? And I'm not sure. Councilmember The Grove, this is your strike S-1 amendment. Would you rather that we go through all the amendments first and then speak to them? Because I know there's some duplicity with your individual line amendments and the strip. I would love the opportunity to speak to it. It lays the foundation. Also, since we're getting tight on time for all of them, I think. That. I'm. You know, growing up here in South King County, I really watched my community grow and change a great deal. And you walk down the streets in any of the cities in South King County and look around. You see people of different ages, different races from different ethnicities and income levels, and that diversity is our strength. And one of the cool parts about being an elected official, the part I love the most is the ability to immerse ourselves in the community and build those authentic relationships and communities of color and immigrant and refugee communities. And I'm. Very, very proud. Of Concerned and Boesky for bringing this forward. You know, as you know, this is an issue that's been near and dear to my heart. You know, we've been working together as a council on you know, we saw some high profile commercial displacement in 2019 about Tugwell and SeaTac that garnered a lot of attention. We see this wave of gentrification coming out of Seattle into South King County and now beyond, and it's devastating to a community to see the loss of community, character and cohesion. And, you know, and these are tough issues to tackle. We know some of it is due to blatant racist policies we have in the past, whether it's redlining or access to capital being denied to black and brown communities. We also see it just in the systemic racism around how decisions are made. And it's heartbreaking when you see not just economic displacement, what that means culturally for different communities. And so I want us to make increased investments in community based and community led strategies aimed at reducing residential and commercial displacement. I want us to make sure that we're reviewing, with support of the community, all of our policies to find those solutions where we need to change our land use laws. And so I sat down to read the legislation. I'll be candid. I did struggle to understand, having read it multiple times, exactly what each of the steps mean. I think the language used, I think the the definitions I think there's a lot of information that's vague. I'm interested in us making sure we understand in concrete terms specifically what is it we are looking for in here and trying to spell it out? So I took a stab in a striker based on the multiple meetings I've had with the there's a coalition working on this and based on a lot of conversations I've had in the community, the folks in the coalition who drafted this obviously hate it. I'm not wedded to it or the language, but I wanted to. Try to bring what I saw as language that cut to the chase. And specifically, I figured, you know, it's not my job to try to. Clean up per se, or try to add those definitions. But there are three concerns and they're flagged in the amendments and to save. Speaking on each of the amendments, I'll just speak to a now, the number one concern for me is this. This doesn't this motion doesn't generate any money. So we're setting up an expectation we're going to fund and it's likely going to come from existing sources because we don't have the ability to raise taxes without going to the public. And there are some obvious areas it specifically references the best starts for kids capital funds right now. Well, it may 5 million this year, $8 million a year going forward. Those are pretty much the only capital funds we have for non housing. So if we want to build community centers, we want to do create mental health facilities for kids. This is our shot we've got is $8 million a year in capital funds right now. Without this, it's targeted at Bipoc communities. It's targeted where the need is. All of these good metrics, adding a new layer on top of it, saying it will now be prioritized in unincorporated areas, I think is a step back for South King County and step back for an area where I think we're seeing the greatest displacement, a community where we have the largest black population, we have the largest levels of diversity, the largest levels of poverty is now being deprioritized and putting if we put those best starts through kids capital dollars, through that displacement lens is defined here. Another potential source of funding for it would be the housing development funds, obviously. And we have, you know, a lot of good work that's being done now. I'm not sure how it's going to be integrated, but we know we based on community input, we now have a program funded through housing, the equitable, community driven, affordable housing development that is funds affordable housing development to mitigate displacement measures, ensure marginalized communities have access. It supports the creation of affordable housing developed by and in collaboration with communities facing displacement. Communities historically experience policies that limit opportunities for people of color, projects led by impacted communities conceived and created through an inclusive community engagement process driven by a place based, community based organization. You know, we put 5 million specifically into Skyway last year to support equitable, community driven development aimed at preventing displacement right now, with the exception of the dollars we've targeted into the unincorporated areas specifically. The whole county has equal ability to compete for those dollars. And I really appreciate it. Councilmember Xilai's comments about not wanting to make it projects in other impacted areas less competitive. But I'm not sure how you can say we prioritize one community. But we don't want that to mean it's harder for the other communities to do that. You prioritize what it means. The others are deprioritized on lower priority, and I just don't think that makes sense to do to the most some of the most impacted communities. And so that's my concern. The other two things I flagging the amendments. One, there's some language that's very vague and confusing to me and says this committee will have the authority to establish policy and budgets. I don't I know they can't create ordinances. This be the first time all of our other boards bring us recommendations or else it's an RFP panel where we've set the policy. So if we're going to give a board the ability to establish policies and budgets. They were charter doesn't allow them to amend the RC ws. I mean, these are county ordinances. Most of the policies, not all our land use related state law really dictates the growth management land use policy update process. So I don't think a group of executive appointees, I don't think we can delegate land use policy making to them legally under the Growth Management Act. Besides whether or not it's a good idea. And with budgets, I'm not sure what the scope is. It says they will have the authority to establish policy on equitable development. I don't know what the range. What does that mean? What policies have we delegated? There. There's just some real. Strange language there, and we're really good about listening to our boards and commissions. When the Conservation Futures Fund's brings us their funding recommendations, we rarely touch that. So I think we have language in there that's a problem. It's well-intentioned. We can tell people, Yeah, you get to establish this, but legally I just don't know how we do that. So we give executive appointees the authority to change our growth management laws or to change county ordinances, which is how we establish policy. So I think that needs some clarity. I would suggest my amendment would say have them recommend or we define the scope of their policies around the grant program. Are we going to let them set the criteria and that kind of thing? And then the other is the composition. We fought for months and this council with best starts for kids and BSA tussle over making sure we had an equal voice in appointing those who are making the funding recommendations. And here we just delegated all the executive. We replace our decision making authority and we delegate that to the executive to appoint a group of people to do that. And I think it makes sense if we want to ensure that the ideological diversity and the true geographic diversity is reflected. I think having council members nominate folks from our district, along with the county executive, ensures that more democratic process where everyone's values and everyone's community is represented. And so those were my amendments and suggestions and concerns. I appreciate you. Let me share. I look forward to work with everyone and open to all kinds of ideas. Thank you very much. Councilmember at the Grove. We are running short on time. I think we can go a little bit more. However, we haven't been briefed on all of the amendments. Maybe that can come next time around. I know that Councilmember Bell, did she want to speak? Is this a good time for you? Yeah, I'd love to. Thank you, Madam Chair. So. I'm glad we're having this public airing of this proposal because it's been it's been around for a little while. And I want to thank the community members who came to meet with me. I came to meet with me virtually and and have offered to to to talk at any opportunity. I mean, they've been very active, very diligent and very available. So that that's been helpful as we review this. I think I want to start with principles and the principle here that for a lot of reasons, good reasons and bad reasons. Aspects of unincorporated King County have been underinvested in. I mean, I think we can start with that premise. The good reason, by the way, is it's not a good reason, but not our not our decision reason is we don't have the same taxing authorities as a city does. We don't have the same ability to raise funds in all the ways that cities can. And so we have more limited sources of funding for this local government purpose. I think we should also start with first principles that we it is undeniable that the outcomes in our unincorporated areas where we have underinvested are inequitable, that we see and we see all the all the challenges of underinvestment. And like Councilmember Ismail, I am not going to try to list them all today. I've been pleased to watch this county in the time I've been with the county really evolve in how we work with our communities, especially our underserved communities. We've come up with new ways to really bring community voices, voices of black, indigenous and people of color to the table, voices of all kinds of underserved folks in that areas, and then really taken that partnership and made it into policy. Some good examples recently are the update to our mobility and transit plans really have centered equity in a way that we really didn't explicitly do before. And there are others. Community of opportunities and Best Start for Kids is an example of this evolution. And this kind of a proposal would be a further step in that evolution. And for that reason I find the idea extraordinarily promising and attractive, and I'm very supportive of walking down the road like this. This action that we're asked to support sets up a process to send a plan that we then will adopt at some point . So, you know, that speaks to me. I love the plan. The plan, and I'm not even joking about that. I think that when you're doing something totally brand new, it behooves us to be very cautious and thoughtful and make sure we're thinking about all the things that we're doing, the consequences, the unintended consequences, make sure it's a success. So I think that this in many ways comes as a a welcome proposal, in a thoughtful proposal. The questions. Oh, and I also want to say my first personal involvement with the Seattle idea was when their director at the time and she may well still be there. Director Obama I'm going to mispronounce name Marjorie. I believe Canary came and spoke to our affordable housing task force where several of us served on and spoke about their anti displacement efforts. And I was very impressed by some of the good work they had done and some of the proposals that they were building at the time. This was a few years ago. So I know that we can we can merge this kind of a community partnership, effort and investment with our highest priority, things that we want to see done as a policymaking body. And we can make progress before we get to the final vote. I know we're just talking here today. I want to make sure that whatever we do has enough public involvement and transparency. The proposal to date has been in the development stage, and I know development stages happens in desks and board rooms and that's all okay. But when we get to the debating and adopting stage, that needs to come out into public. So I'm very glad that we started that today and I think we need to continue with that. I, I, I've been listening carefully to council member of the Grove and I feel also that as we send this over to the Executive , when we do for the development of Phase one and phase two, we should make sure, I think that we stay involved enough and that we are watching closely enough and giving input as a body so that whatever comes back to us is something that we can adopt without a lot of drama, so that we work through the stuff in a way that is that is healthy, that takes into account all of the interests, and that comes back is set up to succeed. And one of the big questions I have is what expectations are being set up about how much money is going to be put into this and where it's going to come from? Because that's important. And it's. Hard. We had a big debate. It was at least 18 months ago. So I can I can forgive as people have forgotten. But we had a big debate about that Best Start's for Kids Capital Grants program on what it would be used for. It started as a proposal, at least in part, from a council member from the city of Boston who says on a regional policy committee, we had a big dream about creating a youth activity center out in unincorporated East King County in the Sammamish Valley area. And it's that's where the debate started. Where it ended was with a broader set of expectations, with the language that has been quoted by Councilmember Danowski earlier about this community driven, equitable process. But I think that there are expectations out in the world, including with our partners at the Regional Policy Committee, about what's going to happen with that particular bucket of money. So we need to deal with our partners, all of them the advocates we heard here today, the people who supported the levy, the voters who voted for the levy, and make sure that we're meeting all of the things we said we were going to do with that funding bucket. And maybe we look for other funding opportunities. I'm just there's a lot to be worked through here. I'm very happy to move to the next step and start working on it. But I do think we have to think carefully about how we do it so that we don't create expectations we cannot meet. Thank you, Manager. Thank you for those thoughtful comments and suggestions. And we do. And Councilmember Dombroski. One moment, please. And I do want to get to you. Of course. I'm just wondering if Kern, Gil and Kelly Rider would like to make any comments or have any questions addressed to them. And Councilman Dombroski, would you rather speak first before they do that? Well, I think I can just be on point for the flow. Okay. This is on a precise this is terrific dialog. I appreciate comes from the Grove and comes from about his comments on that. I was a little bit vague on the best words for Kids Capital Grants program. I do have an amendment that we worked on with the Executive Office and it may need further clarification, but I think that the parameters for that grant are set and it was and it went through our Regional Policy Committee. It's in the implementation plan and we can't collaterally change it with this and we shouldn't. That's my view. So we did clarify that we should, because you're right, because that program is designed. Commitments were made. Understandings were agreed to. And and frankly, that's where it was kind of the genesis of this, where I said, well, hey, folks in the community that are interested in this, let's let's do a standalone where you get real dedicated. We look for funding. I don't know what it is. Got some ideas. We have opportunities, but let's do a wholesale look rather than just give me a little, little bit of an already existing program. Why don't we do this with some some some heft, you know, and maybe it starts small, maybe it grows, maybe it gets big. I don't know. But I think that would be that's one of the reasons I think I'm interested in this process. And one of their one of their items of work is how much should we fund it and how should it be funded. So yeah, let me be really clear where I am on that. On the Bill State Capital Grants program I believe in particularly we need to be respectful of our process that that went through, including with our regional partners. That that said and frankly, if we tried to undo it, this goes over to our P.S., I think so we don't want do that. So thanks for letting me clarify on that. Madam Chair. Certainly. And would you like to have Jenni go over your amendment, which is I don't think. We need to at this time. They're pretty self-explanatory. We can keep working on them. So I asked of Kern or Tully would like to make any comment. I see Kern here with this. Kern. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. Coming up with the exact opposite. Nothing much to add. I can say from an implementation perspective, we're comfortable with both approaches and then concerned, asking for working with us to make some slight adjustments to his introduced version to make it more implementable and feasible. So since they are both implementable, I defer to council on the approach and I look forward to the partnership work. Thank you. Have anything to add, Kern, about this issue on what does priority or prioritization really mean and how is that determined? Yeah, I mean, I think with the language as is our interpretation. As for the community led workgroup to decide the priorities and on this council defines a more clear I don't know Kelly if you have anything to add to that. Yeah. Community and Human Services. If I understand counsel's intent correctly, and so far as I have understood the motion and the but we have received from stakeholders, our expectation would be to take this broad direction through the community directly and work with that work group to identify what it looks like for us to prioritize certain geographic regions as we develop that framework for the program. And either one of you want to comment on the idea that no community in the county would be disqualified. Indeed, just so they would be up to the group. Maybe that was in another legislation and it's a hard one. It is always a challenge to take on prioritization of limited funding, and we continue to do it with our funding streams. And I would expect that this program would be no different. My expectation would be you would develop priorities with the community. We would develop a framework for how funds could be released and wouldn't necessarily see the community orienting around know this community as in and this community is out, but without further council direction in the motion it would have a broad conversation with community that would be bringing it back to the council. Thank you, Councilmember. Thank you. And thank you, Curran and Kelly, for being here. I'm wondering if you could share how you see this potentially integrating with the $25 million Bipoc Economic Resiliency Fund we funded last year, the 10 million for community led displacement planning and Skyway we funded and as well as the work that's underway on the sub area planning , displacement, how are those going? Do you have community led or community engagement on those and kind of what's the status and how does this support duplicate fit? You know, talk a little bit about, if you could, those efforts already under underway and how we could integrate this most effectively. Yeah. Thanks, guys. Remember, as you referenced last year, the exact proposed and council allocated 25 million in federal funding to be allocated through a community led process to invest in economic opportunities and recovery from COVID for our bipoc communities. Last, just to give an update on that last August, the exact name, two additional chairs to the Community led Oversight Committee. And since last year, the co-chairs and a group of community ambassadors and amplifiers have been meeting nearly weekly to establish a community process for that work. Earlier this month, the group and by committee members to take part in this committee, which will lead in allocating the funds and longer term action to make permanent to help the vision for the county's continued committed to the anti-racism work. There have been more than 200 community members that have expressed interest in joining that effort, which has been dubbed the Gathering Collaborative. And this week the co-chairs, ambassadors and amplifiers are hosting two informational sessions to better inform community members about the work. And so through these conversations with community in these sessions will be able to determine which community members will will be joining this collaborative. So the goal is to form and on board members by early spring for for that work. About the unincorporated areas specific work, both the summary plan, the anti displacement policy work and the I think was it 10 million we did for this community based budgeting is that skyway or urban unincorporated that we call it kind of what the status of that those funds are because I know and I just placer it was a . One of the concepts that led to that. Yeah. You want to take that one on since we're close to that? Yeah. I can take on the $5 million that was allocated for Skyway, as well as our anti displacement, where the $10 million fund, I believe, operates outside of DC. Just in terms of the investments in Skyway, we have been working very closely with the Skyway community. We just released that RFP here in the last couple of weeks and are excited to get that funding out into the community. In addition, the anti displacement work, I would say that was based off a relatively similar model, but a much smaller geographic scope continues to work on the implementation phase and figuring out how we can make sure that we implement the very specific community programs and planning aspects. I would imagine that something like the Equitable Development Initiative, which has a much broader geographic scope, would have some amount of alignment around investing in outcomes that complement our affordable housing investments that you see across the traditionally prioritized type of dollars for. But I. We are very focused, I would say, for us in making sure that the very detailed work of implementing the anti displacement efforts in Skyway, West and North Highline continue apace while stacking this equitable development initiative with a broader geographic lens on top and making sure that we can continue our focus in these unincorporated areas at risk of significant displacement right now, while thinking about how we broaden our investments for this community. That's. I don't know if that gets to the core question. A clarifying question to with that, if we give the executive's appointees the. Ability to establish policy versus recommend policy. How does that work mechanically with like the sub area work you're doing? Would the direction come from them for the comp plan updates? Where else? What what does that mean in your mind if we if we delegate the establishment of the policy to that appointed group? Yeah, it's a big question, Councilmember. And very much since we are in the initial phases of this, I think we're going to go through a lot of growth phases of trying to figure out what each of these things mean. In our work in DC, just with the community across our other initiatives, what we have found is that the most important thing is that everyone is aligned in what these words mean to make sure that nobody gets surprised later down the line when decision making painful is actually somewhere else. So what I'm seeing in the language as of right now is the phrase determining policy and funding decisions. I hear you very clearly. I would say with our other funding decisions, those all sit directly with Director Leo for and he makes those decisions. Our advisory committees traditionally advise. I will say at the same time we do attempt to defer strongly to community when we engage them in review processes. And so I think it's going to be a point that we want to work closely with the work group on understanding what it means when we say decision making, what it means when we make a recommendation around this. And it will be a point that we want to make sure we have shared ownership of the decision on so that everybody can feel comfortable. I can't tell you right now where exactly we'll sit. Okay. I just want to be clear. Is it like agency policies or land use policies? And and I just think that the most when you look at which policies impact development the most, apart from budget, the most of the rest and the most impactful other than spending are land use decisions. And so I'm trying to understand what it means to. Have someone else step, you know, establish those as opposed to bring us recommendations. And what just from a mechanical standpoint and in a legal standpoint, what can we delegate? What do elected officials have to do? What does the government have to do? And that kind of thing? So, I mean, I'll quit talking. I know we're we're time. Thank you very much. This has been a tremendous discussion, very thought provoking and I believe very helpful to all of us. Certainly to me, I am a sponsor of the legislation. I do not represent any of the unincorporated King County area. But I think that this is really an important issue that we address and see where we can go forward with that. I still have some questions. I think some of you others do as well. And I believe that we will be able to address this more thoroughly, hopefully at our next meeting, which will be on February 616 . This committee and council member and I appreciate that, Terry and Kern during this, I thank Jennifer for all the staff work. I encourage you all to look over the amendments that were emailed to us late yesterday afternoon. There may be more or maybe fewer when we next meet. And Councilmember Jim Baskins, anything we would like to say in closing? Very well. Thank you, Madam Chair. I do want to thank all my colleagues for taking a hard look at this and for really a good dialog today. And I think that I want to express my openness to continue to work, to refine language, to get to. Yes. And just to refresh, because I think it went over quickly in the staff report. But the language that centered that was the base of a lot of our discussion here was this on line 56. So the initiative shall that's commanded tary for us lawyers being county wide in scope but should prioritize unincorporated communities comma particularly historically marginalized unincorporated area community. So there's a shall and a should and a filter there. We can work on that. Let's let's think about that. Is that really what we want to do? But there is some work to do there and I look forward to working with you all on it. Thank you. Councilmember Peskin. I'm going to do a little bit of research. I mentioned that. I know. And there is that cultural access with again, language and prioritization that I think the results are one or more of our budget. So the last two years that is perhaps a different approach was, as I recall, more along the lines of this shirt. I don't remember this show shared, but that will prioritize communities and organizations and unrest under historically underrepresented communities but not be limited to those. So I think we can look at some potential options to include include here are but I also want to thank those individuals who spoke in public comment to come in today. I found them very compelling and obviously with a lot of thought and strong feelings and ready to get to work. So thank you all and empty on our staff. I believe that we do not miss any votes. We only had one item at a fraction and that was on the for culture confirmation vote. And I believe all members voted on that set. Correct, Madam Chair? So with that, unless there's any other business to bring up. We are turn.

A bill for an ordinance vacating a portion of the alley bounded by Cedar Avenue, South Birch Street and Leetsdale Drive, with reservations. Vacates the alley bounded by Cedar Avenue, South Birch Street, and Leetsdale Drive with a partial special reservation in Council District 5. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 5-15-18.

DenverCityCouncil_08202018_18-0394

Adopted. All right. Thank you very much. All right. If you're up with the next screen, next item on our screen, Councilwoman Blackwell, you please for Council Bill 394 on the floor for publication. Yes, I move that council bill 18, dash 394, be ordered published. It has been moved and seconded questions or comments by members of council or Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Is there somebody from public works here? Sarah Stanek. Thank you. Come. Come on up. This has been one of the more interesting alley vacations in our city. We've had a lot of questions in committee and things have even been happening between committee and now. Just to help with a little bit of the history of this. Sarah, in the first sort of question came from a constituent about this alley where they discovered that there was a great deal of encroachment into this alley that the city owned. This was about six years ago. And at that time, the city decided they were going to cite the neighbors who had encroached and asked them to remove the encroachments that they had. Then there, about a year or two later, the city decided. That. Perhaps they would just vacate the alley and not continue with the encroachment. Do you know why the city changed its mind? Yes. Sarah Stanek from Public Works. My understanding is that we did begin in the enforcement proceedings and part of our process for encroachment enforcement is to look at alternatives. The vacation was offered as a potential alternative through the enforcement process, and we then received an application for the vacation, which we began processing. The vacation was offered by the city or offered by the neighbors. The neighbors applied for the vacation, the encroachment enforcement through that process. Again, one of the options that is presented during the enforcement process is an option to vacate. And the when we received the application to vacate, that was as we were going through the enforcement proceedings. And why does the city think that vacation would be better than enforcing the encroachment? The process that we take for all vacations of the public right of way is to review the use, review objections, notify adjacent property owners and determine if the area is serving the public right of way in this particular instance. All objections were reviewed and found to lack technical merit and the. Alley in. Question was found not to be serving the public right of way and could be vacated. Thank you. What is this does not pass and this alley does not get vacated. What will the city do then if the vacation is not passed? The alley will remain public. Right of. Way. And we will resume the enforcement process. Okay. Thank you very much. If there were a public easement put on the vacation, which there was for for a while, would Mr. Gidley be able to then have access and build his driveway? Is that alley were vacated and there were a public easement on it? Would he still be able to build his driveway? I'm not sure I can speak to that. The public works does not have a precedent for those types of easements. Within vacated once once an property is vacated once the right of way is vacated. It is private property and we do not have a precedent for determining public easements or cross. Access easements. Of private property. You don't have. So, gee, I didn't quite understand that answer. So if we did have a public easement on it, you don't know if Mr. Gidley would be able to use it. The easement the easement would be an arrangement between the property owners, the adjacent property owners, and not something that public works or the city would have a precedent for determining. And yet it was on the bill for a while before it got off the bill. My understanding is that the private parties were discussing other easements. There is a reservation and an easement for utilities for an Excel transformer that is located within the alley. And it's my understanding that the private property owners and their legal representation were discussing other easement options, but that none were filed with this particular vacation. We received a letter today from Mr. Gurley's attorney and saying that if there were a public easement, he would be able to have an alley there if there was public easement on the vacation. Is Mr. Gidley here? I would like to ask him a question about that. Would you like to come up and speak to that place, to the microphone? You have to come to the microphone. On Mr.. GIDLEY or. I'm Josh Porter. Which whoever Mr. Gidley thinks is appropriate, either himself or your attorney. Oh, yeah. Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening. Just tell me, could you please introduce yourself? My name is Joshua Krieger, attorney for. Gary Gidley, who you just. Saw. Resident of 260 leads Dale and one of the adjoining neighbors on this alleyway at issue. And you wrote us today to say that if there were a public easement, he would be able to create an alley even though that alley was vacated. Could you tell us a little bit why you think that's possible? Just as was recently stated, there's no precedent for it. But if. The city reserves a public access easement, which. As you noticed, Councilperson Sussman. Was initially considered here as a mechanism to kind of preserve. Access issues in the alley. And was this public access easement? We see no reason why the city can't reserve that public access easement for construction. Well, Mr.. Gidley would need to continue. The alley from what is currently. Paved and currently blocked by retaining walls and landscaping. That is illegally encroaching in the alley by. The other neighbors. He would need to construct a continuation of that paved portion, a narrow strip along an edge of what is now the public right of way down to his property. And we see no reason why that can't be done under a public access easement. Lack of precedent does not mean anything is standing in the way. It would take some creative problem solving. Between the parties and Department of Public Works. But we see why that can't be accomplished here. I see. Okay. Thank you very much. Again, it means that neighbors have to talk to each other. And I want to ask questions about that, too, because the court, when they came to committee, one of the biggest issues that the committee had was they wanted people to the neighbors to work out some happy negotiations on. If the property were going to be divided, how it would be divided. I'd like to ask Mr. David Foster up here to talk about the division of the property and what the neighbors have come to an. Agreement on. About if it's vacated. David Foster, 360, South Garfield, Denver. You're on behalf of the whites. Who were the applicants on the location. So the property is you may or may not know once the city vacates, it actually is divided per state statute. It's not divided per private agreement. And so what we had discussed is whether or not there was a way to accommodate. Mr. Gidley so that he might have more property than would otherwise be granted to him via the state statute. And although we haven't reached agreement with Mr. Gidley, Mr. Gidley has reached agreement with at least one, if not two neighbors to have access and actually ownership of some property so that if the City Council were to vacate the alley, he will be obtaining more property vis a vis the Ali vacation than would otherwise be. He would otherwise be entitled to vis a vis the state statute. So per agreements he will be receiving more property than he would otherwise be entitled to under state statute. And you all have come to this agreement. Again, there is no agreement, but that is something that both the hamrick who are here today, Mr. Gidley, has reached out to his own neighbor, the Seltzers, and I know that he's reached an agreement with them, but you can ask his counsel about that. So the people that we can I wouldn't say control, but the people we've discussed and come to agreement with, namely being the Hamrick have agreed to convey property to. Mr.. Gidley. Okay. Thank you very much. I see that others have some questions. So I'm going to pass for now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flint. Thank you. I don't know if you can answer this, but I think Mr. Foster has addressed it already. But under state statute, when a public right of way is abandoned, typically the adjoining property owners equitably split, like if it were an alley that went straight up and down. Typically, the owners on either side would divide to the middle and take possession of that. This is an alley that kind of reminds me of an Irish hurling stick. It's really odd shaped and it's dead end and it's got this big area sort of buried in the middle of the block. So it's easy to see why over the years, some of the neighbors illegally encroached into it innocently enough, but but not entitled to it. And it cut off the very dead end of the alley that backs up to Mr. Gilley's property. So I need to know before I can vote yes on this. That there is an equitable distribution of the property that is agreed on. And it doesn't sound like there is right now today. It's hard to vote on something that's still in process. So can you enlighten. Us on. Where this stands from public works standpoint and maybe Mr. Gilley's attorney and the white's attorney can elaborate on where the agreement stands? It's very hard for me to change a tire on a moving car, and I feel like that's what I'm being asked to do. Yes. So public works and the city would not take a position beyond the state statute in the division of the property once it is vacated. Let me let me let me interrupt there for to ask you, because one thing I have a hard time imagining is. What would do we know. Under the state statute what would be an equitable distribution of that really odd shaped property? Has anybody ever attempted to do the trigonometry on that? Did you, Major? Looks like someone might have. You major in trigonometry, David. You know, I did not. I provided that to you, Councilman Flynn. That is a engineered depiction. And I think we need to make sure that we're using the right terms when we're having this discussion. There's the legal. Statutory property. Division and then there's an equitable right. So those, I think are could be different if if it's strictly what the state statute says, you're entitled to the frontage and councilman. Right. You're you're right. I mean, there's this kind of hammerhead. I've called it a hammerhead. And so the analysis has been done that shows who has the linear frontage along that Hammerhead and who would be entitled to certain property along that Hammerhead. I have other copies if others are so inclined to see what that might look like. Beyond what the state statute allows for. And that's one of the exhibits that you have. What I've shared with you already is you do have an agreement from an abiding neighbor, Mr. Hamrick, to give additional property that Mr. Gately is not presently entitled to. Mm hmm. So that goes from beyond the legal to what I would consider more the equitable. More property than he would otherwise be entitled to vis a vis this disposition. Right now, I'm looking at the exhibits, and I think there is one of these purporting to be just. Objectively. Here's what the state statute would show, because I thought this was based on what the proposed agreement was. There are two. There are two. Depictions. One is the state statute. All right. And then the other was more of the equitable division of property that you had asked to see. Okay. All right. Thank you. But right now there is there is no agreement between the parties. Again. Mr. Hamrick, who is the neighbor, has agreed with Mr. Gridley to convey a portion of his property that would entitle him to more property than he would be entitled to under the state statutory division of property. Okay. So to Mr. Gibbons, attorney, what what else needs to be done to proceed with this? Well, I'll start by saying that it's. Incorrect and misleading to say that there are agreements in place that would give Mr. Gidley. More property. Than he's entitled to. As it stands. Mr. Hamrick Mr. Lee's neighbor to the west and the seltzer family, Mr. Ghibli's neighbor to the east, each of whom. Also border on the alley. Have already quit, claimed certain areas of land to Garrett. In return for various work Garrett has done on them on their properties. So Garrett of. He'll only get what he's entitled to under state statute. We realize that. But there are no agreements in place. Garrett is now in a position to gain more land than he would have. In June, May and June, when these quick claims occurred. But as it stands right now, there are no agreements that would allow Garrett to gain more property than he would be entitled to. Right now. He's just been able to achieve. Presumably under operation of law from the statute, which by admission is quite vague. The statute has two parts to it. If it's a. Straight right angle. Public right of way. As you noted, everybody just comes out to the middle line where where there aren't where it's the dead end portion. It's fairly vague and says, you know, to the adjoining landowners, essentially it's what it says. And I think we can agree that there's probably a frontage percentage calculation that goes on. And I think independently on each side, we have kind of come to some independent conclusions about. The Straight. There are two very straight, predictable portions of the alley that will vacate those owners right to the middle. And then for the remaining hammerhead dead end portion of frontage percentage calculation will go into play. But that's really anybody's guess. I think if this were to end up in a court as a quiet title action. Right. It could be a pizza pie. It could be straight lines. It would just be a percentage. I will note that following committee in June, we on invitation of Mr. Mr. Foster provided some settlement proposals and didn't hear anything on those for more than three months until Friday before this meeting I where a map was attached to a response to that that was outdated contained inaccurate information such as the new deeds. So we were just kept in the dark on this and it was kind of sprung on us to have to analyze this. Okay. We can't thank you. That's enough for that, because I see that there's shaking of heads. And also, I don't want to get into the into the private details of the transaction, but I think that's enough. And I think we're all going to need a vacation after this. Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Councilman Espinosa. Questions for Mr. Foster and Public Works. Mr. FOSTER. So there are currently at least three property owners and three encroachments sorry that that are sort of beneficial for access today. Is that correct? Only two properties that actually use the property for access. And there is at least that much agreement that if we what we know is that if the land is vacated, some owners might get something and other owners might get other things. And with those two that are currently benefiting from those encroachments, have agreements among themselves that they're going to continue working together to maintain the access that that they now currently have and sort of co utilize that? That is correct. It would. Be. The only thing that I will tweak there is that there is a third owner who doesn't use the alley. It's on the other side of their fence and they don't have any reason for this particular property. And my clients have been in communication with them to purchase that should the alley vacation come to fruition. So essentially the historic utilization to date will be maintained? That is correct. Okay. So to to to my colleagues, you know, that is actually more information than we have on any vacation that we've approved in the three years that I've sat on this seat. You know, we usually approve these things and then let the state do it. I mean, let let the lines sort of fall where they may. So what we actually have is actually general consensus that the current sort of multi means shared access that has been used to date is there. So my question to public works so well. And so yeah, so I'm concluding that, yes, we have more information to preserve current access and current encroachments that the city has already now deemed okay because they don't need the land provide. So but the current situation is that is in fact right of way. So if, if Mr. I mean a script the names if the if if if Garret were to you know, we have a lot of developments, particularly in my district where there's existing alleyways that are improved to some degree, usually not improved. I have seen developers replace entire alleys as part of their development since we have the right of way today. Could could Mr.. What's his name? Sorry, Mr. Gately. Could Mr. Gately come to the public works and say, look, I will I will construct I would like to access my property from the hour from from this right away . And I would do improvements to city standards from the from the entirety, from the existing street right away across this right of way to my home. And would that be acceptable to public works if they met all city standards for alley right away. I may need to call up one of our representatives from right away services to answer that. The city has no plans at this time to improve that alley as to whether or not we would accept a private citizen essentially making that offer. I will have Jim Barwick this evening. I'm Jim Barwick with Public Works right away services and I think the whole point of the vacation would be lost on that. I don't know how to get the other people to agree to that. Like she said before, we don't get a precedent like of vacating an alley and then an access easement. No, no, no, I wouldn't. I'm talking about if if if at the time when he came in and said, hey, I want to I want access, when the city thought he had alley access because there's a right away on a map and then they realize that actually it doesn't exist. If he had said, oh, I will do that, I will construct that alley for a public benefit. Would would the city would public works review that and consider that and maybe even approve it if it most likely? Yes, if you decided to. But from what I understand out there, the. The amount of construction would take to do that would be pretty immense. But yes, the answer is probably yes. So those are the two those are the answers I wanted, because what I've been doing, I mean, I sort of this is borderline commentary, but I think my colleagues should know this is that I've seen it both ways. And it occurred to me, too, that that, yeah, a proper alley could in fact be constructed there and in fact, reached out to Mr. Gidley and suggested that approach. And that approach has never been fulfilled. And so at some point, me personally and I can take this position because this is not a quasi judicial matter, I'm like , no, the standards are the standards. You meet them or you don't. And if you're in if you're not content with with doing that and satisfying what the city expects from us, Ali, improvements, then we're at an impasse and that the appropriate thing is to follow through with the vacation and let the let the castles fall where they may because we have deemed it if we vote that way, that it is no longer a piece of property that the city. Yes, I believe that's correct. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Espinosa. Councilman. Real quick, sir. What's the. Well, if this vacation's approved, what's the status of that Excel equipment? As in and. I know. There is an easement for to maintain the Excel transformer so it will remain. Sale. Stay. Yes. Yes. Thank you very much. Menu. Councilman Sussman Okay. If I go to Councilwoman Ortega, of course. Councilman Ortega So I just want to clarify. If the. Mr. is that Garrett is provided more land than what he is entitled to, as was stated by David Foster. Does that still give him access? I didn't hear that answered clearly. To be able to get to the back part of his property off of that street. So if somebody could answer that question. It would not anything around. Mr.. GIDLEY As I guess, entitlements upon vacation is buried deep within that dead end of the alley, and he would still be isolated from the actual paved portion that the other neighbors are currently accessing. So in your mind, what solves that is a public easement that would grant access not only to him but to any of those property owners off that alley, regardless of which side of the the alley, it's you know, it abuts up to the different property owners on both the east and the west side. Yes. Either an easement or no vacation at all. And the city enforces the public right of way. Okay, Sara, the map I'm looking at shows that that is a concrete alley, not all the way. There is a section of a paved roadway extending from the north about some some feet below. It is unimproved after that. Okay. And so public works is not wanting to put a an easement on that alleyway once it becomes private. Is that what you're saying is what would set a precedent? Once it becomes private property, we would have no it would be private property. The city would have would have would not have a role in placing an access easement on it. Do we not have access easements for various utilities and other infrastructure on private property around the city? We do and I will. It looks like the city attorney's office can explain a little further. Hi, this is Brandt Eisen from the city attorney's office. If we wanted if there was going to be a public access easement, we would need to reserve that within the the vacation ordinance itself. Just like we're reserving the Excel easement, it would be through the entire alley, and it would necessitate that some of the neighbors that have improvements in the alley would need to remove those improvements. Is my understanding of to have full access, obviously. So it is essentially is like not vacating at all if you're doing it at one point, the portion that we were talking about previously there was going to be a public access easement was for two separate driveways at the top part at the hammerhead part of the alley. If we were to reserve an access easement through the entire alley, neighbors would need to remove parts of. I'm not sure what what dimensions they would need to remove, but they would need to remove improvements that are currently in the alley. So I can't tell from looking at this map if there is any access from what looks like the. I'm not sure if that's the north end on this map. It's the blue shaded part where Mr. Garrett's property is. Is there any access to Mr. Garrett's property from anywhere other than that current alley off the West Side or what looks like maybe the north side? Maybe it's a cell phone. I can't tell. I don't know. Yeah, I don't know the answer to that. Yeah. Jarrett's only vehicle access is off of Leeds Dale Drive. And when it was described a few moments ago that after the paving on the straight portions of the alley, that it's unimproved, it's unimproved and that it's not a paved alley. But the neighbors have put retaining walls. They've changed topography, they've expanded their backyards. They've planted trees in the alley. So it's improved in a personal property perspective, and that's what's blocking my clients access. Even though it's currently. Public right of way. Since it was platted and dedicated. 60 years ago. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Sussman, you back up? Yes. And you can see how complicated this particular project has been. Sara, I have some questions and that's it's probably looking forward. The city wasn't paying attention when these encroachments happened. And it has caused this kind of, you know, worry between neighbors. And I'm wondering if the city has got a plan to using perhaps our wonderful GIS system to sort of study the cities to make sure that this sort of thing is not happening in many other places in the city. As of right now, our process for enforcement within the right of way is is to respond to issues as they come to our attention. That is certainly something that we could could review what that process looks like and throughout the city, what we might be able to do to improve how those things can come to our attention . But we are not currently planning to go out and do proactive encroachment patrols throughout every alley and piece of right of way in the city. But we can we do respond when the issues come to our attention as of in this case, from neighbors or other issues that come up. I certainly wouldn't expect you to do patrols, but I would think perhaps we could invent something with gas to take a look from a bird's eye view. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilman Espinosa. Yeah, David, I don't know if you have the answer to this, but maybe somebody else does. Do you know what the value of land is in this neighborhood? Because this is not an inexpensive place to live. I mean, we've had the property appraised. But do you know what the square footage of dirt is? I we. We have an appraisal that has that. I can't give it to you right off the top of my head. I mean, it's not it's not inexpensive. So it's safe to say, though, that pretty much everyone who borders that right away today stands the possibility of gaining land, except for the well, except for the actual applicant that filed for no money. They will be. Yeah. I mean, what, because it was dedicated at the time that it was platted. So some developer gave that land to the city 60 or 70 years ago. And the city is in the process potentially of giving it back, you know, to the subsequent owner, you know, 60 or 70 years later. Yeah, they're not paying for it. It goes back on the on the tax rolls as well. And it's taxed. I just I want to just make a clarification mostly for Councilwoman Ortega, because we haven't had a chance to talk about this. This property has been planted for 70 years. And for 40 of those years, Dr. Paul Stead, who's not here, actually took care of the city's property and he kept it as a community garden. And everybody had fruits and vegetables as a result of him maintaining the city's property because the city wasn't maintaining its own property. And and so. A. Garage was built with access off of this driveway. And my client's home was built before they purchased it with access off of a driveway. And the city approved those things using this as the access point to both of those improvements. So much to Councilwoman Testaments point. Yeah, I mean, there's some ownership that I think the city has to have in terms of how this circumstance has led itself to a half an hour or 45 minute conversation on a monday night, which is the first time I've experienced this kind of a conversation here and for many of you as well. But notwithstanding all of that, this is not. Necessary for even Mr. Gidley to have access, because he's had. Access off of lead steel. That home has had access off of lease sales since 1960 when the home was built. And that is and nobody is entitled to more than one point of access. It should be noted as a clarification that this issue arose to a site inspection because Mr. Gidley had sought a permit to build a new garage off of leads. Dale which is what resulted in the inspector coming out and noticing that there was this issue of the alley because the inspector thought. That the garage was supposed to be built off an alley that doesn't exist. That's how this whole thing started, because Mr. Gidley was building an improvement to his garage off of Lisa Dale. And that's the history. So one question to Mr. Diddley's attorney as well, because, you know, I tried to remedy that very situation, but that that entire history is very clear to me. And so but so too, to that point ish, Mr. Gidley might stand the possibility of getting existing right of way if if a vacation was approved by this council, Mr. . Gidley might stand to get some land as part of the subsequent parceling out of that former right of way, you know, which would eventually essentially expand the land area of his property, which would be available for backyard or development or other sort of personal use. What that he doesn't have or would never have with Right of Way. Is that true or not? That's absolutely correct. And Garrett would happily improve upon whatever land, whatever title vests in his name after vacation. But windfalls of land and cash have always been secondary tertiary to Mr. Hadley's primary concern here, which is safe access through the Ashley Weed Stables as a state highway, frequent accidents outside of his driveway. If you know the intersection of Alameda and leads Dale it's a very busy, very congested area. The driveway to the southeast of Garrett was blocked up and a wall was created because it was unsafe. And the neighbors moved their access over to the street, to the east. Not recalling what that street is, but it's primarily been an issue of access, and we've reiterated that throughout this entire process when I've been on board for the past year. Garrett For the years before that, that safe access through the alley. As the other neighbors are also able to enjoy has been Mr.. Gately, as you understand that that entire time, if you've been on board for one year, Mr. Gidley has had for that entire time the ability to go to right away with the drawings showing a proper alley being constructed by him from the road to the north all the way across. Relocating the transformer. Getting through those approvals all the way to his house. Not saying it, it would be a done deal because granted that transformers in the way. So there's a whole lot of work that could have been incurred occurring over this last year in good faith towards getting to a right of a proper alley that meets city standards the way any other developer would do, and that has not occurred. Do you understand that? That has always been an option? We are. And to my understanding, when Garrett approached the city several years ago, he was essentially told that it wasn't possible because of the improvements. It's a vicious chicken or the egg situation where the we are arguing for the legal status of the alley. The whites and the other neighbors are saying it's some sort of current physical use of the alley. So we we attempted that and we ran into serious. And there are signals from the city. We recognize that there is a legitimate hurdle with the transformer that exists in the right of way. And there is no there is. Even if we were to grant an easement, there is no guarantee that he would ever be able to access his property unless, you know, without some gerrymandering of the of that easement or some deference by Xcel, you know, this this was not we don't get to this point without serious consideration of the ramifications. And there have always been a sort of more proper channel in a more appropriate way to to address this concern. And and somehow we ended up in this situation where we have two attorneys sort of arguing both sides of of this before us. And that's actually none of this is really of a concern to at least me as a member of council on whether a vacation is appropriate or not. But thank. You. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Flynn. Thanks, Mr. President. I really hate to. Reward an encroachment onto public property that has occurred over a significant amount of time. But it is apparent that the city has played a role in this as well. And I think I want to suggest a course of action for us, and that would be. To. To publish this on first reading and sort of pull the grenade pin on it. And the clock is now ticking. This has been hanging fire for such a long time. I think if we put this on first reading and then we hold it over for final and we can make a decision then based on whether the neighbors can come up with some sort of an agreement among themselves. I feel sort of like the the French cleric are no Amalric at the massacre of this gay and say let's just. Kill the alley and. Let the owners sort it out. So I advocate that we take a vote on this and move it on to publication. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. And I'll just jump on that and say that I am not at all comfortable with this yet. Still, after multiple committee meetings and tonight. But I completely agree with you that we should publish this because this is first reading, move it on and then we will be back. For some second Councilman Flynn's motion. So, well, that's the motion that's already on the floor. Conveniently so. Madam Secretary, Raquel Sussman. Hi, Black. I'm Brooks Espinosa. Flynn Gilmore. Herndon Cashman. Canete Lopez. New Ortega. Mr. President. I am secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results. 12 days, 112 hours one day. Council Bill 394 has been ordered published. Now, Councilwoman Sussman, do you have a motion to postpone? Second, final reading. Councilman Flynn and Espinosa. And I'm ahead of you here. I move that final consideration of Council Bill 18 dash 0394 be postponed to Monday, September 10th, 2018. That's two weeks from today. It has been moved and seconded. Are there any questions or comments just about the postponement? Seeing none. Madam Secretary, Roll Call. Susman Hi. Black Eye Brooks. Espinosa Hi, Flynn. I. Gillmor i Herndon I Cashman can eat. Lopez I knew Ortega I. Mr. President, I'm secretary. Please. Because voting in those results. 3939 as final consideration of Council Bill 394 will be Monday, September 10th. All right. Moving on, Madam Secretary, are you pleased with the next item on our screen and Councilman Flynn? Go ahead with your questions on Council Bill 863.

A bill for an ordinance clarifying and amending the authority of the Office of the Independent Monitor. An ordinance clarifying and amending the authority of the Office of the Independent Monitor and expanding the appointment process for the Citizen Oversight Board to include City Council appointments. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-30-19.

DenverCityCouncil_02112019_19-0029

No items have been called out and under pending. No items have been called out. All right. Looks like we got them all. Madam Secretary, if you could please put the first item on our screens. And, Councilwoman, can you go ahead with your comment? Thank you, Mr. President. This is the bill to update and clarify the powers of the Independent Monitor and the Citizen Oversight Board that works with the Independent Monitor on independent oversight of police and sheriff. We're going to hold our substantive comments until next week on this bill. But I wanted to, for transparency to the community and my colleagues, let them know that an amendment will be coming next week on a very tiny technical issue, which is we did not get this staggering quite right for the members of the Citizen Oversight Board. And so you'll see an amendment. We wanted to just give you time to absorb it, so we'll send it to you this week. But it will basically just ensure that we have a chunk of members kind of expiring in an irregular cadence rather than having a big chunk at once and then none for a year. So we didn't get that quite right. And I'm sorry we didn't catch it sooner, but transparency just wanted folks to know if anyone who's listening or watching needs to see the amendment. We will have it available through my office. 720337 7712 or contact the city council main office and we can have them get it to folks as well. So we'll talk with you more about the bill next week. Thank you.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP HR17-104 and award a contract to Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA, for healthcare, employee benefits consulting, and actuarial services, in an annual amount not to exceed $350,000, for a period of five years with the option to renew for three additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to issue a Blanket Purchase Order to Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., of Newport Beach, CA, for healthcare, employee benefits consulting, and actuarial services provided during the procurement process and additional months of transition, in the amount of $140,000. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06122018_18-0444

Motion carries. Thank you. Number 20, please. Report from Human Resources and Financial Management. Recommendation to award a contract to Alliant Insurance Services for health care, employee benefits, consulting and actuary services, and an annual amount not to exceed 350,000 citywide. Thank you. Let's go to staff. Vice mayor, councilmembers. This item was continued at the May 15th meeting. Our H.R. director, Alex BASKAS will walk us through the report. Good evening, city council members. Before you is a recommendation to award a contract to Alliant Insurance Services to perform employee benefits, consulting and actuary services on behalf of the city with an annual base amount of $224,000, with an end with an additional recommendation of $126,000 for additional studies or services. Please note that there's a correction on the requested contract term that is reflected in the council letter. Human Resources is requesting the Council approve a contract term of three years with three one year options as specified in the request for proposal for a total of up to six years. Human Resources is also requesting the Council to authorize a blanket purchase order to alliant in the amount of $140,000 for services provided during the procurement process. The city utilizes a benefits consulting firm to provide technical expertize to assist the city with the development, negotiation and implementation of health and other employee benefits. This is important to maintain a valuable and cost effective employee benefits program, which includes a self-funded PPO and fully insured HMO health plan. The PPO plan covers roughly 2600 employees, and the HMO covers approximately 1600 employees and their dependents and their dependents. The consulting services also provide also assist the city in evaluating the entire benefits program for quality, competitiveness, cost effectiveness and compliance with plan, administration rules and regulations. They also assist us in evaluating career renewal calculations and assist with the development of budget projections in our budget process. They also conduct benchmarking, benchmarking studies and identify and recommend cost saving options for the city, and they also assist in the development of employee communication materials. Alliant was selected through an RFP process with the oversight of the procurement division. A total of seven proposals were received, including the Incumbents Alliance and a panel consisting of human resources, staff and financial management analysts was comprised and they selected Alliant because of their experience in the Public Sector Plan Benefits Area and also their strong service model and comprehensive services to support the city's strategy of cost containment and providing an employee benefits program that's beneficial for all employees. This concludes our report, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Councilwoman Price. Miss Vasquez. I know there's been. I really know how to characterize it, I guess. Miscommunication, the last time the item came forward. There had been some concerns expressed by one of the employee groups, and we were assured at council that those concerns had been alleviated. I felt uncomfortable at that time and asked that it be continued and then was contacted afterwards saying that the concerns had actually not been alleviated and that some of the things that had been expressed at council by staff, maybe there was not a meeting of the minds in terms of that which you know is going to happen . I understand that. But I think it puts us in a difficult position because we have to make these credibility calls. I have a few concerns about moving forward with the contract tonight. First, I want to thank you for the diligence that you've put into the work through the RFP process to get to the point where a client is selected. And I have no concerns with the recommendations that Alliant be the company that we go with. I do I do. Wish. However, to receive kind of an update from you in regards to have there been concerns expressed by any employee groups about going with Alliant and if so, what has been their proposed solution? Councilmember, just to address the first part of your statement there, there was a miscommunication in terms of us understanding what the union concerns were. We spoke with one representative and we thought we had address those concerns. And then when we spoke another to another representative, we found that there was additional concerns. So we have had several conversations to attempt to address those concerns. And primarily the outstanding issue is that the the union believes that the city should hire a secondary benefits consultant and the city should also cover the cost of that additional consultant. And let me just kind of back up and provide a little bit of history. Last year, through Emory University, Asians, the Poea negotiated a letter of agreement that allowed or gave them an avenue to hire a benefits consultant that which they would cover the cost. And that consultant would review the renewal process for the medical plan, alongside with the city's benefit consultant, a client. And through that process, some of the other union groups also participated in that process with them. They the unions did not opt to go that route this year. But I understand that they have raised a concern recently, and they would like the city to, as I indicated, hire a secondary consultant and cover the cost of that secondary consultant. Let me ask you this. Did the procurement of an initial consultant by some of the labor groups result in any cost savings for the city? So the the process where we use the additional consultant identified some areas that where we could save money but also identified additional costs. And in our other plan, the PPO plan. So they identified savings in the HMO and they were projecting save additional costs in the PPO plan. Our consultant took a look at those projections and also provided feedback. There was different methodology used between both of the consultants. I think that's where some of the differences were. But ultimately, the city did achieve savings, primarily with our consultant negotiating with Anthem, the provider that took place over a series of months. Okay. So so there was some additional efficiency finding efforts that were not funded by the city, but did result in the city realizing some benefits, financial benefits. I think I think that's a little difficult for me to say that it was just solely based on the secondary consultant. I think it would be fair to say that it was as a result of the Alliance consultant negotiating directly with Anthem and also as a as a result of the city's buying power, if you will. And then in addition to that, if you recall, in August, we had an issue with Anthem and Memorial Care, and that garnered a lot of publicity and it impacted could have impacted a number of our employees. So that also gave us leverage to negotiate a further reduction in the rates. Okay. So in your opinion, what is the downside of having a secondary review at this point, if that's what the labor organization is asking for? What's the downside to the city? So we have I have conveyed to the unions, if they choose to continue the pilot program an additional year based on the terms that we negotiated with them and this council approved meaning that the union would pay for the consultant. We would be supportive of that process. My understanding is that they've opted not to do that and they are seeking for the city to cover the costs. My concern initially with with that proposal would be that there would the city would be paying for duplicate services. And I understand that concern. So I have a proposal that's possibly a compromise, and I'd ask my colleagues to support it. So by way of motion, I would be requesting our city auditor to conduct a review of the proposed contract with Alliant Insurance Services for Health Care, Employee Benefits, Consulting and Actuarial Services, and to report back to the City Council. Within 30 days in order to provide. An update or if the study is complete assurances that the agreement that is currently negotiated and on the agenda tonight for approval is fully evaluated and provided to all parties. And I'd ask for my colleagues for their support. Can we get a second on that? I'm sorry. This is part of the part of the motion that you're making, right? Okay. So there's a motion in a second to that customer. Pierce. Yes. I want to thank Councilmember Price for bringing this motion forward. And I do have some comments around the process. You know, we asked for a meeting to happen two weeks ago and typically is not what I like to do behind the rail. But we asked for a process two weeks ago and we had, you know, lots of back and forth and different stories about what meetings were canceled, who canceled where, what miscommunication there were. And it seemed like a hot potato. And meanwhile, my staff spent the entire day trying to track down what really happened and what the real concerns were. And having, you know, as Councilmember Price mentioned, the last meeting, we were told one thing, that an organization was okay with the vote and then found out later that they, in fact, were not. So I have a real concern with the process and the way that this was handled. And so as we move forward, I think outside of having our city auditor do this, we need a process that ensures that before something like this is brought back to council, that everybody is on the same page so that we're not all running around trying to track down the truth somewhere in between everybody's stories. I would like to make sure that we have power to fire all the unions if there's something like this coming forward that when we get a word from our director of h.r. That everybody's good and we're a go, that we can trust that and this is the second time that it's happened where we were in a position where we couldn't we didn't know what to what to trust and who to believe because everybody comes with a different story. So it's something as major as this, you know, with a contract that could go out six years. I just want to make sure that there's process and oversight. And so ensuring that we do have the city auditor take a look at this, I think that's a right decision because we're not going to be kicking the can down the road or asking for a delay, which I know was a topic that was brought up. So I do support this because I believe it will move us forward quickly so that we don't incur higher cost, as was talked about today. So I also encourage our colleagues to support this. Thank you. I do have the city manager that's cued up. I know. And the city attorney. Mayor, councilmembers. I do want to just put a little push back on that. Four weeks ago, the issue was a union wanted to do a meet and confer. That was the issue. It was determined that day that they didn't have the ability to do a meet and confer and that was put to bed. It's been the past four weeks. Then there was an issue that we should potentially be selecting a separate vendor instead of alliance that seemed to get put to bed and then something came up back again on Friday. So I do want to say this has been a very moving target. I want to say everything that you've heard from our h.r. Director has been true. She's given you up to date information. What has happened is different sides. The story has changed as other people went back and different unions are talking to each other and stuff. Alex has been on the phone with the unions today to see what happened and which story has changed and who's changing their mind and all that. So it is very, very fluid. So it's shifted again, even though it's been four weeks. It shifted to late last Friday for a meeting with the unions to discuss what's before us tonight with the extra consultant. So basically, I do want to point out that we can certainly talk about, you know, coming back with a consultant or something. But I do want to know that let you know that we're saving approximately we're spending about $11,000 extra per month by not assuming this contract. So this past four weeks has cost us 11,000. And as we continue to go, we're not achieving the savings that we negotiated through Alex with this contract. Mr. Parkin. Thank you, Mayor. And I'm just looking at for actually clarification of the substitute motion and what is being asked of the city auditor. Are we approving this contract and you're asking the auditor to look at this evening? Is that the recommendation or you want to wait on taking action on this to have her review? I'm not sure what she's reviewing or you having her look at the benefits of having a second company who duplicates the efforts to some extent, possibly. No, my my motion was to have her conduct a review of the proposed contract that's before us tonight that we're not approving. It would remain proposed with Alliant Insurance Services for health care, employee benefits, consulting and Actuarial Services, and report back to the City Council in order to provide assurances that the agreement or proposed contract is fully evaluated and provided to all parties. So your statement, if I am sorry, I don't I just wanna make sure I understand. But to so the audit would be out of the RFP process itself, not the actual contract that was written. The actual proposed contract. The contract would be me would we reviewed by me. If you if you're looking at an audit of the process, I think the auditor may be the appropriate partner. So I'm not I'm not sure what exactly you're looking for in the contract or the order to do. I mean, certainly the other can look at whatever you wanted to look at, but yeah, the legal document would be mine. Sure, sure. And I understand that. And I guess maybe I should be clear. I'm not asking that the city auditor evaluate the legal terms of the contract, but that she evaluate the terms of the contract as they relate to health care, employee benefits, consulting and actuarial services, and to provide for us to us in terms of whether or not there have been look, we've just heard from Alex that others have retained or procured services from others at the at their own costs to evaluate these contracts and come back with recommendations that have saved the city money. I understand that it's costing us $11,000. But my understanding, unless I'm wrong, is that the last review that was done by a different Labor organization resulted in savings for the city that were far in excess of $11,000 or $22,000 or whatever it may be. That may be wrong. That may be wrong. I see the city manager shaking his head. This is not a conversation that we should be. If I'm wrong, then then maybe I'll just turn it over to the city manager to answer on that. I'm just going to go with what Mr. Vasquez said, that certainly the Keenan group was a very, very substantial group and they gave options for a client to work with. But honestly, Anthem would have never come to the table for any of the things that Alliant wanted or Keenan wanted. Unless we have that that tragedy between Anthem and Memorial Care last year that opened the door for us for a client to do some heavy duty negotiating. So Alliant did the negotiating. And I'm we're certainly going to take input from any group that provides advice and stuff but we're alliance save the day. And I get that and let me just reiterate because maybe that part wasn't clear. I have no issues with Alliant. I, I started my comments with commending our director for the excellent work of the RFP process. What we're trying to do is bridge a gap here between a labor organization who feels that there could be additional reviews of this contract to identify efficiencies and practices that maybe we have not identified that could save the city money. And I'm hearing the city say we don't believe that's necessary. We believe that's due flip duplicative and we're not willing to pay for it. So my compromise and the city auditor is okay with this is to have the city auditor take a look at some of those elements and components and make sure that we are basically having a second set of eyes on the services. That we are procuring through. Alliant for, for this contract. It's, it's. It's a long contract. We're talking about the costs of the monthly cost to us right now, but we're looking at a multiyear contract. And I just don't know, other than the $11,000, what the downside of having the city auditor take a look at it and make sure we're getting the the best possible deal that we can in the most efficient way that we can. I don't know what the downside of that is, if, in fact, it might bridge a gap between our employees and the city. Because, frankly, I'll be quite honest, I don't feel like the communication story is good right now because I feel a little bit of pushback in just expressing concerns. If I may. So just for again, I'm sorry, clarification, but if we're asking the auditor to look at basically the scope of. Work to make sure that nothing was left out of the proposal or nothing should be added to that so that a client is looking at everything that they, the auditor, believes should be included. Is that a fair summary? Let me ask the councilwoman. I think that's correct. And, you know, Councilwoman Pierce has seconded this motion, so I'd like her to weigh in if she wants to clarify the scope of the audit by the city auditor, because I certainly don't want to speak for her as the secretary of the motion, so I'll turn it over to her. Customer Pierce. Thank you, Councilmember. I just for me, I seconded this because I feel like we've got the two studies and what we would like. What I would like to see is the auditor, take a look at both of those studies and compare them and give us that feedback. She could also audit the process and maybe it's between both her and your office. But the fact is that we have two different studies. Instead of going out and having a third study to have our auditor give us a breakdown where those discrepancies and are there other cost savings and is this the best? Does she advise us on on taking a yes vote on this contract? I, I follow the last part. Does she advise taking a yes vote on the contract? What I don't follow is that we have two studies. We have an RFP and we have a process that is being recommended tonight. And I understand that you would like the auditor to take a look at what that process and what that recommendation includes to to therefore, you hear from the auditor whether her office believes it's a it's a good move forward or that something else should be maybe added or it should be started over, whatever her recommendation be is . Yeah. So I was looking at both what the city has and what the policy has. That study that they took a look at and that we're comparing all the documents that we have around this around this contract. So I think what you've said is, yes, it's correct. We'll go with that. And I think also and I think. It shows how how complicated some of this stuff is. And to put it in front of council to vote on, we just want to make sure that we're making the right vote. So it's not to say that that it's a bad vote or that we don't support moving forward. It's that it's a it's a big decision for us. And we want to make sure we're doing the right thing. And I think just to clarify to I think it's the request is not necessarily an audit per se, but it sounds to me it's a review and some recommendations to the body as to all the information that's available that's been available through the process. And certainly there have been reports that have been commissioned and completed by some of our labor groups that those would be included in her review so that it's all reviewed. And then I'm sure she will get back to this body, whether it's in a memo or at the council, just her opinion on all the information she has before we move forward on the contract. So I think I think that's the request, if I captured it correctly or not perfectly. And so there's a motion and a second on that request. Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you. I'm confused. And I have a bunch of questions now. So the last. So my understanding and trying to simplify this, my understanding was last time we did this, there was a study conducted by by the Police Officers Association. Am I right? Mr.. Mr.. WEST Okay. And this was a third party independent consultant. Yes. Okay. And that study happened before the award. Was was it was given out or concurrently. When did that study happen? Alex That was after, right. So that that review conducted by Keenan was conducted last year during what we call our renewal process. So that would have been in June of 2017 in preparation for finalizing our 2018 plan year rates. Was that before Alliant was given the contract or after? So Alliant currently has the company already had they have the contract currently? Okay. We had we went out to RFP because we've had a contract with them for a number of years. And through the RFP process, Alliant was selected. Okay. So it seems to me like the conversation here, but before I even get to that. So, so my understanding, Councilman Price, so you already had this conversation with the city auditor and she said she was okay with doing this. Yes. I mean, where I'm trying to flesh out based on what what. The scope of everything here. Is saying, because it's a moving thing. And I get it what we want. But she's on board with taking a look and taking it. Okay. Did she talk about any cost to her? Because I know there was cost with the with the outside review. With any cost because she get it done in a month. I don't know. Okay. I don't know. And that's why I said 30 days. She could give us an update or, you know, if she has recommendation. And then the delay. Ms.. Vasquez, you said there was a certain amount per month delay on this. Yes. The cost of not entering into the new contract with the client, with the rates that they proposed in the RFP, would cost us $11,200 a month. Okay. So if the last time this happened, it seems to me because both organizations reach out to our office as well and figure that it was going to be worked out. But what it seems to me is that both so everyone on the council they've spoken has said, hey, you know, we have no problem with Alliance doing the work. But it appears that last time there were savings, you know, 30,000 went into a study, 750,000 came back. That's that's the word. That's not necessarily the case. But folks are really, truly concerned about it. And is there any risk to this operation? If we were to say employee groups put up the money, if savings exist, we pay the employee groups back. That way you don't start off at a deficit of $11,000 a month. And so I put that on the table to Councilman Price. Is that the goal here? Is it to save money and not necessarily enter into a contract when two groups are both saying the same thing? It is. But I also believe I believe our auditor can get back to us within 30 days with an update, by the way. And I do believe that it is a function that she could perform with existing resources. Perhaps the cost of who pays for this study is something that can be negotiated into future contracts with these different groups. But I think going piecemeal with each group, when we can get that checks and balances we're looking for through the city auditor would be the best course of action. I guess I guess what I what I'd like to do is just keep it clean. Keep it clean. Like, if there's a contract in front of us, if there's willingness on behalf of the council and the employee groups to say, commission a study and get the city attorney involved, then we just handle that. And we not necessarily expose ourselves to $11,000 of being outside of the contract. And if it comes back that there are no resources, then all we did was just spend $11,000. And and this is the second time that we've inserted the city auditor into a contract bid process, the second time that we've done that kind of on the fly. And I really don't like the practice of doing that on the fly without the full council being engaged in that conversation. But not necessarily just, you know, some of us. Well, this is a good time for all of us to be involved in that, certainly because we're all here in open court. I to say open court. It's here where, you know, we're on the record. We're all talking about it. But I will say, if the alternative is we just approve a contract that some people are uncomfortable with, I'm not willing to do that. Okay. But that's just me. Okay. So so yeah, I don't know if I'm if I'm as interested in, you know, doing a substitute or anything like that. But I would say that I think we're not giving enough credence to just simply let's just pay for the study. And if savings come back, we should simply recoup the employee groups if they're willing to step up. And then moving forward, we negotiate that into the contract. In my opinion, that gives validation of what city staff is saying. It gets validation with the employee groups are saying, and we don't set a new trend that we're stopping every contract, you know, the day of with, you know, information from auditors that are here and all of this other stuff. So I'm gonna let it stew a little bit, but I may introduce a substitute, but at this point, I'm going to listen. The rest of the colleagues. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. So just to go back, I hear Alex stating that she does not feel that the savings were significant. And from what claims I've heard, it sounds as though there's a claim that a $26,000 study saved $750,000. But I'm hearing Alex say that that. Can you clarify of what you believe to be true? Or if not you, I'm sure. So during the renewal process, this happens over the course of several months. Correct, Tom? Alliant is our city benefit consultant. And they negotiate with the carriers or on our behalf. They have direct communication with the carriers. In my experience, when carriers give you their initial offer, they always come in high. And so our benefits consultant, with the assistance of staff, negotiate to try to get those rates lower. We also report and work through the Hyatt Committee, which is a committee consisting a rubber representative of each of the bargaining units. And we during this renewal process, we meet monthly, if not twice a month, to go over this process. During that process for the HMO plan, for example, in Anthem initially came in with the 15.6% rate increase. We had a round of negotiation for a 20 plan year 2018. Perfect. Okay. And we had a recap that we had received during the RFP process the prior year. So that also helped us make sure that we didn't get a renewal over a certain cap during that process. As I indicated, Keynan was also reviewing the data that Anthem was using for their rate renewal. They reviewed the data independently and provided a report. The Hyatt reviewed that report. Alliant also reviewed their report and provided commentary. They had different methodologies that they used. They had different assumptions that they used. So they arrived at different projections, if you will, as to what the increase should be from Anthem Justice. So one of the things that's important is just because you believe that our rate should be at a certain amount, you don't always get that rate from the carrier. As I indicated, it is a negotiation process. So I think we were all in agreement that and pointed out some important things and and Alliant agreed with those things as well. But at the end of the day, the final reduction that we got from Anthem was as a result of the the situation with Memorial Hospital and that then the publicity surrounding that with that Alliant was able to go in and negotiate a further reduction in the rates. So where we ended up was with the final increase of 5% on the Anthem HMO plan, which was 1.62% in in the rates and 3.38% in the ACA fees with our mandatory. I see. When you review the Kenan report of two years ago, have you explored all things that they had recommended as potential opportunities for reductions in this next round of contracts? And are there any categories of which potentially need additional exploration? So we're going through the renewal process right now, and we certainly are going to look at any and all recommendations that were made. And we also are going to go into detail with the hiring and review the process. One of the lessons learned in this whole process is that Kenan was able to provide a more detailed review of how the rates are put together by the carriers. And and the hire was very much appreciative of that process. And so that's certainly something that we're going to take and we're going to apply this year with the client and go through more detail with the hiring about how the rates are developed and what goes into those rates. What are the assumptions and where are areas that we can make tweaks to reduce the rates? So are you saying that if we approved this today, which by the way, there's a typo again in our agenda which says it's a five year renewal period which our office has already reached out and I believe the RFP was three years. Is that accurate? So I'm not clear. Again, it adds a little bit of additional concern when our agenda items are inaccurate. Yeah, it does. Villages for that. It should be, as I indicated, a three year contract with three one year renewals for a total of up to six. And I also want to point out that we do have an ability to cut to terminate the contract with a 15 day notice at any point. Okay. It just still goes a little bit to credibility. I mean, and again, I think two weeks ago, Councilmember Supernova found spelling errors of street names. So we just need to be careful and know what we're specifically talking about. So a three year contract. Okay. I'm understanding that, Councilman Pryce, you're asking for Auditor Dodd O'Dowd to look at the rates and categories that Keenan looked at to see if there are additional savings possible. Or efficiencies. Or efficiencies, just a simple review and that she would get back to us in 30 days. Yes. And I believe, based on the scope of the study, it's something that can be done in-house so that we're not incurring an additional cost. Okay. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. I think I'm a little less confused. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks to all the questions here. And I do appreciate the constructive efforts to come up with some solutions. I do have a couple of questions. You mentioned Hayek and for our benefit and those listening at home watching, can you explain what that is and what that process is and who is involved in the Hayek. I'm sure. Through the collective bargaining agreements, there is a provision that has created the Hayek, which consists of a bargaining unit representative that is a member of the health plan. We meet on a monthly basis and the Hayek reviews the proposed benefit plan and they review the renewal process. They hear reports from our carriers on utilization. They get also reports from our benefit consultants on trends and demographics and compliance issues such as the ACA and other things that impact our health plan. Ultimately, what the Hayek does do is they develop a recommendation with regard to the health plan and any proposed changes to the plan, and that recommendation is forwarded to City Council or excuse me, to the City Manager for review and consideration. And then we bring to the Council what the final rates are and ask council to approve those rates. And we also include the report from the Hayek that sent to the city manager. And the the and just four, four, four, the acronym stands for our Health Insurance Advisory Committee, correct? That is correct. Every bargaining unit sit at that table, every represented bargaining unit. Every representative has a seat at that. But not all of them necessarily attend the meetings. But yes, all the bargaining units have a seat at that committee. Okay. And the the Elia group, what would be their role in that that Hayek process is that they're consulting, helping to negotiate the the planned benefits design, whatnot, is that correct? So at the at the Hayek meeting, this staff also participate in that committee and support the committee. And the consultants also sit out, attend the meetings and provide reports or answer questions if the Hayek members have questions. Okay. And so there was there was conversation regarding a potential meeting for. Right. So what is the hired process part of the collective bargaining process in itself? And in a sense in that this is the avenue per their M.O. you were they provide input on the employee benefit plan program. Okay. Thank you. And regarding that, we heard something about the Kenan report. Right. And that was an independent study, as I understand it. Who was how did we reach? How did that independent study come to be. So in the play? And will you agreement? There was a during negotiations they requested the ability to obtain their own benefit consultant. So through negotiations we agreed to permit that process. One of the concerns was, is that they, the consultant, in order for them to do their study, needed to have access to all employee de-identified data. We as so we as I indicated, there was a letter of agreement that permitted that with the condition that they pay for the study and that ultimately was adopted by the Council as part of their M.O. agreement. So when was that agreement negotiated? It was that the last round of negotiations? I believe we. Was it separate from the negotiation process? No, it was part of the negotiation process, a part of the entire M.O. negotiation process with POI. So it wasn't a well, it wasn't negotiated during the contract and wasn't like a side letter meeting confer. It wasn't negotiate. It was never. Situated during the ammunition process for their contract. I see. And so the question before us today is whether or not a bargaining unit and I'll just say I haven't been approached or have had any conversations with any bargaining unit regarding this. So I'm being brought up to speed this evening. And that's unfortunate. The the what's before us today is to have the city auditor do an independent review of the proposed contract. Mayor members of the Council. Yes, that's my understanding, is that the auditor would look at what is being proposed and give a recommendation on whether to move forward with what is being proposed by staff. I guess that that is pretty, in my opinion, benign and it just will add some time. I'm not sure if that is from based on what I'm hearing is that that's the real intent of what is the the real rub between the bargaining unit and their desire and what is being requested here. But that said, I mean, I can certainly support it. I've seen quite a few of these transactions happen over the years, and I don't think I've ever seen one. This. This. This. Unfortunately, this. This money. But I'm looking forward to support this and looking forward to the the auditors review and recommendation and assessment of the RFP here . But at the same time, you know, if the Keenan report was an independent audit, I I'm having a little trouble understanding how the city auditor is an independent voice in this matter as well. So. But I'll support this item just for the matter of move it, moving it forward and hopefully getting some resolution. Thank you. Comes from Birmingham and we've got a public comment. Thank you, Mayor. One of the most confusing things about this whole issue here is that there was apparently some negotiation took place apart from all the other bargaining units. And there was an agreement that came with an independent with independent study that apparently the unions paid into it, but did not totally agree with what was being presented in terms of what the cost total cost savings would be. There's a bargaining unit that feels that there could be an additional savings that could be conducted out there, that could be found if we had a, quote, unquote, independent review by our city auditor. I take a little aside from from Councilman Brosnan in the sense that our city honor is not independent. Our city auditor is elected and elected to be independent. So I don't see how that can not come into play here. But, you know, we have members of the IAM present in the audience and perhaps maybe they could shed some light on this issue in terms of what they feel are the main issues in this discussion here. Before we go into into public commentary, perhaps. That would be public comment. So. Okay. Well, then I'm going to get the opportunity for them to do that at that point then as well. But I do support the motion on the floor. I think that it's one it's a review that I think needs to take place if we're especially looking at charter change, where we're going to be adding some responsibilities to our city auditor. This is one of those points where we can have a preview, if you will, of what the city order can do in terms of clarifying those sticky issues such as these that come before us. Thank you. Just one question regarding before your comment. Yes. Just real briefly. I agree completely with Councilman Yarrawonga because I first of all, I don't believe the request by the organization is to have the city auditor look at it, that that was my ability to try to find some sort of compromise. That was the simplest and the least costly option. So I don't even know. I haven't communicated with them if that's acceptable to them. But what I what I'm hearing is there is a breakdown in the process. It's not unusual. I get it. Sometimes labor and management interests are at odds. This to me seems like a very simple ask. I could be completely misunderstanding the issue. I don't know. But they're basically saying we want another form of checks and balances before we sign this contract to make sure we're getting the best deal. Because if there's money on the table that can go back to the city, it could benefit the organization, it could benefit the labor groups. That's what I'm hearing. And we're kind of put in this place now where, you know, we're making. A credibility call. And I will say, when we negotiate contracts, the council relies a lot on staff's opinion and we defer a lot to staff's opinions when we're talking about salary and things like that. To me, this seems like one of those things where there just seems to be no downside to studying it further other than the $11,000, which I hate to waste, but I if we're going to enter into a contract where we could be saving a lot more money, maybe it's not $700,000, maybe it's $50,000, maybe it's $100,000. Why wouldn't we allow ourselves the opportunity to learn that information before we approve the contract, if we can do it in 30 days? So that with that out and absolutely, the city auditor is 1,000% independent from this body. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. And then, Miguel, the public are excellent. Thank you. Public comment. Good evening. My name is Richard Suarez. I represent the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. There was a lot of debate. First of all, I'd like to thank all the everyone involved for taking this matter. I believe this is a serious issue. I'd like to just make some clarifications on the Keenan group. Was an independent body hired by three labor organizations, the Peoria Fire and the IAM, the Kenan Group presented a proposal, if you will, that was significantly less in the area of increases that the Alliance group had presented. It was only after we shared that information with city management, that city management and I can't speak to the process, but it was after the discovery that there was a less expensive raid out there. City management came back and said, there's a savings. Now, the characterization this evening is that that savings came about came about as a result of a previous snafu with Memorial Hospital. And that was the the genesis, if you will, for creating that savings. What I would respectfully ask is, well, why wasn't that option sought after prior to the initial proposal? That was significantly higher. But be that as it may, the city manager believes that that savings came about. That hook, if you will, came about as a result of them owing us something in the final analysis. The Keenan group presented savings. Whether those savings to Councilman Price assertion are 700,000 or 100,000 or 50,000. There are savings. And since our members and I say feel safe to say that the members of the PRA fire and every other labor organization participate in those premiums. We believe that a review by what has been suggested by the city auditor and independent review would be a non damaging non cost issue. So I stand before you this evening to simply say that we're talking about a significant amount of money. And I again, thank the body for bringing this issue up and hopefully I'll address your concerns. If there are any questions, I'll be more than happy to address them. Thank you, Mr. Suarez. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker. I think my my comment will be just on the grassroots level. I spent a little time in human resources on the private level. So I understand what it means to have a human resource manager. I understand what it means to have a city manager. And I understand what an auditor does. The first thing I recognized when I saw that and I read through recommendations to adopt specific specifications and awarded a contract to Alliant Insurance Services of Newport Beach. That was the first red flag. One of the papers or journals that I read here whenever they're available, is a Long Beach business journal where you go through all the accolades of who these people are and what they offer. Long Beach. And they have I mean, you have everything. And I thought, well, we're going to add Newport Beach. Newport Beach is going to provide consulting services for them. But in my opinion, I'm saying why we're going out there, but we always say go beach. You mean there's nobody in Long Beach that can do this for this city? It just said to me and I'm thinking, look how much money we pay that city manager. But we're questioning his judgment. And if Lord Dowd, her position as auditor is so important, why isn't she brought in on everything of this magnitude? Why don't you bring her in? Is she? If she is your go to person when the rubber meets the road, why are you wasting time to bring it here? You listening to this? And I. I have a few alphabets behind my name. It makes me think I'm hearing something I should not be hearing at a public meeting. This kind of decision should have been made behind closed doors. This is nothing we needed to hear. It is an embarrassment. We shouldn't be hearing it. We have a city manager. And Laura, I paid attention to, I don't know, the woman. We've shaken hands maybe once in passing. But I've heard of her accolades. I've heard of the awards that you give her. So you trust her judgment. So now you're going to hold up the city. Again. I think we're hearing something we shouldn't be hearing. And I'm hoping that after tonight or whenever that vote is cast and if you wait this kind of thing, we shouldn't here again. This is something that you take behind closed doors and you settle the issues. What it's saying to me as a public person is you've lost trust with somebody. You're not you're not addressing that elephant in the room. Thank you. And the last speaker. And then we'll go back to the council. I think you're my new best friend. My name is Trent Bryson. Born and raised. Here in Long Beach, we have a local business that's been there since 1969. My father grew up in Rigley, went to Long Beach PI along with State. I have two kids at Long Beach Poly Stanford Middle School, and I'm an adjunct professor in human resources at Long Beach State. Our business was named Entrepreneur of the Year in 2017. We're a local broker. Seven people put in there. There are peace. Three people were chosen as finalists. Not one was local. We weren't even asked to be a finalist. In fact, not one of our references was called. We are told the reason we didn't get is we didn't have the experience to deal with the city. Guess who had the city of the city along with his contract all through the eighties and nineties? Our firm. It just doesn't make sense. So here I am giving back to my community, chairman of the Ball Boys and Girls Clubs, along which. I speak. On behalf of Young Horizons, child comprehensive group Children Today and the one that they asked to come in and raise money. So instead, we continue to give money to a client who's actually based out of Greenwich, Connecticut, and we give them money and we have somebody outside representing us. And then when I ask what happened? Why don't we get a shot? Why don't even we even be a part of the fair process? Nobody has any answers for us. So what I'd say is we're right here. If we're good enough to to run the Boys and Girls Clubs of Long Beach, if we're good enough to be Entrepreneur of the year, for good enough. To be ranked by our peers as top advisors. In the country, for good enough to teach human resources in Long Beach State. Where are we good enough to even have a shot at City of Long Beach? Doesn't make any sense. Half my employees live in Long Beach. I live in Park Estates. We're based on Bixby and 36th Street. We help all of our companies that we represent raise money, bring money into Long Beach. We support our community over and over again. And then when we finally put our bid in, we don't even get a chance. So I don't know the process that you continue to talk about. I will say as an advisor. An extra 11,200 because you haven't signed a contract doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense because you're paying $140,000 in transition assistance anyways. So whatever you're being told sounds to me like a scare tactic. I don't know all the everything that's happening, but it doesn't make sense. The rates are negotiated with the health insurance company. This contract is for who's your consultant. Why would this contract affect your rates? It doesn't make any sense. So I think you guys need to get the bottom of it. And that's just from a resident on that part. That's not even from a business owner. But as a resident and a business owner that lives here, something doesn't make sense and it feels like they're just renewing a contract because that's the contract that's always been there. And I'd say, why not ask somebody who's local that's shown that they can do the work and that's proven themselves over and over again. So thanks for your time. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks. So it's just a couple of things that, you know, that I have to acknowledge. So two things, really. So, one, while I do trust and believe, Councilwoman Pryce, about the commitments from Ms.. Dowd, I know that she has no motivation, no reason to misrepresent those motivations. I believe that the process and the targeted processes, if we're going to commit that office and based on our experience, it typically you know, typically the staff internally does basic stuff and they contract out the real financial analysis. And I just last time this came up, Ms.. Dale came up and said, Yeah, I would hire a contractor. It would take me more than 30 days. So if I heard from her that 30 days is here and will cost me no cost, then that's fine. The second part is truly just the integrity and integrity of the negotiation process. Frankly, when these issues were arise, have when these issues came up before the council meeting and I know they came up because they came you know, they got to me today. Frankly, we should have the council or whoever that was raised. We should have asked staff to kick this back for a week because this process is a messy if we've kicked it back for a week to allow them allow them to one, identify if there are resources to conduct a study and two, or to reach out to employee groups. I think the council wouldn't be bickering or going back and forth about this process. Frankly, it should just be cleaner. And so what I think is I just have a couple of questions. So. Mr.. So, Mr. West, do you can you identify the funding to conduct this third party study? Is that possible. If directed to find the funding? We certainly would, yes. Okay. Can that happen within seven days? Yes. Okay. And can you sit down with the unions within seven days? Yes. Okay. Well, I'd like to propose that we just push this back for seven days. Is a council meeting in seven days? City attorney. City city manager says he can identify the 26,000, whatever it is for the third party study. That also gives us time to hear from the city auditor. And then there can be a recommendation that comes back from city staff that says either we go with a third party, third party recommendation from whatever this group is that costs 26,000. Or we hear from the city auditor from her lips that, you know, she can conduct the same study, you know, for the same amount of money or less in the same time frame. And that will make me more comfortable in this process. So so I'm going to council and price that's either going to be a friendly amendment or a substantive motion. That's really your choice. Well, I don't want to put you in that position. I'm going to make it a substitute motion. You're making a. Substitute. I'll just make it a. I don't. I honestly don't. I know that you feel very strongly about the contract piece. I hope the one week allows us to work some of that out so we don't have to vote on a contract that we're not on board with. But I honestly don't want to put you in that position. So I'll just say I just want to put this as an alternative to the body. It seems like there's a second, and I want to offer that as an alternative. That's fine. I would accept it as a friendly to you. Well, then we'll go that way. We'll take it a friendly if you don't. I just don't want to vote on the contract. I understand. I understand. I just think this will be cleaner. A cleaner process. Okay. So we have a we essentially have the the proposed friendly. So that's the motion on the floor. It's currently there. Councilman Gonzalez. Yeah, I think I think just the overall and we've been hearing it is just the trust on both ends, both from our employee groups and of course from our public and our businesses. And I know Councilmember Mongo and I have been working on the Long Beach Business First Plan and in that and I know John GROSS, if you sat down with us and talked about that plan and we we really want to hit that point again, and I understand if if all the checks are not hit in terms of businesses, not, you know, hitting that criteria, but it seems like they would and have before and it seems that they would be a good, you know, option not to, you know, just say it would be him. But just in general, I think this is a really good example of sort of breaking down that trust with our with our businesses. And then in the employee group section, you know, I, I think, you know, they were pretty loud and clear as to not I mean, even getting the information from them, from all of them was a bit unclear. And it was just really unsettling to me that we had this in front of us and there wasn't a lot of answer our questions or I'm sorry, answers to our questions. So I like the the direction this is headed. I will say just kind of food for thought down the road is that if we do find that there is an issue with the process, that perhaps there needs to be an annual review when we have these contracts, you know, whether it's the three years or what have you , you know, it feels like there needs to be an additional layer every single year somehow, whether that's simultaneously with the city attorney's office and the city auditor's office. But it just seems like that would build a bit more trust on that end. So thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I want to echo the comments of Councilman Gonzalez and. I guess, additional months of transition. Is that supposed to be the fact that we were supposed to approve this four weeks ago and 140,000? The word transition in there at all seems surprising since it's the current contractor. Just a thought on another item on the agenda and how the word how it's worded, because you're you're transitioning from the same provider to the same provider. Just a thought. Councilwoman Price. I'm sorry. Q Okay, it's on there, but. Okay. Well, we have a motion in a second. Please go ahead and cast your votes. That's the friendly that's been accepted. Motion carries. Great motion. Curious. Thank you. We were moving on to the next item already.

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Long Beach City College (LBCC), the Long Beach Department of Economic Development, Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Network (PGWIN), and North Long Beach higher education experts and advocates to explore the feasibility of establishing a higher education center in North Long Beach.

LongBeachCC_11132018_18-1006

Thank you. Motion carries item 29, please. Communication from Councilmember Richardson. Councilmember Pearce. Council Member. Stronger Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request City Manager to explore the feasibility of establishing a higher education center in North Long Beach. Thank you, Councilor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We have an opportunity tonight to address an incredible need, North Lawn Beach, and provide an opportunity to help our community college. The the motion before us tonight is to engage the necessary stakeholders in evaluating the short term and long term possibilities of expanding higher education uptown. As many of you know, the lobby City College has been experiencing a declining enrollment which negatively impacts their budget. According to a 2017 Long Beach labor market report, the 90805 zip code was identified as the area with the most potential increase enrollment and strengthen and strengthen the college's revenue. And this was a study commissioned by Lobby City College. So here's a few facts on why. So number one north on beaches, the nature of its diversity. The ethnic ethnic makeup is predominantly people of color. And North Lombard is also very young. 50% of the population is under the age of 30 years old. Uptown, the median age is four years younger than the rest of the city and almost six years younger than the county. And looking at the numbers, North Long Beach has the most adults who can benefit from a community college. There are over 44,000 adults and the 90805 community with some college or less as their highest level of education. This includes adults who have completed some courses without obtaining a certificate, certification or degree. Adults who have completed high school, attended high school, obtained less than a high school education. And that said, adults with these educational attainment levels and education and limited English language skills have the most potential to benefit from community college classes in basic skills, careers, technical education and courses such as English and a second language. From an economic impact standpoint, community colleges confer more certificates than any other sector of higher education. As workforce programs help fill labor gaps, which is which fuels our local economy by 2020. And when now we're talking workforce readiness by 2020, 65% of all American jobs will require some form, some form of postsecondary degree or credential. By 2025, California is projected to face a short shortage of workers with post-secondary education less than a bachelor's degree. And there are two employment projections, which will exclude many of our uptown residents from the workforce if we choose not to address our higher education ease now. So here's the opportunity, because community colleges are the primary institution for our workforce development and an affordable pathway toward higher education. We want to ensure that distance is not a barrier. So it's been ten years in the since the inception of the college promise. I think we can all attest to the importance of aligning public institutions, the important that the impact has had on our community and on our education system. Establish establishing a North Miami education center will be no different, and timing is key. With new development and construction projects happening on the Atlantic Avenue corridor, such as private retail that we know is coming out and part community center modernization improvements to the North Long Beach Health Department facility. The ongoing modernization of Jordan High School, North Long Beach. Is it all of these things aligning tells us that it's it's time to explore additional potential partnerships on the private and the public side to help help with this this the improvements this corridor. And so by by collaborating with lobby City College Pacific Gateway and those who are excited about this could mean that the community could mean for the community. I'd like us to explore identify both short term options which can be retrieved within a year. And I'd like us to identify a long term plan which is assessed, which assesses the sustainability, the ongoing sustainability of anchoring a higher education center in North Long Beach. And so tonight, Lobby City College is considering a similar direction to partner with the City of Long Beach to explore feasibility. So I want to thank Lobby City College, particularly more specifically trustee input for this partnership on this proposal. And then I want to thank the council members who signed on to this motion, Councilman Austin Pierce and U ranga as well. And I look forward to our conversation and moving forward. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much, Councilmember. Councilman Austin. Thank you very much. I was happy to sign on to this very innovative item. I want to thank our Councilmember Richardson for bringing it forward. And and I just want to be be clear that that, you know, I think our city is is actually known for its collaborative partnerships with our educational partners. Long Beach Unified, as well as Long Beach City College and Cal State, Long Beach. You know, this is the the home of the college promise. And I think exploring opportunities to expand the community college experience is something that we should definitely support. I was community college student, I'll just tell you. I think most people go to community colleges because they are convenient and where they go to community colleges that are most convenient for them to attend. And so when I was a community college student, I was it was close to my my place of employment. So I could just walk across the street and and be at Long Beach City College. And it was a great experience. And so I think others should certainly have that opportunity. I just want to make sure that we're clear on who's leading this this this feasibility study. Is it Lumbee City College or is it the city of Long Beach? The question for me this so so the idea here it's a good opportunity. The hope here is that we're going to assign dedicate some staff is excited to work work on this on our site and they put some folks on their site because there's two different things need be evaluated. So they're going to do some internal sort of evaluation and we're going to look at some of the opportunities with some of our public public investments as well as some of the private retail. So released two focuses and the hope will be some sort of a joint task force that that sort of explores this feasibility. Well, I'm happy to support Long Beach, Long Beach City College's efforts to expand their their their footprint in the city of Long Beach. I think they definitely have a footprint in the east side of Long Beach and I would say the other east side of Long Beach in the central area. And so northern beaches, if they can do that and expand that model is something I certainly support also would just just make make suggestions that, you know, since we do have a college promise that we engage other educational institutions in this as well, like Columbus Unified because, uh, well, I'll just, just say this, that they are brick and mortar public institutions that are already in existence that may require just a joint partnership agreement to, to, to make things happen. And so and to to increase access for for folks in North Long Beach. I think there's a whole I don't I don't think we should have to limit our scope. We should look at all possibilities. And so happy to support this. Thank you. Council Member Pearce. Yes, I am also was really excited to see this. Also as a community college student, I went to three community colleges before I graduated at Cal State Long Beach, so definitely making sure they're accessible. They often have classes that are different times than a university and so having access to them is critical. I think our partnership with the community college, I know that often we talk about partnership and that sometimes it's, you know, we support each other. But actually being at the table together with skin in the game on both sides is where we're going to see the most change for our community. So I was happy to sign on to this. Thank you, Councilmember Supernova. Thank you. I just have a comment or a question on one part of the report here. A sentence caught my eye that says the average bus commute from Jordan High School to Albuquerque campuses. Our campus takes 2 hours. The fact if it takes 2 hours to go 5.6 miles. Maybe that's a different problem that we can address along with this report, because that seems. Outrageous to think you. Absolutely so. I mean, in the conversations, there's a lot of benefits. I would just say transportation access is going to be a part of that, hopefully will be a part of that ongoing discussion. And there and we were, you know, we think there is opportunities for other agencies, not just lobbies unified, but, you know, the number one the number one matriculation campus for Jordan High School for Community College happens to be Compton College. Number two is Cerritos College. Number three is Lobby City College. Right. And so we come third in terms of matriculation for law for these students. So I think this conversation, once it begins, we're going to find how many different opportunities there are for higher education. And there's also, since it became public, Cal State Dominguez Hills reached out and said, hey, we consider North Palm Beach in our service area. So I think it's a huge opportunity for us to really just talk about the point of higher education. North Palm Beach. But thank you, Councilman Rubino. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Mayor Roberto, go here. Sure. Yeah. I'd like to also chime in. Being a former communications trustee. I think that any opportunity that we have to expand the footprint of the Green College within the language community is wonderful. I want to thank, of course, the Cosmo Rich to bringing this forward and to working with our community college trustee. Would like intact from City College in bringing this forward. It would be my expectation and hope that we look at like a satellite campus. I think that is what we're going towards, that we would also include areas such as West Palm Beach, which has the the same basically demographic in regard to being away and not not a center for people to go to get to go get an education there as well. The real high school is there. Many of our career high school students go to City College, but the commute is can be quite extensive going to our PCC campus or to the east campus. So having one in our town, it would provide an excellent opportunity for choices in where to choose to continue education. But at the same time, I'm hoping that whatever comes out of this feasibility study that we look at the types of programs and the kinds of educational opportunities and options that might be available for students who want to enroll in a in a satellite like campus. So I would look I look forward to working with that. I look forward to that cooperation in coordination with our Albuquerque counterparts, as well as working with the Long Beach State to get their ideas on what would be a real good program that would provide unique and successful opportunities for students to participate in these colleges. Thank you. Thank you. Let me go to public comment now. Please come forward. Hello once again. My name is Maricela de Rivera. I am a ninth district resident. Live within walking distance of Highland Park and the beautiful and much used Michelle Obama Library. This is a absolute welcome conversation and agenda item. I am here half an hour past bedtime. That's how important this is to me. Higher education is the cornerstone for everything. At the Latino Economic Summit that I attended earlier today, I think it was clear that educational opportunities for all of our residents and that doesn't just mean a four year college. Right. Or even an associate's degree, but some sort of post-secondary education is really going to make a difference in the future success of Long Beach when we ensure success for Long Beach residents, particularly in north Long Beach and West Long Beach, where we see less economic development and investment. As a North Long Beach resident, I'm very excited about the things that are coming along the Atlantic corridor, the Artesia corridor. I see this is really good timing because when you bring in college students, when you bring in the additional economic benefit of any sort of satellite campus, I mean, I love that this is not being pigeonholed into one type of thing, but we're really open to whatever best serves my new community. People are going to want to eat. They're going to want to go to a bank. They're going to want to shop, they're going to want to go places. And we already have that peace in motion. So this feels like really good timing. I would also like to just take a moment as a board member for Long Beach Transit, a city commissioner, to address the issue, we recently conducted a very comprehensive star initiative is what we called it. It was basically a complete system review and there is a lot of room for redoing our routes, our systems, our timings. Of course, all of that takes money like everything. And so I would just say that while I have personally talked with our CEO or our deputy CEO who are really engaged and really concerned about equity, about getting people the places they need to be. And this review came after, I think it's been 12 years since the last one. And so people are different places. People have congregated in different places and need to get different places than perhaps they did 12 years ago. So this is something that Long Beach Transit has really taken as a top priority for us. And so I hope that that is something we can say we're addressing very soon. There were many, many different things that came out of that study as recommendations and so service to North Long Beach and West Long Beach. I hear you. Councilmember Urunga is is really paramount to us at Long Beach Transit. Thank you. Very good. You Clercq has to address the need for improvements in that across the board in the ninth district. So obviously they need now they need not be discussed. I think that this approval and complete aid is the resignation of council in Austin and Richardson. For their championing of the deviant Snoop Dogg. That the. Police department. A number of years ago rated as. Long Beach is number one thug. But more disturbing is their championing of the individual Snoop Dogg. With his deviant position relative to how women should be treated. In this day and age. That is a that is so obviously that should not be discussed. And anybody championing it them has no business in any leadership position there. And it speaks very poorly of the community that the community would support those with deviant minds. And they would support people that had those views. Toward women, period. Thank you. Hi. My name is Robert Bonow. Um. I am currently a senior at Jordan High School and it is time for senior go. We do that. We all, we all play for colleges. So most recently play college for every student will be obviously at the community college. And so. For students it's it's. Like a problem to have transportation from north damage. All the way to east side. Long Beach for obvious. You see, transportation is always the main problem. Um. Mostly, uh, students. Also apply for like cause. They see you, you see. And so. For us students. It's, um, it's difficult for us to get there. Other students decided to go to, like, Dominguez or Compton College. But if you live in if you were born in Lombard, you get a lot of promise. One year free education. Of college. So if. You go to college. You wouldn't be able to have that. Opportunity as other. People and Long Beach. So I do believe that it would be, uh, an amazing idea to have like a. Um. A site in, like, North Long Beach of Albuquerque. So easier for kids. At least have a walking distance or take a bike. Instead of taking like an hour or two hour bus ride to get. Some education. Thank you. Excuse me. I thought you. Go ahead. Oh. Um. At a school. What they do, they also have a career center. So have many students apply for college at different colleges. Most are part of the YMCA. I am alumni. We also do also help students apply for colleges as well. So I haven't had a couple calls of the mind, obviously. So we always. Will be the first opportunity. First up because I applied for Boston, decided I wanted to play for. Um. Going to college Hollywood, which does more for media and stuff like that. We just look at. An L.A. ballpark. We decided to do a year free of community college. At least it's because I believe that it's. Better to have one. Year of college instead of having no year at college at all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Good evening. Members of the City Council. My name is Anita. Ravi and I am a K-12 education leader, a Long Beach resident of seven years and a parent. I live in the fifth District. And I currently work in the ninth District. I've spent my whole 24 year career expanding access to college for students of color across the country. As a teacher and a school district leader, my work has focused on empowering teachers and school leaders with the resources and knowledge to ensure more students have. A rigorous and relevant K-12. Education that prepares them for college. Research shows that four years and research shows that two and four year degree. Attainment remains the best. Pathway out of poverty. Four year degree attainment is linked to higher wages, higher job satisfaction, and a higher sense of overall well-being. In addition, families that make 75,000 or more per. Year are twice as likely to vote as those. Making less than 75,000 per year. Access to second says to higher higher education in college. And attainment of a college degree is therefore vital to a functioning representative democracy. With the shift to the Common Core and career ready standards, we in the K-12 space are aligning our efforts to prepare all students for college. Our standards and the teaching and learning that go with them are meant to provide all students with the skills, knowledge and practice they need to be successful in college and beyond. However, academic preparation is only one piece of this puzzle, albeit the most important. Students also need to be able to envision themselves. On college. Campuses and in. The many careers they can access via a college degree. They need to physically be on these campuses, utilize their facilities, and see peers from their own communities there. One strategy to increase access to higher education in the communities. Where students most. Need it is to bring it to them. North Long Beach is one of these communities where the current rate of four year degree college attainment is just 13%. Given that 80% of Americans live their entire lives within an 18 mile radius of where they were raised, this means that a majority of young people living in North Long Beach may not currently have family members or neighbors with college degrees. Councilman Richardson's proposal. Backed by some of. You all to bring higher education, access to a community that most needs it will greatly enhance what we're trying to accomplish at the high school level. By showing students the way and providing increased access for all. As the founder and. Executive director of. We the People High School, a new public charter high school coming to Long Beach next year. I strongly support this effort and this proposal. Our North Long Beach students and their. Families deserve access to the same high quality options that other communities here in Long Beach currently have. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next. Thank you, sir. My name is Reverend Leon Wood. I am not longtime resident of Long Beach. I'm also a former upper bound and talent search director at UCLA back in the sixties and early, early seventies. And I wanted. To say that Councilman Richardson and the rest of the team here. What you've done. It's begin to change the attitude and the spirit of the people who live in North Long Beach. The Michelle Obama Library and now with the coming of the college into that area is going to reduce crime. It's going to it's going to increase high school retention. It's going to stop. It's going to enhance the racial relationships in that area. It's going to give people a sense of hope. And you will see in the area you'll be able to feel the change for what you're doing and what you're going to do. You're going to see and feel the change of the people in that area. And we're going to have a better Long Beach because of it. And the north Long Beach area is going to thrive and grow, and it's going to be unrecognizable in the next few years because of the investments that you're making right now. So I think this is a wise idea, very sharp idea and much needed. And I congratulate you all for doing it. And thank you very much. Thank you so much. General public comment. Constitutionally true. With this? Yes. Thank you. Fine. Go for the vote. Councilwoman Gonzales, Councilmember Pierce, Councilwoman Price, Councilmember Superhot. All right. Councilwoman Mongo. All right. Vice Mayor Andrews, I. Councilmember Urunga. Hi, Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Ocean carries.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Table 41-1C of Chapter 21.41, relating to Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04162019_19-0159

So that hearing item number one. Report from Development Services. Recommendation Receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and accept categorical, categorical exemptions and statutory exemption. Declared ordinances amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to alcoholic beverage manufacturing definitions and accessory dwelling units. Read the first time in lead over the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution directing the Director of Development Services to submit the ordinance amendments to the California Coastal Commission citywide. Thank you. Mr. West or whoever is presenting. Limitato on screen. Here evening, I'd like to introduce our new current planner, Alexis Oropesa. She'll be making tonight staff presentation for this item. Good evening, honorable members of the Council. The agenda item for you tonight consists of a handful of amendments that were continued from the City Council's March 5th meeting. The purpose of the Minutes amendments are to reflect the changes mandated by the California Coastal Commission's action last October when certifying the relevant ordinances. At last month's hearing, the City Council acted to continue that item directing staff to return with additional information related to accessory dwelling unit permits and lot size for the benefit of those who may not have been in attendance. A brief a very brief overview will be provided of the other ordinances, the first of which is the Alcoholic Beverage Beverage Manufacturing Ordinance, which was adopted by the City Council to streamline the permitting process. California Coastal Commission's amendment to this ordinance makes clear the parking requirement for office space that is equal to 25% of the gross floor area of the album use. The second. That batch of amendments is a compilation of changes necessary to create consistency between the zoning standards and Title 21 and the 2017 Training and Building Code Update, as well as the state's water efficiency standards. The California Coastal Commission made a number of amendments, including creating a new definition for demolish and rebuild. Among those changes make a recommendation that the definition of remodel and rebuild that was mandated for the coastal zone only be adopted as a citywide standard. As background. The Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance was drafted in response to the completion that went into effect in January 2017, which invalidated the city's local adopted standards for A2 use. The local ordinance was crafted to provide local standards for the development of areas where possible to ensure that adus were developed in a manner compatible with the city's development pattern. The city map on the left illustrates the distribution of permits issued for youths since January. From January of 2017 to December 31st of 2018. The map gives us a snapshot of the distribution showing that districts 78 and nine have the greatest number of permits issued for 80 use. Of the permit trends that we see, approximately 10% of the permits are being issued for the legalization of unpermitted dwelling units within the city, which helps to create safer housing. The California Coastal Commission Commission acted to certify the city's 80 new ordinance with a number of changes, the two of which were were asked to come back on related to the minimum lot size, where staff was recommending 48 feet be applied citywide. And the second citywide amendment that was recommending was with regards to the parking requirement, which exempts parking for 80 youths under any number of conditions, including when located within a half mile of transit. So staff's recommendation was to change the citywide standard to 4800 square feet outside of the coastal zone. This creates opportunity for 5800 additional lots to be eligible for the development of a to use this additional the number of lots does not create a change in the geographic distribution of units of excuse me of eligible lots to any significant standard. 1% is the greatest change. Staff finds that the 4800 square foot minimum lot size is appropriate citywide for the following five reasons, which includes that it's equitable for property owners both within the coastal zone and outside of the coastal zone. It's also creating one standard creates an understandable and consistent regulation for the public. And finally, it creates an opportunity for relieving the housing crisis that is being experienced city throughout the city and state. Public noticing notices were published in the Press Telegram on March 28th in accordance with the Long Beach Municipal Code. In addition, staff sent notices to members of the public that had previously submitted communication on the ADU ordinances. Staff received a half dozen emails provided to you tonight. Two of the letters expressed support for the four for the ordinance changes and other. The other emails can be summarized as requesting additional information. Staff requests that the City Council take action to adopt the zoning code amendment tonight, with one correction to a typographical area error made in subsection B of Table 51.2 7.2762 related to required parking for A2 use. And the correction would be to strike the distinction that it would be isolated to the coastal zone. This concludes Dove's presentation. We welcome any questions that you may have. Yes. Okay. Cause you'd like to do public companies first. Okay. Is that okay? Do you come in on this idea? Okay, fine. Is there any public comment on this item? Hello. Good evening. Well, good night. Actually, my name is Mona Abbas. I actually lived in District nine and I was trying to move because of, you know, issues in the neighborhood and the Barbie bar that we were they were trying to approve the legalizing the the the bands. So I came here and I said, if that was passed, I was going to go ahead and move out. I did. I took my family elsewhere. I am the director of Families in Good Health in Saint Mary's Medical Center. And we purchased a home that, of course, we couldn't afford a bigger home as we had in North Long Beach. But with the with the goal of actually going and adding to our home so that we could actually live as comfortable as we were living in North Long Beach. But we only have 50, 100 square foot lot. And so we need 5200 square foot is what I was told when when I called and tried to get permits. So as a Latina, as you guys know, it's really hard to live in the 90808 zip code. However, it is really difficult to well, we don't believe I as a Latina, I don't believe in convalescent homes. So I'm trying to build a future for my mom. And so I am just asking today if we could please go ahead and approve for the minimum of 4800. Thinking Speaker. Sure. Good evening, Mayor. Councilmembers. My name is Ryan Kelder. I'm a I'm an associate at a Studio 111 architecture firm here in Long Beach. And also, I'm a vice president, president elect of the American Institute of Architects local chapter, Long Beach Gothic. So we're currently amidst a severe housing crisis, as you as you all know, in California and and elsewhere. And at current rates of housing production, we are falling for four. We are falling far short of many. Both current and future housing demands are already having serious consequences on our population's quality of life, especially those in the median and low income bracket. The supply of affordable housing is diminishing and causing displacement out of existing and established communities and pushing the workforce community further away from employment centers. Because of the severity of the housing shortage, it will take multiple approaches to solve the housing crisis. One important part of the solution is a responsible expansion of use woven into the fabric of our existing communities, specifically within our single family communities. 80 youths are a prime contributor to multi-generational housing and co-housing accommodations. The development of ideas promotes a blending of socioeconomic groups within our established communities. 80 youth provide an opportunity for a grassroots scale of development to support, and the resolution of the housing crisis allow allowing owner owner occupied single family residents who know and care about their communities a mechanism to play a contributing role and being a part of the solution. I'm a supporter of the California Senate and the former governor's position on in court and encouraging local jurisdictions to embrace the intent of state legislation by enacting local ordinances to promote the development of ideas. I advocate for the City Council to support the Long Beach Planning Department's recommendation for the reduction of lot size requirements for energy use for 4800 square feet. This policy, in my opinion, maintains existing community scale and character by utilizing current end scale, form based zoning requirements. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, honorable counsel. My name is Art Richardson. I'm a real estate investor and builder of Addus. And we have many that are available that meet the requirements of being less than 600 square feet. We know our housing situation in all of L.A. County is in a desperate situation. And I really think that I wish the council would consider to even drop the minimum lot requirement beyond 4800 square feet Long Beach. We have some of the smallest lots and L.A. County, and we could probably even go down as low as 4000 square feet and still, you know, be able to meet and get along close with the requirements that Bill and his safety want us to have. Also, if we can consider maybe allowing us to build these adds you not just with single family residence. I think that's one of the requirements that only single family residence that it's available to. There are some duplexes in our town that have the space for us to put a 4 to 600 square foot adu and still provide more housing for our people here. So I would recommend that we would consider even reducing it down to 4000 square feet. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Mr. Mayor. Members of the city council just two here supporting the change to the ADA ordinance. Really, we should encourage this form of development or community support of staff's findings to reduce lot area. I'd also note the parking standards shouldn't be unduly restrictive and and follow clearly established state regulations consistent with the staff recommendation. So in support of the proposed changes. Thank you. Thank you. Let me also. This'll be your last speaker. Good evening. I've heard a lot of talk about 1% tonight, so I'll try to make it quick. This 1% is important to me. I am the third district or homeowner within the third district. I am also a business owner. I own Harting design and construction and I help homeowners build adus and remodel and I help them early on in understanding their expenses and what they're getting themselves into. So first off, I'd just like to thank you all for everything that you've done to solve our housing crisis thus far. And I would like to thank you for protecting our city from overdevelopment and keeping the charm and uniqueness of our community. I would like to share a short story about why I support its use and why a little back yard rental has made me the man that I am today. Early on in my childhood, my grandmother, who we called Ooma, she helped my mom purchase a little two bedroom, one bath home with a backyard unit in the back. And at that time, we had renters living there for about four or five years, and they turned out to be fantastic people. I got to know them well in very many ways. They turned into parenting type of figures. And the rental income helped my mom. And it release the financial burden, some of the financial burden of raising two young boys. Later on in my life, after the renters had moved out, my grandmother Irma had moved in and that at that point, it really turned into a granny flat. The. At that point. She helped my grandmother, helped us a lot with raising us when my mom was going back to work. She cooks meals. She helped us with our homework. She basically took the place of an absent parent. And later on in college, when I was doing a counselor at Long Beach, I ended up moving into the granny flat. So I guess you could call it then from a dandy going to a Cindy, which was a student in my back yard, no longer the grandma in my backyard. And at that time, I had two of my friends. They moved into the front unit. And so there was three of us living in this two bedroom, one bath home with the little rental unit in the back. And we all focused on our studies. Once the community graduated through communications and speech within Cal State, Long Beach, we all rode gondolas in Naples, and we're still friends to this day. I guess what the moral the moral of my story and what I'm trying to convey is that ideas are multi-generational, they're multi-use, and they really will help solve our housing crisis. So I'm asking you today to approve this amendment, and thank you for your time and staying late. Thank you very much. I'm going to close public comment on on the hearing. Councilman Pierce. First, I was going to say this is early. It's only nine. Something about that late. Yes. I want to thank staff for their hard work. You know, I completely support staff's recommendations. And I think I did want to ask clarity on the duplex. They are not prohibited where duplexes are. Is that correct? They're not. So if you have two primary units, you you are not eligible to have an accessory dwelling unit. And accessory dwelling unit can only be constructed where there is one single primary dwelling unit. Okay. All right. Well, I totally support staff's recommendations. I do know I had a meeting with. Some folks from Airbnb recently, and I'm not sure if staff's aware of this, but they are going into the ADU development market, so they are developing a to use to go in drop in within 30 days. You have a whole new project there. So some interesting stuff. I wish that my districts had lot sizes that we could build more, but I appreciate the additions that could be added throughout the rest of the city so that we can tackle our housing crisis. Thank you. Excuse me, Councilwoman Pierce. I just want to make sure does your motion include staff's recommendation to correct the typographical error that occurs on. Page nine in the footnote B to. Remove the words in the coastal zone? Absolutely. That's what I thought. Councilman Austin? Well, I think in the motion, I strongly support this as I was part of bringing this this this motion to the council originally. I think this is a great way to help us solve our our housing crunch here in the city of Long Beach and throughout the region. I think the state legislation was was timely that that afforded us the opportunity to do it. And I want to commend staff for their work on getting us here. I did have one question, though. So I know that there are roughly 150 permits that have been issued for 80 youth since we passed this. Is that correct? That's correct. Let's. We have about round 100, but we've gotten over a couple of hundred actual applications in the process. Okay. So as we know, we will we will be creating housing as a result of abuse. Will this be credited toward our arena numbers? Yes. Our understanding is it is a legal habitable unit. And the arena criteria is that if a building permit has been issued for it, it counts and it will go generally unless it set aside for affordable housing, it would go to our moderate income arena account. Great. Thank you. I urge unanimous support. Thank you. Yes, I have a question. The young lady studio and spoke of her living in the ninth and she moved into eight. What is she like into that category? Would she be able to. Build. With the staff recommendation? She's at 5100. We would go down to 4800. She'd be able to build one. Thank you. Okay. Great. Thank you. I also support strongly the staff recommendation and I'm really glad we're moving forward. I think this is a great way of getting people into homes that are affordable and that are accessible and to deal with our housing crisis as well. So I do want to thank all the councilmembers who have been involved in this conversation. Let me just to to staff's point, I think Councilman Austin brought out some good points. I want to make sure that we're carefully tracking all of these so that we are counting them into all of our numbers. And in addition to that, it's a it's a good reminder for the council as well. And Councilman Austin, I think, alluded to this. When you look at arena numbers, I think there's a there's a misconception that, you know, well, it's true. You know, cities don't hit their arena numbers. But there's also a misconception that our biggest where we're doing the worse is in our low income affordable. The area within our arena numbers that we are need to do better on is actually in the market rate numbers. So we do need to build more affordable units and we are doing that. But whenever someone says we should stop building market rate units, we're doing actually worse in building market rate units according to our arena numbers. And so I, you know, let's let's use the data and we need to build market rate units and affordable units and meet and work to meet our meter numbers as best possible. And then the second thing I'll ask you, because I think I've brought this up a few times, I think, in briefings, but it's a good time to bring it forward more publicly. Ms.. Tatum is, I think, the same needs. We now have this this same effort needs to go into converting our minimum are our minimum number of square footage when it comes to micro units in Long Beach. And remind me again with the minimum number of square footage for a unit and long is. In the downtown plan that. Citywide citywide and downtown plan. Downtown is 600 citywide. We don't yet have a standard there is not currently a standard. And so that, you know, the 600 number for many cities is high. And so one of the one, if we really are to think are trying to create more density on both the affordable market rate side, that 600 number needs to be lower to whether it's closer to the New York number or some of the other cities or, you know, San Francisco or other places. But there is interest, whether it's on the student housing side, on the smaller unit side, to do 500 square foot units. In some cases, some cities are doing 400 to 450 square foot small studio units and are are and I know that for a lot of people, they couldn't imagine themselves living in that small of square footage. But if we want to build affordable units that people can build, the cost is less and we can build more of them. And so when can we see that proposal back in front of this body to lower that requirement? Mayor We are actually working on that now, but we've just started that effort, so I'd say probably 3 to 4 months. I'm very happy to hear that. So I look forward to that discussion in front of the council as well. And there's a motion in a second to to pass this. Please cast your votes. Mm. That motion carries a student. Oh, that's. Interesting. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Next up is item nine.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 18.30 establishing a Proactive Rental Housing Inspection Program, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06022015_15-0492

Report from Development. Services. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending the Municipal Code by adding Chapter 18.30 relating to a proactive rental housing inspection program. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide. Mr. City Manager, am I turning this over to your staff first? Yes. Vice Mayor, council members. This is an item that was first discussed when we last updated our housing element last year. Since that time, we've been working behind the scenes to address this very, very important issue. I'm going to turn this over to our development services director and the deputy director, the same Amy Bodak and Angela Reynolds to make a presentation on a program that we're recommending tonight to help address the issue of tenants rights. Thank you. Ms.. Modak Madam Vice Mayor. Members of the City Council, thank you for your time today. As the city manager said, we are here tonight to talk about a very critically important issue. We did discuss this briefly a year and a half ago or a year ago when we adopted the housing element. And the housing element is a very powerful tool in that it is really setting for us the road forward for the next several years until 2021. On the programs and policies that we're going to be focusing on to ensure adequate housing opportunities and adequate housing resources to all sectors of the community. The housing element has a number of programs that we implement on a on an almost regular basis with really not a lot of fanfare. Part of those programs are just part of the daily operations of the city we are part of. And part of that is something that we want to talk to you tonight. It's about code enforcement in particular. When we were adopting the housing element, there were a number of concerns that were raised by stakeholders about the habitability of our housing stock. And frankly, our housing stock is aging. We are an older city. A lot of our housing stock is, frankly, over 30 years old. We have homes that range from single family homes to 20 units and more. We have large complexes. We have multifamily complexes that are high rises. We have multifamily complexes that are four story buildings. It really runs the gamut across the city. And because of that, we did hear the stakeholders concerns about habitability and how we were addressing habitability, both under state law, which does require inspections for multi-family housing and then for for our specific program. And so what I want to talk to you about tonight is the program that we're proposing to you tonight, which would increase the type of inspections that we are doing above and beyond what's already allowed under state law. With that, I'm going to turn it over to Angela Reynolds. She's the deputy director of development services. Thank you. Thank you, Amy. Good evening, Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Council members. On January 7th, the city council did approve the housing element that has been mentioned here this evening. And one of the primary objectives in that housing element is to conserve and improve existing affordable housing. So just a bit of history on a program that we currently deliver through the Code Enforcement Office. In 1966, the city's Health and Human Services Department operated a proactive inspection program for properties consisting of four or more residential rental units. The reason for the four or more is that the city considers them to be a business and requires a business license and tracks them in that manner. So in line with the housing and excuse me, in line with the housing element, this program was designated to ensure that the city's rental housing comply with the minimum standards for health, safety and welfare of the public in compliance with California Health and Safety Code. 17920. This proactive program incorporates annual inspection fees to those property owners of four or more that help defray the cost of delivering this program in FY 13. This proactive program was transferred to code enforcement. It was in health since 1966. That was all part of the government reform initiative. And I would say that since that time, we've been able to gain more compliance in this realm because they were able to take advantage of all the administrative citations and prosecutions that code enforcement had had in the past. So it's made it a much more robust program, I think. Staff has included new language that provides. I'm going to talk about the prep or the proactive or proactive rental housing inspection program. And I'm just going to call it prep, if that's okay as I go through. And that's something that we're currently doing. However, in light of what we have heard from from the community and some of the advocates as well as the Apartment Owners Association, we've added a couple of things to the ordinance before you tonight that we don't currently do, and those are notification of property owners and tenants prior to us coming out to do one of these proactive inspections. And we've also developed something that a few other cities have, which is a tenant and landlord rights and responsibilities brochure to be provided to tenants by the landlord. And it's also going to be online as well. This brochure includes language advising tenants about how to exercise their legal rights, such as requesting habitability repairs without threat of eviction. We've also added a modification to the inspection process when responding to complaints so that we try to keep it anonymous so that not one unit is singled out in in the apartment building. And then we've also when somebody does not come into compliance and is not working towards compliance, we find them for the first hundred and 20 days as the state code provides 100 200 and $500 for the first 120 days, and then thereafter it's $500 plus penalties every seven days. And then we're also taking them simultaneously to the city prosecutor. So we've met with stakeholder groups, as Amy said, regarding this ordinance on at least six different occasions and incorporated, considered and incorporated feedback from the Legal Aid Foundation housing Long Beach and the Apartment Association of Southern California Cities. So staff's recommendation is to adopt an ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 18.30 relating to the proactive rental housing inspection program. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for its final reading. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Reynolds. Councilwoman Gonzalez. So I, I know this has been certainly a long journey for many of us in the room here. Many of you have come to council every single time. And so we appreciate that, certainly. But we also know that the struggle for renters is certainly real, something we can't shy away from. And one of the biggest reasons why I'm here and I'm so I ran for city council was from my experience visiting homes and looking at the deplorable situations firsthand. Some of our our residents are living in very bad situations, conditions that affect the health and lives of children in their families. And health housing needs to be healthy and safe for everybody. Renters should not fear retaliation from voicing their their needs and basic needs. And in the last year, I've had the opportunity to meet with housing advocates from housing, Long Beach renters and other supporters on the needs of renters. I've also met with the Apartment Association as well to hear their concerns from the ordinance. And I've worked very diligently and very closely with our development services. Both Amy and Angela have worked very hard on this and to ensure that there's a collaborative voice. In addition to that, there is no easy fix for a problem so enormous. And while I support the core values of Deep as a city, we must take careful policy steps as we deal with the upcoming budget deficit. This is certainly an issue that I am committed to for as long as I'm an elected official. I will continue to work side by side with residents, apartment owners, city staff and other stakeholders to create and maintain comprehensive solutions involving strong, effective policies on safe housing. I want to thank everyone who's been involved. I think what we can get from this is that we have worked collaborative, both on the landlord side, the tenant side and from the city side. And what we can do, what is what is possible for us at this time. I have some amendments that I would like to add to the ordinance to strengthen it for the health and well-being of renters throughout the city. And I will say that. We may have been at odds with each other. I know many of us in this room have not talked to each other. There's landlords on one side, tenants on the other, and I don't feel that it really has to be that way. We're all looking for the same goal. We're just getting shot at different ways. And so I think this is a really good opportunity for us to look at those different ways and how we've collaborated and come up with something very comprehensive and sustainable for our city. So, Councilwoman Gonzalez, we have a maker of a motion and a second. Are you are you asking if they will consider your request? I am. Okay. So if the maker in the second year is amenable, can we hear those from Councilmember Gonzalez? Councilmember Superman and. Okay. And Councilwoman Mongo. You've made a motion. She's going to ask for some consideration for friendly amendment. Okay. Thank you. I forge ahead. I'm sorry. This is a very important issue for all of us, right? So the first couple amendments, all I'll ask for is. It was in the original ordinance. And now I want to see if we can put it back in as a state franchise tax board program. I'd like to see if we can direct staff to incorporate participating in the State Franchise Tax Board Housing Program for those owners who do not comply within 120 days and are unresponsive. These are the worst of the worst landlords. As I mentioned, this was in the original staff report but did not make it so. I want to make sure that we include that in this ordinance. The second thing is for $75,000 for that component to be added into this ordinance, because it will assist with educating both tenants and landlords to create, again, a comprehensive outreach program . And I think it's really important that we include in this all renters. We're not just looking at renters that are included in this ordinance. It's all renters. We're taking a larger approach, not just the four plex's or more everyone. And then thirdly, increasing the frequency of our fines. If after 30 days we've given due process, why should we wait an additional 30 days to to increase the frequency of the fine or to find them find a landlord again? It would be good if we shorten that time. If we can shorten that time to increase the frequency of that fine. And in addition, I think accelerating I think Angela had mentioned this, but accelerating the case to the city prosecutor. If it is a health and safety. Imminent danger. And so those are the three amendments. I hope I was clear. If there's any questions, I'd be happy to. So may I ask you a couple of clarifying questions? I know other members will have questions as well. The $75,000 could you repeat for me and for us, you said, where would these resources come from? What are you directing staff to do? Well, I'm looking I'm asking them to look to see if we I mean, the $75,000 would be something that development services would have to look for in our budget to be able to do some outreach with multiple partners. I see the Apartment Association and Housing Long Beach. I don't know if that's possible, but I would like a collaborative, you know, approach as to how we would use this this $75,000 as far as additional outreach to all tenants. And this is for landlord and tenant education. So it could be a collaborative effort between, for instance, the Apartment Association to develop an education program that would encompass both renters and landlords. Yes. Okay. Vice Vice Mayor That's Amy. If I could just add a little bit to that. When we originally submitted our two from four memo to several months ago, we had suggested this as as a way to help the city reach reach certain segments of the population that may be very hesitant in calling code enforcement or may have language difficulties in doing that. So I think that it would be something that we would look forward to doing. We don't have a specific group in mind. We would be really having to RFP it and we would hope to be able to use several community resources to help us reach this this most needed segment of our community. I would suggest that it's it probably wouldn't really go in the ordinance, but would be something that you would direct us to incorporate. And then we would work with our financial management department to do a budget adjustment if we need to do it or incorporate it into our existing fund balance within the department. Okay. So the second item would would be a request to staff, but not included in the ordinance. And the third item, Councilwoman Gonzales, on frequency, you said shorten the time you would like staff to come back with what a shortened time frame would be on after. Yes, because we have to give due process to landlords. 30 days is our our typical due process in the city. So after that, if instead of waiting an additional 30 days for them to comply or to respond, I would like to shorten that time after the 30 days to maybe two weeks. I mean, there's got to be something else that we could do. Can we agree to it? And the next day it would be 15 days. Okay, let's stay in order, please. Sorry. Okay. Right. Councilmember Supernovas, maker of the motion. Would you like to make any comments at this time? And I'll call on Councilmember Mongeau after that. I'll. I think we're in favor or I'm in favor of the amendments. Okay. And Councilmember Mongo, would you like to comment on the amendments that councilwoman. Gonzales asked for and you had a question. So I just wanted to ask Amy first, do you believe that your division can have net neutrality the way that the fund was set up with the $75,000 allocation? I'm not sure I understand the question. I'm sorry. So there was a request in the friendly amendment that we would set aside $75,000 for outreach development services as an enterprise fund, which is supposed to have a net zero annually. Do you think that within your current year budget or partially this year and partially next year, you would be able to find those funds? Or are you asking us to take something to Budget Committee to find additional funds for? I see. I see the funds for this program does not come from the Development Services Fund. We we do have other sources of funds to do this. Development services. If three, three, seven is really just for planning and building. So we do have other sources of revenue within the department that would not impact those funds. So I do believe that we would be able to accommodate this. If not, I would come back and let you know that. And then on the additional follow up, so I'm definitely in favor of those who are not being responsible to receive more quick and swift response responses from the city. Would a 15 day be a reasonable secondary follow up from your office? We'd need to understand if it was working days or calendar days. We typically right now it's every 30 days. So we do 30, 60, 90 and one, 20, and we can modify that for this specific program and do 15 days. So it be 35, 30, 45, 60, 75. The only issue I would say with this in general is in order for us to implement the State Franchise Tax Board portion of it, we do have to wait the full 120 days. So once we got to our fourth citation, for example, if we did it on the accelerated timeline of a of 75 days afterwards, we would do as Angela had proposed, where we do a every seven days, a continued citation. We would then have to wait the full 120 days before we could start the State Franchise Tax Board referral process. So as long as there is an understanding of that, I think we can work with the the every 15 day request to accelerate the timeline. So let's would it be agreeable to say every 15 calendar days next to Business Day? So if the calendar day lands on a Sunday, it'll be the following Monday. It would be a calendar day. That's correct. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Sounds wonderful. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The maker and seconder of the motion. Except those three items. Councilmember willing to hear public comment? Yes. And I would like to ask our colleagues if they'd like to hear public comment first. Yes. Thank you. That's a great suggestion. So at this time, if there's a member of the public that wish to address Council on item. 28, mayor members of the council, just with those friendly amendments, if this motion were to pass this evening, it would come back as a. First. Reading again. Thank. Yes, thank you. Good afternoon, Council. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. My name is Jim Danno. I currently live in the. Fillmore Historic District. I support the amendment that Councilmember Gonzalez. Has brought before you. I actually there's a way of even increasing the fines. I know it's state mandated, but we're talking about the worst of the. Worst. Landlords. And they deserve to be punished. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Council member and council members and vice mayor. My name is Kathleen Irvine. I live in the Walmart Street District and I fully support the the recommendation to adopt the ordinance and Councilwoman Gonzales amendments. I think that if anybody had to live in I live in one of those areas where the there is a certain constituency that is afraid to report things that are wrong with their apartment. And I know that if any of us had to live in those places for a full 30 days or 60 days or 120 days, that we would be voting for the amendments also. Thank you very much. Thank you. Supposed to. Be. Good evening. And hello again. This is the reason I'm here. My name is Kim Rising again. Vice Mayor, Council Member City Staff over 216 East 25th Street. Mr. Andrews District. I've resided in Long Beach in the immediate area for over 30 years. As mentioned, I hold a B.A. and May in political science. I'm retired from General Motors, but still perform as an organist. I play classical, jazz and theater organ. I'm here today to passionately speak towards the issue of the lack of tenant protections in the city. One summer afternoon I was working in my yard. The building to my west was for sale and the owner leaned over my fence and said, I used to live in your house. Is there still black mold there? I replied, Yes, kind of startled. And the previous owner laughed and said Yes, I sold it as is. And I guess they've never fixed the thing, have they? In the last two weeks, my present owner, the second of two owners of my property, painted the exterior of my house. It is the only thing, and I repeat the only thing that they have been doing in repair in my ten year tenancy with this particular owner, the first owner, the one we originally rented from, bragged at the resale of the current property to the present owner. Quote, I did not invest a dime. I'm selling it as is. Although the sale ensued and the second owner who owns it now to date has never repaired anything until the recent painting, there has never been central heat. The fireplace flue is seized open. There is black mold in multiple rooms, there's lead based paint. There is an in sink disposal that is never been repaired. There's a freestanding garage door with the correct frame that cannot be opened. These items were painted over the original circa 1940 Windows, many of which still cannot be opened. The carpet is over 40 years old and has never been replaced. The entire house is leaning to one side on its foundation. This is one of two houses on the property. It is a duplex. My partner and I are retired seniors, 65 and 69. Our health has been severely affected because of the mold and other issues. One of us has AIDS. Presently, we have been given two weeks to evacuate the property so interior repairs can commence verbally. We were only offered one night of motel and one month of storage. We counter offered because we felt these requests were unreasonable and the owner replied via text messaging that our counteroffer was unacceptable and we have not been given any guarantee of reentry. We have signed a lease until April of 2016. No rent adjustments have been offered verbally or otherwise. Our owner is not working in good faith with us and there is nothing that protects us from being evicted in this scenario. How are we as a city to attract a workforce with escalating rents and with property. Tamers. Which intimidate and do not value existing tenants? Thank you. I thank you. Next speaker, please. The honorable vice mayor and Lowenthal and members of the city council. I am Paul Bonner, president of the Apartment Association, California Southern Cities. 333 West Broadway, Long Beach. The Apartment Association provides education and training to residential rental property owners and managers and promotes and strongly advocates on behalf of our industry. In particular, we want our members to comply with our laws and contribute to the economic viability and health of our neighborhoods. These are our core values and are of utmost importance to us. We are pleased to present to you our comments regarding the ordinance before you this evening. Quality rental housing at every socioeconomic level is critical to our community as a whole. With it, we have a vibrant and healthy rental housing stock and an excellent relationship between tenants and rental property owners. Without it, our community is tarnished and the lives of those adversely affected suffer. The proposed ordinance is a balanced work product in the best interests of the city. Inspections should continue. In particular, inspections should focus on slumlord properties, a term that is defined in law and properties where serious code violations exist. There is no room for us to allow serious code violations. City inspectors have not turned their head the other way, and we believe in a zero tolerance policy. Inspections of known violating properties should continue. The council has heard from tenants and about concerns that they may face eviction due to filing a complaint against an owner. Laws currently exist that protect tenants in these situations. We are reminded that our state anti retaliation laws are explicit and protect those who file a complaint with a city or a property owner. We with me tonight are members of our association. We are Long Beach housing providers. We serve a vital and important element to our community. We stand with you and support a residential rental property ordinance. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Vulnerable Vice Mayor Lowenthal and members of the city council. My name is Elaine Hutchison, and I'm here this evening also representing the Apartment Association of California's Southern Cities here in Long Beach. I have twice had the opportunity to serve as president of this association and also of the California Apartment Association and have owned and managed properties in Long Beach for over 30 years. Thank you kindly for this opportunity to express some of our thoughts. We know that you have heard from tenant advocates. We would like to begin by commending the overwhelming 97% of owners of the estimated 77,000 rental units in our city, owners who care for their rental properties as well as the residents who reside in them. As we know from our membership. Most of these are small properties and in many cases its owners struggle to pay all the bills. But these owners do care and often know residents by name. We believe safe and healthful housing is a partnership between owners and residents alike. We believe owners must proactively inspect and take care of maintenance issues in their properties and that tenants should tell owners about maintenance issues that they become aware of. In looking at the proactive rental housing inspection program proposed ordinance before you. We note that every owner of four units or more will have to pay a habitability fee for inspection of properties, not just the minority of bad actors, and that every owner will be required to register their properties. And there are inescapable financial penalties and potentially criminal penalties. These provisions and others fall upon all owners in order to weed out the minority of bad owners. All owners are paying the price. We recognize the responsibility of owners, and just as owners are responsible, we also recognize tenants are responsible to help in maintaining the properties by allowing access for repairs and participating with us. We note that the ordinance continues to allow heavy and code enforcement actions, and as Councilwoman Gonzales has added even more. We wish that there were a provision that if nothing is found on a city inspection of a unit, that the habitability fee would be waived and refund to the owner. We truthfully wish no ordinance would be needed, however, because we are just as tenant advocates want safe and healthful housing for Long Beach tenants. We urge the support and passage of your Honorable Council o the proposed ordinance before you. We hope that the passage of this ordinance, along with a two page document of owner rights and responsibilities and tenant rights and responsibilities, will be the door we can all pass through to greater collaboration and again what we all want safe and healthful housing for all of Long Beach residents. Thank you very much. Thank you. I thank you. Good afternoon. Honorable Vice Mayor and council members Malcolm Bennett. I'm also a member of the Piper Association of California Southern Cities. I've had the opportunity to serve also as president at association. I do own and operate a property management company in Long Beach for probably close to 20 years and myself, along with our staff , really believe we're part of the fabric of this community. I've served on the board of directors of Long Beach Fair Housing Council, served as vice president, was very instrumental in the multifamily improvement district for Andy Street, a just a a stellar project for the city. My manager is on the board of directors of the St Mary's and various other associations. I do own and operate a property management company in Los Angeles where we do have a rental inspection program. And I would start off by saying Long Beach is certainly not like Los Angeles. We are here to support this this program. I've been in the rental property business for more than 40 years. I've been installed and inducted in the Congressional Hall of Records for the work I do in rental housing and been awarded the aggregate of the year through various organizations. One thing I'd like to point out different than people that buy single family homes. You put out 35% to purchase a residential income property. You're looking at putting down 30 or 40%. That's quite an investment. So we have a real incentive to maintain these properties. Are all. Landlords good? Absolutely not. And we support actions to take care of those bad actors who give us a bad reputation. And in addition to this. Ordinance, you always have the complaint driven process where owner tenants can still complain. And we look at this. Some people like to pit landlords against tenants. We're not adversaries. Where would a landlord be without a tenant? We wouldn't be able to maintain a paid a mortgage on these properties. So we have a real incentive and a lot of people don't know as a property owner, you don't really have a right to go in and inspect a unit just to see how a tenant lives. We use the fire marshals ordinance to allow us to go in to inspect smoke detectors and seal devices. So we welcome this inspection program and we fully support it. The amendments that were offered this evening, we certainly are also are those, because those are directed toward property owners who do not take care of their properties. And we have a code of ethics that our association that we try to enforce because we have an investment in the city and I rental property owners. We thank you for your time and we hope that you will support this ordinance. And thank you very much for your time. Hi. Thank you. Vice Mayor and city councilman. My name is Jeff Benedict. My address is on file. I live in the third district. I was for several years. I was the manager of the health housing inspection program in the city of Long Beach. And before that, I spent 30 years when at Orange County in housing and was on many task forces across the city, the county of Orange and I have extensive amount of experience in and regulatory parts of our housing inspection programs. And when I left, I retired from the city in 2008, and when I left, I, I still had some work I wanted to do. And I came back as a volunteer and got a couple of contracts actually to do some work on our health housing inspection program. And I went out and I did a pretty comprehensive survey of the housing because I had some problems with our delivery of how we were doing our housing inspection program. And I spoke to two tenants fair housing, property owners, property managers, etc. And one thing that just came across that that I found was that properties that were managed by property managers actually were across the board in better condition than regular places. But also that our program, our housing inspection program, spent an inordinate amount of time more than necessary on the good guys and on the good on the good places. And when I was trying to redesign our program a little bit, that that came to mind that we really need to concentrate on the bad guys and on the bad inspection programs. When I first heard about this, I initially came with the idea that I wanted to say, no new laws, just do a better job with the tools we already have. You know, as we know, we have the code enforcement, Scott, the citation power, we have reinspection fees. We, we've got a very supportive city prosecutor. I can tell you that I never took a case to a city prosecutor that had some great photos and it was pretty substandard conditions that they didn't jump out and take because these kind of conditions don't don't even actually ever make it to court. They settle out because good pictures, etc., do it every time. So I just don't think that for the lot for a lot of me, my only concern with this program is, is that are we going to start going back and spending all of our time inspecting places that that probably don't need it? And I only thing is, was when we implement this program that we concentrate on the bad guys and do whatever we can to, to, to, to focus in that area. So initially, I was going to come to totally oppose this. But as I stand here now, I think that we just need to to make a very good effort to to to recognize the fact that we need to concentrate on the bad guys and create a way that the program can do a little bit better job of not not doing the comprehensive inspections on the really good places. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor and City Council Members. My name is Worker Rivera, a community organizer with Housing Long Beach. And we've been coming here for many, many weeks and we've been sharing stories because we've been trying to elevate the discussion around our rental housing issues that we're having here in the city. And as you know, we've been asking for rape, a policy which we believe is a good step towards protecting renters, holding slumlords accountable and building a healthier Long Beach in general. The community's cries for this type of help have received much opposition, including our own city staff and development services. And now they're taking a program that's already existed, giving it a different name in a couple of words, and saying, Hey, this is our alternative to tenants rights policy. How is this attendance rates policy? Please tell me how this protects tenants, because this is nothing different than we had, as you had mentioned then we've had or already had. So this supposedly new program falls way short of what residents really need. It does not include 2 to 3 units, which the LA Times article today highlighted would well have been overlooked. Two years going without running water or gas, this program would have not found that. And that also accounts for 15,000 rental units here in the city. It offers no method of tracking. As this gentleman said, we need to know where we're going, what doors were knocked, where did we get it and where couldn't we get in? It does not protect renters. There's no accountability for slumlords, and it's simply not good enough. All of the stories that we've brought to you are we're trying to communicate that people are scared. People are afraid. I have a resident that's sitting out here who just got knocked down by code enforcement because I called and she will tell you that her neighbors did not open the doors. Why? Because they're too scared. It's not because they we they don't want to be inspected is because they're scared of what's going to happen if they do get inspected. How does this program protect them from that? How does it protect them from eviction or rent increases? Yes, they're state laws. But you're going to hear from our attorney that this is not going to protect them when they go to eviction court. They're going to settle out and they still have to move. What if they have children? What if they're low income? What if they don't have the funds to move? How is it going to account for that? It's not going to count for that. So this. Program. Although we do need more inspections, I would not call this a proactive inspection program because it's reactive and it's going to rely on people to complain, as the other gentleman here said, that it would. And if these are all good landlords here, they don't have to worry about this. They're good landlords. You don't have to worry about what goes after the slumlords. So you shouldn't be opposing any of this stuff. We need to protect our renters. We need more code enforcement policy. We mean more tenants rights. And this one here is not good enough. We need more tenant rights. Thank you. Vice Mayor Kelton members. I lived at 1221, East First Street, apartment number ten. Lived there for five years. When I moved in this apartment. The roof was leaking. We had cockroaches and from the roof leaking the mold in the walls. I had code enforcement out four times. Every time they try it, they write out the correct wording on the document to be cited when they would come back to get these corrections done. All the landlord would do was go in and spray the walls, paint over it. When they were told to take the wall out and get rid of the mold, bomb the building for the cockroaches, all they do is bond my apartment, which they just run away and come back. When code enforcement came back. All they said was can't see the mold. They must have done a good job. I've been evicted there for 35 days now. My wife and I are both homeless. I have been. I've had cancer since 92. I'm a cancer survivor since 92, 2002. I was put on disability because of the cancer. Now my spine has arthritis and my wife is 71 with Alzheimer's. This is this is a hard thing for both of us to go through. I had since I lived in that apartment. Half my life was taken out. And in the biopsy, yeast was found from mold. My wife's esophagus was eaten up from the mold since we left. It has correct. It is correcting itself. It has gotten better. But yet we lived in in a motel here in Long Beach. Again with the cockroaches and again with the Morgan Motel. But I'm here to ask this program. Give us tenants some rights. I've been evicted. I had nowhere to go. No one to talk to. The the discrimination. From code enforcement from the landlord of the adult abuse by moving us in their. The handicapped abused, moving us in there knowing that all these problems were going on and then having us evicted. When you tenants need some, right? Thank you. They bring vice mayor and council people. I took off my sign so you could see my my crest, my family crest when you know I'm Irish. I've been living in Long Beach since 1952 at a time when I was renting a garage apartment furnished for $50 a month. Now I'm living on the east side. Mr. Soberano is district or excuse me, and my rent now is 1220 $5. I recently received this notice from my landlord, made every effort to control expenses, hold your rent minimum. However, increasing costs associated with general maintenance. There's been no maintenance. I had the same carpet in my house that I had when I moved in and it wasn't new at the time and that I asked the landlord to please do something about the call up. And he says, Well, if I do that, I'll have to raise your rent. But you've raised my rent. And if you look at this, he's crossed out things. He doesn't want to spend the money to get a new notice. And the other notice that he crossed out was some them from the year 2000 when the rent was $1,000. Now it's 1220 $5. We need some help. And he came to me and I. I refused to pay the $75 that he was requesting. He told me, Well, then I'll have to respect you. And I said, No, you won't have to reject me. But that when we went round and round and I agreed to a $50 increase, which because my daughter, who was very disabled, was very concerned, and it was that it was causing her a lot of problems. Now, I watched. Well, what what is the solution to this problem? And this is well, there are a number of people that we know have not been able to, you know, get proper food and other things because the cost of the rents are so high, so much of their their income my income is from I'm a disabled veteran and I get a pension. And that's that's where my money comes from. And this man wants who is a millionaire living in Bellevue, Washington, wants another $75 just because he can get it. And he can get it because it's it's it's it's it's it. He can do it because there's no law preventing him. I consider this to be extortion. He is extorting me. And then I consider this also elder abuse. I want you to protect me and do something to help all the renters in Long Beach. Sir. Actually. When I started, senora, spell check you miembros consiglio mi nombre. Eric Instead of A.C., We wanted this day to own it. Amy So an apostle in the event that Tracy went out to Tracy, then going to Cinco Annual, we been talking on beef and I mean what Distrito Tengo Cinco de who's e-mails between Aqui También. Yes, the aunque your nope. With all that a year on, we had tables in it. Good evening, Mrs. Suja and council members. My name is Raquel Cervantes and I live in District one. And my zip code is 90813. I've been living in Long Beach for 25 years in the same district. I have five children that live here in Long Beach. And even though I'm unable to vote, they do vote and they are very. Active. Participant as in course, was the leader as well in the group was there with that he like Leyzaola we've seen that thing on Manzano Shindo they let the house in Long Beach. Estoy aqui porque go. No scholars, no city. That is a los Angelinos forget your soil, you know they use mbt cinco anos man this aloha cuatro basis for capital preparation. This dollar is more you being guerrillas. The thing Morella Siamo Bianco lose money have orders Ortiz Wendell told us stabbing me no below reparations cannot be reparations I you sir Kavala relation. I participate and I attend leadership courses in groups like Best Start and the Neighborhood Church. I've been a leader with housing language for more than six years. I'm here because I know the needs of the renters because I'm one of them. In the 25 years that I've been living here, I've been evicted four times because I've asked for repairs. Everything's fine and the relationships with the managers are very good. As long as one does not complain. When one asks for repairs, everything goes downhill. And as companions, Grant doesn't love companions I didn't know say as in cargo the LA reparations. Guess he'll go back last persona must have it that a son Los Ninos de la comunidad para los padrino pinto recuerdos para los mis. I see that is the use is también though improper that is destroying us you it they Rattansi Karachi Hussein is in who's talking your personal mantra estoy pasando también. Also the large companies don't take charge of repairs that are needed. The people that are most affected are the children in our community because their parents don't have the resources for their needs. They're living in properties that have been destroyed and they're infested with mice and cockroaches. It's unfair, and I personally am living through this. Lack of money that the animal shall meddle. You know, is that noise that brought the heat or not the any me the name mucho miedo they had there are losses bit stories porky soon this aloha those boring will look at alas you that. The community is very afraid we're not protected. We're afraid to let the inspectors in because after that we are evicted for involving the city. You're still on beef, pork, your quiero third party de la but yet bara balearic follows the rituals the Los Angeles knows is important. They they is that through this post program ask one month they near Otra no faith is. I got involved with housing Long Beach because I want to be part of the battle to fight for the renters rights. It's important to talk about this problem because in one way or another it affects all of us. Openly and all to improve the hablar para porque all state is necessity and really saki is then. Ascendant leadership rotation allows in killing of poor killers. Let's get the normal. No, no siren. And I'm here taking the time to speak because it's important that you realize that you are here making laws for us and we need things that will support us. A plan this imprecision noise sufficient to get it most mass, get it most cap or generate. The inspection plan isn't enough. We need protection. We'd like you to support RIP. Thank you. Thank you. Evening. Vice. Vice Mayor and. The rest of the City Council. My name is Cortez Arantes. I live in 1242 Cedar. Avenue, which is in the first District. I'm 20 years old. I'm in Long Beach is where I was born and raised. I am a Kurdistan student and on Big City College. But I'm also a really active voter and I've been a member of housing lobbies for for six years. I'm here today because I'm against this inspection program. And here's the reasons why this special program has been has been existing for more than. For many years already. There's just this program used to be called Healthy Homes. City council knows it, and it's obvious that our community knows it. This program hasn't been working because tenants are afraid because of the lack of protection. And as I was growing up in Long Beach, my parents had been. Renting all my life. And it seems. Like the roaches and mice have better protection than I do. So. So instead of investing. In an inspector that's only going to lock on, knock on locked doors, that never going to be open because tenants are afraid. I wish for you guys to. Invest in trust. And protection. Thank you. Thank you. Olav when I start this tells me no worries. Lillia Fuentes No. We want a lottery tournament. All those are all 20. So you want Lombardia and Los Primeros for Feist. Good. Hello and good evening to everybody. My name is Celia Fuentes and I live presently in District two and a volunteer at first five. And eight a minute, hustle, ambush. And all to housing Long Beach. Is there a key Stoiber thing or mutuals? Bain, Daniel, mother, Daniel's baby in the nest as we then there's the Andersons the latterly the Estamos so for in the law allows means by Consequentials Nos ultra low rent areas. There's Qatar I there is in the central zone you'll see not participating but the key Pakistan to anarchy. I've been here for many years. I've lived in the city for more than 20 years. And before that, up until now, we've been suffering the same consequences as renters. The owners say if you don't like it, leave, leave. Why are you renting here? Go away. Parents are given up instead of not being sold on cocaine or sulfate. The La economia board trabajo and I rattle through the apartamento address La Scala, Centro seahorse, la la la casa. And can we important there is our adult I mean pardon me, forget our law, my espanol and English, particularly the property that allows us deals are me seahorse, Kenya, Mimi SMA Beatles Toyi Estoy Estelle or an opera but Balenciaga la sitwasyon economic social demi sequels but good. And they don't stop to think for a moment how we're affected by the economy, by work trying to get another apartment our children's schools because education is very important and even for me because presently I do speak more Spanish than English, because I make my children and a priority more than myself. So I'm fighting to balance things. The situation, the social situation of my kids. Are they still me? Me hotel stays unsold all alone. A thousand needles, the key. Alejandro In spite of that, my son Alejandro is a US soldier. You know, it's possible in a book Real gay. Gay me. Who is the and the parakeet the all those things almost killed me know that HLA moment protection he we in Newcastle mean of our media as west post us all yeah. Yeah. Nosotros nonresidential status. And I it's not possible. I can't believe that my son is working so that we can all have the same rights and the protection. His wife, his daughter. But you all don't give it to us. I mean me because the Parliament decides to. The Animal Coalition. Let me see. The colors. Is. More yellow professional. Yeah, but there are certain things to the minister. Sovereign. The law laws minimize consequences for gay porn lot. The leader in post has to say no, no son, the Mandelas cartels, they are local. It's. I said, that is what this community is based on. And my daughter currently is studying in the college. She's at Long Beach City College. She's a professional model and she's going to be a dentist. But she also is suffering the same consequences. In fact, in the last two years, we've got an eviction letters of 60 days or 30 days, like ten times or. So programa gay or status proponent noise la solution mosque estamos pasando nosotros como and Thaddeus. So the program that you all are proposing is not a solution to the problems that we have as renters. E eliska liz cato the syria key story but silky grasses poor trattati solution l'opération or la solution he can stumble mass malaise as it como el proyecto they get the inherit list be local told in Cologne listen equally la they know no portal neither Barack Bianco Mr. Trabalhando NutraSweet this e equals that I won't dialog percent eating almost eating almost as a privilege you get scared the animals, the literature. Mama knows that baby mama knows grasses. And I want to say and I'm here to say, first of all, thank you for trying to solve this problem, but this is not the solution. We want laws like rape. So I am asking that you study it, that you analyze it and take the chance to see how it is working in other cities. And perhaps one day it will pass and we'll have the privilege to live as humans with the rights of humans. Thank you. Thank. Thank you. Before I take the next speaker, I need to take Mr. Rockwell, who's cute up from the top. Do you have a mic, Mr. Rockwell? I'm not putting it off. Good evening. Thank you. Can you hear me down there? Yes. Okay. I would like to say that while we have some assisted housing in this city, there is nowhere near sufficient housing. There is no where near sufficient housing for persons who are wheelchair users at any cost, whether it be affordable or not affordable. I see people in wheelchairs, out on the streets, blocking areas that should be passable at all times of the day and night. I see persons out on the street who need housing but can't afford it because of the lack of good, proper, affordable housing. Our city is really down the tubes when it comes to having suppression housing for low income workers, those that are working for minimum wage, or sometimes a little bit more than minimum wage persons who are making a thousand or 1500 dollars a month cannot afford to live in Long Beach the way our housing has been set up , a housing that is going up at this time, most of it is running anywhere from 1400 to 2500 or more a month. A person on minimum wage cannot afford that. A person on Social Security or SSI cannot afford that. But yeah, we need to continue living. We cannot afford to move. Many of us are do not have the energies to be able to move from our housing. So, Madam Mayor. Vice Mayor. Council members, please consider the needs of all these people, but are appealing to you and keep things such that we can have decent, affordable housing that is going to be sufficient to be able to live in comfortably and properly. Thank you. Thank you. When I start this, members will continue. Number 13, I want to be one in the street. Elumelu knows a thing or two to see how we been doing it. Good evening, council members. My name is Georgina Goldson and I live in District two. I've been living in Long Beach for 13 years. A Participar co-owner of Grupo de Lava Con, the group of 18, the Scream Clinic continues in action. Yes, it was the annual humanitarian group Latino Girl Senior Center Bella Cuatro Ella McCauley about. I participate in the group's LA off with the group children's clinic with the Latinos in action. And it's been 12 years since I've been a volunteer with the Latino Club at the Senior Center on Fourth Street. And they're the majority of people vote. Can you get us email address, A.L.S. Association, the Captain Lomis Medical Center, your system? I wonder what protections are la comunidad. But I'm honest and to really look at the animals in Bebe. When I got to the association that is housing Long Beach more than three years ago, I realized that they have been fighting for protections for the community to better the conditions that are so terrible that we live in. But is it going to look rather be working? Methadone rescues to El Programa de inspection proponent La Ciudad no suficiente no protocol in clean las inspection is not Syrian. And that's why I still am involved. Living in fear isn't fair. The inspection program that the city is proposing is not enough. It does not it does not protect the renter. The inspections are useless. But what is a criminal substrate is Yukiko Canal Program and Rip City and Rams protection of medicine and make sure this condition is withstood this desperate. And I said it is it can be but they must protect program. Thank you. And that is why we have come before all of you so that with this program that is reap there we would have protections. Our children deserve to live in better conditions. You all can make this change. Let's vote for the program that is reap. Thank you. Thank you. Thank. When I start this, Senora Suya. Stands. Gloria mendoza. Olga. When I started, said Todos, I can present this. Good evening. Suya. My name is. Gloria Montes, the. Oka. And good evening to everybody that's here. Do you want. And last one. anO métodos. Listen up. That is my visitor or home address. I live in District two and my zip code is 90813. It was big, memorable moment of your career. Now, narcos, your record, your it. It is it. The lesson of general medical school. And I tell you, number my number, because once I said two numbers together and they said the two numbers don't go together, it's number by number. Thank you. Thank you. Then go quarantine. You say machine. Maybe in dark in Long Beach. Then go to CBS. You. Vegas is to get on a Navy display. The tide is the highest. Good. So do we want to just give you tomato soup? That is so good. Korean potato may not be huge. We love romance music. I said you welcome me as possible, your bottom of calories. And as I said, I've been living. Here in Long Beach for 40 years. Can you all imagine that? I have three daughters and two of them were in the Navy after high school. They signed up and we had to sign for them because they were under 18. And we did sign. And they know that my husband and I vote every time that we can. Just volunteer for music. Is there anything else in your sentence and different deliveries? It can go on one house in Long Beach. Unforgettable assignment. I've been a volunteer for more than. 15 years in the senior center, and I've been a leader with Housing Long Beach for a bit more than three years. The middle this year, Daniels and Long Beach commu Camille Berman in which was pro lemon so much coastal is still not good apparently. See the first 17. Years in Long Beach we lived in fear and many, many problems. That is not fair and I don't want that for my daughters. It a program young everyone I lost you the noise would be silent. No protection, nothing. Lena's mom was my guitar in middle the report that I was wounded potato. But then in the central apartment. The inspection program that the city is proposing isn't enough. It doesn't protect the tenants. It's not going to take away our fear of reporting something that's wrong with our apartments. Senora Year, I remember you when you. I'm sorry. That's okay. This went off. We are all at senior center. This is how you see a little grass? Yes. Get all this year. Lazaro said you have to move members like you present this ghetto, those little Latino Maoris. Then I said today they would not work remotely nosotros my daughter's school homeowners. It was really shameless and suja. I would like to say you came several times at the senior center, and I'd like to say thank you for that. And I'd like to tell you and everybody here that the seniors, the older people we like to vote because we want to choose who represents us. In program are there is endemic corruption get them of mass protection but I don't think enough people I mean see could even I think. The program rip is our best option. We want more protection for the tenants. Also for my daughters who live here. Is but I'm not going to support you. And we hope. We hope that you support us. Thank you very much. Thank you. My name is Jennifer Wiseman. I'm the tenant attorney at the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles in our Long Beach office. I am the only pro-bono tenant attorney in all of Long Beach without an attorney. A tenant is almost certain to lose at trial in an eviction case. And if a tenant loses at trial, the eviction will be on their credit record for ten years and is subject to renewal. This makes it near impossible to rent a safe apartment. The system isn't working for our Long Beach renters, as you have heard from other speakers this evening and in today's L.A. Times article, retaliation against tenants is real and it is happening. Every week. I counsel families who are being evicted from their homes after reporting substandard living conditions to their landlords and to code enforcement. The proactive rental housing inspection program or prep, as Ms.. Reynolds referred to it, does not address this key problem because it offers zero protections for tenants, even with prep retaliation will continue to occur. It is good that the city is codifying its inspection procedures, but this must mark the beginning of a conversation about improving the health and safety of rental housing in this city. Slumlords will continue to evade the city. The city's efforts if tenants are too scared to open doors for inspectors or to call code enforcement because they fear a retaliatory eviction. I believe that the city can do more both to protect tenants and to hold each and every slumlord accountable. And if the city wanted the code enforcement process to work, the city must do more to make tenants trust that they can work with code enforcement to fix their living conditions and not get evicted. This is vitally important because the only ways to get repairs under state law actually create an environment where retaliation is likely to occur . Option one under state law is to withhold the rent. Many tenants withhold rent because this is the state sanctioned way of getting the landlord to make repairs. Option number two under state law is to make the repairs and deduct the cost from rent. Both of these options result in the landlord receiving less than the full amount of rent, which then result in the landlord often retaliating against the tenant with an eviction. The system isn't working for Long Beach renters. A RIP ordinance would protect tenants from retaliation because it would create a safe harbor for tenants who complain about substandard living conditions. Current state law protections are very flimsy. Prep does not address any of these issues. More is needed to protect tenants who have done nothing wrong, wanted to live in safe housing and now have no home. We should not be a city where slumlords can continue bullying tenants and evading the city's code enforcement efforts. We need a system that works for Long Beach renters. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Vice. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Josh Butler and I'm the executive. Director for Housing Long Beach, and I thank you for discussing. This serious matter tonight. While it has been expressed by many people here tonight that the proposed ordinance falls short. We are encouraged to know that some council members feel the same way and housing Long Beach would encourage you. Housing Long Beach agrees. That this measure falls short. Homeowners and renters agree with us. Businesses and our partner organizations agree with us because. They endorsed a reef ordinance that doesn't let slumlords off the hook. This ordinance lets slumlords off the hook. Long Beach doesn't look good by having slumlords. But we look worse. For not. Doing anything about it. And it's shocking to me that so many people I here tonight that don't want to see us do anything, that want to let slumlords off the hook. I don't think that there are members of the department. I hope they're not members of the apartment association that are currently operating. As slumlords in the city. If they are. I hope they are expelled from that organization. People are recognizing, as we saw on the L.A. Times, people outside of Long Beach are starting to recognize that we have irresponsible landlords and we have people recognizing that we don't have enough tools in the toolbox to address those landlords. I would strongly encourage you to support Councilmember Gonzalez's. Amendments tonight. To strengthen this ordinance, because this is a start. As was the theme at last week's People say to the city that I know many of you were able to attend. We've come a long way, but we still have a very long way to go here. We have to recognize that we have people who are afraid to speak out about their living conditions for fear of reprisal. We have to recognize that we have good property owners like the ones who have endorsed our ordinance. But we also have to recognize that we have bad actors who continue to operate without regard for the. Health and safety of their tenants. As the new executive director of Housing Long Beach. I look forward to working with the community and our brave leaders to take on slumlords. And if we have to take on that fire directly into the streets, we will. We're prepared to. If the city is not prepared to assist us in our fight, we'll do it ourselves and we will lift our neighbors out of their despair because people don't deserve to live a fecal matter. non-Working facilities. Rats, mice. And we think the. Council members have taken the. Time to come out and see those conditions. And we strongly encourage you tonight to take measures to strengthen the rights of renters in the city of Long Beach. Thank you very much. Thank you, Josh. Good evening. First and foremost, I'd like to say thank you for your patience and hearing each of our individual stories. My name is Misty Cromwell. It's my first time here, and this is pretty much impromptu. However, it's very real. I could be your sister, your niece, your cousin, your coworker, your neighbor. In any event, I reside nearly elementary school. I am currently in the background for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. However, I do reside under the nonprofit corporation in partnership with the Multi-Service Center that due to their wrongful evictions and I say evictions, plural against me, I may have to withdraw. No candidate for the sheriff's department may be a part of any civil litigation. If I withdraw, it would make me have to postpone for one or two years. I'm 40 years old. I live with my partner and three year old Anita, our grandbaby. And it'd probably be a once in a lifetime opportunity that I would have to withdraw from the first eviction that they filed. Judgment was rendered in our favor due to uninhabitable, severe roach infestation, among other things, in which the Honorable Peter marriage did rule in our favor and reduced the rent 20%. At that time, we did render approximately $6,500 to the plaintiffs. On March 17th, St Patrick's Day, our granddaughter's birthday. However, on that same date, again, wrongfully and illegally, the plaintiff and the plaintiffs attorneys did document an additional three day notice to evict, claiming I owed a subsequent $800, which is false. There is no way I will render nearly $7,000. Take funds from my 401k to not pay $800. Their their complaints have no validity whatsoever. I'm trying to keep it. And with due time, my partner is 15 years. Her mother does own property. Therefore, we know what it takes and what can be good. These people are operating in no way under good faith. They are receiving federal exemptions, grants and subsidies to which if you're lacking the $75,000, you should unwind that deal with them and you'd have your money right there. And lastly, I would like to just state, among other things, are hearing is for the fifth and I was told if the civil litigation proceeds past the fifth, I would have to withdraw myself. And that's this Friday. The plaintiff's attorney did tell me that no matter how much money we do render and regardless of what the judgment is, they will file an additional subsequent 30 day notice against myself pursuing an additional eviction and credit judgment on myself, which will indefinitely make me ineligible for the Sheriff's Department that I've worked so hard for. A lasting and probably most appalling to you at the moment. Our three year old granddaughter is unable to take a bath currently because the hot water in the bathtub continues to run so scalding hot that we cannot put her in there. She's a brilliant young girl. Excuse me, Miss Thomas. Arch it. Time is out. Thank you very much. Could you do? My name is Hollis Stewart. I live at 115 West Fourth Street, also known as the Walker Building. I'm an owner of a loft there, and I'm speaking as a homeowner then, not as a tenant and not as a landlord, but as someone talking about justice in our society and the need for housing in a way where people can be able to have the decency and an honorable place to live so their children can grow up and go to the same school year after year, so that they can develop neighborhoods and community, so that they could turn out as really good children. And since I live in the First District or because I, I appreciate my my Representative Lena Gonzales and her work on this, and I do support those kind of amendments she's brought in, perhaps in the future that life should be looked at. But I think as a council, you have to really look at what is good for all at Long Beach. And that means having a city in which all the people can grow and flourish and feel like this is their place, you know, in the universe, this is their place in America. This is a place where they can live in democracy and with justice so that they, in fact, don't try and get their rights through tenants rights and then get evicted and and punished in some way so that they, in fact, cannot walk with their head up high and in happiness and where they have to worry about their children, perhaps getting more disease and things like that and when buildings aren't taken care of. And I agree the good landlords don't do that. But there are many landlords unfortunately, who are in it for the dollar, not just to be a service. And of course they all want to make a living from it. I mean, and we all do that in our work. But there's a difference between that and being very mercenary about it and trying to take away from the people that you are serving in order to serve yourself and only looking at your own needs. But when we look at community, as I said, we want stable neighborhoods where I live in the First District. I want that to be a stable area. When I walk over to the Cesar Chavez Center in the afternoon, in the mornings, I like walking through my neighborhood and I and I like feeling when I talk to people and say, hi, how are you doing? That they speak back and they feel with some confidence and I want to make sure that everyone can feel that way so that where I get as I'm getting old while I'm already old, I'm 75 years old. But as I get older in Long Beach, I want to continue to feel that I'm part of a community that is there for all the people tenants, homeowners, landlords, everyone, and that we can all live with pride in what we're doing. And I think this ordinance up here will help in this program. But I think that perhaps the relief program is a step you ought to look at in the future, because it is a problem for tenants. And I've been a tenant, too, by the way. I was only a loft owner recently and a homeowner recently, but before I've been a tenant and it can be very scary. I've also managed apartment buildings right here in Long Beach, and I did, I think, an admirable job. But I talked to other apartment owners and other apartment managers who much didn't care about the tenants. So thank you very much. Just do the right thing here and let's make this a really good city for everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor. Council members. My name is Mike Murchison. I'm here on behalf of the Apartment Association. I want to welcome George Butler back to the City Fold. Josh, it's been a while and I think for the first time one of the few times Josh and I are pretty much on the same page. I say that because neither one of us supports slumlords. The Apartment Association doesn't support slumlords housing, Long Beach doesn't support slumlords. I want that to be crystal clear. I also want to be crystal clear that there's been a lot of articles by our local media that have not fairly characterized everything on behalf of the apartment association. They've mentioned these landlords to you all. None of the people that were indicated in those articles that are landlords are members of the apartment association. None of them. The Apartment Association's been around for a very long time. They do very good work. They do an awful lot of outreach. They're trying to figure out the best way possible to support the tenants. Yes, this ordinance is something that we support. Yes, we do support. Lena's first three parts of her motion. I'm looking forward to the rest of her motions. I'm sure it's coming here in a couple of minutes. There are a couple. Of areas I want to call attention to. We support the outreach programs. We support measures that the council will like to take against landlords that are over. 120 days late. We want to give you, as Josh referenced, more tools in the toolbox. We support collecting empirical data. We want you also to have city staff to have that data so they can present it to. You, present to all of us. We know what's going on. We do believe that there's any discussion of increasing fees. It should be referred to the housing committee. I can't say that. Stronger finally. And I think where we're all at is we believe that for lobbies to succeed, for landlords and tenants to work together, we need to continue to communicate. So I look forward to talking with Josh in the future. I look forward to hearing from all of you. And I believe that the apartment association has made every effort to. Come forward to you folks and say, hey, what can we do to support you? We look forward to being part of that solution. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor. Council members. Staff and my neighbors. Well, once my neighbors. My name is Vanessa Davis, and I've addressed you guys before. But let me refresh you on my story. I was asked to leave my apartment when I when I went through all the proper channels I was supposed to. I talked to my landlord verbally. I then decided to only do it. Written emails only told him he could not contact me over the phone. And after I've been fed up for a year, I called code enforcement. They came through. They made documentations. They cited him. Then I was issued a rent increase. 30 day notice. 60 day notice. He even came to me and asked me, did you call the code enforcement on me? Yes, I did. So he intimidated me in front of my face in my home. After that. I got the grand eviction notice. Yeah, I won because it was dropped once I came in with my stack of papers from the coat inspection, but I still had to move because I couldn't fight the 60 day notice. Did you know that landlords can give you a 60 day notice for no reason at all and you have to move. You cannot question it and you cannot fight it. So you say that we have these regulations for anti retaliation, but when the landlord is saying, Oh, it's not because she called code enforcement, then what leg do I have to stand on? Do you know that I had to go to court myself. I had to file a small. Claims and go to Downey and go in front of a courtroom. Would a judge they had nothing to do with Long Beach. He knew nothing about Long Beach. And who won? The landlord did. So why am I not a neighbor of you guys? Because I became homeless. I had to live in my car. I lived in my car for 19 months. And I love this city. I've been here for 12 years. I graduated the Neighborhood Leadership Program. I volunteered in so many ways in this city. I clean up the beach. I plant trees. And you guys have felt me. This program. Please show me, Rip. Good evening, Vice Vice Mayor. Council members and everyone in this room. My name is Miguel Angel Romero. I have attended Garfield Elementary Stephens Middle School and Milliken High School. I have over 100 family members currently living in City of Long Beach, where the WHO are both tenants and owners. I've been in the property management industry for 13 years. I assist with managing property in L.A. County, which include properties in Long Beach. I'm a professional property management professional. I am. I'm certified by the California Association of Realtors. And if I may ask. Define slumlord. Is it the landlord who refuses to change the light bulb, or is it the landlord who refuses to fix a broken toilet? Or is it the landlord who was tired of fixing tenant cost damages? I would ask the council to define slumlord and where its tenants can relate and pass it on to the tenants of this great city so they can be protected. Now I ask who is going to protect the property owners from slum tenants? Question Please define and provide property owners with a definition so they know and they also that they are also protected. We should put an end to this tenant versus owner mentality. It takes an effort of all sides to make it happen. We need to assist owners and tenants to come together and work together. I support this inspection bill, Henry Ford said. Coming together is the beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together exists. Thank you. I met the mayor, vice mayor, councilmembers again to Gary Shelton. You know, let's let's stipulate that. Renters. I mean, the landlords association, the Apartment Owners Association doesn't have slumlords in its membership or that if it does, they're not welcome there. We can stipulate that. I think we're talking about a whole different crowd of folks. Let's also look at what was in the staff report in the year 1966, 59 years ago. Now, 49 years ago, let's say 50 years ago, this was an issue that the city council acted on then. And I bet it wasn't suddenly in front of them. I bet it took a long time before they finally took action then. And here we are 50 years later, talking about the same thing. I would ask you, how many more stories do you have to hear before you start to put some teeth in what these people are asking you to do? It has baby teeth in it, but you need teeth in there that will gnaw on these landlords and force them into compliance. And you've got the chance to do it, but not with what the staff has brought you here tonight. What housing Long Beach has been talking about for some time is the REAP program and don't be confused with the P rip thing because that doesn't have teeth. I was on the board of Housing in Long Beach for a number of years. I've had to do other things since then. I'm a proud member of my community right here in the First District. I guess we're in the second district here. But right outside those windows, you know. And. I think you're going to be hearing one more story. I think there's one more person in line behind me. Maybe that will be the tipping point. For each of you to say, you know, this is not the ordinance we need to pass tonight. I appreciate that the council member from the first District has tried to put some extra safeguards in there. With all due respect. It's not enough. Thank you. Hello. My name is Malcolm Armstrong. I'm a landlord here in Long Beach. I owned 24 units, and I think it's perfectly fine. The thing that has been suggested by staff. But I do ask you not to get into our business. You know, when you buy 24 units in Long Beach today, you can pay approximately $4 million and up. So the investor the landlord is putting in 25%, at least of that, you can't get a loan for more than 75%. So if you buy a building for 4 million, you're putting in $1 million. Now, I would suggest to you that any sensible person is going to try and protect that $1 million that has been invested. And 99.9% of landlords do exactly that. Quite apart from the fact that most of us are ethical and take pride in presenting people with nice living quarters, it's in our interest to keep our properties in good condition. So yes, do have more penalties for those very few .00 7% of landlords in Long Beach who simply do not correct the bad conditions. Please do not start getting into a financial thing by telling tenants that they can pay a lower rent because conditions are this. You're going to have all the bad tenants in the city calling you up, requesting lower rent, and blaming landlords for the conditions they create. You know, we very often rehabilitate a unit, put in new carpet, fresh paint upgrades all over the place. And if we get a bad tenant in 3 to 6 months, that place looks like something down on the Los Angeles River. So, you know, there is another side to this. And I've been a renter for most of my life. I know very well that that things can be tough for renters. But please don't get into having the money into the city and you know what's going to happen. You're going to have a big bureaucracy attached to this and the money that the rent is going to put money in less than their regular rent. The administrative costs are going to be eating that money up like mad. What little comes back to the landlord in those circumstances? They're not going to be able to pay their mortgage, the taxes, their insurance, their utilities, their maintenance, their repairs, etc., etc.. So it's really important to let us carry on doing it. Thank you. We went on notice, he told me, Nebraska, hear me now on this. Good evening to everybody. My name is Gear Mina Fernandez. You'll be well-known. Edificio Apartamento, Yola. Not if you can. My yet another look at Mazara. Not any more magnate property. And I live in a building with eight apartments. I notify the manager of everything that happens there, but it's only on the phone. We don't have a manager there. Which advisor? List? Vega Manuel. Manager. The Los Problemas Italo? Yes. The American. The Merry, the repent, amigo. Karnataka, the like. Notification this. Isn't that the paradise? Aloha. And then many times when I was calling the manager and suddenly the manager showed up with a 60 day eviction notice. Your lady has Jonas as he took away and cannot take care of me. Apartamento. You must help me. They must be a job. Then go sing on your side. Better you'll be below. Sign your congrats. And I said I need you to check on the apartment. Not just my apartment, but all of them. I've been there for five years, but I lived with rats for two years. But in this list we amando Mira. I regret, said Mimi trabajo. The rector really meant Contreras Autonomy. Casals, la rosa. A lot of my. Quigley And sometimes I would call and I would say, look, I came home from work in Victorville and I found a mouse and it smells and he took it as a joke. You American. The Tuscan premier salamander. Mr. Armando can I says it's almost impersonal, I wonder. Recklessness as it almost robotic. The lava suddenly says it impairment. Larry Fazio, do you say I'm at the unless cancel. And then one time he called me and said, look, you always need us to be cleaning, cleaning the laundry room, trash cans, you need us to clean up. And I'm sick of it. Young lady, pick up your thing. I think I most animals that I told I can also trust our most honest renter estara most stubborn with background on restaurant that all us Nussbaum was viviendo gratis eat ghetto necessity necesitamos we appear to be in 4k ninos. And I said The reason I'm calling is because we all have the right. We pay we pay rent there, all of us. We're not living there for free and we need to live in a good place. There are children. When the Ebola cartel closes. Entry as animal entry. Why me? No, Malala. Hawaii, the brother in law. And when he brought me the 60 day notice, he didn't even give it to me. He just left it there. Thrown on the floor. Eva Ugandan touch. Hillary Holy baby says hi la senora literature. Nagasaki. Yes. Yeah. And there was a girl coming. He said, you let the lady know there's a letter there. That way she knows. I'm coming this holiday. Not even you. Nagata Specific El Motivo Simplemente el medico mpg rental losses Antalya. There was a this girl Apartamento. And he never told me the reason. It doesn't say a reason in the letter he just said You're going to pay me rent for 60 days and then I want the apartment. You met your Lady Hickey. You'll Necessita I'm not going to go anywhere. That poor will not see another Emery No, I stay. L No, I'll get it. Apartamento Apartamento low person autonomously allocated Rio de Janeiro la canal regional not in as a Rachel, not goodness, not out to go work on the loan. You and I said I want to talk to the owner because you don't do anything. And he said, no, he just wants your apartment. And I said, Why there, let me talk to him. And he said, no, you don't have a right to talk to him up. Were able scaling up a la fondation la in Dallas tonight. Yolanda and I looked for help. I went to the neighborhood foundations and they're helping me yesterday. What are your keys? He rekindles his kitchen atlas. Personal photos, estamos noi Samuel Viviendo gratis estamos bargains on the you see him on the Rachel's Common Cleaners. And tonight, I want you to hear from all of us. We're not living for free. We pay rent and we demand rights as renters. Apathetic and or strengthen apartheid can also rattle must not noise then on the masses, not in and not in an motivos por corcoran on the mass Pakistan almost sexy Hindu and also Wrigley. And besides arenas badly they don't even have to have reasons it's they're just doing it because we're demanding that they. Fix things. In which all the laws the laws Senators Carrington Taylor, Lauren Terrell at a munich C no less baguette por Qatar. Qatar, Caracas, Eliasson arsenal regular ace getting less per game. And many of those that rent to us, they demand that one pays when something is. Fixed by ECOMOG union dollars. And I'm telling you that because I already paid like $500. S.A.T.s, he he must get a handle. So I get this and I'll see you there. You see, Ramos had then it connected to Saddam, which had recently televised, must argue almost and also escalating. And tonight I'm here demanding and asking that you hear us and help us. If we have to come back and come back, we will until you do hear us. Get us. Yes. Thank you. I'd like to I'd like to thank all the speakers that came forward. And prior to calling council members from the Q, I wanted to call on Council Member Councilwoman Gonzalez to perhaps make a couple of clarifying statements. I think everybody for their comments. I think it's you know, we've certainly heard you loud and clear. We understand where you're coming from. I certainly do. And it's it's just good to have this discussion and to to shed light a little bit more so on on what you're dealing with every single day. I have to. Just wanted to ask a couple of questions of our staff. So I had two men. I had requested an amendment for the State Franchise Tax Board program. Can you clarify that? So everyone understands what that means for us as far as including that in the ordinance? Certainly when we submitted some information to the City Council as part of the two from four and as part of the housing element, we had heard about the State Franchise Tax Board Housing Program. It is a program that allows state and local agencies the ability to issue determinations that a property is substandard, and this determination actually disallows income tax deductions for rental units that are determined to be substandard. And so this program, if we are to implement that as part of this ordinance, we would be after the 120 day period. There is an appeal period as well within the city. There would be a hearing board, which would probably be the Board of Examiners Appeals and condemnations, which already exists to deal with building code violations. Once the appeals process has run its course, we have the ability to submit the address and of the offending location to this program. And the state actually withholds any income tax deductions that that property owner gets as running that for a business. They are not allowed to to apply for the income tax deductions until the program. They are released from their program and they don't get released from the program until the local agency designates that they're in compliance. So there are some significant penalties to rental property owners who are taking income tax deductions on their rental properties. Okay. And then I also had mentioned the Third Amendment was the increasing the frequency after 30 days and also potentially accelerating the case to the prosecutor's office if it is a life and imminent danger to health and safety. Can you go over that a little bit more? As certainly it looks like I laid out a process as I understood it, in order for us to get to the hundred and 20 days before we can submit to the State Franchise Tax Board. But we have had previous conversations recently with the city prosecutor who has indicated a willingness that there if there is a an egregious property that is truly life threatening, that he would begin prosecution concurrently with any of our citation process. So it would be a concurrent process. We would not have to wait for the 30 days to be over before we started our citations. If we felt, based on the expertize of our building inspectors, that it was a life safety issue, it could immediately be turned over to the prosecutor's office and they would be willing to to consider that case. Can you give me some examples of what that would be? What would a life for, you know, health and safety, imminent danger be so people understand exactly what could be sped up to the city prosecutor's office even before 30 days, certainly 30 days. You know, a building that has a substandard roof where there's holes in the roof that you can actually see through the roof, there's holes in the floor and you can see through the flooring. Clearly, something that does not have running utilities is a significant concern to us as well. Those are truly health and life safety issues to us. We many years ago had a significant backlog of substandard buildings that were truly, truly substandard. And we don't have that level that we used to have, but we do still have buildings that have significant issues that would still be considered eligible for immediate prosecution. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. And then I will make a few other points of clarification and add a few more things if I can. I think it's important we look at Triplexes. I know that that has been a hot topic. Bit of discussion. But I think if we were able to come back in a I mean, I don't know if it's 60 days or so, whatever, you think it would be sufficient to come back and have some more information on that as to how many triplexes we have and the data around that, I think that would be really important for us to do that. We can look into that. What we don't have right now is a process under business license where we treat them as a business. So if we were to look into this, are you suggesting that we would also modify the business license process so that they would also become a business? I would just like to look at this. I would just like the data to see exactly how many triplexes we have and what we're working with and in the beginning. Okay, we can do that. I also think I mean, on the slumlord note, for lack of a better word, I think landlords that are bad actors, in my opinion, need to be publicized. And I've run this back and forth. And I think it's very important that people that are living in deplorable conditions. Clearly, these landlords are making a profit. These people are making a profit. They're making a profit while putting nothing into their units. No additional repairs. They're unresponsive. They may have had lines. They may be at 120 days or more, and they're wasting city resources, clearly. Now, with that said, they're making a significant negative impact on the city and their tenants. So I would like to look into publicizing our our bad landlord list. I know that there's a list of about ten so far. I don't know if there's more. There may be. But I'd like to know how we can roll this out. Certainly we can. I know that the prosecutor worked closely with the city attorney's office to publish a list of folks who were soliciting, but those were after they were convicted. I would suggest we'd need to work with the city attorney's office and the city prosecutor's office to understand what level of notification we would have to give before we could post them. We do have information. You know, all of our information is public. So we do have the ability to run reports on how many cases we have that are over 120 days, etc.. So I think we can probably craft something with the city attorney and not have to wait that long in order to do that. Right. I mean, we're I mean, we've seen it in other cities there faces, you know, the. I don't know to what extent we could include, you know, what what type of information. But I think it'd be important that we include something on our city website, maybe some other avenues with housing. Long Beach, another apartment association with a lot of outreach. And in terms of who these people are and not to do business in the city of Long Beach like that. I would say that, you know, the information that we do have is certainly public. So it would include the address case numbers, what the initial violations were, the date of those initial violations, etc.. So that is public information. I think we can work with the city attorney's office to mine that data and come back to you with a suggestion on on what the appropriate timeline would be for us posting that information. That would be great if it came back with the information as well as the Triplexes. And then lastly, I think just as we're on the eve of budget budget discussions, I think it's important that we do look a little bit more deeply at our data collection. I don't know if our tracking system is necessarily as mentioned. I will agree as well. I've asked for reports and it's not very clear as to who we've gone to, who we visited, what the contact was. I think it's beneficial for both the landlord and the tenant to know. Maybe if someone didn't answer their door what the what all the fine details are. And so I would like to just for us to consider that in our budget discussions as to what we can do and what is possible for a better data system. We can certainly talk about the existing capabilities of our system and how we can try to grow that. It is very challenging for us to do reports that are that remain in the system. You know, once we close the case, the case is closed and those reports no longer consider that address when you're looking at, for example , open cases. So so the numbers of our cases are frankly constantly in motion as we open new cases and close old cases. So we can certainly look at ways to enhance that. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilmember Your Honor. Thank you, Mayor. Lina, I want to thank you for your diligence in this. Those other items that you mentioned, there are those amendments also that you want to include in the in the current. I'm asking for the triplexes and the slumlord information to just come back as a as information. So not necessarily amendments to the ordinance, but just information to come back and the molasses, just a consideration as we get into budget season. Okay. Thank you. While we know that this is a very difficult issue, it's one that has merits on both sides of the aisle here, as I see it right here. But one of the most important things that we have to deal with as as a city council is what do we think is the best and fair way to be able to treat this? We're dealing with human lives. We're dealing with people's lives. We're dealing with their ability to live, and then also with the ability of people to make a profit. But in the end, it's a public health issue as far as I see it, when it comes down to inspections with not only inspecting the living conditions, but it's the deplorable or the living conditions that are there in terms of mold, in terms of vermin, in terms of what other kind of infestation that might be existing in these properties. And I think that one of the things that we lost a few years ago is, is the ability to have health inspectors be a part of this process. I spoke with our IRA with Angela. And I want to thank you very much and. Reynolds for sharing her thoughts with me on this. However, I think that when we transferred the ability of the health department to make inspections in housing, I think we lost a very important component in regards to inspections experts, people who are trained to recognize the living conditions that people might be living in, to recognize mold and just be able to recognize, actually, that a landlord may have just cleaned it up and painted over it and still be able to recognize that there's mold is still there, still existing, that it's not it has not been mitigated and it has not been addressed. I also am concerned, other health issues concerned as well. We know that a lot of the housing elements that we have are old and there's probably a lot of lead based paint still existing in a lot of these apartment buildings because they haven't been repainted in a long time. There was someone earlier said that when they put their property up for sale, they did absolutely no investment in it. They didn't do anything. And so that raises a flag in terms of what had what have they done to that apartment or rental unit that makes them believe that they can sell it as is and still make a profit out of it. So I'm really concerned about that. And I want to thank the housing people and the coalition for their willingness to come and meet with me and share their thoughts. I visited a an apartment in seventh District, and I witnessed firsthand some of the deplorable conditions that these people live in. I saw open water. I saw water coming in through next to the outlets, electrical outlets. I saw mold and I saw droppings of not only rat or mice, but of cockroaches and other type of infestations that that are in the houses. And that was just deplorable. And my heart goes out to those tenants who have to live in those deplorable conditions. On the other hand, I know that, you know, we can't throw the baby with the bathwater in respect to apartment owners. They're not all bad. We're talking about the very low percentage of bad land, bad land owners at the apartment, owners who have been taking advantage of their tenants and do not want to take care of their their facilities in their apartments because they're looking at the profit margin. And when it cuts into that, they're not going to do anything about it because it's all about being able to make rent or make their mortgage because they do have payments to make as well. So I could see both sides. And I want to thank them. The Apartment Manager Association as well for meeting with me and sharing their viewpoints and their thoughts. It's not perfect what we're dealing with today. I want to thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez, for bringing these amendments to the table. I think it's something that moves us in a positive direction. It's not reap. Let's face it that that's not what we're dealing with tonight. We want it. You want it? Fine. However, we can't get there. Not tonight, but at least I think that with these amendments, we're getting closer to something that's going to be amenable later on down the line as we move forward with this. I think that when we're looking at how do we want to place Long Beach in regards to this issue, I would like I would like language in everything that we do. I want Long Beach to be a leader in everything that we have. This is one step towards that. I think it's a it's a step that would be headed towards the right direction because it s addressing the issues at hand. It's addressing potential punishments, if you will, for slumlords with the the state franchise board, the tax board program. It's not rep and it's not an escrow, but it's something that gives it teeth. Maybe not. Maybe they're baby teeth that maybe they'll fall off as you take the first bite. But it's something that I think is workable and that can be used to send the message because that's what we want. I think in the end, we want to send a message to to to those the bad landlords, bad owners that we're we're looking and we're paying attention and we're going to come after you if you're not if you're if you're misbehaving. And I think that's the message that we need to send. Thank you. Councilman Andrews? Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, I would like to thank the staff for their hard work on filling in the holes and finding solutions to our miserable code that protects residents from terrible living conditions and some apartment. I would like to thank the Apartment Association for their efforts to help bring about positive change and working with us to promote the very small community of property owners who do not care for their properties and protecting the rights of the vast majority of good property owners. And I'd like to thank Mr. Murchison here to explain a lot of things with both the property owners and and the slumlords that we speak about. They're not here tonight. You have individuals who really care about their property and care about the people who live in their property. And I think that's something I really want to commend both of you here to listen to both sides with the dialog that we can use here, because tonight is letting us know that we do have some bad guys out there. And I think we're going to find them. We're going to seek you out and let you know that people do have a right to live in decent places. And I would like to thank the Councilmember, Lina Gonzalez, for helping with her passion and leadership on this issue. And I support you Motion. And I would like to also thank the community groups and housing of Long Beach for working so hard on this issue and helping the community. And I feel the pain. I see your challenge and I hear your cry. I have firsthand experience in working with the properties that are in terrible conditions. My hope is that we are making a significant change that will help make it better for men, women, children and seniors who have no choice but to live in these conditions. If the City of Long Beach can't protect them, then who will? I'll be watching this and I'll be continuing the dialog to ensure all of Long Beach. It has a right to stay in their homes in a safe and free from the conditions I have seen firsthand. And I want to thank all of you to come out tonight, because I know it's been a long night, but you have come out with your sincerity, your honesty, and hoping that we can find a better place for all of us to live in. And thank you very much. Thank you. Councilmember Andrews, Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I agree with my colleagues and Councilman Andrews on the statements that he just made. I, too, want to thank everyone for coming out. I've had the privilege to meet with so many of you who are out in the audience every time you've requested a meeting on the subject. I've had the opportunity to meet with you and have in fact met with you and been educated on the issues. So I appreciate everyone coming out and taking the time to not only educate but also to collaborate. My very first meeting with Housing Long Beach, and I know that at least one of the folks who was in the meeting with me, I said the first thing I said is, have you met with the apartment association? Is that something that you're open to doing? Because I think when the two groups work together, we can come up with reasonable and meaningful areas where we can reach an agreement on that are realistic given our fiscal limitations. You know, I know that housing Long Beach has pushed for and really wanted us to adopt REAP. I get that. And that's been the position of housing Long Beach from day one. My personal viewpoint on it is that rape is not warranted in the city of Long Beach. It's not fiscally or legally feasible for us. Given the information that I have and that I've received from our staff and just so you know, I have personally met with staff, city attorney staff on two occasions and our development services staff on I can't even count how many times I've met with them to talk about this and ask them the follow up questions that both organizations have asked me to act to, to take back and and research. So I've done that. And I appreciate that staff's work on this and the fact that they've been so incredibly responsive and educational in their in their approach. So I want to thank them for their work as well. I want to thank Councilwoman Gonzalez for the amendments that she's made today. I think that the amendments really go to the heart of what it is that we're able to do as a city, as the city of Long Beach, given the current problem as we know it to exist. And what that means is that the amendments that the councilwoman has proposed specifically target the individuals who are out of compliance, and that minority of individuals who are out of compliance should in fact be held to a different standard, and they should be targeted and penalized in order to serve as a deterrent for future bad actions on their part. You know, we have an issue comes up all the time in the city of Long Beach, especially in those neighborhoods that have a lot of bars and restaurants where people want to approach an entire industry with broad strokes. And I think that that is not prudent because I think that in every industry and in every field and in every type of business, you're going to have good actors and you're going to have bad actors. And it's really important to incentivize and empower and support the good actors because. They are, in fact, investing in our community and helping our community be better and to really go after the bad actors, either through peer pressure or through sanctions, in order to deter their future conduct. So I think that the idea of putting them on this, you know, along beaches, most out of compliance landlords, I don't know what they're going to call it, but I think that that making that a very public access document or public access system that allows for people to see that these individuals are in fact not being responsible landlords is important. I think the frequency of fees is important. So I support those completely and I think outreach is very important from the very beginning. The one issue that's concerned me is obviously retaliation. You know, we don't want people to feel retaliated against. That to me is the one issue that really speaks to me. We want people to have the right to advocate for themselves and to protect themselves and their family and to really do what they can within their rights to utilize the city's resources. So and they should not be retaliated against. That is absolutely a fundamental right. And I think that that to me is the one piece that housing Long Beach has reiterated to me that really resonates with me. I think outreach is going to go a long way in that regard, communicating with not just the landlords but also the tenants and whatever effective way that we can to educate them on what their rights are is very, very important. And I also think that it's important for us to be mindful that that is happening and that people might be afraid to reach out for whatever reason, whether it's cultural, whether it's linguistic, whatever the case may be, so that we could be a little bit more proactive when it comes to that. I also support Councilwoman Gonzalez's request for staff to study further and come back to council with some more information for us or propose solutions on some of the items that she's requested. I think asking staff to research things is really great. It's good for us to have the information. It's good for us to know what is available as we move forward. So I think that's very good. I will say in regards to Triplexes, probably a bit premature, but we have a lot of Triplexes in the city of Long Beach and I would preliminarily not think it would be fiscally prudent or otherwise prudent for us to change the business license structure as they relate to the TRIPLEXES and require them to have a different business license structure. So, you know, we'll wait and see what that data shows. But I am in favor of studying the issue and getting more information because I think as a council we make better decisions when we have more information. So I commend her for those recommendations. Just make sure I said everything. And I welcomed the new leadership for housing Long Beach. So welcome. I think one of the things that is most effective in advocacy is not just to be, you know, a loud advocate, but also to be an effective advocate. And so I really respect the fact that you're open to collaborating and working with both sides in order to reach some solutions. Because I can tell you, anytime reasonable solutions are presented to us, we consider them. We absolutely do. So welcome and thank you. Councilmember Alston. Thank you. And this has been a very, very interesting to take in. I want to thank all of the speakers, speakers from the housing advocates. I want to thank the landlords, the property owners who came before us and spoke out and shared all of your perspectives, your firsthand perspectives and knowledge on this issue. Much of the testimony was was extremely compelling. And I just want to also thank staff for their their very thorough staff report on this. This was, I think, some of the best work that I've seen, and it was truly collaborative work. The Apartment Association were collaborators. I know the housing Long Beach were stakeholders in this process. This final report, the staff report may not be what everybody wants. And I'm sure what ultimately what this council decides here tonight won't be what everybody won't leave here happy. I think nobody's going to get exactly what they wanted when they came here tonight. And if that's the case, this council's probably done its job or will have done its job. I want to thank Councilmember Nina Gonzales for her thoughtful and compassionate amendments or suggestions, her leadership on this issue. I don't think the action tonight will solve the the problems of bad landlords and substandard housing, but we will, I think, take a step in the right direction this evening. We're going to take a step in the right direction this evening because of much of the advocacy from housing Long Beach and many of the residents who have come and shared their personal testimony over months and months and months. We want to thank you for your vigilance. I think some of the solutions here this evening are are good and certainly palatable. They take us in the right direction. I still have a few questions I'm really interested in. And the state of California, franchise tax board, the substandard housing program. It's not ripe, but it has all the mechanisms in place. It's already in place. It doesn't cost the city of Long Beach anything. And if you've heard anything tonight from the previous agenda items, we're thinking about our budget always. We're thinking about cost. We're thinking about long term costs because we want to be able to continue to provide and be the great city that we are and provide the services that we currently provide. And so we need to look at creative options. And I think this the Franchise Tax Board Substandard Housing program is an excellent suggestion by staff and is something that definitely merits everyone's consideration. It's it's real leverage. It it it will, I think, force a bad actor to to to to change their behavior. I'm not sure that we've addressed the retaliation issue here this evening, and that's unfortunate. I wish we could come up with something, something else. And and I've been kind of racking my brain to figure that out. But I think we do need to continue to do this. And by no means do I think this conversation will be over tonight. I don't think our action tonight will will will be a panacea for for for for any problems. But I do think we're headed in the right direction. I'm not sure. Maybe the conversation should be about more code enforcement officers, and we still need to have that conversation. And maybe that's something we think about moving forward. I think, Councilmember, your longest comments were pretty telling regarding the training of these officers and and and maybe we need to invest more in that direction. But at this point, based on what everything that I've heard, all of the analysis and there has been serious, significant detailed analysis on this, there's been hours and hours and hours and months and months and months of staff work on this. They've studied where RIP works, and from my analysis, it's only one city that actually is implementing REAP and it actually has. And that's the city of Los Angeles. If it was the the the answer, so many other cities would be doing it. It's costly. And I think that is. What, what what what what is giving this council great pause is certainly giving me pause. Slumlords and gave property owners a bad name. But you give tenants a bad quality of life. We don't want to we want to expose ourselves slumlords. We want to penalize the slumlords. But I think we also need to, as Councilmember Price said. We want to create incentives for those who are doing the right thing, and that's probably the vast majority of property owners. And so with that, I would ask my colleagues if you would, as in the makers of the motion, to take a friendly amendment offer for the report that is being requested of staff of additional elements to also look at developing a system for landlords that establishes a history of no violations and no complaints over a certain period of time to require these proactive inspections less frequently, you know, maybe every two or three years, as opposed to annually. And then that by doing that, creating that kind of incentive, maybe you, the bad actors, further into compliance. Maybe they look at, well, if I'm not going to be inspected every year, maybe if I if I want to reduce the amount of inspections, I clean my property up and and you know that Denison it could work was that would that be would you be amenable to that? Councilmember Soprano or Mango. And this is essentially providing incentives for the good landlords. So 24 months in addition to what we currently have. In the works. I mean, I'm asking staff to come back. They can come. Back and say. Okay, the number, I'm not necessarily asking to assign that number or that tonight, but. So it's a reward system for positive correct action. Like that of. Reinforcement. Councilmember Austin, is that a request for information back with the other items or cause that part of the ordinance? I think that's a request for information. Back with the other items. That is what I'm asking for. Thank you. In the maker in the second term, Annabelle. Thank you. Yes. So I did have a couple of questions and I just wanted to get some clarification because a lot has been said about our our rental stock throughout the city of Long Beach. And I want to I want to make sure that I'm clear and everybody else watching and participating here are clear. Do Section eight properties apply to this this inspection process? Section eight inspections are part of the health department. Still, when Section eight, when a landlord is going to participate in the Section eight program, the health department inspectors for the housing authority actually go out there and inspect the units prior to allowing the landlord to participate in the Section eight program. There are times when there is overlap and when that landlord is no longer up keeping the property to the standards which he should. But. But when a property is entered into the program, there are inspections for that program. And as I understand it, they are pretty regular inspections as well. Okay. Thank you. And part of the recommendations is to develop a tenant landlord rights and responsibilities brochure is that posture is the city going to assume the costs for that brochure, creating that brochure and providing that to to landlords to provide the tenants? We actually have drafts of the brochures that we shared with housing advocates and the apartment owners advocates to run the the language by both of those entities to make sure that we were not speaking out of turn, both from a landlord perspective and from a tenant perspective. We are intending to translate those in accordance with the language access program and that is being absorbed into the departmental budget. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So I wanted to begin by thanking everyone who participated in tonight's council meeting, beginning with the community members. I know you've been here time and time again. Josh, I think this this suits you well. You're a part of the former chief of staff fraternity like like me. And I'm glad to see you here, continuing this great work in the city of Long Beach. I want to thank the property owners for coming out. I was really surprised to see how many actually joined us tonight. You've reached out to my office and met with me and answer my questions and and I've had the opportunity to engage with you. I want to thank city staff for working on this and keeping us abreast on what what the realities are with with the realities with our existing program. I acknowledge that there are bad landlords and there are bad tenants. There were a few things that came up tonight that I think I just want to want to remark on. Someone mentioned, you know, to be a property owner of apartment buildings, you have to make $1,000,000 investment. Now, I can't necessarily identify with that, but I can't imagine that that's more impactful than that or more concerning than an investment someone makes in the in the life or the health of their family that lives in substandard housing. I can't I can't say that just because one is wealthy, you have more or less of an interest in the condition of that of that facility. I would also say that I like the approach and thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez, and asking for more information, because I think this is a long term conversation. I don't think the housing advocates are going anywhere. I don't think the concept is going to go anywhere. But that does bring me to the question of Mr. City manager. When is our next bite at the apple? Should this information come back? And we say that there are elements that we want to look, move forward with. When is our next bite at the apple? I think we're councilmember. We're being directed to come back to the council and with studies to look at Triplexes and will be regularly reporting on this. Again, it's going to come back to probably in just a few weeks for the first year. And the ordinance. Well, to be to be more more specific. Is there anything specific in the ordinance about this coming back for annual update or anything like that? We can certainly provide an annual update to the city offline, to the city council offline. And that is probably something that would be very, very important to do, maybe even at a six month level to know. I think like in an open session, I think we need to check this out like annually. We need an annual update on this. That's what I that's what I think. So that we, you know, these these conversations have a specific space. And I was under the impression that we already had that there was an annual update to the housing habitability ordinance. Can anybody speak to that? Yeah, I think amiibo that count. So as part of our work plan for the housing element, we are required to provide an annual report to both the Planning Commission and the City Council, and then that is actually provided to the state which keeps it online. We are required to report on all of our programmatic activities and this activity with our proactive code enforcement and cut enforcement in general actually falls under a specific program within our housing element. So we are required to file that report April 1st of every year. So it goes to the Planning Commission roughly February of March every year, and then we transmit that information to the City Council. We have the annual number of inspections that we do. Certainly this next year we will actually be reporting that we've actually implemented an ordinance and any other changes that we might be making to our inspection program. But there is an annual vetting of the program already. Perfect. So again, there were updates tonight. There was things that folks requested for information to come back. I think, you know, the community asked for RIP City staff, worked with the apartment association and key community folks and and proposed an alternative. Some would say that this is old soup warmed over but I'm going to say that I'm giving I think folks have given given this a good faith effort, that this is really a meaningful step, especially with the with the amendments that Councilmember Gonzalez threw in there. That's a meaningful step. So I think we should have some accountability in that step to make sure that we're we're checking it and tracking it. So I would say, like, maybe in this ordinance, we just mirror the language that an annual report of this will be reflected in. You know, whatever our annual update is, I'd like to make sure that that's a part of this. Are the makers of Motion okay with that. Let me ask a question first, Mr. City Attorney. If it's a restatement of existing policy, does that materially change the ordinance? Well, no, actually, if it's a restatement of material policy, this is part I believe would be reported back as part of the housing plan. But the ordinance could have a statement in there that there'll be an annual report to the city council. I think it's going to be redundant. And my understanding is that all the changes to the motion already required to come back. Come back so it wouldn't delay it any further. Correct. That wasn't that wasn't my question. But you're right. Makers of motion. This. Go ahead. Yes, I think we can handle that. Okay. Great. So just a couple of things. Well, you know, I was a little embarrassed when I got a call from the L.A. Times guy. And and, you know, I said, hey, you know, we we're on top of this. We're having this conversation. And and, you know, we're I'm familiar with what's happening. And and he gave a narrative that simply said, you know, I pulled the I pulled the property owners who are engaged in rape in L.A. and then went and visited their part, their projects, their apartments here in Long Beach. And and here's what we found. And what I learned was that majority of those were duplexes and triplexes that we went and checked out. So I think it's appropriate that we do that. We do necessarily like explore duplexes and triplexes. I know that your recommendation was for Triplexes. I don't know what the fiscal impact any of this is, but I think like as Councilmember Price and council member, your anger tangled about earlier. I don't think there's any problem with getting more information. So I think while we're looking into triplexes like how many we have, I think we should also look at duplexes. I want to know what we're up against here. And if we make a decision that it's not fiscally prudent to move forward with those, then let's do it based on facts, not based on suppositions. So are you okay with that? Mr.. Making the motion. With the caveat that the business license issue is covered also. Absolutely. Certainly that's something we have to evaluate. If I might ask Mr. Burdick, how do you acquire that information? How are you aware of the number of the request is for information on the number of triplexes and duplexes we have in the city. So how would you acquire that? So we do have we would end up working with our GIS department. They would link to the county assessor's office to give us rundowns on duplexes and triplexes. As I understand it, we were asked to return in 60 days with an offline memo on the triplexes. If we were to add duplexes to that, I would respectfully ask for additional time to look into this. The data that we get is not 100% accurate, and we would frankly need to define what a duplex is. A two on one lots may not act as a duplex. It may be a granny flat, but it may show up in the assessor's information as a duplex because there are two separate units and two separate addresses on that property. That's a very, very different rental scenario than a business, a four plex, you know, renting as an investment property. So I think with the duplexes, I have a lot more concerns about what is an investment property as opposed to what is an opportunity for a property owner to, you know, make a little bit of of money and rent to a family member or a friend or even a tenant. But that's a very different situation than a four plex or a ten plex, which is truly an investment property. If we were to add duplexes to the request for a TFF, I, I would just respectfully ask for a little bit more time to investigate those issues. And so and so and I would, I, I, I understand where, where you're going with that. I would say that in order for us to make a decision, I would say we wait a couple of weeks to make sure that information is accurate. And my thought was not that we're just asking for numbers, but it was sort of an explanation of what the impacts are of going to go in three, you know, in terms of the business license situation, in terms of, you know, any logistical or staffing concerns or or fiscal impacts, I just want to have a better understanding of what one means versus the other so that that's my request. And then, Councilmember Richardson, before we move on from that item, Mr. Burdick raises an issue about duplexes and back houses or single family homes. Is our intent here. To. Identify certain solution sets because of the nature of the property or because of the nature of our status as renters? I think that's a fundamental question. So if I mean, you've gone from multifamily units to having information on how many triplexes there are and how many duplexes there are. But I think what we want to get to and really for all people here, we want the same things, which is no renters should be subjected to the conditions that we've heard described and we know exist, whatever small percentage. So it's the renter that we're looking to protect. So if I'm renting a back home, why would my status be any different than if I was renting in a four plex or a triplex? And I'm not necessarily throwing that question at you. But. Ms.. Burdick. Is there a way that you could, without a significant amount of work, at least identify rental properties, properties that are claimed as rental properties, whether they are to plex's, triplexes, whatever it is. What I would not like to see us do is create a two class system where we are saying renters. In this type of unit, we value their quality of life more than renters somewhere else. And I'm asking that question because I don't know the answer of how difficult that would be. But we're passing this down so far down we're leaving. Yeah, I actually agree. That's exactly what what I'm trying to articulate here. Renner's Renner, what is their condition? The L.A. Times article actually discussed Renner's that are not wouldn't fall into what we're discussing tonight. I agree. I want to understand in this report, like, what is the fiscal impact of just categorizing, you know, Renner as a Renner and what, you know, what does that mean if you're in a duplex, multifamily, a triplex? I'd like to. Think it might be impossible to get to that, because you also have people who are renting rooms in in homes. And so there will be a population of individuals that we won't be able to reach with a sweeping policy. And that's something that we have to accept. But if I can have misspoke, let us know what's what's possible and practical. Then we have a realistic understanding of what she can do. And again, I honestly don't know the answer to that. You know, as you're talking about that, I'm thinking of the person who bought an investment condo in a high rise who is renting it out. They are a renter. They're no different than a renter in a four plex or a ten plex. I would point out a couple of things. Remember, the program that we're doing, we're talking about is a proactive inspection program. And even if we were to move forward to a reward system for those individuals, owners who maintain their properties, I think it would be a bit challenging to staff it in an appropriate level. You know, we are already understaffed in our current multifamily tenant program and there would certainly be fee increases that would need to be incurred. Having said that, you know, we'll take complaints of violations in any way we can get them. It doesn't matter who gives them to us. It doesn't matter if a tenant tells their pastor and the pastor calls us. It doesn't matter if the tenant tells their doctor or a social worker or someone at the health department or calls any of your council offices. The important thing for us is that we get those violations taken care of, whether it's a property owner who's being a bad neighbor or whether it's a landlord being a bad landlord, or whether it's a fellow tenant who's wreaking havoc on the rest of the tenants in the building. What is important to us at the end of the day is habitability for all of the housing stock in the city. And so, you know, I don't know the specifics to your answer. I am absolutely willing to explore this and go down this road with you. I just don't know what level of resources are going to be needed to do that. But absolutely happy to do it. Okay. Councilmember Richardson, thank you. Do you have more items? Well, I think everything articulated has been redirected to answer questions that I didn't ask. I'd like to just wrap this up and then move on. So it's in I think it makes sense. So the the four units in up are the proactive piece and anyone has the ability to call code enforcement. Is that what I just heard? Including those who live in four units or more. So just because we don't visit that property, it does not mean that you can't call 570 code. I get it. That makes a lot of sense. Units are less. Excuse. So if in the conversation about triplexes or duplex is really about what the impact would be on a proactive program if there's a fiscal impact impact of the business license circumstances. So based on how many tenants and units there are, correct, is that is that what would come back? You know, I think we'll look into it. I think we're going to have to look into certain definitions under state law. You know, what is a dwelling unit? What is a rental? What is a room rental versus a unit? And come back with some definitions and work within those definitions to find out exactly how many of those, you know, units we have in the city and then calculate if we were to do a proactive program, what that cost would be. So to do that on the so that that calculation, that formula, it's basically a per unit cost, right? You can get it down to a per unit cost. So if it's triplexes, we would know per unit how much it would cost to be able to have a proactive program based on that. Right. You know, that's what we are hoping to do. That's not how the current fee schedule is set up, but that is something that we are looking at. We do think it would be far more equitable to be a per unit cost than grouping them together. Sure. So based on per unit, it would be very simple to calculate. Okay, this is how many? Four and up units. This is how many triplexes? How many duplexes. Based on that formula, this is what it would. And then if anybody wanted to take it a step further and use that on that formula and say this is how many, you know, single family, this is how many everything. Then to have a proactive program, you would understand what that fiscal impact would be. Am I right in that logic? Yes. Okay, great. So so that said, to move on. The last part is, I agree with with Councilmember Ranga that like this is a major public public health thing. And I think, you know, there's a public health lens that should be applied to this. And, you know, I just you know, I made sure that I brought photos. I went out and visited an apartment in my district and I was blown away just at the images like this is supposed to be a white wall and it's like blue and purple with mold. And this was a one bedroom apartment with and I've told everybody about this and I reported this place, but it's a one bedroom apartment with mold. There was a baby living in there. And I just couldn't imagine living in there myself personally. And so, you know, I reported it, but when I spoke with the property owner, what they said was they were afraid to report it based on retaliation and that that particular family had issues with documentation. And so I do want to make sure and I know today is not that day, but I do want to make sure we have a conversation about retaliation and that we do give some evaluation to like public health here. And I know that those considerations are there and that they used to be in the health department. But I think that. Councilmember, your angel makes a very good point. Thank you again, Councilmember Gonzalez, for for leading on this. And I think that's all I have. Thank you. Councilmember Mongo. Can I first start by hearing where we are with the motion and how many friendlies we have and where we are? It's all very friendly. Certainly, I'll try and summarize it. There's a motion currently on the floor to adopt a staff recommendation, plus amending the ordinance in three ways to add the State Franchise. Tax Board. Program to increase the citation review and frequency and third by Council District nine to. Require an annual report. And also and then and then there's four items or five items now that are to come back for additional information or adding $75,000 for the outreach and education of this program. That would not be part of the ordinance to come back with information on how to advertise or roll out a list of poor landlords or landlords who are not in compliance, requesting information on the number of triplex and now duplexes within the city, and to an information on how we can better collect the data for the units that are inspected. And then also information on some sort of an incentive to lower the number of inspections for those landlords or apartments that are in compliance . So let me start by saying that. Though discouraged by my mother from sharing this story, I'm going to share it anyway. When I lived in another place, I had paid three months rent in advance and within two weeks we were infested with mice. Within 90 days of becoming a council member, I opened my garage door one morning. Yes, I'm the woman who wears hot rollers to work. And as I drove out of my driveway, there was a man standing there who told me about the roaches in his house. And so it happens all over the city. And it is important that we have teeth for our bad landlords. We're very lucky in Long Beach. 90% of our landlords, actually probably closer to 99% of our landlords are excellent individuals. And I stand firmly with Lena in the additional. Punishment for those who are terrible because we don't want terrible landlords to own property in Long Beach, we would be more than happy for them to sell their multimillion dollar investment and go somewhere else. We also. I stand strongly with Councilmember Austin. In that we must incentivize those who do a great job to relieve the pressure on the staff, to focus completely on our bad landlords, our good landlords, our good landlords and their consistently good landlords. I hope that we will model our program after the Santa Ana program, which after a history of zero infractions, you move to a 48 month inspection cycle, which has been seen as a very successful model. It reduces the workload of court code enforcement on the good landlords by a significant amount by almost. I want to say it was 40% in a study that was done in 2010, and that additional 40% of staffing can be used to reduce the penalties from the 30 days to the 15 days. It can increase the number of visits. It can increase the proactive review of areas of concern. It can increase the number of inspections on the landlords that are consistent violators. It can work more closely with our outreach programs so that once the first $75,000 is gone, that this is an outreach responsibility of the department because those staff members who used to be inspecting 18 to 24 months are then able to spend that time on the things that we want to do to become the premier rental and landlord city in America. So with all of those things said, I really want to thank a few people who came up and spoke tonight. I know I have not met you before, but Mr. Jeff Benedict, I thought you were really eloquent in your ideas related to the incentive program. While I read a lot about it, I appreciate that that our constituents are coming up and bringing those ideas. And had you not brought that up, that was something I was really passionate about as well. Josh Butler. I know you're an alumni of the Chiefs of Staff, but you're also alumni of the Fifth District. And, you know, the house is on our community, one of which was boarded up yesterday. So we are we are working hand-in-hand to make sure that no renter's or any family members or seniors, whether they rent or are in a home of their family member, are in those conditions, including mother in law's quarters, which we have many of in the fifth. And finally, George Rivera, you've you've you've definitely come around and we appreciate the hard work that you've done in motivating individuals to come to council because it is not easy to come to council every Tuesday night. I was just on a flight back from out of state and I sat next to a woman who didn't know I was a councilman and told me I used to go to every city council meeting and she burned out. And you have not burned out. You've been consistent. If she hadn't burned out, I might have met her before sitting next to her on the plane. So good work to each and every one of you. And I think that we've come to something today that is remarkable. I hope that these incentive programs really free up our staff to focus on those bad landlords. I want to make it so difficult to be a bad landlord in Long Beach that it's easier to just be a good landlord or to put their property up for sale. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Councilmember Supernormal. I'd just like to thank everyone for presenting tonight also. I just had one quick question and that was for Ms.. Bodak. It seems like we had a little mission creep here, and you seem to have a different tone when it came to the duplexes. And I just want to make sure we have a good solid feeling on that. And is does that double the work? Triple the work if you have to do the duplexes also? You know, first we have to start with defining the universe before I can define for you the mission creep to use your term. So duplexes in general have a different level of concern because they are they had typically in the past never really been seen as true rental properties. And there are housing laws that certainly do protect granny flats and the ability to have granny flats in almost every residential zone in the city. So we do need to look closely at, you know, the intent and what we're trying to achieve. Clearly, there will be workload implications and we will be sharing that with you. And ultimately, it's it's your decision to allocate the resources necessary for us to take on the additional workload. All we can do, really, is to share that information with you, and then you can decide if it's mission creep or not. Okay? Yes, that's good. Councilmember Your Honor. We're coming to the end. I like the direction this discussion has taken thus far of. Some very important items have come up in this discussion. I count three of them that are very important. First of all, we're dealing with a finite number of staff and a finite budget that we're having to work with and having that we know that now we have to have the data. We need to know what we're dealing with and come with that. Data comes definitions defining a duplex, defining what is a rental property. And I think that once we take care of those issues, we can arrive at something that's going to be workable and positive for the city. However, we can't get there without knowing what it is we're dealing with. We're dealing with issues that are very important, not only to the to the tenants, which are of the utmost importance, because, you know, there's a chicken and the egg type of thing. Who came first? A renter or the property owner? So, I mean, we have they have to work together and being able to resolve these issues. When it comes down to inspections, there was a consideration about forgiveness program, if you will, or a delayed inspection program. I'm not sure how that's going to work when we have thousands, probably tens of thousands of rental properties out there, some of which will never get inspected, some of which will probably take years, years to even get inspect, inspect it once and where. And one of the issues that we addressed earlier or that has been brought up was, you know, 10% we're looking at 10% of inspections. That's not going to get everything and it's going to take years to get all of them. And how do we identify who's a good land owner and who's not? It's going to be hard to do that. So I'm not I'm leery, wary of what an inspection program or a a relief program is going to look like in rewarding the good tenants, a, the good landlords versus a bad. I'm not sure how that's going to work. The other aspect that I'm concerned about is the escrow, not the school program, the the the tax board program, if that's within 120 days and the renter has already been noticed about. The inspection that's coming or that's that was already there. And then the landlord pushes out that renter. What good has it done? I mean, the renter has already been kicked out. And the and the escrow program is it's going to take 120 days to fix it. If at all. So I'm still a little concerned about how that is going to come into the mix. And perhaps that's something that staff can evaluate and look at in terms of not only rewards, but penalties. Something that that's in there in the interim while we're moving forward with some kind of program. And then lastly, like I said, my my first comments were about dealing with a finite number of staff and a finite budget. It's going to be difficult to implement this program. It's going to be difficult to implement even a deep program because it all costs money. So we all we have to look at out of the box thinking, if you were to coin the cliche, as we always have out of the box. But it is something that we need to seriously take into consideration in terms of the implications for the city, in staff and in resources to be able to push this forward . So those are my closing remarks there. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Urunga. And I wanted to just add a few comments myself. I wanted to thank everyone that came today for your patience. Many of you have worked on this for a very long time, just not the months that this council has taken up this policy issue. And while landlords and renters sat in different sides of the room, I do think you heard today that we do want the same things. I don't think you have landlords in the room today that qualify under the descriptions that you had brought forward for the horrible conditions that many of you described that you live in. So you do have people that are good operators that are here. I wish there was a way to find out exactly what percentage of operators, landlords in our city are under that qualification of horrible slumlords. That's small. We don't know how small. And as I had said before, one is clearly too many because you have families living in the circumstances that were described today and they're all over the city. Some are far more deplorable in certain certain districts. I know this. Several of you have come forward and indicated your second district residents, many of your first district and sixth district, they're all over the city and it's not acceptable. I think we're making a good first start. And that does sound cliche. And I will admit that we do often talk about taking small steps toward larger policy advances, and that's public policy. It is a work in progress. We are not able to cure this situation. The situation precedes all of us. And the human condition of gaming other human beings precedes all of us. And that's really what we're talking about here as well, is when we talk about one human being taking advantage of another and being able to do so because of poverty levels, because of circumstances where we cannot do anything about that, and then those power struggles will continue to exist. And what we hope to do here in the city with with this first step is to cut that short a little bit, is to blunt the force of what that can be like for an individual or a family with the various items that come back for information. I think we assure you that this council will continue to review this. It's not over tonight, and you need to feel confident that it's not because of the items that the city attorney listed, the items for information, the items that will come back, those are all different opportunities that this council will have to either expand on the policy to review it, to make it better, to change it, whatever it needs to be. And so your active engagement is still required. Both of your active engagement is required. And I appreciate Councilmember Richardson's way of articulating that one person's interest does not supersede and others that wealth and investment in one property is not an indication of of the greatest of intention or requirement to protect that investment. We as individuals with families have the same interest to protect our investment, which is our quality of life for our families. So thank you for articulating it in that way. It was it was clear and and it was pure. And I think no one would disagree with that. And so for that, I'm very thankful. But I want to our staff is with all of this work that you've put into it and you are aware of the various bad actors that come toward that that exist in this city, are we in any way able to track or prove that we're reaching previously a segment of the community that didn't used to trust either the city or didn't used to trust that retaliation was an issue? Is there a particular way that we're reaching out to them? Are we working with for instance, I look at housing Long Beach and this is something we can do offline, certainly off line from this ordinance. But it's a very strong advocacy group that people trust. And throughout this whole process, I think what we heard is trust is lacking, trust of landlords, trust of city, trust of authority, trust , distrust in general. That's broken fundamentally. But we do have an advocacy group that I have seen in the council, has seen, has a tremendous amount of trust with these individuals. Can we work with them in a way where, as you said earlier, anyone can make a complaint. So if our advocacy group comes forward with a complaint from a particular unit, instead of just reviewing that one unit so we don't isolate or target that renter, can we not inspect that entire building work with certain stakeholders? And it could be the apartment association as well. They can come forward and say they're aware of a bad actor. And so let's inspect the entire building, give it sort of a priority status because it's coming through a trusted group. First of all, we have been working with housing Long Beach and. An informal process. They have given us the ability to provide us some referrals to certain units or tenants of concern. We do inspect the building and look around the building. If we're if we're going into one specific unit for a specific health hazard reason. We do need the tenant's permission to get into that unit and to investigate. But we also do look around at the rest of the building and we do knock on other doors in that building as well. If there are other tenants in the building, when we're there and they happen to open the doors, we will absolutely talk to those tenants and look in their apartments if they will let us do that related to trust. That is a key component. We have recognized over the last year that the voice of government knocking on your door is not always welcome. And we understand that there are groups out there that can reach tenants and reach landlords better than we can. And so I think that was the idea behind Councilmember Gonzalez's initiative to have us work with community organizations or or CBOs or non-governmental organizations to reach out to those areas where we know there are problems. We know that there may be language barriers, and we know that there's high concentrations of code issues. But we're not just we're just aren't seeing the complaints coming in. So I do think that that's something that we're going to look forward to. And as I said, again, we'll take any complaint in any way, shape or form that it is provided to us and treat it seriously. I can't say that enough tonight, really. So I guess my final closing comment on this is, you know, I really appreciate the attention that the city council is paying to this. I do think that on all sides of the chamber, we are here focusing on housing habitability issues. There are certain skills that the government can bring to that task and certain skills that we just don't have or we're just not as nimble savvy by working with both the advocates and the Apartment Owners Association, I think we can get there where we want to go. Thank you, Ms.. Broderick. And the question of retaliation came up many times today, and that's not something we would solve today either. And I'd like us to consider, aside from the state law and other definitions of what the city's role is in protecting our residents from retaliation, I would like and I know that you do think about this, but I think this council has demonstrated that it is not tolerant of of our residents living in fear and fear of really standing up for our for their quality of life and their rights. And so as you think this through, I don't want us to lose track of retaliation as a risk. There's always a calculated risk that we take when we stand up for something that we believe in. And that's what advocacy is always about. It's a calculated risk of what you will lose in order to achieve what is right. I want us to consider what is our burden in in sharing that risk and removing some aspect of that for our residents. And that, I do think, is an obligation we have. Whether state law requires it or not is to consider that as we consider developing policies and improvements is to not fall into the belief that we cannot do anything about retaliation. And that's more just of a statement rather than something you need to respond to. But I am confident that it's on your minds as much as it is on ours. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. And with that, I do thank all of you. I think this council is prepared to take a vote tonight. And as I said, this is our start and we hope to continue to get better. And thank you for all of your engagement and interest on this issue and your support and valuable input. With that council members, please cast your vote. Motion carries 9000. Okay. So we are back to the regular agenda item. Item 17. 17. Actually, if we can take 5 minutes, that. Would be great. Why did you do this? Yeah. Thank you. Would you like me to get your anger? Richardson. You're on the air and dear in the bathroom. Just. I guess you would have got one month. All right, members, we don't have a quorum. Chiefs of staff, can you go retrieve your members, please? I need you looking official. Thank you. All right, we have a quorum. Madam Clerk. Item 17.

AS AMENDED, a bill for an ordinance amending Article V of Chapter 2 of the Revised Municipal Code pertaining to financial disclosure. Revises the Denver Revised Municipal Code regarding financial disclosure including eliminating the requirement that candidates for municipal office make financial disclosures, modifying the definition of “gift”, “immediate family” and “officer”, modifying the date for submitting the annual financial disclosure statement for city officers, requiring semi-annual gift disclosure reports by officers and annual gift disclosure reports by employees, modifying reportable gifts and increasing the reporting threshold from $25 to $50; making the financial and gift reports of officers publicly available online and the gift reports of employees publicly available on request, and modifying the remedies for violations of the ordinance. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 11-29-16. Amended 1-3-17 to remove the minimum $50 threshold for reporting gifts in the covered categories, resulting in the reporting of all gifts received in the designat

DenverCityCouncil_01092017_16-0919

The majority of the city. But it is it is it is one of those things that it wouldn't be clear when you're talking about simply a ride away vacation, you don't know how that's going to actually subsequently influence the mass of a building that goes next to it. Things are right next. Bill, call it out. Can you please, Madam Secretary, bring up Council Bill 919 for amendment. Councilwoman Canete. You've called it out. Would you like to make a comment before? Thank you, Mr. President. I will be offering a technical amendment to Council Bill 918, which pertains to financial disclosure. The technical change corrects an error pertaining to the effective date of the new reporting requirements. As I described last week, I intended the semiannual gift reporting requirements to begin in July of 2017, which will be the first reporting gift period to which the new reporting rules apply. The amendment reflects the semiannual nature of the proposed financial disclosure statements. Great. Councilman Flynn, will you put the bill on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bills 16 919 as amended on January 3rd, 2017, be placed upon final consideration and do pass. All right. It has been moved needed a second or great council can each. Your motion to omit. I move that council bill 919 be amended in the following particulars on page two line 38 strike quote beginning in 2018, end quote. And replace with quote, beginning July 31st, 2017. Period, end quote. Okay. That is very technical and has been moved and waiting on a second. Any more comments? Yeah, just my apologies. We described it correctly last week and did my best to reread the bill, but I missed this. This change was not made in the in the amendment as in the bill as intended and this particular spot. And so we are just cleaning it up. Apologies to my colleagues. All right. Council Bill 919, as amended on the floor. Madam Secretary, roll call. Can each I. Lopez. All right. New. SUSSMAN My. Black eye. CLARK All right. Espinosa. FLYNN Hi. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Hi, Mr. President. I. Close voting announced results. 12 Eyes 12 Eyes Council Bill 919 has been amended or we have voted on amend it now. Councilman Flynn, we need the motion to pass as amended. And thank you, Mr. President. I move that council bill 2016 does 919 as amended be placed upon final consideration and do pass. All right. Has been moved and second comes of of members of council no comments Madam Secretary roll call. Can each I. Lopez. New assessment i black. Clark. Espinosa. I. Flynn. I. Gilmore. I. Herndon. Cashman, i. Mr. President. I. Please close the voting and announce the results. To advise. All right. To advise. Council Bill 919 passes as amended. This concludes the items that need to be called out. All other bills for introduction are now ordered publish. We're now ready for the block votes on the Bills on resolution bill for final consideration. Council Members Please remember that this is a consent or block vote and you'll need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilman Flynn, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. Yes, Mr. President. I move that the resolutions be adopted and the bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in a block for the following items. 2016 1332 1276 1321 1322 1328 1333 1335. Series four 2017 A Number ten Series of 2016 1273 1290 1336 1240 1329 Series of 2016 1117, 12, 65, 13, 15, 13, 16 and 1320. Just making sure you got him on the you know. I believe I did. Yes. A good way to congratulate you, sir. All right. Thank you. It has been moved. We need a second here. Madam Secretary, Oracle. Black. I. Clark. All right. Espinosa. Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Hi. Carnage. Lopez. I knew. Susman. I. Mr. President. I. Please close the voting. And as a result. 12 eyes. 12 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted in the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 1071 concerning property taxes dedicated for the purpose of purchasing services for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and to require a public hearing on Council Bill 1125 Change Zoning

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 1576 South Josephine Street in Cory-Merrill. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from E-SU-Dx to E-SU-D1x (allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 1576 South Josephine Street in Council District 6. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-23-21.

DenverCityCouncil_04052021_21-0013

Councilmember Herndon, would you please put Council Bill 13 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President, I move that council bill 21.0013 be placed upon final consideration and do pass, but it. Has been moved. Then we have a second from Councilmember Hines. The required public hearing for Council Bill 13 is open. May we please have the staff report and we've got some here with us. Good evening. Let me. Yeah. Let let's go ahead and get that into. Are you seeing it, Christine? If you go ahead and hit that display settings, I believe there'll be another dropdown. And you should be able to. Yep. There you go. You got it. Perfect. Good evening. My name is Edson Ibanez and I am with Muni Planning Development. Before you today, we have a map amendment for 1576 South Josephine Street and the applicant is requesting to reason for an 80 you. It is currently in Council District six in the Cary Merrill neighborhood. The site itself is approximately over 6000 square feet. It's a single unit residential. It is in close proximity to the University of Denver Station and just north of Interstate 25. The current zoning is ESU D x. It is surrounded primarily by that use, by that zoning and the land use is single unit residential and it's surrounded by single unit residential. As you can see, the subject property is on the upper right corner of the screen. As you can see, it's a new construction and you see a lot of predominantly one and two story structures in the vicinity. As you can see, the bottom two residential single unit residential buildings, it went before the planning board on that 217 but just want to make reference that it was originally scheduled for planning board on January six and the applicant asked to postpone the meeting so that they can have more public outreach and engagement. And so I went before fine board on February 17th and it was approved unanimously and it is before it tonight. As a present we have received a permit from the quarry. Merrell are now in opposition and they have two, primarily two primary concerns, which is a third unit in the basement and under occupancy concerns. So city records show that there is no unit in the basement. If the applicant elects to permit a basement unit in the future, then the code would not allow and one would not also permit a detached adu. So there is a lot of concern with people in the community that there was actually a unit in the basement . As a present we have received eight comments of opposition and six letters of support. The comments of opposition were primarily related to the placement of the detached a new and detached adus following the detached 882 building form standards, as well as there is concerns around a third unit in the basement, which our records don't indicate that as well as there is owner occupancy, high parking and noise concerns. The Denver zoning code requires owners to live in and maintain the property. There are several review criteria that are analyzed for a rezoning. The first one is to see what the doctor plans. And there are two plans that we are focusing on, which is comprehensive plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver, a land use and transportation plan 2019. The staff report specifies specific policies that are consistent within comprehensive plan 2040, and I will focus on Group and Denver in this presentation. Within Blueprint, it is classified urban edge, which is primarily predominantly residential. Within the future place type. It is classified as low residential, which is primarily primarily single and two unit uses and accessory dwelling units are allowed. The future street classification for a Josephine Street is a local street, which is primarily served by residential uses. And we do have some policy and blueprint. Specifically the land use and the foreign policy housing for which is talks about diversity, housing choice through the expansion of accessory dwelling units through throughout all residential areas. The other review criteria are specified in the staff report. Therefore CPD recommends approval based on all the findings and other of you have been met. I'm available on the question and the applicant, Greg, is also here for any questions that you might have as well. All right. Well, thank you, Edson, for the staff report. And counsel has not received any written testimony on Council Bill 20 1-0013 and this evening. Let me add, we've got one speaker signed up to speak. We have Jesse Paris. Go ahead and get Jesse in the queue. All right? Yes. Jesse, you're up. Go ahead, please. Yeah. Getty. The Council cannot be heard that. You can, Jesse, but your audio is kind of breaking up a little bit. Okay. How's that? Yep. That's better. Okay. My name is Jessica from Paris and represent him Las Vegas. ExxonMobil for self-defense. Positive actually move social change as well as the unity party of Colorado and frontline black knows and I will be the next mayor of Denver in 2023. I'm in favor of this rezoning tonight. We need more addus throughout the city and county of Denver. Despite what the opposition is saying, we still need these dwelling units. So I'm in full support of this rezoning to make good job Councilman Cash with. All right. Thank you, Jesse. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council on Council Bill 13. Council member, Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Edson. Could you tell us how the city assured itself that there is not a second unit in the basement? We looked through our solar permit permit records to see if there is any permit specifically for some sort of unit in that in the basement. And then not only that, but when they submit plans for a detached aide to you, they will also verify that when the zoning inspector will go out there as well. So currently there is no buy on records for a unit in the basement. Okay. So we didn't actually go and look at the basement. No. Okay. Because I know just because it's not in the assessor's records doesn't necessarily mean that it doesn't. It could be an unpermitted second unit. The other question I have is the owner is listed as lioness, but in the assessor records, it's B.B. and L LLC. And I'm just curious if maybe the owner who is here that the individual could address that. Who actually owns this property? Craig is the applicant and he can address this. Thanks. Huh? Yeah. We'll go ahead and get. Great promoted. All right, Greg, we have a question for you from Councilmember Flynn. And so wanted to give you an opportunity to respond or if you need him to restate his question. No, I heard I understand the question. Thank you so much. Thank you. I'm reformed being able because of my wife and I own the property together. So we just formed an LLC in order for both of us to own it together in that structure. That's all it is. Okay, so who is Linus? Linus. That's my wife's corporation. Oh, so that was a recent transfer. And is it on the application? So the change to BNL has been since you filed the application under Linus. Is that the. Application for the permit? You mean? I'm not sure which. The application for the rezoning. Yes. Well, actually, Bibiano was in there. It was right around the same time. So maybe you can catch up with it. But it is it is under BBN now, which is just 50% myself and my wife. Okay. And how long have you owned the property? Since before we started renovating it. We've owned it about a year. Okay. Are you related to Linda, by the way? I am. She's my cousin. Oh, hi. Nice to meet you. The why are the neighbors saying that you have a unit in your basement? No, we're not really sure. There's a back door that was. Existing in the house when we bought it. There is no unit in the basement. There's just a bedroom and a bathroom and a big rec room. With no kitchen or anything like that. No, there's nothing like. That at all. Okay. Thank you. Edson. Maybe you could answer this in these two. The presentation, which was not. I could not find it in our granicus. I couldn't retain a copy of it. But one of your slides showed what I thought was the subject property, and it looked nothing at all like the one storey house that was in the staff report. What what what went on with that? It looked like a strange story, kind of a post-modern nightmare monstrosity. Showing and showing my my lack of taste, I guess. Yes. So when we create the staff report, we get a lot of times we get the images from Google Maps. And so they haven't been updated. And so. Or in order to have the presentation updated what? I asked the applicant to send me the most recent photo that they took. So you can see the actual notice, like hearing notice in front of the photo I can set up. If everyone wants to see it again, I can put it up as well. Okay. So the image that I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Pardon me isn't the image that was in the staff report then of the one story, brick looked like a maybe a forties ranch fifties rancher that's been scraped and replaced with this three story thingy. Correct. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Madam President. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn, Councilmember Cashman. Thank you. Council President Edson, do you in one of the letters from the constituents, they speak about. The. Property owner having sent out a letter stating that all the neighbors were in support. Do you do you have a letter like that in your file? I didn't see it in the packet that came online. No, I don't have a letter like that. What I included was a letter on the comments as an attachment in page 18, 19 and 23. Right. That's the after the after CPD told the applicant that it was felt their outreach was insufficient. They sent out a second letter and I believe may have had communication with with some some neighbors. Is is that what. You're referring to? Yeah. We always encourage them to do more public outreach. I wonder, Greg, if you could speak. Did you send out a letter at one at some point in your communication indicating broad support from neighbors? When we first reverse this whole process has been a learning experience. What we first did is. Contact all the immediate neighbors. To our left, right and. In front of us. But what we did. Not do was contact the neighbors behind us. And those are the neighbors that came forward and said, hey, we're not really thrilled about this because of the alley access and the traffic situations. It was after that that we canceled our meeting and decided we needed more community outreach. Then we wrote a second letter with giving. People much more time to digest that and appear at the next meeting. And we canvased the. Entire street of Josephine. Between Iowa and Florida on both sides, and the complete west side of Columbine Street, which is the alley the backs up behind us. Because we felt we had not really done a good job reaching out to all the neighbors. So to. Answer your question. In the beginning, we did reach out what we thought was substantial community outreach. But after hearing the feedback from the neighborhood, we decided it was and we postpone the meeting started again. Thank you. Greg Edson, what direction does CPD give neighbor give applicants about community outreach? So in our application, we, we, we encourage them to submit a narrative explaining their community outreach. And then in the Pre-Application stage, we always encourage the applicants to reach out to as many neighbors, to talk to their council representative, to see how many neighbors they should be reaching out to. And then we just leave it to the discretion of the applicants to reach out. But we always encourage you to try to reach within 200 feet. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And just as a general question. You know, I hear a lot in these applications about the the roster of standard concerns is one especially. Concerning. To two neighbors is that it might be. Used for short term rental. And that is an option under under if an aid to you is approved. Correct. It is correct. And for any to have any aid, you approve the property owner, whether they have a relative living there or a short. Term rental or a long term. Rental, the property owner needs to reside on the premises in one of the structures. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Is there. Is it legal. Or is it possible or has it been done that a a property owner would make some sort of agreement? To limit how that property might be used. You know, a neighborhood agreement. Good neighbor agreement. I have not heard of one, but I believe it to be possible. Is is there a city attorney on that? Could let me know whether or not it would be legal, say. For an applicant to make an agreement with their. Neighbors that we won't use it for rental at all. Or we won't use it for short term rental. Is there a reason that wouldn't be legal? Oh. Hearing, hearing person. I'm looking for Nate Lucero. Up there he goes. We've got him moving over here for you. Good deal. I couldn't imagine they wouldn't be on the line. All right. We've got made up there. Nate. Did you hear the question, sir? Yes, sir, I did. Thank you. I'm your assistant city attorney. So there. There. There's nothing that would prohibit two neighbors from entering into some sort of an agreement among themselves. It would be a private matter and not be involved in that. That's what I thought. Just wanted to put. That out there. In general, because I think that it's one area that concerns me just as a Denver resident and I in general have been supportive of that to use as an important addition to our housing stock. But I have no desire to have them use short term rentals. That, to me is not what the short term rental program was developed. For, nor the. 80 new program. But that's kind of adjacent or tangential to this discussion. Nate, thank you for that. Let me see. What we're doing here. Oh, another thing I wanted to clarify that again, it's tangential, but since I have the owner here, Greg, you have a very large sort of spruce, blue spruce in your in your backyard that will have to come down, as I believe, if something is constructed in the back. Is that correct? We do have. A very large blue spruce of looking at it at the moment. We are honestly torn about whether or not to tear it down or not because we do enjoy it. But it really depends on what a tree expert tells us in regards to even. If we move the garage to the southwest corner. Of the lot. With the effect where the TV affected. Sure. And have you have not had it evaluated as of yet? No, I have not. Okay. As again, in the torrent of conversation that I've seen fly by, I've seen comments this someone believe they heard it. They were told that it was not a healthy tree. And I drove by it again today and it sure looked like it was to me. But again. That's tangential to this discussion. That's all the questions I have. Council President. All right. Thank you, Councilperson Cashman. Up next, we have Councilmember Flynn, your backup in the questions, but I now see council member Sandoval. And so we're going to go ahead and go to Council Member Sandoval and then we'll come back to you, Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I have a question. For the owner. Great. Hey, Greg, thanks for being here with us this evening. Do you currently live in the property or why do you have this property listed on? Hat Heights as an apartment rental. We do not. We live in this property and we do not have anything was to dismantle it. I don't even know what hot spots is. Okay. Just so you know, this rent, this property. Is listed as a rental property going for 1790 and insist it is four bedrooms and it's talking about 1850 a month with a security deposit. So you might want it. And that sounds like a scam to me because we are not we're fully moved in and living here. So what's it what's sir. What. The name of the website is hot pots. Hot pad. Peter. And it's an apartment rental and it, and it's pretty expensive listing so someone has and there's even pictures of the inside of the house on the listing. Okay. Okay. And it says it was just recently purchased within the last year and renovated on the listing. Interesting. You know, we're definitely not us, so I don't know what that is. Okay. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Sandoval. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I was going to ask the same thing. I think the same people might be emailing both Councilman Sandoval and I at the same time. So I had one of its hot pads, I believe was was the website. And in that listing, it also says that the owner is willing to rent only the upstairs if that were the case, if that were what the potential renter wanted. And perhaps that's why that's led folks to think that there are two units in the building. So great. You said that this is not you didn't place that and you don't know anything about it. No, I did not. And, you know, to be quite. Honest, I'm a little surprised, but also a little bit annoyed that somebody put it up there. You know? Oh, yeah. Or whatever. I'd be alarmed, too, whatever reason for this hearing, because. Now we are fully living in the house. We're not renting it to anybody. I trying to find it now to see what. The the pictures are that you guys. Are talking about. But yeah, yeah, it's not at. All what we're going to do. So. Okay. And you moved into the property recently? February and February. We were okay because your voter registration isn't yet at that address. So you are. But you are living there full time. We are all those. Rent a little don. Brag about president. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Well, we all found a lot out about hot pads. I guess you don't have to show ownership to post something up there. And thank you to the council members for your questions and the owner for being president as well and seeing no other hands raised. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 13 Council Member Cashman. Yeah. Thank you, Madam President. This has been an interesting. One for me. There's been a lot of speed bumps along. The way, and this is certainly not. The poster child for how I think a zoning application issue should be handled. In that there was the property owner sent a letter out mischaracterizing my conversation with them when I went out to view the property. Theirs was a stop and then a restart on the on reaching out to the neighborhood. I think in general there is more discussion to be had, as I stated earlier on, what a use role should be in general, citywide and in our housing stock. It looking at the criteria. You know, I, I struggle a little bit with the third criteria as far as the health and welfare of the community. Just when when you get a situation where there's so much. Uncertainty about who said what, where, when. I don't know that that that really strengthens the the interaction of neighbors and. The creation of a true feeling of. Community. So yeah, I like I say, I think I think CPD may want to look at their instructions to applicants and perhaps there needs to be more clarity in what's expected in the way of community outreach. But yeah, this this has been a cloudy one for me that I don't know that it needed to have been. So that's that's my comments for now. Thank you. Council Member Cashman. Council Member Flynn. Madam President, I am going to abstain on this. And by abstain, I mean I'm not going to vote no on it or but I'm not I don't feel that I have enough information to vote yes at this point. So if it comes to a vote, I still have some some uneasiness about the situation here that that I would need more information before I would vote. Yes, ordinarily would have supported this. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. And I have to say, based on the information that was presented tonight, and it does seem like some things are a bit cloudy, but based on what was presented, it looks like it meets all of the criteria. And I'll be voting yes on it this evening based on that criteria. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 13, please. Cashman abstained. Can. Each. I. Ortega. I. Sandoval. At. Sawyer. Now. Torres, I. Black. I see tobacco. I. Clark. I. Flynn Epstein. Herndon. I. Hines. Ah. Sandoval. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced results. One nay, two abstentions. Ten Eyes. Ten Eyes Council Bill 20 1-0013 has passed Council Herndon. Will you please put Council Bill 175 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President, I move that council bill 2101758.

Recommendation to approve renaming the Multi-Use Sport Court in Marina Vista Park the Luke Tatsu Johnson Court.

LongBeachCC_07102018_18-0133

Okay, next item. So is 2025 and 26, 25 and 26. I like that. Item 25. I'd like to ask that that be pulled into the next council meeting and possible. Can you. Five and 26. Council Member Andrews We just need a motion in a second to withdraw the item or to continue the item to another date or just to continue the item and it will be rescheduled at a different date. Thank you. Continue the item to reschedule. The first and second one, please. Okay, fine. And I don't need any trouble coming on today. Yes. Public comment on continuing manner. Is there any public comment on continuing the matter? That pleased them me vote. Motion carries. Fine. Item 28.

Recommendation to adopt a Minute Order declaring a citywide moratorium on accepting applications for new drive-through lanes at any new or existing business establishments; direct City Manager to have the Department of Development Services and the Planning Commission review the development standards for drive-through lanes and make recommendations to the City Council; and, request City Attorney to prepare an interim (moratorium) ordinance pursuant to Chapter 21.50 of the Long Beach Municipal Code for notice and placement on the City Council agenda for hearing at its third meeting following adoption of this Minute Order. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04092019_19-0296

Now we move to item 22 with clock, please. With the item. And have a staff report. And I think item 22 is report from Development Services recommendation to immediate order declaring a citywide moratorium on accepting applications for new drive thru lanes at any new or existing business establishments citywide. Not to mention. Thank you. I would like to make the motion here, but I would like to have a change in it. And that is, I'm in favor of having the study, but I'd like to remove the moratorium completely. My rationale for that is the fourth Council District probably has more drive thrus than any other district over the last five years. And that's the nature of of this item. Just on the traffic circle alone, we have seven brand new drive thrus over the last two years. We have, I think, three or four in the hopper, depending on how you count. So a total of a dozen drive thrus where there is an issue where one is not warranted, we exercise the process. The citizens got together, we hosted a meeting and they stopped a drive thru a Del Taco from going in at the corner of Bellflower and Abbeyfield. So we do have a methodology for removing them where they're not warranted. When I look at what's happened to the traffic circle area, I don't believe that what the business journal called a retail renaissance would have happened without the drive thru business model. It also has created jobs. Vice Mayor Dee Andrews Favorite topic employees at one of the restaurants, one of the restaurants has a traffic circle, is now the number one sales volume fast casual restaurant in the city with that. And so you can look at that in a lot of ways. One would be sales tax revenue. I never, never would be. In that case, it's scholarships for the employees. Students there who go to language schools received a total of $50,000 in scholarships last year. One of them, one crewmember, received a $25,000 scholarship alone. Customer convenience. If you think of children in child seats where you don't want to get out of the car, but you'd like to order food, the disabled are picking up food. Also, you know, drive thrus at the traffic circle, we have both a CVS and a Rite Aid with drive thru. So you think of the infirmed or disabled using that service. One we hear a lot about is reducing the need for parking spaces. That's a citywide issue and this certainly resolves a lot of that. Restaurant business models. Now, so many of them depend on the drive thru with with many brands. 70% of the business is conducted through the drive thru and Starbucks has has seen that. And they just opened a Starbucks at the traffic circle last week and they have another one planned for the intersection of Lakewood and Willow. I think I should also talk about the cost of meals. We spent a lot of time last week talking about low income residents. I've done a lot of consulting work in the restaurant industry, and one thing that a lot of folks don't believe is that there is a goal with certain brands to feed a family of four for $20. A lot of us probably can't relate to that, but there are restaurants where you can do that. I think that's all I have. But I stand ready for my colleagues comments and I ask for your support. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I support Councilman Superman's motion. I understand that the issue is one of greater significance and import to him in his district given the nature and commercial corridors in his district as opposed to those in mine. I will say that I completely agree with staff's report, the staff report, in terms of the need for this, because lane configurations and impact on local traffic is a major concern. And so I do support staff taking a look at this. We had an issue in one of the communities in my district. It's actually the community I live in right before I got into office with the Dunkin Donuts and the impact that it might have in the neighborhood and in the community. And I applaud city staff for working so closely with the residents in that community to come up with a traffic pattern that would not impact the community. And it has worked out well. So the work of our planning department and our traffic engineers was huge in that regard. But I think that where we have commercial corridors that are developing and plans by some property owners or lessees to build drive thrus, we certainly don't want to encumber that effort during this period of time while we study these issues. So with that, I support this motion and look forward to hearing from my colleagues. Thank you, Councilman Pearce. I think it would be. Great to hear a staff report, but I do I fully support the moratorium. There has been a lot of work done and this is one of those opportunities where we really can put health and wellness of our communities first. I also am curious to hear the staff report because I know that there's some issues with our code being outdated and just trying to make sure that we align that. And it's my understanding that everything that's already in the pipeline would remain in that pipeline. So if we could hear staff report first, I think that would be helpful. Yeah, we could yes, we could finish up this place and then we can come back to that. Councilman Richardson, please. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So my understanding whenever we, you know, request a moratorium is typically for a short period of time while we evaluate the rules to a system or the policy around, you know, an industry or a system. So, Mr. C, the attorney, is that is that correct that this is a short term moratorium while we evaluate the policy. The proposal this evening would be a one year moratorium, you could ask, that have come back if it's ready sooner. And the by law, I think it would be extend it could be extended for one additional year if necessary. So the idea isn't just the ban drive throughout the city, it's the pause, the process. Any of those that are already in the pipeline will go through. And it would just stop new applications for drive thrus until the policy is completed. You know, upon the adoption of the policy, we could at that point release the moratorium because the new rules are all there. Said that a good description of what we're doing tonight. Yes. Council has the authority this evening to exempt the projects. I believe there are nine that are currently in what we would call the pipeline this evening. And if that's the desire of the council, those projects would be allowed to continue. The moratorium would go into effect immediately this evening. And the minute code requires our office to bring back the ordinance at the third council meeting following tonight's action. So you have the ability to pass a moratorium this evening exempting those those applications that are in the pipeline. And so anybody that's in would move forward and any new applicants would then be have to wait until the moratorium came back or the ordinance came back to council for consideration. Councilman Super. Now, the points you made were really good points was the concern about the moratorium. Do you are some of those projects in the pipeline for your the area you represent? As I originally stated, we have seven completed I believe are actually eight, including a jack in the box on the Anaheim corridor, Starbucks at Lakewood with all Jack in the box that Lakewood and Willow are pending. There's also one that I'm not sure about. There's a vegan restaurant at Clark and PCH that may or may not require CCP. So it's your district. Totally, completely comfortable with saying, you know, let's move forward with what staff is prepared. And then those in the pipeline that you described would not, you know, be limited by the moratorium. That way, you still have the flexibility to continue whatever deals you have in the works in your district. It's important that the moratorium go in place before we change the rules because of be unclear on how that impacts the rules for everyone who's in the pipeline. That's why when we typically do a moratorium, it draws a clear line. If this happened, if you're in the pipeline before this date, you have the current rules, you have the pipeline beyond that date, then you'll be you know, you'll be subject to the you know, whatever the rules are. Once we evaluate the policy and I agree that now's a good opportunity for us to take a look at a modern drive through policy. Many cities are doing this. You know, there's new standards for drive thrus. All of this could be subject to it. So are you willing to to change your motion, Councilman? Super, not to say, you know, as written with the exemption, except the exception of those drive thrus in the pipeline that you described. Chair, do you recognize me to speak? Yes, sir. Okay. If I wasn't clear, I fully support the study. I fully acknowledge what this item is. All the restaurants in the pipeline say there. What I'm asking is that we don't go to a moratorium. I think it's onerous. I think it prejudices the study moving forward. It's so bad that we have to institute a moratorium that has not been proven. If the study proves it, then we should have a moratorium. That's. That's the motion on the floor. Okay, so I'll just make a substitute motion of staff's recommendation that allows the projects that are in the pipeline inclusive of the ones Councilman Suber not mentioned to continue to move forward through that pipeline, but the moratorium is included within this motion. And Vice Mayor and Councilmember Richardson, if I could clarify by your description of the projects that are in the pipeline, you're indicating the nine that are listed as the attachment to the city's report. Those are the nine that we have that are currently in the pipeline. So I don't honestly, the the point was the ones that councilman supervised, you know, speaking about if there are nine in the pipeline, they're not in my district. So, you know, I'm actually flexible on that issue with the rest of the council. I don't want to stop anything anyone else has going. The point was, the ones that were raised, let's keep those in the pipeline and not impact those, but establish the moratorium allows us to have a clear point to begin the evaluation of this pipeline. That's the intent. Thank you. And I think just from our position, the nine that are in the pipeline are the ones that are legally established. Okay. Have a definition. All right. So the nine in the pipeline. Thank you. Yes. All right. Thank you. Councilman Mangal. Thank you. So before tonight, I had done a little bit of research. I had not planned for there to be a substitute motion or a substitute substitute. Nor did I know that Councilmember Superdog was interested in lifting the moratorium. But in listening to his arguments, I agree with him. I did a bit of research, and I think that the challenge isn't just about having or not having drive thrus. The drive thru market has changed considerably in the last 120 days. So in the last 120 days, McDonald's, which is a huge provider of food in my district, has changed it so you can mobile order in advance and then just zip through the drive thru to pick it up. You don't actually have to order in line anymore, which has absolutely changed the pollution component and wait times that are are pending. I also did a little bit of discussion with Vesta, which is the Long Beach Town Center, specifically around the two drive thrus at the Long Beach Town Center. One is in and out and the second one is Chick-Fil-A. One of those two providers can get someone through the line in under 8 minutes, and that's with them doing the ordering. And the largest chunk of time related to a person entering the drive thru was actually them making the decisions and articulating verbally what they'd like to order within this. There is another component at play. So the real estate market in Long Beach is hot right now and there are considerable number of individuals who have signed up for franchises and franchise district areas but have not yet selected locations and are therefore not actually in the pipeline yet to have, quote unquote, drive thrus. And so my concern is the financial implication of a moratorium when there is already a process that the residents are able to easily utilize for the stoppage of a drive thru in a place where it would not be appropriate. So I'm going to make a substitute substitute motion. The bulk of my substitute substitute motion is going to be the original motion that was provided by Mr. Supercar. And then I'm going to back that up with a couple of other things. And here's some data that I have that I'd like to be looked into. I'd like for our drive thru staff report to include. A priority for organizations that have a goal of feeding a family of four for under $20, also a goal of more than 160 cars per hour. So the number of cars per hour that you can get through the line is an indicator of how little time a car has to wait to receive its order or make an order. And so the faster those cars can get pushed through, the better. The other thing I'd like to kind of comment on is the number of drive thrus that we have already are so greatly impacted that the lines are extending out. Very, very long length. So an example, spring in Palo Verde, the McDonald's at spring in Palo Verde. If you sit there in the parking lot of Stater Brothers and watch that drive thru line for 30 minutes during the morning hours, that line will extend so far back that no cars can get in or out of the parking spaces. And so if there aren't the opportunity for other drive thrus to enter the market, those lines will continue to be. Too long. And those length of time that the cars are in line will be longer, which entail creates greater pollution. So it's actually a benefit to bring more drive thrus online, to reduce the demand on the current drive thrus so that it's more equitably spread because now the other business is in the same parking lots are being impacted. So if you want to go to super max, your car might be blocked in because the drive thru line from McDonald's is so long you can't get in or out of your vehicle. And so if there was another drive thru location looking in which we have several currently looking for the town center, but none have been selected , nor have any been starting in the process. I worry that this moratorium would potentially deflate that development at this time, and I think that that development right now, when that area has had food challenges, we've lost maybe six different fast casuals at the town center over the last two years is just too much for us to stand . So I hope that my colleagues will encourage a more quick return of the report from staff so that at that time we could discuss where moratoriums make sense and where they don't. But any drive thru that any of the residents in the fifth District would like to prevent, I'd be happy to work through that process with them at that time, but I don't see any particularly that we're looking at and therefore I don't think a moratorium is necessary. And thank you for the second. Thank you. Congressman. Awesome. Yes. Appreciate it. I did not foresee this much debate on this issue prior to coming to the meeting this evening. I just want to get some clarification for staff in terms of why you are proposing or recommending a moratorium for 12 months. You know, to Council Member Mungo's point and largely what we have been focused on as a city is actually improving our economic development portfolio and trying to be more business friendly and promoting investment in the city. This to me is is runs counter to that. Is it a is it a workload issue or is it just do you feel like we need a pause to to do a a good policy? I'll just let that you tell us. At any point at any point. The council wants to staff reports, just let us know, because Linda can prepare all that. Okay. That's what I was going to say. Yeah. So staff report. You know, we were going to get to a staff report at some point. Did we? Were we? Yes. And we went after the. Yes. So the chair is we'll get to a staff report after our comments. So I will hold my comments until after the staff report, because I do want to hear from. Excuse me, the staff and and. You know. Yes. If you're going to hold it, why don't we just get it now and then you can. Then you have to worry about the coming back. Good answer. Good answer that. We have that. Yes, sure. Can. Linda Tatum. Good afternoon, Vice Mayor, members of the city council. As you are probably aware, our community has been really moving towards more sustainable, environmentally sustainable practices and more walkable, pedestrian friendly environments, particularly along our major corridors. And the notion of drive thru restaurants is is inconsistent with this. And because we've had a significant number of drive thrus in the last several years, 16 over the last several years, and a total in the city of 116 drive thru restaurants, we thought that. It was appropriate to take a pause. To go back, to take a look at the current development standards for drive thrus. And we are by no means suggesting that we shouldn't have drive thrus. But what. We wanted to do was to take a really. Careful look. At where the the locational requirements for drive thrus to be a little bit more specific and looking at some of the potential negative impacts of drive thrus. Councilwoman Mongo has mentioned a couple of those, some of the queuing issues, some of the speaker box issues, and even some of the potential vehicle and pedestrian conflicts that occur because of how the the queuing lanes are positioned and overall circulation on the site. So the idea was for us to pause and while we ask for a 12 month moratorium out of an abundance of caution to make sure we had enough time, I'm really confident that staff could bring back a an ordinance for the council's consideration. And half that time, I'd say six months at the outside, and we could potentially do something a lot sooner than that. So I. Would ask for a six month moratorium time. Frame. Okay. All right. So, Councilman Austin. So I appreciate that that that report an explanation. Can you give us any in perhaps you've done this already, but is there a quantitative analysis in terms of drive through request for permits for drive thrus in the city? Do we know typically how many drive thrus will be requested over the next 12 months? If we don't put forth a moratorium. We don't have that information currently. But what we have been averaging over the last several years is about five per year coming through our our process. And those numbers have have started to add up. And we've had a lot of feedback from constituents regarding the impact, the visual impacts of the drive through. And again, the issue of just the idling in the drive thrus, the addition to the greenhouse gas emissions and the air quality issues around the drive thrus, as well as the esthetic considerations all at a time when we've been trying to again make our corridors more attractive and more pedestrian friendly. So the idea, again. Is to step back, take a pause. Take a look at those standards and see if we can reconcile some of those standards in a way that, again, doesn't preclude drive thrus, but make sure that the locations that they are approved are appropriate from a land use perspective and the ability for the drive thru to be compatible with the surrounding uses. So you can prevent some of the kinds of issues that we've had that occur at some of the existing. Drive thru facilities. Well, I think we definitely need to be a lot more thoughtful and if you see an opportunity to to change policy, I certainly would support the the change in policy. My question also is, does it take 12 months to to to frame a new policy? No. And that was my early feedback. I think again, the standard was 12 months. So we thought that out of an abundance of caution we could ask for that. But I can again, I. Assure. You that we can bring back something within six months and likely even sooner than that. So you could do the policy in six months. I don't know that it's an opportunity for me to do a friendly on the motion, on the floor to to accept the six month. But I do appreciate hearing that. And I want to hear more from my colleagues. I want to go back to excuse me and apologize for Councilwoman Pearce, because the fact that I got you doing that, you asked for the. So would you please you can start now for the moment I cut you off and then I'd like for you to go now, because when you wanted to report, did you want to start now? Okay. So you're okay now, but I will. I see you. Okay, fine. Okay. Councilwoman Price. Thank you very much and I appreciate those questions from my colleagues and of course, the staffs report. A couple of questions I have here for Ms.. Tatum. So I know that we have I we think that there are reasons why we need to update our drive through policies. Is that correct? That's correct. Is it possible for staff to to prepare a report for council, not an ordinance change or a policy change, but take a period of 30 to 60 days to prepare a report that would outline or highlight why we need to make changes. And then we could that way, thereby justifying the need for a moratorium. And then a moratorium could be implemented for a six month period of time after staff has demonstrated why we even need a moratorium. The answer is yes. Staff certainly could. Take that direction. From council and come back with a report. Okay. So I would like to make a front. And the other thing I wanted to to say is I also want to make sure that we're that we as a council are mindful of the recommendation and the basis of the recommendation. So while we may not like some of the foods that are served at drive thrus, the purpose of this recommendation, the agenda ized basis for it has to do with planning and development, not the content or the the type of item that sold. So I want to make sure that legally we understand staff is bringing this forward because of the land use and development issues with drive thrus, not because of the type of food they're selling. We're not discriminating against the type. So this is all about land use. Yes. So I just wanted to make sure that we're very clear on that, given the our obligations under the Brown Act. But I will say that there are a variety of fast food restaurants that are emerging, many of them catering very specifically to newer clientele with healthy food options, vegan food options, things of that nature. And I do know that they have an interest in coming into the Long Beach market, which I think is something we want to encourage in terms of providing variety. So my recommendation and my friendly to the sub sub would be that we ask staff to prepare a report outlining the need for a moratorium and to return that report to council within 60 days so that we can then vote on whether or not a moratorium is justified and the length of that moratorium. I absolutely would support that. I feel that it is the proper cart before the horse process that's necessary, especially when there's already a process that we've seen be used successfully in blocking drive thrus. Additionally, over the last year, I've been in a process where a property has actually fallen into what I call disrepair with most multiple needs for code enforcement, because we were working on making sure that it was pedestrian friendly and adding pedestrian walkthroughs in places that a development services deemed necessary to make it where they felt was okay and that caused additional delays. So I'm very, very supportive of the friendly and I would include that that report should in some way kind of contextualize a goal, a goal for what we want a drive thru experience in the city of Long Beach to be like. For example, I mentioned some of the drive thrus in my district. They serve a customer every 34 seconds. And so if there are complaints about idling cars and the such, oftentimes they're they're warranted. But in other cases they might not be warranted. An example might be that I often get complaints about public works trucks speeding and will will will pull the report on the speedometer of that truck that's been recorded. And it was actually going 22 miles an hour. And so perceptions and realities are often different things. And I think that it's very important to have such a report. Thank you, Councilwoman Price, for suggesting it. Thank you. Yes, Councilman. Oh, interesting. I was originally. Pleased that the moratorium was in place. And that was what we were going to go for, because I've had a couple of establishments in my district as well that were considering drive thrus, and I wasn't totally happy what was coming forward at that time. And they had nothing to do with the business. He has had to do with your pets in the community and in the neighborhoods. So I was very happy when the applications did not get approved because there were some issues with it. Now, now that this is coming at this point where we are looking at a moratorium across the city in these types of establishments, I'm totally supportive of that. So I find the the the friendlies to the sub subs disingenuous to a great extent in the sense that we're asking to do a study before the study, when the study is going to actually produce what we want. So I'm going to go back. I'm just going to say let's stick to stats recommendation. I think they've been very accommodating at this point. They went from a year to six months. And I think that if staff can certainly do the study within that time, I think it meets everybody's goal here in terms of not being overly long in in having a moratorium for business to continue. But it also keeps in place those businesses that are already in the pipeline to get their businesses approved and have these these drive thru. So I'm not going to vote for the Friendly's and the double doubles or whatever it is. The sub subs. Sounds like I'm making a sandwich. Anyway, bottom line is that, you know, I want to whatever gets me back to the original motion of a moratorium with the with the recommendation that it's six months, I will support that. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes. So right now we have a substitute substitute motion on the floor. I would agree with Councilmember Suranga as well, because although this is land use we're talking about and I fully support staff's recommendation because I think we do have a reasoning and that is because of the it says here in the discussion very clearly to me that it's basically the growing number of applications have provided because concerns regarding safety, esthetics and environmental impacts of this activity that are becoming more evident. And I agree as well. I think we have a lot of city plans that we put in place, mobility, sustainability plans that this would be contrary to. So giving us some time to think about a good policy would be great. Another statistic that I just pulled is that big boxes and large franchises, 50 to 60% of their sales are derived from drive thru Burger King, McDonald's. And guess what? If we took a map of where these drive thrus were located, they're located in districts that have incomes that are lower. They have people of color. And those are districts like my district. So what I would ask, as well as ensuring that and the reason why I say that is I actually did a health asset assessment back in gosh, this is probably like 2010. I walked with the health department to every single drive thru in the first District, how close they were to parks, how close they were to schools. You wouldn't believe how many drive thrus we had. Jack in the Box, Burger King del Taco, the ad. So kids going from Edison Elementary School which is by the 710 an additional impact because they have cars trucks everything going by have about ten drive thrus just in that neighborhood, maybe a one mile radius. So I'd like to know, because I think it'd be helpful in this discussion if we were able to get a two from four. And I hate to give you more work, Linda, but I'd like to see a map of where these drive thrus are are located. So the council fully has an understanding of where they're where they're at, which we would I would say they're mostly in downtown and central Long Beach, guaranteed. So the more impacts that we have, the worse that we're going to be off as a city. So I would love to stick with the. I would love to stick with a recommendation to go back to the original and get a two from four. That would include a map. And also, if there is a way to look at maybe getting some blips of our mobility and sustainability plans that have our goals and standards and how we can kind of create a better narrative as to how this this would be contrary to that. I think that would help. Maybe that that's a lot. I know that I'm trying to create another I mean, I know the subs already there, but I'd like to add a friendly to be able to get that information back . Council Member The motion that is on the floor is the sub sub, which is to request staff to come back within 60 days with a report to council to justify the moratorium. If I understand you're friendly. If the sub sub is not successful and you get to the second motion, the substitute motion by Councilmember Richardson, which would staff's recommendation and allowing the nine in the pipeline and it may be amended to just limited to six months instead of 12 months. You could add your report at that time or your friendly at that time, I think is what you're asking for or is it for? I thought for some reason the sub sub included the six months, so it does not include it. The second motion for the moratorium as as currently made is staff's recommendation of one year. It could be amended when, if, if and when we get back to that motion to six months. So I'd like to accept it as a friendly. Anyway, can I use me. Excuse me. I just want to make sure that. So can you clarify the subsub? Because I want to make sure that I have that. Absolutely. I currently the sub sub is a report back within 60 days from staff to justify the moratorium. It also has a request to begin the study on the impacts or the possible changes to the ordinance on drive thru restaurants. I got all drive thrus, not just restaurants. It would be any drive thru business. A pharmacy. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. And so and that's a good point as well. So. Okay, great. So I would not support the subsub. I again want to say that we are want to create livable, more healthier communities, especially in the communities that need it the most. And I also think just another thing, too, is that it limits if we want to talk about business. It limits small business opportunities, especially local business opportunities. It provides more opportunities, I think, for the large corporations and franchises, which I don't think we're talking about. So I will leave it at that. I hope we can maybe get back to the original motion of a year of recommendation or at least the the the former sub. So thank you so much. Thank you, Congressman. Chris. I yeah, I'm going to start now. Okay. Thank you. So on the issue of the subsub, ie, the issue of a moratorium and we saw this with Willow, right? We say that we're going to do something in the future and then a bunch of action happens. So who's to say that if we to come back to us in 30 days with another report, then in the next 30 days we might not have some of these applicants go through and become in the pipeline that now we have these other ones that are in the pipeline when we already know that there's a better way to design these drive thrus and to to make sure that they're designed for healthy communities. So that's my challenge with the sub sub is that staff has already done the work. They already have ideas. It's six months. I understand that the word moratorium could be triggering for for some of us on the council or for some community folks for big box business moratoriums might freak them out for our community members. And mind you, we have a letter from Walk Long Beach, United, Cambodian Community City Fabric, Long Beach, Forward Long Beach for a short time exchange, something I can't read. Long Beach Alliance for Food and Fitness and Coalition for Healthy North Long Beach. These groups have been working together to try to find solutions that not only build a more walkable, pedestrian community, but also find solutions and planning. And so when I say healthy, it wasn't in regards to the type of food, it was in regards to the fact that we can design healthy, cool, hopefully new drive thrus. I'm a fan of drive thrus. I'm in the middle of saving a drive thru at Fourth and Juniper right now. That is a small business that if they go away, it'll be a Starbucks or Jack in a box. And so it's important to me that we don't allow some of the words to get in the way of writing good policy. So for that reason, I would not support the sub sub and I and I want to thank and applaud staff for trying to make sure that they gave us a longer time period but support coming back in six months. I do know that historically drive thrus have been in communities of color. Of of higher poverty. And I do recognize that in CD4 you've you have had a renaissance where you had land that opened up and that that might have been a good fit for your constituents and for the folks that drive through over there. Having a six month pause is smart policy. It's the right policy for our community. And I would hope that our council colleagues can can see that a six month pause is not the end of the world, and it allows everybody to have an option to design smart drivers. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Richardson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So, so quickly, just a question to Steph. Please. I'm sorry. No. Oh, thanks. Thanks, Vice Mayor. So a question of staff. So these moratoriums, they're not a they're pretty common practice, are they? Would you say they're common or can you think of some examples of when we've deployed those? I wouldn't say they're common. They tend to be not very common. But there are a tool that most cities use as necessary. And in this case, given the plethora of drive through restaurants and our concerns about trying to really strike a good balance between the environmental concerns, the safety concerns, the esthetic concerns, we just thought it was appropriate to step back and take another look at the standards. So the most recent example of a moratorium that we've had here in the city is the ah one ill. That was done where from Council District eight. We got the request to go back and take a look at the large lot development standards to address extremely large residences on single family lots. And that moratorium was a one year moratorium, and we ended up extended that, extending it because it ended up involving a lot of engagement with the community. And it was very helpful and very productive. Now, in this case, because staff has already started to look at some of the issues and concerns, and that's why I'm really confident that it won't take us a year to get something back. Okay. So we typically so again, we typically use these moratoriums as a best practice to sort of pause the process, evaluate the policy when the policy is complete, we lift the moratorium. Staff has said that they can get it done in six months. What hasn't come up is uncertainty to businesses if we are in the process of changing our rules. It's difficult for businesses to make plans about if they don't know what the rules of the road are. And let's let's think about developers. If a development and we just had a development in my district where it got to be contentious about drive thrus, but the rules were the rules and the rules essentially said the way you plan out this development, you need to design it in a way that it pencils out. And these are the tools at your disposal now. If we had said we're going to change this policy in the middle of it and change the rules, that could be devastating to a project establishing a baseline and saying, Let's posit those in the pipeline, move forward. The rules are not changed. You know posit institute the moratorium while we discuss and debate allow for fair fair input where people are not biased against their project or you're going to jeopardize their particular project. You allows for us to actually be thoughtful about what it is we're trying to do. And at the end of that process, we pass a policy. We lift the moratorium. And the rules have changed. It's just cleaner to go about it in that way. Next point I'll say is that it's not a zero sum game. It's not you know, it's actually very close. We're talking about we're talking about a matter of six months, you know, and if there's a way for us not to create winners and losers here and work together, I think the best way to go about that is we've already exempted I mean, the substitute motion already exempted those in the pipeline that were raised up by Councilman Supernormal and those that are in pipeline. The staff report ultimately said they don't even have to do a year, but they need a pause of six months in order to be reasonable and get it done. So if we were to amend the staff recommendation and say, okay, six month moratorium. You know, get the policy done. If we don't pass the policy, then that's on us. But we give staff what they're asking for, which is a six month moratorium, so they can do good, balanced public policy that's not pressured by a project or development or a lobbyist or whatever it is they can do reasonable public policy. And so and so I'm not controlling the motion, but what I'm saying is if it gets back to the subject to motion, I'm happy to take it down to six months at what staff said. But. But who controls the motion? It's Council on Mongo. It's the Council on Mongo. Are you willing. Are you willing to change your motion to reflect staff's recommendation with a shorter moratorium of six months? So I appreciate your comments, Councilmember Richardson. I believe good public policy can happen with or without a moratorium. I would also bring forward a couple of things. The staff have already done a lion's share of the work. This has already been presented at a planning commission study session. At that time, the Planning Commission did not recommend a moratorium to the City Council nor anything else. I'd be interested in folding in some of the things that would address Councilman Gonzalez's concerns. I do think that it would be very valuable to have a report of the type and number of drive thrus by either council district or zip code, or maybe both columns would be helpful. Well, Councilwoman, you're actually next to queue up. So if there's a note to the friendly, I'll just conclude. So you can just take the floor. Okay. I'll think about it. Okay. So. Okay, so the best case scenario here, in my opinion, would be for the person who controls the motion to simply accept these compromises and move forward. Because I think there's been a lot of accommodation here. If not, then I think we need to be strong support a moderate, a modest moratorium of six months. So I would encourage vote no on the substitute substitute motion and the staff recommendation is is the substitute motion. And we would amend that to to make it six months. And so so that's the position I would say. No on the substitute substitute motion. Yes on the substitute motion. Thank you. Thank you. Congresswoman Soprano. Thank you. So let me just clear up some numbers a little bit here. I think Ms.. Tatum said that we're looking at five per year. So if you look over the last three years that I've had 12 in the fourth District, that means there's been one per year in all other council districts. If we're averaging five per year. So I think I just want to frame the issue there. Also, it's the concept of a moratorium. The message that sends out there for that six months that the time frame makes no difference. Once you put on the moratorium, the anti-business, negative tone that that creates is where the damage is. And I just think I'm all for looking, studying this issue. There's a lot of improvement to be made, but we just don't need the more important moratorium in place to do that. There's no requirement for it. And I think Ms.. Taylor mentioned, you know, study session with industry experts and whatnot. I think that's what you're referring to. I don't think the moratorium was brought up in those meetings. Maybe the industry would have an opinion on that, but I think we know what that would be. So I am supporting the subset. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. So I'm going to fold in a couple of things to make sure that my colleagues feel heard and that it's inclusive. I agree with Councilmember Super not on the business messaging, and I hope the chair of Economic Development, Councilmember Richardson, will stand with the substitute substitute in letting business know that the city of Long Beach is and continues to be open for business. I would like to add to the motion. Instead of spending the time on a report requiring and understanding the moratorium. Send us a report back at your earliest convenience. That includes the types of policies that you're looking to for this council to adopt and that you're exploring. You mentioned speaker boxes, you mentioned double drive thru lines, single lines, etc., and that the report also include the types of drive thrus and the district and zip codes that they are located in. I think that that's important. And it's it's really important to me when I hear the council member who has received 80% of the the drive thrus of the project. Excuse me. If if we could make the amendment and then speak to the amendment, I'm sure that my following you. That's my amendment that the report include the type. Location of council district and zip code of drive thru citywide. And when I hear the council member who has received 80% of the new drive thrus, 80% of the new drive thru was in the prior three years. How many years have you been on council? Four years. So in four years, in three of his four years, he's received 80% of the drive thrus of the city, and he is standing against a moratorium. I think that it's important for us to stand with him. And for that reason, this was not anything I plan to stand up on tonight. I'm really glad that I did the research because I really didn't know it was going to be this controversial. And so I hope my colleagues will support the substitute substitute as I believe this will come back to council within 120 days, at which time we can make a decision on whether or not we want to adopt an ordinance or not. I think that this still supports a direction that we want to hear a policy recommendation from staff, and that we do want to ensure that we adopt policies that make it a cleaner, healthier Long Beach. Unfortunately, a moratorium can also condemn those that already have the drive thrus in situations that are less favorable. And I don't want that to happen. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman, your muranga. You know, the more we. The more we talk about this, the more people queue up and new things come in. So, I mean, I want to stop this now because we keep getting deeper and deeper into the minutia where I think that the original motion addresses a lot of the amendments that were brought forward. A lot of the friendlies that were brought forward. It's the original motion that actually encompasses all of this. The only difference between what we have now and what we had before was the elimination of the the moratorium, which Stapp has basically said, don't need a year. We could do it in six months, which is very workable and I think very doable. But, you know, I was going to call the question right now, but we have exactly. But we haven't had public comment yet. So I want to reserve my comment now to call the question after we hear public comment, please. Excuse Councilwoman Gonzalez. Okay. Now hold it. No, no, I'm not going in right now. I just want I'd like to ask the question, is the CVS in the you know, the are the pharmacies and are they and into this? MONTOYA Because that's where I'm running the problem in my district, I have more, you know, convenience, you know, stores than I have , you know, like I say, the Taco Bell's and all of that situation. So in some of those close early and that's and they they closed early and then all of a sudden you got to drive through where they're going to be able to get their, you know, their product from the doctors. So that that to me could be a problem. So I'm just asking that if that is put into this motion, they are everything is what they drive through and those are added into it. Okay. All right. Well, let's continue to go on with this. Could we have some public comment on this and then we'll get back to it. Ladies first. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Like. We're afternoon. My name is Hilda Guyton. I'm a Coalition for Cooking Long Beach co-chair. And I'm here to let you know that, yes, you are right. Everything that we are talking here at a certain level is planning. But there is studies that says that. The way that we build the environment affect the health of the people. And my community is living 5 to 7 years less than the community of the Tier four and five district. And I understand that maybe you don't see what happened on my community. So I'm here to let you know, though. We have drive thrus and fast food on every corner. We've been working very closely with our council member to fix this, but it's almost impossible. We cannot remove the drive through that exists right now and the way that we are that the communities already built. Every single change affects our health. So if you don't see the health part or why are we talking, then we are. We are you are not talking on the whole spectrum. And I know that there is planning committee and there is public work and it's a lot of different thing. But you have to start thinking about the people. The people. I mean. I understand that businesses are good. And when we say that we closed for business is not true, because if you go to another city, they are building they are building brand new development with no drive thrus, issues, what you are giving to the people and what you are giving the opportunity to the future on health. My community is in the Big Three, but we have all the drive, the drive thru. We have no, no trees. And you want to say, well, why do we need trees? Well, trees are important and we have the freeways right there. So we are talking here about health. And I want you to think about that and maybe hear from you guys that you're talking about development, businesses and everything. But I really, really ask you to the moratorium is not going to be that much, is not going to make a difference. Just give us a chance to put something in place and just do it. I mean, are you going to ask my council member for Charlestown? And I want to thank you for everything that you have done and you have sane and all of you to please support of the moratorium and all the changes and all the work that the that the staff. And I want to thank you the staff, the city staff, for all the work that you have done. Thank you. Good evening, everyone. City Council members. I am so good. Me I live in the eighth district and I am one of the co-founders of Long Beach Environmental Alliance. And thank you, Hilda, for everything you said. I second what she said and her organization that she helps oversee the coalition over North Healthy North Long Beach is part of our alliance as well. I'm here representing Lombard, SRI 50 citizens climate lobby, the Long Beach, Gray Panthers, Cambodian Social Nation of America. And the list goes on. You can check our Facebook Long Beach Environmental Alliance. So we want them more. I had had a moratorium. Yes. Thank you. And where is our common sense? More cars equal, more pollution. It's easier as one, two, three. So there is one thing we all can't hide from, which is don't add a death, so why not? You know, improve the longevity of our lives by not permitting drive thrus in our community. I know it might just be in a certain area, but that area, you know, the air shifts, the wind, you know, whether we all are affected by air pollution and drive thrus are dangerous for pedestrians. I know. Ms.. Councilman Councilwoman Mongo stated something about that as well. How can we make it more safe for people? And even Councilwoman Janine Pearce said something about, you know, not just the food being healthy, but the way how it count, how can we design it to be healthier for us? And, you know, we live in 2019. We're in the age of technology and we should use it technology as a tool. We can get healthy, produce online, even grocery stores deliver now, too. So, hey, we can be as lazy as we want and stay at home ordering food, healthy food from our homes. Forget the drive thrus. I stop eating, drive fast food for a year. Now, if I can show you my abs, I would. But I can't do that. Right. So catch me on the beach. So, guys. But aside from that, I wanted to lighten the mood and just speak the truth. Um, so drive thrus are not the answer. Greenhouse. Greenhouse gas emissions. They suck. They they they cause asthma, maybe stroke, diabetes, you name it. I have a whole list for if you guys want to talk about it later, but I say, can I have ten more seconds? I say, why not? You can just keep create. Why not replace the drive thrus with greenspaces and grow trees? Because trees, they think they're not costly and they help improve the quality of life. Okay. Thank you. Guys. Thank you. Yes. You're a great. You're going to live forever. Ever. Go ahead, young man. Son, I cant fe. 3 million tonnes of CO2 was pushed out into the air last year alone in the state of California due to idling cars. That's what you're referencing when you speak about this this state. I would like to think the state of New York specifically, because they're the ones who pushed the environmental standard that a lot of businesses. Monopolies franchise big business specifically had to adjust to and that is that 100 over 130,000 tons of CO2 is annually produced in the city of New York alone due to idling cars. And because of that, the city council there created more stricter restrictions in regards to idling. I think it's no more than 5 minutes. They actually have a program where you can as a common citizen, you are incentivized by the city to film cars that are idling. And due to that, it has completely reduced cars on the street that are idling. Also, they targeted drive thrus that are on transit corridors that cause cars to idle. And because of that, you had a phenomenon, which is these mobile order stations that McDonald's one that comes to mind specifically is the one on in second District on fourth in Alamitos. They had an issue with parking. They created an operation there where they have the mobile order stationed there. They don't have that problem anymore. I think that's something that we should look for. The original motion I agree with, councilman. Wrong. This is this is not necessarily about targeting companies that sell food that we don't like. It's about misuse of land. Specifically in the case here. You know, we're not you know, in other districts outside the fourth District, you know, we're not creating businesses to gain the focus on international students. You know, I like to welcome my new Saudi Indian and, you know, international friends that comes to this beautiful city to go to school at Long Beach State. But for the rest of us, I grew up in the Wrigley neighborhood and Long Beach Willow, specifically, and I grew up next 12 drive thrus. And these drive thrus target the youth. They don't you know, when it's in the fourth District where they're talking adults, that's a different conversation. But when they're targeting our youth and we see the epidemic of obesity and how it's a target and how it's affecting the next generation after us, I think it goes beyond just saying, oh , well, you know, we're targeting companies that are selling food that we don't like. It's targeting the future. And we have to maintain and focus on uplifting the future generation of children. And that's not fast food. And I think a moratorium was great in that regards. And thank you, Steph, for pushing this. Thank you. Evening. Counsel My name is Kurt Davis. I have also been doing tons of research, not recently, but for a long period of time, about drive thrus and the effect that they have on our community. And I have to let you know, I accept the fact that I live in an area right next to the 91 Freeway in the ninth District where my life expectancy is shorter than three other than than two of the zip codes in this one, the number one is in the Andrews area, and that my household is in the 95th percentile for air pollution, according to the Southern California AQ, M.D.. I don't like the proliferation of drive thrus. Starbucks did their own study when they wanted add a new drive thru up in Santa Barbara. They figure the average wait time is 4 minutes. That's from order to pickup. That doesn't include the time that you wait before. Now, if you have 400 cars a day, come in. That causes 12 tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year. That's just one drive thru that gets 400. Also, we're not really against. We are against fast food. I am. I am the past chair of the Coalition for Health in North Lombard. And it's all also studies proven that students that live within a quarter mile are fast food restaurants within a quarter mile of a student of the school. The students here have a higher propensity for obesity than the other types of schools that are farther away from those fast food restaurants. But I know the issue tonight is the drive thrus now. Our general plan is 30 years old. The new general plan, if you've read it, does include some restrictions against drive thrus and even for the overabundance of fast food. But I know that they need the time to continue to fine tune these regulations to make them fair for everybody. Now, if you're saying we only get five or five drive thrus a year, a moratorium for six months is not going to impact that much. In the last year, we had four drive thrus approved just in the ninth District, three on one development, which is the reason I got more involved in this. And those three drive thrus are within 50 feet of residences. I don't know what happened with the other one in the fourth District. They were able to get rid of it, but we weren't able to get rid of ours. You know why? Because the planning commission said their hands were tied and they regretted that they had to pass those three drive thrus through. They regretted it. It's on record. Also in the last planning commission meeting after we spoke. They said that that the only recourse that they saw is to ban drive thrus completely. But they thought that would be too drastic measure. That is also on record from the last Planning Commission meeting to ban drive thrus. And according to Baldwin Park, the city of Albert Park bans drive thrus. The City of Baldwin Park is the home of drive thrus. The first in and out was built in Baldwin Park, and now they ban drive thrus completely. I urge you to support marriage, not marriages, not marry yet. I urge you to support Councilman Richardson for the original motion with a six month moratorium instead of a 12 month moratorium and keep that in place. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, uh, what you got? How about if you have a wedding ring but you don't? Wait a. Minute. I had on that. You're not on it. I was at the. You took me. Out? No. Point of order. Point of order. This is point of order. No, it's point of order. Was with the. Excuse me. We went to a public speaker. Now Mr. Richardson comes from Richardson on the side. Vice Mayor. If I recall correctly, the council member from the seventh District asked to reserve his call for the question until the conclusion of public comment. Excuse me. That I'm just looking at the. Go ahead. All of that I see people cued up. I'm going to withdraw my call for the question and continue the discussion. It's Hollywood. Well, fine. I just am following what I see up. Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just wanted to queue up once again and just thank the residents who came down to speak tonight. I know it was a difficult conversation that we had that we just went through. And I was there at the Planning Commission meeting when they said, our hands are tied. We really need to take a deeper look at this. And I also understand that a lot of times our communities, we get dumped on. And, you know, when it comes to liquor stores in every corner, I spent five years figuring out how do we create leverage to change the narrative around liquor stores. Right. Drive thrus, it's this is what's being proposed tonight is a very small thing. Six month pause while we figure it out. And everyone's committed to this. So. So I thank you for coming down. I understand. I know what it's like to live in a community adjacent to two freeways. When you raise up your issues and it seems like, you know, maybe they don't they're not value to the same degree as maybe a corporation or so. I understand that. So I want to thank you. Councilman Mongo, you mentioned as economic, you said I should vote with you as economic development chair. I just want to just want to be clear. This is not modern economic development and push in drive thrus. It isn't. And and while I think it's appropriate and fair to have a baseline for when we, you know, evaluate our policies. So we have some some level of stability in the marketplace. You know, I I think I just want to be clear that, you know, where we're heading as a community is more walkable, more integrated development that's scale and integrated with our local communities. And frankly, drive through, in my opinion, should only be leveraged in spaces that actually Councilman Andrews talked about. Like, you know, I think far if we could, I would love to just say exclude pharmacies, exclude banks, ATMs, but as a land use conversation, you really can't do that. And so I would love to say if if a drive thru gets me a bank in my district. Yes, that's a case for that's the case for a drive thru. If it gets me an additional pharmacy in my district, yes, that's a case and we can set those policies. We can't do a a moratorium based on that. Right. And so, you know, I just want I just want people to I just want to say, because that was done, I wasn't cued up again. I don't say I hear you. No matter how the vote turns out tonight, I hear you. We're going to keep working to fix this issue. I believe the smart, fair thing is to hit the pause button, have a moratorium, have a thoughtful conversation with all nine of us and the community to figure this out. And you have a commitment from city staff to get it done in six months. I don't know if that's the way the world is going to go tonight, but but that's what that's what I support. And I think that's the responsible thing for the city council to do, is to vote no on the motion that's in front of us and vote yes on the substitute motion. Thanks. Thank you, Congressman Michael. So I also want to tell you that I hear you. But a moratorium isn't going to help the drive thrus that already exist today, which is, I think, the bigger problem. I also think that the city is built out in a way where. We're not saying no to a moratorium. What we're saying right now is I'm not even sure if the numbers come in. The numbers coming in from my colleague, council member, Super Anon, my colleague, Councilmember Richardson, don't add up to the numbers that I'm hearing from development services because they said five per year and then he's had four and he's had three, that's seven. So we don't know where we are. I think that's a big point of this. So I think that we are going to study this issue and we want to come back with something meaningful. I think that it's important for us to know the types of drive thrus that we have and also to know that when people are looking to get a drive through, they're just going to drive further to get to one, which is additional greenhouse gases if they're not in the right places. And we already know that a lot of them are in the completely wrong places. But the city was built a long time ago. Some of our fire stations are in the completely wrong places and we're getting to an adjustment from there. So I hope that you'll know that my motion mirrors the original motion on the floor with additional add ons to support some of the things said by the dias. And so I hope it's not turned in a way that the people that vote yes right now are looked at in a way that they're not in favor of that. I'm not sure why. Member Super nor was his district was able to galvanize and prevent a drive through and that Councilmember Richardson was not I don't know the details behind that. And if within a week or so were able to find out more details, we can always agenda it again in a week or two. But I hope that you'll open up a dialog with all of our offices because many of us aren't aware of the challenges. There is a process in place and I think that part of this is not duplicating and doubling down on processes that make it more difficult for anything in the city. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. So I would support a moratorium. I just want to reiterate that, and I think that the substitute substitute actually duplicates efforts. There was an eight month from, if I'm not mistaken, planning commission process. About six community groups in neighborhoods that would be impacted by drive thrus have said that they support a moratorium and staff has recommended a year. So I think we've done enough research and studying. I think that the community has clearly spoken and they don't just speak for North Long Beach. I know they speak for a lot of the communities within the city that have additional impacts, land use very much connected to environmental impacts and health impacts and all of that. I understand the thoughts about protecting the business community. I completely get that. But I also think that this absolutely is protecting the business community because it's giving us a great opportunity to get it right by, as we mentioned, taking a pause, taking a step back, and really looking at a new modern policy that will hopefully help us all. So I really ask my council colleagues, you have community in front of you. They don't just come here and sit for 3 hours and wait for us to just say no to them. They're here. They've done the research. They're continuing to do the research with our communities. And I would hope that we would just hear them out and listen and support this moratorium. So, again, no. One, the subsub subsub, I really could not support that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Pearce. I'll try to be brief. I've been sitting here and trying to think, is there a way to get to that magic spot where we all feel good? And I and I recognize that the land use element and so we we can't pass it out and say this use and not this use. And I was going to queue up again, but I'm struggling with what sounds like a disingenuous comment around and I hate saying that on the floor moratorium impacting existing drive thrus, I think staff has done a really good job about saying allow us to continue the process that's happened for the last eight months, allow us to take a pause so that businesses can thrive and they can come in and design their projects the right way. That is healthy for everybody. And so this idea of pitting business versus the residents who really live in these impacted areas is something that I can't find a middle ground anymore. And so I you know, I hear you guys, I urge you to continue to engage with all councilmembers and to talk about the health impacts of all council districts. And let's let's have this vote. And hopefully our council colleagues will will see that this is the best thing for those that live in disadvantaged communities and for the residents that live here every day and not for big business or lobbyist. Thank you. Councilman Austin. So I've heard a lot and I do appreciate the comments from the residents. I appreciate the back and forth from from the council and to me, the motion on the floor. Doesn't necessarily put forth a moratorium tonight, but does it say no to a moratorium? In a couple of months or in the future, it's saying let's let's study it. And I think. One mistake that we make as a council over and over and over again is if we need to make the decision tonight that it's on the agenda. I think the conversation has been great. I've sat back and been quiet for the most part throughout this entire debate. But I'm going to support the substitute substitute, because I think it opens the door for more information as I'm sitting here thinking, I would love to know about the drive thrus in my district. I would love to get a report and know specifically about the drive thrus in my my district. To to to to further analyze this and in here hear feedback from from residents. This hasn't, in my opinion, had enough of it. There's not enough behind it to to to justify a moratorium, in my opinion. And we can agree to disagree, but I would hope we can get to a vote. Yes. Councilman Pierce? Well, I. I also appreciate the conversation. And I want to say I appreciate the fact that the you guys are saying it's not a vote against a moratorium, that we could always moratorium down the line that are. What my issue is with that is that, say, there's somebody thinking about a drive through tomorrow and in two weeks they can come in. We could have ten of them come in and put in their application. So by the time the moratorium gets here, we've now screwed ourselves by telling them that it happens. It does. If we've had eight and in one year, that is the that is essentially what a moratorium, why a moratoriums are great because it gives you a break. It doesn't say we'll give you a break in six months from now. And so I just wanted to make sure that I cleared out all the other arguments and why I support it. But that's the point of a moratorium, is being able to do it quickly to take a pause, to be able to come back and have good policy in front of us. So I also have enjoyed the conversation around data and wanting to have more information as well. Fine, thank you very much. Before we take a vote on this, I like to ask Council on Price, were you talking about 90? You say 90, 160 days. You make that point. At all for the report to come back. 60 days is what I said. I said 30 to 60 days, but whatever it takes. And the report would specifically be for a justification so that those council members for whom the issue is a big one can have a justification to vote for a moratorium. Yeah, that's yeah. Because I think anything you guys what we're doing tonight is a lot of we do need to take a pause and really see what's going on here because we've had very good dialog, I think, in every one of our conversations. But I think now and I definitely understand my colleague when he says, you know, no moratorium, but I think in my area when especially when I think about certain things, where do we start it? Where do we start? I think we do have a lot of good reports that we've had from the staff. I want to know what's going to happen. Maybe I didn't like the term deal at all, so I think the six month thing would give us some clarification on this. So I really look forward to that. So I'm going to support the six month, you know, moratorium and hopefully we can come back. And I hope my colleague, Supernova Councilman Hooper, and I will understand that we will get the kind of information he needs for us this week, because I need it also for me. So thank you very much. And I could come for the question. If I could. Gentlemen. And. Vice Mayor, to get to the six months you vote down. Yeah, I'm just. Are you recognize me? Yes, I am. I want to recognize this because I think I just. Want to be clear. That means you will vote no on the substitute. Substitute yes and the vote yes on the on the substitute motion, which is staff's recommendation. And I would include the Sixth Amendment that gets us to the sixth month, the much shorter moratorium. Yes, that would be what we do, because your staff at 12 months. Staff had said we're going to bring it down to six. Yes. Thank you. Please vote. Yes. Could we vote in on that or will. Voting on the substitute? Substitute? Yes, I think. Okay. All right. Yeah. Councilman Spooner, Councilmember Mongo. Motion feel. So Vice Mayor now would be the substitute motion of which would be staff's recommendation on the moratorium with allowing the nine that are currently in the pipeline as identified in attachment A to be allowed to proceed. Yes, there is an amendment to the Fourth Amendment. Yemen is back with. An amended six months. Yes. Yes. Councilmembers opener calls memo mango Vice Mayor Andrew's Council Murang'a. Woman Water Illiterate. This motion also includes the item that Councilmember Gonzales put forward as well with the TSA in there. What is that? Had it not been accepted at this time, would be appropriate time to add it, which would be a staff report to identify the type location of drive thru citywide. So a full report on that? Absolutely. We can include that. I want to make that clear. Motion carries. Yeah. Thank you. When we get them to close, we no guns. Item 22.

On the message and order, referred on March 2, 2022, Docket #0313, for an appropriation order in the amount of Twenty Seven Million Two Hundred and Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Four Dollars ($27,205,854.00) from Fiscal Year 2022 community preservation fund revenues for community preservation projects at the recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee, the committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_04132022_2022-0313

0313.0313 The Committee and Community on the Community Preservation Act two, which was referred to a March 2nd 2022 docket number 0313 message in order for an appropriation amount in the amount of $27,205,854 for fiscal year 2022. Community Preservation Fund Revenues for Community Preservation Projects at the recommendation of the City of Boston, Community Preservation Committee submits a report recommending the order ought to pass. Thank you. The Chair recognizes counsel clarity. Chair of the Committee on Community Preservation Act. Counsel Clarity of the Floor. Thank you, Mr. President. In accordance with General Laws, Chapter 44 BE The Community Preservation Committee recommended a total of 52 projects for consideration for the allowable uses of the community housing, open space and historic preservation. Of the approximately 27 plus million appropriation, 14,000,660 and 159,000 are being recommended for ten affordable housing projects. $6,141,357 recommended for 25 historic preservation projects and $6,404,338 recommended for 17 open space and recreation projects. This matter was sponsored by Mayor Michel Will, referred to the committee on March the second. As previously discussed at the last council meeting, the committee held a hearing on April 5th for public comment was taken and members of the administration provided testimony on all 52 projects. With that said, I am happy to report that the 52 recommended projects support and align with the objectives of the CPA and the priorities of this Council. And I know that is referenced in the opening prayer as we are in Holy Week. The prayers of the ministers and pastors in the congregation of a lot of churches were answered by the CPA this week, so congratulations to them and the other recipients of the many in much needed causes. And this was also a call to other organizations and groups and churches out there to take a long, hard look at CPA . Get the word out there also to my district and colleagues. If there are things in your district, if you are driving by something and you think it could be a good fit, that's kind of how this thing works. It's you get to introduce folks to CPA and introduce the CPA to the different organizations around the city. And as mentioned through the chair, it's an opportunity to kind of bring people and organizations together. So with that, as the chair, I recommend or could 0313 ought to pass then and that will be the full owner will be $27,205,854 from fiscal year 2022. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. Before we take a vote on this, does any council wish to speak? The chair recognizes. Councilman here. Councilman here. You have the floor. Thank you, Councilor Flynn. And thank you to the chair. I just, um. I'm really excited to see all of these investments. The only thing that I just want to point out that in the affordable housing line, most of those projects are just earmarked to Dorchester, Roxbury on Jamaica Plain, which is great. I'm glad to see more affordable housing, but I think as we continue to move through these conversations in the future, I would love to see affordable housing being spread across the entire city so that we're looking at affordability across other spaces and places. I just want to want to name that and something for us to continue to hold ourselves accountable to that. Affordability should be across the entire city, not just in concentrated areas. That's it. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman. Here, the chair recognizes council block. Council, block. You have the floor. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Just as vice chair of the committee, I wanted to say add my support to the chair on approving the slate and also say that I really appreciated how much the administration came to also answer our questions, kind of about how CPR is being administered, how we measure the questions of equity, geographic distribution, how we make sure that the historic preservation program in particular supports the parts of our community that have amazing historic assets but don't necessarily have a endowment or a board or whatever organized around them. And I just as somebody who fought for EPA back in 2016, it's just really great to see it sort of coming in to that maturity and also to see the administration recognizing that it's still a work in progress in terms of how it puts all those things together. So I know I saw a docket go into Councilor Flaherty's committee today about the administrative budget for the year ahead. And so I think some of the conversations we started there will get to continue, but just really excited about this slate today. So thank you. Thank you. Counsel book the chair recognizes counsel Baker. Counsel Baker, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. I just have a quick question through the chair to the the other chair over here. I guess, does a 27 million does that deplete what we have in EPA now or do we start at a zero balance for 23 counsel? Clarity on the floor. Here, and I'll refer that one obviously to counsel because I think that they hold back, but then it's going to continue. It's a revolving door. So not necessarily depleted. This probably similar to what we do with the um. Yeah, there's a statutory hold back, but through the chair to counsel. Counsel to counsel blocking of the floor. Yeah. I would just say so there, there is a bit of a residual but it's not huge. But then we get a whole bunch more in like July 1st. So the. Wait at the CPA. For anybody watching at home. If you are thinking about applying for a CPA project, it's a rolling application process. So you and your group could submit an application today. If you go on the CPA website, there's actually a whole bunch of info sessions coming up in April and May, and I think the deadline for actually filing is all the way in August and then through the fall they work with projects around like viability and making you qualify for CPA. And then it's really the winter where we get this slate of projects and then voting in the spring. So it's kind of a year long process. Okay. Thank you, Counsel Bork. Thank you. Counsel Baker The chair recognizes Constitution Council and you have the floor. Thank you. And I want to echo something. Katzenbach said the administration really did a great job with their presentation in terms of allocation of CPA funding. I also just want to echo something, Counselor Flaherty said. When we're out and about, looking at, you know, what can need upgrades, I want us to pay particular attention to our immigrant communities. When we look at the distribution of who receive these funds, I don't see a lot of representation from immigrant congregations, from folks who may not have access to City Hall in ways that others do. So just a plug for us do be a lot more intentional about reaching out to communities that may not know about TPA or may not have access to folks who know about CPA. Thank you, Counsel. Again, the chair recognizes Counsel Fernandez Anderson. Counsel Fernandez Anderson. You have the floor. I guess just piggybacking off of my colleague sister occlusion. I think that, you know it's it's it's they did an amazing work presenting thank you to the chair and councilor Fox presented presentation and questions as well engagement it really I learned a lot from the presentation I think piggybacking off of Councilor Allusion, it's just really eye opening to see that access is everything. So everything that is getting preserved or rehabilitated and we'll probably see that in the budget as well, is about people who have access, people who are directly connected, people who know councilors, people who are politically connected as well. So if we continue that way in this city that we continue to rehabilitate and fix and put capital funds or preservation funds into projects that stakeholders or activists or people are of affluent communities. Even with the budget at the Tory budget process, with the community, we noticed that it was about 70% white and affluent communities, therefore empowerment , therefore knowledge and navigating of resources. So if we continue in this way, I would like to set precedent to at least to be if this is educational moment, an aha moment, whatever. Like let's get to the point where we actually put our money where our mouth is and actually start changing this thing. Because I heard one comment in there that was very offensive, extremely offensive. And to just like to even today, I can I'm still emotional about it about and I'm not going to call out names or anything like that. But it was about and it was a public thing. I guess I can talk about it. It was about Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan, not wanting or not caring about fancy stuff. And so what the hell does that mean? We do care. We do want that stuff. The thing is, is that we're so poor, we want to eat. We're just so busy, we're just so poor that we are so busy to just advocate on getting housing and food. So, of course, we're not our first focus is not get beautifying and fancy stuff. So I just to go back and I don't want to get sidetracked here, but I want to open up and encourage everyone in moving forward with any types of programs or any types of funds or any type of capital that we really open up our mind to look at how we're redistributing funds and how are people connected and how people get money because it really seems lopsided. And it really, as I said, it really seems like it goes to affluent communities because they are more connected and know how to advocate and understand how to reach this money. Thank you. Counsel Fernandez innocent. Anyone else like to speak on this? The chair recognizes Councilor Braden. Councilor Braden, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to. This is a great program. Um, we're still ironing out some of the kinks is fairly new. It's, it's putting a huge amount of money into projects that wouldn't necessarily be funded otherwise. I do share my colleague's concern about the geographic spread of of the allocation across the city. But part of that is I know from my experience and also in Brighton, I have a list of the back of my paper here of things that possibly would be eligible for some EPA money. But very often it is. You need community groups, you need people who are volunteers, your historic society or your neighborhood groups to really dig in and do the work to prepare these presentations. So I hope that we can ensure that community groups all across the city or our neighborhoods that need support, technical support and guidance. I know that the EPA has that technical support and guidance to help, but that people will be emboldened to sort of think about their neighborhood and and ask for help to prepare a presentation for CPA funds going forward. So it's a great program. I hope that we can expand the reach and and the distribution of funds going forward. And thank you for all the work that's been done so far. It's incredible, incredible group of folks that review all the applications and and present the ones for approval. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel Brain. Um, I would like to add that, you know, just want to say thank you to counsel, clarity, counsel and a former counselor counselor. Campbell Those three were really instrumental in bringing CPA two to Boston. So I want to recognize counsel by our counsel, clarity and counsel, former counsel Campbell bringing this to bringing us to the city. It's an incredible program, as everybody mentioned. Just. Just as just as a follow up to Councilor Braden's comment. In my district, I host a list. I host a session which each each neighborhood in my district on CPR itself, just try to encourage neighborhood associations to attend and to complete the application. So there's an important role for for us to play as well in the CPA staff will attend a meeting if we do ask them to attend. So let's all try to work together in bringing this program throughout the entire city. But let's also use our district city councils as well, because they have great contacts with neighborhood associations, community leaders and in the CPA will will gladly assist us in some of these outreach information sessions. So I just wanted to mention that in case it's helpful, anybody else like to speak on this matter. So thank you. Councilor Flaherty, the chair of the Committee on Community Preservation Acts. Councilor Farrelly seeks acceptance of the Committee report passage of Docket 0313. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. The ayes have it. The docket has passed. At this time. The chair recognizes counsel of our counsel. Our I apologize for not calling on you. Thank you so much, President Flynn. And I don't think that this will impact the vote at all. I unfortunately missed this hearing. And so I wasn't there for the process. But I because I missed the hearing, I set up a one on one meeting with the dean to ask these these questions ultimately. And so our office is hoping to. Look over the eligibility and create a list of eligible organizations and schools that didn't have access to these resources so that we can send a letter to those offices. I wanted to offer that to my colleagues because it's just we know it became it was evident to me as well as it became evident to everybody else that having access and knowing about the fund was a barrier to it. And so obviously that's gonna take some time to comb through the entire district and see, like, organizations or schools that are eligible. But our hope is that by sending kind of like a mail in letter and maybe doing some phone banking to like make calls to people to just let them know and having some of the community meetings that you just mentioned that it would increase. Access and just knowledge of the CPA program. I know that there are still going to be barriers because it is a grant. And although you don't have to be a grant writer to write it, you still have to have some sort of knowledge like council and said to put it together. But I think that letting people know about it is a good first step so we can actually ultimately see what the what the need is for more technical assistance and make sure that they, Dean and the CPA office, has all of the resources that they need to run the program effectively. Thank you, counsel. Lara. One final comment, Councilman. Here. Yes. I'm here for all of that comes with a lot of and you know, I'm in my, what, 28 months here on the council. And the more that I am in this building, the more I realize the access of accessibility and who has it and who doesn't. So I really do think as we continue to move forward, all of these conversations are going to need to be led through an equity lens, as my colleague Fernandes Anderson says all the time. And I think that while I am voting yes and moving this along this time, I do believe that we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard when it comes to city resources, because the haves and the have nots continue to persist. And I think there's 13 members of this body and we all have a responsibility and making sure that we're serving all of our our all of our constituents. And right now, this as the end and as doled out does not really, truly reflect equity. Thank you. Thank you, counsel here. Matters recently heard. Matters recently heard the possible action. Mr. Clerk, please read Docket. 01990199 order for a hearing on State Receivership for Boston Public Schools.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3201 Curtis Street in Five Points. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from PUD 379 to U-MX-2x (planned development to mixed-use) located at 3201 Curtis Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-25-20.

DenverCityCouncil_08172020_20-0161

First up, we have a bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3201 Curtis Street in five points. Councilmember Clark, would you please put Council Bill 161 on the floor for passage? Absolutely. Madam President, I move that council bill 161 be placed on final consideration and do pass again. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The required. Public hearing for Council Bill 20 dash 0161 is open. May we have the staff report, please? Thank you, Madam President. Good evening. Council and the Chamber. With CPD presenting an official Map Amendment application for 32 A1 Curtis St rezoning from 5379 through umx2x. The subject property is located in Council District nine within the Five Points neighborhood. The subject. Property is on the corner of 32nd and Curtis Street. It contains almost 17,000 square feet of land area. And the structure on the site is a two story firehouse that was constructed in 1929. The applicant is requesting a rezoning TMX to X, which is urban context mixed use with the maximum height of two stories and limited uses. Facilitate reuse of the site. Current zoning on the subject site is former chapter 5950 379, which I will further detail in the next slide. But with the exception of Mestizo Curtis Park to the south, surrounding properties are zoned. You are age 2.5 with the storage structure use overlay and the Curtis Park Conservation Overlay. So getting the. Beauty through 79. This dates back to 1995 and it's highly customized for the existing building and the current user. Specifically, the beauty sets forth limits on maximum building coverage type setbacks and for area ratio for current buildings, maximum areas for imperfect impervious surfaces, including parking and drive aisles along with minimum landscaping requirements and a minimum number of off street parking spaces are prescribed allowed land uses are those in the R3 three zone district with specific square footage is allowed for additional nonresidential uses, including office food packaging and processing and the retail sale of specialty food products. Existing land use is classified as office of the small scale production, warehousing and retail uses also exist. Surrounding land uses include single to and multi-unit residential as well as park and open space. To give you. An idea. Of the building form and skill in the area. This aerial photo shows the subject property outlined in yellow looking north. And these Street View photos from Curtis Street show most of Curtis Park on the top right. Followed by the subject property and single unit residences in the north. The subject property also contains a contributing structure within the Curtis Park historic Landmark District, which was established in 2010. Any request for demolition would require a public hearing before the Landmark Preservation Commission, and approval of any such request is extremely rare. Any request for a significant modification of the exterior would also require a landmark Position Preservation Commission design review. At a minimum, any change to the history of the building is subject to the design guidelines for Denver landmarks, structures and districts. Informational notice of this application was sent in mid-November and Planning Board voted unanimously to move the application forward at the February 19th meeting of the City Council. Public hearing for this case was delayed twice due to COVID 19 and the George Floyd protests. Today, staff has received letters of support from both the Curtis Park R.A. and store in Denver. We have also received four letters of support and two letters of concern from members of the public. Concerns raised in these letters include not knowing who the future owner of the property will be and the rezoning that meeting the criteria set forth in the Denver zoning code. Moving to the criteria, CPD staff must find that the rezoning meets all five to recommend approval. There are three plans that impact the subject property. Beginning with Comprehensive Plan 2040. The proposed rezoning is consistent with Plan 2040, particularly with the strong and authentic neighborhoods, vision, element, policies and strategies, as it would better align city regulations to support historic preservation and support the reuse of existing buildings. Similarly, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the climate vision element policies, as it would prioritize the use of an existing building and promote mixed use development where services and infrastructure already exist. The staff report further details a number of other applicable planned policies and strategy. Moving to Blueprint Denver. The subject property is mapped as part of the urban neighborhood context, which contains mobile unit and mixed use areas embedded in one and two unit residential areas. As a proposed end district is intended to enhance the convenience, ease and enjoyment of transit, walking, shopping and other public gathering within the neighborhood. It is consistent with the Blueprint Denver campus. The subject property is mapped as low, medium residential and the future places map below. Medium residential classification includes areas where neighborhood serving retail may be found at key locations with limited mixed use along some arterial and collectors. With 32nd Street mapped as a local or a designated and Kurdish service, serving as a residential arterial, a mixed use district as appropriate. This location has and is consistent. Each place map. The subject property is located within all other areas of the city, which are anticipated to see 20% of new housing growth and 10% of new employment growth by 2040. The proposed MAP amendment to Upmc's two X is consistent with this map, as it will enable compatible adaptive reuse of the existing structure and support continued viability of the existing building. Additional applicable blueprint. Denver policies and strategies are further detailed in this report. This request is also consistent with several northeast downtown neighborhood plan goals which are listed here and speak to promoting the re-use of existing buildings while supporting complementary small scale commercial use. And this map. The subject property is shown as single family row house. These areas are described as moderately dense and primarily residential, but with some complementary small scale commercial uses. The maximum allowable building height in this plan is. Mapping the subject site is 2.5 storeys. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the neighborhood plan for the following reasons. The UN Mixed Zone District only allows neighborhood scale commercial uses that are appropriate for the predominant residential character of the surrounding area, and the maximum height allowed by the proposed district is less than the conceptual building heights identified in this plan. Lastly, through the name, a very specific beauty tailored to one specific user and enabling a broader range of land uses. This rezoning will encourage the reuse of the existing historic building that is part of the fabric of the neighborhood. Moving to criteria number two and three. The proposed rezoning to UM X to x will result in the uniform application of zoned district building form, use and design regulations. It will also further public health, safety and general welfare of the city for implementation of adopted plans related to supporting both the re-use of existing buildings and neighborhoods. Serving commercial uses at appropriate locations. The justifying circumstance for this rezoning is that the property has retained former Chapter 59 zoning, while the city adopted the Denver Zoning Code in 2010. Lastly, the proposed zoning would facilitate re-use of the historic building and allow uses consistent with the neighborhood context zone, district purpose and intent statement. CPD staff recommends approval based on finding all five review criteria. Thank you. Thank you, Brandon. All right, we have. Tonight on the rezoning for 0161 Council has received 13 written comments on Council Bill 161. There were ten submitted comments in favor of the application and three submitted comments in opposition of the application. All members of Council that are present have certified that they have read each of the submitted written comments to any members of council. Need more time to read the testimony submitted. Seeing no hands raised. Council Secretary. Let the record reflect that all written testimony, both in favor and in opposition of Council Bill 161 have been read by each member of Council and all written testimony will be submitted to the official record of the hearing. Tonight, we have 15 individuals signed up to speak. We will start with our first speaker, Bruce O'Donnell. Can you hear. Me? Go ahead, Bruce. Okay. Thank you. Members of the council. I'm Bruce O'Donnell, and I'm the owners representative for this applicant rezoning. And I reside at 386 Emerson Street in Denver. We originally were scheduled to come before you at on April 6th, and this is our fourth attempt. So we're delighted to be in front of council this evening. A quick recap of the process. We've had extensive community engagement and public outreach. We did, councilman, see the boxes, request a mailing to all the neighbors within 200 feet. We held an open house in October. At that open house, we had 15 guests sign a petition of support for the rezoning. We also worked with the R.A. Curtis Park neighbors and got extensive input with them. They recommended the two X rezoning districts that we've applied for and we presented to a general meeting of CPS as well . As a result of that, the Reno has issued a letter of support for this rezoning, which was done back in October of last year. And in addition to that, they reaffirmed the reaffirm their support with a resolution last month reaffirming their support since so much time had gone by. The old Chapter 59 Pudi that the property is currently zoned is very prescriptive and it almost limits the use of the building entirely to that for manufacturing, wholesaling, dry seat mix. And so any new use would require rezoning. The fact that this is a contributing structure in the Curtis Park historic landmark district is a great bonus. It's a two story building or a planning for two storey zoning, and no matter what, any exterior modifications are going to have to go through. Landmark Review. I'm not going to repeat CPD's excellent presentation other than to say that this rezoning request meets the criteria in COB Plan 2040 Blueprint, Denver and the Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan. And the justifying circumstances being that it's a former Chapter 59 zoning that we have an opportunity to get into the new code, the Denver zoning code now. Both CPB and the Denver Planning Board recommend approval. The Denver Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. And with that, I ask that city council vote yes to approve Council Bill 20 dash 0161 Rezoning 3201 4232 um x2x and I'm available to answer any questions that members of Council desire that thank you. Thank you, Bruce. Next up, we have Tamara Ryan. Thank you, members of council. It's nice to see you again. In 1989 when Women's Being Project was founded, we started with an idea if we could give women an opportunity to learn through working how to move into mainstream employment. That would be the cure for poverty and that was the vision of Jesse Eyre, who recently passed away. Today we are a much larger organization and we serve many more women each year. As we followed up with with the women who graduated a year ago in May and June. We found that 100% of the women were still employed, which is a considerable achievement, given the fact that we hire women who have not had a job longer than a year in their lifetime, and the average age is 39. We teach them through working and through life skills training, how to not just get a job, but to keep the job and how to manage their lives and get their children back. And really, ultimately, what we hope is that that benefit extends beyond each woman to her family and the community as a whole. What we are hoping is that this change in zoning is the first step for us to not just sustain our organization, but to further our mission in Denver. As as presented by Brandon. We believe that our application meets the criteria for rezoning. So I respectfully ask that council members vote in favor of our rezoning application. Thank you. Thank you. Up next, we have Paul Ryan, us. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Paul Grannis and I'm a Denver resident. Support for citizens of Denver with the greatest needs is my passion. So when I first heard about the Women's Being project with a zoning application, I was really excited to learn more. Over the last couple of months, I bought products from their store, reviewed their financial statements and strategic plans, spoke with the applicant and their consultant, listened to the committee hearing on February 25th and heard from longtime neighbors of theirs. Based on this review, I do not support this rezoning application. I ask you to consider the following. First, the questionable nature of whether or not the application actually meets Denver's zoning code requirements. Legal criteria. And second, examine discrepancies that exist between the testimony given by the applicant, their strategic plan, and their financial statements. First, on the legal criteria, Denver's zoning code requires that a rezoning may only be approved by city council if it complies with all of the review criteria. The lens by which I evaluate these criteria is built upon the logic that a current zoning of 32 on KURTIS has enabled women's being project to provide a valuable service to women in need here in Denver. B If this rezoning were to be approved, it would set in motion a chain of events that would remove this service from this building and possibly from the entire city of Denver. C With market forces being what they are and without an operator identified, this rezoning would enable the use of this property in a manner that does not provide equal or greater social benefits to residents as required in the adopted plans. The details of the plan goals that are inconsistent with this application are in the briefing that I have submitted to Council. 3 minutes does not provide me enough time to read them out loud for, but for reference at a high level, their first comprehensive plan 2040 goals. 1.94.14.4. Secondly, Blueprint Denver Goals one, two and eight. And Third Northeast Downtown Denver Neighborhood Plan Goals CDOT two. Moving on to the legal requirement that the proposed official mapping amendment furthers the public health, safety and general welfare of the city. I haven't seen or heard any evidence that indicates that this rezoning will increase the general welfare of the city, and it appears that could actually decrease the general welfare of the city. Switching gears, I'm concerned about the purported discrepancies from the testimony of the February 25th zoning committee hearing, meaning the discrepancies include first, the applicant painted a picture of having outgrown the property due to overwhelming demand for their products. This conflicts with their financial statements showing a steady decrease in product sales from 1.2 million in 2012 to only 756 K in 2019. Second, the applicant testified that when he bought the building in 95, their build their budget was 500 K year and today there are two and a half million dollar operation. This conflicts with their fiscal year financial statements showing their total revenue of only 1.6 million, which is at two and a half million or 1.6. Third, the applicant testified that their goal with rezoning is to employ more women. However. Sorry the screen popped up. However, what they didn't mention is they're facing labor costs are too high, and as a result, they plan on using capital equipment to automate and replace the work of the women that they are employed and helping. Curtis Park. If replacing women with machines is a reason for cashing out of this property, why was that not disclosed to council members? When was during the committee meeting? City Council? Please help resolve these discrepancies. Thank you. I will remain available for questions if needed. Thank you. Up next, we have the honorable Albert Wedgeworth. Hello. Hello. You can go ahead. Thank you very much. Good evening, everyone. Madam President and members of City Council. My name is Albert Wedgeworth and I live in Northeast Denver and District nine in the Whittier neighborhood. I was very honored to serve on the Denver City Council from 1999 through 2007, representing then District eight, where the Women's Being project building is located and have supported this organization for many years. Because I also grew up in the Curtis Park neighborhood. I wish to urge city councilors to support the rezoning tonight because the organization has met the rezoning criteria. They have worked comprehensively with neighborhood organizations. And others throughout the neighborhood. To ensure that neighbors will be totally engaged with what will be proposed at the site. But most importantly, this will give the Women's Being project the opportunity to grow their mission to support women and their quality of life to return to the workplace. With the challenging times we are facing in our city, we need more programs like the Women's Being Project for people in our city. So again, I urge you to support the rezoning application this evening. And thank you very much for your thoughtful consideration. Thank you. All right. Next up, we have Rochelle Subfloor. Oh, I think you're on me still. Good evening, everybody. Thank you, city council. My name is Rachel Subfloor and I live at 3327 Arapahoe Street. And I am here to show my support for the rezoning for the 3201 Curtis Street. So I live about two blocks away from the women's game project. And I just want to say, first of all, I think that they are an excellent neighbor and they are a valuable member of our community, of our neighborhood. And I think Denver as a whole, I understand that they have outgrown their space. And in order for them to continue to serve more women, the rezoning plays a key role in in furthering their mission. And I think most importantly, aside from that, is that this rezoning. Criteria as previously sold in the it's. Supported by blueprint. Denver the comp plan as well as the local plan as shown. By the approval through the planning board, it has justified circumstances because it currently is a former Chapter 59. And a very restrictive one at that. Talking with my neighbors, I we have. Discussed that or have had casual. Conversations with my neighbors. The. Of that, we believe that. A limited mixing effect that's being proposed is. Very appropriate for the location. And not only that, that. Is something that we would like to see. As a redemptive use. For the structure. I mean, living. In this neighborhood, there's a lot of change going on. And I think it's really. Refreshing or it has been really refreshing. And we appreciate to have the community outreach that we had gotten from the Women's Game Project. I mean, I think that they've done a really great job in informing the community. And seeking input. And that's I can't really say that I've seen any of that from anyone. Else. In our area. So I definitely. I know that the rezoning is being supported by the SEP as well as. The local Arno. And by myself. And other other neighbors in. That community. So for those reasons, I ask for the Council to consider voting yes on this region. So thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Angelica and DeSilva. That is correct. Good evening. Thank you. Members of council. Most of you I've wanted to meet all my life. My name is on Hilly, so I reside at 1031 32nd Street. My family has lived here for four generations. I lived two houses away from the Women's Project. I have enjoyed the work and I've seen the transformation that they have provided to empower women. And however, I am concerned with the potential rezoning plan. I'm concerned about the outcome of this plan, for example, traffic or parking accessibility. Another concern that I have is because my hope is that the community members such as myself will have a voice and will be represented and the neighborhood will maintain its integrity and its cultural history. I often walk around my neighborhood, I see all of the changes. They have been positive, but I've also seen the changes. Where is it really reflective of me as a person of color? I see the new homes, the businesses, the establishments that are being built every day. But my hope is that the community once again will be reflective of all its community members. Please do not approve of this zoning plan or changes until we have full transparency. What type of business will be provided at the address that mentioned the Women's Project? That's my main concern. Thank you for having us. And thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Donald Damon. I think we still have you muted, Donald. There you go. Still married. Stuff that you needed. How out there. There you go. Okay. Thank you all. Thank you. And good evening. Members of the City Council Committee. I as well, I, I, my entire family have always lived in and raised and grown up in this park. I heard earlier from someone that testified that that we've been contacted. My family and I have lived in the neighborhood for also three generations. 32 zero 432 zero 30 zero 632 ten 3212. Arapahoe Street, which is actually one lot away from the property in question. It's disappointing in many ways that. So when we speak, a lot of these individuals that are being that are speak live within blocks, we when I say we as a family and I, I live within a locked one legal lot away from the being project. Always been a supporter. Not only is order because of my interest in in the being project, but because of having family members gone through the projects at a success rate. I in being at the corner see the traffic has dramatically dropped. It's not what it was before. What's concerning about this is I've always been a supporter of the of the being project and we as a neighborhood when I say we the beam project and and as has the community we have endured quite a bit to get through where we are today. As I mentioned earlier, we're all within a block radius of my family and I. There are six of us and some of them are not here because of that, are not present because of the language barrier. What's concerning about this is that they the I see a lot of information that's put out by the Beam project, which is not true. I speak as an appraiser and a real estate broker, certified appraiser, commercial appraiser. And a lot of what is being said is not reflective of the everything that I've learned in the 33 years in commercial real estate practice. They're very. I read everything that's come my way. And what's bothering some of it all. Is that the. My still on. Hello. Yeah, go ahead. Okay. The inconsistency the inconsistency of the reports. The big thing is, why is it being project, not being transparent, consistent with the data being provided and being truthful with the true intentions of the reasoning? I can tell you why. As a certified Fraser broker, I could tell you why. They're looking to reason for a larger pool of buyers at a much higher price in the real estate market. Thank you, sir. That's your time. We appreciate it. Next up, we have Keith Pryor. Can you hear me? And I want to have. Hi. My name is Kate Pryor and I resided in Champ Street in Curtis Park. And this bill for 3/2 and Curtis, the Women's Being project was originally a firehouse. And so that's why it's part of the historic district, and that's why it's a designated historic structure. So what we're. Finding. Is it had a life as a firehouse and now has a life as and is being priced, has been a great tenant and it's been a great caregiver for the historic structure, and we've really enjoyed them as neighbors. This community is now they need to look to their future and we need to look to Curtis. And the future life of this building in its new form obviously not going to change the zoning movies. And what we're wanting to do is take it from the section of Chapter 59, which was updated and did take into account a pudi that no longer existing in today's zoning code. And so we really need to update this building into its new world of 22 and the current zoning code. Um oh, the um xaum2x is something that they did to the community and they were wanting to find what would be the best options that would actually bring the best mix of uses for the neighbors. Just as other people have said, they have been a great neighbor and they want to make sure that it continues to have that. There was a great use as a fire department, but obviously we've outgrown and just as the women's project has outgrown this space, we're looking for something that would really work well with the community and with this neighborhood and really bring a successful new life to that building. And the, um, x2x really does have zoning protection not only for the neighborhood, but it also opens it up to something that is way too prescriptive as the current PD, which would seem to be as that tenant. So I'm in very much support of this and we I am supportive. This rezoning it does meet all of the criteria and it will be new life to the building. And, you know, things change. It was no longer a firehouse. It will no longer be the home of the Women's Swing Project. Those are all losses that we definitely agree. But we also see new opportunity and we feel that this is the best and most appropriate zoning. So please do support this. Thank you. Next up, we have Jesse Paris. So get even the members of council cannot be hurt. Uh huh. Go ahead, Jesse. Good evening, members of council. My name is Jesse Paris. I'm representing for Denver. Homeless out loud. Black Star Action. War for Self-defense. Positive Magic. Commercial Commitment for Social Change as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, Universal Healthcare, People's Organization and Mile High News. And I will be your next mayor in 2023. I wasn't either for or against this hearing the testimony. I'm leaning more against it because it doesn't seem to be supporting the integrity of the neighborhood of the east side, of which I am a resident or a native of not current resident. I reside in District eight at the studios. But. Me personally, I would have to be I'm against this hearing, the testimony from so-called people of color that reside in the neighborhood, that have lived in the neighborhood for generations. I supported what the band project is doing, but I think they should find another site for this because this is not honoring the culture or the integrity of the Five Points Curtis Park area neighborhood. So I would have to be against this tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Up next, we have Paul Davidson. Good evening. My name's Paul Davidson. I live at 3230 Arapahoe Street in Denver. I'm here to speak in support of the rezoning. And I just want to thank you all for hanging in there during a long session. I know the Women's Being project has waited a long time for this hearing. In addition to being a member of the Curtis Park Neighbors Board for the past four years and the neighborhood for the past 19 years, the corner of my property is exactly 24 steps from the corner of the Women's Project. So I hope to provide a unique perspective on both a personal and neighborhood y level. I'd like to highlight two points and then I'll turn it over to the next person. The first is that this application is consistent with all of the city and neighborhood plans, and it meets all the legal requirements for rezoning all of them . Our neighborhood has an urban context. It has numerous mixed use properties peppered throughout, and they're actually encouraged in our neighborhood plan. It is, of course, common practice and encouraged for properties with the old zoning to be moved to the new zoning. And then the second point I want to make is that Curtis Park neighbors, we did a ton of neighborhood outreach before our board is unanimous decision to support the rezoning last summer women's being reached out to our new president Jeff Baker and zoning committee chair Joel Noble requesting a recommendation from our R.A. on what would be the most appropriate zoning. And this is the first time in my time involved in the neighborhood that I can remember someone asking our opinion before applying. And it was sincerely appreciated. And it gave us time to do a significant outreach effort. We passed out over 100 fliers to homes within two blocks of the property. We highlighted the request, provided an F, a Q, provided pros and cons, and gave direct phone numbers and emails for feedback. We spoke to and received replies from about a dozen neighbors within a block of the property. All were in support that we spoke with of the rezoning provided that it had restrictions. And this current proposed zoning of two X is actually the most restrictive zoning available in the new zoning code. So it's it's pretty much guaranteed to fit with the neighborhood and to be and to be within the context of the residential area that surrounds it. So for the reasons above and especially the wide support of the neighbors in the neighborhood, I asked the members of the Council vote in support of this resolution, especially my representative. Councilwoman CdeBaca, thank you so much. Thank you. Jeff Baker is up next. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hello? Geoff Baker. I am current president of Curtis Park. Neighbors and I reside at 2422 Chalmers Street. Paul, you did an excellent job of explaining kind of the detail that we did there, and there have been some other comments and support. So I will not reiterate the neighborhood plans that it is consistent with the city plan that it's consistent with. What I will mention is that we really appreciated how women's being came to us prior. They gave us the option to select the zone. The reason that we were going to. And. With a significant amount of outreach. The way we view many of our situations like this, like liquor licenses, we go directly to that specific area and do direct outreach to people that's going to directly affect. Yes, we'll take into consideration the entire neighborhood, obviously, through general meetings and other community input and outreach, but we do do a focused and this was very focused. It was very explicit on all of the code and the options and the opportunities and being that this is the most restrictive option available. We will be entering into good neighbor agreements and that will be the that will be the mechanism to ensure that it fits into the neighborhood and that they act appropriately in a residential neighborhood. It is true that we have commercial in many corners and it has been like that since the beginning of time for this neighborhood. Number two. We did the flier outreach that Paul discussed, which was heavily detailed and went out to the immediate neighbors. And the main opposition this evening, I believe, is out of the neighborhood and never reached out to the rhino. I believe that was the second speaker. This evening does not live anywhere near the neighborhood, as far as I understand. And we never heard anything from that person in this opposition. So that outreach would have been nice coming this way. We will miss the Women's Game Project. We ask for your support in the Zone Council. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, we have Julie Robson. Well, maybe first we're going to go to Ryan Cox. We'll get Ryan and muted here in a second. I can hear me now. Mm hmm. Go ahead, Ryan. Okay. Hi there. I'm Ryan Cox. I live here in Curtis Park on the 29th in Curtis. So about three blocks from the women's been. I'm speaking tonight in support of the red zone request. Paul Keith and others have spoken to different aspects of the rezoning, but I wanted to comment on a couple of things specifically. I'm on the board of Curtis Park Neighbors as well, and women's being involved the neighborhood early in the process and was very interested in seeking zoning that most aligned with the wishes of neighbors and as Paul mentioned and did extensive outreach to the neighborhood, particularly to those that were closest to women's being, which informed the rezoning request . And although Curtis Park had been involved in the process from the beginning and saw it and provided feedback on the rezoning, our councilwoman chose to gather feedback via Facebook survey that may be presented as community input. And although our councilwoman has had no difficulty in posting town halls and other marketing materials directly to the neighborhood Facebook page , she chose not to share the survey to the neighborhood the right up there, and she used the survey provided background information that was frankly misleading and opinionated. The survey questions were then crafted in a way to produce responses that the draft chapters had desired, so the survey could be cited as having gathered community feedback. Women's being has been a great asset and a neighbor. And we truly hate to see them leaving the neighborhood, but preventing them from continuing, expanding their mission of serving more women by attempting to block a straightforward rezoning request is shortsighted and detrimental to not only women's being, but the women they serve and the city as a whole . I ask the city, approve the request. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Our last speaker is Brian Conley. Hello? Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead, Brian. Thank you. Good evening. Council president and members of council. My name is Brian Connolly. Several of you know me as a land use planner, an attorney with the firm of Art and Johnson. However, I am here this evening as a citizen and neighbor of women's being project, and I am fully in support of the rezoning request. I think that, as you all know, this request is guided by the criteria in your code. And I think Brandon did an excellent job of analyzing the application, and I certainly agree with his conclusion that it meets all of your criteria, and certainly it's consistent with the adopted plans of the city. I submitted an email outlining the remainder of my comments so I won't dwell on them. I will just note that several of the opponents of the rezoning have noted that they will lament the loss of women's being project. That being said, as many of you know, as a matter of land use laws, zoning can't dictate who owns a given piece of property. And in fact, in most cases, it can't even dictate the exact design of any building that gets constructed on a given property. However, here we have a unique situation in that the concerns about community character are really mitigated by the protected landmark status of this property. So thank you very much for your time and your service to our city and please vote in favor of the rezoning. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers questions from members of council. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I guess, Brandon, this would be for you. The. The building is a contributing structure in the Curtis Park historic district, but it's not individually designated as a landmark, correct? Actually it is a contributing in the district. Okay. But it could be designated. It is designated if. There were an application. Were there any discussions? And maybe Mr. O'Donnell could address this also? But but, Brandon, you would know for certain. Were there any discussions during the negotiations over or over this rezoning as to whether that would become a landmark structure at the end of the process? It is already a landmark structure. It is a contributing structure within the system. Okay. I guess maybe I misunderstood that it's individually also a designated correct. Ah, the next question is about our criteria. And I was reading the material that Mr. Grannis sent us and talked about here. And one of the criteria is consistency with adopted plans. And I've noticed in all of our rezonings we always pick out two or three goals and strategies with which this application is found by staff to be a consistent. But what occurs to me, as Mr. Grannis has pointed out, several goals and strategies that he finds the application to be inconsistent with. So I'm wondering how does CPD staff deal with an application where you might clearly and I'm not asking you to admit that this is the case here, you understand, but just generally so I can understand. An inconsistency and inconsistency. How does CPD staff handle it when you clearly can see that? Well, this application fits ten criteria in between comp plan and blueprint. But we can also see how it's inconsistent with seven. Does that go forward with recommendation for approval or does it? How do we handle that? Good question. So you'll see that in the presentations where you typically highlight a couple of policies and strategies that are applicable, there's usually more detail in the staff report. And then it is a little bit like you alluded to when we look at the number that it is applicable with and consistent with, we have those on balance with what other ones might not be. And for this application, we think that generally speaking, it is. Marcus's work, mostly consistent with the planners, more consistent and implemented, is not okay. So it is possible, in fact likely that you could recommend you in the plural, could recommend approval of an application that is consistent with a large number of strategies, but might not be consistent with others. In other words, we don't require that an application has to be consistent with every strategy. In fact, that might not even be a possibility, right? Yes, that's correct. And usually that comes up a lot when we have like a newer plan like blueprint and then we have a really old neighborhood plan that, you know, is completely different than the blueprint. So it's it's all about a balancing. And on balance, it's finding that the application does consistency criteria. Okay. Thank you, Madam President. That's all. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Flynn or I'm sorry, Councilman Cashman. Let me see. Councilman, I think you're muted. Not yet. What else? Oh, now we got. You got me. Now, huh? Go ahead. Okay. Yes. For someone from the Beam project. If someone can answer this. Mr. Grant has sent us a detailed, some detailed information. I was just very interested in looking at and seeing that since 2012, the overall sales seem to have declined from around a million to to about 700,000 in last year. And just want to understand that, since my understanding is the idea in selling is to get a larger facility that will have the ability to help more people generate more more bodies. Anyone can answer that. We had Tamara Ryan, who was representing the Women's Being project. Hopefully she still. President Gilmore, this bruising. I'm sure I'm around. And I'm still here. Yeah, that's right here. I'm still here. I was just in nether land, so I would be more than happy. And I've offered this a number of times to talk with anyone about, first of all, the difference between an operating budget and audited financials and also the intricacies of how a nonprofit financials are reported when you also have sales and how net sales are reported. And so all of those financials are are provided on our website. And but don't give you the color of things like we have grown in certain areas and we have also taken write offs for growth in grocery. And and what I will tell you is that it's not it is both about sales is about creating jobs and is about having enough space to employ enough women. So we have challenges with respect to purchasing materials are being supplier recently told us that our minimum order quantity now is doubled which means that 50 foot truck needs to come and offload £20,000 of beans to our site. We don't have space for that. And we are at the point where nearly every week we have some sort of a challenge relative to space that impacts both the business, the number of women we can employ and how we can deliver for our services. And that is that that's the whole story and really cannot be accurately reflected in financials on our website. Right. Well, but is it is it true that your your sales have decreased a bit further for the reasons you've just stated. For one year, 2019, they decreased in this past year, they increased 30%. So taking a snapshot of one year makes it difficult to look at what to surmise that there is a trend. And again, I'd be more than happy to sit with anyone and go into more detail. I, I guess. It's not really relevant to the criteria, so we don't need to spend too much time on it. Ms.. Ryan, I appreciate that answer, and we'll let you keep your energy for questions that are really related to your zone. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Councilman. Councilman Hines, you a president? That's actually what I was going to ask. Could be the business model is not related. That's not one of the criterias. And I mean, it's not even. Remotely. Any of the criteria is right. So we can't make any sort of judgment tonight based on the success or failure or lack of success of of any entity, including the women's project. Is that right? The party's analysis is strictly with legal criteria. Okay. And, well, we could. Well, I guess maybe. Looks like Mr. Griffin is still here. So from the city council attorneys perspective, I hear CBD saying that it's not within your legal criteria. It's not within our legal criteria either. Right. Is that is that just talking with the city council attorney? Yeah. Well, I think we've got Nate okay with us, so we'll let Nate weigh in. Come on down. Councilman Hines, what was the question again? I'm sorry. The question is that we're you know, we're obviously we're considering a rezoning at this point. And we have five legal criteria through which we should make our quality judicial decision. None of those criteria consider the success or failure of any business model, including, in this case, the Women's Bean Project. It's like we we must remain blind to whether the whether any entity has a good or bad business model. Is that is that correct? Yeah. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Thank you for repeating it. I was listening to your commentary and I agreed with it. And so when the question came up, I was like, was there a question there? But yes, thank. You, Councilman, that you're correct. Okay. Thank you. And this is of which I'm curious the the comment of the councilperson which district doesn't in. I believe it's. And we are we are in District nine. Okay. Well, I'd be curious to hear her comments. So. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to ask a question. I don't know if former Councilwoman Oprah Wedgeworth is still available. If you are ever. Would you mind? Coming back on for just a minute. I have a question of you. All right, we're going to. Can you ask her to raise her hand in the list of attendees? Do you see her still on? Mm. Okay. I don't. Maybe. Maybe, Brandon, you might be able to answer this or Nate. So when the city sold this property originally to the Women's Being project, I remember this being at a significantly discounted price. And I'm wanting to know if there were any reverted clauses in the sales price. I know. What is now our host office. It used to be dildo or OED before that routinely has reverted clauses in a number of their contracts when they sell property to different nonprofits. If they're. Operations, you know, go out of business or they're going to move or whatever that requires the property to revert back to the city . So I wanted to ask if that was looked into by your office or by the city attorney's office to to just confirm that you don't have that as an issue. And I believe we have Skye Stewart, who's available, too, to answer. Yep. Thank you very much. Sky Store Mayor's Office. I think there has been a little bit of a misconception about that. The city actually did not sell it for less than market value when the property was sold in 1995 for $185,000. The assessor's records for that year were an assessed value of 183,900. So the city actually made a little bit more than the assessed value on that. So it was not sold at a loss at all. And and because that was a market transaction, there was no revert or clause or any other conditions on the property. That's that's helpful clarification. And then I just wanted to ask Miss Ryan, there was a comment made by one of the speakers about and I know this is not part of the criteria, but, you know, it's part of the reason for the change is to create the opportunity to grow. But you're going to automate, which means you potentially would reduce the number of women. Is that is that accurate? And let me just do that first and then our last look. Sure. Thanks for that question that we had in our strategic plan. We talked about automation. And what we realized ultimately was that we were really headed more toward semi automation. And ultimately we have several stops along any production line that includes now filling machines and sealing machines that all have to be operated by individuals. And in fact, what we've learned in that is that not only do we need the same, if not more women based on volume, we actually are teaching skills that are much more relevant to the workplace when the women leave. There is no scenario in which a woman will graduate. Women's being project can go on to landfill, being to mixes. And so what we are teaching them is, is how to operate the equipment, how to troubleshoot with the computerized panels, how to clean the equipment, how to meet food safety standards that are more complex with with machinery . And so what the what we didn't even realize when we were talking about automating our processes is what great opportunity it would actually create for the women. And that really full automation is not going to be possible. That really it's much more a semi automation process. Okay. And part of the reason for looking to grow is or looking to make make this changes so that you can grow. And I'm assuming that means looking for a bigger building elsewhere, is that correct? Yes, that is correct, yes. Have you identified something else that's sort of contingent on this rezoning? And I don't know if you have an option contract on the if somebody has an auction contract on the property. But. Does that then? You know, afford the ability for you to stay in Denver or are you looking elsewhere? We absolutely always we're committed to staying in Denver. When we started this process, we did not have a new home. We now have identified a new location and on Alameda in Councilman Clark's district. And we will be we will be occupying this new location adjacent to Denver Housing Authority and some new housing that they will be building . Okay, great. All right. And I saw that. We have. This back on the line. But I don't know. Number one, if you heard my question, it sounded like that was answered. But I wanted to give you an opportunity to see if there was anything more that you wanted to add. No, I didn't hear your question. Can you repeat it, please? I was just double checking about whether or not there was a revert or clause in Skye. Stewart from the mayor's office clarified that the building was sold at market rate and therefore there were there were no provisions placed on the sale. Yeah, that's my understanding is. Okay. Great. I have no further questions. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman, and thank you to our speakers. The public hearing for Council Bill 20 dash 0161 is closed. Comments by members of Council. All right. I'm not seeing. Oh, here we go. My Internet said it was unstable for a second. We're back, Councilman Clark. Thank you, Madam President. You know, this is not in my district, although I was lady. But it was good to hear that women's region is looking to relocate into my district. It's a wonderful organization, which, of course, has nothing to do with our rezoning criteria. But I just didn't see the councilperson for this district. It must not be online anymore. And so I just wanted to make sure to say for the record that thank you to staff. I think that this has been demonstrated that it meets the legal criteria for rezoning, and I will be supporting it this evening before we voted . Thank you. Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. I just put my video down, so maybe my Internet's going to work a little bit better. Councilman Ortega. In Tibetan president. So at one point, a very, very long time ago, that used to be part of my council district, part of the Curtis Park neighborhood, used to be part of District nine. Back then, at times it was changed. It was not in the district. So I'm very familiar with the neighborhood and of the original sale of this property to the Women's Project. And they have been an amazing employer. I mean, they're the epitome of a a genuine social enterprise that is working with women coming out of our prison system that are gaining a skill set and as we heard, are gainfully employed as a result of coming through this program, which I think we need so much more of these kinds of projects that need to be tied to our shelter system and all of that that really helped people. Councilwoman So you and I have talked about the delay and see Street Project and how successful that model has been in San Francisco. And anyway, I digressing here, but this particular operation has has just been a magnet in this community for for so long since they purchased this property. And again, you know, they meet all the criteria. Glad to hear that they are staying and have found a place in Denver on a bus line that gives them the opportunity to grow and to provide even better skills with some of the automation and whatnot to the women that will be going through the program. And I'll be supporting this tonight. So I just wanted to chime in. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Seen no other comments by members of council? This proposal has has met all of the criteria and guidelines, and I'm happy to support this rezoning. Madam Secretary, roll call, please. CdeBaca. Clark. I. When I. Herndon. I had. Hi. Cashman. All right. Kenny Ortega. All right. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres, I. Black I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 12 Eyes. 12 eyes. Counsel Bill 161 has passed. Up next, we have a bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2755 Irving Street in Sloan's Lake. Councilmember Clark, would you please put Council Bill 546 on the floor for passage?

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending and restating in its entirety Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan (SEADIP) (PD-1), read and adopted as read. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_10022018_18-0855

We're going to hearing item number one. Please take a seat. Please take a seat. We're going to hearing at our number one. Thank you. All. I'm here for that. Yes. Hearing Item number one Report from Development Services Recommendation to receive supporting documentation of the record. Conclude the public hearing. Declare ordinance amending the Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan. Incorporating the modifications by the California Coastal Commission. Read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution to submit amendments to the Long Beach zoning regulations and supporting material to the California Coastal Commission for Approval and Certification District three. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to turn this over to the city manager. I thank you, Vice Mayor, council members. We have a report on this by our director of Development Services, Linda Tatum. Good afternoon, Vice Mayor, a members of the City Council. This item is a procedural matter. It is the return of an ordinance that the City Council adopted earlier this year to amend. The. Sea dip. Zoning and sea dip, which is SD one. It was designed to. Facilitate the low Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Project. That project was. Also approved by the. City Council. The city is required to. Submit a local coastal development. Program amendment to. The Coastal Commission. In order. To effectuate the ordinance changes. That is what this ordinance represents. The Coastal Commission heard the ordinance in August. They adopted the ordinance with the changes that Council is being asked to consider tonight. So that. Concludes. Staff's presentation, and I'm available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Find. And just a reminder, this item includes both the new ordinance, the revised ordinance and the resolution. Returning it back to the Coastal Commission for their final approval. Thank you. Mrs. Price, you have anything to say? I just asked my urge my colleagues to support this item. It's been through Coastal Commission. I want to thank Councilman Aranda for the work that he did on the Coastal Commission when this item came forth. And I ask for your support. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman, you have a. As noted by staff, it's a procedural effort here that we're doing, and it's basically affirming what the commission has already done and we'll continue from there. Thank you. The only public comment on this item. Please state your name. Very good. You work as it is. I support this with this one caveat. And I'm not quite sure, but I want to make sure that this has nothing to do, nothing to do, nothing to do whatsoever with the pending plan to redo the breakwater. I just because I've received communications back and forth and I quite frankly, wasn't sure. Okay. So this has nothing to do with the break of the breakwater. I fully support this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Goodwin. Next public comment. Good evening. And Cantrell. And I'm representing citizens about responsible planning and the protect the Law Cerritos Wetlands. In September 2017, this council approved a new zoning plan for the southeast area. It's known as Southeast Area Specific Plan or C CIP. The city spent over $100,000 on a consulting firm, plus hours of citizens time in preparing this plan. However, instead of using this revised plan for the proposed new oil drilling project within the zoning area, the old outdated sea dip plan was used for the air and coastal. Commission applications. This has required a number of changes to CDEP to allow for different land uses in four parcels, including oil drilling in places where it was not allowed previously. We are confused by these changes to sea dip, since Sea Dip will now be updated by tonight's changes. Does that mean that C CIP will not be sent to the Coastal Commission for approval? If C sip is to replace c dip with all of these changes you're making tonight, be automatically transferred to c sip or we'll see cip also have to be amended to allow the oil drilling. Especially troubling is item M on page 28, which discuss an extension of Studebaker Road. The extension of Studebaker Road was removed from c cip. And must be removed from sea dip on August 18th. The Coastal Commission approved oil drilling on the most storied US Wetlands Authority, five acres and pumpkin patch with many requirements. What you will find listed in your staff report. It wasn't read to you tonight in the in this report. Although Coastal. Commission staff has worked very hard to attempt to modify and mitigate the potential. Harm. Which might be done by new oil drilling in an environmentally sensitive area. We find that most of these modifications are inadequate. There is an argument as to whether the five acres in the pumpkin patch are esher but there is no argument that the lost Cerritos Wetlands, the San Gabriel River, Alamitos Bay and the Pacific Ocean could be . You know, your time is up. By an oil. Spill. Thank you. Corliss Lee, of course. Thank you very much. Next, the next speaker. I see. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Carelessly. And my address is on file. I am also a member of carp, continuing on monitoring sensors and shut off valves will have little use in a large earthquake. Your yes vote tonight is saying that you are willing to add the following 15 modifications to sea dip in order to allow oil drilling. Please consider carefully what you are voting for. Here are just a few. Modification five environmentally sensitive habitat areas as defined in the Coastal Act shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values and only users dependent on those resources shall be allowed with these areas. And the carp comment on that is, I repeat, that oil drilling will be disrupting the habitat areas. The pumpkin patch contains wetland, obligate plant and animal species, which will be permanently destroyed by both drilling and industrial uses. Modification seven. All development that would be adversely impact archeological or paleontology or logical resources shall include reasonable mitigation measures. And the question is what are these measures and reasonable to whom the local Native Americans do not find digging in, drilling on or degrading their sacred lands as reasonable? Modification eight The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas shall be considered and protected. And here's the carp comment. Most people do not consider a 160 foot drilling rigs and 18 foot block walls as scenic or visual qualities. Modification nine All development shall minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic flood and fire hazard. And the carp comment is both. Both of these proposed drilling areas are near the Newport-Inglewood fault area in a tsunami and flood zone. The best way to minimize risks to life and property in these areas is to not allow oil drilling. Modification ten All development shall assure stability and structural integrity and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability or destruction of the site or surrounding area. And the carp comment is it will be impossible to drill hundreds of feet down next to an earthquake fault, extract oil and then force water back into the void and guarantee geologic stability. So there's several more on here, and I don't think I can get through them in the next 15 seconds. But you might want to look intensely at this report and realize what you're signing up for. This isn't something to take lightly, and you don't want to commit to something you can't do. So thank. You. Thank you very much. Speaker. And Christensen protect the Long Beach Low Cerritos wetlands. It said in the agenda item that you've read all the enclosed materials, but I'm just going to highlight some of our statement from Protect the Long Beach Low Cerritos Wetlands. And it really has a lot to do with environmental racism. So we would hope that people could find a moment to listen. The city's stated intent is to amend Sea Sick to comply with a new oil drilling project that that you guys already approved over the objections of many tribal members. Given the fact that oil production facilities proposed for both the site, the new sites were completely altered the surface areas and allow for toxic chemicals to be used and stored on these sites. Given the fact that oil drilling operations would extend for miles under the low cerritos wetlands and include the instruct extraction in re injection of millions of gallons of water. Given the fact that the construction of massive storage tanks, pipelines, methane burn off towers will disrupt damage and destroy wildlife and habitat. Given the fact that the operation of these on any new or other new oil accessories will extend the life and massively increase the volume of fossil fuel extraction from the Sea City area, pollute air and water and involve spills, possibly on a scale that cannot be contained. Given the fact that fossil fuels contribute to global warming and sea rise, one must conclude that all of the above are to be sacrificed in order to promote new oil drilling operations in the coastal zone and in and adjacent to the low cerritos wetlands over and adjacent to the Newport-Inglewood fault in an area subject to liquefaction. And in an urban area because Caesar proposes housing 4000 new residents. Actually, it's apartments, I think, more or more along the edge of the low cerritos wetlands. Place is central to the identity and continued existence of tribal peoples. The history, the health, the future of tribal peoples is rooted in the connection to specific lands and waters. The connection is one of stewardship, not exploitation or extraction of resources. To remove is to disconnect the people from the land, to remove the evidence and erase the tribal history of the land, and to devalue the meaning it has to present and future generations. Directly to Coastal Commission staff member Kate Hucker Bridge Chief Anthony Ramos. You honored a couple of chiefs tonight. Here's another one. Chief Anthony Morales. Gabriel Nino. Tonga. San Gabriel. Band of Mission Indians voiced his tribe's opposition, his tribal council's opposition to the proposed amendments to the LCP, which is what you're voting for tonight. Chief Morales raised concerns that proposed oil and gas production activities would adversely impact sacred sites and anti ancestral mean. He called them genocide. Fine. Thank you for telling me that. Uh, good evening, Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Michael Assad, on which the beautiful mineral sport bump. I'll keep it brief. I just wanted to say thank you to the city staff for their diligent work and coordinating with Coastal Commission staff to get this LCP approved at the Coastal Commission and under a year. That's truly remarkable. So we say thank you. I also wanted to say thank you to all the public support we got here at city council hearings at the Coastal Commission, especially by the CWA, the nation, the coast, Reno's Wetlands, Land Trust and the El Dorado Audubon Society. Um, so I wanted to thank all of them as well, and we urge you to support the staff recommendation and the Coastal Commission's actions on this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there any more public comment on this item? If not, please take a vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Now we'll go to a hearing. Number three.

A MOTION requesting that the executive develop a regional operational plan for extreme weather centers and disaster sheltering, with a special focus on the most-vulnerable King County residents.

KingCountyCC_07202022_2022-0197

That, of course, is just fine. Okay. Our next item on our agenda is the motion sponsored by Councilmember Sali Reck, requesting that the executive develop an operational plan for sheltering the most vulnerable King County residents in the event of extreme cold heat or wildlife smoke, which is going on right now in central Washington. We were briefed on the proposed motion at our last meeting, and as I understand, we have a proposed striking amendment today. We will hear from council members July, but we have, I believe, Jennie Giambattista with our central staff to provide a short briefing on this item since we had one earlier. And also on the striking amendment, we also have Mina Hashimi, Brenda McClusky and Caroline Whalen here from the executive branch to answer any questions if they come up and four members. Just a reminder, we are going until noon today. We started half an hour early and I expect we will be able to finish all items. Okay, Jennie, please go ahead. Thank you. Councilmember Cole Wells. Good morning. Members of the committee, Jennie. John but Keith, the council staff. I will be discussing the proposed motion 2020 20197, which does begin on page 25 of your packet as a recap of the discussion on July six in CAO. The proposed motion requested the executive develop an operational plan for sheltering the most vulnerable residents in the event of extreme cold heat or wildfire smoke. I've updated the staff report to respond to questions from the last meeting. The updates are in blue. On page 27, you can see an update from executive staff. They provided more information on the current status and their planning efforts. On page 28, the third of the packet, there's additional information on fatalities and EMS calls from the heat dome. And on page 35 of the packet, executive staff note that they will need to assess the budget availability for the work, but they anticipate needing at least one dedicated resource to manage the work. If there are no questions on the underlying motion, I can now go over council members striking an amendment which was developed with executive staff . Thank you, Jennie. Just one moment. Does anybody have any questions on what Jennie has briefed us thus far? I hope you all had the opportunity to to read over the additions to the staff report that reflected the executive branch's comments from the last meeting. Okay. And before you start, Jenny, going over the amendment. Councilmembers, I do you have anything you want to say at this point is wait till after Jenny's through. After Jenny, please. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Jenny. Go right ahead. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember. The striking amendment is on page 43 of the packet. I have also included a version showing changes and that's on page 53 of the packet. There's also a title amendment as well. So starting with the striking amendment on page 43, I'll walk through some of the substantive changes. The most substantive change is the body of work is expanded to include planning for disaster shelters, not just extreme weather shelters. Executive staff requested this change because they noted that if they were bringing together all the stakeholders to do this planning work, it made sense to discuss emergency sheltering overall, given that they would be talking about sheltering for particular types of emergency. The next substantive change is the striker removes the date by which the executive shall begin to offer expanded sheltering. The next change is the requirement for the executive to conduct community outreach in low income communities and unhoused communities in unincorporated King County, to gather information on the location and features that would result in the highest shelter utilization. It's changed, and it's changed such that the outreach to unhoused communities is removed, and instead such outreach is encouraged by the Regional Homelessness Authority. Additionally, the request that such outreach also seek to identify other community needs in responding to extreme weather shelters is also removed. The striker adds language to clarify and provide details on the information requested for those King County facilities that are currently serving as disaster and extreme weather shelters and those that could do so with improvements. There is also language added to clarify and provide details on the requested information for non county owned facilities. And the information on whether long term care assistance facilities and family care homes have air conditioning is now requested only if it is available from the State Department of Social and Health Services. The request for a plan to offer hotel vouchers that was part of the motion as well as introduced is changed so that it's now a request to consider with the Regional Homelessness Authority and City Partners the use of vouchers for accommodations, or they use activities for the most vulnerable residents. And the due date for the operational plan is changed from February 28th, 2023 to June 30th, 2024. Councilmember. I would also note that there's a title amendment so that the title conforms to the strike. So those are the major changes in the strike, or I'm happy to answer questions and as you indicated. Councilmember Cole. Well, we also have executive staff here as well. Thank you, Jenny, for your outstanding staff report, as always. And we do have a question from Councilmember Bell. Did she. Sorry. That was an error. I apologize. I'm good. Okay. No question. Are there any questions? Council member Perry. Thank you, Chair Coles. I appreciate that. I am wondering, you know, that originally or in our last discussion about this, I had mentioned language specific to providing equipment heating, cooling and air filtering equipment. So the language is outreach. Efforts should also seek to identify other community needs in responding to extreme weather events. And after. The whole. I'm just wondering if there's a place in this to call those specific things out, because part of the issue is people not a big part of the issue with the deaths was people not having access to air conditioning, cooling, heating and air filter filtration areas that are not able to move to different spaces. So so people can locate and if they're living outside, that hasn't has a specific focus in in making sure that folks get to appropriate shelter if they're living inside and they don't have heating, cooling or air filtration systems as senior citizens, as of folks living with disabilities, different kinds of experiences who could benefit greatly from those those specific kinds of equipment. I'm just wondering if it can be called out more specifically or if there's just if we're wanting to keep it that open and that that that made. Councilmember Perry, if I may, just clarify the language specifically requesting information on other needs that language is and struck. So okay. So and so with that clarification, I will turn I think it would be appropriate to ask the executive staff what their plans are in addition to conducting outreach on the location and features that would result in the higher shelter utilization. That to ask the executive staff what additional. Information they're going to be querying on in terms of the needs of the community? Well, exactly the question I would like to ask then. There we are. That is a good. Okay. So we do have Caroline Whalen from a director of the Department of the Executive Services and then we also have OPM director Brendan McCluskey available as well. Sharon Wells If you if you would. I don't know how you would like to address that, but I would that would be great. I Council Member Perry. I will leave some room here right now if either Director McCluskey or Director Whalen would like to respond. I would like to remind people we are in a tight time frame, so I appreciate having any questions or remarks being made as brief as possible. So anybody from our executive staff would like to respond. Thank you. Chair Caldwell. So I will just say briefly that we are interested in doing a needs assessment as we do outreach. We are expecting to get a report from the City of Seattle of some outreach work that they did. My understanding is one of the findings is that people will say, yes, they want government to supply. Cooling centers are warm, wet, you know, heating centers, but they want it for other people. They really want to stay where they are. And I really understand, Councilmember Perry, what you're saying is some people can't move. And so what is it that they need? So we will be doing a needs assessment. And doing our best to accommodate, you know, our residents and visitors. And I don't know, Brendan, if you want to add to that, if that would be okay with the chair. Okay. Go right ahead. Yeah. Thanks. I don't know that I have much to add to that. I think that, you know, we want to take a very comprehensive and complete approach to this so that we want to look at every potential option that's out there. Thank you. Thank you. And I'd again like to say, as I did at our last meeting, there are many long term health care facilities and resident facilities that do not have air conditioning. My mother and rather a friend of mine was in one of those before she died, no air conditioning and it was really, really challenging. So I'm hopeful that this issue will also be addressed. Okay. Are there any other questions? K Council member C Yeah, council members. SA Hello, would you like to make a motion? So move chair Caldwell's. Okay. We have a motion for proposed motion 2020 20197 before us. We do have a striking amendment which has been explained. Would you like to move that? Council members. Hello. So move. Check. Okay. Thank you. And would you like to speak to that council members? Thank you. Absolutely. I think making good policy as council members requires that we work collaboratively with the executive branch. They're the ones who will implement our legislation, and they are also subject matter experts, whereas I'm not. So I fully support the striking amendment and making it more implementable and in the spirit of collaboration. I want to thank Director McClusky, Director Whalen, Rena Hashemi, Karen Gill, King County Regional Homelessness Authority, who have been super responsive and collaborative, like I said before. So I, I encourage your support on this striking amendment. Thank you. Council Member And does anybody else have anything to say on this or have a question? Okay. Councilmember Dombroski. I just want to take a moment to thank Councilmember Xilai for this thoughtful and forward looking piece of legislation that's going to, I think, become increasingly necessary as our climate extremes present themselves. And it's a longer term project, maybe with some shorter term deliverables, but it's really good and thoughtful work, and I wanted to commend him publicly for it. Thank you, Councilmember. Thank you. Councilmember building to. Thank you this time was intentional. I also want to say I think in looking through the staff report and listening to discussion, this fits well in with, I think, a multi-tiered plan because we have to work in the short term and the long term. The executive's study appears to look at ways to mitigate heat, which is a very big and long term project. And councilmembers are always not in talks about sheltering people when because we are going to have extreme heat events. And I just really wanted to point out that this morning Craig is already in process of activating their response tier network approach to the projected coming here. That looks like we're going to get up into the nineties next week. And so we have we have. Work going on at. All scales. And then now in the short term, in the long term and just for those anyone who might be watching what the message this morning said is that the Tier one response will make funding for cooling supplies available to homeless service providers up to $2,000. And if if you are someone who provides emergency shelter, day center or outreach, you should reach out to KCR today because the this this money's available now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. That's very helpful information, especially given that from what I've heard, the Puget Sound area here has the least amount of air conditioners of any major equivalent American city and and metropolitan areas. So we're going to be expecting we'll have some hard times next week, everybody, but we worry particularly about our most vulnerable and as citizens, residents. Okay. Are there any other comments? Okay. All in favor of striking amendment one. Please say I. I hear any polls say now, Kate, the amendment has been adopted. We now have title amendment one, and that is to correspond with the changes made in striking Amendment one. Any questions? All in favor of title. Oh, we have to have a motion to move it. Kind of move. Thank you. Councilmembers. Hello. All in favor of title amendment one. Please say I, I. Any no's? Please say no. Okay. With that, we have a title. Amendment one has been adopted and we now move on for a proposed motion. 2020 20197 as amended. I would like to just say that I as well I'm very appreciative of Councilman Rizal I bringing. Forward. It's, I believe, really improving what the executive had already been working on and brings a lot more public awareness to it when we have this. So Councilor Basile, I do have any final comments. In addition to the people I already thanked, I want to thank our legislative branch teammates Jenny, Jim Batista, Jake Tracy, Rosa Mai for all their great work on bringing this vision into a reality. Thank you, everyone. Okay. And I should have asked if anybody else had any comments. Okay with that. Would the clerk please call the roll? Thank you. Chair calls. Councilmember Belushi. Hi. Councilmember Dombrowski. Councilmember done. I. Councilmember McDermott. Hi. Councilmember Perry. I. Councilmember up the grove i. Councilmember Yvonne Reich Bauer. Councilmember Zala. I chair Caldwell's I. Turco. Well, as the vote is eight eyes zero nose with Councilmember Yvonne Reich Bauer excused. Kay thank you. With our vote we've approved proposed motion 2020 20197 as amended, and we will place this item on consent unless there's concern on that and we will send it with the do pass recommendation for the consent agenda to the August 16th Council meeting. Unfortunately, King County TV is having some technical issues, so we will take a brief recess. For how long do you expect? 5 minutes. So we will be on a five minute recess. Thank you. Okay. It appears we are ready to go. So I will call the meeting. The results over concluded and we will be back in our meeting. Now the next item on our agenda is the first of two panel briefings we are having today on the topic of preventing gun violence.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Sixth Amendatory Agreement between the City and County of Denver and State of Colorado Judicial Department, to pay for personnel to provide a school based gang prevention program. Amends an agreement with the Colorado State Judicial Department by adding $75,807.82 for a new total of $999,637.73 and six months for a new end date of 6-30-20 to continue the work of the Gang Reduction Initiative of Denver (GRID) program, citywide (SAFTY-201100301; SAFTY-201952991). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 6-29-20. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-3-20.

DenverCityCouncil_06152020_20-0508

Thank you, Councilmember. All right, that concludes the comments on this item. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and that will be Bill 508. Councilmember CdeBaca, go ahead with your questions on. You're right. Thank you, Mr. President. This one is up for first reading. But I do have a question. I have a few questions to list for you to take back. But my main question here is the dates. So we're adding $75,807 and six months for a new end date of 630, 2020. Can you explain the the contract change and the date and what exactly this is funding? Yeah. Thank you for your question. Good evening. Council Members Michael Sapp, Department of Safety. That dollar amount is reflected for the first six months of this year because of COVID and uncertainties with how the IPS will be operating during COVID. We're going to cut that contract short. And so that 75,000 is reflective of half of that contract. And so what is the half fund? So the half is for two FTE positions with our Colorado State Judicial Department. Two positions. One is for our great program and the second is for our state judicial gun probation. So there are two FTE for probation officers that do work in our schools. Our great program to date has served over 9000 students and our successful rates of kids who enter into the school and maybe they're possessing a gun. The success rates for Denver County are around 57% approval rate compared to about 46% across the state. So we see a lot of success. Hang on. Hold on. Walk me through that again. Yeah. Metric for success. Yeah. So great question. So we are pulling out my notes. So the state of Colorado, we have the juvenile intensive supervision program. And for Denver, for individuals, young people who have handgun cases, the success rate for our individuals was 57%. For those outside or statewide, the success rate was 43%. But what is the success like? What is. Yes, yes, yeah, great question. So when we do our intervention services, it's it's basically administered to Sean Combs, who's our chief probation officer. And it's several different tactics that they use. It's one is supervision, and then they do prevention and they do suppression work. And it's in tandem with our grant network and our grant network. They provide family counseling. They also provide partnerships with community organizations to help with food. And so they walk or they track a young person making sure that they're in class, they're completing their class, that they're in home at a certain period of time, and that they're completing all of the necessary requirements from the state. So is this funding the gun pilot that we had been discussing and safety? No, that's a separate request. And that's a that was the handgun that was a program out of Mobile, Alabama, that our state our state partners were pursuing. But that that's not a part of this. And I forget what that's called. It was the hip program, handgun intervention program. So this gun probation officer is a Denver thing. Is this something that we've always had or what makes this gun prevention or what makes this probation officer different than all the rest of them? Yeah, this program has been in effect since 2011. And what's different about our program is that we we are and this is what the Grant Network is really in partnership with community partners. So for folks who are unfamiliar with Grant, it's, it's, it's a program that's, that's based on three, three tools, prevention, intervention and suppression. And we have grid networks struggle them on below. We have the Dream Center that serves Southwest Denver. And then we have impact empowerment. That's in Councilman Herndon's district. And these three providers, they work with our probation officer, probation chief probation officer Sean Cone. And so once an individual or young person is has been identified as being either gang involved or has some gun case, they they work in partnership to identify what the needs are. Because understanding that and it's a great question with the struggles and not being in schools anymore. And while we're advocating for new safety programs and grit to take a more elevated role in our schools is because we are actually looking at the whole system or looking at the whole the whole person, rather. And so that's what makes it unique is that it's in partnership with the community and we do wraparound services with the entire family. So this is just on first reading, but some of the questions that I'm looking for answers for is a specific breakdown on how the dollars are going to be used. Can you give us some numbers about success and metrics and a fully, fully formed definition of success and where we can get information publicly? Because on the Denver Gov website, there are some drop downs, but there's no downloadable data about the impact of this program since 2011. And as we move officers out of schools, I think it's important for us to be very conscious of how the city uses officers with young people, and this is one of those contracts that does deals directly with our young people. So I want us to scrutinize this one a little bit more heavily than we have in the past. Yeah, these are probation officers. They're more like. Officers. But yeah, I got two or three questions. Let me just repeat them. Breakdown at dollars, breakdown of what success looks like. And then just from a transparency perspective, where can you find this effort or these programs happy to provide us. And the explanation on how we're operating in a time of COVID without the access to the schools that the great program relies on? Yeah. So these contracts come to an end on 630 this this month. And so we were considering bringing or separating these two contracts after July 1st and doing an RFP process, given that we've been operating these contracts since 2011 of actually doing a competitive bidding process and looking at other community partners that could come in and do the work in partnership with the state. And so that was the goal to separate the great contract and the gun court probation manager, and we were planning on doing that after July 1st. So I think your question. As long as we get a breakdown of where $75,000 is going within two weeks, that would be helpful. We have that information. Thank you. Yeah, there are a couple other in the queue, so you might stay there. Councilmember Gilmore. Thank you. President Clark. Michael, following Councilwoman say to Bucky's questions and follow up, you said that this would cover two FTE positions. So is the 75,087 specifically to cover those two full time positions. So so when you mentioned Struggle of Love or other community organizations, none of the 75,087 and $0.82 is going to struggle, love or community organizations? That's correct. There. Those three providers are paid out of our professional services and that's around $600,000 for struggle of impact, empowerment and the Dream Center. Okay. And then so this is going to go towards paying for two FTE positions. And are the probation officers if if we weren't in a COVID situation, are those individuals actually in the physical school building? Yes, they they are. And they work with the they work with the principal to make sure that there is supervision inside the school and outside the school. Is there a reason that that happens during the school day? Wouldn't it make more sense for the student to be in class? Yeah, so great question. So typically what they do is they'll meet with the principal beforehand and they'll they'll recommend time like gym or lunch will they'll do a check in, but that it just depends on the case and the severity of the incident. And if a young person has a gun or is seriously involved in a crime, then that would potentially require some level of supervision inside of the school. So as a follow up, I would like a little bit more information about exactly how these two FTE positions interface with both Denver public school students and the school personnel. And, you know, when we're talking about community organizations, this is almost $1,000,000. If the 75,000 is added in and to councilwoman say to Baca's earlier question about the 2.5 million that was possibly going to Eckerd, that adds up to almost $3.5 million, both through workforce and through this agreement with the Colorado State Judicial Department. And those are dollars that we would like to now keep in specifically black communities and figure out how we work that and how we expedite that and saying that people might not have the. Capacity to do that. As small organizations. I think there's a lot of support in the community to make sure that organizations can build that capacity as we begin to phase out old systems and asking new questions about that. And so I'd really like to get a little bit more information because as much work as the GRID program does in our community , since I was elected in 2015, I have attended seven vigils in the Montebello and our community specifically. And so I don't know how well this is working. It's clearly not working for some of our families and students. And I just want to make sure that we're evaluating it fully and that you're providing all that information to counsel so that we can ask good questions. And appreciate that. And I appreciate the honest assessment. Great. Thank you. Thank you, President. Clerk. Thank Councilmember Councilmember. Thank you. Great questions from my colleagues. I was just looking up because I wanted to refresh myself. We had a great presentation on the full program back on 531 2018, and so I just found the presentation in Granicus. So, you know, it's helpful as I'm looking at it, some of my questions were asked about dollars that are going to community groups from other budget items. So I know that councilwoman back box request was for how this 75,000 is being spent, but it's helpful actually to see the whole picture since this is just one grant. Yep. It sounds like we also might need the exact language on what these funds are eligible for and what the rules are under the state. To Councilwoman Gilmore's question, it sounds like this money's already spent. Truthfully, this contract is the work is already ending. So I think this is more about looking to the future than, yeah, you know, this is going to be done. But the other question I had was, you know, in terms of other prevention efforts, you know, grasp or other community based organizations, I believe we are funding as well. If you have a quick answer on that tonight, that's great. But if you're not adding that in, well, even both, if you have a quick answer, but then adding that information to what you provide to us, because it's hard to look at one piece of the picture and understand what we're doing. So I'd like to see kind of that whole picture. And again, this PowerPoint from, you know, it's now a little outdated, but it does have kind of that whole picture in it. But maybe something's changed since then. So we are we still funding grasp from the city and if so, from what budget is that being funded? Yeah, we are funding grass through the Department of Public Health and Environment Excellence. So we're doing some of our gaming. So and I just can I ask a naive question, is the difference that this particular program we're here to talk about tonight is for youth who are already justice involved. Okay. So this is more about preventing the occurrence reoccurrence. And then we have other funding streams that are about prevention, for lack of a better word, further upstream before someone's just started. That is correct. This is more on the intervention side. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. Thank you. Councilmember Councilmember Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Wyatt speaking to take Councilmember. Can you just wonderful words yet again to ask a naive question, why are we paying more to exit sooner? It's just because we got to fill. We're if we're we're filling the fault but half of the half of the half of the year so is from is from start date of January to June 30th. So what was this? Was this for a full year? This is for half the year. But the but we're so we're changing the end date to six 3020. What was the original end date? The original. End date was scheduled for December. And we're we're amending that to cut it short on the 30th of this month. So the so the original total was for December for $999,000. No, no, no, no. That's okay. I know that that dollar amount is reflective of the full contract since 2011. Okay. Thank you. That that that answers my question. Thank you for and and indulging me. The other question I have is you this is ending this contract but you also mentioned our of PS and whatnot. Denver public schools just unanimously voted to exit. Sorrows out of our schools. What have. I'm assuming you're in consultation with TPS. And if so, what are their thoughts about any sort of future program that are along these lines? Well, school board members T Anderson and Jennifer Bacon, they passed that resolution on last Thursday. And they've tasked Superintendent Suzanne Cordova with putting together a strategy to have before the board in August. And what we've communicated to the Board of Education to Superintendent Suzanne Cordova, is that we want to be a partner. We have Denver youth safety programs that is in schools today or currently they do pre-arrest diversion programs. They're there at North High School, they're at West Campus. And that these are programs that are designed to in that school to gyp school to prison pipeline. And so if we're going to remove SRO as out, then could we look at these type of restorative justice practices inside of our schools with community partners because you safety programs, they have community partners that they do work with as well. And so can we have these conversations? And the answer to that question is yes. And so we're going to start we're a part of that stakeholder gathering process that Suzanne Cordova is going to be working with to kind of provide some expertize and also to begin to look at what's the future of of our relationship. I think it could be a great one. I think I stand and supportive of argue safety programs office. The work that they did at North High School and West Campus were phenomenal. I was I did the version when I was at my Bell High School. I know Councilwoman CdeBaca did the version as well. And we both landed in really good positions. So I believe in that program, and I think that that can help replace that SRO role that historically was in school. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilmember. All right. See no other questions or comments on this one. We're going to move on. And that was our last one. So that concludes the item to be called out this evening. Our bills for introduction are ordered published and council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification of 2500 East 44th Avenue, 4348 Columbine Street, 4301 & 4349 Elizabeth Street in the Elyria Swansea neighborhood. Rezones property located at 2500 East 44th Avenue, 4348 Columbine Street, 4301 and 4349 Elizabeth Street from E-TU-B to PUD-G 18 (urban edge to planned development) in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-19-18.

DenverCityCouncil_08132018_18-0617

I. Madam Secretary, please close voting and announce results. 12 Eyes. 12 Eyes Council Bill 797 has passed. Councilwoman Sussman, will you please vote? Council Bill 617 on the floor. Yes, I move that council bills 617 be placed upon final consideration and do. Pass has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for council will 617 is open. May we have the staff report? Technology kept catching up. My computer does that to. To push through it. So Jeff Hurt, with your planning a development here to present a rezoning for a property in the area Swansea. And this is a Denver housing authority owned property working with Habitat for Humanity to to build 16 duplex units. So we'll be talking a little bit about the project. Actually, the applicant is here to, uh, to fill in some of the details. So this is a rezoning request in Council District nine, as I said, in the Elyria, Swansea neighborhood. And so the request area is one city block. It's about 1.3 acres, and the rezoning requests is to go from E2 B So that's urban edge to unit, and the B stands for the minimum lot size, which is 4500 square feet, and they requesting to go to a PD. And so the PD it's Pdg 18. The G just means that the general PD and the 18 means it's our 18th beauty. So there's not much to the acronym there actually. And the purpose of the rezoning is to accommodate a redevelopment for residential units in the Elyria, Swansea neighborhood. And this is the site plan that the applicant handed out at Ludy. And it's a it's a an evolving site plan, but it does their plan is to build 16 duplex units for a total of 32 units in this neighborhood and for them to be alley loaded. So the existing zoning, as I said, is to be the surrounding properties north of 43rd are also YouTube. And then you look south and west closer to the tracks, and it gets more into the industrial zoning that reflects the character of that area. In terms of existing land uses, there's a mix again. So looking north of 43rd, there's a mix of different types of residential units, single unit two, unit multifamily and then south of 43rd to get more into the industrial land uses. And so on to some images of the subject site. As I said, it's one city block and this block has been vacant for really its entire history. There are two small structures there that were historically there. This area was platted in the 1890s. Those structures were demolished in the early 1990. So it sat like this for quite some time. And so looking at the images of the subject property. And then looking at the surrounding property, you see the single family. Some of the original single family structures, again, 1890s era. There's been a fair amount of some redevelopment of these houses, but it's generally maintained this character. And then this is an image looking south. So across 43rd, looking toward the both the freight rail and the commuter rail tracks and you get more into the industrial one story, uh, character of that area. So I'm going to talk a little bit about what you, what parties are, the purpose of them, why they're used. And then I'm going to get into the specific request of what their the applicant is actually asking for in speed. Speed is the city used to use them a lot more, but we've been a little bit more uh, we've used them lesson in recent years. The purpose of the party in the, in the zoning code at least, is to provide an alternative set of regulations on really challenging sites that have the term uses in unique and extraordinary circumstances. So in order to accommodate the proposed development, you would need a lot of waivers, conditions, variances, things like that. So the proposal and the reason for the PD request. So in these cases, staff works with the applicant to work through kind of all the zoning options to figure out if there's a base standard zone district that would work for their needs. In this case, it really came down to the width, the subject block, which is about half the width of the surrounding blocks. And it is, in staff's opinion, a unique and extraordinary circumstance to have a block that's this narrow and also to accommodate any type of development that's sort of consistent with the surrounding built environment in terms of two rows of of alley loaded of development. And so when you look at the current zoning ETB, there's a number of constraints. So the minimum lot size and in particular the setbacks, the front and rear setbacks, when you factor all these metrics together, it creates a really, really small buildable footprint. If you did one do alley access development and so that that steered us toward the parade route. So I'm going to talk a little bit about what is actually in the PD. So the way that we do Pwds is essentially we start with the base zone district that makes the most sense. And the PD itself sort of lists all the variations from that based on district. And so if you wanted to actually look at the PD itself, which would become the sort of the controlling zone district for the site that is in your packet in the actual application. But I'm just going to go through at a high level what those variations are, and they're all related to the building form and placement. There's no changes proposed to land uses or parking or anything like that. I think that's important to note. So would maintain the the two unit and single unit allowed uses. So the variations at a high level, again, we could get happy to go in more detail on this, but at a high level, the variations are to address the narrow block and to accommodate two rows of alley loaded development. So the first big variation is to. Remove. A there's so there's a split in the zone district in the in the YouTube zone district where the front 65% of the lot has a two and a half storey allowable height in the rear. 35% has a one story allowable height. So and then the bulk plan is calibrated by that front and we are split. Two staff does not believe that that split makes sense on this block because it's so narrow and these lots would be roughly about 60 feet deep. So and it's also sort of creating its own context within one block. So there's some variations related to the building height and the number of stories and the book plane as it relates to that front rear split. And again, I'm happy to get into those details. Another variation is the reduced minimum size. So that was a big issue with the current zoning, with a 4500 square foot minimum lot area that's actually out of character with the surrounding properties and how was originally plotted. The original slide had lots very anywhere from like 1600 square feet to something like 3800 square feet. So 2100 falls within the range that works for the applicant and and it's consistent with the surrounding context. So that is in there as well. And then the remaining changes relate to the setbacks. So reduced front, rear and side setbacks. And those are those are largely consistent with the surrounding development pattern, which has a lot of nonconforming non-compliant structures that were built well before zoning was in place. And then lastly and a really important one, the UTB Zone district does not actually mandate alleys and alley access. You could technically do or theoretically do vehicular access off the street, which is inconsistent with the surrounding development pattern. So one of the changes in the PD is to mandate vehicle access by alley only, and pedestrian access certainly could come from the street, but we're talking about vehicular access. So process wise followed our normal process. Planning and ordered planning board did unanimously recommend approval with a condition that was more of a correction or clarification. I'm happy to talk about that condition. And then that brought us to tonight. So there are a number of Arnault's restaurant and neighborhood organizations for this area. All were notified and we did receive one public comment in support of the request and in support of specifically residential development and going to a PD from the Elyria, Swansea, Globeville Business Association. That's in your packet as well. And so I have a number of different criteria to go through and I'll I'll try to get through them concisely. But we've got our standard review criteria that apply to all rezonings, and we've got an additional layer of criteria for Pwds. So I'm going to go through each of those and highlight a couple that require a little more explanation. So just listing out what they are. So starting with the standard rezoning criteria, so staff looks at consistency with adopted plan. So we certainly have the two citywide plans to look at. And we also have a very recent neighborhood plan in the Elyria Swansea plan that we looked at that addresses the site. So in terms of comp plan policies, so the policies that staff called out and are elaborated on in your staff report are listed here. I'm not going to go through each one of them, but generally relate to the policy in the concept of encouraging infill development and places where services and infrastructure already exist, which is definitely the case here. It's it's embedded in the grid of this neighborhood, and there's certainly services and infrastructure around it. And then there's policies related to encouraging residential infill development at appropriate locations. So staff does find the request in the request to go to a pretty consistent with plan policies. So related to Blueprint in Denver, the other citywide adopted plan. The subject property is in an area of change and has a land use designation of single family duplex. And so the area of change really points to encouraging infill development in areas where services, infrastructure already exists and also areas that have not realize their full development potential. And so staff finds the request consistent with these policies because as a vacant block in a in an established area, it certainly has not realize its full development potential. And, and as a duplex single family duplex zone district, it is consistent with that single family duplex classification. So on to the Elyria Swansea neighborhood plan. So this is the area specific neighborhood plan adopted in 2015. There are a number of policies related to encouraging or addressing the decline actually in residential population and residential dwelling units in this specific area. And there's actually a number of policies that point specifically to encouraging residential infill. And even looking at this specific site, it was actually called out in the plan as an opportunity site for residential infill. And so staff does find the requests consistent with the obvious ones in neighborhoods plan for those reasons. So I'm going to go through each one of these. I did want to highlight so these are the rest of the criteria that stuff looks out and making a recommendation. I did want to highlight criteria number four, which is related to the justifying circumstances. So Steph doesn't need to find or the city needs to find a justifying circumstance in support of the rezoning. There's a number of changes going on in this area that that support a rezoning and staff's opinion. One of the Illyria Swansea neighborhoods plan in itself is a change that sort of, you know, set a path for this neighborhood in this community in the future. And secondarily, also a big one. So with the central I-70 project and the expansion that's happened, there's been a number of residential units that have been taking out of the of the housing stock for this neighborhood. And so that's a big change that this rezoning in this Pudi, I think, looks to address in terms of attempting to replenish some of those lost housing units. And then related to the last criteria, again, standard rezoning criteria, the staff does find the property is consistent with the neighborhood context generally because the poverty itself is customized to reflect the surrounding context in terms of setbacks, building coverage, accessing off of alleys, things like that. So Steph does find it consistent with what that criteria applied to a library at any of these. Okay. Last set of criteria is the PD rezoning criteria. So these are the criteria specific to PD requests. And so I'll go through these as briefly as possible. So the first criteria is if the PD is consistent with the purpose and intent of parties themselves. So looking at the zoning code language for when and why and how the city should use parties, it generally addresses, as I said, where there is a unique and extraordinary circumstance and a physical constraint in this case. And this one I think is pretty straightforward. The physical constraint is the narrow width of the block, at least relative to the development proposed in a development that could go in and be consistent with the surrounding contacts with the alley loaded in the two rows of development. So stuff does find it consistent with that criteria. And so the last three criteria here. So I won't go through each of these, but um, I guess to highlight CPD criteria, see, so again, the development and looking back at that site plan and the applicant is here to, to elaborate on it, but looking at that site plan, there really is no standard zone district available, as I said, that that accommodates the type of development that kind of fits in with the with the surrounding context, without multiple variances, waivers, conditions, things like that, where you really get into this funky, customized situation. So PD is really designed to be since staff's opinion for situations like this and then last that the PD addresses uses that are compatible with adjacent properties, there's no change. As I said in the beginning, there's no change to the uses set forth in the zone district in the YouTube. So all of the single family unit and kind of ancillary use, as you would typically see, would remain the same as with the parking requirement. So it's really only about the building form and siting. Oh, there is another one. Sorry. So this is something like a bit of a broken record, but. So. So the last criteria is about users. This is more about building forms. And so stuff does find the party request consistent with this criteria. Because it does it it is calibrated. The party is customized and calibrated to respond to sort of the built environment around this block, which is highlighted in this aerial a bit. You can see with the parcel boundaries are in pink. If you can see you can see the original buildings and some of the newer buildings are not built to, you know, a 20 foot setback and a five foot side setback. They're really building out these these these parcels and they're alley loaded. You can see that the YouTube is on this. Without this pudi customized approach would be a real challenge to develop anything consistent with the patterns of this area. So with that, staff does recommend approval of their rezoning requests, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. We have four individuals signed up to speak this evening, so I'll ask all four of you to come up to this front bench so we can get through things quickly. As soon as I call your name. There will be a slight delay for your time to start as you step up to the podium and then your time will start elapsing. So first up, we have Bruce O'Donnell. Thank you, Mr. President, members of council. My name is Bruce O'Donnell. And I am at 386. Emerson Street in Denver. I'm here this evening representing Habitat for Humanity, the applicant. And I'm joined by members of the. Habitat team. Who are here to provide some additional context and answer any questions. Should you have any? We're eagerly engaged in this process and feel that in this instance it is the perfect tool to address. All of the unique site. Conditions that were discussed in the staff report. And staff did a great job and was excellent. To work with to kind of solve the riddle. To maximize. The opportunity on this crazy. Narrow block. To get as dance as we could. To provide a permanent deed. Restricted for sale, affordable housing. We're here this evening to request your approval and vote of approval for Pdg. 18 and are available to answer any questions you. Have. Any. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Katie McKenna. Thank you, Council President Clark, and thank you, council members for having us here today. I'm Katie McKenna. I'm from Denver, and I'm the director of community development at Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver. We're here today to request your support for the rezoning of this block in Swansea, a neighborhood at Habitat. We believe that housing is the foundation from which everything else is possible and affordable. Housing is such a key piece of infrastructure and critical component in our communities. The global area and Swansea neighborhoods have been an area of a special focus for Habitat for Humanity over the last six years. With that, we we help home as Habitat for Humanity. We help homeowners achieve strength, stability and independence that they need to build a better life for themselves and for their families and for their communities. In our recent homeowners survey, we learned that 98% of people who grow up in habitat houses graduate from high school. That's compared to 79% of that's our statewide average is 79%. To me, this is important in our neighborhoods. We also learned that two thirds of our habitat homeowners have a budget and can stick to it. And seven out of ten aren't worried about paying their monthly bills because their housing is affordable. That's financial stress that's lifted from a low income family because they have an affordable place to call home. Hey. Here. In Denver, Habitat has worked with 843 families since our founding just about 40 years ago in Globeville, Leary and Swankier. We've invested more than $16 million to serve 200 families through our home repair and our homeownership programs. We're committed to these communities and to finding continuing to evolve, to find solutions for affordable homeownership. And this block is a really important part of that. I often say that I have one of the best jobs at Habitat because I get to work with all of the people. So I have the opportunity to connect with people through our community engagement efforts. We've hosted community meetings, we've attended other organizations meetings. We've connected with. R.A. is in local employers. We've canvased door to door to talk with people who don't often go to community to community meetings. We've walked around the neighborhood with residents to hear their thoughts about this vacant lot, and we're hosting homebuyer readiness classes and working with local groups to make sure that people in the area know how to buy the houses and when to apply. We're committed to making this project a source of neighborhood pride and hope and opportunity. And of course, we need to rezone it first to make that possible. So that's why we're here tonight. And I thank you for your time and consideration, and I hope you'll support it. Thank you. Next up, Cory Whitaker. I think we're just available for questions. If you want to, just go ahead and introduce yourself and say exactly that and then you can answer here. Okay. Corey Whittaker I'm the real estate manager with Habitat for Humanity. Address 3 to 4 or five Elliot Street. I'm here to answer any questions about the site plan, and thank you for your consideration of this. Thank you. And last, Kate Helberg. Cahill, Rick, director of real estate development. For Habitat for Humanity. 3245 Elliott Street. And just here to answer any questions that the rest of my colleagues can't. Great. Thank you. That does conclude our speakers questions from members of council. Jasmine. Jasmine. Jeff. The planning board recommended unanimous approval with increasing the height to 2.5 storeys on the rear of 35%. Sorry if I missed it, but what's. What's the logic to that? Yeah. So I almost think of it as an oversight. So the, um, the proposal that was before planning board had, um, I believe it was if it's 30 feet in the front instead of 17 feet in that rear, 35%, it was 30 feet in the rear. So the, the, the package that planning board saw was to increase the height uniformly across the site and sort of get rid of that 6535 split. I think by mistake, honestly, we admitted that the rear 35% would also be allowed to go up to 2.5 storeys. So we had, if that makes sense. So. So the way it was, it was put before planning board the rear, 35% height was increased from 17 feet to 30 feet. But the number of stories didn't match that. It stayed at one story and it should have gone up to 2.5 storeys to match that 30 feet. Inside is uniform the full length of the property. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Cashman, Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Jeff. That's okay. The alley. Because there is no alley in the original subdivision. The alley width is 16 feet. I'm just. I just want to verify. Is that our standard alley width? So believe so. I believe that there may be some allowance to go narrower, but I think that that is that is the standard. Okay. You're not certain whether 16 feet is our standard alley. I'm just concerned about, you know, services. Do you know of trash and recycling and composting pick up can be done from the alley with that with. Yeah. I mean so that's and this is punting on the question. I know but it is typically handled at the State Department planning stage. We did coordinate with those folks to make sure but 16 feet sounds right. I'm just I'm thinking that we've made allowances for narrowness in some cases, but I can't I don't think that that's been decided yet on this site. Okay. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Councilman Brooks. Thank you. How you doing? Excellent. How are you? I'm doing great. Thanks for leading this time, Parky. Your favorite subject on this. I remember when this came to commit. Council president. Are you laughing over there? Okay. Just make sure you're okay. On the. When this came to committee, it was an issue around parking. Can you just address and I know that came up a planning board as well. The issue of whether or not they could provide parking. Yep. Each because each of the units do not have to provide parking in the back of their in the back of the townhomes are. So I believe they do. And they they do have one space per unit proposed as part of their site plan, a surface parking space coming off the alley. Okay. So and the number of units there, they're they're you 32 total. Okay. So each unit has one parking space? That is correct, yes. Okay. There was some. There was some. I'm okay with that. Matter of fact, I'm okay with none. But there was some pushback on there, and I just wanted to make sure there wasn't any issue. Do we not talk about that in the party when we were in committee? I don't believe. It came up explicitly. I apologize if it didn't. I'm forgetting it. But, um, I didn't have it in my notes that it was a specific issue. Okay, great. And then I'm going to have come back up, Katie, and just tell me real quick, in the public, the am I level that these 32 units will be at? Yeah. Habitat for Humanity works with families, 80% of the area, median income or below for Globeville, Leary and Swansea residents where we're building three and four bedroom homes. So targeting larger families and expecting the income to be right around 47 to $49000 per year, which is also the average income of the neighborhoods. Okay. So right, about 60% of my kids are okay and all of the units are right at. How many bedrooms did you say? Three and four bedrooms. Awesome. All right. Thank you. See. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for House Bill 617 is closed. Comments by members of Council. Councilman Brooks. Yep. Thank you, Mr. President. I'll be supporting this number one, because the criteria is aligned with our plan documents. And I'm very excited to see these parties begin to work in our community and especially addressing all the site plan issues. But I'm really excited about this because most of the affordable units in and in the District nine area are what a lot of elders in my community say dormitory style. And these are three or four bedroom homes for families. And so hats off to, you know, Habitat for Humanity. I was there at many of the outreach meetings. You did a fabulous job. And this is one city block. You are. And I'm just this is a is a cool night in my district thinking about one side of my district, Elijah's 62 acres, all of this crazy new opportunity and exactly the other side of my district getting new opportunities for 32 families. Today with this rezoning. So it's a good night. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Brooks. Councilman Nu, I just want to thank Habitat for developing this project. You know, you're probably one of my favorite organizations across this country. You do such great service in every area, whether it's in a disaster area or just a redevelopment area like this. So I just want to say thanks for what you're doing for for Denver and for the low income families like you. Thank you. Councilman new councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I also wanted to thank Habitat. They've done excellent work. They've been down in southwest Denver as well. And this is a project that will it's hard to believe that this block, even efficiently platted as it was, could have sat for. A century and, you know, 101, almost 130 years without being utilized, while meanwhile being surrounded by, you know, by a vibrant neighborhood. And so it's very good to see see it finally be able to host 32. Good sized families. And on a historical note. I wanted to point out that the original subdivision plat was signed by then city attorney John Schaff Roth, who went on to become U.S. representative. Senator and Governor of the state of Colorado. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn and Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you for that, education Councilman Flynn. I want to excuse me express my support for this rezoning tonight. This is part of my old district. District nine. And, you know, to recognize the fact that there are so many changes happening in the area and that these neighborhoods are actually going to be losing residents to have a focus on new housing coming into this community is really, really important. And, you know, I don't know how many of the residents in the community have gone through the application process and actually qualify for any of the homes. But I know there's a there's ironically, there's a strong homeownership concentration in these neighborhoods. But for those who are renters, they're sort of at the mercy of the the landlords. And we've seen a lot of people that have been displaced as a result of landlords being able to, you know, increase the rents and and get higher, you know, people with higher incomes that can live in the neighborhood. So that's having the, you know, displacement effect on the people who who are, in fact, there today or have been there. And so knowing that you all have made a commitment to targeting the LMI levels of the neighborhood as opposed to the entire city, is really important to trying to keep people in that community. So I appreciate those efforts. And you guys have done a great job in Globeville with all the housing that you built over there. And I know you have a lot of trust and respect of people from these neighborhoods, so keep up the great work. Thank you for what you're doing. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Brooks Becker. Yeah. Just a tidbit here, Mr. President, if you allow me, I think this is kind of a big deal. We didn't do this before, but I just want to have Kitty McKenna, who works for Habitat. For folks who are watching and want to know how to get involved and get on the list and see if they can get in on some of these units. Can she provide some information? Go ahead. She's also a Globeville resident, by the way. Yeah. Thank you. And for anyone watching, we would love it if you apply, if you're interested. The best way to get information is to visit our website at WW Dot Habitat Metro Denver. Georgie. Thank you very much. All right. And with that, seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Brooks. I. Espinoza. Flynn. I. Gilmore I Herndon Cashman can each new Ortega I Susman. I. Black i Mr. President. I I'm secretary. Please close voting and announce results. Sorry, I got one thing wrong here. Mr. President, my screen is locked. It says I am absent. Oh, now it says I voted I. Thanks for coming back to us. 11 eyes. 11 eyes. Comfortable. 617 has passed. On Monday, September 10th, 2018, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 791, changing the zoning classification for 12680 East Ashbrook Drive in Montebello. Any protest against Constable 17 one must be filed with council officers no later than Tuesday, September 4th.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 12680 E. Albrook Drive in Montbello. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at 12680 East Albrook Drive from S-MX-12 to OS-A (suburban, mixed-use to open space) in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-31-18.

DenverCityCouncil_09102018_18-0791

Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close the voting and thus results choice. 12 hours, countable. 881 has passed. Councilwoman, can you please be accountable? 791 on the floor. Yes, I move that council. Bill 18, does 791 be placed upon final consideration and do pass? It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Council Bill 791 is open. May we have the staff report? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Members. Counsel. Good evening. I'm Courtney Livingston. And with me planning and development. I'm here to present on a rezoning for 1260 East Albrecht Drive and Council District eight in the Montebello neighborhood, the size is about five and a half acres, and the proposal is CPD on behalf of Denver Parks and Recreation is requesting to rezone the property from as the Max 12 to OSA to align the zoning with city ownership and use as a public park. As I just mentioned, the subject's site is zoned as Max 12. The surrounding properties are as max 12 as well. We also have some form of Chapter 59 zoning surrounding the property to the north, R3 to the south, before waivers to the West Bay. You are one you go to. In terms of the existing context for the land use. As I said, the park is the property is currently under construction for the open space park. It is showing is currently vacant. But on this map we have various commercial, retail and institutional uses surrounding the property as well as industrial to the south. This is showing the property and site photos of the site we have showing it that is under construction currently. And here is photos of the surrounding context. We have Denver Health Building to the west. North, you'll see the multifamily to the east, just general commercial, retail to the south, industrial warehouses and to the west. You have an extended detention base and that is serving flows from the industrial warehouses to the south. The proposal is to rezone the property to OSA. The OSA district is open space public parks district. It's specifically intended for parks and open spaces owned, operated or maintained by the city and county of Denver. In terms of the process. We had our public planning board hearing on July 11th and it was unanimously approved. Lee was on July 31st. In terms of public comment, we had a letter of support from Montebello 2020, the registered neighborhood organization. Three additional letters of support from various organizations in the area. We also received a timeline and update of the Mount Belo Open Space Partnership, an acquisition that is in your packet. And so we'll go through a step through the criteria for approving a rezoning. First one consistency with adopted plans. There are four adopted plans that apply to this rezoning the comprehensive plan Denver Parks and Recreation Game Plan Blueprint. Denver and the Montebello. Green Valley Ranch Neighborhood Plan. For the comprehensive plan. The request is consistent with several comprehensive plans strategies for use as parks and open space. And we also have the game plan and the request is consistent with several of the game plan policies as well as the OCA district will allow for greater flexibility to support the partnership with Environmental Learning for Kids. And with Blueprint Denver, the concept land use is town center and the ozone district supports the town center land use by better integrating a park into the town center. And it is an area of stability. And the goal for area stability is to allow some change in development. The proposed MAP amendment to OSA creates a better alignment between the use and the zoning, and both of those are consistent with Blueprint Denver. With the Montpellier Green Valley Ranch Neighborhood Plan from 1991. It contains various policies supporting community services, parks and open space uses. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the My fellow GBR plan, and the plan has various policies that support those open space uses. So we'll look at the other review criteria two through five. The rezoning will result in uniform application of the OSA district regulations across the site. It furthers public health, self safety and welfare as it furthers adopted plans. The justifying circumstances. The change in the area is that the city has property has been conveyed to the city transfer city. There is an approved site development plan already on the property under the Max 12 in the construction of the Montebello Open Space Park is already underway. It is consistent with the neighborhood context and zoned district purposes. Ten. As I mentioned, it's the open space context. That context is specifically for to support various active passive recreational uses. And also the OSA Zone District is specifically the A is specifically for parks owned operating or maintained by the city and county and Denver, which this is . So in conclusions, committee planning and development recommends approval of the application based on finding. All review criteria have been met. Thank you. That concludes my presentation. Thank you very much. We have four individuals signed up to speak this evening. So if you signed up to speak on this one, if you could make your way to the front bench there and I'll call you up in order. And again, your time will start as soon as your name is called and you reach the podium. First up, Loretta Pineda. Good evening. Welcome. My name is Loretta Pineda, and I'm the executive director for Environmental Learning for Kids, and I'm here to answer any questions you might have. Thank you very much. Next up, Mark Taber. Good evening. I'm Mark Taber with Parks and Recreation. And we wholeheartedly support not only this zoning change but also. The use as it is being developed right now is. Open space park and an environmental education center. I'll be happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you very much. Next up, Chairman Sekou. Chairman Zuku doesn't need to say all that other stuff or just get started. You can just get started. Okay, good. All right. First of all, thanks. I missed class. I was gone. Thank you for the instruction. I will be no public perception that he was interrupting me being rude, but that wouldn't have meant I wasn't having it all. It was just informing me how it was working. I didn't know. And I thank you for your courtesy of helping me out with that in the hallway. So, Mr. President. We support this. His only change. Because it's consistent with what's going on with the development out there now, with massive projects going up and buildings going up in the air. Folks. From here. This used to be in in this neighborhood. And I grew up in this neighborhood. We need some air, man. We need some space. And we need some brass for the kids somewhere to go play. And a safe place environment and a good place to go walking around, you know, exercising and stuff like that, feeling at home. You know, healthy physical fitness, mental wellness and. Spirit of lifting space. Space. This is the wild, wild west. We need space, space, space. Now, we have an issue, though, in that public safety. Protection of folks walking around so they can feel safe. And I'll give you an example. As businesses growing and a development a city and people coming in from other areas of the country. We're also attracting that which is so good. Say That ain't so good. And then the to the police about incidents that happens to people in the neighborhood of little. Example is candidate run for city council just attacked in West Side. At a train station with his bus on there. And the police did like what? But if that had been you, you, you, any of the body could have been in the papers due to due to investigation. All that ain't nothing happened. It was like. Oh, well. How am I going to feel safe now? I'm going to say. And I'm running for elected official, and I'm a good guy. Can't walk from a train station home without getting attacked because his bike is a trigger for folks who want to steal it. That ain't from here. And that's one of the things we have to protect against, because as we attract all of this, we track in good will, tracked and bad. We've tracked an ugly. And this thing could easily become real interesting and unmanageable. Like the city of Chicago. We have to be careful about how we go about doing all this. But those open spaces must be sacred. They've got to be sacred. If we don't protect nothing else, where there's playgrounds and kids and senior citizens come in there and people jogging around the park and just relaxing so they can get ready for the grind to Monday. That's got to be sacred space, not just open space sacred. And so as we go about doing this thing, think about the police protection that's got to be included in the plan. How much money are we going to need here? We're going to need here to manage this here without being obtrusive. So don't look like it's no armed camp. But you're going to need to add that to this idea because we're growing way too fast with resources trying to catch up. The development is pushing us as opposed to us. Pushing to develop. So we caught up. So we got so this thing down. And then suddenly we got speed this thing up and as we slow it down for stability so we can keep going, we got to protect territory. We got to protect the land. We got to protect, first of all, the children, the women. Senior citizens. The ones that are most vulnerable to these outside elements. So. I say that I didn't break the rules. No, that's okay. I had to do all that. Did great. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Paris. Good evening. Jesse Paris Blackstar. Some Movement. Denver Homeless out loud. Candidate for City Councilor at Large 2019. I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it seems like a good idea on the surface to put a open space park where there used to be a park and ride use service people of Northeast Denver, which was torn down. And now people in northeast Denver have to go all the way to 40th and Peoria to catch the train to get to downtown Denver, opposed to having to go to the Montebello Park, a ride where this site is located. My whole thing is we don't need any more permanent patties and barbecue. Becky, is this predominately black and brown neighborhood? If you put a park here, what is going to stop these transplants, these gentrifiers, these newbies from calling the police on people for just simply barbecuing in the park, simply having a get together in a park? That is my concern. So if I also I want to know what it's all going to be here is it's going to be a park. Is it going to be a garden with what is all this? And tell me. So if I get some clarification on, I greatly appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council councilwoman? Can each. Thank you. Mr. President, I just had a quick question, and I just had never caught this before. And maybe it's because this is one of our first of several partnerships the is doing. But you mentioned it was a city owned, operated and maintained. But I actually think that the agreement with the environmental learning for kids has them doing some maintenance and maintaining of this. And so I just want to clarify that everything is okay with the zone district that you don't have to have city all three of those being done by the city. Just can you clarify to me I just want make sure that we're good with the arrangement we have and the zoning. Yeah, you can definitely you can be owned but maintain there's many different OSA zone properties that are owned by the city, yet maintained or leased to a different entity. Okay, got it. So note no incompatibility. All right. Thank you. Thank you, councilwoman. Can each councilwoman or it. So I was just trying to understand if it was elk that was the applicant or if it was the city of Denver that was the applicant. And I was trying to look through these documents and that wasn't real clear. Right. So the city and county in Denver is the applicant. So community planning and development, the department, we are the applicant on behalf of Denver Parks and Recreation as they have the partnership formerly without. Okay. And how much of the land actually. So it's my understanding there's a structure being built on the site that it's not all just open space, is that correct? Currently, and that's in the phase two. The site development plan has phase one and phase two on the property. Phase one is the open space park and phase two would be the the Environmental Learning Center. So is there any limitation that Parks and Rec has for how much? Structure can be on their parks. So that would be with the ozone zone district. It is up to the executive director, Happy Haines, and I believe it is 2500 square feet before it has to go to city council for additional approval. Do we know the size of the building that's proposed for the building for that site? I'm not 100% sure. So I'll let Loretta answer that question. Thank you. Council on Woman Ortega. Right now, the building will be 7800 square feet. That's the plan. So if there's some other process we need to go to. Well, we'll have to see. Okay, we do that. But you don't propose. I mean, I know you're probably just raising the money to build that right now. So do you propose it any time in the future that it would grow or it's really intended to use the building to then interface with the park? Right. Yeah. The open space, it's one acre is dedicated to the building and the 4.5 acres are dedicated to open space. So with that much open space, hopefully we can still. That's a helpful explanation because that that wasn't clear from looking at the information that was provided to us. Okay. I think those are all the questions I have. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Clark. Courtney, could you go to Slide eight on the presentation? I just want to make sure it's clear that this has always been, you know what, I might be on the wrong slide. It's the slide that has. Yep. That one right there. The previous one. And this one for the Nets. Yeah, that one right there. So this has always been raw, undeveloped land, correct? That's my understanding, yes. And so the park and ride that was referenced is actually to the west of this parcel of land. And so this isn't on the current RTD park and ride that has been vacated. Now, the RTD is that concrete, you know, to the north, I guess would be northwest. So you see the corner of Peoria and Walbrook, it would be just to the east of that that concrete area. That's the park and ride. Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for Council Bill 791 is closed. Comments by members of Council. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't think Councilman Gilmore, she took my first point. This is not where the parking ride is going. I was going to make that correction. Thank you for that. This is a no brainer. I'm a huge. Fan of what environmental learning for kids has been doing under your leadership. Thank you for that. And of course, we have to give. Huge. Kudos to your predecessor who created environmental learning for kids. So I will. Look to. My left and look for my colleague, Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you for that, for educating our youth. And so I welcome anyone to come out to this space once it is done to learn about our environment and how important it is no matter where you live, because anyone could benefit from that knowledge. So I want to thank you for your. Leadership as we move forward. Best of luck as you continue to fundraise. For this cause. I know they were still still working to get to our total goal, but I certainly hope my colleagues will support this because this is a great cause for the Marbella community and beyond. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilman Herndon. Councilman Brooks. Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. A couple of things. One, I'll be supporting this because it is in conjunction with the criteria we need to approve rezonings. This falls right in line with that. So I'll be supporting it to environmental learning for kids. You know, I think it really touches the kids of the neighborhood, which I appreciate. And so to get kids of color in the neighborhood, connect it with the environment is huge. So I just really appreciate you all doing that. And three, 18 years ago, I lived at our Brook Apartments on our brook. And so this is like really exciting to see this area getting so much attention. And so thank you all for your hard work on this. I think the city to for for really parks and rec for being proactive on on doing open space in the city. I think it's a critical time. I think we're going to look back on this time and say if we hadn't had done this and increased our acreage of open space in the city, we would not have had such incredible greens in our city. So thank you for all your hard work. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilwoman. Thank you, Mr. President. I also agree that the criteria have been met, and we'll be happy to support this rezoning today. I just wanted to share my recollection of getting toured this site back in, I think it was 2014 and it was, you know, at that point we were just doing an, you know, tour, just just the two of us. And there, sure enough, was a totally unscheduled school class that was going around and comparing weeds to native plants and just, you know, as high school students. I don't remember if they were from Montebello, Ohio, where they were from. But anyway, so so this community was already trying to interact with this space and create an open space. I mean, sometimes it's like when you let the community use a space, you can they'll tell you what it's going to be. And so and then I juxtapose that with doing neighborhood night out at the Albrecht apartments where what they do is they empty out the parking lot for neighborhood night out. And it is just so many children. You can see all of them playing and you just imagine that most of the time they can't do that because their cars parked there. And so just the proximity of it to, you know, some really much needed high density housing but without, you know, that big open space to play, I just think that the synergy is you couldn't imagine a better kind of way to make use of urban infill to do a park. So and just lastly, having had a few years of experience converting a place into open space, we have no idea how much where Councilman Gilmore and the new leadership and Parks has done to get here. So it's just exciting to see a vote on this. We've had a couple other little midges come through, but this one's a big one. So congratulations to everybody who's worked on it for all these years because it's it's it's more than this slide show could ever tell us. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Kennedy. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Clark. I was kind of reviewing the history of this site and my work on it, and we started this conversation in 2006. My daughter is 14 years old and just started high school. She was two years old when we started. Working on this project. And so from that standpoint, you know, having founded Environmental Learning for Kids, we had all of our community meetings in our home in Mount Bello. And when we. Ran out of space in our backyard and we couldn't fit 75 people in our backyard to do leadership programs and education for young people in their families. The kids and the families in Elk said, Why don't we have a place in the community so that we have a home, we have the Gilmore House, but that's not our home. We want this in the community for us. And so after 12 years in the making of robust community outreach, engagement, education, advocacy, it's nice to see us finally get here to rezone it because the schematic that's up there, there's a 7-Eleven to one corner, and we had a social path that ran through this property that went right from the 7-Eleven car wash, straight over to a marijuana store and a payday loans and a liquor store. So we had people. Utilizing. The property. But to break that up and to create an education zone, an open space, a park is something that has definitely been a labor of love and happy to support this tonight and see where it might go forward. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. Councilman Nu, I just want to support two is going to be a wonderful educational facility for kids. I just can't wait to see it happen. It's really exciting and thank you and all of the supporters. And I especially want to thank one of my constituents and Bennett, who's been a real active supporter of this program. And so she she's just as party or more as passionate about this as she was helping me with the minority or weirdness legislation we had earlier did it earlier than last year. So graduation is what you're doing and it's going to be a wonderful facility. And thank you for all your leadership in what you're doing. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Using no other comments, I'll just end with that. I'm happy to support this. Thank you for the great presentation showing how it meets the criteria for rezoning. Outside of that, it's really exciting to see something come forward to change the zoning that this will be a permanent addition to our public park system and our public spaces. Thank you to parks. But on top of that, it's not just a park in a community. This is a park that that was built by the community. And having spent my entire career working in environmental education, health is the gold standard for working in this community, specifically working with kids and with youth, and doing the critical work that is connecting communities of color, kids of color to careers in wildlife, biology and natural resources. I mean, it's the it's the measuring stick that every other nonprofit that is working in this space is working towards. And so to see all of that come together where you have just this gold standard of a nonprofit partner and you have a piece of property that is vacant and underutilized and a place where we can build a park and have that nonprofit immediately activate it and just take the work, the great work that they're doing to the next level in a way that the city could never do on our own, never bring that level of expertize, that level of engagement. It's it's really exciting to see and I'm thrilled to be able to support this tonight. Thank you to our current leadership and past leadership. Very exciting day and excited to vote yes for this one. So with that, Madam Secretary, roll call. Herndon. I can eat. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman Black. Brooks. I. Flynn, I. Gillmor, i. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close voting. Announce the results. 1212 hours council bill 791 has passed. On Monday, September 17, the Council will hold a required public hearing on council will eight five approving the service plan for the creation of the Denver Rockdale Metro Metropolitan District and a required public hearing on Council Bill 944 approving the service plans

A resolution approving a proposed Third Amendatory Agreement between the City and County of Denver and JKS Industries, LLC to extend the term and add funds to provide on call asbestos, lead and mold abatement services. Amends a contract with JKS Industries, LLC to add $2 million for a new contract total in the amount of $2,480,000 and to add two years for a new end date of 8-3-19, for nuisance abatement actions for residential properties and environmentally regulated building material abatement and demolition activities of city-owned facilities including those associated with the North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative and Platte to Parkhill projects (ENVHL-201415783). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 6-12-17. The Committee approved filing this resolution at its meeting on 5-10-17. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilman Espinoza called out this resolution at the Monday, May 22, 2017, Council meeting for a postponement to the next regularly scheduled meeting of Monday, June 5, 2017.

DenverCityCouncil_06052017_17-0421

Okay. And then we'll put a question for 577. Right. Okay, great. Madam Secretary, please bring up the block for Espinosa's resolution for 21 two for 27. Councilman Black, we put resolutions for 21. For 2022. For 23, for 24, for 25 and for 27 on the floor for adoption. Yes, I move that resolutions for 21. For 22 for 23, for 24 for 25 and for 27. Be adopted in a block. All right. It has been moved. And seconded comments by members of council. Councilman Espinosa. Actually, I had a question, but is there anyone here to speak on? Thank you. The first question was, as there are six contract contracts being amended, but the amended briefing materials that were given to council last week only include an abstract, abstract information about four of the contracts how how much of its environmental, technical solutions and foothills been encumbered for. Those are 2.48 million as well. So the two that were not called out or that were not given more detail, those are consultant contracts. The four other ones are either abatement contractors. So sometimes the consultants do the advising, the scoping, the budgeting and the oversight of the contract work to make sure that it's done to adequate standards . Right. So they were actually $1 million contracts. They're the lesser of the group. But so my I'm just trying to understand so that you provided information that shows we're probably close to 80, 90% or 90% on most of these contracts. Are we also 90% on on there for 84 consultants, or are we actually have some room there? That is correct. They're close to contract. I was. Introduced herself. Oh, sorry. Steve Gonzales. City and County. Denver. Denver Health Department. I'm Greg Thomas. I'm the division director for the division. I manage the contracts and the two you called out. They are the oversight, as Greg was mentioning. They're the oversight consultants for the contractors. Every time we do work with the four contractors, the two consultants are involved in some capacity for oversight actions and will get used to the contract values or less because they're their capacity. They're not labor, they're a kind of documentation and oversight, and that's generally a less dollar value than the labor. Having been familiar with both Foothills and ETS in my past life as an architect, I was aware of that and sort of expected that to be the answer. However, I just wanted to point out that the language in the Indy Council agenda and thus the bill request is identical for the other four contracts. Despite the fact that there are different services, as you're saying, as you're explaining. So anyway, the rest is comment. You can stay up there if you want to respond, but I'm not. Thank you, guys. So on Monday, May, June, May 22nd, 14 days ago, I proposed to postpone action on these resolutions due to a glaring lack of information supporting a more than tripling in authorized contracts going from 3.4 million for three years worth of work to 12 nearly $12 million, adding nearly $8 million for two additional years. Well, questions were asked in committee. The responses should be seen as interests insufficient to approve this multimillion dollar increase without clear delineation of the increased need. More than a week passed when our legislative staff inquired about the lack of follow up by the agencies requesting these these amounts and backup, despite the fact that the supposed contracts for these supposed projects for these contracts should have been defined years ago and revisited many times, particularly in the last few months through the Gabon process, the requested supporting projects and cost estimates for the needed abatement work was not at the ready. How how these numbers were arrived at for these contracts without this? How were these contracts arrived at these amounts for these contracts arrived at without these basic this basic information with two weeks to provide information that should have been at the ready . Getting contract, justifying information should not have been any issue. Yet it took nine days to present this response. These two pages that are now at each of my colleagues desk. Please note that there are no estimates, no project years, be it 2017 this year, 2018 or 2019 included with this information. I remind my colleagues that we constantly fight for scraps of money for our mobility agenda or to improve access to affordable housing. And yet we approve unsaid unsubstantiated contracts in the millions that far exceed the amounts that the administration allocates to either endeavor. What's more troublesome about these request is that some of the abatement work will support the NWC, a project with which taxpayers agreed to fund through to tourism related taxes not to expend their general fund dollars on. Even more egregious is to spend our limited general fund dollars on a PDP stormwater project. When this council already approved nearly 400 million in obligatory fees to all Denver property owners to fund these improvements. Now we are asked to approve an indeterminate amounts of Denver sales and property taxes to these two projects on top of the over billion dollars that have already been essentially allocated. There are many worthwhile projects in the city that go unfunded year in and year out. These two projects, the National Western Center and the PDP Hill, are not among them. I recognize that many that they may have in those two projects may have indeterminate needs, but those projects are substantial enough that they should be contracted for separately so that all of the other cities abatement needs aren't at risk by the unknowable of those major projects, and that the accounting of our large projects avoid obscuring their total cost to Denver parks tax and fee payers. Given that the administration has three months because these contracts don't end until August and September to revise and substantiate the appropriate contract amounts for the four typical agency needs. Rather than relying once again on this behavior of getting the foot in the door with a sub, a small sub, $500,000 contract, and then pumping the amount 400% and including projects that weren't even approved by taxpayers or council at the time of the 2014 contracts, the time these 2014 contracts were passed, I urge this Legislature, legislative body for once not to be complicit with this conduct and say no to these resolutions on your own without direction from the administration. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. Was this does this come to committee for a discussion? And were some of these questions answered as a part of the overall? Just want to make sure we're being clear here. The overall programmatic needs and construction that we approved and planned to park last year. They were answered satisfactorily for me. I'm not sure it was the same for. Okay. Okay. Great. Um. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that did not go in consent, and we had a full discussion within committee. Okay, great. Councilman Ortega. So I don't want to debate the merits of the particular resolutions that are in front of us and go back and rehash the overall drainage project that was proposed that includes Globeville Landing Park, the Open Channel, the. City Park Golf course. I think what my request is, is that we have an update on where we are at in the total cost. As you all know, this came to us as one project. It was called the Twin Basin Project that was part of the intergovernmental agreement. And I think it would be helpful just to have an update on the overall cost of where we are at in terms of how much have we spent and how much do we still expect to expend for all of that? And if we could schedule that to come to committee, I think that would be extremely beneficial to just know where we're at. Are there more contracts coming down the pike? Is this the end of it? Where are we in the big picture scheme of things? Yeah, there are probably several more contracts I think because of the abatement contracts, but I think that would be okay. Councilwoman Sussman, would that be okay to schedule an update in your committee? Of course. Be glad to. Okay. And if you could just let us all know when that does get scheduled. Thank you. And, Gaby, you hear that from the mayor's perspective? County Councilman Espinosa. And I just respectfully disagree with the comment that everything was there presented at committee to satisfy these things. Here was what was presented as part of that. The presentation clearly says about these contracts on the slide, and it includes Public Works Project Project and applied to Park Hill and geo bond projects. I mean it states that and it can and possibly included. I mean, we couldn't at 2014 when this thing was approved, we were you were still working on the stormwater master plan that was still in draft mode. So plan to Park Hill wasn't even, you know, a glint in somebody's eye, maybe at the executive level, but we're not privy to that. And so as we get is what you guys provide, the executive provides the legislative branch. And I'm telling you what was presented at committee and what I have in hand based on additional asks remain insufficient. My colleagues may agree that our lack of information is thorough and worthwhile, but I'm sorry my the taxpayers didn't put me in office to rubber stamp these things. Councilman, I think every person up here does their own research and to to attack their research and say that it's a rubber stamp is is probably it's a huge overstep. So what we will do is have a conversation. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. We'll have that in the committee about the overall budget of a contract that we originally approved a year ago. And that's what we'll do. And every council person can vote this up or down. Madam Secretary, it's been moved the second to roll call. Espinosa. Nick Flynn. I Gilmore. Herndon High. Cashman. Kenny G. Lopez. I knew. Ortega. I. Sussman. I. Black. I. Mr. President. I believe clubs close voting and as a result. I'm just checking. One is missing. Ten Eyes to name. Yes. Okay. Ten Eyes. Two names for 20. One through four. 27. I'm going to say I'm just for the record. Resolutions for 21. For 22. For 23. For 24. For 25. For 27 have been adopted. Thank you. All right, Madam Secretary, please, will you please put the next bill in by? Yeah. It's 577. Excuse me. Go ahead.

A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and PetroPro Engineering, Inc. concerning the management and operation of seventy-five (75) oil and gas wells on the property of Denver International Airport. Approves a contract with PetroPro Engineering, Inc. for $3.6 million through 10-31-21 for the management and operation of seventy-five (75) oil and gas wells on airport property. The scope of services include optimization of production, monitoring revenue, cost control, well maintenance, oversight of third-party contract services, environmental compliance, regulatory reporting, and the provision of advisory support for economic evaluations, forecasting, operating, and capital budgets (201524898). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 9-19-16. The Committee approved filing this resolution by consent on 8-17-16.

DenverCityCouncil_08292016_16-0607

12 eyes, one abstention. 602 and six three passes. All right. I am going to bring up 607 Councilwoman Black. What would you like to do with that? I have a question. Go right ahead. Oh, you already know. Okay. Hi. Hi. Aaron President. Denver International Airport. I just have a question. Who owns these? The city in county of Denver. And do they make money? We do generate a revenue. We do. We made 2.2 million in 2014. I want to just talk about what it is so that the public knows. So this is a resolution approving an agreement between the city and county of Denver and petro pro engineering concerning the management and operation of 75 oil and gas wells on the property of Denver International Airport. So thank you. The city and county of Denver owns them and Petro Pro operates them and Denver makes money off of them. That's correct. Thank you. Great. Is that it, Councilwoman Black? Yep. Okay. Councilwoman Gilmore, I'm going to pull up six away. You want to take this off for a separate vote, correct? Yes, Mr. President. And the same. Four, six, ten. Yes. Okay. We're going to hold on 16. We'll do this for six or eight. Councilman Herndon. Yes, Mr.. President. I move that resolution 608 be adopted. It has been moved in second to it. Madam Secretary, roll call comment. Gilmore abstain. Herndon R. Cashman High. Cannick I. Lopez. New Ortega. By Susman by Black Eye Clark by Espinosa. Flynn, i. Gilmore. Abstain. Ortega. Mr. President. I close voting, announce the results. 12 Eyes, one abstention. 12 eyes, one abstention. Council Bill 608 has been adopted. Madam Secretary, please pull up Council Bill 610. And I assume this is going to be called out for vote. I'm going to. All right. We'll just go into commentary.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Division V to Chapter 2.84 establishing criteria for the procurement and management of Job Order Contracts, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05172016_16-0455

to make sure that we we get to this item quickly as well. Can we just do item 21st before we get to the hearing? Which is the Jose ordinance. So Madam Clerk, if you can just read item 20, please. Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to adopt ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code. Establishing criteria for the procurement and management of job order contracts. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide. Thank you. I just wanted to also, just as a reminder, the Council have unanimously asked the city attorney to draft an ordinance for a job under contract ordinance, really looking at best practices. I want to I want to take a moment and I really want to thank our city auditor, Laura Dowd, who has been very involved in this process, not just with my office, but our city attorney's office. And I want to also, in case you haven't heard, she's been receiving a lot of accolades lately, and her department and team have said we can just give her a round of applause for her hard work. It's been really fantastic. And so I want to thank her. And of course, she's been working with the city attorney's office closely to ensure that we have really a best practices order, juicy legislation. And so if I can get a motion on that, we have a motion and a second. Any public comment on that? Seeing none. Okay, Members, please go and cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. And thank you again. Of doubt. Fantastic. So thank you. And this. And that. That'll be back next week for the second reading. So now we're going to we have a time certain, which is the first hearing. And I do we have an oath which is required for that. I'm just trying to get through here. So, Madam Clerk.

Recommendation to adopt Minute Order declaring a moratorium against the issuance of any new "exemptions" from the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for those alcohol related uses set forth in Footnote 1, subsections b through e, inclusive of Table 32-1 of the City's Zoning Code; and directing the Department of Development Services and the Planning Commission to undertake a study pursuant to Long Beach Municipal Code Chapter 21.50, to determine whether or not the City's current zoning regulations related to CUP exemptions are appropriate or need further review or modification.

LongBeachCC_03102015_15-0211

Item nine is a communication from Councilmember Richardson, Councilwoman Gonzalez and council member Urunga recommendation to adopt minute order declaring a moratorium against the issuance of any new exemptions from the see up requirement from those alcohol related uses and directing. Department of Development Services and Planning Commission to undertake a study. Pursuant to Long Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 12 21.50 to determine whether or not the city's current zoning regulations related to Kewpie exemptions are appropriate or need further review or modification. Councilmember Richardson Sure. I'd like to. I'd like to. My motion would be to continue this until date. Certain until date, certain, March 17th. Okay. And Councilwoman Pryce seconded that. So there's been a motion in a second to continue this to March 17th. And is there anyone that would like to address the continuance? Seeing nonmembers cast your vote. Motion carries six zero. Item ten. Item ten is a report from Development Services recommendation to prove the first substantial amendment to the fiscal year 2015 Annual Action Plan to allocate new program income in the Home Investment Partnership Program for activities that create affordable housing for low income households.

AN ORDINANCE relating to affordable housing on properties owned or controlled by religious organizations; modifying affordability requirements adopted in Ordinance 126384; and amending Section 23.42.055 of the Seattle Municipal Code and Section 10 of Ordinance 126384.

SeattleCityCouncil_09272021_CB 120157

President Gonzalez. I h in favor and opposed. Thank you so much. The motion carries in the clear file has been accepted and filed with the clerk. Please read item two into the record. Agenda Item two Council 120157 relating to affordable housing on properties owned or controlled by religious organizations. Modifying affordability requirements adopted in ordinance 126324. And amending Section 23.40 2.005 of the Soundness four Code and Section ten of Ordinance 26 384. Thank you so much. I moved to pass Council Bill 120157. Is there a second back? Thank you so much. It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Strauss, who is the sponsor of this bill, in order to make comments on the bill. Thank you counts president. As this has been discussed at council briefing council but 120157 makes changes to council 2120081, which the Council passed on June 28 to increase the affordability requirements from 60% in May to 80% in my Council. Bill 120081 implemented a new state law that allows for larger buildings than zoning would have otherwise allowed for affordable housing developments on sites owned or controlled by religious institutions. The state law defined affordable housing as 80% in my as did the original bill Casper 120157 that was transmitted to council and voted out of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee. We did in committee considered the amendment to require 60% AMI but moved forward without that requirement before council, as we all know, ultimately passed a similar amendment lowering the affordability requirements to 80%. Am I making Seattle's law more restrictive than the state law? Following these votes, my office and others were contacted by churches and community organization organizations expressing deep concern with the amendment, including from the Nehemiah Initiative, which works with historically black churches in Seattle to save many black churches in the central area and to combat displacement. These stakeholders shared that 6% AMI requirements threatened the viability of certain affordable housing projects, meaning they would lose affordable housing units that would otherwise have been built under this ordinance. And additionally, I heard that churches had planned to use this ordinance in ways that are more broad than what the City Council discussion reflected. In some cases, churches may wish to build affordable housing to allow their members to return home to the communities that have already been displaced from. Some of these members may not qualify for 60% Army units, and they still have been displaced. I don't. Also understanding that churches can still have a range of affordability of the units. Not all units must be placed up to 80% AMI. At this point, I don't believe the city needs to micromanage how these religious organizations best serve their congregations. But I think I'm pretty much done. I just want to say that this legislation will amend the previous council bill to provide more flexibility to churches to serve the congregations, build the needed affordable housing, and maintain themselves financially so that they can too can continue providing services to their community. Thank you, Council President. Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss, for giving us some initial comments on the bill as introduced as kinds of a120157. I do know that folks have comments to make about the the bill, the underlying base bill. We do have one amendment to consider. So as usual, we will go through the amendment, have a conversation and deliberation around the amendment. We'll take a vote on the amendment. And then once we know whether the bill is amended or not, we will open up the floor to comments on the general bill. So without further ado, I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to Councilmember Herbold to make her motion on Amendment One. And then I will ask if there is a second. Thank you. I commend Council Bill 12 0157 as presented on Amendment One, which was recently distributed. Second. It's been moved and seconded to amend Council Bill 120157 as presented on Amendment one. I'm going to hand it back over to the council member for Bullet to walk us through. Amendment One. Thanks so much. So I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this amendment. This amendment would allow the higher 80% AMI rental affordability threshold in those urban centers and villages identified in the comp plan as having a high displacement risk. But should the amendment pass, it would maintain a 60% AMI rental affordability threshold in other locations throughout the city. Just for some context, what that all means at 60% ami a qualifying one person household would pay an affordable rent of $1,162. A qualifying four person household would pay an affordable rent at $1,726 a month for three bedroom rented units that are developed on property owned in urban areas, in villages with high displacement risk by religious institutions that receive this density bonus, allowing them to build in some cases, nearly twice the number of units would have a more permissive extent of AMI affordability threshold, and their units could be rented at a rate of a studio being rented at $1,545 a month and a three bedroom apartment renting at $2,295 a month. That's the description of of the amendment, just as you know why I why I think it's so important. I know we talked about the fact that state law permits a maximum 180% AMI affordability threshold. We discussed with the other version of the ordinance I really appreciate hearing via Councilmember Strauss's office that that's the sponsor for the legislation in the state legislature. Representative Whalen, who represents the 46th District of Bellevue, Redmon, Kirkland, Clyde Hill, Medina, Yarrow Point and Hunts Point, that her legislative intent was that it be at the 80% threshold. But again, we are no way prohibited from considering the needs of renters in our cities by lowering the affordability requirements, just like we do with other local housing programs that are authorized through the state legislature, for instance, MFT. There's a higher affordability threshold that that we could offer, but we don't. We are we reduce the affordability threshold because that's what renters in our city need. My knowledge, no one has demonstrated, and I know council members have asked how a 60% AMI threshold affordability requirement would thwart the goal of developing of of of incentivizing the development of affordable housing by. Our. Religious institution partners. Again, the density bonus can increase the development potential of these persons by up to double further. The development performance that we have seen when requested not seem to attack the value of land itself, which the religious institutions own. You don't account for the value of land that will lead to a return on investment calculation that looks like a loss. But only is whether the developers are religious institutions or private developers. We do not need to incentivize developers to build units at these rents. We are nearly market rate if we allow all religiously owned properties throughout the city to develop at 80%. AMI, we're actually creating a disincentive for religious institutions to partner with nonprofit developers, resulting in fewer rentals out at affordability rates. So now that we're reconsidering this issue, the alternate path I'm saying, maintains the 80% AMI threshold within urban centers and villages identified in the comprehensive plan as having higher displacement risk. This includes the Central District, Columbia City, Beacon Hill, Rainier Valley and other areas where historically and you'd be displaced. You. Okay. Colleagues, any comments or questions on that amendment? I see. Council member Strauss has his hand up, please. Thank you. Council President. Council member Herbal. I absolutely appreciate the spirit in which this amendment is brought in because you are correct in understanding we have to serve the poorest among us. And 80%, Amara, does not necessarily do that. This is there are many different avenues that we fund housing and sit in requirements for 60% AMI throughout the city. And that's but at this point, I do not believe it is appropriate to limit higher affordability levels only to some urban villages and centers. These are lines drawn on streets and the problems that our city faces and those are for zoning specifically. So I have heard of projects in other districts that would be prevented from using this flexibility and the flexibility that they were expecting because they are not located in urban villages or centers. I have also similarly not heard any external stakeholders advocate for this amendment. I have when I've reached out to my stakeholders and only heard of opposition. So nothing personal here. I absolutely appreciate the spirit in which you're bringing this. I unfortunately will oppose this amendment today. Thank you, Councilmember Girl. Councilmember Strauss Any additional comments on proposed Amendment one? Council Member Paterson, please. Thank you, Council President. And just for the viewing public, who might not be as familiar with this legislation. This is we had adopted the council adopted legislation and then some groups approached the mayor's office and wanted to see the legislation changed. And so the mayor submitted it to us. And because we're going in budget season, it's coming straight to the full council for discussion today. And I think there were some you know, I appreciate the points made by both council members who spoke, and it was a close vote to begin with on the original legislation. So it sort of makes sense that there would be these good ideas floated from the various council members. And I really think that council, our Herbold amendment is a compromise. It is it's it's it's basically saying that, okay, even though the original legislation allowed additional time under the higher income 80%. Am I that perhaps that wasn't enough time for for some churches. So what this amendment is doing is geographically it's saying those those churches that did approach the mayor's office and had were very vocal about it. They would be able to stay at 80% AMI And so I think that this compromise that, you know, we don't want to make a citywide policy when we don't necessarily we don't need to apply it citywide. It makes sense to apply it geographically as Councilmember Herb what it's done in the high displacement area. So I will be supporting this amendment. I do see it as a compromise from the original bill. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson. I see that councilmember mosquitoes and hand is up. Please go ahead. Thank you very much. PRESIDENT Thank you, colleagues, for the opportunity to chime in on my my support for the underlying bill. I will be voting no on this amendment. I do appreciate that. We do have a chance to talk about this again. If you'll recall, the last time we talked about it, it was one of the hottest days in record for Seattle. And many of us were huddled near fans in the dark trying to stay cool on a very hot afternoon. So having the chance to now have a chance to look at the legislation that was passed with the amendment last time. I was a no on the amendment the first time around, but having the chance to really read through the amendment this time around and recognizing that it's slightly different, appreciate the nuance that was trying to be woven here. I do want to underscore why I am voting no on this. Even though it is a tweaked amendment up from the original, I think the bill as transmitted contained several large public benefits by maintaining the continuity of EMI levels across across the city. But I'm just going to focus on two very briefly. The first is that maintaining the Army threshold of 80% means that organizations will have the ability to create affordable housing without seeking as much public subsidy. And that is a huge public benefit. That means our public, affordable housing dollars can be stretched to go further to create more deeply affordable housing throughout the city. And I do think that it towards the goal of creating more affordable housing if religious institutions have to compete for public subsidies. If the threshold were to be lowered to 60%, that means there's fewer funding sources that could be rated together to create that affordable housing, which is the goal of this legislation both in the city. I know it's our goal as well as the state legislature, by keeping the 80% AMI threshold that the current level of where it's at. We are opening up the ability for more of these religious organizations to be able to access complementary funding sources that are not public subsidy only. And that way we can help these organizations build the housing. That is our overall goal. The Knight Nehemiah Initiative also emailed us earlier today, I believe, showing how if the threshold was lowered to 60% EMI, that it would actually support their existing projects. We don't want to be in a position where we are in any way, even unintentionally reducing the ability for us to build more affordable housing units across our city. And in the document that they sent us, they showed how their numbers don't pencil out under 60%. And I believe these religious organizations are potentially in the red, whereas 80% AMI would provide small income stream to make these projects more viable. Number two, the ability to build AMI to build that 80% and mine units will function as an anti displacement policy. This bolsters religious institutions ability to not only provide housing for communities that have been largely displaced, but largely affected by gentrification and displacement. But this also helps us prevent future displacement in our communities, where these religious institutions have experience with working with communities, especially our elders and our communities of color, who are experiencing higher rates of displacement. So working with them, allowing them to bring funding, keeping it in a percent, I believe is a win win. So I'll be voting no on this amendment and yes on the other line Bill. Thank you, Councilmember Moschino, for those comments. I see that Councilman Morales has her hand raising her hand overturned. Thank you. I, too, appreciate the the you know, what you're trying to accomplish. Councilmember Herbold, this isn't something that I will be able to support the amendment. That is mostly because we have heard from a lot of folks in our community who aren't supportive of this amendment and who specifically requested, as we were, the underlying legislation was being considered, who are waiting religious institutions here, who are waiting for this bill because they do have a project that they're waiting to proceed with and want to be able to provide housing for their young families. You know, the the amendment, as I understand it, would really limit, you know, limiting to urban villages doesn't provide flexibility to these institutions that are outside of those areas like the institution that I'm talking about, who contacted our office. So I think it's important that we proceed with the underlying legislation and and with the frankly, with the original intent of the state sponsor who had passed the 80%, Amy, which is what advocates had been pushing for at that level. So I worry about the underlying bill, but will not be supporting the amendment itself. Any additional comments for Councilmember? Councilmember bill, you'll have the last word. I'm just looking for any other hands raised on Amendment One. I'm not seeing any other hands raised. I did want to make some comments on Amendment One as well before we hand it over to Councilmember Herbold and have her close that debate. So, colleagues, the bill before us today does include reporting requirements that will help us better understand this policy tool and how we can support more community led affordable housing projects that is in the base bill without the amendment. Since this issue last came before the Council, I have had the opportunity to personally meet and hear from several impacted stakeholders, specifically from stakeholders representing the interests of black churches in Seattle, about the need for flexibility without losing sight of our goals around affordable housing across the city of Seattle, my staff have worked through some of the scenarios with the Office of Housing and Mural Staff on this particular issue, and I do believe that the bill before us without amendment will allow for a future decision on affordability thresholds to be informed by data collection. Therefore, today I'm going to vote yes on the underlying bill, but unfortunately cannot support the proposed amendment in doing so . This does not deny the need for ongoing need for deeply affordable housing throughout our city and in every single neighborhood, including those that are at greatest risk of gentrification and displacement. Indeed, we know that the greatest housing needs are faced by those in the 0 to 30% area median income. The recent McKinsey report estimated housing costs in the Seattle King County region would be about $1 billion, and it pencils out to be about needing an additional 37,000 units of affordable housing to address the needs of those on the extremely low income spectrum. So I want to acknowledge that that I just, like many of my colleagues and so many in our region, share a really deep commitment to addressing these housing needs. But I have also heard loudly and clearly in the weeks after our initial vote on this Council bill, that the City Council should forego the temptation to place the burden of meeting this deep need on the few religious institutions who are in a position to realize affordable housing communities in our city. So, so, so in the letter, for example, that we received today from Michael Ramos of the church council, Greater Seattle, he writes, quote, Generations have lost wealth and assets to redlining and other systemic colonial violence, even as rents and property taxes rise to unaffordable levels. The majority of black land based assets in Seattle are owned by Seattle's historic black churches. It is essential that we recognize black churches as an essential asset, cultural hub and service provider for black Seattle residents, and consider the ways we may support them to leverage their assets towards community development in the face of ongoing white supremacist violence. We must also be mindful of the long term impact of our development decisions providing space for the return of displaced black renters in a sustainable way that does not contribute to further racial and economic segregation closely. I think it is important that we not substitute our judgment for the judgment of black churches who advocated for the new state law. The reality is that for their statewide advocacy, we wouldn't be in a position to be considering this affordable housing bill at all. So black church leaders have unequivocally also told us since the passage of a similar amendment, that this amendment before us now will similarly tie their hands. In this instance, the proposed amendment has the effect of reducing the income threshold from 80% to 60%, but now has a layer of geographic restrictions that could potentially further exacerbate the racial disparities associated with concentrating growth in our urban villages and urban centers. Or, in the words of Donald King from the Nehemiah Initiative, which was recently shared with me, he wrote, quote, I agree that the limit of 60% may be more aligned with most black households, but I still believe that 80%, Amy, provides for more choice and acknowledgment of the reality and aspiration of black renters to be considered more prosperous. The 60%, Amy, will negatively impact the land value of the property that our black churches seek to leverage for a more independent and less subsidized housing production. So I want to thank Donald King, the Housing Development Consortium, Community Enterprise, the Church Council of Greater Seattle, and all the other stakeholders who have reached out to share details of why this bill is needed without proposed Amendment One. And I encourage my colleagues to also vote no on this proposed amendment. Again, since my initial vote, I have had deeper conversations about the operational impacts of adjusting the income threshold. And while I am deeply committed to more deeply affordable housing, I think this bill is simply the wrong vehicle by which to effectuate that desired outcome at the level we truly need across the city of Seattle. So as a result, I'm convinced that voting for the Council bill. All that is before us without the proposed amendment will help black churches in our city combat anti displacement, and it will do so in a manner that respects their self-determination, while leaving the door open to address our shared desire to incentivize and or require other developers to incorporate a lower income threshold into the projects. So with that being said, I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Herbold for purposes of closing out debate. I will keep it very short. As I've said, I believe that having the threshold at 80%, we are actually creating a disincentive for religious institutions citywide to partner with nonprofit developers. Something that feels really lost in this conversation is that this legislation affects religious institutions all across the city. According to the Stsci Directors report, there are six 692 parcels throughout the city owned by religious institutions. Of course, not all of them are large enough or have enough space to take advantage of this added density. But nevertheless, they are all over the city. They are not only in locations where black churches are facing displacement. The Housing Development Consortium wrote today to say that the 60% AMI will negatively impact the net operating income of the projects that the black church seek to leverage for more independent and less subsidized housing production. My amendment was intended to address this directly by allowing more expensive rental housing to be built in those areas where black churches are faced with displacement. Councilmember ROSQUETA, you referenced being able to review the the assumptions underlying the the conclusion and the analysis that 6% AMI housing would not pencil out. I would greatly appreciate the offer opportunity to review those assumptions when I have done so. As I mentioned earlier, I saw that the value of the land was not included in the assumptions, making it look as if there was a rate of return or return on investment. Sorry, that would would support the the the argument that they're not penciling out. But once you include the value of the land, that these density bonuses in many cases would double. That is not the case. I just want to also again underscore the point that I made this morning, that if you look at the data from the 2017 American Community Survey, 80%, sorry, 80% AMI housing. So housing that is developed at the 80% AMI threshold of affordability will be out of reach for 69% of black renter households that we have 14,320 black renter households in the city. And housing at these rates will be unaffordable, out of reach for 69% of them. I believe that when we're looking at a public benefit, we we should be looking at creating something that is not market rate housing. And 80% AMI housing is essentially market rate housing. Thank you. Thank you so much. Councilmember Herbold. Okay. That does conclude debate on Amendment one. So I'm going to ask the clerk, please call the adoption of Amendment one. Strauss No. Herbold. Purple X. Lewis now. MORALES No. Let's get a. No. Pietersen? Yes. So on. Yes. President Gonzalez now three in favor, five opposed. Thanks so much. The motion fails and the amendment is not adopted. Now we are going to open it up for general comment on the underlying bill. Are there any additional comments on the bill? Hearing none. Will the court please call the court? Never mind that we're silent. Go ahead. So I think you. So I think that in considering this legislation, we need to be concrete about what it actually accomplishes and what the cost is. You know, on the one hand, this program is based on increasing the height limits or density allowed on church land for affordable housing. And I certainly support increasing density. And so, in my view, the program as a whole does not sacrifice anything. On the other hand, this policy has been described as creating affordable housing to stop gentrification and reverse displacement. And I am very concerned that it will not accomplish that because of today's both policies. And the affordable housing limits are increased to 80% of area median income. It becomes shockingly expensive and a more horrible that actually has gone over the data quite comprehensively. But just to reiterate some of those points and also to add some other statistics, I mean, unbearable just now, as you were quoting, talked about how if you bring it up to 80%, it essentially becomes like market rate housing. Well, according to the Office of Housing, rent for a one bedroom apartment pegged to 80% of area median income is a is $851 per month, which is $550 a month, more than if it were pegged to 60% of am-I. And in fact, it's actually more expensive than the average mortgage rate rent for a one bedroom in Seattle. So we're not talking about, you know, minuscule differences. We're talking about a big difference and I believe comparable just referenced some of the conclusions that can be reached from State of Community American Community Survey, really, which is basically the census data which which will guide me if I'm wrong. But I think you said that 80% and my benchmark essentially would mean that 69% of black households will not be able to afford it. Actually, before I go on, would you just confirm that, please? Yes, 80%. And my housing is out of reach for 69% of black renter households in Seattle. Okay. Thank you. And so it's just it's just too expensive to actually have an impact on displacement and gentrification, which is the goal of this. It is the stated goal of this whole effort. And that's because the whole premise is to be dependent on for profit housing, on the for profit housing market, to make housing affordable. Which the for profit market has resoundingly failed to do for decades. In fact, affordability problems are dramatically worse now than a decade ago. The argument for increasing the rent limit by $550 a month, which is just whopping. I mean, what we just heard from renters who are just having an absolutely hard time and that problem is disproportionate and compounded for black households, as we know. So the argument for raising the rent limit that we have heard is essentially that developers and property owners, which are churches in this case, will not be able to afford to build the housing if it is less expensive without without public subsidy. But that is exactly where I mean, that's where the the problem lies. I mean, that is exactly why so many activists, including Black Lives Matter activists, helped to build the tax on movement when the Amazon home tax a tax on big businesses to fund affordable housing. I mean, that cannot be the last word. That's not enough. And in fact, we will need a massive fight using the people's budget movement this year to make to make sure that the actual funds are allocated to affordable housing in the way that it was intended when the council voted on it. I don't know what Mayor Durkan has planned to do, but, you know, we'll see when we look at the draft budget from Mayor's office and it and even even last year actually funds were from the Amazon tax were used to backfill the budget shortfall. I think we have to that's big business is more I mean they are making money hand over fist and we should make sure that all the money that was intended already to build affordable housing should be used and additional revenues should be raised progressively to make sure that there are no budget cuts either is not one against the other. And I mean, and it just it just foolhardy to depend on the for profit real estate market. And I just don't see how this is viable. I mean, I would be open to, you know, to supporting this. I mean, and to be very honest, I mean, I, I really acknowledge the good intentions of the Church Council of Greater Seattle. So many of the faith community leaders who I believe genuinely want to build affordable housing and my staff and I, again, very honestly, spent a lot of time looking into the numbers to see if this was going to be something justifiable. But it just again, if we want to be data driven, then I just don't know how this this is this is going to be viable. I understand that the faith leaders want to try this legislation to build affordable housing. And I also understand that many of them also support the Amazon movement. And so I would really urge them to understand that we cannot ask working class renters, much less the black community, working class renters, to pay on unmanageable rents and then call it affordable housing. That just cannot happen. We actually need to need the expansion of taxes and citywide citywide taxes on big business. And also, we need to bring enough pressure to bear to force the state legislature to tax the rich statewide to greatly increase funds for affordable housing. We also need to rent without corporate loopholes, not just in Seattle, but also statewide, so that we can make the market rate housing also affordable. So I think given all these gains, it's really difficult. And I would also note that as far as I know and my staff know, that we have made sure to ask a lot . We have not heard from any renter or a black renter, much less advocating for this change. Thank you. Any other comments on the bill? Councilmember Mosquito. Thank you very much. I first want to thank the Nehemiah Initiative for their work and advocacy and deep education that they did on this legislation in the last few months and earlier this year. I am happy to see this legislation back before Council where we've all had a chance to sit with it and not 100 degree rules and trying to make some decisions in the moment. I feel like this has been an opportunity for us to really have engagement both with community and among council and restore here today a key facet of the legislation to ensure that this is workable, workable for religious organizations in our communities to actually build affordable housing that is needed. I also want to be really clear about something. No one is saying that this legislation alone is going to build the affordable housing that we know we all need across the city. We are all committed to building that affordable housing, and that is why the majority of council both sponsored and passed jump start progressive revenue for the payroll tax in Seattle. And that's why we had a unanimous council vote for the spend plan, which puts two thirds of that funding into building affordable housing. We all know that we need this, and I think by passing this legislation today, we should continue to underscore that building affordable housing is not on the backs of our community, church organizations or religious institutions, nor can it all be done on religious properties. So this is one small but important component to our overall goal to build affordable housing. I also want to say I am appreciative of the conversation that we've had around the Am I levels. Again, I think that restoring the and my levels to 80% am-I is going to be a win win in both achieving affordable housing and working towards our shared goal on this Council of advancing anti displacement strategies. Religious organizations as well do not have to build up to the 80% and my threshold. They can choose a different level of am-I affordable it if they want to, but by not requiring them to have a lower amount, they will be able to potentially partner with additional affordable housing developers, which we've heard time and time again. Many organizations don't want to be held to a paternalistic standard, and that's not language coming directly from them in our conversation. So I appreciate that we are taking an important step today and that we also, at the same time, in the same breath, are recognizing that this is not going to solve our affordable housing needs and that we're going to continue to work on building more deeply affordable housing, creating the funding sources to do so. And like we did last year through Jumpstart Progressive Revenue in Seattle, which focused on 60%, actually 30%. And below that, we will continue to focus on more affordable housing and workforce housing across the city, with more progressive revenue sources at our fingertips soon, which again as a stand alone, are not enough to solve our deep housing affordability crisis across this region. So much more work to do. But excited about this legislation today. Thank you so much. Are there any other additional comments before we hand it over to Counselor Strauss to close it out? I'm not seeing any of their hands raised. So, Councilmember Strauss, why don't you close us out? Thank you, council president and thank you, colleagues. Echoing Councilmember Skater's comments about the Jumpstart ordinance that is going to be funding so much of our housing needs. Councilmember Herbold, Council President Councilmember stated the four of us were the original four co-sponsors. So I absolutely see each of your dedication to this. I'll just briefly state that this is this bill does not require religious institutions to put the housing at 80% AMI. It allows them to go up to 80% AMI. It's my understanding that that there will be a mix of those housing units and the religious institutions are different than other institutions where that those dollars will be funneled back into their organizations to support their congregations that are providing services to their communities. I'm not here to micromanage them. I appreciate everyone's intent on this bill and where everyone's coming from. Thank you, Councilmember. Her book for your understanding of my position today. Thank you, Councilperson. It becomes more stress. Okay. That does close out debate on this council Bill. So I'm going to ask that the clerk please call the vote on the passage of the Bill Strauss. Yes. HERBOLD No. Lewis. Yes. Morales a. Must get to. All right? PETERSON No. So what? No. President Gonzalez, I. Three. Yes. Five in favor. Excuse me. Six in favor. 3a5 in favor. Three opposed. There you go. Thank you. That's all right. I was keeping tally, too. Okay, so the bill passes and the chair will sign it.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and grant an Entertainment Permit with conditions on the application of The Modern, LLC, dba The Modern, 2801 East Spring Street, Suite 300, for Entertainment With Dancing. (District 5)

LongBeachCC_07242018_18-0607

Thank you. Item number three. Item number three. Item number three is a report from financial management. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and grant an entertainment permit with conditions on the applications of the modern 2801 EAS Street East Spring Street, Suite 300 for Entertainment with Dancing District five. Thank you, Mr. Tom. You have put on that. I believe an oath is required. Does the oath have to happen if we're planning to continue it? If I'm planning to make a motion to continue. Yes. I think you should take an oath to open and then you gifts your emotions. Thank you. Do it. You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now and the pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. Find us to our presentation on this. Would you like to hear. Staff Reporter Right. Move right to the motion. We can move right to the motion. Like, I'd like to motion to continue this for 90 days. We're going to need to continue this to a date certain. So I'm not sure what date you had in mind, but. Hopefully before I give birth is what I was hoping. So I haven't gotten it down yet, but maybe early October, maybe the first meeting in October. But we have a calendar. Well, I would like to be present for the continuance. Is the first Tuesday in October an option? That is true. Lena did go into labor at the dais. So we would. Suggest that you move this to October 2nd. I move this to October 2nd. A motion. I ask the support of my colleagues to move this October 2nd. Fine. Thank you. Is the only public comment on this item. That will close. But. Please come down, sir. Hey. State your name. You have 3 minutes. Good evening. Council members Jeff Guy representing southern counties oil and sea fuels leaseholder there at dawn sky harbor. We are at property 2735 East Spring Street, which is directly west of 2801 the modern. Our main concerns are just parking and traffic we have in the have in the past for the past I guess 18 years I don't I've had issues with parking based on the flight schools that are there and the restaurants that have been in and out of the past, the the facility there at 22 one, we just are concerned that we're going to end up with the overflow parking in front of our business during the business hours that we need and possibly traffic ingress and egress out of the facility. There is a parking I mean, a signal there that does not allow a lot of traffic through it just because of the drainage, I guess swell that's there. It's really hard to go out and only about typically about 2 to 3 cars go through the signal. So maybe if the city engineers can adjust the timing of the signal, that might help in a if they do move forward. We are neutral on issuing the permit. We think it's great. I love what they've done with this facility. It looks great and anything for that whole parcel is great for us. We look forward to possibly using it for events that we have. And I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very. Much. Thank you. Someone from my team is going to come get your contact information. Summer will come by. Thank you. In a more private comment now, can you please have a vote? Councilmember Gonzalez Councilmember Peers Motion Case.

Recommendation to, by motion of the City Council, request City Manager to arrange a presentation by the winning team of the 2013 National Association for Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP) Southern California Real Estate Challenge.

LongBeachCC_01142014_14-0042

Item Voice Communication from Councilwoman Jeri ships key recommendation to buy motion of the City Council Request City Manager to arrange a presentation by the winning team of the 2013 National Association for Industrial and Office Parks Southern California Real Estate Challenge. Great Council member ships key. Yes, Mr. Mayor. Pro tem not the correct. No, it's just a council member, but. A council member. We have an exciting opportunity to take a look at an exciting plan that has just been developed. The NAACP, which is the commercial real estate organization each year, has a contest between USC and UCLA in their graduate schools and includes their real estate, includes their public policy people, and the winners of those then get to make the presentation and be judged on it. This year they actually designated the property at Second and PCH as the subject matter for this contest, and the winners came up with something that they are calling Belmont Yards. And what I'm just asking is that the city council get the opportunity. Several of us were invited to come up when they did present this and to watch their presentation. But I think it would really be exciting for this council to see the full presentation. I've talked to the city manager about this, and so what I'm asking is make a motion if we can request the city manager to contact the winning team. It certainly was not my alma mater, that one, but it's they really came through with an incredible design. So I make that motion second. Moving in second. Moving in second. Any public comment on this item? A single public comment. Members cast your vote on item number four. I'm a yes. Bush and Kerry. Item number five, Madam Clerk.

A resolution approving a proposed First Amendment to Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Nossaman, LLP to extend the maximum contract liability for legal counsel for the Great Hall Project at Denver International Airport. Adds $600,000 to the contract with Nossaman, LLP for a new total contract of $1.2 million and extends the maximum contract liability for counsel provided to the city on all aspects of the Great Hall Development Project agreement at Denver International Airport (201629808-01). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 4-17-17. The Committee approved filing this resolution by consent on 3-15-17.

DenverCityCouncil_03282017_17-0321

Oh four question. Great. All right. All right. And we have, uh, councilman new four question four 322 So, Madam Secretary, please bring up Council Bill 321 and 22 to be adopted. And actually, Councilman Flynn, I just to take your star, your thunder a little bit. Will you put resolutions 321 and 322? On the floor. Yes, Mr. President. I never thought of it as thunder, but I'll try to live up to that. Maybe lightning. I, I move that resolutions 321 and 322 be adopted in a block or. Oh, right. It's been moved. We need a second. Great. It's been moved. And second, because Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Brooks. I will be abstaining on both of these resolutions due to my brother in law having an interest in the project. Thank you. All right. Good reason to abstain. Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. Councilman, New York, your question? Just a question, Aaron. There have been a lot of discussion about the extension of this first phase of evaluation for the Great Hall, and I didn't know whether this additional funds was related to that extension is yes. Aaron Barraza, Denver National Airport. This is adding funds to the KPMG contract as part of this extension. Okay. And in the discussion we had earlier about the reasons for the extension, I wasn't really sure what those reasons were. Could you elaborate on that? Sure. So our whole our whole idea of this pre-development phase has been to really get this done right. And so we're taking our time with this. And we've taken this project in different phases. So right now, in trying to do this right, we need to we need to go through the process about a month or two longer . And once we do that, we'll be ready to submit a development agreement to the first City Council approval. But in extending that time, we do need more funds for the KPMG, KPMG contract and for the Norseman contract. And what were the issues related to doing it right? So there was a there's three major issues. One was security. We've we have we've had some turnover in the TSA. So working with our partners at TSA and reeducating them on the project that we're doing was one of them. Customer service was another one. We don't want the Great Hall to become just another shopping center, so to speak. So we wanted to make sure that we incorporate a lot of customer service into the projects. And the third one, sorry about that, customer service security and bracing in the Great Hall. So when it comes to construction, there was a lot of unforeseen that came up during the during the pre-development phase. And so we want to make sure in doing this right, we kind of took all that bracing of construction into consideration. So these were all unforeseen issues. They were all unforeseen issues, unfortunately. Is this the total cost, the additional cost for this extension? Sorry. Can you repeat is. This the total cost for this extension, just this additional money here or thousand, or are other costs are going to be related. To this? No, they under $1,000 is the only additional cost. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman new Councilman Espinosa. I see you. Might as well since you're up here. Thank you. There's no time extension noted. There's no time extension on this one. No, no, sir. Okay. And then can I get a commitment from the airport to give us a presentation either of a draft or the final work product that you know is supposed to be delivered to spur the subsequent final contract so that we can. Sure. Absolutely. I'll reach out to your office tomorrow. Okay. But I if there's, you know, let's talk about it. I wonder if there's an element there that we should be talking about in committee as well, you know. And I'll work with our committee chair as well. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. All right. I know, Councilwoman Ortega. I just want to say that before the construction contract comes forward, which is going to be a big contract, it will absolutely come to committee so that we can get an update of what that's going to look like. So I don't know that the project is there yet in terms of all the details. But so I'm Sabrina, uncommitted. Councilman Herndon and I are both on the committee for the Great Hall and excuse me. So I just think it's important to know that this is still part of the pre-construction. But when they get ready to bring forward a contract on the construction, we'll see all those details. And Councilman Espinosa, do you have any? Yeah, no, I certainly appreciate that. And the airport has briefed me as well in the progress. And so I'm happy to hear some of Aaron's response to sort of about the sort of over commercialization that was maybe part of previous drafts. And so because that's one of my observed concerns is where we were and where we sort of ended up. And maybe as a step back, I would love for us to see it in its evolutionary stages so that we're not getting so we're getting something akin to what I think makes Colorado a special place and a and our airport a sort of modern landmark. And we're not just converting it into something that is totally commodified. Yeah. Well, Councilman, I think I think we're definitely going to have these presentations in the business committee will definitely have them to any presentations that the councilman needs. He can have those privately. And then you can continue to talk to the chairs for for more presentations as needed. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Aaron, for your good work. All right. Seeing no others, it's been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, call. ORTEGA Hi. Sussman Right. Black. Hi, Clark. Hi, Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. Hi, Gilmore. Herndon, I. Cashman. I knew. Mr. President, I. Please vote announce results tonight. One abstention tonight is one abstention. Council Resolutions 321 322 have been adopted. Okay, Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Councilman Flynn, will you please put Council Bill 285 on the floor for a vote?

A bill for an ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 15 of the Revised Municipal Code for purposes of approving a new redistricting plan for the eleven council districts of the City and County of Denver for the municipal election on April 4, 2023, and for any general or special council election held thereafter. Describes the district boundaries depicted on Map D. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 3-14-22.

DenverCityCouncil_03292022_22-0299

Good evening. Tonight we have one public hearing for those who are participating in person when called upon. Please come to the podium. On the presentation monitor, you will see your time counting down for those who are participating virtually when called upon. Please wait until our meeting. Host Promote you to speaker. When you are promoted your screen will ask permission to allow us to promote you. Please accept the promotion. When you accept the promotion. Your screen will flash and say, Reconnecting to meeting. Please don't leave the meeting. You will be connected and will need to turn on your camera if you have one. And your microphone. You will see your time counting down at the bottom of your screen. Once you finish speaking, you will change back to participant mode and see your screen flash one more time. All speakers should begin their remarks by telling the council their names and cities of residence and if they feel comfortable doing so. Their Home Address. If you've signed up to answer questions only, please state your name and note that you are available for questions of counsel. Speakers will have 3 minutes. There is no yielding of time. If translation is needed, you will be given an additional 3 minutes for your comments to be interpreted. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing. Must direct their comments to the council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Council members say to Barker, Will you please put Council Bill 20 to dash to 99 on the floor for final passage? I move that council bill 22 dash to 99 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for Council Bill 20 2-2 99 is open and we have Council Member Sandoval who chaired the working group. She'll do the presentation this evening. Thank you, Madam President and colleagues. I just wanted to give a presentation for the public hearing before we hear from the community. I had the honor and privilege of chairing this process, and I had two amazing colleagues helping me along the way. I would like to acknowledge Councilman Herndon and Councilwoman Black for your dedication and all the time that you put into this process. And I'd also like to thank Emily Lapel from our central staff. So next slide, please. So this slide is really tiny because we ended up doing a lot in a very short amount of time. The first thing that happened was in March of 21, the council president assigned the Redistricting Working Group, which was made up of myself, Councilman Herndon and Councilwoman Black. We started working and figuring out the process. We met with Dr. Theobald from UCC US, who is a redistricting specialist. She gave us guidance and helped us along the way. We came up with the idea for a meeting in a box and community engagement strategies and data collection. We created a media plan website and outreach tools. We recruited staff. We had two interns along the way to help us analyze all of the information that we got in July of 21 City Council. We elected new leadership, and at that time, I officially became the chair of the Redistricting Working Group. We went to think of to give an update. We started our community outreach process, which is define your Denver and what define your Denver meant for residents was we asked them what they thought their communities of interest were. Once and then in August, the clerk referred a ballot measure to change the ballot reform, which ultimately changed our election. We purchased the map dated software and part of the aptitude software that was so important it was able to give a direct translation. It was not Google translation. It was actually translated into your native language, the entire website, which was very important for us as the small working group. It also had, for the first time ever, a public portal so that the public part could participate in map drawing. Last time, ten years ago, we had two licenses. We had one and both of them were here on the fourth floor. So if you wanted to create a map, you had to figure out and come down to the fourth floor of the city and county building and use our software. And so with the purchase of map data, we were able to have a public facing portal. We started working on the resolution and principles of procedure. And at that time, I met with each council office to gain your feedback on what your council district, what you thought of your council district, things that were challenges, things that were benefits and burdens. We filed our resolution for principles and procedures, and then finally we received a data received data from the Census Bureau in September. And normally, this data usually comes out in the spring. And once again, this data did not come out until September. In October, we adopted our rules and procedures, the year resolution. We had internal meetings with GIS to go over our map to to our represent a bill where we talked about our communities of interest. We worked with CSU students on the maps of the communities of interest. We were able to train city council and staff on our redistricting software. We completed our defined year Denver process, which was communities of interest and opened up the map attitude. So we had a demo on our website. Then in the December of 21 this are clear can read Carter did repressing Diem and came up with their new precincts, which are the base of all of our work that we have to do for City Council in January through the end of January, from January 1st through the end of February into January. The public was able to submit and draw their own maps. And then from February, City Council submitted their maps that we debated all in February. We had public meetings. We had public vetting of the proposed maps. We had many debates. In March, the committee we approved to to move forward. And on first reading, we have the map here in front of us. And today, the day after Cesar Chavez Day, we are here for a public hearing to adopt our final map. Next slide, please. We had some unique challenges this time around when it came to redistricting. We had a COVID 19 pandemic. We had the surge of Akron. We had, for the first time ever in Colorado history, we had a state independent redistricting commission. We had delayed census information. And we had a ballot initiative in November of last year which changed our municipal elections from May to April. Next slide, please. Although we had a lot of challenges in 2021, we were able to do a lot of work. We hosted a mapping drive. We received 154 maps. We hired a facilitator for the first time in Denver history. We had a facilitator working on providing input for the public meetings and round the public meetings. We created outreach materials for each council office to work with. We worked with the Office of Social Equity and Innovation. We had two weeks of training for City Council, and we also provided training for the first time ever on magnitude software for the public. Next slide, please. Some of the highlights from 2021 were the resolution where we increased the number of public hearings. We required language, language access. We incorporated language surrounding communities of interest, which had never happened before. We were able to have the aptitude redistricting training. We were able to have represented Borg, which is the anti gerrymandering software, which was the base for a lot of our maps. We received 154 maps and it was the first municipality in the country to use represent Apple in official capacity at this level. Thanks to Dr. Theobald and her suggestion on using that software, we created a social media meeting, media and a meeting in a box which was translated into two different languages for councils to use. Next slide, please. The redistricting timeline for this year, which is only three months. We had the public create maps. City Council created their maps. We vetted those maps with a facilitator. We had guys created Dashboard with equity data layers for the first time ever in redistricting history in Denver. We had two virtual meetings, four in person, so a total of six meetings, which was more than the last time ten years ago. We received weekly updates from our facilitator about the meetings or the public meetings that were held. That never happened before in the history of redistricting. We deliberated on our maps and ultimately we are here today. One last thing we will do in April is central staff will work with our communications person in Central to come up with a final report which will go into the city archives. When we started digging into this ten years ago. When Emily and I took on this adventure in 2020, in the midst of a pandemic and started doing research, the note keeping and the record keeping of our council is not very robust, and that is something that I hope to change with this process, that we leave better tools for those who come after us in ten years. Some of the highlights from 2022. Next slide, please. We had, as I mentioned, the six meetings. We had three over 389 participants. We represented 54 neighborhoods. We had a community report for the first time ever that was put in the record highlighting what happened at the community meetings. We had a dashboard that was able to talk about equity and incorporated information from Denver Human Services. And to date, we have received 269 public comments from Denver residents. Next slide. I just wanted to remind the public and my colleagues that these are the rules that are set per charter. Draw 11 council districts. Have them be as equal in population as possible. Must contain contiguous territories. Must be compact. Compact as possible. Must contain whole election precincts, and must be approved by this evening. March 29, 2022. Other considerations that we had to take. Next slide, please. Other considerations that we had to take into consideration is the deviation. So each council district must have as much as the equal population of the 11 council districts. The one with the largest population and the one with the smallest cannot have any 10% larger. Race and ethnicity should be taken into consideration, and district lines must follow obvious geographic boundaries to the greatest extent possible. What else we took into consideration in our resolution is that we would respect collegial and statistical neighborhood boundaries to the greatest extent possible. And we heard that often throughout our meetings is how important it was to keep our neighborhood boundaries hold, that we would preserve logical communities of interest and the core existing constituencies traditionally represented to the greatest extent possible. And we would do our best not to have to incumbents in the same council district. Next slide. And this slide is Map D draft two, which will have our public hearing this evening. And I would just like to thank the public for your patience as we went through this process in the middle of a pandemic, where oftentimes we did we had to pivot at the last minute, as many, all of us have, and thank the leadership of City Council for giving me this opportunity to create new tools and a different experience for the residents of Denver when it came to the redistricting process. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. For the staff report. For the report, we have six individuals signed up to speak this evening. All of them are joining us virtually. And our first speaker is Shannon Hoffman. Hello. Can I be heard? Yes. Thank you. Good evening, members of council. My name is Shannon Hoffman and I live in District ten. Thank you for directing me to speak tonight instead of last week. That was a very helpful phone call from the city manager's office directing me to speak here. Thank you for rebooting the zoom last week before I still attempted to make comment and essentially silencing me. Thank you for this entire redistricting process and the changes described in the presentation. Thank you for doing what not only I would describe, but other community members have described as a low bar for engaging community members in this process . And thank you for telling community members who did take the time to engage in this complicated process that they were, quote, signed on to a letter they didn't read or understand that when they came to a community meeting, they were, quote, trying to disrupt the process and that if we supported one particular map that was more equitable than others, we were, quote, spewing propaganda of one councilmember. Thank you for coming into the community input process with six votes already supporting one map. Thank you for supporting a map which the person who drew it didn't even show to committee the day it was thoroughly reviewed. And no supporters of the map used one data layer to indicate why they supported it. Thank you for. Voting to approve tonight. A map that will create seven districts with more than 50% white people. Two more districts with 45% white people. And a city that was the first in the country for displacing Latinos. Thank you for approving a map that will put districts three, eight, nine, ten and 11 all at or above the 65,000 person threshold. When we know census undercounting occurred last year and we know we are being overdeveloped with luxury units in a rapidly growing housing crisis. Thank you for prioritizing yourselves and your reelections over our community voice and our community needs. Thank you for all of this, because the fire that is raging in my chest and my belly after this experience is growing. So thank you for that. My community members and I are ready for the community to lead this process. We want an independent redistricting commission with the democratized power to make decisions about these maps. And we want more than that. We want co governance with the people who cannot pay 1600 dollars a month for rent, with the people who sleep outside, with the people who can't breathe there outside. With the people who can't. Get to their hourly wage job on time because of our transit system. So, community, I hope you are ready to fight because these seats are ours. This money is ours, this map is ours. And thank you so much for this process. Thank you. Our next speaker is Darryl Watson. When it's not. Yes, President, the devil can say all. Gilmore Miembros del Kinsale. Darryl Watson Soy Owen Resident ID Adrian Tanyas Steal the street all the way back up inside they came a bolo is de central mango e crazy in as easily as we heard is my spaniel annoys me when I'm wrong. I mean my presentation is going to be in what I refer to as Spanglish. A little English and a little Spanish. Durante El Proceso de recherche three Tashjian la palabra marlene seh or traders two one people was used Paradis CRU beer honorable in the Emperor's Day Stoke on sale it doesn't matter. The insult was made to face to face a car rally by tweet or retweet. Words have impact. That term was despicable. It was shameful. It's no shame because this city rightfully honors Cesar Chavez yesterday and throughout this week. Korea competition to win on the way by palabra hero Gina. I have known each of the members of council malign with that insult challenging their leadership during redistricting, put community first and demonstrated respect for the process. Let me share why they are heroines, not only for their people, but for this city. One of our heroines has focused her life to fighting for the rights of the immigrants, indigenous people and other marginalized communities. The other has spent her time elevating the voice of youth in MONDELLO in Toda La Ciudad or the Arena stepped up during COVID pandemic to expedite care for her community. Saving the lives and protecting the health of many. She also successfully led this redistricting process during a global pandemic. No less Fenomeno de Nuestro de my hero, Lina Patriota, three decades ago. Encourage us to imagine a great city, a great city, not because of our buildings on Weber, Equipo de Baseball or Nueva Aeropuerto. Our focus was always about the people. That has been our focus during the redistricting process. She knew then, and it is important to remember now that people are what makes Denver a great city. She has committed her life to this work. That's Las personas in Denver. I personally thank each of you for your example and your life of service to the other members of Council. Congratulations for leading a successful redistricting process. The voices of the silent majority often gone heard in these public hearings. On behalf of them, I thank you for your service and your leadership. I encourage Council to vote yes on map draft two, which is gracious. Everyone has notice. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jesse Paris. Oh, yes. Good evening. Members of council may be heard. Yes. Yes. My name is Justin the song pair some represent for Blackstar action moment for self-defense positive I come chains as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, the East Denver Residence Council and Frontline Black News. And I'll be the next hour of Denver in 2023. I'm against the redistricting map that was chosen to be published tonight. I attended a meeting on February 23rd at Emanuel High School, where about 60 people were in attendance. And the consensus of that meeting was Matt E Amanda Sandoval's math majority of the people that were there were in unison with that map. And to see today that the Council has voted against that map and opted for map D is very disingenuous to the process, the climate. She did all kinds of outreach with communities. The communities voice is not being heard. Like I said, I attended a meeting on the 23rd. The consensus of that meeting was map. It was had the least deviation from the previous map or our current map since 2015. And to see that you are voting for D is, like I said, is very disingenuous to the process. So I'm against map B because this is not the meeting in your high school was Map E and now you're choosing to go with B. So as Shannon Hoffman alluded to, this whole council needs to be replaced. This whole mayor needs to be replaced. Really, this whole system needs to be replaced and replaced with a system of justice. This process was not just the voices of the people are being silenced. The same people actually clamor. Being marginalized and disenfranchized in every area of society are once again being marginalized and disenfranchized in this process. So thank you for allowing me the time to speak. Please vote against Matt. The vote no on Matt. That is not what the community wanted. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Christina Xie. All right. Can you guys hear me? Yes. All right. Well, thanks for letting me speak this week on the process, since you had first and second last week specifically asking me not to speak on this process, even though the process was still going on last week. So a good portion of council is back, the same that from the start. Without providing any real transparency for the public. What was the purpose of the community input meetings? If you're going to ignore the questions and comments completely brought up during the meetings was not an active participant towards the beginning of the process because really shouldn't be our job to make sure council is still working for the people. The only reason why I started looking to them is because someone from the mayor's office made his opinion very loud and clear at a meeting that but not with basis and maybe not fact, but someone from the mayor's office was there just to shut down one map and then put maybe E or F was highly suspicious and made want to look into nothing more. And if you've heard the same verbiage, supporting methods, because that was the only that was full transparency was provided for a council member providing a 40 minute video breaking down layer by layer. Why then? That was not the way it was. It seems like the mayor's office actually had some plans at the public meetings to a conversation. So why are you supporting this? Not that the mayor's office has been pushing. You've not provided transparency to the public on the map you're voting on tonight. So again, I ask equity for whom are you protecting majority minority districts? Are maps complying with the Voting Rights Act. Why did the request to include community voting data in the public report get shot down by a council member with? Well, I don't know what that's going to do. I could get data shows, community input, which should be taken into consideration. Picking a map that will affect all of us for the next decade is supposed to serve the people. Stop degrading and deflecting defined. Gerrymandering is not the same thing as showing us how your math prevent gerrymandering and to say Denver voters. Voters are color blind and insinuate racism is not an issue in Denver. It is extremely dangerous for others. It's a privilege to think that way. But for people of color, we know that reckless rhetoric leads to senseless murders. Why aren't you taking community input into consideration of making these decisions? Why are you protecting this community? Why aren't you protecting the tax payers who claim to care about your actions? Do not align with your words. You claim to care about saving taxpayer dollars and then go and increase the deficit budget. I've already told you over and over again they don't protect us when we terrorize and traumatize us and you somehow decide it from community input of police brutality to increase their budget. We want to talk about Ukraine. Why don't you focus on what needs to be done in this city? I mean, focus on the civilians being targeted in Denver by DPD and now we're paying these large settlements and counting as the terrorizes local communities. Any solutions for that or are you just lip service for the mayor's office? Why has nothing improved in the last few years? Your Band-Aid solutions do nothing to protect this community. Does it matter what I say? You guys are going to vote the way you showed up. You would vote from the start in favor of the mayor's office. Outside of the personal gain from your position, I just want to know, is the city something you're proud of? Are you proud of the homeless crisis created by the city you want to talk about humanitarian crisis, look at your own city. Are you proud of that? You're continuously. Some of our city corporations are displacing people. Thank you. That's the thing. We have a lot of treat. Speaker Our next speaker is David Hagan. Oh, thanks. Wait, no, I'm not going to. Thank you, counsel. Not going to thank you for bringing me up here tonight. I'm not going to thank you for being here tonight because I don't want to be here. I'm not going to thank the people that have spoken about the people tonight. I'm going to go ahead and thank Candace Owens, the one that went before Jesse Perez. I think. I think that was his name, Candace Owens. Let's go over how this whole thing has gone tonight. We talked about data and September rules in October. We spoke to guys. We did this. We were the communities of interest. God, we are good. We are for the people of Denver. My God. Listen to me. I am going to speak highly about myself. We went to community interest. We define. We define your Denver. We went by these precincts. We went through these public maps. And then in February, we went through these council maps, public meetings, public vetting. And then a day after Cesar Chavez Day, I think I about threw up when I heard that. Unbelievable that this is the that we're looking at. I think that everybody's spoken about the fact that this is not the map we should be looking at. This is not equitable. This is not this is not the way that Denver should be looking for the next ten years. This is the way that we whitewash Denver and continue to gerrymander to produce a map of Denver that is not of the people. This is a map for that view. This is a map for the the wealthy. This is a map for whoever it is that's pulling your strings. This is not a map for the people. I had something put together to say, but I mean, I just didn't really feel it necessary. Like like like was said prior to. To me, it doesn't matter what I say. It doesn't matter what anybody else says. You all just figured you get one person to come up here and and and jerk us all off, and then we'd be stand behind your map. Now, the truth is, the proof is in the pudding. I think this how they say it. I like what Shannon's. I will actually talk about Shannon for a second. She spoke about a fire in her belly. That fire is not only in her belly, it is elsewhere. There may only be a few people up here tonight, but there are many, many more that are going to come and take every one of your asses out of those seats, because this is not representing Denver. This is not for the people. This is not for anything other than whoever it is that pulls your strings. And I don't know why y'all are the mayor's minions, but you are. You do whatever he says you like. The wonderful person said before me. How much? 14 million. That's just the start. We're at the beginning and it's just 14 million. That's what your redistricting map is going to do. We're going to do more money to those asshats and 14 million to this group. And there's a 50 person lawsuit coming out of that, right? 50 people. That was only, what, 11 or 12? 14 million. That's the time where they're. Going to take that. Want to try? Our next speaker is Katie Blakey. Council members. My name is Katie Blakey and I live in District ten. I wanted to start by thanking the council members who put some sort of effort into creating a strong map. So to those of you who considered equity, population growth, census undercounts. Communities of interest. Community feedback. Thank you. I don't like math. There are a lot of reasons, but most personal to me is that it breaks up my home. A defined community of interest. Capitol Hill. Now I know that many maps broke off Capitol Hill. Well, I wasn't thrilled about it. I recognized that with some maps. This meant they would allow marginalized voters in Denver to retain some sort of power and would distribute future growth more equitably. I'm okay with my neighborhood being split if it serves some sort of greater good. The greater good does not include the reelection schemes of incumbents. I'm particularly disappointed in those who broke up my neighborhood because math is hard or because we live in the real world, not Narnia, or because they just didn't want to put in the effort to listen to their community and make an equitable map. Decisions like these should be made for the benefit of the residents of Denver, not for politicians who don't even know the names of the neighborhoods surrounding their area. This process has been painful. Understand that council is working with some difficult circumstances and I don't want to dwell too much because to be quite honest, this whole process has been really distressing and exhausting. So thank you to the few council members who really engaged. Thank you so much to the community members. Most council members ignored who showed up throughout the whole process and worked a whole lot harder than most council members to come up with the massive benefits done right. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers this evening. Questions for members of Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 299. Seen no questions. Councilmember Ortega, do you have a question or do you have a comment? It's actually a. Comment, but. Okay. Clarification from the city. Okay. Can we if it's a a comment, I want to make sure we stand for clarification or clarification. Okay. We'll disregard then mean gaveling out and closing the public hearing. Go ahead, Councilmember Ortega, with your. I apologize. I think I was. That's okay. At the same time, you know, if that's okay, I thought I gave it enough beats, but no, that's that's totally fine. So please go ahead with your. So I want to ask the city attorney to just clarify the process of redistricting and the role that the mayor's office plays in the process, because this has historically been a city council led process under our charter. And so I wanted to just get your sort of confirmation or clarification of that. Sure. Councilman Ortega Archibong, a Legislative Council councilman under Charter 3.1.2. Redistricting in Salt Lake City Council. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right. Now the president. Councilmember Ortega, appreciate that clarification. Now the public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 299. Councilmember Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to first acknowledge that we did have, in fact, a very open and transparent process. It started as early as we were able to begin with without having had the benefit of the census data, which is what is critical, as well as the new precincts that have to be done based on the the new districts that are done at the state level. And so the fact that the federal government did not produce the census data as early as they normally do, it created an expedited process. And I do want to thank Councilwoman Sandoval, as well as Councilwoman Black and Councilman Herndon, who were the the three the committee that that move the process forward to all of us. I did work on a map. I had posted it, but I never shared it as a map that I submitted. I guess it was shared on the on the map tattooed site, but it was not submitted for consideration because I did have conversations with my colleagues whose districts would be impacted, and there were concerns about why they would not support it. So I did not take it further to try to count the votes among other members whose districts were not being impacted with the changes I was proposing. So I chose not to submit it. So I think in in the background, there were lots of us looking at different ways to try to bring a map forward that created the balance of representation so that it was equalized, as we're basically mandated to do, and also taking into account that these boundaries will be in place for the next, you know, 10 to 12 years, because by the time we get the next census data, it's typically two years after the, you know, the ten year cycle of when this process happens. So I will be supporting the map that came forward. It did change from the very beginning that it was introduced. I shared my thoughts with. One of the members who was a catalyst in bringing that forward. That individual actually helped me shape the map that I worked on and ended up posting. But at the end of the day, it comes down to do we have the votes to move a map forward that adheres to all of our rules and guidelines? And this map, in fact, does that. So I will be supporting it tonight. Thank you, Councilmember Ortega. Councilmember Herndon. Thank you, Madam President. I want to go back to August of 2011. So we were barely four weeks into my first term. And and I remember Council President Nevitt coming up to me and saying, hey, I would like for you to be on redistricting. And I'm like, Great. What exactly does that entail? Four weeks into my council term and we were six new council members, four district council members, along with council members Ortega and Kennedy, each at large. And we put together a map, that one I'm very proud of, because for the 2015 and 2019 elections, that was the city council map that got us the council that we have before us, which is Councilman Flynn, who talked about probably the most diverse and representative council we've had. But the work that we did a decade ago, compared to the work that we just did in the past few months, doesn't even compete or compare. And I appreciate Councilwoman Sandoval just highlighting some of those ways we were ensuring that community was going to be first and foremost during this process from and finding and reaching out to a redistricting expert to touch on community several different ways and paper through mailing, through virtual, through representative all the different ways we could in the middle of a pandemic. No and no less. With virtual meetings and person meetings. And so I'm so proud of this process. And so Catwoman Sandoval, Councilwoman Black, Emily Lapel. We cannot tell you. Thank you enough for the work that they did, because on the small group, I saw all the effort that they put in and how much they cared for this process, and you cannot thank them enough. So just a process in itself. I want to tell them thank you because they're not going to hear it enough for all the work that they put into it. And I'm proud of the map that we have before us. And yes, it is a map of their sponsor. But there were other maps that I didn't support that had they gotten the majority of votes, I believe would have been effective maps as well. I do believe that Map D is the best are the ones we had before us. No map is perfect. We have requirements through populations separating neighborhoods. But to my colleagues who did this, to the community that did this, thank you as well. And I. I hope that my colleagues support met in person to take them on present. Thank you. Councilmember Herndon. Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to talk on map D and say that in this map in Council District one, we lose the West Colfax neighborhood. And I heard from the Jewish community not long ago. My office is working on a cultural district, cultural and landmark district for the Jewish Orthodox Jewish community in West Colfax. And they had were nervous about representation. And I remember ten years ago that they were also worried about representation because West Colfax was going to be split. Now it's going to be made whole again. And so for those residents who are watching in West Colfax, I still have the honor and privilege of representing you in this next year, up until July of 23. And it has been an honor to work with those communities. And at the same time, it has also been an honor to work with counsel, mentors, that cultural and landmark district for our residents in the Jewish community who have been in the West Colfax neighborhood for 150 years, and just want to say thank you for all of the feedback on all of the maps and all of the processing. I think one thing that I've learned through the entire process is there's a lot of passion involved in this, and it's because it's home is where your heart is, and when your heart is in something, you will elicit a lot of passion and feelings and emotion. And so I know that I personally have a lot of passion and feelings, and I know the North Side and Denver is where my home is and where I'm raising my kids. And so it's been an honor and privilege to be part of this process. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I want to thank Councilman Herndon for raising the point that I believe I raised in committee when the maps were all before us in the committee the whole few weeks back. The map that was approved after the 2010 census and put into play for the 2015 election gave the voters of Denver the ability , as you see up here on the dais. To elect their representatives who almost precisely reflect the demographics of Denver. It's remarkable. And it's my expectation that map D while no map is perfect. We necessarily have to split some neighborhoods because of where the population numbers fall and where the precinct lines fall. But while no map is perfect, it's my expectation that Map D will produce the same way that the map of 2011 for the 2015 election produced. A council that looks like this city. And with that, I will vote for my party. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn, and see no other council members in the queue. I'll go ahead and round out the comments before we do our roll call vote. I would like to really sincerely thank all of the community members who participated in the redistricting process. We had more participation by community members than ever before in the history of our great city, and we knew that this was going to be a very difficult process and one that everyone wasn't going to be happy with. The Final Map. Councilwoman Sandoval, Councilman Herndon and Councilman Black, along with Emily Lapel from our legislative staff, have been stellar in their coordination, in their leadership and ensuring that we had a good process that followed all of the requirements that we had to make sure we checked the boxes on. And as already stated, that this is the first time in Denver's history that city council use technology. And we expanded the community outreach during this process to ensure that we heard from our community and we started this back with the community in October of last year. And I know that this council did the work, that we followed the process. And it's indicated indicative that when Councilman Herndon and I had a combined office hours on the 18th of this month, we didn't have anybody show up. And that is indicative to me that community members understood our process. They understood the requirements that we had to make sure that we met for the redistricting maps and that they understood the difficult work that we had to do. And then again tonight, we had six speakers for this one map. We could have easily had 50, 75 to 100 community members. We it's a required hearing. We would stay here and listen as long as it takes to make it through all of the speakers. And we have done that. And so I know that we have followed the process, we have done the work and I am happy to support D this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 22, Dash 299, please. Can each. I. Sawyer. I black. I see tobacco. No. Clark. I. Flinn. I. Herndon. I. Hinds. Cashman. Ortega, i. Sandoval, i. Torres, I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. One 812 Eyes. 12 Eyes Council Bill 20 2-299 has passed our pre adjournment announcement on Monday, April 25th. Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 22, Dash 246 Changing the zoning classification for 2039. South William Street in University are required public hearing on Council Bill 22, Dash 249 Changing the zoning classification for 41, 51 and 4155 Jason

A bill for an ordinance authorizing a transfer of cash from the Excise Tax Base Account for an increase in appropriation to the 2017 General Fund Contingency and subsequent supplemental appropriations to the Affordable Housing Property Tax Revenue Fund and the City Attorney. Appropriates $9,451,397 to the 2017 General Fund Contingency due to excess revenue derived from the recent settlement surrounding hotel lodgers tax revenue; appropriates $4,058,171 to the Affordable Housing Property Tax Revenue Fund; and appropriates $5,393,226 to the City Attorney’s Office for legal fees associated with the settlement. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 11-21-17.

DenverCityCouncil_12042017_17-1319

13 nays 22 has failed. Thanks for catching that, Councilman Flynn. All right, Councilwoman Quinn, each 319 is up, and you had a question. Thank you, Mr. President. It's 1319. I know the correct bill is up, and it is actually to request that it be put on the floor for a vote. This bill transfers funds from a settlement into several different funds, including the housing fund, which is a great place for the funds to go. But due to some timing and questions that are unresolved, I'm going to abstain tonight. All right. Any other any other comments? Members of council. Councilman Clark, will you please put 1319 on the floor to Bill for induction? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 1319 be ordered published. All right. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. And I can say. Can each Epstein. Lopez I knew. Ortega. I. Sussman. My black guy. Clark. Espinosa. Flynn. I. Gillmor, i. Herndon. Cashman. Mr. President. I was very keen as a result. To advise one abstention. To advise one abstention. 319 has been adopted. All right. We have one last one, 1196. Please pull that up. Madam Secretary and Councilman Flynn, you had a question for this one.

Recommendation to reallocate $5,000 of funding within the Special Advertising and Promotions Fund Group in the City Manager Department from the current allocation for the Martin Luther King Jr. Day Parade to instead be utilized to provide a donation to Partners of Parks for the 2022 Juneteenth Celebration at Rainbow Lagoon Park.

LongBeachCC_05242022_22-0617

We want to do all of the fund transfer items. Item 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 35, I mean 34, 35, 36 and 37. And I guess to turn it over to the clerk to read them off. Item 18 is communication from counsel mentioned they has a recommendation to increase appropriations by $1,000 to provide a donation to project Welcome Home Trips. Item 19 is a communication from Councilwoman Allen recommendation to increase appropriation by $1,000 to provide a donation to the Long Beach Panther partners. Parks in support of the Long Beach Juneteenth celebration. And increase appropriations by $1,000 to provide a donation to Wild West Woman Inc in support of a screening of Still Working 9 to 5 on July 24, 2022. Item 21 is a communication from Councilwoman Praise recommendation to increase appropriation by $250 to provide a contribution to the Long Beach Unified School District for the Woodrow Wilson High School Senior Celebration 2022. Item 23 is communication from Councilmember Muranga recommendation to increase appropriation by $1,000 to provide a donation to partners at Parks to support the Long Beach Juneteenth celebration. Item 34 is a communication from Councilman Super now councilwoman price recommendation to increase appropriations by $1,000 to provide a contribution to the Tickner Clinic for Children for the seventh Annual Super Heroes Carnival and Resource Fair. Item 35 is a communication from Councilwoman Price recommendation to increase appropriations by $350 to provide a contribution to the Center Long Beach in support of the black and white ball. Item 36 is a communication from Councilwoman Sara recommendation to reallocate $5,000 to provide a donation to Love Beyond Limits for the 2022 Juneteenth celebration at MLK Junior Park. Item 37 is communication from Councilwoman Sarah recommendation to reallocate $5,000 to provide a donation to partners at Parks for the 2022 Juneteenth celebration at Rainbow and at Rainbow Lagoon Park. Okay. Those are all the items. It's been moved to the second it. Is there any public comment on the. Consent for fund transfers. There's no public comment. Here and none on anything from buying the real. Okay, members, please cast your votes. I'm sorry. Councilmembers in Dallas. I just have a brief statement. Councilwoman Allen actually sent me a brief statement that she wanted me to read in regards to this item since she could MP here tonight. Councilwoman Palin says that she is proud to support two important events that highlight gains one in two civic civic rights struggles that continue on today. She is proud to support Juneteenth for the second year and wants to thank the organizers for ensuring that this wonderful event is free to all attendees. Juneteenth is a chance for all of us to come together, and Councilwoman Allen is excited to join residents and from across the city and the region to celebrate our diversity and heritage together. Councilwoman Allen is also proud to support the free screening of still working nine to 9 to 5 at the Arts Theater on July 21st, put on by Zoe Nicholson at Wild West Women. This film is educational and inspirational, and she wants to thank the organizers for holding the screening at the evening hours when families may be able to attend. Thank you, Zoe, for your timeless advocacy and efforts educating us on. Thank you. Great. Any other comments? Harry Nunn, please vote. Emotions carry. Thank you. So our next item is the general public comments from Clark. Is there any public comment?

Recommendation to approve naming the green space/median located between 1st Street and Loma Avenue the John Parkin Green Space.

LongBeachCC_08142018_18-0343

Council member, Urunga. Councilmember Richardson. Motion carries. Thank you. We also had a request to move item 13. Communication from Vice Mayor Andrew's Housing and Neighborhoods Committee recommendation to approve naming the green space median located between First Street and Loma Avenue, the John Park and Green Space. Q There's a there's a motion in a second. Do I want to go to Vice Mayor Andrews first? Your motion. Okay, go ahead. Vice Mayor. Yes, I would like to move a motion myself. Okay. I think I think I think the vice mayor wants to move the motion and picture. Excuse me. I'd like to move this motion, please. Okay. My colleagues. Can we get a push? The motion can get a second on that. Okay. Vice managers? Yes. You know, I think that this is something Mrs. Price has really put a lot of time in with this, but I think it's a wonderful idea and I support it 100%. Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second Councilwoman Price. Thank you. This park is being dedicated to an amazing resident who loved his neighbors and his community, and they loved him in return. This item really came fourth as a result of the community reaching out and asking for a space that can be dedicated to Mr. Parkin and to all the great work that he did for many years in his community. He played an important role in the history of Long Beach because it was a very, very modest man, and many of his closest friends and neighbors didn't even know what he had done for the city over the course of his life. I want to invite everyone to a dedication of this screen space on Saturday at. I'll give you the details right now. Sorry, I didn't pull them up. Saturday, the 18th that we will be at. First and Loma. At 9:30 a.m. to dedicate the space, the Bluff Bluff Heights Bluff Park Community Association will be with us, as well as the Park and family. So please join us. I make user public comment on the John Parkin green space. Please cast your vote. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Parkin. I would just like to thank the mayor and the council and the Bluff Park and Neighborhood Association. This is my father. And it's very humbling, but very nice and very nice tribute. This space is actually right out front of where my grandmother used to live, so he was always tinkering with that. So this is kind of fitting. So thank you very much. Thank you. So there is a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. And item 16.

Recommendation to receive and file the application of Michael Eutseok Kim, dba Sushi Zen Maru, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 454 Pine Avenue. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_04192016_16-0341

Thank you. Sir, any member of the public that wish to address the Council on item 24. Seeing None members cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Item 25 Report from Police Recommendation to receive and file the application of Sushi San Maru for an original application of an ABC license at four or five for Pine Avenue District one . Councilman Gonzales? Yes. Commander Lisbon, is there a staff report? Uh, yes, councilwoman, there is. And so honorable vice mayor and members of City Council, this items an application for a new type 41 on sale, beer and wine. ABC licenses for a restaurant. This restaurant has been operating since 2007 and they're just now applying for an ABC license. The police department has conducted our investigation. We don't anticipate any adverse impact with the issuance of this license, and that concludes my report. Thank you very much. And I think we'll go forward with supporting the the motion, the recommendation. Councilman Austin. Great, sir. Any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 25. CNN members cast your vote. Motion carries. The great item 26 report from Police Recommendation to receive and file the application of Chipotle Mexican Grill for an original application of an ABC license at 4250 Long Beach Boulevard District eight.

Ordinance Amending City of Boston Code, Ordinances, Chapter VII, Sections 7-2.1 and 7-2.2, Building Energy Reporting and Disclosure (BERDO).

BostonCC_09222021_2021-0775

Docket 0775. The Committee on Government Operations, to which was referred on June 16th, 2021. Docket number 0775 An Ordinance Amending the City of Boston Code Ordinances. Chapter seven, Section seven, Dash 2.1 and seven. Dash 2.2. Building Energy Reporting and disclosure, known as Bourdeaux, submits a report recommending the audit ordinance ought to pass in a new draft. Thank you, Madam Chair. No, thank you, Madam Clerk. Chair recognizes Councilor Edwards, the chair of the Committee on Government Operations. Councilor, would you have the floor? In a moment. But before we get to the substance of the the ordinance, I'd like to substitute the committee report. There was one passed around earlier to all my colleagues. All the changes, all the amendments are just technical and slight grammatical and just for clarification purposes. So I move to have the new report submitted here. Hearing no objections, the substitution of language council. I would you may. You may proceed. Thank you all. I am excited to bring this this ordinance before the body for a vote. This ordinance has been years in the making, and it's the second version of expanding our building emissions reductions in the city of Boston. This this is after the result of a robust hearing with many, many people in two working sessions where we made sure that we had all of the feedback and the concerns addressed in each one of them. And I want to I want to thank again the advocates who came out. There's just too many organizations to to name. But they were instrumental in this in this moment and in the conversation, which I thought was incredibly respectful, informative and inclusive. It was in three languages, at least two, as all of us really recognize, that we are all stakeholders in our future and an agreement at that. I want to thank Councilor O'Malley for his leadership, and I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to him as a lead sponsor for any further remarks. That's okay with you. Thank you, Councilor Edwards. Chair now recognizes the original sponsor. Councilor O'Malley. Councilor O'Malley, you have the floor. Thank you. Chair, if you could just press. Thank you very much. You know you're good. I am good. One more time. There you go. Now get good. You got it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You got it. You know, fatherhood offers one hell of a perspective. Not only does it really make you or parenthood, I should say, offers one hell of a perspective. Yes, I really I just said hell of a twice on the council floor, because I'd be yelling at all of you for doing so. I you have a dispensation. Thank you. But it really has helped me sort of appreciate the important things in life and also take stock of of of what we should be grateful for. And I am incredibly grateful for standing in front of all of you and having this opportunity to bring this amendment. This we call it an ordinance that's actually technically an amendment. But to bring it to a vote and I'll tell you a little bit story that when I was first elected, 2010, November 30th, 2010 is when I was sworn in. I actually had a really good office for a month and then a month later, as the newest member, I was bumped down to what is now a niece's office and I was there languishing for many years. The other thing in those days, committee assignments were doled out strictly by seniority. Martin can tell you this like no matter how many years you had, if you weren't on the right side of a council presidency vote, you wouldn't get the it didn't matter. You'd get the committee based on your years of service. I mention this to say that the last committee that anyone wanted in 2011 was the Committee on the Environment. So it went to me the most junior member and joke's on all of my colleagues. At the time that was the committee I most wanted and have had every year for the last 11 years. And we've done some great things. We've done some great things together from the plastic bag ban and wetlands, community choice, energy composting, the paperless pay stuff. Did you know that there was no opportunity at the beginning when I was first elected to opt out of getting my biweekly pay stub, our our salary is set by statute. It's not like it's going to change. And I couldn't opt out of it in those days. And I was actually criticized when I said let's let's have an opt out feature like most banks in the 21st century. And I say that to say of everything I've worked on legislative say this is the most proud I've ever been and I am the one who's lucky enough to introduce this. But the fact of the matter is, it is the people behind me. It is the people to our left and to our right. It is the people who couldn't be in this room because I said we're going to limit the crowds because I'm still we're going to be focused on COVID and being safe. This is all of us. This is collectively the work of eight years. We did Burton 1.0 in 2013. Tom Menino deserves enormous credit. This guy had better political instincts than anyone I've ever met and never got the credit he deserves. But he saw this coming. We were the first city in the country to simply say, you have to manage and measure your greenhouse, get your utility usage. That's it. There was no there was a fine associated with not complying. But in eight years, Alison, we've we've assessed how much and fined $0 because people did it and people realized this was the important thing to do, that ordinance, by the way, it passed. But it was a it was a vote of 9 to 4. And it shows how far we've come as a city. It was so it seems quaint now that that there was debate over that. And I don't mean to count my chickens before they've hatched, but I feel pretty good because of the great conversations and leadership of all of you of how we're going to have this vote today . But my point is, eight years ago we started this and this is the culmination. And it's because of the people in this room, the people who have put the blood, sweat and tears, recognizing the fact that climate change is an existential threat and it's up to cities and towns to lead. And we can do that. We have before us the most impactful decarbonization law that I would argue is anywhere in this country. We're going to lead on this. We've done we're not the first, but we are absolutely the best. We are going to decarbonize our large buildings over the next 25 years, full stop. And we're going to work to make sure that all of the work is centered around equity equality, addressing environmental justice communities and working with the institutions to get it right. And we had a question at that little presser earlier about the business community. It was a fair question. Business community has been largely supportive of this. Eight years ago, if you were here, Frank was here at the time. I think you're probably the only one here at the time. Eight years ago, when we were doing the first part of it, you had people actually lobbying councilors saying, you can't do this, you can't move ahead on this. You probably haven't heard from a lot of folks because people recognize the importance of what we're trying to do here. It will be absolutely ground breaking beginning in 2025 and following every five years thereafter. Through this ordinance, we'll be setting aggressive but achievable metrics. And that's the key point. We could have easily passed an ordinance saying we're going to decarbonize all of our buildings by 2030 and it would probably pass, you know, probably signed into law, but there'd be no blueprint to get us there. This actually does get us there. We're going to have aggressive but achievable metrics for buildings to reach a substantial cut in their greenhouse gas emissions. Obviously, we have different classifications and requirements for each building type from our hospitals to our commercial buildings, and we'll work with building owners to help them meet their goals and have already started those converts. With many, many stakeholders who are interested in getting a head start. Now, I'm hesitant to do this because I am sure I will leave someone out, so I apologize ahead of time. But I just needed to thank several individuals, starting with my chief of staff, Jessica morris, who has done such great work on my side on this and everything environmental for. To share. Lydia Edwards, who, you know, gave me high praise indeed, at the last working session, she said, this is the best working session I've done as government office chair, and it's largely because of her. She gets it. She understands it. She dives in the weeds and you facilitate an amazing process. Special shout out to Christine O'Donnell as well from central staff who has been. There for some. Thank you, Christine. Alison Breezes is our environment commissioner. She has been our quarterback this entire time on behalf of an incredible team. Brenda Pike, Kat Eshel, Hannah Payne, Stasia Shapira, Maurice Lodhi, Ben Silverman. Kathleen Hard, all working and supporting Alison. In this role, you have been marvelous. Thank you so. Much. Alison, this. Two, Chief Mariama White. Hammond, and before her chief Chris Cook, an unlikely duo as you will meet, but two of the most effective environment chiefs this city has ever said they helped get us here as well. Advocates. My God, many of whom are sitting behind me. Ricky Harvey. Andy Krasner. Anthony Camargo. Andy Wells Been. Dwayne Tindall. Sophia Owen. Michelle Brooks. Mark Lowe. Andrea Ad Carson Atkinson. And the team from one square world are off. Will, Emily, Tim and Larry from the DC special shout out for Tim Sullivan as well, who used to work here, who has been an amazing partner to me through this work as well, Mary Malta and so many stakeholders, especially those who are impacted by this ordinance. We've worked with all of you to achieve the best possible standards so we can all lead and achieve carbon neutrality goals. Our hospitals. Maskell This another instance about, you know, how the business community feeling. Maskell sent all of us a letter of support of this. That was a big gap. And if I may be a bit immodest, I will. I worked incredibly hard this summer working to try to find that common ground with folks without sacrificing what we set to do in this ordinance. And that wasn't always easy, but it was important and we want to get it right. And that's precisely what we are doing here. We're going to vote on this. The mayor is going to sign it, and we are going to cut begin cutting 37 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the next 30 years. This ordinance affects 4% of our total building stock. That's 3500 buildings. Yet those 4% of buildings account for nearly 60% of all building emissions. I'll be asking for a vote now on this transformative climate policy. I thank each and every one of you, my colleagues, all of you to a person. This is legacy stuff for all of us. This is stuff that we can say we voted on and we got it last time and I'm not going to do it again. But last time I cited all of our children's names. It's going to be these kids and their kids in generations to come that we are absolutely leading. I am enormously proud and grateful for each and every one of you. Now let's get this done. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank. Thank you, Count O'Malley. Job well done. Is there anyone else looking to speak on this matter? Not seeing any. Chair Edwards and Counsel O'Malley seek acceptance of the committee report and passage of Docket. 0775 in. A new draft. All those in favor say i. I. All those opposed say nay. Doubt the vote. Yes. Madam Clerk, will you take a roll call? Please be my honor. Good job, man. And I had black hair when it was eight years. Well. I do. I get 0775. I'm sorry. Counsel Arroyo. Counselor Arroyo? Yes. Counselor Baker. Counselor Baker. Counselor Bach. Counselor Bach. I Counselor Brady. Counselor, bring Counselor Campbell. Counselor Campbell. Yes. Counselor Edwards. Counselor Edward Diaz. Counselor Sabi George. Counselor Savage. George has. Counsel Clarity. Counsel clarity is. Counsel Flynn. Counsel Flynn is. Counselor me here. Counselor Me here. Counselor O'Malley Yes, I was just wondering about that. Counsel Counselor. Well, yes, Mr. Chair, docket number 0775 just passed unanimously. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. This is this is incredibly special. Moving right along. That was our only report of committee. So matters recently heard for possible action. Madam Clerk, would you please read docket 0398?

Recommendation to receive and file a report requested by Councilwoman Price from the California State University Long Beach Anthropology Department on their recent research and findings on the topic of Long Beach homelessness and outreach efforts.

LongBeachCC_05142019_19-0447

Great. Thank you very much. And thank you, Stephanie, who is also obviously putting a lot of work into that. With that, let me move on to item number 16. Communication from Councilwoman Price, Vice Mayor Andrew's Council member. The recommendation to receive and file a report requested by Councilman Price from CSU L.B. Anthropology Department on the topic of Long Beach homelessness and outreach efforts. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you. For the record, this is not the debate portion yet. I am presenting the agenda item. So I'm so glad to be receiving this report today. So if we can have our Long Beach State students come down, I'd really appreciate it. It was over two years ago now that we began discussing this research and the important role it could play for addressing homelessness in Long Beach. I want to thank our homeless outreach team and the Health Department, as well as our quality of life officers in the police department and our heart units in the fire department for working so closely with these students to ensure their research and information was strong. Focusing on the incredibly difficult question of why some people experiencing homelessness refuse services could have a huge impact on the way we conduct outreach. It takes 17 interactions on average to convince and build the credibility with an individual to accept services. And those 17 interactions are over months and sometimes years and mean city staff has to spend time and work to conduct this outreach and to build that credibility, focusing on how we can reduce that number and tailor outreach to get people to accept the fantastic services we provide here in Long Beach not only helps individuals, but improves our community and could save us money for classes from Cal State. Long Beach's anthropology department worked on this project for over two years. Over 550 hours of outreach and field work went into this report. They had 487 documented outreach encounters. Information on the use of global tickets and their potential benefits to getting people into services was very interesting. They did interviews with service providers that we partner with as a city and provided details on various hurdles to getting into services that can be studied as a city as we look at making our services and our outreach more efficient. So I'm going to welcome our team from CSU. I'll be to the podium. I want to thank you for your patience tonight. The students got to see how democracy works and to be a part of that process. Thank you. Honorary Mayor and member of councils. AUDIENCE Good evening. My name is Mitra Baghdadi. I'm from Department of Anthropology at California State University, Long Beach. And with me, I have a department chair, Dr. Karen Quintilian. Two of our students, Acacia, Adel, Anton, know one and two of our undergraduate undergraduate students, Phenix, Pedro and Iris Salazar. Homelessness got my attention. And when the movement of not in my backyard started popping up on our news feed and I noticed substantial number of close consultation and meeting by city officials and police officers were being held in the different communities across this city and neighborhood, and it was a part of process of how to do that , increasing part of process to deal with, you know, increasing number of homeless individuals in the streets. Since I live in District three, I also work in District three in case State Longreach and I have witnessed how Constable Missy Price product proactively was working to address homelessness issues around the city. Therefore, I approached her with an idea of creating a project that is mutually beneficial partnership between City of Long Beach and Department of Anthropology in California State University. Long Beach. Addressing a critical issue like homelessness, which is very important for our city and community. Councilwoman Suzy Price as she mentioned, invited and introduced Dr. Quintilian and I at. And our idea of this collaboration to meet with. And Ms.. Ms.. Theresa Chandler, city manager. Bureau of Helping of Health Services. And also with Ms.. Shannon Parker, Homeless Officer, Service Officer in March of 2017. I want to acknowledge that both of them are here. Thank you very much. For two years of collaboration. They they've worked with our students very and the entire two years. And our students were very fortunate to basically get many guidance from their. We listen to some of their challenges and we discuss a plan to conduct conduct. Ethnography research. Councilwoman Suzy Pryce wanted to make sure the project is a city recognized project and is specifically wanted to make sure that our students get the recognition for working on this project with the city and experience that needed to get our project. And our research is focused on understanding why many individuals who are experiencing homelessness don't regularly take up services offered to them by the city or government service providers. We tried to understand this question from multiple perspectives. We tried individuals, including individuals who are currently receiving services with individuals who are refused services. And more importantly, we talked with the authority members who attempt to address each client unique circumstances. In past two years. Dr. Karen Quintilian and I, in anthropology department with 12 graduate student and 14 undergraduate students, worked on a collaborative research project with the Department of Health and Human Services based and many of the continuum of care partners including. Quality of life officers in the police department and health and and fire department, homeless education response team, heart team and many other service providers, including faith based organizations that they play a really important role of giving service to the homeless population in Longreach and. Six of us here. Yeah, six out of six of us here, we are presenting our research, the booklet you have in your hand. We divided our talk into different things. We promise we won't take time. That's much. I know. You have a long night. I would like to invite Dr. Quintilian to share some of our funding findings with you. Good evening and thank you, Mayor Garcia and council members. And it's really hard to follow a debate about how long a presentation should be. So I can assure you we did make sure we were, in a word limit. Just so you know. And with that in mind, I do want to really express, you know, sincere appreciation for making this possible to present these research findings on homeless outreach in our city. You know, with four of the key students that prepared this report, there were several other students involved that conducted the research that was described by Council member Susie Price in the number of hours that went into it. And I want to just point out some of those key findings and then invite them up to do a brief description of their research posters and some other key findings that they worked on as part of this report. I'd like to emphasize that this report is really meant for you to read as a whole, to really understand the inner workings of the street team. We examined the professional qualities and skills of this team in creating the conditions for service acceptance, both short and long term, and the hurdles they helped people overcome in that process. So I'm just going to outline for you to just, you know, cue up when you read the report, some of these key findings today. First, service acceptance is a continual process. Almost all of the 487 outreach encounters, documented and observed, led to the outreach team goals being achieved in one way or another. Building trust and rapport, for example. Assessing needs immediate and longer term. Determining eligibility. Acting as a liaison to service and guiding people through the hurdles to care. Second, multiple contacts between outreach team members and those experiencing homelessness is critical to under overcoming the lack of trust in, quote, the system that people may possess and believing that personal change is possible. Faced with hurdles, some people simply give up. Clients describe specifically accepting service as a matter of being ready, being able to meet service criteria. Finding a program that fits their needs. And having the support of people such as the outreach team to meet their goals. Third, as the frontline workers, the outreach team are responsible for addressing the hotline, calls and emails from the Long Beach community members. They use professional skills to negotiate and manage the needs of both the larger Long Beach community and people experiencing homelessness. They conduct outreach in a manner that fosters communication and trust. In that regard for the outreach team innovates to facilitate people experiencing homelessness to take the first step to accessing services. And lastly, further research is needed to identify how the factors that contribute to successful service acceptance can be adapted and how the hurdles to access to services or gaps in services can be addressed. The outreach team has critical knowledge and expertize in understanding both of these areas that can inform practices. And now I'd like to invite up the students just to share very, very briefly some of the highlights of their research posters. And thank you very much. Hello. My name is Ira Salazar. I'm an undergraduate student and I'm part of the anthropology department at Colby. I'm also part of the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity Program, which is a mentor based research program. Which has given me the. Opportunity to be part of the homelessness, homelessness, ethnographic research and Education Lab. My part in the homeless outreach research was assisting in the data analysis and also writing the report that you are being provided today. My poster titled Let Them Get to that Place Understanding the role of outreach staff connecting homeless individuals to services focuses on the quality of the outreach members need to possess in order to effectively. Perform their jobs. And I encourage you to read pages four and five to learn on the report to learn more about the qualities outreach members need to have in themselves in order to effectively connect individuals to services. Thank you. Hello. My name is Phenix. Pedro and I will be graduating next week with my bachelor's degree in anthropology at Cal State Long Beach. And then in the fall, I'll be attending a Ph.D. program at Notre Dame University. My project in the here lab revolved around analyzing field notes in interviews to identify the types of obstacles or hurdles that individuals experiencing homelessness face while attempting to obtain services. Many of these obstacles are things like acquiring the proper documentation and identification in order to gain access to services. There are strict rules and regulations around services, insufficient amount of services, lack of transportation and lack of trust. These are the types of hurdles or obstacles that the outreach team assists people in overcoming when possible and when they are ready. And this can be seen in the barriers portion of the report on pages 16 and 17 in the report. And this research poster here, which is titled Barriers to Accessing Homeless Services in Long Beach, California, which is one of three that have been presented at multiple research conferences over the last year. Hello. My name is Tyne and I'm a graduate student in the Applied Anthropology Program at Cal State Long Beach. For my research, I honed in on looking at quality of life police officers to work with the outreach team. And what I learned was that they handle most, if not all, of the division service calls that involve people experiencing homelessness. It alleviate some of the pressure off of patrol units and helps the police department provide the most public, good possible quality of life. And the street team work together in coordinated outreach. The officers ensure the safety of the team and provides access to locations the team may not visit. Normally, enforcement is conducted very rarely and strategically. In my personal field work sample of 109 outreach interactions, only 15 included some form of enforcement, like a citation or arrest. Instead, the quality of life officers focused on building rapport, learning what their needs, the needs of the people they're meeting are, and figuring out how they can help the people they meet. There's a lot more detail on page nine that I invite you to look at. Thank you. Hello. My name is Acacia and Alan. I'm a graduate student in the Department of Anthropology. My contribution to this project was examining the transitional period between living on the streets and becoming housed and highlighting the lack of transitional assistance or retention services for individuals experiencing homelessness. It was while conducting this research that I became interested in homeless material culture. The items that individuals collect, keep and dispose of, and how they how they use these items to manifest their idea of home on the spaces that they occupy. Taking this as my thesis project, which is my poster right here. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, you guys, that was amazing. Amazing. First of all, I want to say this booklet that you've created is so dense with information. It covers so many different topics that we have studied here as a counsel in our study sessions on homelessness. It talks about housing. It talks about the importance of outreach. It talks about obstacles to getting into services like the lack of identification alone, just not having an ID. What that does for individuals who want a service. This document right here is just unbelievable. I mean, I'm going through it here. You talk about some of the legal hurdles we've had, some of the changes in the law and how that's impacted our homeless population. I really think you should apply for some sort of an award for this research project because this summarizes a lot of what we see every day, and it's just it's just chock full of information. So thank you. This exceeds any expectation I ever had when we first partnered. I mean, it goes above and beyond. And I just have to tell you guys, I wish I wish there were more people here to hear this presentation because this is unlike anything we've seen from it, especially from a college, you know, department with student labor. So thank you. And I want to thank our homeless outreach team. I've had the opportunity and feel incredibly blessed for the continuing opportunity to be able to join the Street team on some outreach efforts. And the work that the street teams do is just unbelievable. Anytime anyone reaches out to me about a not my backyard type issue, I say, Would you like to go on a homeless ride along? Because I think once they do, it really changes their perspective about what it takes to get someone into a service. So I just I'm so impressed by this, you guys. Thank you so much. You have no idea how valuable this is going to be for us in terms of policymaking and making informed decisions based on data. So thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Interest. Yes. Thank you very much. First of all, I want to thank Councilwoman the price for bringing this forward to our diocese, because what I'm seeing and you guys, first of all, I just want to tell you what a tremendous job you guys have done, because sometimes when I go out and speak to individuals, especially when dealing with homelessness and they're not homeless, and I speak in my various, you know, community groups, you talk about those people where you have put yourself in a position there to be a part of that. I have to give you kudos because the fact that I just can't even imagine what you went through to try to go to get the information that you have. Each and every one of you individuals, the job that you've done, it shows people that just not in the third district. Homeless is a worldwide problem. We have you. And I just want to thank Mrs. Price for bringing this forward. And I just wish we had more people here in the council to be able to see this, because you guys don't realize what a great job you're doing and the picture that you're showing to the community, to the city of Long Beach. Fantastic. And go beach. I just have to say that. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Ringo. Thank you, Mary. And I, too, want to extend my my, um, thank you to Councilmember Price for including me in this item. I had a a meeting a couple of weeks ago with the lottery, with Wetlands Authority, and there they have, as you know, a very serious homeless problem that goes into the wetlands and in those areas . You missed that meeting. But but I was there and we had a presentation done by the Quality of life officers from that Long Beach PD there. And what they basically brought forward was the fact that it it it can become a law enforcement issue, but it's a quality of life issue. And for many of those homeless individuals that were there, their compassion and their ability to communicate with the homeless people that were there was just absolutely phenomenal. They were able to have that those 15 or 17 point of contact, but more like ten or even less because they were they showed such an amount of of humanity to these individuals that it helped them reconnect with family, reconnect with society, get themselves cleaned up and get back into into the mainstream. And a lot of a lot of what we deal with with homelessness is not you know, we look at it as a law enforcement issue or maybe in an economic issue or socio economic issue, but it's a human issue. And if we are able to treat our fellow human beings more with more with greater sense of humanity, I think we would go a long way in addressing the homeless issues that we have in the city. But I was looking for the chief a little while ago because I want to get those names of those officers that that work in that area. Because they made a presentation that was just heartbreaking. I mean, it was it was it showed so much. Those guys really need a badge, not a badge. Merit medal for for all the work that they do out there, because they were doing phenomenal work in reaching out to these homeless people and getting them back into the into the mainstream to make them back into society. So this report here is absolutely wonderful. It basically documents what a lot of us already know. But you did the research and you did. You collected the data that just basically proves what we may already know or or perceive. And it's in it's all right here. So I agree with Councilmember Price that this could be a good policy document for us to look at and to determine what directions we want to take and where do we want to spend our money. And obviously, one thing that I can glean from this right now and how you worked already with with these other officers, is that we need to basically put a moral commitment into quality of life issues and quality of life efforts that would do a more direct outreach into the homeless community so that so we could bring in bring them back in, into society and connect them with their families and with the mainstream. So I want to thank all the work you've done. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman Mango. Excellent work. We have had the quality of life officers and the outreach team to many of our community meetings. But one of the things that I think is poignant is when a encampment is in a particular community, that's when the community adjacent is most open to understanding and listening and hearing the difference between perceptions realities. We have a lot of crossover jurisdictional issues between Long Beach City, Caltrans, L.A. County, who's in charge? When L.A. County, when Long Beach goes through to offer services. Oftentimes, they won't take the services till the day before the cleanup. How do we work on that efficiency? Is there an opportunity for us to work with, say, L.A. County so that they're noticing requirements match the adjacent city? Because one of the things that we consistently have as a challenge is as the city resource team goes around and meets with different individuals and cleans up those areas. They move to areas that have longer notice periods and then the neighbors who live adjacent to those area areas have different levels of frustration. And with that frustration comes a reduction in tolerance and compassion. And so we need to kind of be able to figure out and balance the ways in which we can interact and solve this as a whole. So I really appreciate this. I would love a digital copy so that I can do a better job sharing this with my network and our community leaders. I think that this is a great document as a starting point, but it also love to meet with any of you or all of you about your policy recommendations on how we could better pull together. Because I know in my district and actually in almost all of our districts, we have so many cross jurisdictional issues where it's, councilwoman, why can't you do something? And the area they're asking about is not within our jurisdiction. And then the frustration of where the funding comes from and how it can be used and what it can and can't be used for. Excellent work and we have a lot more work to do. So thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Super now. Thanks. I'd also like to thank Councilmember Price for bringing this item forward. I agree. Just an awesome publication. Great job. I would say at the highest levels of professionalism, it's hard to believe this was done by students. I did see on page four that it's titled The Street Sharks. That has nothing to do with the new mascot for coastal languages. You know, I thought about that and I think we're all aligning here. So we're all we're all about the beach now. Okay. Well, President Connelly is going to be at my next community meeting at the end of the month. I'll make sure I point that out to her and to Teresa and Shannon, thank you for being here tonight. And we all know on the dais here how important they are. In fact, let me just say this. I never thought of your outreach team as sharks, but let's let's explore that a little bit. But the rapport with the council office is so key and because we communicate all the time. And so I just want to acknowledge that and thank you for assisting the group. And finally, Councilman Gonzalez. I just want to say thank you so much for your work. I see the methodologies that people really need to understand when we're out there reaching, you know, the most vulnerable of our populations. So thank you very much for this work. And also to Shannon and Teresa. I know you're amplifying a lot of their work. And oftentimes as a councilmember, when I'm explaining this to downtown residents, it doesn't come off very well. They're just thinking that I'm just, you know, not explaining it or they don't understand it or they don't believe me any of the above. But I think this will be a really good way to present it. And I would love to invite you to some of our meetings in downtown to just talk about this report. It would be really great to do that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there any other public comment outside the presentation? Please come forward. Can I get. Out? Let me go ahead, please. Let's do that. Actually, no, I mean, I meant one of the professor. Please come forward. And ma'am, please come forward also. I just want to emphasize then this. I we as a group and a department, we want to we really appreciate what it was offer to the collaboration, the partnership. It didn't cost that much, but what we gained was priceless. The experience of having our students in a real field, what we did in our class, we designed a class two way that our students, they study all of the, you know, logistic, all the city decisions, everything was happening in the city. And we went and we look at the news nationally and internationally. We let the students sit and do all the forms, one by one, to figure out what the homeless individual has to go to do good services. And then as a result of that, many of our students, our students, they presented their work in three national conference . One No national one of a student got the first prize in the post there they had in the very prestigious conference in anthropology. Well, we just want to thank all of you and say this kind of research. Basically, we are educating our students to be the agent of change in a community, and that's what we like to do. I know as educated as you are, looking forward to it to. Absolutely. Please come forward. Hello, counsel. My name is Nita Chopra. I am the community development coordinator of Mental Health America of Los Angeles. And we are based out of Long Beach here in the community. We have many. Programs targeting, you know, people of the homeless population today, which is our transitional age. Youth and even veterans actually came here specifically today to hear about the issue. I'll be anthropology department report. We have a two innovations, two grant funded projects through the Department of Mental Health that were approved this year. One is targeting transitional age youth within the Long Beach community who are homeless or at risk of being homeless. I came out here today to make you aware of this program that we have and to gain community partners going forward. Because as the anthropology department stated, it is all about connections within the community to make sure that we know of the resources that we have available to us to provide towards our. Members that we have. So I think it. I just wanted to let you know that we have our next collaborators meeting coming up next week on the 22nd at one of our community partners, the LGBT center of Long Beach. Again, this is for transitional age youth who are 18 to 25, who are homeless or at risk of being homeless, who have experienced some form of trauma from being homeless, experienced poverty, being a LGBTQ community. And we. Also have another one that is. Our Workforce Development Innovations grant, and that is for anyone 18 and over, and that is another sector that we are doing. And it is to provide. Stabilization for people's lives going forward, not just in our services, but past our services as well. At Mental Health America, our goal is to give people a life. We don't want to just give them a service and see them out the door. We want to give them stability and we want to give them a reason to move forward. So I invite you all, encourage you all, please to come to our collaborators meeting next week on the 22nd. And again, that is 12 to 2 p.m. at the LGBT center of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Brice. Thank you. I just have to end it. I want to thank Mental Health America and fact check. Cunningham from my team is going to reach out to you right now because we know that you guys also expressed an interest in our homeless work program that we're trying to roll out. So thank you for that. Thank you for all the partners to our Cal State Long Beach team. Thank you again for everything. You know what I love about this document here is a lot of time and I want to thank my colleagues. They started their comments with with a lot of thank you's, which is kind of customary. But what we do here but I just want to say there's no thanks to me. There was an opportunity for me to collaborate. And I love that this document here that you created is not political. It doesn't have a, you know, politicians logo on it. It's about you and your work product. And it's a document for us as policymakers to use. It's not any one person's initiative. It's not any one person's effort. This is something that's going to help the entire city. It's for all of us. So I brought the item tonight, but it could have been any of us. You did the work. So I want to thank you for giving us some tools. We're really lucky to have Cal State Long Beach in the city. I'm really lucky to have the university in my district and opportunities to partner on this cost us nothing. We didn't have to give money from the taxpayer dollars to commission the study. We didn't have you didn't have to have 100 people in here asking for money. You did this on your own because it's a research project that's going to enhance your students and it's going to enhance the city that the university is located in. And I wish we could have more endeavors and projects like this. So this is so positive. I'm very, very excited about it and I'm so grateful to our city staff for working with you and really driving this project. I just put it on the agenda. I didn't do any of the work. You did everything. So thank you. I think it Councilwoman. And I just wanted to close say, first of all, you guys did a great job. Amazing that this has been both graduate and undergraduate work in partnership. I think obviously you're doing this graduate level research and just really great. There's there's so many partnerships that the university has with the city, similar projects like this with other departments, whether it's engineering or the innovation work happening or with business. And so many projects where students are getting hands on experience and doing work that benefits one the city. But most importantly and I think your faculty got it exactly right, the the folks that are benefiting the most are the students that actually get to do the research that is applied. And it goes back into that classroom and that field experience that you're all getting. And so that's really exciting. And so congratulations. And with that, everyone, please cast your votes. We hope. Thank you again. Motion carries.

A bill for an ordinance repealing the sunset date of the cannabis consumption pilot program. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-28-19.

DenverCityCouncil_02252019_19-0024

. Thank you, Madam Secretary. We do have one item for separate consideration this evening, so we will now vote on final consideration of Council Bill $19 002 for repealing the sunset date of the cannabis consumption pilot program. Councilman Flynn, will you please put Council Bill 19 Dash 0024 on the floor? Certainly. Mr. President, I move that council bill 19, dash 24 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. Are there any questions or comments by members of Council or Councilman Flynn? Thank you, Mr. President. I was absent last week when this was on first reading and the public hearing was held. And I but I did go back and watch it. I missed last week's meeting just after I, my youngest son, got married and happened to choose that Tuesday for his wedding. But I did go back and watch the the testimony. And as I said in the marijuana committee, I don't believe that simply repealing the sunset, which the voters had approved, in which the authors of the initiative are included, is going to make any difference in the context of all the other changes that would have to be looked at before this program can actually take off and have an attempt to be successful. I believe at this point now we will have only one such business open and I don't see that removing the sunset would. Result in any new businesses suddenly coming forward with all the other restrictions that I believe are truly the reason that more of these licenses have not been sought by other businesses. I think we should solve all the problems together and move them forward as a package. I don't oppose repealing the sunset when it's part of a larger package that addresses all the other reasons that that that would need to be addressed before we could see more businesses come forward. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. See no other questions or comments. Council members. This is just a reminder that any reform ordinance adopted by a vote of the people may be amended or repealed by city council only by a two thirds vote or nine affirmative votes instead of the standard seven affirmative votes of council are required to pass this bill this evening. Madam Secretary, Roll Call. Black Eye. Brooks Flynn. Now. Herndon. I. Cashman. I can eat Lopez. I knew Ortega. I assessment. I Mr. President. I Madam Secretary, please close the voting. Announce the results. Tonight in one night. Ten eyes one accountable 19 0024 has passed. All right, councilmembers, this is your last opportunity to call out an item. Councilman Flynn, you've already begun, but will continue with you for the motions this evening. Unless you object. I'll do a quick any objections?

A RESOLUTION affirming The City of Seattle’s support for its local Iranian-American and Iranian-immigrant communities, recognizing the importance of people-to-people diplomacy at the local level, calling for a de-escalation in the conflict and damaging rhetoric between the U.S. and Iran and an end to the attacks on the democratic rights of people with Iranian heritage in Washington State and requesting the Office of Intergovernmental Relations communicate these positions to the Washington State congressional delegation.

SeattleCityCouncil_01132020_Res 31925

Thank you. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. We'll move on to adoption of other resolutions. Please read into the record. I had number three adoption of the resolutions, agenda item three, resolution 319 25 expressing the Seattle City Council's opposition to the Trump administration's escalation. Toward. War with Iran and to attack an attack on the democratic rights of people with Iranian heritage in Washington State and requesting the Office of Intergovernmental Relations communicate these positions to the Washington State Congressional Delegation. Council Members one Thank you. Council President Pro Tem Herbold. I would like to describe the motivation behind the resolution, but then also make a motion to hold it and explain what it does. Thank you. I wanted to thank all the activists who came here, Veterans for Peace Care, Washington Council on American-Islamic Relations. I really appreciate everybody who's here who testified and who didn't testify, but who are here for supporting this resolution. This is the resolution in opposition both to Trump's escalation toward war with Iran and also in response to reports of Border Patrol agents targeting people of Iranian descent, including U.S. citizens at the border crossing in Blaine, Washington, and also at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Trump's policies towards Iran, including airstrikes and the prominent drone assassination of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani, are risking war and it is totally unacceptable. The U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq we have seen, have not expanded the freedom, democracy, standard of living or safety of ordinary people in the Middle East have not increased the safety of people in the United States. Instead, they have caused massive loss of human life and ongoing suffering in Afghanistan and Iraq. And for U.S. soldiers, it is ordinary people, especially women, young people and the marginalized who always pay the greatest price for imperialist war. In 2019, working people in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon built inspiring mass movements against poverty, corruption, women's oppression, ethnic oppression and authoritarian rule. However, what has happened now is that the threat of war with the US has cut across the momentum for this movement and helped strengthen for now, the authoritarian Iranian regime. Injured of threats of war. We need a mass antiwar movement in the United States and globally in solidarity with the movements in the Middle East. In drafting this resolution, my office looked to see if there was any precedent set by the City Council in 2003, when Bush drove the U.S. to war with George W Bush and drove the U.S. to war with Iraq, using similarly sketchy intelligence reports claiming imminent threats but no details. It was shocking, actually, to find that the resolution that was passed in 23 did not actually oppose the war in any way. And I think we need to set a different kind of precedent, actually, for the Seattle City Council to take a stand against any kind of military aggression. Because I know because we know it will be it will it will not favor the safety and security of our country either. And so we need to make sure that our movement is reflected. The movement that has changed the politics in the city and nationwide and internationally is reflected in the resolution that we passed. And I also want to be crystal clear that the way to honestly support the well-being of soldiers is don't start this war. And I think we have broad agreement that was reflected in the public comment that we just saw. We also want to make clear that we are opposed to the border control, border patrol agents in Washington targeting people of Iranian descent. And it and we and I want to speak more in detail about this, but I will reserve more comments for Tuesday, January 21st. And just more like before I make the motion, I want to explain to members of the public and especially who are here for this resolution. We have had requests for amendments to this resolution, which I'm happy to consider, but I would like for time to consider them so that we actually send the amendments to the activists who are involved, the organizations that have been involved in drafting my current resolution. So do you all have a chance to look at it and tell us what you think? And so I think in in favor of that kind of public scrutiny, I will move to hold resolution 31925 until January 21st, 2020. Thank you. And I just want to also add that there are a number of organizations that through the Office of Intergovernmental Relations that I worked with over the weekend, they, too would like. To have. Be an active consultation in the development of the final resolution, and that includes the Iran. An American Community Alliance pay band which supports the University of Washington, Persian and Iranian Studies program. And then finally, the Seattle Esfahan, a sister city advocacy organization who's working where we work with them every year to hold an annual event. And they're working towards also becoming a sister city here with us. So they have expressed that more time would allow us, allow everyone more thoughtful consideration and consensus. And they're very honored to have their work and their community noticed and supported and believe it's really. Critical for. Their community to see this sort of gesture of allyship at this particular time. So thank you for your for your willingness to to work through some of the issues of. A very, very diverse community here in Seattle. Thank you. Let me just add, just to clarify to members of the public, my office was and has been in touch with the Office of Intergovernmental Relations and thus a sister city advocacy organization as well. And we're happy to continue to be in touch with them, but will make sure that the proposed amendments are run through by the other organizations as well and come up with a recommended resolution. That is but but a strong but I would say a strong resolution that takes a position against war in Iran and also against the detaining of people of Iranian descent. Thank you. It has been moved in, seconded that the resolution be held into January 21st, 2020. Any further comments? CNN. Those in favor of holding resolution vote i. I those opposed. But now the motion carries. The resolution is held until January 21st, 2020. Is there any other business to come before the council seeing? Then we are adjourned. It is 2:51 p.m.. Thank you.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 1468 Tennyson Street in West Colfax. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from U-SU-C2 to U-SU-C1 (Allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 1468 Tennyson Street in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-18-22.

DenverCityCouncil_02282022_22-0028

Residential properties have 24 hours until they have to shovel. Let's all do our part to keep Denver's sidewalks safe for everyone. Denver 311 and Pocket Gov are helping you navigate Denver City Services. Clearing sidewalks after snowstorms helps ensure the safety and mobility of our entire community. This is important, especially for senior citizens and people with disabilities. What's inconvenient to you could be dangerous or even life threatening to them. Be sure to shovel your entire sidewalk. A wheelchair needs a minimum of 36 inches to pass, and if your property has a curb ramp, be sure to clear that entirely as well. Residents and businesses alike need to help make our community safe and accessible for all. One. 11111111. If you have signed up to answer questions only, please state your name and note that you're available for questions from council. Speakers will have 3 minutes. There is no yielding of time. If translation is needed, you will be given an additional 3 minutes for your comments to be interpreted. We will alternate between. In-Person and virtual for efficiency. By calling in-person participants and then alternating to virtual speakers. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole, and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember Hines, will you please put Council Bill 20 2-0028 on the floor for final passage. And move the Council Bill 20 200 to be placed upon final consideration and to pass. It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 20 20028 is open. May we have the staff report? Thank you very much, Councilwoman Thrace. Good evening, counsel. My name is Valerie Arara, senior city planner with community planning and Development. I will be presenting an 80 year rezoning case for the subject property located at 1468 North Tennyson Street. The applicant's names are Matt and Lindsay Waste, and they'll be joining us virtually this property in Council District one with Councilwoman Son Duvall. And is located within the West Fox statistical neighborhood. The subject property is currently our standard 6250 square foot zone lot with a width of 50 feet. The request is to go to urban single unit C one to allow for a detached accessory dwelling unit in the rear of the lot. In terms of zoning, the site and the surrounding properties to the northeast and west. Are you, as you see, to allowing urban houses with a minimum zone, lot of 5500 square feet to the west and east? The zoning is your 2.5, which is a multi-unit district that allows up to two and a half storey rowhouse building farms. To the north is West Colfax Avenue, which is classified as a main street arterial. For existing land use. The site is single unit residential and surrounded by single two and multi-unit existing residential land uses in the neighborhood to the north along with cold facts. Existing uses include a mix of commercial, retail, public, quasi public and mixed use. For existing building form and scale. The subject property is on the north side of the block with Alley Access and is located just south of West Colfax Avenue. There's an existing primary single unit structure and a detached garage accessory structure currently on the lot. Nearby properties just south of the site are shown on the screen. The property in Orange is classified multi-unit residential and the bottom left photo is looking down. Tennyson. In terms of process. This MAP amendment went to planning board on Wednesday, January 5th, where the item was recommended approval on consent agenda. The rezoning was moved forward to final hearing of city council by the Land Use Transportation Infrastructure Committee on consent on January 18th and is being heard today. To date, staff has not received any written input from any of the registered organizations that were sent notice. And there's also been no public comment. The Denver zoning code has five review criteria. The first is consistency with adopted plan, starting with Plan 2040. I found this rezoning to be consistent with several strategies shown from the Comprehensive Plan 2040 for equity and environmental resiliency. Equitable, equitable, affordable and inclusive goal staff found the rezoning to be consistent with Goal two strategy a creator creating a greater mix of housing options in every neighborhood for all individuals and families that can be found on page 28. And in speaking to the climate and environmental resilient vision elements, staff found this rezoning to be consistent with the goal listed. Environmentally Resilient Goal eight Strategy A promote infill development where infrastructure and services are already in place that can be found on page 54. Blueprint. Denver maps this area as the urban neighborhood context. Future places is residential low, which consist of predominantly single and two unit uses on smaller lots and allows for accessory dwelling units to be thoughtfully inappropriate, appropriately integrated. Where compatible. Additionally Blueprint Denver guidance provides support through policy for diversify housing choice through the expansion of the aid to use throughout all residential areas and then strategy a city wide approach to enable aid uses preferred until the holistic approach is in place individual rezonings to enable to use in all residential areas, especially where proximate to transit are appropriate unless there is an a neighborhood plan supporting adus rezoning should be small an area in order to minimize impact to the surrounding residential area. Looking at the West Colfax Neighborhood Plan of 2006, we have support provided through the Urban Neighborhood District Goal two focused on density and promoting discrete increases in residential densities within established residential districts. We also have recommendation one of the urban neighborhoods Stability support the efforts of the Zoning Code Task Force to update residential zone districts and ensure the provision of appropriate design and development standards for additions, infill and redevelopment in established urban neighborhood areas. Recommendation three on building types is established vocabulary of urban neighborhood building types promote the construction of these buildings within appropriate locations. In urban neighborhood districts include a range of building types that permit discrete increases in residential densities, such as carriage houses, multiplexes, small apartments, townhouses or road houses. Looking at criteria two and three staff found that this rezoning is consistent with adopted plans. The proposed rezoning will result in uniform application of zoned district building form, use and design regulations, and it will further the public health, safety and welfare through implementing adopted plans and facilitating increased housing density. Four criteria for justifying circumstances. Staff found the proposed rezoning is justified through a city adopted plan. And finally, for criteria five, the context zone districts purpose and intent of USC. One are all appropriate for this particular location, giving the surrounding area the adopted plan guidance and the location of the site. A small nuance is that us you see two allows for tandem house duplex and detached adu building forums specifically on corner lots that are on either collector or arterial streets. This property is not on one of those corners, so they can't do any of those building forms. They could right now only do attached ads by going to us, you see, one, they will be allowed to construct that detached adu that they are requesting. Given the findings that our review criteria have been met. CPD Recommends City Council Approve Application 2020 1i00160 based on finding our review criteria have been met. Approval of a rezoning is not approval of a proposed specific development project. Thank you very much. I'll take questions. If there's questions. Thank you, Val. We have one individual signed up to speak this evening. Jesse Paris is joining us online. Greedy members of council may be heard. Go ahead. My name is Jessica. Some parents and I'm representing for Black Starts a movement for self-defense, defense, positive action for social change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado. It is Denver Residents Council in Fort Long Black Nose and I'll be the next November 2023. I'm in favor of rezoning tonight. As the stated on general public comment, we have a housing crisis. Any time now we have an opportunity to increase our housing stock. That is great. I don't know exactly what the occupant is using this associate building for. If they're using it for Asian parents or if it's going to be a short term rental, I could answer that question or those questions. I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Jesse. Questions for members of Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 0028. Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for the presentation. So in our zoning code, are there any other areas other than this area in West Colfax that have this particular zone district? You know, Councilwoman Sandoval, that is a great question. Off the top of my head, I'm not sure this is the first time I see a case with this scenario. I'm not sure of CPD leadership or if there's someone else that might want to respond to that from our department. Oh. You. You in here and. And but I'm we're happy to follow up with you if this is my first case to see this scenario like this with the C2. Can you go over the uses again on one of your slides the U.S. use to. Absolutely. So right here on the first bullet, you, as you see to allows tandem house duplex and detached accessory dwelling unit building forms, specifically on corner lots that are on collector or arterial streets. So this property is not on one of those corners nor one of those street classifications. And so in order to do a detached ADU, they will need to go to this one. So do you have a map with all of the parcel sizes? Not with me in this presentation, no. The closest is just looking at the zoning map and the existing land use in built form. Okay. So this particular if you can if you go to this map, all of the houses on the corner, even though it would probably be they look I can look it up on the Internet, but they look like about the same zone lot. It doesn't matter. They so that corner units could build an excess detached accessory dwelling unit, tandem house or duplex, but all the interior homes could not. Correct? That is correct. Because of the corner lot limitation. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. I know other council members in queue for questions. The public hearing is closed. Any comments by members of Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 0028. Councilwoman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. Pro Tem. My office attempted to do a overhaul on the zoning over here. We didn't get as much participation as we like, so therefore I didn't move forward with a legislative rezoning for this area. But I feel like this is an area toward zoning code. There's only 300 and some odd houses in the whole entire city that have this zoned district. And it does not seem fair to the everyone else who are in the interior homes to not have the ability to have a detached accessory dwelling unit. When I did a deep dove on 1468 Tennyson Street with our planning department and asked them why they usuc2 zoned district was created, I did not get any clear answers. Nobody quite understood why these areas and I think it's only like 300 some odd parcels are zoned this way. So I would ask my colleagues to please approve this rezoning. The owners, Matt and Lindsay did as much outreach as possible so that we could do a legislative rezoning so they didn't have to be have to bring this forward on a one off. And unfortunately, at that time, we didn't get the traction that we needed. So I would respectfully ask my colleagues to support this. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no other members of council in queue. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 22, Dash 00280 CdeBaca. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Work. I. Clarke. I. Flynn, I kill more. Herndon. I. Cashman. Ortega. I apologize, Madam Pro Tem. I should have closed with you. I think. You have ten eyes. All right. Madam Secretary, close the voting. Announce a result. Tonight. Tonight, Council Bill 22 zero 0 to 8 has passed. Councilmember Hines, will you please put Council Bill 22, dash zero zero for four on the floor for final passage?

A proclamation proclaiming the week of October 17, 2016 - October 21, 2016 as Choose to be G.R.E.A.T. Week in Denver, Colorado.

DenverCityCouncil_10172016_16-0988

Santa Fe Drive Pedestrian mall see St Luke's Pedestrian Mall Deli Del Gainey Street Pedestrian Mall East 13th Avenue Pedestrian Mall South Downing Street Pedestrian Mall Tennyson Street Second Pedestrian Mall West 44th Avenue and Elliott Street Pedestrian Mall, Golden Triangle Pedestrian Mall and West 32nd pedestrian mall on two proclamations. We have three proclamations tonight. Councilman Lopez, will you please read proclamation 988. Thank you, Mr. President. Proclamation 988 series of 2016 proclaiming the week of October 17 through October 21st of 2016 as Choose. To Be Great Week in Denver. Colorado. Whereas the city and county of Denver is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all of its residents and visitors. Whereas, youth violence, delinquency and bullying are concerns locally, nationally and internationally. And. WHEREAS, The Gang Resistance Education and Training Great Program is an evidence based gang and violence prevention program built around school based law enforcement constructed classroom curricula, teaching youth to say no to gangs, drugs, crime and violence. And yes to a great future. And. WHEREAS, the great program offers a continuum of components for students and their families that focus on providing life skills to help youth avoid bullying, delinquent behaviors and violence. And. WHEREAS, Great has now served over 6 million students nationally and internationally since its inception in 1991, and since two or since 2011, it has been taught to over 6000 students in the Denver public schools with partnerships with the Denver with the United States Attorney's Office, the John Denver Juvenile Probation Department, the Denver Police Department, and the Darren Denver Sheriff's Department in coordination with the Gang Reduction Initiative. Of Denver Grit. And I might add, city council members as well, too. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Council of the City and County of Denver, Section one, that in the pursuit of reducing youth violence and bullying while fostering a better relationship between youth and law enforcement officers, the Council of the City and County of Denver does hereby proclaim the week of October 17th, 2016, through October 21st, 2016, as Choose to Be Great Week. Section two. At the council, the city and county of Denver encourages all students to be upstander by speaking up against bullying. Wearing orange throughout this week and signing the great pledge, quote unquote, I pledge to use my great skills to reduce violence in my community, work to resolve conflicts peacefully, and stop bullying whenever I see it, end quote in Section three. At the clerk of the city and county of Denver shall affix and the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation, and that copies be transmitted to the executive director, Paul Callanan of the Gang Reduction . Initiative of Denver, chief Sean Cohen of the Denver. Juvenile Probation Chief Robert White, the Denver Police Department Sheriff Patrick Furman of the Sheriff's Department, and Bob Troyer. United States attorney. Thank you. Councilman Lopez, your motion to adopt. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council proclamation 988 series of 2016 be adopted. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of council. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. This program is a great program, and with all pun intended, it is an amazing program. This is something that I know in Denver we have a great passion for. I see it in a lot of our schools, in our neighbors, and in our neighborhoods. And as a city councilman, it's awesome to see this interaction at such a young age. It's awesome to see our kids in Denver commit to nonviolence and to solve conflicts without resorting to violence. And it's not just kids and it's not just inner city kids. It's not just kids on one particular side of town. It's something that all. Of us should model. All of us. In our language and our behavior in our interactions. Right. And this is something that we need to learn at a very young age. There's a lot of forces in our community that are pulling for our kids attention. Away from classrooms, away from homes. Away from public spaces, away from our libraries. And we have to do our best in our city to make sure that that choice that we have, that we are presenting to our young people is an easy choice. Right. And it's an easy choice in a good and in a in a positive direction. These young people amaze me. Every every school that we participate with. Every time that I meet, Garcia Sandoval invites me over to hear the kids come speak to the kids, bind up hearing from the kids. Because I think to many of us, grown ups. Talk a lot. And we like to pretend that we know everything there is to know about the world and that our kids need to hear it from us. But when we go and listen to them. We actually learn. In 2008, when I was first elected, we participated with a program like this one. I think it was one of the another program was associated with it but. One of the kids. I asked, Hey, so we're eating lunch. I say, Why is all this graffiti on our side of town? We used to have a lot of graffiti on the West Side. Why do I see it here? But I don't see it in Cherry Creek. And I was very careful when I said that because my colleague looked over at me. Are you daring him? No, I'm not. And he's doing that right now. But I said, why is that? What's the difference? What's going on there? And I asked. I didn't know the answer. I just said, Hey, why is it on this side of town? Why do we have all the incidents on this side town by seeing this Denver map and I see all over the place and I don't see very much over here. What's up with that? And everybody was silent. Except for one kid. And this kid got out and he says it's because the hood. So what do you mean by the hood? Because the hood. And so. Yeah, but what about it? I could do it here and nobody cares. Are. Nobody cares. So. And so we made sure that was the last time a kid in our neighborhood said about our neighborhood that nobody cares. With Grid with great. With all this. Investment. In our neighborhoods on the social level, on this on this level. I'd like to say that that number with graffiti has been almost eliminated. We do see it here and there, but I'm looking over it at some of my folks over there. We don't see it as much as before. We don't see that the kind of problems that that that I did when I grew up in the nineties, it was a day when we could even wear these colors. We were making progress. And we're making progress because we're investing in our young people. Because we're teaching them that nonviolence is hard work. But it's the only way. To be nonviolent requires. It's a lot of hard work. And that's what they're doing. It takes a lot of discipline. And that's how you solve conflicts. And when you flip on the TV now and you're hearing, you know, folks and talking heads, talking about punching this person out, or it's always some violent expression. That's what we got to work against. But I look in our schools and look at our young people in this program, and it is truly a great program because, ladies and gentlemen, this is not a. Problem that we can arrest our way out of. We can educate our way out of an it starts with these young people. So with that. Mr. President, colleagues, I urge support of this proclamation. I know there will be and I know there's other people in the queue. So thank you. I'm very proud once again to get this proclamation passed. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Any other members of council? Madam Secretary, roll call. Lopez. I knew a black clerk. I. Espinosa. Flynn. I. Gillmor, i. Herndon, i. Cashman. Hi. Carnage. Mr. President. I close voting, renounce the results. Ten Eyes. Ten Eyes proclamation 1988 has been adopted. Councilman Lopez, is there anyone that you want to bring up to receive this proclamation? Yes, I do. I know there's a supporting cast and then there's there's an All-Star that's going to speak, so why don't I call them up? Let me bring up Shanklin, Deputy Chief Matt Murry, Probation Officer Debbie Garcia Sandoval and Pro Lopez, and then Cassandra with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And I know that there's somebody else you want to bring up, so. Okay. Go ahead. Who's first? Go ahead. Good evening, Castle. Chief White couldn't be here. He's traveling out of state, but he asked me to pass on his wishes to you. And thanks for this. He often says the police are the community and the community are the police. And that is something we're working very hard. To accomplish in this city. And we do that with your support. And and. Certainly with all of these partners who really are the people who make this program work. We couldn't do it. Without doing it together. And we just absolutely thank them for all the. Hard work and the effort and the commitment that they have put into this program. And then finally, obviously, the young people of our city who are truly our partners in the future. Thanks. Good evening, Sean con. With that the chief from Denver juvenile probation. And as you know, we are a state agency. And so this has been truly a wonderful opportunity for us to work with the city and county of Denver and recognize that these are our children not siloed as to what system they belong in. So it has been a wonderful opportunity to not only worked alongside our partners in Denver, but also to do prevention work. And I think we are the only probation department in the state that is actively doing prevention work to put ourselves out of business. So that is our hope and wish. And I appreciate all the support the city and county has given us. And Chief. Thank you so much. I don't even know where to begin. This has been the most fabulous assignment I have ever had the privilege of doing. I've been doing it since 2011. And just to be able to work with all of these wonderful people, all of the students from Denver public schools that have been part of the great program and. Our city is absolutely. Fabulous. I can't say enough about it. Thank you, Councilman Lopez thing. Thanks to all of you for supporting this. To my department, to grid, to everyone. That is part of it. All of our partners, we are part of Choose to Be Great Week, which is all throughout the United States of America and in Central America as well . And so we truly wear that as a badge of honor. And I just can't thank you enough. And the students, if any of you ever get a chance to come out to the schools, that would be fabulous. And they will just hug you to death, just like they do when the police officers come in, have lunch with them, participate in the program with us. So you're all welcome. And thank you again from the bottom of my heart. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Cassandra Carlton. I'm one of the assistant United States attorneys on behalf of acting U.S. Attorney Bob Troyer and our entire office. I really want to thank city council for acknowledging this program as being such an important part of. Prevention and really building relationships with the students. So the recognition by council in this really does boost the entire program. And just want to thank Officer Garcia. Her energy and working with the kids is just amazing. At this point, I'd like to also introduce my cohort, Jason San Julian, who has also participated in the great program in the classrooms. President Brooks. Councilwoman. Councilman. My name is Jason St Julien and I'm an assistant United States Attorney in the District of Colorado in the Criminal Division in Major Crimes. And I stand in front of you today as a volunteer in the great program, and I want to make a very important distinction about this program. But so often in life we participate in some reactionary way that any event happens, and only after that event happens, we become involved. And given the current climate of community policing. Given that specific client, it's even more important now. But there is a proactive effort and a proactive mission. In the community. And that. Is what the great program is. You know, we're tasked to always answer this internal question of how do we reach those individuals? Before they turn to gangs and before they turn to violence. You reach them through the great program. You see, you reach them at a young age, as young as fifth grade. You reach them by bringing in individuals like these people. Into the classroom in a context that is non-adversarial. Just to be. With these children to teach them. So when they do have an encounter with law enforcement or an arm of law enforcement. That is not seen as something to challenge any confront and conquer. All it is. Is an interaction with another. Human beings. That's what the great program gives you. You see, these kids want this. And they need this. And studies have shown that when an individual, a young person has an an interest in adult in their life. They're able to make better choices and they can recover more quickly when they make bad choices. So here in front of you are interested adults. And if there's anyone here who's a part of great who is not standing, please stand. These are interested adults. These are the individuals that are in the classrooms teaching these students. And I volunteered at Gilpin Montessori. And after volunteering the principal. Told Parole Officer Garcia Sandoval in our office that these individuals showed a measurable difference, a measurable impact. From being a part of the great from. Now I can stand up here and continue to pontificate. Pontificate, but you have much more important things to do than listen to me. But I will note one thing from Councilman Lopez. That there are so many different factors pulling. Our children away from school. But this. And these people. That is an example of everything that is going right in our community. In the midst of what is pulling children away from school. This is an example of everything that is going right. So I thank you for honoring the program. I thank you for your work. And we look for continued involvement with the City Council in the great program. Thank you. Thank you. Pearl Lopez with a great program. I just want to thank City Council for moving forward with this proclamation. And also in recognition, we're all wearing orange for this week. And just to remind everybody, students in Denver public schools will be proclaiming the great proclamation this week in school. So they'll all be made aware and reiterate that as well. So thank you so much again for allowing us to come and speak here. Thank you so much. Councilman Lopez. Yeah, we have some gifts that they brought us, and these are little wristbands. I'm going to start passing them down there. Choose to be great respect. That's great. That's great. What schools are represented here? Do you know? Oh, my God. It happened like that. That's probably okay. We have kids here from all. Over the city, from the great projects, right? From my. Experience. We good. We coordinated tonight. That was awesome. All right. Thank you all. Thank you all. The perfect segway into Councilman Clark, will you now please read Proclamation 99?

Recommendation to increase appropriations in the General Fund Group in the City Manager Department by $10,000, offset by the Seventh Council District One-time District Priority Funds, transferred from the Citywide Activities Department to provide a donation to the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association to support our partnership to create additional painted utility boxes in Council District 7; and Decrease appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Citywide Activities Department by $10,000 to offset a transfer to the City Manager Department.

LongBeachCC_03082022_22-0251

All right. So next, we will take of the fund transfer items. Item 14, 15 and 17. Now, where can you read those items? Communication from Council Member Your UNGA recommendation to increase appropriations in the General Fund group by $10,000 to provide a donation to the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association to create additional painted utility boxes in Council District seven. Item 15 is a communication from Councilwoman Sara recommendation to increase appropriations in the General Fund group by $500 to support the Carmi Parent Association's seventh Annual Mother and Daughters Conference. And Item 17 is a communication from Vice Mayor Richardson recommendation to increase appropriations in the General Fund group by 1400 to provide a donation to the name Neighborhood Association and African-American Historical Society of Long Beach. They can never part of their emotion. Second, to prove the fund transfer items. I've got a motion by Councilmember Thoreau and seconded by Councilmember Price to you. Is there any public comment towards these funds transfer items? If there are any members of the. Public. That would like to speak on item 14, 15 and 17, please use the raise hand feature or dial star nine. CNN. That concludes public comment. All right. About roll call vote, please. District one. High. District two. High. District three. High. District by. District five. District six. I'm District seven. I. District eight. Hi. Motion is carried eight zero. Wonderful. So next up, we have our hearing out of over 30. Madam Clerk, turn it over to you as introduced item.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2160 South Grant Street in Rosedale. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from U-SU-C to U-TU-B (single-unit to two-unit), located at 2160 South Grant Street in Council District 6. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-11-20.

DenverCityCouncil_05182020_20-0130

Thank you, Councilmember. Just waiting for it to come up on the screen. Make sure that we get a second. There we go. It has been moved and second in the required public hearing for council bill 130 is now open. May we have the staff report? Thank you. Members of the City Council, Jason Morrison, Community Planning and Development. I'll be bringing forward both map amendments this evening. First Map members at 2160 South Grant Street with the rezoning request from you, as you see, which is urban single unit district with a minimum lot size of 5500 square feet to YouTube, which is urban to unit district minimum lot size of 4500 square feet. We're in Council District six, so in South Denver, in the Rosedale neighborhood, and the subject property is on South Grant Street. It's just over 6000 square feet in a single unit residential. The subject property is less than one block south of Evans Avenue and three blocks east of South Broadway. It's also a half mile from the Evans Light Rail Station. The current zoning is us, you see, and it's adjacent to us, you see, and YouTube, among other zone districts. And the site is occupied by single unit residential surrounding uses, includes single unit and two unit residential, commercial and retail and public and quasi public uses. This is a bird's eye view of the subject property looking north and east for images or some of the single and two unit residential nearby. For context, the image on the bottom left is directly across the street, and the image on the bottom right is representative of a two unit pattern developing throughout the neighborhood, including a duplex directly behind the subject property on Logan Street. The Map Amendment application was unanimously recommended for approval by Denver Planning Board and moved forward by committee back in February. Since the staff report was published, we received four letters of support and one letter of opposition prior to the Planning Board public hearing. And those should be included in your packet. As you know, there are five review criteria when analyzing the appropriateness of the request. We'll start with consistency with adopted plans. In addition to comprehensive Plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver, there is one neighborhood plan and that's the urban station area plan. However, starting with comprehensive plan 2040, the proposed MAP amendment is consistent with several strategies from current Plan 2040 listed here and also detailed in your staff report. Specifically, the request is consistent with strategies under the equity vision element because it will enable development of housing units close to transit and mixed use developments. It will also create a greater mix of housing options within the neighborhood. The request is also consistent with strategies under the environmentally resilient vision element for several reasons. The site is at an infill location where infrastructure is already in place and it will focus growth by transit stations and along high and medium capacity transit corridors. The requested rezoning is shown on a context map within Blueprint Denver as urban contexts. The proposed YouTube is consistent with this context. The future place of this area is residential low South Grant Street is a Non-Designated local and Evans Avenue is a main street arterial. The proposal of YouTube is consistent with the future place type and street type within blueprint Denver. The request is also consistent with the Blueprint Growth strategy, which maps this area as all other areas of the city. These areas are anticipated to see 20% of new housing growth and 10% of new employment growth by 2040. Blueprint Denver also provides guidance when a rezoning request is made to change the zoning to allow to unit uses so from one unit to two unit, citing that this decision is based on small area planning guidance, among others. So we're looking at the station area excuse me to have an stationary plan. We find that one of the goals is to encourage development of a full range of housing types. Additionally, to increase the supply of housing, including for sale and rental of varying types. And within the Urban Stationery Plan, the subject property is located as is excuse me is identified as urban residential, which recommends up to two and a half storeys and encourages a mix of low and medium density housing, including duplexes. Therefore, staff finds that YouTube is consistent with the urban stationery plan and thus satisfying the blueprint guidance to a two unit district. The proposed rezoning will result in uniform application of zone district, building form, use and design regulations. It will also further the public health, safety and welfare by implementing adopted plans, as well as providing additional housing units that are compatible with in the neighborhood. And the changing conditions in the neighborhood is an appropriate justifying circumstance for the proposed rezoning, specifically along Evans Avenue and South Broadway, and of course, the new development that's occurring around the Evans Light Rail station. The requested UTB is consistent with the neighborhood context description zoned district purpose and intent and staff recommends approval based on the finding that all review criteria have been met. Thank you. Thank you very much. Tonight, counsel has not received any written comments for this section of our hearing on Council Bill 130. But we do have one individual signed up to speak in person. Jesse Pearce. Good evening, members of council. My name is Jesse Paris and I ran for city council at large last year. Almost 15,000 votes with no money. And I'll be running again in 2023 to be your next mayor. And I'm representing for Denver homicide low black star similar for self defense positive actually come in for social change as well as the unity party of Colorado and mile high nose. I'll make this really easy for me. It's going to be a yes for me. It's one of them good nights, Piers. I don't the only question I have is what was this letter opposition about? If I could please answer that now. Greatly appreciate it. But this meets all the criteria. So there's nothing I can say that's going to change the vote on this. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers on this item. Are there any questions from members of Council Council member Flint? Thank you. Jason. Just to follow up on what Mr. Parish just said, I was curious because I did not see the letters either supporting or in opposition in the packet. Can you tell me what they said, who they were from? I saw there was one letter of support from a property owner across Grant Street. So from whom did the letter of opposition come and what was their basis? Sure. So, yeah, there should have been. I apologize if it didn't make it into the packet, but. So there there were four letters of support from various neighbors that were within a couple of block radius. And then the one letter of opposition that we did receive prior to excuse me, prior to playing board was from a resident nearby as well. And it was a general concerns about traffic and acknowledging that, you know, so close by, I believe it's the archdiocese. There's a school nearby, Arthur Logan there and concerns about traffic that's from those areas that spilled into the neighborhood as well as Broadway and what additional units might do to the traffic in the neighborhood . So it was a very general concern about that. Okay. And then the other question I have is this parcel is actually outside the Evans Station area. It's on Grand Street, but it's on the east side. Was still evaluated based on the adjacent plan. And there is no plan for a Rosedale neighborhood. Correct. Yeah. So but I will just to clarify, it is within the Evans stationary plan is within a half and half mile radius of the area plan. Oh, okay. If you look. Yeah. I mean, I was just looking at the figure that had it all the stars outside. Yes. It is on the edge, though. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Councilmember Hines. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for coming and presenting tonight. The staff report. Is this an existing structure that will remain and they'll just subdivide the structure or are they going to re they're going to scrape and start over? How is that going to work? So I'm not 100% sure that the applicant is here tonight. And if you would like to come up and speak to that, and I'll thank you for the staff report, but I am curious to hear what the applicant if the applicant is planning to subdivide or scrape or start over with the . Not a gotcha question. We're not meant to be a gotcha question, at least. Hi, I'm Justin, and thank you for having me. So the plan would be to evaluate the existing structure of the House. It is relatively distressed in nature, and so it's likely that it would be a new two unit duplex structure that would go on the site. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilmember Councilmember Torres. Thank you, Jason. Just a question for you about blueprint. When it says residential low. What does that mean? How how much how many. Units on a property still qualify as low. To a good question. So traditionally with within the urban context and blueprint Denver, we're looking at single unit and two unit residential. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Councilmember Sandoval. Yeah. I have a question for the applicant. It's hard to tell where the questions are coming with the masks. Councilmember, stay on the ball down here, sir. Thank you. Are you the owner of the property or do you represent the property owner? So I am one of the principals of the owning entity. Of the. Property. And when did you purchase the property? Excuse me? When did you purchase the property? So my entity took over the note, which was previously a loan to an investor, and the investor walked away from. The property. And we. Ended up with ownership from the note. So a lot of times when that happens, at least I'll speak in my statement. In my neck of the woods, there's usually a design build. So do you have plans for a duplex where this did that come with the sale of the house? It did not. We have some renderings, but we don't have the plans. The engagement and cost of the plans would be contingent on the approval of the loan. And then one other question. When you say the House is distressed, is that your terminology or is that actually like you had an inspection done? Like, you know, when you buy a house, you have an inspection. Is that from it like certified inspector or is that you just the developer thinks that the house is distressed? Well, so when we took over the house there, it was not habitable. There's there was no HBC, there was no plumbing. And we spent approximately $40,000 making the house rentable and habitable and safe. However, as far as the future of it, it probably is best fit as a tenant. So it was gutted. And you bought it when it was gutted. It was about to be redone or something. Is that what I'm understanding? That's correct. The inside of the. House had been. Basically demolished, been. Totally demolished within the walls of the structure. That's correct. Correct. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. All right. I don't see any other questions this evening. So the public hearing for council at 130 is now closed. Comments by members of Council Councilmember Cashman, this one in your district, just barely. You want to go first? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. This is a man is keeps trying to edge into my district. I'm telling you for two words. I think this this project is a reasonable request for an increase in intensity. It not only meets the review criteria, but it fits comfortably within the existing context of the neighborhood. That said, and and I do intend to support this tonight, and I hope my colleagues will follow me in that. But I just want to just get up on the soapbox for just a second and say, I would just love to see our city take a real deep dove into design review to really let us create neighborhoods that we all want. I know taste it varies from person to person. It's a complex world to get into. Other jurisdictions have done it with success, and I think this is one thing that's missing in Denver right now. And so I hope as time moves on, this city and this council will be more active in that area. But as I said, I do feel. This meets the. Criteria and I look forward to supporting this tonight. Thank you, Councilmember Cashman. Seeing nobody else in the queue for comments, I'll just add a thank you to staff for your comprehensive report. I think this clearly meets the criteria and I'll be supporting it this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call. Cashman. I black. I see tobacco i. Flynn I. Gilmer I. Herndon I. Can eat i. Ortega I. Cinnabon I swear I. Torres I. Council president. I. Madam Secretary, please call the voting results. 1339 as Constable 130 has passed. All right, Council Member Cashman, would you please put 131 on the floor?

On the message and order, referred on March 30, 2022, Docket #0435, Petition for a Special Law re: An act authorizing the City of Boston to grant four additional licenses for the sale of alcoholic beverages to be drunk on the specified premises, the committee submitted a report recommending the petition ought to pass in a new draft. The report was accepted; the petition was passed in a new draft; yeas 13.

BostonCC_03302022_2022-0435

04350435 Counsel Inclusion. And may he offer the following petition for a special law reenact path raising the city of Boston to grant four additional licenses for the sale of alcoholic beverages to be drunk on the specified premises. The chair recognizes counsel. Eugene Constitution. Two of the four. Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you to my co-sponsor, councilor and me here on this petition. This is a homo petition for four additional liquor licenses at the bowling building. So place restricted. Liquor license is historically this body. And as the city, we know how hard it has been to get liquor licenses for our communities, especially in our black and brown communities, because of how expensive the liquor licenses are. And so this would be our request for four nontransferable and restricted licenses. In the past, we've attempted to get a lot more dispersed around the city, and we have failed even when the mayor has tried. So this is just a precaution before a liquor license, as we hope to in the future, work towards getting more liquor licenses to our neighborhoods. But this is just after the bowling building. We had some great businesses in that area in Roxbury that could really benefit from having those licenses. We also know that our colleague, Councilor Fernand Anderson, has been doing really great work in D7 and this would really help the businesses in her district and make sure that they're able to make more money and revitalize help to continue to revitalize the Nubian Square area with these liquor licenses. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Constitution. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes. Councilman. Here, Councilman, here. You have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you to my co-sponsor. We look forward to the opportunity to partner with the administration on securing four additional site specific liquor licenses located right in the heart of Roxbury. The council has had in the past voted to pass on all petitions to allow site specific liquor licenses, which has greatly benefit communities . The Charles River Speedway administrative building is a great example of that. This is an opportunity for not only to provide for additional liquor licenses to the Roxbury neighborhood, but hopefully this is also an opportunity for us to explore in greater detail the issue that this body has taken up many times, which is an equitable distribution of liquor licenses across the city. And I want to acknowledge our sister and service now, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, when she was on the council fight ferociously on making sure that our city had a real representation of liquor licenses. Unfortunately, a lot of those did not end up and in Mattapan and Dorchester and other parts of our most distressed neighborhoods . So I'm hoping that this is just the beginning of the revolution. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Here, the chair recognizes Councilor Fernandez Anderson, Counsel Fernandez. Anderson, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. Let me say for the record that I appreciate the nuances involved as it pertains to the issue of liquor licenses. Said licenses do create a degree of economic viability for restaurants. But let me also state to quote an old adage, that man does not live by bread alone. Simply stated, my deeply felt religious views and customs place me in a position of opposition, the partaking of spirits. As a practicing Muslim, we believe that the consumption of alcohol is a decision that is detrimental to health and well-being. However, recognizing the significance of this issue to many of our esteemed small business owners, I have stepped aside and allowed or not allowed but welcomed my sister. Join me here and Rosi Lucia to file in my stead. Hence, there is a duality at play here for yours truly, where the importance of economical and spiritual realms are direct , indirect confrontation for me. And while I recognize that the economic realm is a great concern, I cannot compromise my core tenets of spiritual beliefs and hence compromise an essential aspect of my being. Furthermore, while acknowledging that alcohol sales do constitute an engine to economic empowerment for restaurant tours, I believe that there is a plethora of healthier society , societally more appropriate ways to grow economy. I hope that such alternatives can be discussed and implemented, and as time progresses, we can work together to develop them. But for now, I stand strongly on my spiritual beliefs. Thank you. Thank you, Counsel Fernandez. Innocent. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Docket 0435 will be referred to the Committee on Government Operations. Mr. Clarke, please. We talk in. 04360436 Council as Council agreed and offer the following order for a hearing on the state of Boston's non-governmental, nonprofit social sector and charting a post-pandemic recovery.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending and restating Chapter 8.99, relating to just cause for termination of tenancies, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02082022_22-0155

Thank you. Item 25. And I do. I know the city attorney has a few comments at the start of the item and then we'll do public comment. And in a moment about. Report from city attorney. Thanks for. This. Continue. Sorry, Rich. Oh. Okay. You can hear me. Okay. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. And council members. Just a couple of introductory remarks. I wanted to point out that I'm bringing back an ordinance in that complies with the direction you gave me back on December 7th. In all respects, except for one. One of the things you asked for was that there would be a 90 day notice in advance of any tenant termination for a substantial remodel rather than a 60 day notice. I apologize that we did not discuss this in depth on December 7th. We should have, but it wasn't brought to my attention until after you gave me that direction. That there is a California appellate court decision that pretty strongly holds that landlord tenant transactions and notices under a lease are a matter of statewide concern and can't be changed by local city council actions. So we removed it. I'm fairly confident that the 90 day change would not have held up had it been challenged. I took it out so that you could consider action on everything else. Tonight we can discuss this further if you're so inclined in closed session. Whether you approve this tonight or disapprove it. We can always discuss this further and make further changes in the future if need be. The second thing that I would like to address is that there's I think as a lot of people know, the county recently extended its eviction moratorium on January 25th. In that what that means is any change that you make may make tonight to Chapter 8.99 regarding substantial remodel. It will be legal and it will immediately go into effect. As far as being on the books. But in practice, it's going to be suspended. It'll be on the books, but there will be no landlord that will be moving forward with a termination of tenancy or an eviction because the county moratorium will effectively immediately suspend any evictions under the substantial remodel. You can still go forward with your change. It does not conflict with the county moratorium. It'll just be suspended. So because of that, we had originally set this up as an emergency ordinance. I really don't think that it needs to be an urgency ordinance anymore given the recent county extension of its moratorium. So I would if the Council is interested in moving forward with this adoption, I would suggest that maybe the the motion could be to adopt the staff recommendation, but subject to the following, which would be the removal of the emergency declaration. And then related, we need to adjust the effective date of the prohibition on evictions. We need to make sure that those will be effective as of April 1st, because that will be the effective date if you remove the urgency declaration. Just a couple of minor ministerial changes to the ordinance amending 8.102. Hopefully that was clear enough. That's that's all I have to say. I stand by for any questions. Councilman Allen. Thank you, Mayor. I just I'm glad to see this ordinance today. I know it's been a long road and I'm pleased to see how far that we have come. And I know that many folks have for their concerns. But what we have here today are concrete actions that will make a difference for renters at a lower cost to both the city and landlords. I also want to recognize my co-sponsors on the original item Councilwoman Susie Farrow and our Cosigners Vice Governor Richardson and Councilwoman Van de Hoff for their partnership and support on this. Sorry about the background noise. I also want to thank all the Senate and property groups and residents who reached out to my office and participated in the process to voice their questions and concerns. The work that we've done is going to actually improve our housing climate in the city, I understand, but still continue to have concerns. And I recognize these perspectives. But increasing relocation benefits, collecting data and establishing a civil fine for both bad landlords are actions that make a difference for renters today and in the city. So I would like to make a motion to adopt that recommendation subject to the following. First, due to the renewed L.A. County eviction moratorium. I like to remove the urgency declaration from both ordinances. And second, as a result, I would like to adjust the effective dates referenced in the ordinance amending Chapter 8.1 or two to reflect the actual effective date resulting from the removal of the urgency declaration. So just a summary. I'd like to move this item forward, but remove the urgency declaration due to the current L.A. County moratorium and take the steps necessary to make that happen. Thank you, Councilman Ciro. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to also think I want to thank Councilwoman Allen for her leadership on this item. I know that I agree with her that there's been concern raised. And I want to make sure that to thank the our in those who reached out to share them that that we we heard you and we also know that it's important that we do that that I know that I'm in support of Councilwoman Allen's motion that she just made around some of these changes. And I just want to share and just think staff for their hard work and and getting us to this point with the language as well and that I know that there's more that we could do that you feel that we could do. And I think that that today is and the only time that we'll have a discussion about this item, I believe so. With that, I agree with Councilman Allen and and I and I seconded and I support it. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? At this time, if there's any members of the public that works to speak on this item, please use the raise hand feature or press start on our first speakers credit Mona. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council Member. I know that we're all tired of revisiting this issue, but I nevertheless ask you to table item 25 until later in the year in acting. I will just cause confusion since it will be suspended until next year because of the L.A. County eviction moratorium. If you insist on taking action on this item tonight, I urge you to revisit the staff recommendation to change the construction threshold for a substantial remodel from 30 to 60 days. This item, which came out of meetings with tenants and landlords, was the only item in staff recommendations that actually prevents evictions. Rather than just making them more expensive, this change would protect the remaining 20 original tenants in my apartment complex and many other Long Beach tenants who will otherwise face eviction. At the end of the county moratorium. Moratorium. Even with the proposed changes tonight, whether you table the item or act on it, I request that the city issue a statement to the press and posted on the city website and social media as well as mailing directly to landlords, clearly stating that landlords are required to comply with the L.A. County eviction moratorium. I know of three people who received illegal 60 day notices in the past week, so the city needs to do more to educate both landlords and tenants that there is still a moratorium in place through the end of the year. Thank you. Our next speaker is Ailsa Chang. Good evening. Councilmembers Members Tung from Long Beach forward. A huge, huge thanks to council members Alan and sorrow for championing this item. Look, as you heard from the city attorney and from the Legal Aid Foundation letter submitted yesterday, the countywide eviction moratorium bans substantial remodel evictions in Long Beach through the end of the year. Therefore, passing this ordinance tonight will lead to mass public confusion for both tenants and landlords and unfortunately will lead to more evictions. As explained in Lafleur's letter. The county policy is not an actual moratorium on filing eviction cases. Thus, a landlord can still serve an illegal notice, file an illegal eviction, and it would be up to the tenant to know their rights and assert them in court. Most tenants don't know their rights, don't want to go to court, and are understandably terrified when they get an eviction notice. So most tenants simply move out without knowing they are protected. This is a self eviction because of the awkward timing of this ordinance. It is fundamentally the city's responsibility to prevent mass public confusion and publicize via news media, social media websites and mailers that the countywide eviction moratorium is currently the law of the land and protects Long Beach tenants from eviction through December 1st through December 31st of this year. Thank you. Our next speaker is Leona. Libra wishes to. Support the concerns that have been raised. And we echo the things to the city council members that have supported this. And I especially want to recognize tonight the tenant leadership and consistent participation over months to try to move this the tenant protection policy forward. I agree that we need the Council to make a clear statement about the county protections covering all of us who are resident here and the council people, not only the city staff, but the council people need to use your newsletter. You need to use the area of City Hall where we pay our utility bills. We need to have leadership from the city. If you are going to pass this because as has been said, the evictions have already started, illegal or not. There are bad actors, as we all know. There are just regular landlords out there. And they are. Escalating their use of evictions. Leverage telephone is ringing off the hook when we are making outreach calls to thousands of tenants here in Long Beach. We are increasingly hearing about what are illegal evictions. So if you pass this tonight, we are going to look to you and to the city staff for an aggressive public education campaign to make sure the tenants do not get preyed upon by landlords who will attempt to use this public confusion to. Get rid of the tenants that they have. Thank you. Our next speaker is Melody Ozuna. Good evening, Council and Mayor. Again, my name is Melody Osuna and I'm an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. I'm also a resident of the eighth District. LeFlore agrees with city attorney Rich Anthony's assessment that the county moratorium prevents substantial remodel evictions while the county resolution is in place, which is at least until December 31st, 2022. It's important that the city communicate that landlords cannot move forward with these types of evictions until the county resolution known as the moratorium, is over. As I mentioned in my letter to the city yesterday, there's a real risk of tenants self evicting after receiving a notice from their landlord or landlord filing an unlawful detainer action as the county resolution is not an actual moratorium on evictions, but a defense a tenant has to assert against an unlawful detainer in court. There needs to be a strong effort from the city to communicate that these notices are invalid until the county resolution ends. Finally, I have to reiterate that this current substantial remodel item does not go far enough to protect long standing tenants, making a small adjustment of requiring 60 days worth of work other than 30 days for a substantial remodel. Eviction. Show that the city supports long established tenants. The current substantial remodel ordinance. Just make substantial remodel evictions slightly more expensive. It doesn't protect the long established tenants. Tenants will be displaced for higher paying tenants, and the cost to substantially remodel and evict the previous tenants will be recuperated quickly by the property owner. Without strong anti displacement policies. The third is choosing to support profit rather than long established communities of color and tenants. Thank you. Our last speaker is Maggie Swallow. Maggie Valenzuela. That concludes public comment. I'm sorry. I just got. I'm sorry. I was doing hard time with my. Good evening. Name is Michelangelo. I am the senior organizer with the union, part of the Coalition for Good Jobs and Healthy. I wanted to speak about the center model ordinance. One Long Beach member comes to mind name is Shelly Ward, who expressed to her member concerns the damages in her apartment. She applied to Long Beach rental assistance application even after applying was still served with a 15 day notice and then of 30 things to make her very sick to the point where she ended up in the hospital because the L.A. County Emergency Eviction moratorium and no fault evictions through the end of 2022, which includes the substantial remote evictions passing the ordinance today will lead the mass confusion of language with bad landlords to take advantage and issue eviction orders to tenants who don't understand the rights. To truly prevent these evictions, we still need to change the definition of substantial remodel to construction work that requires a tenant to make use of 60 days instead of 30 days. Thank you. Take include follow comment for this item. Thank you for back to councilman zero. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to make sure I forgot to ask the question earlier. If, um, Mr. Anthony can just clarify. How do we make sure that there isn't confusion about this moratorium that county, as you know, put out and between what our ordinances. Thank you. I don't know that there's any change that can be made to the language of the ordinance that will help assist with that. I think I would probably say that the most effective way to combat confusion would be what several of the speakers mentioned, which would be, you know, a concerted effort on the part of staff to publicize the fact that there's a county moratorium and to publicize it as widely as possible. I think you. I have councilman's in house. Thank you, Mayor. I want to say thank you to Rick Anthony for the clarification provided. I really appreciate it. I would also like to thank Councilwoman Allen and Councilwoman Sorrell for bringing this very important item forward. I'm glad that the L.A. County has issued a moratorium and will be protecting tenants who are still combating COVID 19 challenges . So thank you again for this item. I do. I do want to say that we should definitely. Do as much as we can of the city to inform both, both landlords and tenants about the moratorium. I think that's going to be important. I also think that there might be people out there that I mean, landlords out there who may not know about this moratorium and who may feel that they can evict, but they're not doing that maliciously. They just don't know about the new ordinance. So we just need to make sure that we are able to pass out this information to everyone. Anything additional from staff. No. Mr. Mayor, we are. My report is done unless there are any further questions. And I believe we did public comment already. So with that roll call vote, please. District one. I district to district three i. District for. Right. District five. By District six i district seven. I. District eight. District nine? Yes. Motion is carried.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4710 North Pennsylvania Street in Globeville. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from E-SU-D to U-SU-C1 (allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 4710 North Pennsylvania Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 4-13-21.

DenverCityCouncil_08022021_21-0577

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for council bill 577 is open. May we have the staff report? And welcome back, edson. Hello everyone. At 21 years with CPD here. 4710 north Pennsylvania Street is requesting a rezoning to allow for an accessory dwelling unit. It's currently on Eastside, which is a single unit zoned district asking for us. You see one. It's currently located in Council District nine. Seelbach is a district in a Globeville neighborhood, so the site itself is just over 6000 square feet. It's a single unit, residential. It's across the street from Argo Park and they're requesting an accessory dwelling unit. The current zoning is ESU. D it's surrounded by you. You do have some, um, x three, which is a mixed use, up to three stories in close proximity as well as s, which is open space. And then when we look at the land use, it's a single unit residential with single unit residential, some industrial and open space across across the street. And the site itself is in the upper left corner. As you can see, it's a one story structure and the park across the street. And it went before the planning board in May and it was approved unanimously. And as a present we have received no comments for this item. And when we're looking at specifically a rezoning, we have specific review criteria that we analyze based off the Denver zoning code. And the first one is consistency with adopted plan. So we're looking at comprehensive plan 2040 Blueprint, Denver, L.A. and Transportation Plan of 2019 and the Global Neighborhood Plan of 2016. There are several strategies found in the staff report that this case is consistent with. And so I would jump into Blueprint Denver. And so Blueprint Denver classifies this area as urban, which where you see the small area plan as well as a blueprint deviate from what it's currently zone, which is the urban edge. And so urban edge is more a transition between urban and suburban. But this area is one of the few areas in the city where Blueprint Denver, as well as the neighborhood plan, specifically call out for a change in the neighborhood context. And so this neighborhood context is urban, which is a small multi-unit, residential and low intensity mixed uses buildings typically embedded in single unit and two unit residential areas , and it offers good walkability with short predictable blocks as well as when we look at the place type, the place type is single and two unit uses and accessory dwelling units. ADAS are appropriate as well as Pennsylvania Street is a local street which are primarily served by residential uses. As well as Blueprint has policy around AIDS, which is policy for which talks about the expansion of accessibility throughout all residential areas. And then when we when we dove into the neighborhood plan, the global neighborhood plan of 2016, this plan specifically calls this area a single family with an edu. And more importantly, the plan has specific recommendations, such as recommendations B one that says all accessory dwelling units. Units to enable aging in place, additional income through rentals, and to increase population density in the neighborhood without altering the character. And then, more importantly, this area says update the neighborhood context, the Denver Zoning Code's Urban Neighborhood context, as opposed to the currently mapped urban edge context, better reflects the use of the alleys limiting or prohibiting curb cuts for street access and the continuation of detached sidewalks where possible. As well as it talks about tailoring the minimum zone lot sizes in areas where existing zoning requires a 6000 square foot minimum zone that size. The Future Zone district should have a 5500 square foot zone minimum. So that's what the Zone District is doing here. But the applicant's applying for. There are several other review criteria that the staff report classifies and therefore CPD recommends approval based on all findings of the records. Your having met and I am open for any questions and the applicant Eric is also on as well. All right. Thank you, Ensign, for the report. We have three individuals signed up to speak this evening and all are joining us virtually. The first one is Tess Dougherty. Is that me, Stacey? Yes, I did. Go ahead and say that. I'm so sorry. I didn't hear because it was changing over. So I'm in support. I think I actually mark the wrong thing for both of these ones on the thing. I just I don't know what happened, but I I'm in support of the aid to you. And I just, you know, this is in Globeville, where they haven't had they haven't had gas for three days. And, like, I don't know what's going on because, like, why why do we continue to allow the environmental racism in this town ? You know, there was a time in five points where they there was there wasn't even indoor plumbing because, you know, the city and county of Denver refused to service that area in the same the same time the rest of the city had it. And, you know, we've since renamed well, not we, some real estate developer renamed Fivepoint Reno, which is absurd to me. How about right? Never. It's five points. And I don't understand why we allow people to come into our spaces and to completely I mean, they got to change the name. And now we have clans named after with the rhino. Something clean. I mean, why did we even allow that to be named that? You know, and we have people in hilarious ones here who are literally in Globeville who can't even breathe right now because of the I-70. All the particulate matter in the air. Not to mention they're near Suncor, which we know went unregulated for 11 years. No idea how that, you know, just slipped the mind of everyone and, and like we have, I mean John Evans is one of two people who ordered the Sand Creek massacre and we have a mountain named after him. We have a boulevard. Like these are the things that we want you guys to start actually doing and taking ownership of because you have the power to change some of these things that are just racist and they're just blatantly racist. There's an unquestionable. And like in these meetings about zoning and all of these plans that are coming forward, where are the plans that address this? Where are the plans that address the racially restricted covenants of this city's zoning? We'd like to start seeing that as well in these plans because it's really gross to think that there's a mountain and a boulevard and a light rail station named after a man who slaughtered 300 women, children and elderly. And what would you do if you had to if your family was impacted by that, your ancestors and you had to hear people talk about Evans Boulevard every day? I mean, it's just the legacy of displacement and racial segregation is so strong in the city that we really need to start addressing it, thinking you. We're going to go ahead and move on to our next speaker. We have Helen Herron, Mushfiqur. And we're going to be able to allow them to speak. To. The camera. Go ahead, Helen. Hello? Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Hello. I'm sorry I followed. Hello? You hear. Me? Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Yeah. I was going to speak at La La. Okay. I'm sorry. That's what we had to. HELEN So if it's okay, we'll go ahead. And skip over you for this hearing and we'll make sure we've got you. I believe we had you with Llama Lincoln Park as well. Okay. Thank you. All right. Our last speaker for this hearing is Jesse Paris. Yes. This is all me. Yes. Members of council. Those watching at home. Those who are still in the chamber. My name is just Allison Pearson. I'm representing for black sites a move to self-defense self the positive action command for social change as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and frontline black males. And I will be the next member in 2023. I'm in favor of this rezoning. So I of this 80 year request, this neighborhood has been rapidly gentrified, as already had alluded to earlier. So we need more accessible dwelling units throughout the city, especially in areas that have been rapidly gentrified and have suffered rampant displacements. So it meets all five of the criteria. So please pass this. You request to my good job, Candy. I think you got this one. Thank you. Thank you, Jesse. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council on Council Bill 577. Seeing no questions. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 577 council members say the Barca. No comments. This is something that I think. You know, we've talked many times about it. People shouldn't have to go through all of these hoops to get here. So I definitely support this idea. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Council members say to Barca and see no other speakers. I agree that this meets the zoning criteria and will be supporting this this evening as well. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 577 CdeBaca. I Clark. Hi. Flynn. I Hinds. I Cashman. I can. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Black. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 11 Eyes. 11 Eyes. Counsel Bill 20 1-577 has passed. Thank you, edson, for the staff reports and for the community members who joined us. We are on to our final hearing this evening. Councilmember Torres, will you please put council bill 758 on the floor for final passage?

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with local stakeholders to create a community vision for developing and activating a cultural district recognizing and supporting the historic contributions of the LGBTQ+ community.

LongBeachCC_06212022_22-0694

Yes, we'll do that for sure, sir. Is Lissa Bishop here? Okay, then word concluded from a comment. And we're going to go ahead and go on to the remainder of the agenda. We're going to begin with item number 25, please. Item 25 is a communication from Mayor Robert Garcia and Councilwoman Allen. Recommendation two requires city manager to work with local stakeholders to create a cultural district recognizing and supporting the historic contributions of the LGBTQ community. Thank you very much. I'm going to go out and just make a few comments and I'll turn this over to Councilwoman Allen. I think it's no surprise that Long Beach has a large and really proud LGBTQ plus community. We have had it for four decades. One of the things that makes Long Beach unique is organizations across the country will tell you that the density of LGBTQ plus people in the city is actually one of the highest in the state of California and certainly for a city of our size. When you think about Long Beach and the heart of the broader gay community, that really is the Broadway corridor. Our LGBTQ plus community is has developed, has grown, has come out, has invested all up along this corridor for many, many decades. It's also one of the most politically active communities in the city and has been for a very long time fighting for rights at Pride, making sure that that employees had equal but equal employee benefits, and ensuring that, particularly during the AIDS crisis, that there was attention brought to this important and critical issue for many gay people and members of the community, myself included. Many of the spaces along Broadway, particularly in Alameda Speech and the bars and and the businesses, were the one place that you would go to, where you could be open, where you would come out, where you would meet friends, where you would share stories. And so the the the corridor along Broadway is a very significant place for the community and I think for the broader language community here in the city. For many years, there's been discussions within the community about creating a historic or cultural district that would encompass the historic gay neighborhoods in Alameda Speech along Broadway. These are spaces that are incredibly important to the community. It is currently there are numerous small businesses, LGBTQ plus own businesses, bars, nonprofits, restaurants, spaces that celebrate the community as well as, of course, other other businesses. We also know that this is an area that is a great neighborhood, a neighborhood that is incredibly inclusive, broadly across the city as well. Over the years, there's been improvements made, whether it's been the crosswalks, whether it's been ensuring that the infrastructure for mobility gets, gets, gets installed. But this is an opportunity to think about the broader history and to involve the broader community. The recommendation is to ask staff to come back with a a plan after, of course, working with the community. And we'd like the team to work with our local historians, neighbors, the LGBTQ plus business owners, of course, not the nonprofit organizations, to really begin creating a cultural district along the Broadway corridor. It is something that can be created with and through the community. And most importantly, it's a process that is going to respect the businesses that are already there. Ensure that we don't that we don't lose the history of the of the street and make sure that we are working with small business owners to try to maintain that as a culturally significant portion of the city for the community. I will also add that over the years we have lost some businesses, some of the bars, but many remain that you find most of them there along that stretch of Broadway. You talk to most gay folks in this community, most LGBTQ folks in this community, and they all have stories about Broadway and how important it was to them as it was and has been to me personally, in my experience coming out in the city and and meeting other people that were like me and like folks from our community, across the community. This is creating and designating LGBTQ plus historic districts is not uncommon, and it's happened in other communities across the country that have large gay populations or that have significant areas that are that are historic. And so this is something that we have been talking about for a significant amount of time. And I'm really proud, particularly as we celebrate pride, to be able to bring this forward and get approval and support from the council to begin this really important process for the community. And so with that, I'll turn it over to Councilwoman Allen. Thank you, Mayor, for your leadership. And I'm excited to work on this vision with you. I'm also proud to represent this area. These bars and businesses have been safe spaces for people in need for many, many years. They are homes away from home community centers and gather. The wrong places. They make people feel safe in our community when so many other communities do not feel safe. Long Beach has no nationwide is welcoming and inclusive. And the Broadway corridor is a central part of this history. As councilwoman representing this area and its history, I am so proud of what our city has accomplished, and I'm proud of how inclusive we are. I think that we must be committed to working on even be a more welcoming, welcoming and more inclusive. I'm proud to have supported the gender inclusive language policy for the city to be supporting the placemaking and events at the restored Pride Tower and to support the LGBTQ plus community building events and cultural affirming programing. I'm also excited to hear from constituents about what boundaries and vision for this district should be. I look forward to how we recognize and preserve this history that makes our community so very special. I want my children to be able to talk to to take their future children here and learn more about the resilience and the accomplishments of our LGBTQ community. So I look forward to starting this process and definitely want to thank you again, Mayor Garcia, for your leadership and vision on this. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And now I'll voice my support for this idea, this concept. You know, I didn't know that it wasn't already. I always assumed it was already a historically historical district, because everyone in lobbies knows that that's sort of a historic corridor there on Broadway. I think it's important context for the entire city. Landmarking is an important process that recognizes local, local culture, local diversity, local history. But it's also smart economic development policy. The more you can add value and recognize the existing assets and see people and see their culture as an asset, you attract more interest in the area which supports those small businesses that certainly need more support and more help. So this this makes a whole lot of sense and I'm happy to support it. I think this will underscore what is truly a strength of our community, our diversity. But also I think it acknowledges history and it brings broader understanding as well. And so I'm happy to support this motion today. Vicki Vice Mayor, Councilwoman Sara. Thank you, Mayor. What a great item to bring forward during June, which is Pride Month. And I am just so proud of our LGBTQ plus community and what they have all accomplished to come to this I think point and as far as continuing to uplift the struggle but also the accomplishment and to continue to celebrate what the community have have done. And, you know, it's just I'm just really happy to be able to support it and to continue to lift the LGBTQ community forward in and and have it continue to be recognized nationally. Because I think that whenever people think about Long Beach, it's much more than obviously our Cambodian community that's well known, but also our LGBT. Uh. LGBTQ plus community as well. So happy to support that item. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Sunday House. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for this very, very important item. This is a very, very important step for our city. So thank you, Councilwoman Allen, also for for supporting this and bringing this forward, actually. One of the things that I will also agree with is that I've always thought that it was already a district. So it's so encouraging and so beautiful to actually make it official. Long Beach is known for being welcoming to all, and that's very important. I think that, you know, the reason for that being is because we take great pride in our rich diversity. Cultural districts highlight and celebrate our diversity through artwork, foods, businesses and spaces that are tailored specifically to create safe spaces for for our communities to enjoy. I look forward to initiating this process and to establishing a vibrant LGBTQ place district in Long Beach. Congratulations. Thank you. And I just want to before we go, I think there's a member of the public here to to speak before we go. I just want to I also think the center, Long Beach, I think they're going to play a key role in the key role in helping us bring the community together. And I know we've asked the staff to work with directly with the center to help us guide this process. And then the other piece, which I think is important, is that throughout this process, the a historic district can be a lot of things. It could be obviously ensuring that the history is preserved that could be working with businesses. Its its economic development is historic preservation, it's infrastructure, it could be infrastructure improvements. And so there are a lot of pieces that can really make this a really special corridor more special than it already is as we continue to preserve our LGBTQ history in the city of Long Beach. And so with that, I'm going to open it up to the public. I think we have a member of the public, Madam Clerk. We have Josh Newell almost. Good evening, Mayor. Good evening. City council people. I'm so glad to hear those wonderful comments, especially since we are right coming to the end of Pride season. So happy pride to all of you. Happy pride to the city of Long Beach. My name is John Newell, and today I'm representing the LGBTQ center here in Long Beach. And the LGBTQ center advances equity for LGBTQ plus people through culturally responsive advocacy, education and programs. Long Beach has made a tremendous, tremendous and huge advances in the last 30 years. And a portion of that success is due to the strong LGBTQ community here in our city. As a community, we're very proud to see these items come up on the agenda today and to formalize that the Broadway corridor is part of our culture and part of our history here in Long Beach. The Broadway corridor is filled as as many of you know, with gay and queer owned businesses, gay and queer friendly businesses. Many of these businesses have open storefronts. The nearby homes have been rejuvenated along the corridor, and residents can visit a plethora of coffeehouses, bars, stores, thrift stores, restaurants, all selling art, clothing, furniture that definitely help the economy here in Long Beach. One thing that we do need that I do want to recognize is this area has our very first LGBTQ rainbow crosswalks. Thank you to the council and the city and public works for putting those in. So I again urge the city to and the Council to fully support this item. And the LGBTQ center is here ready to support this item and work with the city to make sure that this cultural district becomes a becomes a reality. So, again, thank you, Councilwoman Allen. Mayor Garcia, the entire council, we appreciate you. And this is a perfect way for us to recognize pride. So happy pride, everyone. Thank you so much. And thanks to the center and the entire board. And with that, we have a motion and a second. Let's go ahead and please cast your votes. The motion is carried. Thank you. We're moving on to item 40.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use review decision and meeting procedures; temporarily modifying and suspending procedures in Titles 23 and 25 of the Seattle Municipal Code and amending Chapters 23.41, 23.49, 23.66, 23.79, 25.12, 25.16, 25.20, 25.21, 25.22, 25.24, and 25.30 of the Seattle Municipal Code, consistent with the Governor’s proclamations and the Mayor’s proclamation of civil emergency on March 3, 2020; declaring an emergency; and establishing an immediate effective date; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_04202020_CB 119769

I. Nine in favor. None opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation? All right. Item one. Agenda item number one. Will the clerk please read the short title into the records? Agenda Item one Capital 1197629 relating to land use review decision and meeting procedures. Temporary Modifying and suspending procedures in Title 23 and 25 of the SKELMERSDALE Code. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I will move to pass Council Bill 119769. Is there a second floor? I guess it's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilmember Strauss, you are the primary sponsor of this bill, so I am going to yield the floor to you to address council bill 119769. The floor is yours. Thank you. Council President. This emergency legislation addresses design review, historic preservation and permitting processes during the COVID 19 emergency. The intention of this is to allow critically needed housing projects, especially in affordable housing, to continue moving through the permitting process in a way that preserves public input and engagement and protects public health. Specifically, this legislation would allow projects to opt into administrative design review for six months, or until design review boards are able to meet virtually or in person. It would allow for the Pre-Application community outreach to be done virtually and explicitly provides ways to accomplish this. It would allow for minor design or way decisions related to historic landmarks or historic and special review districts to be made administratively while suspending meetings and the major, major decisions of the landmarks and special review boards. Because legislation is being enacted on an emergency basis, all provisions would lapse after 180 days, and we would be required to hold a public hearing within 60 days. We discussed many amendments this morning, and I've had many conversations with most not all of you. And there have been a few changes made since then which we can discuss as we move into amendments. Thank you all for the consideration of this legislation. And while I know that there are small changes needed to be made for some folks here and there, I really do stress the importance of passing this bill today. Again, I'll finally end with while I have staffed this. Body of work, permitting and design review and any land use work for over two years. At this point, the level of complexity and nuance is great. So much so that I have had to be re briefed on many sections of this bill. And so please, if you do have questions on nuance, do not hesitate to ask. And I do urge passage of this bill today. Thank you for your time. Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss. So we have lots of amendments and lots of things that changed sort of at the last minute before we were reconvened. So I'm going to go ahead and call for any comments on the underlying bill. I know that Councilmember Strauss, I wanted to recognize that between the end of our council meeting and now you were able to do successfully work with some of the amendment sponsors to incorporate previously circulated amendments. Many of the amendments that we discussed during council briefing this morning into an updated substitute bill that is now being identified as the Strauss substitute version, to my understanding is that this version includes the following amendments Mosqueda Amendment one, Herbold and Strauss, Amendment six and Herbold Amendment three. There is additional language that was added to version two of this substitute, the stress substitute version two that has not been previously circulated. And I will need to request that you describe the language once you address the substitute. So because of this new language, we will need to move to suspend the council rules to allow the Council to consider version two of the substitute again, because it was circulated after the noon deadline. So if there is no objection, the council rules will be suspended to allow consideration of the Strauss substitute version two. It was not previous that has not that was not previously circulated. Correct. So I moved to amend Council Bill. You can't move it. You can't move anything until I go through the process of seeing if there's any objection to even consider it. So I called for any objection to considering stress of supervision, to I'm not hearing or seeing any objection. So hearing no objection, the council rules are suspended and we can proceed with consideration of version two of the Strauss substitute. So now, Councilmember Strauss, I will hand it over to you to move your substitute. Thank you. I move to amend council bill 119769 by substituting version two for version one A as presented on version two. Strauss Substitute recent recently distributed. There are second. Thank you. All right. It's been moved and seconded to substitute the bill. Councilmember Strauss, I will hand it over to you to address the substitute. Yes, thank you. Council President. This amendment makes several technical and clarifying changes to the legislation that were suggested by different councilmembers. I'd like to thank Councilmember Mosqueda Herbold and Morales, especially for their collaboration. In addition to the items discussed this morning, we were sent a new version of this substitute amendment to councilmembers, which adds in several of the non-controversial amendments discussed this morning. It now includes Councilmember Skaters Amendment One to the Joint Amendment six from Council Member Herbold and myself and Councilmember Herbold, Amendment three. Additionally, this substitute amendment adds new language from Councilmember Morales, a substitute which would remove the Administrative Decision Authority for the International Special Review District and adds language access requirements for any virtual meetings of any other body and adds language prioritizing projects that are important to the community. So it is my understanding, oh, in addition to these new additions that would allow Seattle Housing Authority to utilize design review, exemption for affordable housing, clarifying community outreach requirements, improving tree protections, allow for administrative approval, door and window replacements in historic and special review districts. Allow for administrative approval of Penthouse installations in Pioneer Square. Allow for administrative approval of certain certificates of approval and landmarks. Boards have granted preliminary approval and request S.T.A.R. Labs to investigate a rule protect to protect construction, workplace safety during the COVID 19 pandemic. It finally requests reporting in 60 days on the progress towards implementing virtual meetings. I would like to thank all of my colleagues again who contributed to the development of this amendment. Hand it off to anyone else. And I would like to clarify with Councilmember Morales that this. Language does, in fact, include the ability for the special international special review district to elect to allow for any projects that they deem that they want to put forward to administrative review that they would be able to. I know there were a lot of last minute discussions, and I just want to double check that this meets your the criteria in which you've requested. Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss, for that description of the substitute. So again, that the substitute as described by Councilmember Strauss includes at the Met the following amendments that we discussed at the council briefing. One, if it includes mosquito amendment one listed on the attachment to the agenda, it also includes the Herbold and Strauss Amendment six and the Herbold Amendment. Three. There is again some additional language in there as described by Councilmember Strauss. So that is the version of the bill that is before us for consideration. I'm going to go ahead and call now for any additional comments or questions on the substitute version of the bill. I raise a hands. Okay. So I. Councilmember Peterson first and then Councilmember Morales. Peterson, the floor is yours. Thank you. Council president, just to clarify on the process, what we're about to vote on is simply just swapping out the bill. With the new substitute, not actually voting on the substitute itself. Correct. That is correct. So at this point, we are actually. Mean. Let me go back to that. So we are or we are considering the substitute version. And so what we are considering now is, is to just the procedural act of of substituting the bill. So we will get to a point where we can talk about the substance of the bill. But right now, we're just talking about the substitution before us. Thank you. Yeah. Because we're moralist. That was my question is. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions about the substitution? A hearing nun. Will the clerk please call the roll on the. Yes. Well, the clerk please call the roll on the on the adoption of version two of the Strauss substitute. Macheda I. Peterson, I. So what I. Proust, I. Purple. I. Whereas I. There is. I. Morales. I. President Gonzalez. I. Nine in favor. None oppose the motion carries and the substitute is adopted and version two of the bill is now before the City Council. So again, I'm going to open it back up to comments on version two of the bill that is before us. And before I do that, I just want to make sure customers just don't have anything else to add to this version. Correct. I'm seeing you nod your head. That is correct at this time. All right. So we'll go ahead. And I know that this is where we want to consider several amendments. And I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Herbold, who is going to move her amendment first. Thank you. I move to amend council Bill 11 9769 as presented on the Herbold Amendment one on the agenda. Is there a second? So thank you. It's been moved and seconded to amend the bill. Councilmember Herbold, please feel free to address the amendment. Thank you. So Amendment one would delete the proposed provision that would exempt affordable housing projects from meeting certain requirements from design review, specifically in this case, the requirements associated with this administrative design review. Affordable housing projects are currently subject to administrative design review, which do not require in-person meetings. Everything else in this bill before us today serves to restore public process to certain projects via virtual meetings as necessary during this COVID 19 crisis when we cannot meet in person. If this amendment fails by merit of exempting affordable housing projects from administrative review, affordable housing projects will not benefit from these future virtual meetings that we're working to stand up. Yesterday, Director Tory Wilson confirmed for me that affordable housing projects, as a matter of business practice at GCI, are currently prioritized in the administrative design review process and throughout the entire permitting process. Director Tom Wilson also confirmed that the need for affordable housing projects referenced in his Memo to the City Council, one located in Lake City, one in Bitter Lake, one in Columbia City and one in Rainier Beach. These projects not only have priority in the administrative design review process, but all of them will be able to complete the early community engagement and outreach process. I am hearing from folks that even though the administrative design review process for affordable housing was legislated by the council very recently, it only went into effect in July of 28. I am hearing that people really feel that we need to reform that process for affordable housing, and I would support working on that effort. But it's really concerning to me that the Council would take up a provision in this bill during this public health crisis. And that is really a policy conversation that the Council should be having with broader community participation. The state attorney general has issued guidance on the Open Public Meetings Act, and that guidance states that legislation that we consider must be either necessary and routine or necessary to respond to the COVID 19 outbreak and current public health emergency. Just a little bit more background on that. This guidance from the state attorney general came after the March 24th governor's proclamation proclamation 2028. That proclamation says, subject to the conditions for conducting any meeting as required above, agencies are further prohibited from taking action as defined in RTW 42.3 0.02. Unless those matters are necessary and routine matters or matters necessary to respond to the COVID 19 outbreak and the current public health emergency until such time as regular public participation over under the Open Public Meetings Act is possible. The March 26 Attorney General guidance went on to say that put another way, in this unusual and urgent time when members of the public may not be attending agency meetings as they normally would. We need to ask whether or not agencies could hold on some matters until life returns to normal. They go on to say, Since March six, state and local agencies have placed more restrictions on the public's movements and activities as the means to help stem the spread of the virus. Consistent with the general approach in the March six. Guidance, asking agencies to focus where possible, and holding meetings only on those matters that must be considered. Under the proclamation, agencies must now specifically ask two questions on those matters where they want to take actions. They are whether or not the matter is necessary and routine or necessary to respond to the COVID 19 outbreak and current public health emergency. If the matter does not meet those criteria, then the matter must wait. The the guidance from the state attorney general even go so far as to define action as hearing briefings or reports in committee, not just taking legislative action. And so, again, that's really for me. Makes our decision today as it relates to this particular section of the bill, really something to be taken very seriously at a time when we are pleading with the members of of the public to take the the the proclamations from from the governor seriously. I feel that we have to really model that behavior as well. The language in our own ordinance as it relates to the findings for the need to to act on the section of of the ordinance basically says that the ordinance provides an exemption from design review for certain affordable housing projects. If they can file a permit application in the next six months, potentially long beyond the restriction of meeting in public. The Office of Housing is funding a number of affordable housing projects and will serve populations particularly impacted by the COVID 19 pandemic, including seniors and people at risk or of existing homelessness, and that are far into the permitting process. These projects are currently subject to administrative design review, which allows certain departures to be granted. Exempting these projects from design review and allowing departures to be granted outside of the design review process will shorten the time required for these projects to complete the permitting process, advancing the date by which they could be constructed. All good things. But nevertheless, the focus of this part of the bill is related to recovery, not addressing the public health challenge posed by in-person meeting requirements. On the role of boards and commissions in development decisions and the affordable housing built that might be exempt from design. Administrative Design Review wouldn't come online to house people impacted by COVID 19 for a year at best. So exempting affordable housing from administrative design review will not house people who need housing now. One testifiers correctly said that the COVID 19 emergency did not create the affordable housing crisis. This particular exemption in the legislation will could help those people later after the COVID 19 crisis has has passed. But the affordable housing crisis will still be with us. And I am committed to working with housing providers on administrative design review reform when we can do that in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. That's all. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Herbold. Is there anyone else who would like to give comment? A council member must give. The floor is yours. Thank you very much, council member Gonzalez. And I appreciate your stewardship of this conversation remotely and the public testimony that you made possible today. I also want to thank the sponsor of the legislation for all of your hard work to include a number of amendments, including the two that we talked about this morning, and the amendments from Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember Morales. Five very much support. So I appreciate your tough work on that. Colleagues, I do want to speak to the amendment that comes from a just spoke about which would remove the provision exempting affordable housing project from design review. Unfortunately, as Councilmember Purple knows, I mean no on this amendment. I'll be voting no because I disagree with the premise that affordable housing is not part of our emergency response to COVID. I want to draw your attention to two articles that we received as submitted as public comment today, if I might, Madam President. Yes. Yes, you may. Thank you very much. One is from an email that we received from the air from Michael Davis this morning at 1150. He says we're in a critical time regarding affordable housing in the city of Seattle, a crisis only exacerbated by COVID. This bill, by including affordable housing in will help stave off critical time in the process and aid in facilitating the production of more units and more quickly. The housing crisis here in Seattle, in the metro region across the nation is bound to become considerably worse. Must be to emerge from the pandemic with countless numbers of renters, homeowners already in a precarious financial situation. At the federal level, we've seen a lack of leadership. Even historic legislation passed by the federal government fails to adequately address most those that adequately address those directly affected, including those who are housing insecure, elderly people, people with immune compromised systems, people of color, and those who have been disproportionately affected by the disease and its economic impacts. It is precisely because of this, he writes. That is why we are so critically. It is so critically important that we see action at the local level to address these challenges and that those measures be sufficient in duration to actually have an impact. These measures need to be six months and include affordable housing. Christopher Peterson from CEO of Capital Housing wrote this morning, As I know you are all aware, our projects were determined by the governor to be exempt from restrictions under his stay home, stay healthy proclamation because our projects are deemed essential for many affordable housing projects. The league is, and their timing could render them infeasible or at best delay them for months, thereby eliminating or delaying our vital affordable housing efforts for the people impacted by COVID and particularly the homeless. Our project, in partnership with Youth Care will house very low income people, including formerly homeless youth. Without this fix, the project could be delayed for a year. We know that another affordable housing developers are facing serious delays without this legislation, so the impact goes well beyond this project. It is not an attempt to conclude this is not an attempt to sidestep design, review or landmarking, and is only an attempt to move housing forward in a crisis. And although it may not seem like it meets the definition of an emergency, I can assure you for those who are homeless and those seeking affordable housing, it is an emergency. So, colleagues, I would propose, as I talked about this morning, that it is precisely because of the length of time that it takes to build affordable housing, that this is exactly why we need to include affordable housing in this ordinance being considered today under the umbrella of COVID being a crisis that is directly affecting whether or not people can have access to healthy, secure housing. We cannot change how long it takes to actually build and create these affordable housing projects. But we can change the city's role and the timeline it takes to allow for affordable housing to move forward. Just because a project takes a year to actually build doesn't mean we should not act now. In fact, I think COVID 19 underscores why it's so important for us to figure out a way to expedite some of these provisions. I appreciate that Director Torkelson was reached out to, and I know that the Office of Housing was briefed as well. But the comment that affordable housing is always expedited doesn't recognize that the office has created an Office of Policy and Innovation that was going to set up a process where affordable housing projects are actually stewarded through the process. We know right now it takes far too long for affordable housing to get through, and we wouldn't have been setting up this office to steward affordable housing projects if they weren't being prioritized. More affordable housing is critical for creating the ability for people to socially distance. You cannot social distance in overcrowded shelters or in supportive housing that is at capacity. We cannot move people out of shelters and into housing without building the affordable housing. The order from the governor is to stay home in order to stay healthy. We need people to have homes. It is necessary to respond to the COVID outbreak and the current public health crisis. By definition, housing. And it's a necessity for responding to this public health crisis. So I will conclude by just saying I understand the importance for us to make sure that the public has every possibility to engage in the process, even as we're expediting and leaning heavily on staff to in this moment of emergency, move as many projects forward as possible. But we knew we were an affordable housing crisis before this. The fact that we have COVID linking over our community means that it is essential that we construct and move forward with affordable housing wherever possible in keeping our our workers healthy, but in recognition that affordable housing is a way for us to address the crisis of COVID and the public health concerns. I don't think it's accurate for us to say that in a year from now when. In a year from now when the housing would be moving through the process, that we're going to somehow be out of this crisis, we just don't know that the the best case scenarios for a vaccine is 12 to 18 months. We don't know that in a year or in 12 months, we won't even be able to see our way out of here. So I do think that building housing, expediting the process, ensuring the community has, as has a venue, as this audience has articulated, to engage in the process and make sure that we are providing the necessary oversight and input, but that we are building housing now is exactly what we need to be doing in order to make sure people can stay home, can stay healthy, have a home to go to, can move out of overcrowded shelters. And in an effort to be proactive about what is on the horizon. I would encourage our colleagues to keep the affordable housing provision in. Unfortunately, I'm a no on this amendment. Thank you. I have three people in the queue now. Council member so followed by Councilmember Strauss and then Councilmember Lewis. Councilmember thought the floor is yours. Thank you. President Gonzalez. The COVID 19 crisis goes far beyond the tragic medical impacts of the coronavirus itself. As Councilmember Mosquito is saying, it's also causing a recession that is rapidly developing into a depression. The need for a public jobs program and affordable housing after the medical crisis is abated and there is a lot of uncertainty on when the medical crisis can be abated. So therefore, jobs and affordable housing have to be an important consideration in addressing this emergency. And I do not believe that they can be separated. And we have to do absolutely everything in our power to build social housing and create jobs through that. I've heard members of the community expressing the concern that affordable housing will become low quality housing if it's exempted from the design review. However, I'm not convinced by that argument because the things that determine the quality of affordable housing, such as the apartment size, appliances, bedrooms, you know, factors like that are generally not are generally driven by funding, not by design review. So while I understand the sentiment behind this and sympathize with it, I will be voting no on this amendment. Thank you, Councilmember. Silent. Councilmember Strauss and then Councilmember Lewis. Well, thank you, council president and to Councilmember Herbold points, we had a long, robust discussion about this this morning. And I will summarize, which is just to say, since affordable housing projects are already able to move through administrative design review, this legislation simply allows them a bypass for six months. Much like the work that we allowed for volunteer design review boards to be moved to administrative design. There is limited staff time in this tranche, which means that we need to alleviate that pressure. So I believe that allowing for affordable housing within this bill is regarding the operationalization of this bill and not outside of our abilities and our parameters under the Governor's orders. I will say that I will I agree with everything that Councilmember Mosqueda said. And with that, I will be supporting Councilmember Gold's bill amendment simply for the fact that I would prefer to see this entire bill passed today than to see it fail. So, again, to reiterate, thank you. I'm going to support this this motion. And I still believe that this, including affordable housing, remains within the spirit of the legislation and under the governor's orders. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss. Councilmember Lewis, the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam President. So I'm going to be voting in favor of this amendment today, I would say, in response to councilmember mosquitoes points, which as a matter of policy, I very strongly agree with. I don't know that this particular legislation. Reflects some of the concerns I think it would if affordable housing was on the same footing as other similarly situated development that is subject to review board process like all the other development that we are going to put into the administrative review. I don't think that since the affordable housing is already subject to administrative review, that we're effectively putting it on the shelf or prioritizing it as a city or prioritizing it as a department. If we were in a position where the development of affordable housing was not able to proceed because it required in-person meetings, I think a lot of the concerns that Councilmember Muscat articulated would be a reality. But since it is subject to administrative review and it is the highest priority of ECI, I am not in a place where I think it's warranted to move forward with this particular portion of the bill, which is why I support councilmember proposed amendment. I think that it would be something that we should consider as a council subject to a process. And Councilmember Strauss's Land Use Committee, I think it makes sense as an incentive to figure out if we can exempt affordable housing projects entirely from the design review process from where they currently are in administrative review to the. To the representations of the gist of the department as to how this could be connected to the emergency response. And that's essentially the the process that Councilor Strauss just articulated, where because of the switch that we're going to make of going from the board process over to the administrative review process for other projects, which is going to result in a potential bottleneck there and require us to make further exceptions for affordable housing, which is already an administrative review. My hope is that that point is going to be largely merged in the case that we do transition over to the virtual board meetings, which all of us should be hoping that we are doing in short order rather than a long order. I don't want us to go forward with the assumption that what we are passing right now is an ordinance where we are expecting the entire six months to be taken up by this process where the review boards are going to be completely sidestepped. So. In that case, if the review boards can resume their work, that takes care of the bottleneck that will be created by the expansion of the administrative review. At that level, that's an incentive for SDI to develop an ability to conduct the virtual meetings faster, which I think is something that this substitute, the council member Straus puts forward, makes us a priority. All of us want to see the virtual board stood up as quickly as possible so that we can retain that due process while at the same time not limiting essential projects that we know if we do not take some kind of action, are going to languish and are not going to be able to be completed. So I think it is fully appropriate that in the interim of setting up the virtual process, there needs to be some kind of administrative stopgap, which is what this bill does. And on the whole, I'm very supportive of that process. This particular process where the affordable housing has moved completely out of any kind of design review, feels to me to not be connected to the exigent issue trying to solve as a council. I think that it is a valuable and good piece of policy that we should be exploring, but I don't know that this is the proper forum for it. So with that, I'm going to vote for Councilmember Herbert's amendment, and I would urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis, for those comments. Are there any other questions or comments on Councilmember Herbold Amendment one. Okay. I'm not seeing or hearing any additional comments on the Herbold Amendment one, so we can go ahead and move through the process of voting on this particular amendment. I would say that in in in voting on this issue, I think it's important that the public hear that that that this council is committed to expediting the construction of affordable housing projects. I appreciate and understand the concern that has been expressed by the proponent of Amendment one, Councilmember Herbold, who has has very carefully gone through the process of explaining her rationale as it relates to that particular amendment. I do think that when we are talking about housing infrastructure, it's important for us to acknowledge in the context of this emergency response that really what we are called upon to do is to, in this emergency response, deal with the realities of how COVID 19 and the governor's proclamation order impacts the way we do business and the way we can do business. And so for me, I see this bill as a whole, as a shift in how we operate as the work we're doing is isolated by the realities of the public health emergency. And when we're talking about this in the space of land use, we know that land use is one of those areas where public comment and public testimony and public engagement is a corner store stone of the way we do the work as it relates to land use and as a result of that. This bill I see as as a response to the realities to our new reality of not being able to engage in that work the way that we would ordinarily. So I absolutely suppose support the policy and at this juncture can't support this particular amendment. But I'm looking forward to seeing to see how we can continue the conversation if this amendment does pass. I do hope that we can come together and have a robust policy conversation that frankly, potentially goes and goes even further than this to make sure that we are truly expediting the process of construction and development of affordable housing in the recovery phase of COVID 19. So with that being said, Councilmember Herbal, do you want to have any last words on your amendment? Thank you for giving me the opportunity. I just want excuse me. I do want to clarify that I do believe that affordable housing is part of a COVID 19 response, but for purposes of adherence to the act that would be restricted to the affordable housing units that we can open up now while we're in this crisis, not units that we open up later that are very, very needed in our affordable housing crisis. That is part of recovery not as required by the state attorney general's guidance and the governor's proclamation as it relates. So I just there was a statement that attributed to me that I did not believe that affordable housing was was part of a COVID 19 emergency response. I do believe that. But that would be for units of housing that we are opening up now. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. Appreciate you. And again, stating your clear position in terms of wanting to be consistent with the governor's order and proclamation. I think, frankly, I have gone back and forth in my own mind on this particular issue. I think that it reasonable minds can disagree and differ in terms of the conclusion in this particular space. So I do appreciate the opportunity to have a really respectful conversation into into sort of put out on the table in a very public, transparent way that the different ways that folks can think about the same issue and come out with a slightly different outcome. But again, regardless of how the vote comes down on this particular amendment that is related to how we review affordable housing projects, I want to make sure that the public hears clearly that this city council is united in the ultimate effort and desire to quickly construct affordable housing that will last in our communities for years to come, and that will be easily accessible to those who need it the most, whether it's now or in in the in the coming in the few coming years which will be difficult for us in this economic recovery as a result of this of this crisis. So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and move this along so we can go ahead and take a vote on this one. So will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Herbold Amendment one get macheda. No. Peterson. I. So what? No. Strauss. I. Her bold. Lawrence. No. Lewis, I. Morales. No. President Gonzalez. No. Four in favor, five opposed. Okay. The motion fails and the amendment is not adopted. Are there any other comments on the bill as amended? Council president. Matthew, few words quickly. Yes, you may remember, whereas you were recognized. Thank you. First of all, thank you, everybody, for all the hard work you've done and how we went through this vote. And in particular, thank you to Councilmember Mosqueda and Councilmember Solent. I do appreciate what my other colleagues said, but I just want to share that your words really spoke to that. We are in. Unique times and we have to do extraordinary things. And if there's ever a time for us to move things forward, this would be the time. I know it was an easy vote on a54, but I want to appreciate everybody's hard work. And so I just wanted to end it on that note because again, as County Council president shared, we may have some differences on some of these inclusive issues, but the overall general picture under the governor's proclamation and what we're trying to do through Zoom and all these other technical it has caused us to try to do our jobs in different ways, but still moving our city forward and addressing affordable housing. So with that, thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Juarez, for for those words. Okay. We're going to. Are there any other comments on the list? Yes. Councilmember Peterson, the floor is yours. Thank you. Council president. So just so I'm clear, there are no more amendments at this point. Is that correct? I believe there are no additional amendments to come before the council unless Councilmember Herbold, did I forget one of yours? I did have an amendment, too, but I am I'm withdrawing it at this time because of other items that were included in the substitute. And also just don't don't need to at this point, based on the vote that just occurred for my purposes to to bring forward amendment to. Great. And your amendment, Councilmember Amendment three, is already incorporated in the substitute. And my understanding is that Councilmember Morales will not be advancing her substitute. Is that correct? Councilmember Morales. That's right. Okay. So all amendments have been considered and and any and all of the remaining issues that were pending as of our council briefing this morning, were rolled into one single substitute bill, which we are now considering. So we have a substitute bill and it is ready for discussion and and vote. So you are now officially having a conversation about that. That bill. So, Councilmember Peterson, why don't you go ahead and provide us with your comments and then I see cause we're a mosquito has her hand up and we'll we'll hear from her after we hear from you and then Councilmember Alice as well. Thank you. I'm really grateful to Council President Gonzales and the land use chair Dan Strauss for providing more time for the public to consider this complex land use legislation from the Durkan Administration. I also want to thank my other council colleagues for digging into this and offering amendments to try to make the legislation better. And thanks to our central staff analysts for rapidly organizing those amendments over the past couple of weeks, our office heard from both supporters and opponents of this legislation. The supporters of the legislation seem to be mainly from the real estate real estate development industry. And I want to state for the record my concerns with the legislation. So. The bill is presented as an emergency and based on my experience, managing analysts in the field of commercial real estate and in that working with investors, I do find it hard to believe that that project's that we cannot solve the technological challenge that we have here for design review in our highly advanced tech city. I feel that I'm concerned that. When there isn't an opportunity for the public to weigh in, that the quality of the housing can go down, there can be even we heard concerns from some constituents about economic displacement. And so I think that's that's very serious. And I want to put that concern out on the table. It was mentioned before low income tenants deserve the benefits of design review, including administrative design review. And so I think that. Again, quality of the. Housing sometimes suffers when there's not that public input and the public input has been watered down over the past few years, I think that's important context to have here. And ultimately, you know, there have been amendments to substitutes, but no matter how many times you try to amend this bill, we're stuck with the official title of the legislation, which literally declares an emergency. I think Councilmember Herbold really laid it out well in terms of our concern about the governor's proclamation and the Washington state attorney general's interpretation that there is some additional nuance here. We're also invoking the emergency under the city charter. City Charter title for Section one, which states when an emergency exists in which it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety that an ordinance shall become effective without delay. So this ordinance is invoking that. And I'm. Concerned about that, asserting that there's an emergency, an emergency need to essentially water down the process of public input for real estate development. I have discussed our city is a world leader in technology. I, i again, i think others may find it hard to believe that we don't have the technological means to fix this. I'm concerned that will not survive legal scrutiny or challenge in the courts. And ironically, a legal challenge could result in the opposite on this bill because any legal challenge would create even longer delays. So I just want to put these concerns out on the table and we'll. Be voting no on. This legislation. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Peterson, for those comments. Councilmember Mosqueda. And then we will hear from Councilmember Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. And I want to thank Councilmember Herbold. I think that the legislation that has now been amended with your amendment number three in the underlying bill, if I have the numbers correct, was a strong addition to the legislation . And I want to thank the sponsor, Councilmember Strauss, for all of your work with Councilmember Herbold. Councilmember Morales and myself and I know a number of others have been trying to work to the extent possible role of various amendments into the provision there. So I want to really underscore my appreciation for all of our colleagues and specifically to the good member from District one. I definitely did not mean to impugn any motives. I know that you know that housing is a health care issue. I think, as Council President Gonzales said eloquently, perhaps different reasonable minds can differ on what the definition of now might be given the length of the COVID crisis. So I appreciate your clarification on that. I definitely want to underscore how strong of a housing advocate you have been, especially around housing for those who are low income and unsheltered. You have been a true leader and appreciate your heroic effort over the years to make sure that housing is created and temporary housing is built as well. So I thank you for that clarification. And lastly, I just think that the legislation in front of us with the leadership of Councilmember Strauss has put forward some provisions to make sure that we not only are able to ensure that projects move forward, but they are able to, to the extent possible, build in that engagement strategy in a robust way and as soon as possible, make sure that we are getting that that public feedback online. As Councilmember Peterson noted, we have technology in our backyard. I know that it will be a quick process with our departments to make sure that we are creating a full engagement process as we go forward. Last thing you would be to the Building Construction Trades Council. In our last two weeks of Tuesday updates, we sent around both the Washington State Building Trades and the King County and Seattle building trades. COVID 19 Safety Guidelines for construction on the Work Place. Well, we have deemed a number of workers, essential workers. It is essential that we keep their health protected. And we want to make sure that any building that goes forward in this era not only maintain these guidance guidelines, in fact, as permitting is approved, but that we are quick to shut down any construction site that does not meet those guidelines. And it is imperative that we continue to push out the message and the contract numbers for anybody who feels that their worksite is not in compliance with public health requirements. And with that, I just want to say how much I appreciate all of your feedback on that. And I come from a humble I just wanna make sure I clarified my point as well. Thank you. All right. Next up is, I think, Councilmember Lewis. Thank you so much, Madam President. So, you know, I will be voting for this legislation today. I think it's important to note a couple of things about it in advance of voting for it. And I just wanted to flag those things now for my colleagues and for the public. And the first really critical component of this is once the virtual meeting system is stood up, which, as has insisted that they're working on, to be able to do the design review process remotely under the terms of the substitute bill, that's going to revert everything back to a fairly familiar design review system, albeit one that's going to be done remotely and through a remote meeting. And I'm just imploring Stsci here in my final remarks to please work to stand up that process with urgency, even though under this bill there is a there's six months to do it, even though under this bill where there's going to be certain urgently needed exemptions to make sure that a pipeline that would pipeline jam up a project that would do irreparable damage to our economy and our recovery to make sure that that build up does not occur. It's essential that we have this streamlining of the process temporarily, that it has to be temporary. And there's frankly, I'm not convinced of the excuses that are given from Stsci on why it's going to take an exuberant amount of time to stand up this remote meeting process. I understand that it could take up to 30 to 45 days to do it. That is complicated that we as a council took two months to develop the process to get public comment in our meetings. It wasn't until today that we were able to accept them, but we did it and we did it within 60 days. There is no reason why, as a council member who's had a town hall where there was interactivity with members of the public as a council that's been meeting on the Zoom platform for several weeks, that it's going to need to take an exuberant amount of time to set up the design review process. I'm frankly not convinced that, for example, the training needs of the department that were flagged are insurmountable or not surmountable in the short term. So I'm just I just want to say, for the members of the public, the underlying protections of the design review process are going to back once we have the ability to conduct these design review meetings remotely. I know that Council Member Strauss and all of us on the Council are going to be pushing to make sure the department does promulgate those meetings. And frankly, you know, I feel like based on the predictions that have been made not only by some of the people that commented publicly today, but people from the department on the irreparable harm that could happen to our economy, that this is essential legislation that needs to be passed. You know, I wish the attempts to amend it had gone better, but I feel like where we are now, it has to go forward and the department should take the cue that sooner rather than later is better to set up the original process. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis, for those remarks. Are there any other comments from my colleagues? Councilmember Morales. I think you're on mute still. Thank you. Got it. Thank you, everyone. I know that this has been a lot of work for everybody, including central staff who once again spent the weekend trying to answer all of our questions and help us get to a place where we could move forward. I want to make sure that as the representative from District two, it's really clear to my colleagues that I believe we should not be pushing projects through without the community process, especially in the Sydney and the South End, where the possibility for disaster gentrification is especially high. I do admire that city bill and asked central staff to draft an amendment that would remove the Isrg, the international district, a special review district and preserve the status quo during the crisis. It would allow the community to retain the ability to expedite certain projects that they prioritize for administrative review. And I did ask Councilmember Strauss to incorporate that into his language. I do want my colleagues to be aware of what this bill will and won't do for affordable housing and major projects in historic districts. You know, the memos that we've seen in none of the memos that we've seen related to this bill is a real explanation about the fact that to get approval in product and design processes are what the bill addressed this. We need to be clear that the decisions related to certificates of approval outside the limited authority given to do in the proceeding. This includes some certificates of approval for affordable housing and for major projects. Two thirds of the bill addresses a perceived administrative backlog, but we're still not achieving our goal of moving forward affordable housing projects that haven't received that designation, the certificate of Approval and Submission. I also want to say we all just received an email from the Department of Neighborhoods that highlights why this is so concerning to me and why I really see this bill as a vehicle for promoting downtown development. There are eight new construction projects in the city. One of those projects is for affordable housing. The rest are for market rate housing, condos and hotel projects. Council colleagues, I want you to understand that neighbors in the city are worried about a very real existential threat to the historic nature of the community and for what it means for the preservation of their culture and their community . Neighbors there don't want a dignified version of the city where hotels and chains move and look easily. They want to preserve the ability of the low income Asian families who have neck, who have only ever known life in the city to stay in their neighborhood. I realize that some consider my previous proposal as drastic amendments, and I disagree. What is drastic is a proposal to exclude community from processes that affect their neighborhoods. The department argued that shifting decision making to them is necessary to handle a backlog of projects and that these are only minor benign decisions. But that is in the eye of the beholder. You know, the addition or removal of park benches, for example, might seem benign to some. It might seem like an insignificant decision. But these projects that allow elders to age in place and to do that well requires input from community elders. They're the ones who should be making decisions about whether a park bench is inappropriate, is in the right place or not. The people of District two, especially in the city, believe that these boards and committees were intended to give community input to the decision how their neighborhoods function, and this proposal excludes them from giving that input. To presume that everyone has easy access to technology or to the language skills needed to follow these processes in English is to demonstrate a poor understanding of our racial equity ethos. So I am glad that the amendment is included in this language. I still believe firmly that this should have been two separate bills that it conflicts the issue of participation with the issue of affordable housing. While I'm very supportive of affordable housing and know that that is not going to be problematic in this process, I do believe that we need to be very clear that protecting the ability of our community members to participate in this process is as important. Thank you, Councilman Morales, for those remarks. And is there anyone else who hasn't yet spoken who wanted to provide comment? And I'm going to give Councilmember Strauss the last word on the bills on the on the substitute version of the bill. But I did want to check in with Councilmember Wise who's on the phone and whose face I can't actually see. So I don't know if she's raising her hand or not. But Councilmember Suarez, do you have any comments on that, on the bill? No, I don't. And thank you and thank you for checking in on me because you know how I feel about Zoom. Yeah, I do. I do regret about you. I can't. I handle your facial expressions while we're meeting. Thank you, President. I'm good. Okay, good. Thank you so much. Just wanted to make sure I didn't. I didn't skip you. So it looks like we don't have any other folks who are wanting to speak on the underlying bill and Kilmer. Stross Before I hand it over to you for the last word, I just wanted to to also express my gratitude to you and to our council central staff for doing a lot of tremendous work on these bills over the last several weeks. I think for some council members who just started to engage in the last couple of weeks, it's important to recognize that council central staff has been working on these bills for for a little bit longer than that, trying to work through many of the issues. I do appreciate the difficulty of having to tackle a complex land use issue remotely. When we're not all co-located, it makes it a little bit more difficult. And and when we are left with the only viable venue to have a robust discussion on this being council briefing, it makes it a little a little difficult. But I appreciate your patience and you're willing to engage in the ongoing conversation here. I do intend to support the underlying bill as amended and represented in the substitute bill. I want to thank all the amendment sponsors, including Councilmember Rebel, who again, I have a deep amount of respect and affection for you, Councilmember Herbold, not only as my colleague, but as my district representative and and really do appreciate your your stalwart commitment to making sure that we are maintaining consistency as it relates to your reading of the proclamation and how this bill fits in or doesn't quite fit into that that rubric. I think that that was a very reasonable conversation for us to have, and I really appreciated you bringing it forward so that we can have that conversation. And, you know, when Councilmember Morales speaks about the needs of District two, it's a it's a very powerful reminder that communities of color, communities who have limited English proficiency have been historically and continue to be excluded from many of the systems that we have in place that are represented by government and certainly by our land use codes. And I think it's important for us to recognize that, that when we talk about the recognition of history and the cementing of history in our city, we oftentimes don't see the history of people of color and immigrants and refugees acknowledged or captured throughout our city, Chinatown International District. And Little Saigon is an exception to that. It is a a a amazing representation of the rich history and cultural contributions that that community has historically made and had right here in our own city. And and I deeply respect the perspective that Councilmember Morales is lifting up when she talks about racial equity and as it relates to this particular issue and frankly, many, many more so. But with that being said, I do think it's important for us to acknowledge the operational difficulties in this particular period of time. And I do believe that they are temporary in nature and have the same expectations as Councilmember Lewis that the department and agencies will act swiftly to implement the processes needed in order to to address the public comment and input participation piece of the work that that that belongs to them. So with that being said, I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Strauss, who's going to take us home, and then we'll go ahead and take a vote on this bill. Thank you. Council President. Overall, I want to thank all of my colleagues here. Councilmember Herbold loyalists, council President Gonzalez, Mr. Peterson, Councilmember Mosqueda, Councilmember Serrano looking at Councilmember Suarez, even though I don't see your your face and of course, Councilmember Morales, I want to highlight the importance of making sure that we do not have to pass new decisions without public input. We are responding to an emergency. Virtual meetings can be very difficult. They can be very difficult, especially when you are engaging in deep policy analysis of complex issues. For instance, today, just getting back. On to council for council this afternoon. I was kicked off three times and I'm not even sure that my zoom is working correctly. So I'm in. And here we are two months into this. And so, you know, again, everything the council president said in council member Lewis is you sum this up very well. This is intended to be a temporary procedure of moving. Decision making to departments. We hope that virtual meetings will be up and running as fast as possible. Councilmember Herbold, I know that you are dedicated for affordable housing, to creating affordable housing, and I appreciate all the questions that you you raised in this process. Overall, I really want to thank council central staff. Cheadle wish Ali for being on phone calls with me over the weekend, late into the evenings, all last week. I want to also thank Noah in my office being council president's office. Aaron House. Aldridge Again. Councilmember Mosquito Council. President Gonzales. Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember Morales for making this a more robust bill. It is our intent that these practices, the virtual meetings, will be up and running as soon as possible. And I thank you all for your coordination on a very complex subject matter over over Zoom. And I think that that is telling as to the complexity of setting up these virtual meetings that have very complex subject matters. So thank you all for your time. And I urge your support of this bill. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss. I really appreciate those those words. I just want to check in. Speaking of Zoom and technological difficulties, I just want to check in to see if Councilmember Morales is still with us. She is. Yeah, I. I kicked off two in the last 5 minutes, so. Oh, okay. I'm back. Okay. It looks like we've got everybody else still. So before you get kicked off, let's let's let's call this once you call this one to a vote. Okay, so will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended? Mosquito I. PETERSON No. So what I. Strauss. I heard both. Okay. Excuse me. No, thank you. Juarez. Hi. Lewis. I. Morales. No. President Gonzalez. I. Six in favor, three opposed. So, colleagues, this is emergency legislation which requires seven votes in the affirmative. We only have six votes in the affirmative. So the motion the motion fails and the bill, as amended, does not pass. For a lack of having the seven required votes. So we have a couple of options. We can let sleeping dogs lie, or we can resurrect a motion for reconsideration that would allow us to find an alternative way to move forward. I will say that on a motion for reconsideration, only the prevailing party is allowed to make a motion for reconsideration, and in this case, the prevailing party are one of the no votes. Councilmember Herbold, you are recognized. Thank you so much. I move for reconsideration of the bill before us, including Amendment One, and into a friendly amendment to that to include other sections of the bill. Second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded to reconsider Council Bill 119. Excuse me. I'm just off the bill. Number seven, six, nine. So, colleagues, we're going to just take a vote on the motion to reconsider. So we're not considering any amendments at this point. We have heard a intent statement from Councilmember Herbold, who is part of the prevailing party, because she intends to bring this back for reconsideration with a reintroduction of her amendment, as well as the invitation for other potential amendments to the substitute bill. So but right now we are voting just on the motion to reconsider. Council Bill 119769 as it appears on the agenda. So as I remember from Thelma. I'm sorry. Excuse me. This is Amelia, I'm sure. Yeah, it's Clark. And because of the fact that the council did not pass the bill at this meeting, the motion to reconsider is correct at this point. But actually following through on the motion for reconsideration needs to happen at another meeting per the city charter. Good. And I can quote the city charter, if you. Like, for me to do that right now. Could you please? Because I think that's inconsistent with some motions and motions for reconsideration that we've done in the past. Okay. If a bill is moved for final passage and fails to pass and a motion to reconsider is made, the motion to reconsider shall not be voted on before the next meeting of the City Council. That's the president in. Oh, hold up. Hold on, hold on. Okay. So it is. So, Emilio, last week we have last week or two weeks ago, we had a motion for reconsideration on the introduction of referral calendar and voted on that motion for reconsider. At the same meeting. Why is that correct and correct? And those emotions. Relating to. The adoption of the injection for all. Calendar. Not bills that the charter requires, that bills as fail cannot be reconsidered at the same meeting, but at. Another meeting. Jason So because I want to make sure, because I want colleagues in the public to make sure that we have some consistency and understanding of how this rule applies. So what I'm hearing from you, Amelia, is that as it relates to a motion for reconsideration, because this is a substantive bill, the charter requires us to wait until next Monday to hear the motion for reconsideration. Now, we were able to take the reconsideration vote on the introduction reversal calendar because that wasn't substantive legislation. Is that accurate? That is accurate. You can reconsider any vote except for a passage of a bill that did not pass. So at this juncture, can we vote on a motion to reconsider but have it slated for next Monday? Is that the clerk's recommendation? The clerk's recommendation. Is to do this at the next meeting of the city council. So no motion for reconsideration at all right now? Correct. It'll stay pending until the next meeting of the city council. Okay. So, colleagues, unfortunately, we've heard from our our clerk that that this is not appropriate for us to consider under the charter rules, which is news to me. But but it is what it is. And so we will have to convene with our law department and the clerk and and and discuss what to do next as it relates to council level 119769. Councilmember Strauss. Thank you. Council President. I also have Councilmember Morales on the line because she has been kicked off. I've got her on the phone up against my computer. A question for you and the clerk's. Is there an ability for council members to change their votes on the previous action? That is what a motion for reconsideration is designed to do. And I'm hearing from our clerk, the Council for a motion for reconsideration on a substantive bill is out of order. And there's no opportunity for suspension of that role. Is that is that a correct understanding? Madam Clerk. According to Roberts, both the border and member may actually change their votes if there's unanimous consent. But unfortunately, because the actual council, the city. Charter preempts the. Council, the Roberts rules of order, and the motion has been made to reconsider. It cannot be made today. So unfortunately, the only opportunity that we have at this moment would be to reconsider it. At a future council meeting. Correct. Not today. Thank you for wrestling my deep disappointment in this motion. Thank you. Okay, colleagues, unfortunately, that bill fails, as I mentioned. So we will I will my office will consult with a lot of parliament and the clerk's office on identifying next available steps. My understanding was that this was time sensitive legislation that needed to occur today. So the fact that it is not occurring today and has not been successful today may have some intensely negative consequences for some of the issues that we were discussing here. I will go ahead and move along in our meeting now so that we can continue on the other items of business. On the agenda. Will the clerk please read agenda items two and three into the record? Agenda items two and three quick file.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance relating to the Denver Zoning Code, to modify certain building form standards in response to slot home construction. Approves Text Amendment #3 to the Denver Zoning Code to create a new Town House building form with revisions to other related building forms to address “slot home” development through new or revised zoning standards for side-by-side residential development. Amended 4-16-18 to make reference to a corrected version of the text amendment filed with the clerk. The previously filed text amendment incorrectly stated in five locations that certain dwelling units located within 20 feet of the Side Street Zone Lot Line shall be oriented to the primary street zone lot line. The language in these five sections should have stated that the dwelling units shall be oriented to the Side Street Zone Lot Line. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 3-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_04162018_18-0306

Tonight's two nays to 59 passes. All right. We have one other. Please bring up three or six. Madam Secretary, Councilman Herndon, will you please make a motion to take counsel about three or six out of order? Yes, Mr. President, I move the council bill 18 days 306 to be taken out of order. It has been moved and second in this motion is non debatable and will require an affirmative majority vote. Madam Secretary, roll call. Herndon. I Katherine Kinney. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman. My black eye. Clark. All right. Espinosa. Flynn i. Gillmor, i. Mr. President, I. All right, we have to. Sorry, Madam Secretary, do you want to tell us we have total votes? Total vice. All right. We have 12 ICE Council Bill. Three of six is now taken out of order. Councilman Herndon, will you put Councilman three or six on the floor? Yes, Mr. President, I move council bill three or six be placed upon final consideration and do pass. All right. It has been moved and second it. Councilwoman Sussman, your motion to amend. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that on page one. Line 27, strike the number 2018, dash 0130 and replace with 218 0130-001 on page one line 28 Strike the date April 4th, 2018 and replace with April 11th, 2018. All right. Question. Questions by members of council. Columnist, member of the Council, Council on assessment. Yes, the purpose of this amendment is to make reference to a corrected version of the text amendment filed with the clerk. The previously filed text amendment incorrectly stated in five locations that certain dwelling units located within 20 feet of the side street zone light line shall be oriented to the primary street zone light line. The language in these five sections should have stated that the dwelling units shall be oriented to the side street zone lot line. All right. All right. Madam Secretary, roll call on the amendment. Susman I. Black Clerk Espinosa Flynn. I. Gilmore, I. Herndon, I. Cashman, High Carnage Lopez. I knew Ortega. I. Mr. President. I. Plus Kosovo police. Kosovo bringing us. Results. 12 Eyes. 12 eyes. Constable through a six has been amended. Final consideration of the meant the amended council bill were bill 306 with this public hearing will be on May 7th. All right. This concludes all the other items and needs to be called out. All of the bills for introduction of order published. We're now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Council members remember this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. You'll need a vote. Otherwise this is your last chance to call it a separate item for a vote, because we heard it. Will you please put the resolutions for adoption of bills on final consideration? Final passage on the floor. Yes, Mr. President. I move that the resolution to be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed on final situation and do pass in the block for the following items. All Series 2018 unless noted. 333 334 286 311 329 328 to 96 324 326 three 3355 303 zero nine. All right. Well done, Councilman Herndon. Madam Secretary, do you concur? Yes, Mr. President. All right. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black. Hi, clerk. Hi, Flynn. Hi, Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Canete. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Guy Sussman. Mr. President. I please cause voting in US results 1212. The resolutions have been adopted in the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 18 Dash 0169 Cheese Zoning Classification four 3122 Marion Street in Whittier and required public hearing for Council Bill 18 Dash 0171 Changes on classification four 4401 Just Fine Street in Elyria, Swansea and a required public hearing for Council Bill 18 Dash 017 to change zoning classification for 301303 and 327 South Harrison Street in Bel Caro. Anyone wishing to speak on any of these matters must see the Council Secretary to receive a speaker's clerk to fill them out and return to

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City and County of Denver and The Nichols Partnership Inc. for the sale of 1701 Platte Street. Approves a $13.5 million purchase and sale agreement with The Nichols Partnership Inc. to sell property located at 1701 Platte Street in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 3-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_04162018_18-0259

12,694,000 some dollars and for just 150 days. And so I've asked the airport to try to come up with, you know, how that happened, to escape attention. But when they give us descriptions of contracts, it be very helpful if they can be very scrupulous about getting the amounts correct. The contract itself does have the correct amount. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Councilman Flynn, for pointing out that detail. Okay. Can you please bring up Council Bill 259? And Councilman Herndon, we please put that on floor. Yes, Mr. President. I move the council bill 18 0 to 5 nine be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved. And second, it comes from the council. Councilman. No, go ahead. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. This bill has been really difficult issue for me. You know, the we're we're selling this property, and half of it is going to be going toward expanding our affordable housing fund. You know, several years ago, when we approved the Affordable Housing Fund for $15 million a year, several of us thought it was enough money. And and now we're saying, yes, that's correct. It's not enough money. And we've and finance has come up with an excellent proposal we heard this morning about expanding the affordable housing fund from 15 to $30 million a year and doubling the unit production over the next five years, which is really great news. The issue I have with is, is this piece of property is a vacant piece of property the city owns is basically, you know, we're going to sell this property. You know, he's basically valued at nothing, dollar a square foot. And we're going to sell it for about $400 a square foot to a good developer. But the main thing is especially free land. When we talked about this affordable housing expansion, the Denver Housing Authority, a wonderful organization, is helping us provide, you know, affordable housing and for low income citizens, is going to talk about expanding to 25 projects, about 2 to 3 acres per project. That's about 50 to 75 acres of land. This land, they're going to have to buy that land. Part of the affordable housing fund will be that $50 million that they're going to do with a bond issue to buy land. And they're saying that land will be back 45 to $50 per acre that they're going to try to buy. And here we have a piece of property that's basically free and a dollar per square foot, you know, that we could be using for a start up for affordable housing. But no, we're going to sell it for first can be done for commercial development, which I you know, I appreciate commercial development. Nothing wrong with that. But the main thing is we just need to make sure we understand how we're using our city owned properties. In the past, we've asked for an inventory of city owned properties or I believe we have and and if we haven't, I'm asking for it now of what city properties we own so we can make a decision of how we use those properties, especially when we have such a need for affordable housing. This is going to be for this affordable housing expansion, be from 0 to 30 AMAYA The low income. But we've got workforce housing, we've got all kinds of housing issues around the city. And so I'm just really troubled. I won't have this money from the proceeds. The sale will go to help fund the the affordable housing. But I'm just convinced with a $1.5 billion, you know, general fund budget that we have this year, we could have found seven and a half million dollars from our general fund and use this plan to to jump start affordable housing development. So that's the dilemma. I mean, and and but I don't want to take away from the excellent plan that they put together this morning. I'm so happy that we're going to go from 15 to $30 million a year for affordable housing and expand our production. And I definitely want to finish by saying I want to thank the All in Denver organization. They're the catalysts that really encouraged us to expand this affordable housing fund and that community citizen driven effort really did a wonderful job. So I'm going to vote against this tonight. I know it'll probably it'll pass, but I'm going to vote against it tonight because I think we should you should be using this land for affordable housing development. And I think we could take the seven and a half million dollars that we need for affordable housing out of the general fund. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. New Councilwoman. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank my colleague, Councilman Yu, for raising some questions about this property. I just want to share, I guess, for transparency sake, some of the conversations that I had. And I believe Councilwoman Ortega was also involved in these conversations. We in the city, you know, there's an executive order that helps to guide how the city disposes of additional land. And it's, you know, signed by the mayor. It's not subject to council approval. And I think that what we learned as we, you know, kind of dug into that a few years ago is that it does not require the use of excess land for affordable housing. It at the time when this parcel first came up, I think it basically said, like, we'll check with OED. It was very, very light requirement and it might not have even been housing people who actually looked in, determined whether land could be used. And so through the process of asking questions and pushing the administration, thinking about whether we could or should do an ordinance, the charter was a barrier to having us legislate higher standards on this. We certainly can look at that again. But but the administration did change the executive order to at least create a much clearer process of how land would be evaluated for affordable housing. So we took a step in the right direction, but it simply just doesn't require land that could be used for housing to be used for affordability. And I will I just want to, you know, share your concern that many cities do say that San Francisco, many others say if this land can be used for housing at all, then it should be used for housing and it should be used for affordable housing and or for homeless housing. So so it is possible and other cities do have stronger requirements. We do not. I will say I spent a lot of time learning about the projects and I'm not sure there were a number of parking requirements that we placed on this property. I we the size of the property shrank throughout the process. And so as I shared with the media, I can't be 100% sure that it would have been appropriate for affordable housing at the end. I don't know that, but I certainly agree that we should have had and in can have and the mayor has the power to do an executive order that says flat out we won't do this kind of sale if we can do affordable housing and we'll do that first and only if we can't do that, then do we move on to commercial or other uses. So so I think it's an important conversation to raise. I thank you for raising it, but because I can't necessarily guarantee the ins and outs of how this would have turned out and because I do believe that the resources are being dedicated appropriately, not just to affordable housing, but the other another portion of these funds are going to go back to some some funds that provide homeless emergency services. To me, I feel like this is a project worth going ahead and approving at this point. But with the important caveat that we could have a stronger policy and the executive order could be strengthened even further. We may or may not be able to legislate that, but it's certainly an option opportunity and many cities have much stronger standards than we have. So with that, I will be voting for it today, but with, you know, appreciation for the important issues being raised. Thank you, Councilwoman Canete. Seeing no other comments for this body, Madam Secretary, roll call. New York. ORTEGA Minus a reluctant eye. SUSSMAN Eye. Black eye. Clark, I. Flynn i Gilmore I Herndon I Cashman. Know. Can each. Lopez, I. Mr. President. I believe so is voting and thus results. That's right. Tonight's tune is. Tonight's two nays to 59 passes. All right. We have one other. Please bring up three or six. Madam Secretary, Councilman Herndon, will you please make a motion to take counsel about three or six out of order?

Recommendation to request a series of public safety measures designed to proactively address this public safety concern: 1. Request City Attorney to draft an ordinance requiring the following: All hotel and lodging employers, to include motels, shall provide an emergency contact device, often referred to as a panic button to each hotel employee assigned to work in a guest room or other space without other hotel employees present, regardless of job classification, at no cost to the hotel employee. A hotel employee may use the emergency contact device if the hotel employee reasonably believes there is an ongoing crime, threatening behavior, unwanted physical or verbal contact, or other emergency in the employee's presence. The hotel or lodging employee may cease work and leave the immediate area of danger to await the arrival of assistance. The hotel or lodging must allow guest room doors to be left open during cleaning. The hotel or lodging must also allow any employee reporting abusive or concerning behavior to be reassigned to a different area, away f

LongBeachCC_09042018_18-0797

I don't think he's ready yet. Okay. All right. Let's move on to the next item, please. Oh, maybe they already. Tom, did you guys have it ready or. No? Okay, let me go. Let me keep going with two more items. So let me just keep going. Item 26. Please. Communication from Councilwoman Price. Councilwoman Mingo. Vice Mayor Andrew's Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request a series of public safety measures designed to proactively address hotel worker safety concerns. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you. So these recommendations were actually drafted in November 2017, but I didn't bring them at that time. They followed a an October 2017 public safety meeting where we had a presentation from Long Beach PD and others regarding some of the measures that we felt were responsive to the comments that we had heard at the September 2017 council meeting. And then we most recently heard a lot of similar comments. So the item actually speaks for itself. I'm not going to go into it in too much detail as it is late in the morning, in the night, early in the morning. But I'd ask my colleagues to support this measure. I think it's prudent and frankly, it addresses concerns that have been brought directly to the council and expands upon them. Thanks. Oh, I would ask that recommendation number four be removed because my understanding is that although it's not asking for the responding officer to be female, but that the officer taking the call be female, that that does present some resource limitations for our police department and serious that that's certainly not our intent. So we'd ask that it be approved absent number four. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman, Mongo. I appreciate that the entire council has consistently said that they support this, so it makes sense to bring it. Thank you, Council Member Pearce. I really wish it wasn't 1230. So can we go. To public comment? We have some people here first and then we can speak. Let me just first make the motion. Councilman Price, we came with it. Of course, the soup can't do public comment, so please come forward. Hello. Just a conclusion because it's just two folks. Great to see you. Okay, great speaker this close. Hello. My name is Zoe Nicholson. I live in Rose Park. I happen to be one of the three proponents of Measure WW. I'm going to briefly recap my understanding of what's happened so far. We spent four years discussing the protections for our hotel housekeepers, and over the last 13 months there were two failed voting rounds 5 to 4 against labor protections of ours, weight limits and square footage. Secondly. Decisions around sexual assault protections, specifically supported emergency alarms and working in pairs. So we did what we had to do after those failed votes. We spent 55 days collecting 46,000 votes. Just to show you that we're serious about this. The city of Long Beach counted those 46,000 votes. I was there most days as they did so those then went up to our Saint Louis County where the signatures were validated. They were able to stop at 43,000 plus because that's all that was required. This is a matter of record who voted against it. For those five people have registered and asked for this new ordinance. Here's my offer to you. Join us. Join us. Let's do what's right. Let's support labor protections. Let's support square footage protections. This is the week of Labor Day, after all. Let's do more than unsupported panic buttons. I've read this proposal several times. It says nothing about who's answering that call. But in fact, ordinance WW. Does. So I welcome you. Councilman Price. Councilman Mongo. Councilman. Deandra is vice mayor. I beg your pardon? And Councilmember Allyson, we'd be happy to welcome you to support the proposition that will be on the November six ballot signed by 43,000 members of the Lambert community, which, by the way, is more than voted in the last voting round. And let this go. This last ditch effort to be recognized that you care. Join us. We really care. Thank you. Thank you. NICHOLSON Next speaker, please. Our last speaker on this. Welcome back to the council. Dave Shukla on file. This is not my issue. Climate change, I believe, is a is a generative issue in the most fundamental sense. But since I was here for the hearing a few weeks ago and had to leave the room because I was shocked at the level of racism and outright. Castro. How do you say that word? Because you history case based reasoning, moral equivalency, equivocation there words for things. The whole point of. This effort, as I've seen it unfold in this town that I grew up in. With some of the people who like me, who look like me, would actually be the kids working some of the hotels and motels in question that are, as an industry, being asked to bear the brunt of a very. Specific set of players. Structural problems. If you don't include, for instance, square footage, you don't include work ratios, you don't include how structurally some people who are given sweetheart deals on land and all the rest that we all know the game with don't run the hotels very well. How do you expect an Indian kid respect defender, a shukla's son to look you in the eye? I mean, I mean, you'd literally be giving me or my most some of my friends a panic button to do what? Like tell our parents that somebody, you know, who you know, like, let's say in the nineties when all those bases closed and we didn't have that conversation about the peace dividend. That we should have. You know, we had epidemic levels of syphilis and gonorrhea and some of those people were having real problems and, you know, mental health, whatever you want to call it. Those would be the people who you'd have to ask your parents about, like, hey, you know, is it all right that they're walking by and causing problems for people here? I mean, there's all kinds of issues that people in storefronts in many parts of town see because they're externalized literally onto their doorstep. And some of them directly. Have to do with which players get to have which say at what time of day or night. I mean, for a town that wants to say. That we're making progress on women's issues in a town where we still have to like police ourselves, that rapists don't play. Beloved venues. Atonement has so many rape kids circuits just sitting around. I mean, please. How much longer are you going to tout yourselves as a place you want tourists to come, people to start new families, and you're not going to protect them at the most basic level. That's so obvious. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Let me go back to I guess I think it was that Councilmember Pearce who was speaking. So did you. I see you did. You were. But I'll speak. Well, you have you had the floor. So let me go back to you. Okay. So I think I want to take off from the conversation that that the comments that Zoe made. While I appreciate and I know there's been lots of conversations around, hey, we should make it for everybody. You know, I think that that is is a conversation that is a valid conversation. I have to go through this process where we ask, how do we end up here today after having it put on the supplemental and on a Labor Day weekend where none of us found out about it until yesterday? I have to ask the questions around how many of these hotels that are 50 rooms or less were outreach to my staff spent the day outreaching to 12 hotels in my district just to find out if there had been any community engagement through this process ever since 20. You know, what was that 2014 that we started talking about this policy, 2015, 2016 when it came here. The members of this council said we need more time. We need to engage more. The members of this council two weeks ago asked for a financial study so that we can look at the impacts. And then two weeks later, without that financial study or directing the city attorney to go forward with an ordinance. So for me, I'm struggling today with this item being what appears to be politics, playing with what hotel workers lives. And I know that that might not be the intention of some of the council members, but that's how it feels when it's done in this way after having two years of debate over it. So I have to get that part out because when I saw the item, I was personally offended at all the work that we have done and how far I thought we had come. And so I, I have to just put that out there first to say that I feel like we have been trying to get to a place of of healing and recognizing that the voters are going to vote on something. And in my mind, the best way to move forward would be let the voters vote on it, because God knows we've done the work. And then, too, after we get the financial report and after they the voters vote, that then we can say, okay, now let's apply this policy that's appropriate. So hotels of 50 rooms or less. So I have questions. Has any communication outreach been done with hotels of 50 rooms or less? Does this policy, the way that it's worded and leaves it vague, does it include Airbnbs? Does it include bed and breakfast? So those are my first two questions. Okay. So I think there's questions. I can ask all the questions or we can have a dialog around. I mean. Sure. I think if you want to maybe put all your questions out there and then we'll go from there. Okay. So all my questions, one is understanding why this has to happen. Today. After we've had a long budget meeting. What is the significance of the timing? My second question is, is there a legal concerns that having this vote while we have WW out there does put us at risk for making it look like we're dealing with politics and trying to make a position on the measure. Two or three is the item doesn't include. Let me get to my specific questions, not about politics. Language doesn't cover subcontracted workers, which is a major issue in the hotel industry. Is there a reason for not including subcontracted workers? It leaves off notification of guest, something that we know the hotels have lobbied against. But something that we know is a distract is a. Deterrent for people. If they see a sign, they're going to think twice. It's something that we. Fought really hard for with. Sex trafficking in the hotels. So is there something we can do about it? Amidst the retaliation language to protect housekeepers whenever they do speak up and it leaves out hotel workers ability for legal remedy if the law is not complied with. So those are policy questions that I think need to be answered. In addition to understanding from the city attorney, the timeline that we're working. With the council. Have requested that you come back in 30 days where we are with that 30 day report. Does that 30 day report include the impacts of hotels of 50 rooms or less? And what liability does that put the council out for voting on this? Now, while we're waiting on a measure to be voted on in November, I will leave those as my questions for now. Okay. So I know there's there's some questions in there that are probably for the city attorney and there might be some others are there for the makers of the motion. Maybe we should we keep going, maybe hear from the members or did you want to get those when I have a lot of questions answered now are. You want to just do those now? Okay, let me. I don't have those all in front of me. But do you want to start? I mean, Mr. City Attorney, do you want to maybe answer some of the questions that were posed to you? There's a number of questions that I wrote down that are either a policy question or the maker of the motion. Question on why the timing of this. The way I read the motion and the language here, it would not include Airbnb's. The legal concerns versus politics. I can't address the politics, but the legal concerns. This does cover areas that would not be covered by measure WW. And depending on what was adopted, if anything, was adopted by the City Council when a ordinance came back, if the measure WW applying to the larger hotels was more restrictive, that would apply . And so if you didn't have some of the other things that you brought up, that would be a policy decision to include in an ordinance such as the subcontractor, the notification language, the retaliation in the hotel, the legal remedies for the individual workers. All of those protections would apply to the hotels of 50 or more would not be required on the ordinance applying to the 50 or less unless council amended the ordinance at some point. So I'd need further direction from the City Council to if there were going to be ads and there would be an opportunity to do that one this evening or at first reading. And when that came back for the Council's consideration, if at that time the Council read it and either wanted to add things to it or change things to it, obviously we could do that at that time and we would come back depending on those changes by for another first reading if necessary. I can I can answer one of the questions in there and then someone quickly if I if I'm wrong. I think when when a initiatives is in front of voters all of that but that is passed by the voter essentially becomes kind of supersedes and become becomes the law. It would trump the ordinance. And then what if whatever whatever is presented in front of us that goes beyond the scope of what's in front of the voters would apply as long as it doesn't contradict anything that is currently in the other measure. And if it did this, it is superseded by whatever is actually implemented by the actual voters. So and that's the my understanding of the way I know this question came up when we had Measure M and May as well. And so that's. Correct. That was a little bit different because there are competing measures on the ballot. And I actually part of some of the council discussion that we were voting on when it came to the tacked to the tax structure. But I think that I think that that is the response as far as the voter initiative would always supersede if there were areas of conflict. And currently, I think that the the way our municipal code reads, motel, Airbnbs and bed and breakfasts are not considered motels. I think that's correct. Mr. City Attorney say lodging. And I think that the way I read this all hotel lodging employers including motels. I want some additional clarification on that, but I hope it doesn't indicate that they want Airbnbs in here. So we would go generally speaking, we would start with our municipal code definitions of those items, the hotel lodging employers, if we have that in motels and use that as our definition and then obviously come back for first reading if that's not the intent of the makers. So my other question was around the timing of the report in 30 days, how much information is coming back, what's going to be included in that? And then I'd like the maker of the motion to answer the questions around the policy. So the study, if on August 7th we were asked to do a study, it was originally a 30 day study, but then was kind of modified to give us a report of where we are in 30 days and come back with a study. So by next week we'll have an update to kind of the process and what we're doing. We expect the full study to be available to the Council by the beginning of October, probably first week of October 1st, second week of October. And does that study include hotels of 50 rooms or less? And as I understand it, we're doing some comparative analysis of some of the other ordinances that are out there. And some of those will be for hotels, 50 or under. I can ask John Kiser to further speak to whether or not, you know, what level of analysis we have for 50 or less. The honorable mayor and members of the city council. Yes. So. So we're working with our consultant on the scope of work and refining that now. We will be taking a look at how our ordinance is proposed, compares to some of the other ordinances out there, which are inclusive of different numbers of hotel rooms, as well as different square footage and different requirements that are included in their audiences. So what we'll get back. We're looking at Seattle, Chicago, Sacramento County, Miami, Las Vegas in New York City, all of which have ordinances. But they're all different in their own right. We'll compare our proposed ordinance to those other cities in and we'll have a matrix that will point out the similarities and differences. And then from that comparative review will also do an analysis of economic impact. So what these different proposed measures might do and how they might influence existing and proposed future hotels. So as Assistant City Manager mentioned, our goal is by the end of this month, within the next couple of weeks, be a consultant, will be conducting interviews as well as that literature review of other ordinances. And then we'll have a period to review it internally and have something back by mid-October. Okay. Thank you for that, John. I do want to note for the council and for those listening that the proposed ordinance that's on the ballot in November is an ordinance that was spent, as mentioned, four or five years in the making with large hotels as part of that conversation. One of the first groups that I met with when I got into office was all of the hotels, minus the renaissance of 100 rooms or more in the city, and that we had a real understanding about what their operations is like and the fact that those are not mom and pop hotels and the fact that these hotels that are 50 rooms or less are often owned by a family and their operations is completely different from, say, a marriott that has a national standard for how they operate. And so that is one of the reasons not that we wanted to exclude a population I absolutely support. Housekeepers are having sexual assault protections in their hotels. I just think that if we're going to include that, that doing it in this short time frame without any engagement with that business community is short sighted. So I, I will start my comments and hear from the maker of the motion on some of the policy questions. Kay. I'm going to count somebody. Want me to keep going through that? You want to drive some of these now or. I can provide some of the answers. I'm not providing a staff report. This is just an item I'm presenting to my colleagues. So I'll do my best to. I'm sorry. Was there something. Yes, this is a proposed ordinance, but I'm not providing a staff report, so I'll do my best to articulate for my colleagues where I'm coming from, and then they'll have to make the determination as to whether it makes sense for them or not. It's not you know, it's not a staff report. So the timing of this well, first of all, this is an item since September of 2017 that I have indicated very clearly and unequivocally that I would support the panic button option, because I do believe that that is a public safety concern. However, we did hear this at the Public Safety Committee meeting. We heard this issue and there really was no data to support some of the concerns that we were hearing regarding the need for panic buttons. And it wasn't until the most recent discussions that the need and desire or perceived request for panic buttons was highlighted very clearly to the City Council. And I. If that public safety concern is in fact legitimate and honest, which I believe it is, then it makes no sense for us to wait. I'm assuming that this ballot initiative is going to pass. Absolutely. But why would we wait to implement a public safety aspect that we have repeatedly meeting after meeting, heard from people that they want and it will make them feel safer. The Fiscal Impact Study, as council member Pearce may recall, was about the impact to the city for compliance of the square footage requirement. The panic buttons would not be paid for by the city. They'd be paid for by the entity that would be disseminating them to their employees. So there would be no cost to the city. And that's why in September of 2017, I recommended both privately to council members who were supporting the item and publicly during the council meetings that I believed we should move forward on the panic button item, since that appeared to be a very necessary item that had no nexus to some of the other provisions that were in the ordinance and something that I believed the Council unanimously agreed was necessary. So. While I understand Councilmember Pierce's concerns and thoughts and I respect them, while I may not disagree with them, I assure you that sitting here on this side of the dais and hearing woman after woman say they're not safe because they don't have panic buttons, and that's something that the city council can easily fix and remedy from a public safety standpoint. Why wouldn't we? If something were to happen between now and when this ballot initiative passes, wouldn't we want to say that we did everything we could in our power to protect those women now that they have raised that as a public safety issue for the city, not for the hotels, but for the city. So I think, you know, it's it's a prudent thing to do. Frankly, I don't really understand the basis of the opposition. Is it that I. So there's a couple of things in regards to subcontracted workers. I, I've no objection to including that. In fact, I'm totally amenable to any recommendations colleagues want to make. So we can include subcontractors. If, if, if that's a friendly, I would absolutely accept it. We can also I do believe there was some outreach done with the motels. But remember, this is a proposal for an ordinance that will go through the proceedings, for an ordinance to be adopted. And we can certainly phase in implementation if there's going to be a financial burden for hotels similar to what we've done with other policies that we've set where we've been concerned about the impact on small business owners. We can certainly phase an implementation to address that. But I do believe that if hotel workers are concerned about not having public I'm sorry, panic buttons when they're accessing public and the private rooms, then motel workers would have the same concerns. And so I do believe and again, I remember having this conversation, Councilmember Pearce, with you in a public setting and September of 2017, where I said I believed that any provision should apply to both hotels and motels. So, you know, while I understand the concerns, it it's a very simple item that places at the disposal of every hotel worker and every motel worker access to an alarm system so that they feel safer. And that is really a public safety concern. And it separates it out from other issues that really don't have a nexus to public safety. So this is purely a public safety item with no other factors attached to it. Those factors will be addressed by the voters at the ballot. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilwoman Gonzalez. Thank you. So I have some. A few. Questions. I am also struggling with this due to a few things. So the first and foremost is the process. I agree with Councilmember Pearce that this was submitted very late on a Friday over a holiday weekend on the supplemental agenda when we've been oftentimes chastised for doing that, if for any reason. But this is a very heavy item. I understand that it's looked at as maybe just a public safety item. But it's a pretty heavy item submitted very late. Not even including any of the Claudia Law stakeholders or any of the council colleagues that have pushed this through. So I feel that that could have been, you know, one way to to just have us weigh in on on this work because it's been done for so long. So the process for me is a little bit shaky in that sense. Secondly, I would have to disagree on the fiscal impact. When we say fiscal impact, we talk about city resources. Well, when the bulk of the item includes PD resources, we should actually ask for a fiscal impact. A female officer website information on a website, outreach to hotels and motels, which is fine, and I know our PD may be doing that already, but we haven't had a report, a full report back at the city council level to understand what they're currently doing and what we need to do. We absolutely I think many of us agree that we want panic buttons. We want extra security measures at motels or hotels, less than 50. But there's a lot in here that we're not talking about. And there's no fiscal impact, especially after we. Talked about the financial policies of our Bossi. Including fiscal impact not included. So again, like I said, public safety resources that are being expended. I understand we're taking out the female officer component. But I think we need additional information and it would be great to have additional information on how these how we were how we derived these resources and. How much they'll cost. Lastly, I. Agree the timing seems very bad. It just seems very negative. It may look like it's confusing voters, which we don't ever want to do. And it makes it unclear as as to whether as to what the city council is currently doing versus. What WW would do. And I think that that to me seems a bit I don't know, it seems a bit unethical in my sense that we have this coming down the pipeline. People don't really understand or may be able to differentiate what. WW and what. The what this item may or may not do. So I would actually like to see additional information and I'll let I'll let my council colleagues speak as well. But I'd like to hear additional information on fiscal impacts. I'd like to hear additional information on timeline and additional information to any legal implications. We have the Political Reform Act, and I don't know if that will have any repercussions with this. I mean, city attorney parking, do you find that we're going to be having any issues with this, at least with perception? We we again, we got this on Friday. Also, we have not done any legal research on any of those issues at this time. Thank you. So I would just ask us to review that because I think that those are very key, important issues. And in fact, you know, when we put this item together a year ago, I spoke with every hotel. Whether they liked what. I was saying or not. I spoke with every hotel and made sure that they were engaged. And so I don't think that our motel owners are engaged. I would also say on top of the motel thing, we have a nuisance abatement policy that Councilmember Richardson has brought forward. Do we even think people that are not even keeping up with the quality of life in their motels, do we honestly think that they're going to add a panic button for women and men that have been potentially could be sexually assaulted? I don't know. I think we need more information on that as well. So I'll just put it out there. Thank you. Councilmember Orinda. Thank you, Mayor. Let me ask a question, and I know that this is a we've got a long speakers list. Do we want to take a last vote briefly for our budget? Folks can head home and then we'll continue this conversation if they know that they're ready for us. It's just a quick vote if there's no objection with the council we have. Can you please read the item?

Recommendation to receive a report from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Public Works on the status of the North Long Beach HEAL Zone Initiative, with an emphasis on activities related to mobility and active living; and Request both departments to explore a partnership with the Uptown Property and Community Association on the creation of a mobile application focused on mobility, health and local businesses as part of the North Long Beach HEAL Zone.

LongBeachCC_01062015_14-1075

Okay. Now we are moving on to the regular agenda. We have we do have one piece of unfinished business first, which is item number 20. So I'm going to go, Mr. Kirk, January 20. Thank you, Mayor. It's a report from the Office of Council Member Rex Richardson and Council Member Alison with the recommendation receive a report from the Department of Human Services and Public Works on the status of the North Long Beach Hills own initiative and request that both departments explore a partnership with the Uptown Property and Community Association on the creation of a mobile application focused on mobility, health and local businesses as part of the North Long Beach Heal program. Councilor Richardson. I'd like to ask for a staff report first. Certainly mayor and council members. I'm going to turn this over to our Health and Human Services Director Kelly Hall to report on the heels on. Good evening, honorable mayor and Council Members. Just thank you for this opportunity to provide an update of the Hill Zone. And we've had a couple of different fitness zones go in. The College Park was completed with the Clippers event last fall and we also are in the current are currently implementing a fitness zone in Halton Park which will be in place by the end of September. At the same time, we're looking at hydration stations. It was one of those things that during the youth photo voice project, they talked about it a lot. And so hydration stations allow you to fill up your water bottles and things in the different parts. So there'll be two in Hilton Park and one in College Park that are aligned with the fitness zones. In addition, we've implemented a walking loop in Hilton Park with City Fabric. They worked with our staff from the Community Health Bureau and they finalized the route and the signage has been installed so people can walk around and read different exercises to do. We've also worked very closely with the Cal State University, Long Beach Department of Kinesiology, the Beach Wellness Program, and they're conducting fitness classes at the Hutton Park Community Center, and they've developed really a great following. A lot of neighborhood residents are there. They're doing that. They're doing the fitness classes also as part of the grant. We do have an MOU with the Department of Public Works to create an app, and this app is to encourage walking, bicycling, healthy choices by helping people find nearby events and local community resources, as well as good walking and bicycling routes. This is the app is really focused at the hills zone, but we're also focused to build it. So it's scalable to include other neighborhoods. Community resources might include nearby activities, events, opportunities for active living at local parks, um, health centers, libraries, schools, farmers markets, community gardens and other points of interest. And they also for healthier trip making that might include walking your bike routes as well as transit options with recommended routes based on the user's location and chosen destinations. The Coalition for Healthy North Long Beach will be meeting on January 21st to discuss all of the final deliverables. And the Coalition is planning to host a broader community meeting in February to ensure that the current implementation strategies incorporate all of the local resident feedback. Um, we invite the Uptown Property and Community Association to participate in these meetings with the Healthy North Long Beach and in the community meeting in February to engage in the dialog about the app to determine its functionalities moving forward. And with that, I take questions. Thank you. Councilman Richardson. Thank you. So I just want to say that in 2012, City of Long Beach received this grant from Kaiser Permanente to establish the Hill's own program. And now we're and we've just entered 2015. It was a three year commitment of $1 million over the course of three years. I think the health department has really demonstrated over this time how to squeeze blood out of a turnip, not only to do that, but how to really make a major impact here. This zone was designed to help help folks to make healthy choices about access to fresh fruits and vegetables. We've seen a lot of work, a lot of of positive outcomes as a result a direct result of this grant. The purpose of this was not only just to receive an update, but secondly, to to acknowledge that when we began this process and we set out some goals like creating a mobile app, like starting a farmer's market , the communities changed. There are a lot, lot more partners, a lot more activity here. And so what might have begun as a concept for a simple, safe, rustic school mobile app has turned into something totally different and much greater now with the potential partnership of our business community as well as other departments. So the purpose of this was really to encourage our Health Department and the Department of Public Works to work with our business district to to change this mobile app and expand to expand its potential. You know, there an opportunity for us to, you know, we've got this open streets event happening in in the spring. And I'd love to see how we can align the launch of this app with that event somehow. I'd love to see how we can integrate our businesses and and and a lot of the other excitement that's happened in the area with the new community center, so on and so forth. So that's really the gist of this. And that said, I make the motion as written. There's been a motion seconded by Councilmember Austin. Any public comment on the item? So please cast your votes. Oh, there is. Please come down. There's a comment. Okay. Make. Good evening, Mayor. Councilmembers My name is Lorraine Parker. I'm the property manager for the Uptown Property and Community Association. I'm here this evening to express my support to explore the partnership with the North Long Beach Hills own initiative, the Uptown Property Community Association. I wanted to say we are celebrating our one year anniversary, so we're very proud of the programs that we've accomplished over the last year. And we're really looking forward to upgrading the city in the heel zone district, as you guys have done here this evening. And looking forward to this mobile app and really ramping up the the North Long Beach area with this initiative. And we look forward to the partnership. So thank you very much and have a good evening. Next week. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Phil Phillips. I'm here. I am in the ninth district. I'm on the board of the. Top Town Property and Community Association. I was at a CORNISH Club breakfast this morning in Bixby Knolls, and Shawn Durran, who is Lorraine's assistant manager, was the guest speaker after his presentation on the organization's accomplishments in its first year of operation. He was asked about the organization's. Cooperation with the neighborhood. Associations if they engage the neighborhood associations. He said that was planned for the next for the future. His Uptown business. District is new and it's had a lot of accomplishments this year. It's one of the goals of this organization is to foster greater interest by the community in the businesses in the North Palm Beach area. And it is incumbent on these businesses to contribute to the well-being of the residents in their community. And I think this. Motion is a first step in doing that. So I urge your vote on this. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no other public comment, we do have a motion. Please cast your vote. Councilwoman Miller. Thank you. Motion carries a protest. And. Next item, please.

Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and file an update on the City’s Strategic Vision efforts.

LongBeachCC_05112021_21-0424

Thank you. And I would be happy to do that to thank you for for that invitation to do so. Happy to do that. With that, we are going to go ahead and go into our study session. We can read that, please. Item 19 is the study session recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and file an update on the city's strategic vision efforts. I will now turn this over to the staff. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council. So in 2019, the City Council embarked on a effort to create an updated strategic plan looking to the future or strategic vision. We've done a number of strategic plans in the city and some really great work, and this is kind of an overarching effort to pull all of those together and to really create a document that helps us kind of focus and look to the future. So we started that effort in 2019, and then along with many things, we had to take a pause during COVID and we've restarted that effort. So tonight you're going to get an update of some of the work that's been happening. We're not asking for any specific direction tonight, although we certainly welcome comments and then we'll be bringing this back to you in summer so that you have a chance to really dove into it a little bit deeper. And with that, I'll turn it over to both Theresa Chandler, our deputy city manager, and Kelly Collopy, our director of Health and Human Services. Good evening, honored mayor and members of the city council. As Tom mentioned, in the early in October of 2019, the City Council directed city staff to develop a strategic vision for the city that would reflect the next ten years to 2030. We were in we were in the middle of all that and providing and then when COVID hit, it was set aside. Tonight, we are here this evening to provide an update to that strategic vision planning process and to and to really just sort of give you insight into what we are hearing. We began this journey in partnership with Arup Consulting Firm in February of 2020. However, due to COVID, we were delayed and we are just now sort of back and really engaged and working through it. Fortunately, we've been able to pick up where we left off and we've been able to have conversations with many of you, in fact , all of you throughout the process. In this evening's study session will provide a high level update of where we are in the process. We'll share the goals and themes that have emerged collectively from the work to date. Provide an update on our progress. Share what we've heard and our next steps. Our goal of this work is to develop a tenure. Well, nine year now strategic vision for our city that reflects your voices, the voices of our teams and the voices of our community by way of using an equity and resiliency lens in this design process. This vision will help focus and prioritize our work as we emerge from this pandemic and move toward an even brighter future. Just about all of our city departments have their own strategic plans as departments or for specific focus areas to help guide their work. All of which elicited community feedback as part of their planning process. It wasn't necessary to start from scratch, given the rich information used to create each of these plans. Therefore, we started the visioning process by reviewing and pulling out the common threads or themes that emerged across all of them. We spoke with each of you to elicit your feedback and visions specific to your council districts and for the city overall. We also conducted sessions with city excuse me, city leadership and staff to gather their thoughts for internal and external transformation. Though we are using the information gathered from the community during the strategic planning processes, as mentioned above, starting this week, we are also meeting communities where they are at to gather more information about their vision for Long Beach in 2030. And we'll simultaneously gather information from city staff who are on the ground working hard every day to meet the needs of community members. All of this rich data will lead us to the development of the road map for the future of Long Beach. From the 25 strategic plans across the city departments, over 15,000 community residents were engaged through those efforts. As I mentioned in the last slide, ten interviews were conducted with each of you and the mayor. We have a steering committee made up of city staff who meet monthly to provide guidance to the Arab team and city leadership participated in two listening sessions, and another listening session is on the horizon for city staff who are on the ground providing services day in and day out. This is an this is an all hands in effort designed to ensure voices from across the city are heard and are contributing to a collective vision. Now, Kelly is going to share more about what we heard in these sessions. We'd like to share more about what we heard from the interviews. The themes that were pulled from the various reports, as well as our visioning sessions with our employees. From the original, from the review of the plans, general themes emerged. They're focused on housing and homelessness, public safety, accessible public transportation, and safe places for active transportation, workforce development and economic inclusion, health, mental health and overall wellness education at all levels, beginning with the early child and throughout the lifespan. Digital inclusion. And climate change. And the environment. The conversations with you included these themes and highlighted included the themes of the strategic plans and also highlighted that we needed a focus on the basic needs of the city and ensuring that the basic needs are met across the city. You highlighted that equity must be a well integrated into our policies and program design as well as implementation and that resident interests are represented. Many of you discussed that in many ways. After this pandemic, we needed to return to the basics, ensure that all our communities have access to these basics, such as quality and reliable infrastructure, clean air and water, and ensuring safety in our homes and in our communities. This was framed in a conversation about ensuring that Long Beach is a desirable place to live. You highlighted the need for a resilient and diverse economy so that our residents can thrive while working, living, playing and raising their families in Long Beach. You also highlighted the importance of drawing businesses to the city and supporting innovative opportunities. And finally, you're focused on increasing civic engagement and working to create stronger community relationships and communication structures to ensure community voices are engaged in planning and decision making. Our Department Leadership and steering committee also focused on the importance of addressing the areas of greatest need in the city and working to prioritize resources and aligning them with the goals outlined in the strategic planning areas. They focused on addressing the digital divide to ensure that communities across the city have digital access and competency to learn, work and be civically engaged. They focused on environmental resiliency, ensuring that we have the infrastructures necessary to withstand the impacts of climate change, and also the ability to support those who are most vulnerable in our communities, such as older adults and those living in poverty who have limited access to healthy environments. And last but not least, they highlighted the need to support health and wellness by investing in children, youth and families to support the future of our city. This includes investing in early childhood education, workforce opportunities for parents, health and mental health services, as well as increasing access to healthy food and physical exercise opportunities in areas where they are most lacking. We know that to achieve what has been discussed through this presentation so far, it's absolutely essential to have a strong, vibrant and resilient city government. These next two slides really highlight the focus on our government. The Department Leadership and Steering Committee highlighted the importance of developing and strengthening mechanisms for equitable service investments, utilizing an equity lens and taking a long term planning view. They discussed the need for resiliency in the face of shocks that could be natural, manmade environmental or in the face of a pandemic such as we're experiencing now. And to ensure that we can continue to provide basic services and focus on a strong future. They talked about ensuring that we are strong, working together across departments to strengthen our ability to meet community needs by leveraging, not duplicating our efforts, including funding and talent. They also talked about the importance of community voices in the city's work and ensuring that they are engaged in our work together. There was also a focus on financial resilience and ensuring diversified funding streams clearly agreed upon priorities and investments in families, green infrastructure and safety, to name a few. They highlighted the need for accessible data that are shared across departments to support decision making investment determinations and to determine program effectiveness. They, however, needed to ensure our city employees are fortified and appreciated. This includes creating learning environments, growth opportunities, the ability to build skills while also maintaining a positive work life balance. And finally, they highlighted the need for technology investments to strengthen business practices and efficiencies, increase access to services for our community members, to support collaboration across departments and with the community, and to ensure flexibility in workspaces, including the ability to work remotely. Their vision of our city. Government truly highlights resilience, learning, engagement and financial strength through all that comes to our city. After reviewing all of the existing plans, working with city leadership staff in our legislative offices, we have gathered quite a lot of information in a short amount of time. We certainly have some ways to go still. However, we have drafted the statement of possibility for our city to uplift the vision. We are all working to achieve that. People are healthy, well, and feel safe in an equitable and fair community. Housing is affordable, protected and available. Economic opportunity exists for everyone. Transportation and mobility needs are met for individuals and for the community. The environment is sustainable and resilient. We are looking forward to diving deeper into making connections with the community members who may have not been engaged in earlier city planning efforts. This week, we will begin meeting residents at vaccine distribution sites in parks located in some of the hardest to reach neighborhoods in west, north and central Long Beach to elicit feedback about their vision for Long Beach in 2030. Conversations will be had with people who are waiting in line before getting their vaccine and with those who are waiting to be cleared. Post-Vaccination. These conversations will be available in Spanish, Tagalog and Kami, and the following questions will be asked during the conversations. Well, we'll start out by gathering demographic information, and then we're going to go into what resources did they did you and your family rely on the most to navigate through the year? Looking forward, what do you want the city to focus on as we recover as a community in the future? What does a well-prepared Long Beach look like and what is the most convenient way for you to give feedback in the future? The team will also conduct some employee listening sessions to engage staff in the visioning of their future. Questions to prompt these conversations will be developed soon and shared in the final report. Many city employees are also residents of Long Beach, and we want to make sure their voices are fully represented in this vision document as well. The slide outlines our next steps in moving this work forward. It's been moving full speed ahead since we reconvened at the beginning of this year, and I'm proud to share how far along in the process we have gotten in a relatively short amount of time with all of the trials, tribulations and lessons learned throughout this pandemic response . We have been able to bring more clarity and purpose to this strategic vision process. We have seen the highs and lows. Our areas for opportunity have been exposed. Our strengths have been uplifted. And this document will allow us to align across the city so that we are united in our work and service provision going forward. We will be moving towards completion through this summer after we finished the listening sessions. The Preliminary Strategic Vision Action Agenda will be drafted to help move us along the pathway at the duration of the drafting phase. We will deliver a presentation to all of you in a council meeting and once approved, we will share the final version with our city team. This is where we are so far. We are certainly looking forward to hearing your feedback about what we may want to still consider as we proceed to the finish line. Thank you for your engagement so far in this process and for your time this evening. And we are available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you. I want to just obviously thank staff for all the work. After this epic brawl, I think we all can probably understand and appreciate this strategic plan directly. Pretty important documents. And they are obviously important as it relates to our departments, our community and how we move forward over the course of the next ten years especially . And so I just want to commend the staff for the work and for persevering, doing the work through the through the pandemic. I just want to also I know that tonight is not it's just an update and there'll be a lot more in the future. Mr. Modica about report is going to come down a month from now in the summer. Is that a draft or is that more of like what? What does that look like when when you come back to us? We're the mayor. The timeline is over the next couple of months. And so we anticipate that we'll, um, that we'll be pulling all that information and you'll get a draft and have an opportunity to review and um, uh, provide feedback and then we'll continue on to, um, to finalize. Okay. And the only other thing I'll add is I think that, um, our community input is really important in a process like this. And so, uh, I do appreciate the, uh, reaching out that you're all doing at the, at the vaccination clinics. And I'm just hopeful that, and I know that there's been obviously extensive community input over all the plans in the past and any other opportunities that there are to do. The additional input I think will be important, is what I'm sure you guys are all considering that as we as we move forward to. Thank you. I might have Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I'll be brief. I think it's great that we're doing this. I think it's important now. Given everything we just went through. A lot has changed about our city and about the vision. Needs to be factor of this input into it are two things that I wanted to just take this opportunity to lift up. One, I know we're doing outreach at the vaccination sites. I just want to say in North Long Beach, that's a fifth of the city's population. One site, you know, doing outreach in there is not going to really capture what you need captured. I think you should be looking at multiple sites or opportunities across North County, some massive areas the size of Compton, Carson. So you should be looking at both districts, eight districts, nine west, northwest, northeast, just fine opportunity because some people don't go to Highland Park for the vaccination site. The second thing I would say is and this was my sentiment and I don't know what everybody said in their interview, I enjoyed my interview with Short 30 Minutes, but the message for me was simple. It's in my opinion, you know, that there's this transition toward equity and advance in our city. Really. It should be owned by owned by the city, owned by the city staff, the employees. And we really should be looking at the city as an organization. It's organization focused. Make sure no neighborhood is left behind, not to counsel people or not, you know, politics. We are a place where it really the city, our key performance indicators of the city should be on how well we all are doing. So basic common denominator. We all should meet a certain level of response times. We should all be meeting a certain level of economic activity in areas with more unemployment other than other areas. That's where we should be putting our focus of workforce. But I think what I really want to see, since the organization is doing this visioning that the organization as a whole really think about how it's going to meet meet the future as it relates to equity. It shouldn't you know, it shouldn't be city council members or you know, we certainly can say we want to say, but really it should be a part of the service. Those are two things. I would I would just add. Keep up the great work report to the next. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce. You, Mr. Mayor, and I really appreciate the presentation that that you guys have given, and you've already done a lot of work. I know there's still a lot more community engagement to be had. But just out of curiosity, was there any information that came out from the visioning efforts so far that was surprising to the team? Or was the information that you learned kind of further corroborating the track that we're on progress we're making? I think that there are many things that we heard that were aligning with what we've been hearing through other plans and things. I think the impact of the pandemic has shifted some view. For some, it's harder to think past what we've experienced. And so there has been a little bit of a step back and thinking about making sure that we really are settling and taking and taking care of the basic needs of our community, really focusing on, you know, access to food and access to safe spaces and and those sorts of things which in in previous conversations may not have been uplifted as much. So I think it did center a little bit more given the experiences of our city in the past year. Okay. That's good. I have, you know, do you know yet? Are there significant variations in the input that we've received from the public based on geography or socioeconomics or gender? Or are residents mostly in support of the same priorities in terms of strategic planning? At this point, Councilmember, that much of the information that has been brought forward has been pulled from the strategic plans that have been going on for the last few years. So if you think about the, you know, the CAP plan and you think about the blueprint for economic development and you think about the early childhood plan. And there are just so many different plans and the feedback from across the city is included in all of those plans. And we haven't gone through all the plans and broken out that I don't know that we actually have those data that indicate where all the those voices came from. But much of the themes that we have forwarded here have stemmed from a review and reading the comments and engaging with the more than 25 plans that the city has developed in recent years. Okay. I appreciate that. I know it's it's kind of a a bigger, broader question to think about as we move through this process. And I think, you know, for me, I enjoyed my interview with the team as well, but I think it will be interesting to see what the strategic vision and priorities are for a city that's as diverse as we are. Because I know, for example, delivery of government services and response times and the delivery of customer service or public service services is probably a major priority for the residents that I represent. I know just kind of the response times when they report an issue in terms of strategic visioning, you know, how do we continue to have good customer service as a city to all of the residents that I'm just curious because we hear that a lot. It's a priority. Whether that was a theme that people thought about in terms of strategic planning, that that customer service be be looped into the discussion as we talk about a future strategic planning . So I'd be interested to know after you guys do your listening tours, assuming you're going to do them all over the city and capture the diversity that makes the city so beautiful and yet so different throughout the various borders of our city, so that we can develop a strategic plan that really encapsulates priorities to the extent we're able to of the diverse communities that we all represent. So I thank you very much for starting these efforts, and I look forward to hearing more about them as we continue these discussions. Thank you, Councilwoman. The D.A.. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to say thank you for the presentation. Very good presentation. I know that I really enjoyed my interview as well, but I think like Councilmember Rex had mentioned that, you know, it's really we really need to you know, what's more important is what the community sees. So our visions and I think that that's a great thing. And so I'm really thankful for you taking the time to actually try to reach those those folks that are hardest to reach. And in doing this pandemic, we have realized that how much how much residents we actually do have that are hard to reach. So I just wanted to say how much I appreciate you taking the effort and make our I should say, making the effort to really reach those and those folks that don't have a computer, that don't have a cell phone, that are victims of our digital divide and really trying to get their visions included as well. So thank you very much for that. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? There's no public comment on this item here. So I think the motion was by Vice Mayor Richardson and a second by Councilman Price, if that works. And with that, we'll go ahead and take a roll call vote. District one, District two I. District three. District I. District four. I. District five. I. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. Hi. District nine. Hi. Motion carries.

Recommendation to declare ordinance finding and determining that a credit is due against the Transportation Improvement Fee applicable to the Shoreline Gateway project located at 777 East Ocean Boulevard; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement regarding credit for transportation improvements made in connection with the Shoreline Gateway project, read and adopted as read. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_04132021_21-0307

Thank you. Item number 14, please. Report from Public Works recommendation or declare ordnance finding in determining that a transportation improvement fee credit is due for the Shoreline Gateway Project and execute an agreement with Shoreline Development Partners for a tariff credit and in the amount of 369,596. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading District two. Kevin. Motion and a second. Can I have a. I don't see any. Public comment on this item. So let's do a roll call vote, please. You have emotion in a second? I do. I have emotion. Councilwoman Allen and a second by Councilman Mongo. Thank you. District one. My district to. By District three. I district for. I District five II District six. I'm District seven. I. District eight. All right. District nine. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. Item number 16, please.

Recommendation to declare ordinance approving an application for a Development Agreement pursuant to Chapter 21.29 of the Long Beach Municipal Code; directing the City Attorney to prepare a Development Agreement embodying the application and key terms of the Development Agreement as approved by the City Council; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute, on behalf of the City of Long Beach, a Development Agreement with The Long Beach Project Owner, LLC and DEM Investment Company, LLC, for the Riverwalk Residential Development Project and Oregon Park construction, read and adopted as read. (District 8)

LongBeachCC_11172015_15-1136

Report from Development Services Recommendation to declare ordinance approving an application and requesting the city attorney to prepare and the city manager to execute a development agreement for the River Walk Residential Development Project and Oregon Park Construction read and it as read District eight. City Public comment on this item who's come forward. And Cantrell and last week when the Oregon Park was discussed. It has been stated that the soccer field was to be artificial turf, but when the developer spoke in his rebuttal, he said he could go either way on this. And so I'm hoping that. As this park is developed. You will consider putting in a a natural grass field. If you put in an artificial field. It will have to be fenced to keep off. Drinks, food, bikes. Cars. All the things that destroy an artificial field. So that means that this will not be open for the children of the neighborhood to play on. There will have to be a locked gate to keep out. Any. This is what has happened in Hawaii and Gardens. If you go over to the field, they're behind the. Casino. You will find that they have a paid worker there to keep out anybody that's not on a team and all the team members are searched before they go on to the artificial sports field to make sure they have only water. The artificial turf is more fragile than a natural grass field. And there are other considerations, such as heat and injury risk, that makes natural grass much more. Usable for a large population of children, not just soccer players. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. My comments are going to be pretty much the same as my previous comment, so I'll keep it brief. The soccer field is another does the same thing. This is going to be a recurring theme with me. Again, I'm wondering why the city is specifying artificial turf. I'm having a lot of trouble with this one is that we have, again, a document that is contradicting itself. There's. At least within the city. We have two people. We have we have a councilperson that stating that is incorrect and we're using the same document, it seems to drive the the need for artificial turf. And the specifications is obviously going through the city and it is being requested from our planning department, whoever is he's getting his information from. If I'm incorrect on that, please let me know. I've also looked at the, uh, the documents that Mr. Parkin has said that drives the. The city has said that they are. The council has said that the the meeting minutes of September 3rd, 2013, was. The Council has decided that. They were that that it was artificial turf was done. I've looked at the video. I've also given it to federal prosecutors who live in California and a judge, a federal judge. And they've looked over the documents. And I'll be I'm just going to quote from what they said is that you have to be crazy to to even think that this is has any kind of intention whatsoever to. To go artificial. And I'm just telling you, this is what they're telling me. I've got 30 years of contract experience and I don't see any place at all where where they said that there was artificial was being driven from there. So I'm just trying to understand. Can you tell me where how I mean, any reason, even the slightest reason, even a phrase that says, look, we're trying to improve artificial surfaces for all of the cities on here. I don't see a single document, a single writing. I don't see a single even thing on the video that shows that. Are we see is a budget that's been approved for the different fields on this particular one. I don't know what's driving it, but I just got to understand, we have a mayor here, great, intelligent, good looking mayor. And he's saying that he wants to to, you know, going green is the way to go. It helps the environment. And now we're we're paving over it with artificial turf. That's what I'm saying. I'm just trying to be as polite as I can and as nice as I can. And I'm just kind of trying to understand the process of what we're going through. That's all. That's all I'm trying to do. Thank you. We have a motion on the floor in a second. Members, please go and cast your votes. Thanks, man. Motion carries. Thank you. Item 31 Report from Development Services Recommendation to Declare Ordnance. Finding that a transportation improvement fee credit is due and authorizing the city manager to execute an agreement providing for the Transportation Improvement Fee Credit Read and adapted as read.

Recommendation to request City Manager, or his designee, to create a citywide Enforcement Plan for Senate Bill 1193, the California law that requires public posting of human trafficking information at specific businesses and establishments.

LongBeachCC_01202015_15-0064

Item five. Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Councilman Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, and Councilman Andrew's recommendation to request City Manager to create a citywide enforcement plan for Senate Bill 1193, a California law that requires public posting of human trafficking information at specific businesses and establishment. Councilmember Richardson, thank you. Over the past few months, I've been and my staff has been following the efforts of the Long Beach Human Trafficking Task Force. Specifically with relation to the Senate Bill 1193. This agenda item tonight is to support those efforts on enforcing this law and to further the city's commitment to combating human trafficking. SB 1193 requires specific businesses and other establishments to post a notice that concerns contains information related to slavery and human trafficking, including information hotlines for specified nonprofit organizations that provide services and aid that aid in the rescue of those victims. The hotlines are toll free and available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. There are also anonymous, confidential and accessible in numerous languages. The 12 types of businesses and establishments that are required to post those are most likely to be used by trafficked individuals. Currently, an enforcement plan has been developed by the Human Relations, the Human Trafficking Task Force, in partnership with our city prosecutor's office. I'm asking that. It's asking that the city create an enforcement plan to assist in those efforts and ensure that all proper sites comply with comply with this poster law. So at this point, I'd just like to ask for an update on where we are with the implementation of this enforcement plan. Alternate over to Commander Lisa Lopez. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. And council members Councilmember Richardson. City staff from various. Departments. Will be working together to create. This citywide enforcement plan for Senate Bill 1193. The plan will include education about the requirements of the Senate bill to both existing and new businesses. That meet the criteria. That's established. Great. So at this point, I'd like to just so I've made the motion, but I'd like to go ahead and just inquire with the city attorney about those specific types of businesses. Could you just state what those businesses are that are listed in this law? Vice Mayor Members of the Council. Yes, the there's actually 12 in the civil code section 52.6. I do point out that they are for on sale general purpose premises consumption maybe under under the ABC act. Adult or sexually orientated businesses. Primary airports. Inner City Passenger rail or light rail stations. Bus stations. Truck stops. Emergency rooms within urgent care centers. Farm labor contracts. Privately operated job recruitment centers. Roadside rest areas. Business or establishments that offer massage or body work services. Those are the 12 currently listed under Civil Code 52.6. So are there any. So can you just update me on what other states or other agencies have done in terms of including motels as well. As other other states or other jurisdictions have looked at the options of requiring the notice that either hotels are motels, if there has been a conviction at the location for certain enumerated crimes, including solicitation or prostitution. Okay. So with my motion, I also want you to I'd like for you to come back with some options on whether it's legal or appropriate to explore, maybe going a little a step further with this bill. I mean, with this. Yeah. With enforcement of this bill. By including motels, is that something you can do? We could certainly research that and get back to you. Councilmember Great. Thank you so much. Councilmember Gonzalez. I want to thank Councilmember Richardson for bringing this forward. I think this is very important, especially since PD has been working so very hard on this already. My question goes to the various languages. I think I meant I read something that had mentioned a couple of them, but I don't know what is covered currently or what we would legally be required to do. Anyone know? 17 Vice Mayor members of the council. Yes. The under the current section of the Civil Code, these enumerated businesses, which I read would be required to post in the code section itself. It talks about the size of the notice and what the content of the notice should say. It's also available on the Attorney General's website and working with the police department and the other departments. There will be a concerted effort to make sure that these businesses that are located in Long Beach will have the necessary language posted in their facilities. The the language provides for civil penalties. So I work with the prosecutor's office on this, but I anticipate our office would be through our code enforcement individuals. We would be if there is a problem where they're not posting it, we would be contacting them, advising them of the penalties associated with not posting and making sure that we gain compliance. Which languages would be required to? I don't know. Oh. I'm sorry. Yes. Under the Civil Code section, the notice to be posted is printed in English, Spanish and one other language that is most widely spoken language in the in the county where the establishment is located. Oh, it's in the county. Not specific to the city, though. So that's correct under the civil code. Because I would think that in some areas, I mean, especially along Cambodia town, I mean, it'd be nice to have something in, but I don't know if there's something we could. Currently we were limited to the statute. The an option might be is is or you could refer potential amendments to this bill to the state led committee and they could certainly talk about it on a statewide level if you wanted it made changes there. We're going to be looking at options for the city, for Councilmember Richardson's memo. We could look at this. Also. Can we friendly amend an amendment that as well? Absolutely. Okay, great. Councilmember Andrews. Yes. And thank you, vice mayor. You know, I'm happy to see that this enforcement piece has been, you know, included in this agenda. You know, this is definitely a great idea because it's about protecting our community. And I would like to think the human trafficking, you know, task force and community and Councilman Rex Richardson taking leadership on this and bringing it forward. I appreciate this very much. Thank you. Councilmember your Yarrawonga. Thank you, bass player. I have a couple of questions in regards to I know it's probably described somewhere in terms of SB 1193 in regards to what is the definition of human trafficking, because I'm sure that there are many instances and broader definitions of just sexual oriented abuses of people who I'm sure that there's others as well . Is there a definition in here somewhere that I can refer to in terms of what is a definition of human trafficking and slavery? That I can look at. Is it in the bill itself or vice mayor or members of the council? It is not included in the bill itself. Because I would I would define slavery. Ed, for example, as what takes place more commonly is sweatshop. For example, people who are working in the sweatshop, working under adverse working conditions, not being let out to go take breaks and that type of stuff. So is that included in this? Would it be would it be incorrect for me to to include that in there? The current thing is. Definition I'm sorry. Thing. If you or someone you know is being forced to engage in any activity and cannot leave, whether it is commercial sex, housework, farm work, construction, factory retail or restaurant work or any other activity, call the national human trafficking resource. So while they don't specifically define it, they they do indicate in a very broad sense, the areas in which if an individual feels that they're impacted by any of those areas, they give the 24 hour hotline numbers on the notice and then it describes the hotline and it's toll free, anonymous, etc.. Okay. So when we're talking also about potential penalties, we're looking at any establishment that refuses to post these notices. That is correct. The first offense pursuant to the Civil Code section is $500 in subsequent offense or $1,000. And how would that enforcement take place? Would that be through our police officers or inspectors or various other types of agencies that would be entering these establishments? Yes, the the if the establishment is is failing to comply, obviously, our goal is to get full compliance. And if they're not in compliance, we would probably be referred to us and we would reach out to them to contact them and and indicate to them what their penalty assessments are. If they did not do so, then we would go forward with a civil assessment and try and get an award for the either thousand or 500 and then subsequent thousand dollar assessment penalties. Well, that definitely is pretty broad. And I'm just wondering how many establishments are we are we talking about I mean, you're looking at liquor stores, you're looking at markets, you're looking at mom and pop shops. You know, it could be pretty expensive. How is that cost going to be covered in regards to the printing and the distribution of these notices? Is there a plan? That's that would be the responsibility of the business owner. Our responsibility is to ensure that they do it and comply. Okay. Clarification, the business owner posted. How are we going to how are we going to get that to them? Are they going to come to city hall and pick up a bunch of posters or what? We would talk in our committee, as Commander Lopez talked about, but more than likely would provide samples of posters or documents that are recommended by the state. And then it would be the responsibility of the business to have those photocopied or created and posted. Also, there was a discussion about language. We're talking about the county. We know that sometimes that sometimes we know we have a problem that's in human trafficking and it's an international problem covering many cultures, many languages. And it seems that we're going to be limited to a very few languages around here and that even Carmine was listed . In Tagalog, it would be in the West Long Beach area is an example of how we how are we going to address that issue in terms of the target that we want to address in regards to people being aware that human trafficking is. Natalie Allen. Councilmember Barunga. One thing that we can do besides an educational campaign for the whole community is we can post these requirements on the city website also so that the community can be aware of it. We can also. Seek. Voluntary compliance. With businesses in different parts of town where the language may be different than that. Third most common language in the county. In the county. I think that's it for a nice clarification. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank my and my colleagues for bringing this item forward. This is certainly an issue that that has plagued our society. And Long Beach is no exception. Some of our business corridors and what goes on behind closed doors is actually appalling. And so I commend that human trafficking task force and my colleagues for for bringing this forward. I think this is a no brainer, something that we do have to support here this evening. And so I'll certainly be voting in support of this. But I did have a couple of just clear point questions. Regarding the point is that established in the legislation. And is that specifically does it come to the local government or does it go to the state. Vice mayor or members of the council? That that's an excellent question. The the fine is established in the civil code. I don't have an answer for you tonight on where the money goes, whether the city or jurisdiction gets to keep that or it goes into the court system and we get a small percentage of that fine. But I believe it would it would be the latter. Okay. And then when you in the item, it makes references to the following businesses and establishments that are required to post the notice. Number two, who refers to adult or sexually oriented businesses? Is there a definition for that or is that just a broad kind of stroke? There is a definition in that adult or sexually orientated businesses as defined in Subdivision A of Section 318.5 of the Penal Code. I don't have that in front of me to read it to you, but I can provide it to you. I'll be happy to to research that on my own. Like I said, I don't think there's anything here that prohibit my support for this this item. But I wanted some clarification. And Councilmember Richardson mentioned motels. Obviously, that's not included in the type of businesses. We do know that there are. And I don't want to. I don't want to generalize any type of business, but massage parlors where I know there has been calls for service and issues with human trafficking activity, is would that be considered under this number two definition or is this something that we would have to look at. Including possibly vice members of the council? I believe that would be included under number 12 business or establishments that offer massage or body work services for compensation. Oh, good catch. I have no further questions. Councilmember Turanga. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I had one more thing I forgot to mention is that now that the work of the task force and I thank them for their work has been completed. Is there a monitoring mechanism that we're going to establish here, maybe through the Human Relations Commission, in regards to how how we're doing with this with this effort? I'm at this stage, we don't know exactly how we'll monitor, but that's something that Commander Lopez and the department teams will work on probably through business licenses. And we certainly could report back on a regular basis to the city council and perhaps a suggestion to Councilmember Austin's inquiry about the penalties and where it goes. I would suggest maybe establishing some kind of child fund or a victims fund to help individuals get back on track. Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. I'd also like to just add that my own gratitude to Councilmember Richardson for his interest in this subject. I know we have members in the audience that are very supportive of this. It's extremely important to encourage the public awareness. And we have folks that have been doing that. And for us to join as a city to help with that I think is critical. Hopefully we will inspire victims and would be victims to seek help. There's clearly a common misconception that these are somehow victimless crimes. We hear that time and time again, and those in the community, the advocacy community, have highlighted for us how that, in fact, is just a fallacy and a false narrative. My thanks to our city prosecutor Doug Halbert and our human trafficking task force for your focus on this and related crimes that upend families and demoralize communities. And I think we can only improve our efforts as we work together. With that, is there any member of the order of the audience that would like to address this council on item five? Please come forward. State your name. Hello. Virginia's aunt with a human trafficking task force. I'd like to thank Richardson for bringing this forward to the council tonight. We're happy to have your support behind us. Thank you. And I just. Just a few comments. One is that, sir, before this law was passed, survivors were asked what would help those victims who are currently in the life. And over and over again, they said if they had more information. So having this phone number out in public places for victims to see and have access to is very important and helping them get out of the life. So I thank you for your help and support on this. Also, I just wanted to make one comment too about the posters and the language. We do actually have a poster that's made with it's one poster and it has the language in English, Spanish and Kami on it. So we do have that in the language came from this, the secretary of state of California. And so thank you all for your support. Thank you. Anyone else. Please come forward and state your name. Yes. The city prosecutors should be commended. This is a very serious subject, equally serious. And I'm wondering whether or not there's a way of developing it since you're dealing with the massage dynamics. Whether or not we can establish of a program to go after those that are involved, particularly those in this building, of massaging the numbers, if you will, and the finances to channel them illegally, such as was codified in this hymnal of hosannas. Using taxpayer money moneys from. Mr. to you you're off topic. So the city cannot develop a program. I'm saying we're on item five, which does not deal with the issue you are discussing unless you wish to speak on human trafficking in our efforts to work with the community. I don't wish to hear it. You're not dealing with are we dealing with the massage parlors? We are not. You're not. We are. Not. I'm sorry. I thought. Thank you. When will you be due? We're not tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Any further public comment? Seeing nonmembers cast your vote. Councilman Austin. Motion carries seven zero. Item six recommendation to receive and file report from the Long Beach City Prosecutor's Office on the Johns Exposed program.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment for the period of October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019; and, authorize City Manager, or designee, to extend the agreement with the Fourth Street Business Improvement Association for a one-year term. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_10092018_18-0886

No. No. No. Okay. Okay. Now, your number two crackerjack, please. Any news item? Hearing number two report from economic development recommendation or receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution continuing the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Assessment for the period of October 1st, 2018 through September 30th, 2019, and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Fourth Street Business Improvement Association for a one year term. District two. Thank you. Yes, Mr.. Vice Mayor, members of the council, the staff report will be given by Eric Romero, our project management manager and the Economic Development Department. Honorable Vice Mayor and Members of the City Council. This item is the annual approval of the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area Annual Ongoing Assessment. The Fourth Street Business Improvement Association promotes and markets, the fourth Street Commercial Area, using funds generated through the assessment of businesses located in the Fourth Street Parking and Business Improvement Area to continue the assessment levy. State law requires that a public hearing be held on the proposed program and assessment on September 11th, 2018. The City Council approved a resolution granting approval of the annual report and set today's date for the public hearing. There are no proposed changes to the basis of assessment, nor significant changes to an proposed activity. Staff request that the City Council receive the supporting documentation. And to the record. Approve the resolution, continue the levy. Of the assessment, and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for one additional year. That concludes my report. Thank you. Any public comment in this? Please support. It's going to be. Very clear as the address as the circumstance has it. I sent to our council members an email over the weekend last week relative to an issue that touches upon this relative to traffic and parking in general and also illegal parking in bus spaces and so forth in the second District is prone to very serious problems. And if one needs to understand that hop the 151 bus at some time and moments after it turns the corner and gets into the ditch, these ones district are. Until you pass. Redondo What you've got are large trucks, including including 18 wheelers that have stopped in the middle of the road to offload. As well as smaller trucks. And it goes through the various different districts all the way down to, as I pointed out, as I referenced earlier, just beyond Redondo. So somebody has got to marshal those various different neighborhood group groups to work on the street isn't that way to start with. But then if you've got parking on both sides. And very few lots parking in the middle of the street, just stopping and offloading. It just intensifies the problem. So there really needs to be some intelligent leadership in that area to solve the problem. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hill. There's any comment from the council. I just want to thank staff for their work on this. And I know that at the last board meeting that I attended, we had a discussion around the parking lot at Fourth and Cherry and making sure that we are enforcing the hours and pay and everything. Can you speak to that briefly? Or some stuff. I know it might not be you, but. Sure, I believe that Public Works is responsible for ultimately enforcing parking in that area, and. I believe that someone should be following up shortly. Great. Thank you. Yes. Councilwoman Gonzalez. I'm just supportive of the item as well. So that's all. Thank you. Thank you. Now we move to the hearing. Number two, could you please. We need to take a vote. Please take a vote. I'm sorry. Excuse me. You couldn't take a vote in that.

Recommendation to request City Manager to establish information lines in multiple languages and also website landing pages in the three most commonly spoken languages (Spanish, Khmer, Tagalog), as described in the City's Language Access Policy (LAP); Direct City Manager to provide adequate staffing, resources and translation services to ensure that our monolingual residents are apprised of the most up-to-date information regarding the COVID-19 global pandemic, public health updates and City services; and, direct City Manager to report back on the feasibility and costs associated with permanently moving our translation services in-house to provide a faster response and update to our residents.

LongBeachCC_04142020_20-0306

Communication from Councilmember Aranda. Councilmember Pierce. Vice Mayor Andrews. Council Member Richardson. Recommendation to request city manager to establish information lines and multiple language. Direct City Manager to provide resources to ensure that our monolingual residents are apprized of the most up to date information regarding COVID 19. And direct city manager to report back on the feasibility and cost associated with permanently moving our translation services in-house. Okay, I'm going to. Before I turn this over to Councilmember Ranga, can I please have everyone meet their phones? We are getting some feedback. So if you can just unmute your phones, except for the person that's called on, that would be that would be great. Thank you so much. Customer Ranga. Thank you, Mayor. This sale came about because obviously we were in a in a very critical point of our city history right now. And basically, it's so very important that we maintain open lines of communication with all our residents. And one of the things that came up during the pandemic is that information was getting out there, but it wasn't a real time for those that were challenged by my English language. So we thought that it would be appropriate for the city if we can get quick time translations to all information to go out, including press releases and any notices so that all of our individuals will speak to Garlic Gourmet in Spanish and also get that information in real time. So I hope that I can get the support of my colleagues and the World Bank is going to join me in this item. As we know, it's very important that we maintain as open a communication with our residents as we possibly can. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Andrews. Thank you. First of all, I'd like to thank you for bringing stadium forward, because I think it's disappointing that this has to become an agenda item before we took serious action this week. And the city has prided itself in diversity and access, as we should always be forward thinking and proactive about our monolingual residents. This is an entire process of having a language access policy and we should not be throwing policies out the window because we are in a crisis and dismal translation is not enough. We can do better. We have not employed every skill and this is the time to be maximizing on our in-house skills and employ that. And I think the cosine is going to take him also. And let's not forget that we do not have an internet. Social media is to receive an update. Thank you again, Yolanda, for bringing this forward. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor. And I'm assuming customary anger that was in motion and vice mayor without a second. Yes. Okay. Councilmember Pierson. Thank you. Appreciate that. Further comments made by the other Cosigners and the Roberto. Thanks for bringing this up. You know, I want to to say I fully support this. I know that this is asking for a report to come back. And so just wanted to outline, I think making sure that we've got dedicated staffing and resources is really important. A permanent move to interpretation and translation in how I know with my office it has. We're fortunate to have a Spanish speaker and somebody that can do some translation. But I know sometimes that it's taken us a very long time to get translation material. And when we do try to do events or briefings with translation, it often is a week or two weeks later whenever that information is already. You know, outdated. And so I think the more that we can do this in-house is really important. Fully support having dedicated phone lines and Spanish commodes going as well as on the website and provide interpretation for all council meetings as well. So I'd be curious to have staff report back on what that would mean, particularly for our our Spanish speakers. I know that sometimes there's been times when we've had long holidays, right? So we recently had where we were closed on a Friday. Monday was also a holiday and so people weren't able to call in and get translations. So knowing that every council meeting would have translation, especially for our Spanish speakers, it would be really important. I look forward to the staff report coming back and again, thank my colleagues for bringing this item forward. Thank you. Customers in the US. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to say thank you to Councilmember Odinga for, again, bringing this item forward, I think is very, very important. I think that representing residents where the majority were a big majority of our residents speak other languages. I think it's important and like Councilmember Pearce said, in regards to having the the documents or information translated into Spanish in real time is very, very important, especially. You know, a perfect example is what we're going through right now. So I really think that it is very important to to have these in the house. So thank you. Councilmember Richardson. Segment. The mayor wanted to chime in quickly, say, I think this makes sense. Councilmember Rank Elevate says, in fact, this is not new in our city and we know that our health department is doing the best that they can right now. But they need. I think it's important that they hear from the council that, number one, we support what they're doing. And number two, we want to add more resources to make sure that, you know, communities that may not speak English was not their first language. They have a very you know, they are getting information and real time on how to stay educated and learned this this this virus. And I think this is just a moment that really underscores that language access really is essential to public health and health equity. Thank you, Councilmember. And just as a reminder to all we have, of course, was comments that people forwarded in the comments, which I know you're all aware of, you already received them all. But those are those. We have those, of course, for all these items. And so with that, let's look at what will work. Although, Madam Kirk, can you call the office district one? I district to. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. I. District six. By District seven, by district eight. Hello. District nine. I.

A bill for an ordinance designating certain properties as being required for public use and authorizing use and acquisition thereof by negotiation or through condemnation proceedings of fee simple, easement and other interests, including any rights and interests related or appurtenant to properties designated as needed for the Sand Creek Project. Grants the authority to acquire through negotiated purchase or condemnation any property interest as needed in support the Sand Creek Project, including easement interests, access rights, improvements, buildings, fixtures, licenses, permits and other appurtenances, located at 8101 East 40th Avenue in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-7-20.

DenverCityCouncil_07202020_20-0668

Yes, Madam President. I move the council bill to zero that 0668 be ordered published. Thank you, Councilman. May I get a second? Thank you, Councilwoman Sawyer. Questions or comments by members of Council Councilwoman said about the matter. Is there anybody here who can speak a little bit about this one? I just have some general questions about who the current owner is and what we're what we need ownership of this parcel for and why we need to use this route. Perfect. We have Lisa Lumley here. That evening with assistant director of Real Estate. This is owned by Max, and the parcel that we are looking at for this land acquisition ordinance is on the north side of the creeks and develop your property right now. That is your. Repeat what you said about the ownership. I'm sorry, Councilwoman. Can you repeat that? You were cutting out when you said who the current owner is. It is an LLC. They are doing business there on the south side of the property. We are looking at the north side of the creek. Oh, I'm going to apologize for my daughter. So this is not impacting your business at all. This is a development that will help support the flood mitigation. As. Well as protect the habitats that are there. And it allows them to restore some of the banks. We apologize. I've got somebody in front of my door. Got it. Or no. Way to have done the. Food. Grocery Council. I'm not going to try to move. Hold on a second. He really said. This is sensory aids. Do you want me to help answer that question, please? Hi. This is great. Yeah. Sensory AIDS Parks Resiliency Principle planner. I'll just step in and help out for a moment. So we have discussed with the current property owner several options to try to do the work, and we have not received any cooperation in working directly with the property owner. And is there a is there information you can disclose to us or is that private? I know it's all public record. So the property so his property is divided in half by Sand Creek, the portion to the south he is he owns and operates the portion to the north is actually sandwiched between two other parks owns property. And the almost entirely the property we are seeking to purchase is within the 100 year flood plain. So we have worked diligently with him and other the Floodplain Management Group and our development services to actually see if there were options for him to develop that land. And it's very limited what options are available based on some of the constraints around it being in the floodplain and grades. So this was kind of our last effort and trying to negotiate something with the property owner outside of this path. So eminent domain is a touchy one for me because, you know, our neighborhood currently lost a lot of property and generational wealth through the use of eminent domain. And so I'm wondering what would have happened, what would happen if the city didn't do this mitigation? And there was a 100 year flood event and this owner maintained ownership. So if he maintained ownership and didn't develop the property, then the property would serve its natural function and would absorb a lot of that flooding. And if he is able to find a way to develop the property and meet all of the permitting and requirements associated with developing within the 100 year flood plain, then he does have the ability to do so. However it could, he would have to show that that development does not adversely impact any of the adjacent properties. So there's there's definitely a process he would have to go through and it could take time for him to do that . As you know, it's best practices for floodplains to have the buffer needed in order to keep property out of our flood zones and make sure that we're providing that space for safe flood conveyance. So this is a goal of the city and of the Parks Department. And again, we've tried multiple times to negotiate one on one with him. I believe Lisa can attest to the fact that, you know, we've gone through multiple negotiations and we just haven't received any kind of middle ground on what. Options are available. But was it. In the floodplain when he purchased the property? Yes, it has been in the floodplain since it was originally mapped back in the seventies and the mile high flood district is in the process of updating that floodplain and current mapping is showing that his almost that full property property will remain in the 100 year flood plain. And so. And I just don't understand. If he doesn't don't want to engage why we're not just it's his property. Why why are we pursuing it since. All right. You may want to also address the funds that you have towards this project. Yes. And so the Mile High Flood District has provided some funding in the amount of $250,000 to help purchase the property. In addition, we have a $500,000 natural resource damages grant to restore the additional 30 acres surrounding this property. Again, this property, it's about five and a half acres we're seeking to purchase is literally a donut hole. So it's a hole in the middle of 30 acres of natural native open space along the sand creek. In addition, the Sand Creek Trail traverses well could traverse the property, but currently it goes up and around the property. And so we also have some partnership funds to reconstruct that trail. And I've worked very closely with the neighborhood and the Sand Creek Regional Partnership to develop funds for that project as well. It is a public benefited project. Currently, again, he has no ability to develop the property and 75 to 80% of that property is in the floodplain. So that is why we were seeking to purchase it. Is it possible for him to maintain ownership of the property and for you all to make the improvements, if you would, for a profit purpose anyway? So he would there's currently a metro wastewater, so a sanitary easement that runs along the same alignment of which we would install the trail. And so we've even discussed the opportunity to put in a or two to create an easement for not only that sanitary line, but also the trail alignment. And we haven't received, again, any, you know, agreement from the property owner to go that route either. Again, this is five acres of native open space in the middle of a pretty amazing wildlife corridor. So. It's this the department believes that this is the best use of the space to provide public access, connect habitat, provide that flood attenuation space for the safety of people and property, and to build that regional trail connection. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilman Herndon. Think about where I want. This is on first reading for publication, and that suggests my colleagues I serve on the sacred region of Greenway, the Denver portion of it. And if any of my colleagues are ever interested in and writing the entire Sand Creek, which abuts our neighboring municipalities, but particularly the Denver portion where you can see how the the trail has to go around where it currently is and see why I wholeheartedly support this. This is part of our Sand Creek Regional Greenway Master Plan that we had in 2016. And so I would certainly encourage my colleagues to support this on publication and on the final consideration if you want any more information. I'm happy to connect you with Beth Nobles, our executive director, and why we feel that this is so important. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Next up, we have Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to clarify again, because of a lot of emails that we've been getting on this particular issue, that this there was an implication in the emails that that we were taking people's residences and homes through this action. And I, as sincerely pointed out, this is vacant land in a floodplain that is un developable because it's on the north side of the creek. And in fact, it can't be accessed from either side because the city of Denver owns property on both sides, along with the master developer in Stapleton. And the only way that that the current owner could access it would be by constructing a bridge across Sand Creek, which, given the parcel sizes, is cost prohibitive. So I just wanted to let folks know who might be watching, who sent us those emails that this does not involve anybody's home, it's vacant land, it's in the floodplain , and it's part of the Sand Creek Regional Trail. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. See no other folks in the queue for questions or comments. Madam Secretary, roll call. Actually, I vote. Please. I just want to I understand fully what we're trying to use this property for, and I understand the reluctance of the property owner to negotiate with us on principle. I don't think that I could ever support forcibly taking someone's land unless it was being returned to the people it was stolen from, specifically on Sand Creek. And so I think it's important for us to acknowledge that while there may be a public benefit for this project, we are still forcibly taking land instead of improving it. The the gentleman or the person who owns probably is well aware of the fact that they cannot develop this land, and it doesn't seem that they are holding onto it for the purpose of development. And so I think there are other tools that could be explored. There are ways that we could make the improvements that are necessary and still have and prohibit development on that land. We have Park Hill Golf Course. Case in point, as an example of how we use those tools in other situations. And so I think that there should be other tools explored before we forcibly take someone's land, regardless of how much we say we need it, when we're not willing to forcibly take land for literally life and death situations like housing people. So I'm a no on this and I hope some of my colleagues can understand why. Thank you, Councilwoman. All right. Thanks for catching me. Before we did the vote for your comments, Councilman Hines. Thank you, Madam President. One other comment I would make is that sometimes we do things that are in the to support protected classes, like there is a upcoming there is an eminent domain to put in programs. So for people with disabilities and and so I would want to make a distinction of just to go on the record why it might be important or interesting for the good of the community for us to take an eminent domain and maybe in some situations for the it is for that. But I think I'll just leave it at that. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Sawyer. Thank you, Madam President. I think Councilman Hines draws a really important distinction there. And I think it's something I think Councilwoman CdeBaca makes a really important point as well. So I will be voting to move this forward tonight because I think it's worth you know, this is first publication. It's worth moving it forward to a final vote next week. But I don't know that that means that I will support it next week. I'm going to need to think about this a little bit more. But I do think that tonight I will move it forward because it deserves our full consideration next week. So thanks. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. All right. Last call for any final comments. Seeing Councilman Flynn. I'm sorry. I just wanted to point out that the city is not allowed to spend public dollars improving private property. So one of the reasons that we need to acquire the property is to do the improvements we can't we can't improve our private land. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. All right. And this is a reminder, this is on first reading. And so folks will have another chance at this next week. Madam Secretary, roll call. No. Clark. All right. When I. Go more, I. You've actually lost now about a second since I heard it. I. I. Cashmere. I can eat. I. Sandra. I. Sawyer, I. Torres. I black. Right. Madam President. Hi. Madam Secretary. Closed the voting and announce the results. You have a nice one day. All right. 11 days council bill 668 has been ordered published. Next up, Madam Secretary, please put up on the screen the next bill. Councilman Herndon, will you please put council bill 592 on the floor for final passage?

Recommendation to receive and file a report on the Restaurant Retention Strategy and provide input and policy direction to staff on economic relief strategies for independent, full-service restaurants, with an emphasis on equity, designed to improve the economic survival of restaurants impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic across Long Beach. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_12082020_20-1229

Let's do 68 since it's restaurant related and then we'll go back to the dashboard and the health order issue and COVID. So the 68. Then, then 48 and 65. Report from Economic Development Recommendation Receive and file a report on the restaurant retention strategy citywide. Mr. Modica. Here. Mr. Keisler can give a brief staff report of the committee's recommendations. Excellent honorable mayor and members of the city council. Thanks so much. As you know, the Economic Development and Finance Committee of the council takes items from the council to review and recently had a meeting on December 1st. Went through some of the background of actions taken by council since August 18th to support the restaurant sector in Long Beach. Of course, there's a lot of survey data that we presented to the Economic Development and Finance Committee. We recently had an economic forum as well to see just how hard this industry in particular has been hit, both businesses and workers, and how it's impacted employment. In L.A. County. Almost 200,000 jobs lost in just the last few months. Know in Long Beach, of course, over 25,000 of our unemployment claims are from accommodation and food services. This is our largest group by far in terms of raw numbers and percent of total claims. And so we know that both business owners and workers are suffering in this industry. Now, the core components of our restaurant retention strategy, we looked at eight different core components that we've seen and plans ranging from research to technical assistance and some of the other things that we've already implemented as a city. But the committee really wanted the council to focus on key performance measures, things like the percent of restaurants retained, the percent of jobs preserved, promoting equity across the city, improving the actual business and sector resilience, assessing of an individual business, health and strength, and then improving outreach and education so that we have a better ongoing communication with business owners. And then in terms of the committee recommendations, adding to those core components I just mentioned, there were seven key areas that have to do with developing a really comprehensive and equitable restaurant retention strategy, not just a reactive one full of activities, expediting application and approval processes, approving an urgency ordinance related to delivery fees. Adopting a resolution to prioritize restaurants in our next round of federal stimulus. Providing regular public reporting on the distribution of federal stimulus funds like the CARES Act, and specifically identifying any available funding that we might reallocate to the industries like restaurants that are experiencing the greatest impacts. Expediting and simplifying the business grant application that businesses have to go through to access those funds and reduce the documentation that's needed just to apply, and then having shovel ready projects in anticipation of future federal funding. We know that we've got to have a strategy that has projects ready to go to be funded the moment those dollars are ready. So finally, in terms of next steps for a restaurant retention strategy discussed with the committee will be starting tonight just incorporating those city council priorities that you would like as a staff to add to this this plan and identifying available funding at the local level, taking action now on urgent items and things we can do either at the administrative level or with city council approval in the coming weeks. We need to complete a research report using an industry expert that knows the restaurant industry. Continuing our community outreach in our industry input. Adapting our emergency policies and urgency ordinances. And advocating for policies and funding from state and local or federal government. So our hope is, is that we can do things right now while we're developing this strategy. With that, I'll turn it back over to the mayor and city council for your input. Constable Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thanks. Thanks, John, for the presentation. Thanks for the many members that Economic Development Finance Council member Mongo Guzman Turanga. Not a healthy amount of discussion. You know, some themes that were were brought up during the committee meeting I think needs to be highlighted here. It was a lot of discussion about scope, accountability, transparency and expectations. We know that there are significant losses the restaurants are doing. And the reality is a lot of the programs we put forward there, we've done as best, the best we can. But it's not going to make hold all the losses the residents, the restaurants have taken. However, when we think about the policy changes we can make, for example, the committee made a recommendation to you know, we made a motion back in the committee, talked about third party platforms, delivery fees back in May and June. Still hasn't happened, but in the committee meeting we came back and made a recommendation, bring the council to say, let's do this with urgency now with delivery fees of 15%. Those are some of the things that can make a difference in terms of the bottom line now. So with the restaurant retention strategy, what we're really interested in are short term, immediate term and long term things that we can do to help make make the, you know, how actually have a plan to make our make our survivability, our survival rate of restaurants a bit higher. And so the first thing I want to do is obviously, I'm going to make make a motion to accept all the recommendations here. But I want to ask about specifically one of the parts related to the the third party platforms. The committee made a recommendation to council to give direction to create an ordinance with urgency capped at 15 at 15%. Mr. Chrisler, can you speak to that? Absolutely so. So we have actually taken this up as part of the Economic Development Commission. That was the initial review in in our July agenda. And we actually talked with restaurant owners who are experiencing this challenge to understand, you know, what the what the costs are, how it impacts their business and their bottom line. So we now have some research. We're going to be sharing that with the city attorney and to to identify what would be in a similar ordinance in some of the other cities nearby. And then if we can bring that back to council, our goal would be in the the first part of January. Of course, we will need to review that and put some language together. The city attorney obviously would need direction from council. So we would have to just sequence that process in a way that is acceptable. So we're ready to go with our research and we'll we'll communicate to you what those next steps are. Fantastic. And and so, you know, as I wrap up with with my motion as two things, it's one, I think this fits very well with the motion we just received from the mayor. We talked about that. These are the strategies you've done the research. We looked at the National Restaurant Best Practices Plan. We've engaged healthy lobbies. We engage with our businesses and we have a plan that we can stand behind. And so I move these recommendations, and I also, within that motion, am requesting that the city attorney work with the with the Economic Development Department to come back with an ordinance that caps restaurant fees and urgency ordinance, having restaurant fees at 15%. And so that would be my motion and and thank. Thank you. I think I have a second by councilman. Mango. Mango. Yes. Thank you. I just wanted to kind of speak again to how important the outdoor small business infrastructure relief will be that I discussed in an early item when I was spoken to the mayor, Mr. Chrysler. Mr. MODICA. And I guess my question to Mr. Heisler is now that you are. Headed in that direction. What kind of timeline do you see before businesses can apply for and receive this relief? Council member. So last week's meeting with the committee was really helpful in advancing some of these recommendations, which we've now brought back with some potential options for the city manager to take a look at. Of course, we need to coordinate across our different departments to make sure that we identify which funds are available in the existing Appropriation for CARES Act. And so we should have something available for City Council in writing over the next couple of days, and I hope would be that we would be able to make sure that those funds are committed by December 30th, given that this is CARES Act funding. So we believe that that timeline is is possible. We also believe that we have a regular communication with the businesses in the restaurants that have outdoor commerce going on right now and have the permits in place and have also already incurred costs related to those improvements. So we believe this could be a program that could move very quickly. We just need to get all the technicalities in writing for city leadership to to review. Wonderful. Thank you. And when will we be receiving the financial report requested at last Tuesday's meeting? Absolutely. So we we have it for the economic support programs. We obviously track all of our our financial information. That's the same on the same timeline. In a matter of days, we will pull that in, likely communicate that information also in a memo format and provide that to the city manager. So that's available for for council review. But we have that information and we're happy to provide it. And what steps were taken when the request was made to ensure that that information was provided timely. Because it seems like it's been seven days that we don't have that information yet. And it seems like from a position of a budget manager that and again, I know this is not just your division, but if we have $40 million that it needs to be committed and extended by December 31st. We approved this in May, and one would think that we would have budget status reports and updates on a regular basis so that this council could have made decisions at this meeting. I'm related to. Underutilization or underspending by some of our contract providers so that we could have made sure to put that money into the hands of others. I was glad to hear from Mr. Modica and we've had several conversations. I just think it's important to to kind of have this dialog again that. But that we won't be leaving any money on the table. I think that that's important. I think that when there's any dollar available, the Long Beach workers and Long Beach businesses, we need to make sure we have it. But I would just strongly encourage and I wanted to make the statement publicly that whenever we receive funding, that there should be at least monthly updates available, not necessarily published to the Council, but available upon request. Should there be a need to make a pivot and I know we're in a a new economic time, but I just want to make sure as the next set of funding comes down, that those those controls are in place. Because businesses and workers are counting on us. And then lastly, I spoke with a member of the press who asked about some of the. Ideas that are brought forward in this recommendation. But it's my understanding in talking to Mr. Keisler that the strategy as a whole would really be part of what we're asking the contractor to do. Your council member, too. So the the we're asking an industry expert to to review our our economic data related to to restaurant activity. So the consultant will provide an economic analysis of how we compare as Long Beach to maybe some of the regional and national standards, those retention rates, which the percentage of of these businesses that are at risk. So we'll really be looking for guidance on the economic information. But then when it comes to developing the strategy, the staff will actually be taking the lead on that. That's something we can do in-house with the input that's being provided, of course, by the consultant, but also by our industry experts, our local businesses. We've been meeting with them regularly and ultimately receiving their feedback as well. So that that report, the strategy itself, will be prepared in-house. And that will be back to us in January. February. What's our timeline? Yeah, absolutely. So so our expectation is that we can have our our or outline our draft report in in January. And our goal is, of course, we're going to be talking about the economic recovery strategy. We want to have that that done and ready to go as soon as the the second quarter of 2021, because, as you know, we move forward with health orders and in the COVID situation being stabilized to have shovel ready projects as soon as business can resume or as soon as federal dollars are available means we've got to move quickly. So that doesn't mean that we can't bring you one off items, urgency items like the cap on delivery fees or like the restructuring of a grant program. Those we'll bring to you as soon as those ideas are available and we can get them on the agenda. The overall strategy that's waiting for some of this economic information, some of the economic equity studies that we'll talk about it next council meeting on Tuesday. Next Tuesday, that that just is going to take a little bit more time for that data to arrive. Councilwoman, your 5 minutes is. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, I have. Who is here. This is Councilwoman. I'm sorry. Councilmember Aranda. And then councilmembers in the House. Thank you, Eric. And I want to commend the economic model for bringing this forward. We had a great meeting last week. A lot of great ideas are out there and they're really working hard and trying to deal with this COVID 19 pandemic and getting projects ready for implementation once we are over this. So I want to thank John and his staff for all the work that you've been doing. It's been creative, somewhat frustrating. I can understand that because they are there are limits to what they can bring forward and the council to consider. So I'm fully supportive of Councilmember Retreat into motion. Thank you and good. Get support on the rest of the city council. Thank you. Country councilmember, actually councilwoman in the House. Thank you, Mayor. I also would like to thank the Economic Development Department. Thank you, John, for all that you and your team are doing to help our businesses. I know that the businesses in my district have benefited greatly from all the programs that that you've been putting forward. So I'm really excited about this. This restaurant retention recommendation that you guys are making on this program, I think is going to be very important moving forward. One of the things that I wanted to ask Councilmember Rex Richardson is if with your motion, maybe you could if it would be okay to include maybe what the feasibility would be of those 33/3 party charges that are being made through delivery services and what the feasibility could be if the city could actually subsidize those. That 15% cap for our, you know, maybe getting some funds down to us. Would that be something that maybe we can include in in that? Council member. I've become unclear on on what it is. Let me tell you what I think I heard and said. We're going to direct staff to come back with the cap of 15%, but also create a program to subsidize restaurants so that we. May not necessarily like create a program, but maybe bring back information on the feasibility if it's even possible to be able to help out the restaurants with that 15% cap. Because I know that even even the big restaurants, but also including the smaller restaurants, that fee can be really hard on them, especially right now when we're in this economic credit crisis. So I was wondering if maybe. I think I think I think staff in. Look at that. So I think it's what I'm hearing is, you know, because what we're talking about is the fees that the restaurants are charged by the third party platforms for instituting a cap simply because, one, they're they're dependent on those now they don't have indoor or outdoor dining. So, yes, we should cap it. But if you're talking about relief for that, I that that exists. I think that to be within the realm of how, you know, whatever support funding we have, you know, we can put that in the mix. I agree. So I think so. I'm I'm okay with accepting accepting that feasibility that question before born feasibility on it. Thank you. Thank you. I think that it's very important moving forward. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Pierce. Thank you. I think most of the comments were were said before me that I wanted to make. I fully support putting a cap on that third party platform. I know in Long Beach we've got a lot of local places that are trying to to do those deliveries for our restaurants. And being able to see more of that during this difficult time would be great. Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember. Did you guys not hear my comments? That's right. No, I did. I did. I'm just waiting. I wasn't sure you continue. Our staff was waiting on something else. No, I didn't ask any questions. I just gave my input and said thank you. Okay. Let me I don't I don't have any other councilmembers lined up yet, so why don't we just go ahead and do another public comment on this? Yes, we have De Shukla. However, if you go on file just like the stuff my support for, which should hopefully become a model program. Thank you all very much for working on this. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Okay. Richard Clarke. Yes. That concludes public comment. They had somebody else. And I guess there there's no. Okay. So that we'll we'll close then do the roll call, please. And the woman's in the house. I had to remember Pierce. And to remember Pierce. Councilwoman Price. I. COUNTERMAN Supernanny. All right. That's one manga. I. I saw Anders. I. That's Miranda. I come from an Austin. I can't remember Richardson. All right, ocean cares. Okay. Thank you. We've had a request from our vice mayor who has to head out soon here to move up his item, which is 64, and then we'll go back to the agenda.

Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute an agreement with Social Bicycles, Inc., of Brooklyn, NY, and any necessary amendments, for the purchase of bicycles, station racks, and associated parts and equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach Bike Share Program, in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000, for a period of three years, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and Increase appropriations in the Transportation Fund (SR 182) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $1,500,000, offset by Proposition A funds available. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03132018_18-0243

Stacey. Motion carries out 28, please. Report from recommendation to adopt resolution to execute an agreement with social. Bicycles. For the purpose purchase of bicycles, station racks and associated parts and equipment for the expansion of the Long Beach bike share program in an amount not to exceed 1,500,000 citywide. Kate, There's a most interesting and I see a couple of folks queued up. So do you want to a quick staff report on this? Craig back. Thank you, Mayor. Members City Council. We're excited to bring this item before you. I think many of you, if you haven't actually ridden one of the blue bikes, are very familiar with our bike share program. It's been a successful program. We have roughly 400 bikes deployed through primarily the downtown and coastline areas of the city. This request before you this evening would allow us to purchase probably in the in the order of 500 more bikes. And our next expansion would essentially take it up through Bixby Knolls in the north Long Beach following our bike boulevard routes. So we view the bike sharing, the Bike Boulevard project and expansion kind of going hand in hand. And so we're asking for council approval tonight to allow us to move forward with purchase from the vendor, which is S.O.B. bicycles. That concludes my staff report. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. Bike share shares coming uptown. That's it. Thank you. Councilmember Pierce. Yes. I am excited to see the bike share expanded. I did want to see. Are there any smaller bikes? I'm five one. I'm not even a kid. And it's really hard for me to ride those bikes. Do they have a smaller bike? Councilmember I'd be happy to show you how the seat. I know how the seat adjusts and when I adjusted all the way down, it's a challenge of it's a challenge for me. It might be a challenge for a junior high kid that wants to go on a ride with their parents. You know, all seriousness, we are actually working with a vendor for a couple of things. And what we would like to introduce into the system are tricycles as well. Not I don't want to try. Not not little people off of tricycles, but adult tricycles because some people have asked for something that's more stable and something with a basket. So we're looking at tricycles. We're also looking at e-bikes as well. So electric. Bikes. I will ask him something specific for. You know, people in between, you know. You know, he said tricycles. Yeah, adult tricycles. I like it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Supernanny. Thank you. I just spotted some e comments here. And I guess for the purpose of telling the audience that we read the comments even at 12:12 a.m.. But there is you know, I'm sorry, but it's the comment was no measure eight funds should be spent on these bicycle. So I think the confusion is Proposition eight versus Measure A. Mr. Beck, could you explain that, please? Yes, Councilmember, thanks for bringing that up. That is correct. We are not asking for approval to utilize Measure $8. Proposition $8 are transportation dollars that the city receives through its partnership with L.A. Metro, and they're targeted specifically for transportation projects . So it's really quite different from Measure A in that is, is it would you call it like a reimbursement or. What would it be called? The city receives a share of the Proposition $8, which again are transit oriented dollars that can only be spent on transit projects. Measure as you're very familiar as a tax the city receives, it is essentially general fund dollars. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Just really quickly, Craig, since we're on the issue of tricycles, thinking of our little ones. Councilmember Price had mentioned maybe a unicycle. I'm kidding. But actually I have thought about. Children or families with children like my own. And we often think of adding the little one and putting I don't know if the the addition for children. I don't know how we incorporate that, but I've seen that in other cities. So I don't know if we're even perusing that, but it'd be a really good one for us to add maybe down the line if we could, just throwing it out there. Thank you. Thank you, Counsel. Actually, Vice Mayor Richardson. But that break does bring up a good a good question. I know. Is it true that people under 18 can't do can't check on a bike? Is that true? So one of the things that we're looking at is modifying both our rules and our rate structure. Okay. We believe it's important in our community to add a rate program for those that are lower income. So that is something we'll we will be bringing back to council. And when we bring forward that rate adjustment, we'll also be talking about who has the opportunity to utilize the bikes, essentially. A vice mayor has to do with being an adult. So if you're 18, you can sign up for a program yourself. If not, you would need an adult. Got it. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? None. Please cast your votes. As we move on to the next item, we officially have passed the land use element meeting from last week on time, which which I didn't think was possible, but we always find a way.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance amending Title 28, Article IV of the Revised Municipal Code of the City and County of Denver regarding the prohibition of discriminatory practices in purchase and rental housing transactions on the basis of source of income. Prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on buyer’s or renter’s source of income. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-18-18. Amended 7-30-18 to exempt people who rent out a single unit from the prohibitions in the bill.

DenverCityCouncil_08062018_18-0788

I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting. Announce the results. 3913 I as comfortable 775 has passed. Madam Secretary, could you please put the next item up on our screens? And, Councilwoman Gilmore, will you put Council Bill 788 on the floor. And move that Council Bill 18 Dash 078, as amended, be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded questions or comments by members of Council. Councilman Quinn. Thank you, Mr. President. I call this out in order to vote no, as I did last week on on first reading. And I believe that this is a very good initiative, but even very good initiatives need to have the devil taken out of their details. And I believe that we're on a path to do that. I believe that the effective date of this ordinance providing for nondiscrimination in in rental housing and for sale housing based on source of income is is not effective until January 1st. So there still is time to chase the devil out of the details that I see in here. But as it stands right now, I just called it out to vote no, as I did last week, because I don't believe it's soup yet. And I think that because we have until January 1st to look into some of the issues where there may we may actually be causing some harms in the in the attempt to do good. I just wanted to vote now. No, now. Before. One final thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn, Councilwoman Cannick. Thank you so much. Mr. President, I've had conversations with many of my colleagues and heard from more of the community since our last public hearing. So a couple of you and a couple of the community had asked me to provide some updates just on this bill. So one wanted to do that. First of all, we had some questions for the Denver Housing Authority last week, and they got back to us with the question of how many vouchers get expired after the 60 day period because they're, for whatever reason, unable to find housing. And their answer was about 308 of the 1371 issuances they've had were expired. So that's about 22%. Remember, if you add that to the 12% of folks that are leaving Denver with their voucher, it's looking like, you know, we've got about 34%, if I'm doing my math right, folks who are struggling to find housing in Denver with vouchers. So I think that's an important fact. Many of you wanted more data. And I just wanted to say for a minute a little bit about the relationship between the city and DOJ, because I think there might have been some confusion about this. Denver Housing Authority did not propose this bill. They didn't come to me and suggest we run it. This really came from the community. It came from best practices. They are a quasi governmental organization. They are separate legally from the city. And so we don't govern how they administer their programs. And in fact, in many cases, we can't govern how they run their programs because they are subject to federal rules provided by the Housing and Urban Development. So, for example, the number of days that folks have to search for housing is a standard established by HUD. So there are many ways that we might, you know, use our our collective energies to provide assistance to DHS. For example, we already have a meeting scheduled. I described this last week, but we're working on a meeting where we might say to them, is there something our pique team or our technology team might be able to do in order to help you track data, for example, and on what the time period is between getting an approval for a voucher and then when someone or applying a unit applying to be approved for a voucher and then the move in date. So we will see what we can offer as a as a partner. But we can't legislate the way that they do business, both because of HUD and because of their separate legal authority. And I just in part, you know, data is one of these things. No one has ever asked them for this data in this way before. And so I know that there's frustration, but I also just I feel a little sensitive to folks holding them accountable for something we've never before asked them for and being mad that they don't have it. So I'm just putting that out there so that folks really understand what the relationship is. The second update I wanted to provide, we heard from a number of landlords last week and, you know, many of them shared some of their concerns with the program over the weekend. I know many of us got at least one or two emails from landlords who had different experiences, who reported their on time payments and the fact that they have a lot of success renting with vouchers. And I also, when I was out at my Denver days events mostly in northeast Denver this weekend, I heard from a couple of landlords who pulled me aside and said, you know, that they were very supportive. So just wanted and wanted me to share that, that there were these varieties of opinions. Lastly, regardless of whether or not we have total agreement in our community about whether or not people can stay in business and rent units using all of these sources of income, it's clear that we do have questions about a second line of defense in the case that maybe a security deposit doesn't cover all the damage I committed in the beginning to the landlords and the associations that I met with that I would do the serious research into what these funds that provide a little extra assurance looked like and what the best practices were. I don't believe in stopping it, just looking at how much money people put into the fund or what they're named. I went the next step and my staff, Paul Kyle, went and talked to them about how many claims they actually had and whether they were effective and whether they were working. And so that research got done last Monday and it shows that the funds are not heavily needed. But as we discussed, they may be very important for the individuals who make the claims. So we did share that research with the mayor's office and the departments. They've had a minute to talk about it and I just wanted to see if Skye Stewart wanted to provide a brief update on where the administration is that I know some folks would have wanted us to legislate a fund here at the dais tonight for charter reasons. We don't appropriate money in bills like this in the middle of the year. We can only do that through the budget. But I took seriously my commitment to work on this. I have followed up on it every day. And and I'm really pleased that the administration has similarly taken time to to look and review the research. Sure. Skye Stewart, mayor's office, as councilwoman, said, she provided the research she has done to our office. And the mayor had a chance to take a look at that and has. Now directed our housing team to look into what a fund might look like in terms of parameters for its use size, the oversight where that funding might come from. So our team is starting to do that research and anticipate coming back with some thoughts on how that might work, but definitely open to moving forward with an idea like that. So I want to thank the administration for for their willingness to keep working on this. And with that, I would like to encourage my colleagues to support this ordinance tonight. I think the evidence is clear that we have folks who cannot use the housing assistance they need in our city. We have survey two separate survey data is demonstrating that there is a need, that people are being turned away from these sources of income. We heard testimony from folks who are experiencing this. And because this is something that we have the ability to deter, I believe it is our obligation to help to meet more of the housing needs of our residents who are struggling. So with that, I urge a yes vote tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Gage. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I am going to support this. I even though I'm voting differently than Councilman Flynn, I agreed with all of your comments. Councilman Flynn, however, I am voting for it. I do have some concerns. We've all heard from a lot of landlords, particularly concerned about some small scale landlords. And with as with any law that we pass, there's always the risk of unintended consequences. So I want us to monitor this. We talked last week about in a year from now getting a report with feedback from tenants, from Denver Housing Authority, from landlords and the apartment association. So I think that will be really important to evaluate how it's gone. A couple of the things I would want to look out for is that. Is there any sort of additional financial burden on smaller scale landlords that would force them to increase their rents or even sell their investments? I talked to some people and they were here last week who actually owned some rentals in some hot neighborhoods and. If it's too much of a burden for them, then they might end up selling and we are going to get some housing that's not affordable. So those are the kinds of things I'm concerned about. That said, I am supporting it and thank you for doing all that hard work, Councilwoman. Thank you, Councilwoman. Black Councilman. Thank you, Mr. President. Just to clarify with the council we klipsch, it's my understanding that the bill really just knows no guarantee to Section eight applicants for housing. It just it gives all the income for section eight candidate be treated equally so that they're an equal basis with all other applicants for available housing so that a landlord for legitimate business reasons can choose whoever he was among the applicants available. We hope that this will help, you know, Section eight to help us find more housing. But the main thing, it doesn't deter the rights and privileges of the landlord to select any applicant that he wants or a legitimate business reason . Is that correct? That is correct. Councilman, I think the simplest way to describe this is it is an equal opportunity. It is not a guaranteed outcome. So everyone has the opportunity to seek housing, but it doesn't guarantee the outcome. I know there was a claim made. You know that if you only had one applicant, you have no choice but to accept them. That's simply not what the law states. The law states that you can't turn someone away for a discriminatory reason. If you have a legitimate business reason and you're screening your tenants. That would all be investigated. And nothing in the law says that, you know, if you're down to one, you have to you have to rent it. It's all about the reasoning and what the legitimate business purposes are. So this is not about guaranteeing who you rent to. It's just ensuring that everyone has an opportunity. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. New Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to indicate my support for the bill tonight. I believe that the work that has taken place looking into the fund is very important. I support that and appreciate the work the administration has done in directing our Office of Economic Development to identify resources and parameters for how a program would work . I heard loud and clear the information that perhaps in other cities the funds are being highly utilized. But I think to operate in good faith with our apartment owners, property owners that may experience damages to their property that are in excess of the deposits that we should have a fund available. Obviously, if it's not being utilized, we could look at how to redirect those dollars. But I think having that in place is is very important. I appreciate the work that's been done by Councilwoman McKinney, the Colorado Apartment Association or apartment association and Metro Denver, I think is it's more properly known, DHS, for for your role in this process as well and appreciate the the briefing that you gave us around the process and how you all have worked to try to share that up and make it more timely in terms of approving people and and getting the money out the door to the landlords. I think this is critically important as one of the many steps that we're taking to try to address housing affordability for people in this city who are struggling. I know that oftentimes it will take somebody several years to finally get approved for that DACA voucher. And they're so excited because they've been waiting for this for years. And then they take it and they go to different places. And if they can't get into housing, that's a problem. So this should help to some degree in solving part of that problem. Again, it doesn't guarantee anybody anything, but it's again, one more tool in the toolbox that says if you were the only applicant and you were not considered for that housing, then you have a claim. You can you can file a discrimination claim. But, you know, I think we have a collaborative environment in this city where we have worked to. Find a way to close the gaps with so many of the different programs that we have seen brought forward. And this one, I think is going to help tremendously so that one can each thank you for your work on this . Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you, Mr. President. I, too, appreciate very much the work that Councilman Kennish has done on this, particularly to help everybody find suitable living expenses. I've just sort of feeling the way that Councilman Flynn does that I'm not sure that the initiative is fully baked yet. We had an amendment just last week. We have suggestions that there be a fund for damage deposits that don't cover damage, although I think that's of great concern since it is the renter that pays the damage deposit. And how would we choose this kind of renter to help the landlord with but not another kind of renter to help the landlord with? We learned that it looked like it might not be possible to pre-qualify landlords so that they might be eligible for taking vouchers and maybe there would be a way to pre-qualify them so they wouldn't have to wait that even the two weeks or sometimes the month. I just feel like there's lots of things that can be fixed with this. And I hear what Councilman Kennish has said, that we could work on fixing it, but it reminds me of some of the initiatives we've had that that do pass. And then we have to go in and make sure that they'll work with what the city can do and what it can't do. I would very much like to support the concept. I believe in, you know, having complete equality on being able being able to rent a place. But I'm not sure we've got all the. I's dotted and the t's crossed in this one, so I won't be supporting it tonight though I am very much in support of the concept and look forward to perhaps improving it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I i office next to councilman. Can I sit next to the councilwoman on the dais? And I work with her and councilman new in the Homeless Housing and Homelessness Working Group. And I believe this bill, whether it's fully baked, I believe it's sufficiently baked. And I'm certain that the. Need. Is is fully baked. And we have people in need of housing that are being discriminated against because of source of income that I don't believe is appropriate. I very much hope that that our landlords will hang with us as we iron out the remaining details. You know, at the end of last week's meeting, I stood. Here for for. Quite a while after the meeting with three landlords, relatively small scale landlords, who said, we don't care about the fund we have insurance for for excessive damages. Now, I know it's not that simple for everybody, so I'm glad the administration continues to to look at what is appropriate. And my guess is we'll get there. I know that Mr. Guerrero and the DEA are committed to doing everything that they can do to become as efficient as possible in the administration of their functions. So, you know, like I say, the need is is so obvious. And, you know, we. We looked at a program recently, the live program where we're assisting our apartment owners with subsidies of some vacant apartments to help people find places to live that they can afford. So I hope that that partnership can move further along in this particular case. So I'm very pleased to support this tonight and committed to with my colleague to continuing to iron out what needs to get ironed out. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Cashman. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President, I. In this in this environment. I think I think to myself and and this environment that that we are in in Denver, in the challenges that we're facing with the lack of affordability in the housing crisis that we have here amidst a booming economy. I don't know how I could not support this in an environment where discrimination is rampant again. I don't know how I would not be able to stand up for this. We have to stand up for this. This is an easy step. Um. In a much more complex issue of vouchers and modern vouchers, the modern voucher program, the modern landlord tenant program or environment that's out there, that's not what this bill is set to to fix. This is a bill isn't a comprehensive housing plan bill. This is. Making sure that no matter the source of income, if their rent can be paid, you shouldn't be able to discriminate against her. I do not like the stigma. I do not like the characterization. I don't like the the stereotyping of so many folks who are who have lived in Denver, have always lived in Denver, have called this city home. And now they are struggling to continue to call this city home. Here is a good idea, a best practice around the country. It's a it's it's something that we can implement in Denver. And it's it's it's a step in the right direction, a very important step. So I am absolutely supportive of this. And I encourage my. Colleagues to. To really think about that and bake on that. Bake on the idea that the status quo was not acceptable in Denver. Take on the idea of there is no regulation. Denver. What kind of Denver would that be? So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilman, do you back up? Oh, I think I forgot one thing. General, I just wanted to mention to the in addition to what Councilwoman Soares was talking about with the HUD regulations. I just want to voice input put on the record from the committee. We really think there really needs to be a meeting with HUD and bring them down here to talk about some of these issues of making improvements. I'm especially concerned by where the 60 day expiration of a voucher says 22% of all the people who have approved vouchers have expired after 60 days. And it may be in this tight housing market is very hard to find a suitable housing in 60 days. So I really think they'd appreciate if you could express that to the HUD officials. And somehow we need we've done doing our job, trying to help. And I think they just need to help us make changes that will improve the situation. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. French. Thank you, Kels. Councilman. Councilman Flynn, your backup. Thank you, Mr. President. Just to come full circle. I'm reminded that last week, during the public hearing, we did hear from Denver Housing Authority that all of the vouchers, that all the housing choice vouchers that they are authorized are being utilized. So it's not a question of if people aren't finding housing, it's because all of our vouchers are being used. And I'm reminded also that in the update we got today, that of the vouchers that have expired, we don't know the reason why they were expired. Mr. Guerrero told me before the meeting that it could be because of family situation or finding other suitable accommodations or some other such reason that that the vouchers have expired. But the fact that all of the vouchers that we're authorizing can fund are being utilized tells me that we do have some time before January 1st to to think this through and to come up with a mitigation and to work with those for whom this actually may be working a harm. Otherwise, it's entirely a good idea, and I support it completely. And if it were if it were balanced on both sides, I would gladly vote yes tonight, and I would gladly vote yes before January 1st on any sort of mitigation amendments that we can make to it. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. I'll just add my thanks, Councilwoman, for your leadership and getting us here. I'm happy to support this bill tonight. Madam Secretary, roll call. Flynn. No. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Carnage. Lopez. I knew. Ortega Sussman. Black eye. Brooks Espinosa. Hi, Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 11 eyes. Two days. We get everybody. I think we're missing one. Oh, no, that's it. Sorry. Well, have a nice two days, Constable. 788, as amended, has passed. Madam Secretary, will you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilwoman Gilmore, we need a motion to take out of order.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2900 South University Boulevard in Wellshire. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at 2900 South University Boulevard from S-SU-F to S-SU-F UO-3 (adding conservation overlay to existing zoning) with Waiver in Council District 4. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-26-18.

DenverCityCouncil_08062018_18-0668

These photographs show some development around the site, including the there on the left hand side of the screen, in the middle of the parking lot directly to the south and the church. And then on the on the top right hand side of the screen is the cluster development to the northeast of the property. And then finally at the bottom right, there is a picture, a historic photograph of the of the structure itself. As I mentioned, the C f zone district allows suburban houses and it calls for deep setbacks and lower lot coverage that would typically characterize suburban development. And then this proposal also proposes establishing the U. O three historic structure use overlay at the site. The historic structure use overlays typically applies applied to sites and only is applicable to sites that are two structures that have been designated as a landmark by the city and county, and it permits limited commercial uses with the goal of encouraging the preservation of historic structures in neighborhoods. Those uses include limited office uses, not not including medical or dental offices, art studios and bed and breakfast lodging. And the overlay establishes limitations on parking signs and other events to to around events at the site to minimize impact on surrounding properties. There are quite a few neighborhood associations that are registered neighborhood organizations that consider the site to be within their boundaries. All have been notified several times through this process. We've not received any official public comment from Arnaud's. We did receive one appraisal document with a short email introduction from a neighbor and it has been included in the staff report. As you're aware, to adopt a rezoning, the Council must find that these five criteria in the Denver zoning code are met. With regard to the first consistency with adopted plans, this property is affected by two plans the comprehensive plan and Blueprint Denver. This proposed rezoning would further several comprehensive plan policies aimed at incentivizing the preservation of historic structures and landmarks in the city. The blueprint future land use proposed for the site is single family residential and it is an area of stability which, according to Blueprint, includes most of the city's residential neighborhoods and their associated commercial areas. And the goal for areas of stability are to identify and maintain the area, the character of these areas, while accommodating some new development and redevelopment. The waiver request in this case, staff feels, is justified because it would allow for the use of property that is just slightly smaller than what had been originally intended by the YOU oh three overlay. And Historic Preservation staff have noted that there are other structures around the city where perhaps adjusting this threshold may be appropriate and it is intended to be addressed on a larger scale in a future text amendment to the zoning code. With regard to the other criteria, this request will result in the uniform application of the CFA zone districts, building form, use and design regulations and the regulations of the historic structure use overlay. It will improve the will the general welfare of the community by facilitating the rehab and preservation of a historic structure while respecting the existing suburban development in the area. And staff agrees with the proposed justifying circumstance that it's in the public interest to apply an overlay here to allow for the rehabilitation and adaptive use of a unique historic structure that has been in nonresidential use for for many years. And then finally, this will this proposed rezoning will result in the establishment of the appropriate suburban neighborhood context, which is appropriate in this area for the single and multi-unit, residential and other and commercial use types found in this area and the pattern of suburban houses on larger lots. So with that, CPD recommends approval of this proposed rezoning based on a finding that all the review criteria have been met. Thank you very much. All right. We have one person signed up to speak this evening, PJ Paterno. You have 3 minutes. Come on up to the podium. And if you could introduce yourself for everybody. I'm PJ Turner. I own the property. I'm happy to answer any questions. This is a property I've found after selling a property down the springs, which was actually about 15 years older than this 1900. So this is a child compared to this property I'm used to. An old property happened upon it. I thought it was cool. It spoke to me a little bit. I've been in the Greenwood Village Tech Center area for about 15 years of my business, which is 28 years old. Happy birthday, Leo. My birthday was Friday and was 28 years ago that I got into the business of wealth management. So we have, you know, clients around Denver in other states, actually just quite a practice in California. But we have limited employees. We're hiring actually somebody right now. But it's a great piece of property. I think it's going to be cool again. It was in disrepair, both the property, the grounds and I'm learning the actual building. But we're going to make a great again. I have people helping me and and giving a lot of proposals and trying to figure out ways to make it no longer a child care, but an adult care. Adult business. So happy to answer any questions. Actually the work you guys do having sat through the first part of this. So thanks for taking my little property on the tonight to and hopefully it works out for all of us. Thank you. Thank you very much. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council Councilman Lopez. I actually think I. Accidentally push that button, so. All right, Councilwoman Ortega. Mr. Potato, if you could come back just for one minute. You mentioned something about putting adult business in there. I don't think you meant that literally in terms. Of retract the statement. This is not. I just. Wanted to clarify. That. Yeah. I'm sweating on that one. Yeah. No, no, no, no. I didn't mean it in that regard. Okay. Thanks for. Paying such close attention. To clarification. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Andrew. Could you clarify something that became fuzzy during your presentation that I thought I understood the. The use overlay three can only be applied. Over a huge structure that is already landmarked. Thank you for asking for that clarification. It can actually be applied anywhere and it is applied around the city in places that do not have historic structures. But that's what I. Have. Uses can only be applied under the overlay to a historic. Structure. In a landmark structure. In a landmark. Structure, yes. Are we so in your opinion, are we doing this out of order? Because our next item is to landmark the structure. Should we not do that first or does that not matter? I, I don't believe it actually matters because if the if even if the you oh three overlay were applied and for some reason the landmarking was not adopted, the, the other three would not apply unless the landmarking had been accomplished as well. Okay. And the you oh three overlay can only be applicable to residential properties to residential zones. Is that true? I believe so. It's it's typically aimed at older residential properties. It was it was originally used to replace the R four zone from the from former Chapter 59. And it was applied around kind of around Cap Hill and places like that where there were kind of older mansions and other big buildings that they were looking for. Prior to the current zoning code, we're looking for creative ways to allow reuse of those of those old buildings. And the UO three was developed during the process of creating the current zoning code and applied there as well. So these limited to. Commercial residential. Uses, so these limited commercial uses could occur in residential structures that are in a unitary overlay but are not landmarked. Only those that are in the upper three overlay and our land earlier. Okay. Thank you for that clarify. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Seeing no other questions for a public hearing for Council Bill 668 is closed comments by members of Council Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. You'll hear more about this property during Kerry's presentation. But it's a cool, funky old house. It's actually in my neighborhood. And most of, you know, I live in a very suburban 1950s neighborhood. This house is very, very different. And we really lucked out with P.J. being interested in purchasing it and willing to landmark it. And I am actually doing this as a legislative rezoning so that he can have his office use in the neighborhood. So I hope everyone will support it. Thank you, Councilwoman Black, seeing no other comments. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black Eye. Brooks. Espinosa. Flinn Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Carnage. Lopez. I knew Ortega. I. Susman. I. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and Nelson results. Sorry. There's somebody. There we go. 1339 as council bills 668 has passed calls from Gilmore. Will you put Council Bill six, eight, eight on the floor.

Recommendation to declare ordinance approving approving Resolution No. WD-1441A, A Resolution of the City of Long Beach Board of Water Commissioners Establishing the Rates and Charges to be Charged For Water and Sewer Service and declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 a.m. on June 1, 2022, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05102022_22-0533

Motion is carried. Item number 30 Please. Report from City Attorney Recommendation as clear ordinance approving resolution number WD 14418. A resolution of the City of Long Beach Board of Water Commissioners establishing the rates and charges to be changed for water and sewer service and declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 a.m. on June 1st, 2022. Citywide. Thank you. It's been moved in. Seconded. Any public comment on item 30? There is Mr. Dave Shukla and this requires two votes, one for the urgency and one for the ordinance. Right. Mr. Shukla, you're up. Okay. He declined. Okay, let's go ahead and have our first vote. Motion is carried. Thank you. We need a motion to second on the second vote. Thank you. Please cast your vote. Motion is carried. Thank you. That satisfies the agenda. Now we have our second public comment. General public comment in a member of the public would like to address the council. Now would be the time.

Recommendation to receive and file a report from Long Beach Unified School District Board Member, Dr. Felton Williams, on the 2017 Urban Educator of the Year, Green Garner Award.

LongBeachCC_12052017_17-1111

So let me get a motion to continue that real quick, if you don't mind. For good cause that's pretty great. There's emotion or second is our public comment to postpone not to just to continue okay cost Castro votes. Motion carries. Okay. Next item is item 29. Report from Technology and Innovation and Financial Management Recommendation to authorize the city manager to submit to the City Council. Purchase transactions for critical technology infrastructure needs citywide. Okay. Thank you. You know what? We're going to. What? I'm going to move, actually an item around because we have some folks here for another item. And I want to get them on their on their way since I know they're all here. So let's go ahead and do item 35, which is the Grand Prix item. Want to be respectful of all these folks that are here. So if we can do item 35.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Section 10.34.040 relating to parking at City-owned and operated lots with disabled plate or placard, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_07142020_20-0632

So we'll go to another audience for a second reading. Number 27. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to parking at city owned and operated lots with disabled plate or placard read and adapted as read citywide. However, Councilmember Susie Price motion is their second. Thank you. Councilmember Richardson, Councilmember Price, you want to speak to this? You. As a member, Richardson. No. Is there public comment on item 27? There's no public comment on item 27. Let's call for a roll vote. District one. District two. I. District three. I. District four. All right. District five. I. District seven. I. District eight. Are. District nine. Right. Motion carries.

A bill for an ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 15 of the Revised Municipal Code for purposes of approving a new redistricting plan for the eleven council districts of the City and County of Denver for the municipal election on April 4, 2023, and for any general or special council election held thereafter. Describes the district boundaries depicted on Map D. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 3-14-22.

DenverCityCouncil_03212022_22-0299

One I Council Bill 20 2-33, two has failed. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Council Member Clark, will you please put Bill to 99 on the floor for publication? Yes. Council President of the Council. Bill 299 be ordered published. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 22, dash 299. Map D. Black. I see tobacco. No, Clark. I. Flynn i. Herndon High. Heights Cashman. Kenny Ortega, i. Sandoval, I. Sawyer. I. Torres. No. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. Two Nays, 11 Ice. 11 Eyes Council Bill 20 2-299 has been ordered published. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Council Member Clerk, will you please put Bill 300 on the floor for publication?

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by repealing Chapter 8.97, relating to Tenant Relocation Assistance; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:00 a.m. on January 1, 2020, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_12102019_19-1238

Okay, we're going to do item 23, please, Madam Clerk. 23. Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance repealing chapter relating to tenant relocation assistance. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of City Council for final reading, declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect at midnight on January 1st, 2020, citywide. Thank you. I do have three public speakers, if I can, because, Mr. Emerson, you make sure the full council is out here really quick. Thank you. Okay. If Norberto Lopez, Liana Noble and Marlene Alvarado could please come forward. Norberto Lopez led a noble and Merlene Alvarado could please come forward. Please. Go ahead, sir. All right. Um, so my name is. I work with Libra, the project director there currently. And once again, you know, we stand behind Long Beach amounts. There's a lot of misinformation that has been going out in the media saying that the state amount is higher than the Long Beach amount. We're still saying the Long Beach amounts are higher than the state amounts. And the fact that the average rents in 2019 were approximately 1400 dollars here in Long Beach. And so currently the way that the ten and below policy works in the city of Long Beach is if you live in a studio, you get 27 or six and then it goes up to 4500, depending on the amount of bedrooms. Where we would like is for a policy that comes back hopefully soon, sooner rather than later, that just implements everything from HB 1482 and just substitutes the relocation amounts from the state policy to the Long Beach amounts in order to help protect some tenants from going homeless. Average moving amount right now for a lot of people that we work with is around $6,000. Even then, with the current Long Beach amount, that isn't enough for people to move out but is definitely a big lift and helping them find a new home. So we're hoping that you can revisit this item and, you know, hopefully maintain the Long Beach amounts one way or another. I'm pretty sure you could find some way of maintaining these amounts for their Long Beach residents. And hopefully you can find, um, you know, the perfect policy, which I know is going to be hard, but nonetheless it's doable. I also ask that you take a closer look at how are you going to repeal something? And I have another substitute ready to go. I don't think that the senior and disabled program will be ready to go by the time that the repealing of the tenant relocation policy is done with. Thank you. Thank you so much. Liana Noble and Marlene Alvarado, please. My name is Liana Noble. I live in downtown and been active in our North Pine Neighborhood Alliance. There's several points of I'd like to make tonight. I appreciate that. There we have members of the council who have been consistent and clear advocates on affordable housing. However, what I am seeing now is a resident is that while you have your your intention of, as you put it, I think previously of clarifying what's going on and making it clear to landlords as well as to tenants what is applicable here in Long Beach in terms of the extreme housing crisis that we have. What I'm experiencing is somebody that pays a lot of attention to City Hall is that this is a critically important issue and yet it's being dealt with in a piecemeal basis. So my experience is that you are approaching a critically important problem that affects more than 60% of those of us who live here in Long Beach. And you are doing it piecemeal. That in and of itself is creating confusion. I would ask, therefore, that you not proceed with this sanction of relocation. If you rescind this, then you're adding to the confusion. You've made a made it public that you want to put together a program for seniors and disabled. And yet that is currently up in the air. In my neighborhood, we have. Three. Section eight senior housing towers, which doesn't begin to address the needs of the disabled and seniors literally living in our neighborhood. So if you look at the whole town and all of the other districts, this is a serious problem. And again, instead of coming to us with a package, you're doing it piecemeal. The other concern I have and the reason why I believe it is important that we have a Long Beach ordinance, is that the burden for enforcing these laws is falling on individual tenants. This is completely unacceptable as a tenant. We have we're in no shape to take on the corporate landlords. Or landlords that own. Properties here. If we have a local ordinance, you and our city staff can play a role in enforcing that ordinance. And as we know, the relocation ordinance here in Long Beach hasn't been implemented. It's not been enforced. We know of way too many tenants who aren't receiving the relocation benefit. Thank you so much. Thank you. Marlene Alvarado. Please. I'm only Alvarado. I'm in the first district. Quickly. I. I own a property. Not here, but. My tenants barely are able to pay rent, housing and everything else. I can't imagine anybody who is a landlord and takes out poor people and then expects them to pay for first and last month's rent. The state is not enough money for them to do that, especially here in Long Beach. It's really important that we continue the amount of money that we have already passed this law, which is more than what the state has. Gee, I can't. I can't. It breaks my heart to see so much greed here. I mean, this is Christmas, and I make a decent living charging reasonable rents. Why? I wouldn't want to kick out my tenants. They're really good people. They're hardworking people. And that's what's happening with most poor people who do this to the poor. It's tragic. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Members, please cast your votes. I know we're having some delays with the motion carries. Okay. Thank you. We are moving on to item 20, please.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Partial Release of Use Restriction and Right of Reentry for CDOT Parcel between the City and County of Denver and Metropolitan Football Stadium District for land the Metropolitan Football Stadium District will convey to the Colorado Department of Transportation. Authorizes the partial release of use restriction and right-of-reentry for City parcels previously deeded to the Metropolitan Football Stadium District to allow the Colorado Department of Transportation to construct a new headquarters on Stadium Parcels B6, B7, and B8, at approximately West Colfax Avenue and Mile High Stadium West Circle in Council District 3. The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 12-19-16. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 11-17-16.

DenverCityCouncil_12052016_16-1143

All right, I'll do a quick recap. Councilman Flynn, you no longer need to call out Council 1138. Okay, great. Council man Espinosa, you want to call up for a vote? 1143. Yes. Okay, great. Madam Secretary, can you please bring up I believe that is in the bills on final consideration. 1143. Yes. Yes, Mr. President. Okay. Madam President, pro tem councilman. Clerk, will you please put Council Bill 1143 on the floor for consideration to pass? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 1143 be placed to fund final consideration and do pass. It has been moved in second and comes from as a council. Councilman. Yeah. So last week, this is one of two bills I attempted to postpone. This one was successful. I did, in fact, meet with the real estate office, and I wasn't completely satisfied with the answers that I received. So therefore, I will be so I don't feel comfortable moving this forward. So I will be abstaining from this vote tonight. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. So, you know the comments of Secretary Roll Call. Espinosa. Stephen Flynn. I feel more Cashman can eat. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Black Eye. Clark. All right. Mr. President. I. Please close voting. You know, I can announce the results because I can see them now. Ten eyes, one. Ten eyes, one. Abstention. The motion passes. It's move on to final consideration and do pass 1143. All right. All bills for introduction are ordered publish. We are now ready for the block. Votes on resolutions and bills from consideration council members. Please remember, this is a consent or block vote. You'll need to say otherwise. This is your last chance to call it. And I don't want to provoke. Councilman, clerk. Will you please put bills? Please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills in front of the situation on final passage on the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in block for the following items. 1138 1169 1158 1135 1164 1165 1159 1160. 1167 1175 1180 1187 1123. 1145 1130 1133 1134 1142 1146 1147. 1148 1149 1150. And 1124. It has been moved in second it. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. Clark. Hi. Espinosa. Flynn. Hi, Gilmore. I heard it. Catherine. Kenny Lopez. I knew Ortega. I missed president. I police calls voting in Nasr results. Lebanese 11 eyes. The resolution has been adopted and the bills have been placed for final consideration and do pass since there are no public hearings and there will be no objections if there be no objections from members of council.

A bill for an ordinance adopting a new Article VIII in Chapter 28 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code, to be known as the Public Safety Enforcement Priorities Act. Amends Chapter 28 of the Revised Municipal Code to add a new Article VIII related to public safety enforcement that will provide the following: memorializes existing City policy by prohibiting the detention of individuals beyond their sentence; memorializes predominant City practices by prohibiting City employees from collecting information on immigration or citizenship status; prohibits the sharing of any other information about individuals for purposes of immigration enforcement; and, memorializes predominant practices by prohibiting use of city resources or City cooperation with civil immigration enforcement, including prohibiting providing access to secure areas or facilities. This bill was approved for filing by Councilmembers Kniech and Lopez.

DenverCityCouncil_08212017_17-0940

Nothing has been called out under bills for introduction. Councilman Lopez has called out council at 940 for a comment. Under Bill's defining consideration, I have nothing under pending. We have nothing, Madam Secretary. Is that right, everyone? All right. And, Madam Secretary, please put the first item on the screen. 940. Councilman Lopez, go ahead. Make your comment. Thank you, Mr. President. This is in regards to the Denver Enforcement Priorities Act. I just want to let folks know we want to make I want to make my comments in general comments and have have time for that lengthy process next meeting. And I just being that there's some folks from the coalition here, I just want to thank you for your hard work. But Mr. President, don't want to belabor the point. Just be want to be able to make those comments and have that time next next meeting. Now that there's a public hearing. Great. And you want to just make that comment again for folks who came late in the night. Hear your announcement. Oh, yeah. Thank you for for that. So just for folks that are that I came into the room before or during the announcements, we asked that we have a scheduled public hearing in one hour, a courtesy public hearing for the next council meeting in these chambers next Monday. 5:30 p.m.. It's a one hour courtesy public hearing on the Public Safety Enforcement Priorities Act. That's Council Bill 940. So I want now that we have that, I want to be able to make those comments then great. Thank you to the folks that came here. And then I just want to recognize my colleague, who's my course, who's the co-sponsor here, and I Councilman Kasich. That's great. And I echo those comments. So we'll have the debate next week for the courtesy public hearing. Madam Secretary, we have three public hearings, so that will be the last public hearing next week. Just want to. This. Correct. Okay. Just for folks who are going to be a part of this would be the last public hearing for that for a courtesy public hearing. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. As some of the folks know, I voted no on this bill when it was in committee a couple of weeks ago. And in that time, after making my objections to one of the provisions known the sponsors, Councilwoman Lopez, Councilwoman Cranitch worked very hard with the community here and with the administration to make some compromises that make it acceptable. And I intend to vote yes on it tonight and next week. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Well, this concludes the items that feels a little weird saying that on an August night. So there's no more items that need to be called out or moving right along. All of the bills for introduction have been ordered published. We are now ready for the block votes and the resolutions and bills and final consideration. Councilmember this rumor. This is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise it's your last chance to call an item for a separate vote. Councilwoman Sussman, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills for final consideration and final passage on the floor? Yes, I, I move that the following resolutions be adopted. Resolution 886 838 854 873 874 875 876 877, eight, 78, eight, 93. 852. 853. 867. Eight. 78. 71. 862. 879. 888. 92. And that's the resolutions. There's those on final. And though and also I move that the bills for introduction for final be passed. Let me get down to them. Should have had them up here. Series of 17 Build Number 794 924. Great. Madam Secretary, do we have it? It's been moved and seconded. My secretary. Roll call. Can each. Lopez. All right, new Ortega. My assessment. All right. Black eye. All right. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn. Hi, Gilmore. I heard in Katherine. Mr. President. I plusieurs voting announce results 3913 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted in the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass tonight. There will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 751 Changes on classification from 46 north to Lady Street in Globeville.

A resolution approving a proposed Automated Photo Red Light - Photo Radar Traffic System Management Program Agreement by and between the City and County of Denver and Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc. Approves an agreement with Xerox State & Local Solutions Inc. in the amount of $6,417,923 with a contract term through 9-3-21 for the provision of services for both the Photo Red Light and Photo Radar programs (201627552-00). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 10-3-16. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 8-31-16.

DenverCityCouncil_09122016_16-0759

It's a much needed sidewalk they're partnering with See Dot, who's picking up most of the tab. So thank you very much. Okay. Great. All right. Now we are going to go to the bills for introduction. 759 was that one of them? Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. 759 Resolution. Councilman Flynn, what would you like to do with that thing? Mr. President, I'd just like to put this up for a vote. All right, Councilwoman Gilmore, would you please put Resolution 759 on the floor to be adopted? Yes, Mr. President. I move that resolution 759 be adopted. Great. It is moved in second to Councilman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. We have such a lengthy agenda tonight, and this is a topic that we've debated quite thoroughly. And I've had the benefit, and I want to thank the traffic and the police staff who met with me to talk about this issue. And we're at the point now where I just wanted to vote. No, I don't oppose. I'm sorry. This is the photo red light and the photo speeding radar van contract because they're packaged together unlike previously. I just want to make it clear I do not oppose the photo speeding van. In fact, I wish we had more of them. I wish we had them all in my district. As a matter of fact. But at the risk of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, I don't want to go on and on and debate this again tonight. I just want to make note that I believe that having advocated with the staff unsuccessfully, that we follow a new guidance from the Institute of Transportation Engineers. And I do understand their reasons after meeting with them this afternoon. I just want to register my no vote in in in protest of that and and continue to advocate that we adopt a practice that in some other locations, particularly in California, where this new guideline has been has been codified in their state law that has reduced red light running, reduced accidents and enhanced safety without having to while reducing punitive fines. In other words, we can get compliance, we can reduce accidents without without fining people over it. So with that, Mr. President, I will forego talking about all the material that I've emailed folks over over time and just continue to urge the the traffic engineering staff to work on this. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. I really appreciate that. Thank you. I knew you would. We also have. Oh, councilman new. Go ahead. Well, question is Steve Hershey come up. Steve, if you could, could you address the national standards for especially the yellow light situation and the length of time and how we manage the length of time of those red lights and of the young lives in particular, and any national standards that you have. Sure, Councilman. Currently, the city and county of Denver has adopted the Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. That is a federal manual that comes out of Washington. It's adopted by sea dogs, also adopted by the city and county of Denver. In the manual, it advises that cities or counties or states use an adopted practice to calculate yellow and all red times. We've adopted the city standard, and the city standard is a formula which uses speed, grades and other factors to determine how long yellow times should be in California. They have their own mutes. The federal government allows the state to adopt their own multi-city in California has done that. Colorado has not. So we felt it was in our best interest to keep our practices consistent throughout all the intersections in the city and to follow the guidance in the manual of uniform traffic control devices from the federal government. So that's the process that we are currently using. You'll be continuing to evaluate this. Yes. Currently, we have a study going on that's looking at violations at a myriad of other intersections around the city. We are following what's happening when we adjust yellow times. What happens to compliance initially and then also what happens to compliance over time so we can get an understanding of is it an immediate reaction? Are we immediately seeing compliance? But then drivers are drifting back to old bad habits or is this a sustainable thing? And currently we have some data to support that. It does seem to bounce back and the drivers do seem to violate. But we're continuing to study that and we've made that commitment to Councilman Flynn that we would not only continue the study, but that we would be upfront and share all of that data with him. Yeah. Thank you, Steve. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Yep. Thank you, Steve. You may want to sit up here just in case. Steve, I think you might want to come to the front desk. We got some more questions. Council Councilwoman. Councilman Espinosa. No questions. I just wanted to segment support. I mean, explain again. Did he call now for a vote? Yes. Yeah. Why? Once again, I'll be abstaining because there's technically nothing wrong with the contract. However, Councilman Flynn did bring this up last year, and I'm not quite satisfied with the fact that we don't have a we didn't have a better answer at committee on on on why we haven't further pursued these real. What he has is really hard data on the benefits of extending these these yellow light times. So in support of the fact that the research that you guys are doing and the transparency you've you've offered, I won't be voting no, but I will be abstaining from this vote. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to lend my support to Councilman Flynn for the hard work he's done in bringing up this issue, as I understand it. Councilman, the issue has to do with where? You'd like to see the yellow lights timed pretty much in conjunction with the speeds that people are actually driving, whereas our traffic engineers want the yellow lights timed according to the speeds as as our speed limits are signed. And for me and I'm taking the time to talk about it, because traffic in the city and county is the most frequently mentioned issue to me by my constituents. And I think we need to address this issue in a two pronged manner. The if people are driving too quickly, then we need to employ whatever traffic calming measures that we can, whether it's electronic signs telling you how fast you're driving, whether it's striping, narrowing lanes or whatever. But we need to address it to control the speeds. For me, the red light cameras are to control safe passage and safe stopping at intersections. So I think I think he's right on the money. And I hope you will continue to to look at this. In addition, I just wanted to bring up I know a number of us were surprised in committee to find out that in the entire city and county of Denver. I don't know what people listening and watching on TV I think we're doing, but we've we don't have dozens or hundreds of these cameras. We have four we are monitoring four intersections in the city and county of Denver with our 685,000 residents and millions of visitors every year. We have, I believe, five photo radar vans that we kind of shift around the city. We have I don't know how many trailers, speed trailers with the signs that tell you how fast you're going and urge you to slow down. So I think we really need to if we've decided that this is an effective program, I think we need to look at a substantial expansion of this program. People are driving like lunatics in the city. We have too many people. We can't our roadways aren't handling it. People are cutting through our neighborhoods at speeds far exceeding what they should be driving. So I just wanted to give that a little bit more time so people understand the scope of what we're doing here and maybe will let us know what our constituents think we ought to be doing with this. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Steve. You can have a seat. Thank you for being up here. All right. Madam Secretary, roll call. Flynn. No. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Kennedy. I knew Ortega. Sussman. I. Black. All right. Clark. All right. Espinosa. I'm staying. Mr. President. I. Please close the voting, announce the results. Ten eyes, one knee, one abstention. Ten eyes, one day, one abstention. Resolution 79 has been adopted. We're going to the bills for introduction now and we're going to start off with Council Bill 760 with Council.

A proclamation Honoring the Dedication of “El Viaje (The Journey) and the Annual Summer Solstice.

DenverCityCouncil_06202016_16-0455

I think let's just move on before 55, if you don't mind, Councilman Clark, because now we we can tie it in. Councilman Espinosa counts a proclamation for 55. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so this. I'm going to be reading the proclamation number 16 0455, honoring the dedication of the hour by the journey and the annual summer solstice. Whereas Grupo Tulloch, Danza Azteca is a traditional cultural dance group comprised of adults children dedicated to preserving the indigenous dance of their ancestors ancestors. The Mexicana mean America. And. Whereas, Grupo Tulloch is hosting the 2016 summer solstice in La Raza Columbus Park, where family members come to share oral traditions, pray and dance in honor of the rain that grows crops and nourishes our bodies. Because without rain, nothing survives. And. Whereas, Grupo Tulloch has been dedicated to the community for the past 36 years, providing direction and guidance with dances and ceremonies in Denver, Colorado, Iceland in the world and throughout the world. And. Whereas, the time to water the seeds that need growth and development to heal the sorrows of life, moving from inhumanity to humanity. And. Whereas, for 36 years, Grupo Tulloch has used Onza to educate La Comunidad and to summon our ancestors to walk with us on this historical journey. And. Whereas, other forms of art such as mural ism, poetry and La Palabra that emanate and belong to the hint, they are part of our cultural renaissance, produced and communicate communion with Nuestro spirit to have joined us this year to celebrate summer solstice. And whereas the mural Elvira The Journey was unveiled Sunday, June 19, telling the historical journey that La Raza has taken in and the ongoing sojourn that remains. And. Whereas, we take the time to honor our ancestors, self, homeland, spirituality and community from Mesoamerica, the Las Americas and throughout the world has arrived. And. Whereas, the summer solstice symbolizes the nurturing of our youth who need guidance and vision to create a better tomorrow. And. Whereas, Dunsborough reclaims our identity and spirituality through action and performance in new ways to our communities to pass down to the next seven generations. Whereas political, cultural and intellectual development is the basis of human progress, recognizing our past informs the course of history. That is the proclamation. And so I just wanted to. Well, that's the proclamation I won't add any more language at. But Councilman, you have to make that motion to adopt Council Regulation 455. Yeah. I think that's. Mr. President, I move that proclamation. 455 be adopted. Do we have a second? You see, it has been moved and seconded. Councilman Espinoza. Let me see. Do we did you read the sections? Yes. Okay. All right. Councilman Espinoza. So I would like to some know there is somebody I would like to invite to receive the proclamation. I need you to sing. This is just comments if you want to do comments. Okay, we do the comments. Then we do roll call and then we out of. Sorry. You're calling me on the comments? I'm sorry. No problem. So, yeah, I'm surprised. I'm thoroughly amazed because between the procession that preceded the dance and the hours of dancing that went on yesterday, to see that you guys all had the energy to continue to do it. Here is thoroughly impressive, but it shows the dedication to this artform and to the community that is inherent in their work and that resonates with David. So the real reason for the I mean, the solstice has and continues and will hopefully forever happen. But new to this year's install performance was the dedication of the artwork that was sponsored by Denver Arts and Culture, produced by Dave David here. And that was wonderful. So it was my honor to participate in that dedication of the mural. It was a mystical experience. The prayer, I mean, the blessing that you received was incredible and be part of that process. And I'd like to thank Ramon del Castillo, Maria Salazar and Rudy Cheri with Denver Arts and Culture for our arts and venues, for their hard work in coordinating the event. I'd also like to thank Carlos and Grupo De look for yesterday's ceremony and tonight's performance. So I've said it enough for David. Your artwork is beautiful and I'm going to be working hard to find out that we properly illuminate that project and that artwork so that it's able to be experienced day and night. And now I'd like to thank Ramon for your assistance in actually drafting this this proclamation. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, Mr. Pro-Tem. I would like to commend my colleague, Councilman Espinosa, for sponsoring this proclamation. And, Madam Secretary, I'd like to have my name added to the proclamation as well. And, you know, I'm just honored to be present here tonight. I had forgotten how powerful and centering the drums can be, and it brought me back to that place of center. And so I'm very honored to have been here and been so close and honored to be here and witness and and be part of it. So thank you, Councilman. And thank you, Mr. Pro-Tem. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. Pro Tem. I want to ask that my name be added as well. And I want to thank Councilman Espinosa for bringing this forward. And I look for your continued work in our community. This is a group that has been around for many, many years, not only sharing the culture with the greater Denver community , but continuing to ensure that young people carry that tradition on. And if any of you have ever had the opportunity to go to the March powwow and see the different tribes that come from not only every state in the United States, but other countries, and to see the entire floor of the Coliseum filled with dancers that are carrying on that tradition, and to see elders and little tiny toddlers dancing on the floor of the Coliseum and sharing that culture with all of us, it's it's just very touching and just gratifying to know that that culture was never lost when you see so many of the atrocities that happened to the Native American community. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. And I just would love to be a part of this and add my name as well. And I love this group, Grupo CRO Claro. We have had numerous events on the east side, the east side peace walk as well. And you guys have been incredible. And what I love is that you all come into a community that's mixed in, diverse with African-Americans as well. And the African the African Aztec Alliance is alive and well. And we appreciate you all for always being present. So thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman. Thank you, Mr. President. I, too. I thought I'd added my name is a sponsor, but I don't see it. So if you can please add me, that would be great. Thanks. Right. Duly noted. Are there any other comments? Well, I was a little premature in my comments, but, you know, I can, you know, attest that the group of dialog has been around for quite a while, I think over 30 years. Oh 2636 I think I was two years old when they started to a teen as I was your age. Now I am very proud to hear those drums and to have you here in the chambers. It is definitely full circle. And, you know, it's a misnomer to not to. Think about Denver and or even to, you know, welcome folks with America and scientists to Denver because they were here. And this is just as a part as Denver culture, as our skyline or Mile High Stadium or five points or the west side or the east side it is and north Denver to I'm looking over how to manage to get mad at me if I don't mention north Denver and it's it's it's a very important tradition. And like I said, for me it's home because I have my, my, my brother from another mother over there and we went to school together. And if it wasn't for that and if it wasn't for that culture and that support throughout those years. It's establishing community. You don't you really don't have that that support network if you don't have that. So thank you very much for being in these chambers. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. Brooks i. I. Espinoza, I. Flynn I. Gilmore I. The Cashman. Carnage. I knew. Ortega. I Sussman. Mr. President. I. And if I might add, the murals are amazing throughout Denver. Madam Secretary, can you please announce the results? 11 eyes. 11 eyes. The proclamation has passed and been adopted. Congratulations, gentlemen, as we know that. Councilman Espinoza, is there anybody you would like to receive to the, uh, to the podium to receive the proclamation? Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to invite David and Carlos to receive the proclamation. Carlos? I'd like to have you both up to receive the proclamation. Right? Actually. While that headdress is coming, I want everyone to know that David spent six months working on this mural, and it was amazing to see it. After I shortly after I was elected to see it in progress, just as sketches, pencil drawings on on pieces of paper, and then getting painted painstakingly, hour after hour, onto these giant pieces. And so to start the work that you see in that building out there today is original artwork. It's not a reproduction or anything. It is is the real deal. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Let's move on to do the proclamation with you. Or did you? Actually, I'm looking for Amanda. Oh. Go ahead, David. I just want to say thank you. To all the. Council here. And I'm really. Honored to be here myself. With with you all and very honored to have been chosen to create this mural at this park. And I myself also identify with with dance, the culture, the colors, the the symbolism is very important, very powerful, very spiritual. That it is very the sounds are very centering for me as well. And there's a lot of respect there. There's a lot of positive energy for everyone, for the children. And that's what I that's what I was when I was the mural. That's that's that's what I had in mind, you know. It's for everyone. And so I hope you if you haven't been able to go out there, I invite you to to to take some time and stop by the park and just see see the painting. And. So thank you very much and honored to be here. Thank you. All right. Thank you, guys. All right. Thanks. Next up, we have. Proclamation. 454. Councilman Clark, this is your proclamation when you read a council proclamation for 54. Thank you, Mr. President. Proclamation CP 16 0454 designating the week of June 20th through June 24th as Bike Week, and Wednesday, June 22nd as Bike to Work Day in Denver. Whereas the city and County of Denver partners with the Regional Council, Denver Regional Council of Governments, local bicycling organizations and cycling enthusiasts each year to plan activities and events intended to promote awareness of the benefits of bicycling. And. Whereas, Bike to Work Day is an annual event designed to encourage people to ride their bicycles for transportation on a consistent basis to reduce congestion, improve air quality, and benefit public health. And. Whereas, the Department of Public Works hosts the Civic Center Park Breakfast Station, one of the largest in the region where cyclists celebrate their commute to work with free snacks, raffle prizes, music and educational outreach offered by organizations in the region. And. Whereas, the Department of Public Works is a major contributor in the planning and implementation of Denver's bicycle infrastructure, implementing at least 15 miles of new bikeways annually, and this year installing two protected bikeways on Arapaho and Lawrence Streets in downtown, with vertical separation between bikes and cars, and whose plans to install more protected bike lanes are contributing to Denver's designation as a top bicycling city and its inclusion in the People for Bikes Green Lane Project, which provides technical assistance in the installation of bike lanes. And. Whereas, the city now has more than 140 miles of on street bike lanes and SROs and more than 100 miles of off street trails, offering recreational opportunities along scenic routes and is in the process of constructing the 35th 36th Street Bridge, an important pedestrian and bicycle connection from the new RTD East Line and will begin work on the Brighton Boulevard bicycle facility in the near future. And. Whereas, Denver is supporting bicycling in other new and creative ways, offering on street bike crawls and bike sharing stations near places where people gather with the goal of supporting local businesses and making bike riding an attractive way to get around for more of Denver residents. And. Whereas, bicycle and pedestrian safety and infrastructure continues to be a top priority for the Denver City Council and the city and county of Denver, which is supporting funding for additional and expedited multimodal improvements that will increase bicycling in our city now therefore be proclaimed by the City Council of the City and County of Denver, Section one that the Council designates the week June 20th through June 24th, 2016 as Bike Week, and June 22nd as Bike to Work Day and encourages citizens to keep their heads up and watch out for one another and stay safe this summer, no matter what mode of travel Section two that the clerk of the city and county of Denver shall attest and affects the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation, and that a copy hereof be forwarded to the Manager of Public Works. All right, Councilman. Clerk, your motion to adopt. Thank you, Mr. President. I move the proclamation for 54 to be adopted. It has been moved and seconded. Councilman, is would you like to make any comments to start us off? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't think it's any secret that I am an avid bike fan. And so it's very exciting for me to be able to put forth a proclamation about Bike Week and Bike to Work Day.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Subsections 8.120.010.D, 8.120.020.B, and 8.120.040; and amending and restating Section 8.120.030; all relating to temporary enforcement of Long Beach Health Orders related to COVID-19; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide) (Emergency Ordinance No. ORD-21-0003)

LongBeachCC_01192021_21-0055

Vice Mayor Richardson. Vice Mayor Richardson, motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Item 25, please. Item 25 is a communication from city attorney. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code related to temporary enforcement of Long Beach health orders regarding COVID 19, declaring the urgency thereof. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide. I have a motion that comes to me. Ranga, can I get a second, please? Second Vice Mayor Richardson. I think there might be one public comment. Yes, we have two public comment for this item. Tiffany DAVIES, the first speaker. Tiffany Davey. Good evening of the American City Council and Tiffany David, District four residents. I'm just calling to voice my support of this amendment to the language we use. The Code Chapter eight 120 as it relates to the temporary enforcement of the health orders regarding COVID 19. The amendments concerning length of time understanding the monster ordinance were to expire tomorrow on January 20th. Allowing for enforcement beyond the most recent promulgation of the order seems consistent with ultimate goal to preserve life during this ongoing pandemic. As for the amendments to enforcement and penalties, I also support that in light of recent events wherein a business within the food and beverage sector openly defied this health order publicly and on multiple counts, in addition to organizing like minded business owners to meet, to find ways to continue to defy, to defy the health order. I find this and the aforementioned amendments to be urgent. The fact remains that the health orders are promulgated in an effort to ensure all members of the community are safe and the orders should not be subject to an individual feeling or law. That is what I said with that empathy for all affected, but for concerns of the safety and health of every member of our community. Thank you. Our next speaker is Dave Shukla. Good evening. I like this to express my support for this item. And briefly, I would just like to separate the utility shut off for bad actors from the overall extension of the health of these health of the city has made tremendous efforts in its vaccination program. With the options that are currently available on the market, the widespread availability and adoption of vaccination will likely have to include more accessible and affordable options like the not yet FDA approved AstraZeneca one. And it simply may take longer than hundred and 80 days, especially if there are complications from new variants of COVID 19 that have already been documented in California. But continued education and public outreach are other basic behavioral interventions that one can take are crucial for wearing masks, handwashing, distancing, ventilating people, and so on. No. There are tremendous opportunities with the incoming administration to expand support for these basic behavioral interventions, along with expanding testing, tracing and other communication on COVID. People like to make a difference, along with a lot of the increased enforcement that we. We're considering claiming but I think the health department and for every. Thank you. That concludes public comment for the final. Roll call vote. Please note Councilwoman Sandy has. I'm Councilwoman Cindy Allen. Hi. Councilwoman Pryce. And. Councilman Spinner. All right. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilwoman Sara. I. Councilmember Arango. All right. Councilman Austin. All right. Vice Mayor Richardson. Vice Mayor Richardson, I motion case. Thank you. Okay. I think we have gotten through a lot of the a lot of the items. We're going to go back now. We do have some other some other items. You're going to have reports and so forth. So we're going to start going through those. And before we do that, let's go ahead and have the clerk just go through the public comment, the open public comment. We'll get through that and then we'll start the rest of the agenda. Thank you. Our first speaker is Joni Ricks O.D..

A MOTION requesting the executive to contract with the University of Washington to conduct a retrospective analysis of the impacts of COVID-19 and the actions taken by King County leaders and public health - Seattle & King County to limit the spread of the virus.

KingCountyCC_06022020_2020-0182

I can have a contract with the U dub and they would be requested to conduct a retrospective analysis, the focus of which would be the effectiveness of actions taken by King County leaders and public health Seattle King County to limit the spread of the virus. The study is intended to be conducted with participation by public health and organizations that were directly that are directly involved in the COVID 19 response in King County. Examples of such organizations include the University of Washington Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and Gates Foundation. Motion Request The Executive transmit a report to council based on the retrospective analysis and have it filed by June 30th of 2021. And that concludes my remarks. Happy to answer any questions. And we also have Karen Gill available for questions as well. Questions for Ms.. Porter. Cancer Council member, Don. As the sponsor. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thanks for the briefing. This is coming up a little more quickly than I was ready for in terms of full consideration. And so like the prior item, I'm going to ask that we have a little more time to discuss this. There is some overlap with the what the internal auditor's office may be doing, but I think there's a lot of success stories that can be told and what we did and also a lot of lessons learned relative to our early and midway responses to the pandemic. This was designed to be a long term study. As you as you heard, the reporting deadline is more than a year away. And so I wanted to have a briefing. I wanted to have people have a chance to ask questions. And I'd like to go back and talk with the relevant players to make sure there's not overlap before we actually take a vote, if the chair would allow it. Happy to have conversation questions today. And if there's no emotion, there's no motion. Questions. Well, what is it? I would ask. What is the time frame for when the motion proposes to begin its study and look back? Is it upon enactment or is it. Once a vaccine is developed? At what point when Washington State hits phase four, is there a trigger for when we look back? I can answer that. I'm going to go ahead now. All right. The motion is not specific about when the retrospective analysis would begin. It indicates that the analysis should begin far enough time in the future that experts are able to effectively analyze the pandemic response. Thank you. Clearly, if this thing drags on for three years, then it's a different it's a it's a different time frame. Part of the reason for the genesis of this is I want to make sure that we are all all of all of the various agencies involved taking copious notes and collecting data so that we can really properly study this and have some empirical data. It's been 100 years since the last pandemic really hit the United States, but it could be ten years or five years or 20 years. And the ability to collect data and learn a lot of information is useful not only in the short term, but it's also useful in the long term. So I'd certainly be open to suggestions, but I don't intend at this time to make a motion. Appreciate the chair very much putting it on the agenda as quickly as as he did and would look forward to working with my colleagues a little more and also specifically the executive branch of government. And hearing no more questions will advanced eight in 2020 183, which asks the Office of Emergency Management and Public Health to update all of the county's emergency management plans to address the risks of pandemics. Jake Tracy will revisit the motion.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance increasing the sales and use tax by a rate of 0.25 percent and dedicating the revenue derived from the tax rate increase to fund Denver parks, trails, and open space, subject to the approval of the voters at a special municipal election to be conducted in coordination with the state general election on November 6, 2018. Refers a measure to the eligible voters in Denver to extend the sales and use tax to be used to fund Denver’s parks and open space. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-12-18. Amended 7-16-18 to specify that canals are included in the intended use of the special revenue monies funded by the additional sales and use taxes, and, to require that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to hold no less than one public hearing and submit a five-year plan for the approval by City Council.

DenverCityCouncil_07092018_18-0641

. And limiting sugary, sugary drinks is an evidence based way to keep kids at a healthy weight and prevent obesity. We applaud Denver's commitment to creating healthy environments and making the healthy choice the easy choice. So unfortunately, several of the do you team were not able to make it tonight, but we do have representation from the Stapleton Foundation . Be well healthy initiative. And some of those youth would like to speak. Come on, let's give it up for a quick online. Hi. My name is and my girls and I am ten years old and I'm going to be presenting how sugary drinks and snacks are not healthy for kids. Hi. My name is Maya Grimes. I am ten years old and I'm going into the fifth grade at Bill Roberts. I would like to talk about why it's important to provide healthy food and drinks for youth. Why do you why does why do kids eat so much junk food and sugary beverages? They drink sugary beverages and eat junk food because they believe in way of what they believe in, what other people sell and say and they think it's okay. They don't realize that it has so much sugar in it and it's bad for your health and your heart. Eating too much sugar makes life harder because it makes you feel lazy and like you don't want to go anywhere and just stay and watch TV and watch TV at home.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Section 16.52.2370 relating to the designation of the property located at 4204 Cedar Avenue as a historic landmark, read and adopted as read. (District 8)

LongBeachCC_12082020_20-1209

Let's read 50, 78 and 59 and then we'll do it all together. This read each item. I don't 57 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation Declare an ordinance designating 262 Newport Avenue as a historic landmark. Read for the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution establishing a historic resource designation for the property. Item 58 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation Declare Ordinance Designating two for four Miramar Avenue as a historic landmark. Read the first time and letter of the next regular meeting of City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution establishing a historic resource designation for the property. An Item 59 Communication from City Attorney Recommendation declared an ordinance designating 40 zero four Cedar Avenue as a historic landmark. Read it for the first time and lead over the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution establishing a historic resource designation for the property. Give a motion in a second by Councilman Price and Councilman Austin. Is there any public comment? There's no public comment on these items. All right. So we'll cover. District one. My district to. I. District three. District Court. I thank you. District Court. By. District five. I. District seven. I. District eight. Hi. District nine. I motion carries.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 10.82 relating to prohibiting spectators at street races, sideshows, and reckless driving exhibitions, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03082022_22-0228

Thank you very much. Next item is item 21. We have three audiences that are reading. So Councilmember Superman, I think has a motion for item 21. Can I get a second, please? Second break comes from Ringo to add any additional comments. Councilmember to Vernon yes, I'd like to add. Last week I was asked just how pervasive are these street takeovers? And we never got to that point. So thanks to the administrative deputy city manager, April Walker, I have those numbers tonight and that is year to date in 2022. But we've had 46 events and those events are defined by ten cars and spectators or more. It's not the one offs. And for all of 2021, there were 282 street takeover events in Long Beach. And if you averages out per day, that's about 77% of the days we had a street takeover. So it is pervasive. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. I don't believe Councilmember Ranga has any additional comments. So we will go ahead and do. Councilwoman Price to comment. Yes. I just wanted to echo what Councilman Supernova just said. And since we approved this last week, we had a street takeover in Belmont Shore just a few days ago. And it was very scary and very loud. And we're going to have a community meeting about it. So I want to thank Councilman Super now for pushing this forward because I think it's important. Thank you. Thank you very much. With that, we've got a motion any second. Is your public comment on this. If there are any members of the public that would like to speak on this item, please use the raise hand feature or doust or knight. CNN. That concludes public comment. Councilwoman Allen, if you have something you want to add to this. No, I was just going to second it. Okay, great. And then we are we got we have a motion in a second. Please go ahead, members, and cast your votes. District one. I. District two I, District three I. District four. I'm. District five II District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. My motion carries eight zero. Thank you. And before we move on to the next item, if you want to queue up, just raise your hand or either virtually or just wave and I'll call on you. Next up is item 22.

Petition for a Special Law re: An Act Relative to Reorganization of the Boston School Committee.

BostonCC_01262022_2022-0187

Thank you. Docket 0187 Council Councilors Arroyo and Mejia offer the following petition for a special law regarding an act relative to the reorganization of the Boston School Committee. At this time. The chair recognizes Counselor Arroyo. Counsel Arroyo. You have the floor. I'll be brief again because I have a few of these in a row. This is the home rule petition to reform how the school committee looks at an elected format. This is obviously something that I'm looking to, and I think the council is looking to move within the earlier part of the council's term. This is not something that we'll do lightly. I hope I fully hope and expect that this council will engage in what they want this to look like. I know that there's members on this council who want a fully elected body. There's folks who want district. There's folks who don't want the district, those folks who do want some version of a hybrid. And so my goal is in the next couple of months to hopefully have this go through working sessions and homework in maybe another hearing and additional hearing to make sure that all those voices are heard, that everybody sort of gets to come in and put their stamp on this. And hopefully we get to some some compromise that is not necessarily perfect but is good and does the work that the city has asked us to do when they voted overwhelmingly to to enact in next an elected school committee. And so this is just a refile from last year, and there'll be more edits to this and more work done on this with the body. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel royalty, the original co-sponsor. Counsel me. Here you have the floor. And to my co-sponsor, Councilor Arroyo, last November, Boston residents made it perfectly clear that we need to return to an elected school committee, with over 99,000 Bostonians voting in favor of returning to an elected school committee. We have an obligation to make that happen and to make the process as engaging and as collaborative as possible. We have had the privilege of working alongside several amazing advocates, the Yes on three coalition, the ECP, the Boston Education, Equity and more. We're going to continue engaging the public through a series of community conversations that we hope to be hosting soon. And I'm happy to say that we'll be doing it in various native languages to ensure that our voices are heard. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Here. Anyone else like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes Council of Florida. Please have my name as a co-sponsor. Thank you, Counsel. Anyone else like to add their name? Please. Councilor Baker, Councilor Braid and Councilor. Console, Lara. Console vision. Councilor Murphy Council overall the chair. Uh, talking 0187 will be referred to the committee on. Government operations. Madam Clerk, please read docket 0188, please. Thank you. Do I could zero 180 Councilors Arroyo in here are fortifying ordinance preventing wage theft in the city of Boston.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Public Walkways Occupancy Permit with sidewalk extension parklet for sidewalk dining at Pine Avenue Parklet, located at 440, 450, and 454 Pine Avenue. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_01092018_18-0014

Motion carries. Thank you. Item 11 Please. Report from Public Works recommendation to authorize a city manager to execute a public walkways occupancy permit with sidewalk extension parklet for sidewalk dining at Pine Avenue Parklet located at 440450 and 454. Pine Avenue District one. Thank you. Staff report. Please. Deputy Director of Public Works, Sean Crombie. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Council. Item 11 on the agenda is a request to approve a parklet within the sidewalk dining program at the addresses of 440450 and 454 Pine Avenue. The PARKLET program is in place to allow restaurants to occupy a portion of the public right away for seating that has multi benefits to the community, in that it provides extra seating for the restaurant, but it also activates space within our public right away. It's been a very successful program. This particular parklet is a little bit unique, first of its kind, because it's the first parklet that's shared between between three different businesses, shared space. So with that, I'm available to answer any questions that you have. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez. I just wanted to acknowledge Tony Shoshone, who's here. He's really worked very closely with public works, as well as our office in revitalizing what was formerly known as City Place, which is now the street. So I thank you, Tony, as well as Shawn, Crumby and Public Works. Thank you for working through many of our parklet questions. We look forward to continuing our work together. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Pierce. Also the same. Congratulations. You guys have really helped transform our downtown and so thank you for all the work and always things to stop for thinking outside of the box on our PARKLET program. Thank you. Public comment on this item. Seeing nonmembers, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. So at this time, we're going to go to public comment on non agenda items. We have only three. I think folks want to get to the state of the city tonight. So we have Harold Ara Boesky.

A bill for an ordinance approving the 4201 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Plan and the creation of the 4201 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Area and the 4201 East Arkansas Sales and Property Tax Increment Areas. Approves the 4201 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Plan authorizing the creation of an Urban Redevelopment Area and sales and property tax increment areas in Council District 6. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 11-12-19.

DenverCityCouncil_12022019_19-1245

Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close the voting, announce the results. 1339 as Council Bill 1058 has passed. Councilman Herndon, will you please put Council Bill 1245 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the council bill 19 dash one, two, four, five be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded the public hearing for Council Bill one, two, four, five is open. May we have the staff report? You go. Good evening, Mr. President. Members of City Council. My name is Tracy Huggins, and I'm the executive director of the Denver Urban Renewal Authority here this evening, requesting council's approval of the 4201 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Plan to facilitate development of the 40 2001 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Area. The proposed area is an area of 13.2 acres located in the Virginia Village statistical neighborhood. The site includes six parcels, five of which are positioned for redevelopment, and one of which includes a microwave tower which will retain will be retained by Seedat. The area is generally bounded by East Louisiana and East Louisiana. Easy for me to say. East Louisiana Avenue to the North South Byrd Street to the East, East, Arkansas Avenue to the south and the Eastern property line of the private commercial property fronting Colorado Boulevard to the west. One of the parcels included in the area is located east of South Byrd Street at the northeast corner of East Arkansas Avenue and South Birch Street. The area served as the seaboard headquarters for approximately 65 years in 2018, set out, consolidated its operations and relocated to a new building in West Central Denver, Colorado. State law requires properties owned by the state to be offered to a local government entity first before they may be offered for sale to a private purchaser. The city and county of Denver was the successful bidder for this site. After being selected, the city chose a master developer through a competitive selection process to effect catalytic development of the property, ensuring development consistent with the existing neighborhood area plans, economic and job development. In December of 2018, much of the site was resigned from the Campus Zone District to a variety of mixed use and residential zoned districts, with the intention of incentivizing the creation of a pedestrian oriented community asset that transitions appropriately into the existing neighborhood. A Condition study was commissioned in July of 2019 and it was finalized in October of 2019. The study specifically excluded any conditions relating to the buildings as they were to be demolished by CEDAW prior to the consideration of the Urban Redevelopment Plan. The study supported a finding of blight based on the presence of the following conditions. Unsanitary or unsafe conditions. Deterioration of sight or other improvements. Unusual topography or. Inadequate public improvements. Or utilities. Environmental contamination of buildings or property. And the existence of factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings or other improvements. The finding of blight is a legislative finding by the City Council. Based upon the condition study, which has been filed with the city clerk and other evidence presented at this public hearing. As part of the purchase of the property from the city, the developer was required to commit to certain development outcomes related to the planning and development of the site, including the preparation of a master drainage study to address all drainage issues, including onsite detention and water quality. A traffic study addressing all transportation issues, including offsite and on site intersections, street layout, on site multimodal connections and other elements as determined in coordination with the Public Works Department, a required minimum of 10% of the net developable area to be publicly accessible. Open space or a designated park. A master transportation demand management study is to be provided to the city for review and approval. In addition, each concept site development plan for a parcel of vertical development must submit a letter identifying the team practices to be utilized, a requirement to construct at least 150 housing units with a maximum affordability restriction of 60%, ami a covenant to develop the property in a manner resulting in a minimum of 150,000 square feet of commercial space and the creation of a minimum of 200 permanent new jobs. While the developer is bound by the above noted conditions, they are serving as the horizontal developer initially of the site and will sell finished pads to vertical developers. Accordingly, there are no specific vertical development plans for the site, but this slide provides a proposed conceptual site plan. The expected development includes not more than 690 residential units on the site to be located on blocks one, two and five. The housing may include senior and senior assisted living and a mix of rental and for sale product. All of this will be dependent on the market conditions. The 150 affordable housing units will be located on BLOCK six. It is important that the site respect the density of the area so the maximum number of residential units is capped at 840. The current development plan includes an approximately 130 room hotel to be constructed on block for the remaining required. Commercial development will occur on the ground floors of blocks one, two and five. The goal, again, is to be a vibrant, mixed use development that delivers housing across a spectrum of incomes and ages meets the 100,000 150,000 square foot commercial development requirement and provides the 200 permanent jobs. BLOCK three will be an approximately one acre park to be owned, maintained and programed by the existing metropolitan district. The objectives of the Urban Redevelopment Plan are to reduce or eliminate blighted conditions and to stimulate the continued growth and development of the urban redevelopment area. The proposed Urban Redevelopment Project meets the objectives of the plan, as noted on the screen behind me, including the creation of complete and inclusive neighborhoods. Encourage mixed use redevelopment that is socially and economically inclusive more effectively. Use underdeveloped land within the urban redevelopment area. Improve access to healthy transportation options, healthy foods and open space. And promote a diverse, sustainable neighborhood economy, including mixed use and commercial development opportunities within the area. This slide, which I apologize for a challenge in reading any of it is intended to show the key objectives of the Urban Redevelopment Plan, Plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver that this plan and project will address the city as part of their sale transaction to the developer identified many of the strategies necessary to allow for the redevelopment of this approximately 13 acre site in a way that maximizes its development potential while balancing the impacts of redevelopment on the surrounding area, the inclusion of 150 units of affordable housing, the requirement of job creation, the open space dedications, the traffic mitigation requirements and the density limitations all work to mitigate the involuntary displacement of residents or businesses, respect the existing character of the neighborhood and provide new access to services and amenities. Any Urban Redevelopment Plan in Progress project must be determined to further the goals and objectives of Plan 2040 and its approved supplements. As this diagram intends to show, not every goal and objective of each plan can be addressed through urban renewal activities. However, we believe this plan and project meet the relevant criteria of the city plans. The Urban Redevelopment Plan was submitted to the Denver Planning Board on November six of this year with a staff recommendation to find the plan to be in conformance with the comp plan. 2040 Planning Board voted 8 to 1 to find the plan to be in conformance with Plan 2040 and its adopted supplements. And a letter to this effect has been submitted as part of the the record of this hearing. The Urban Redevelopment Plan authorizes Doura to finance projects with the in the area by the use of tax increment financing. The tiff will remedy the blighting conditions through financial assistance of costs related to infrastructure, environmental remediation and site work. In addition to the development challenges presented by these blighting conditions, the project is also requesting TIFF to deliver the development plan outcomes already discussed. The TIFF will also be used to help address the costs related to delivering 150 units of affordable housing. The additional parking, open spaces and costs associated with tower improvements. The Dora staff has reviewed the development budgets and proforma submitted by the developer and believes there is a financial gap in the project of of approximately $23.6 million. This financing gap will be addressed by reimbursing eligible costs through property tax and sales tax increment generated from the tax increment area, which is coterminous with the urban redevelopment area for a period not to exceed 25 years. The utilization of tax increment financing invokes the requirement that before City Council can approve a new urban redevelopment plan, they must find that an agreement has been entered into between Dura and the affected taxing district in regards to the allocation of property tax increment to the project. There are three other property taxing districts Denver Public Schools, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District and the East Arkansas Metropolitan Districts. All taxing districts were notified of the proposed urban redevelopment plan following that notification. All of these districts evaluated the impact the project would have on their ability to deliver services based on the information provided to urban drainage. They have determined that the project will have limited impact on their ability to deliver services and have agreed to allow all increment derived from their mill levy to be paid to Dura to support the project. Denver Public Schools has also evaluated the impact the residential development will have on their ability to provide services to schools in the Southeast planning region. These schools include Ellis Elementary Merrill Middle School and South High School. While DPS has agreed to allow all increment derived from their mill levy to be paid to direct to support the project, they have requested payment of just over $1.2 million from the tax increment to support the schools in the Southeast planning region per the terms of the DPS Inter-Governmental Agreement. The $1.2 million will be paid prior to any amounts reimbursing the developer for eligible costs. The East Arkansas Metropolitan Districts have requested that all incremental taxes generated by their mill levy be paid to them to support the redevelopment of the site. The cooperation agreement between Dura and the Metropolitan Districts allows for this payment. Lastly, the under the cooperation agreement between the city and borough governs the collection and remittance of both the property and sales tax increment to support the redevelopment project. It also limits the term of the tax increment area to the earlier of repayment of the DURA obligation or 25 years. In considering the approval of the 40 2001 East Arkansas Urban Redevelopment Plan, City Council must make the following additional legislative findings that the boundaries of the area have been drawn as narrowly as feasible to accomplish the planning and development objectives of the plan. If any individuals or families are displaced, or if any business concerns are displaced as a result of adoption or implementation of the plan, a feasible method exists for the relocation of those families, businesses and individuals in accordance with the ACT. Due to the vacancy of the project area, it contains no residences or business concerns. Therefore, no individuals, families or businesses will be displaced. Written notice of this public hearing has been provided to all property owners, residents and owners of business concerns within the urban redevelopment area. This written notice was mailed on October 31st of 2019, at least 30 days prior to this public hearing. Not more than 120 days have passed since the first public hearing before City Council on the plan. This is the first consideration of an urban redevelopment plan for this site. And this the city Council has not previously failed to approve an urban redevelopment plan for this site. The Urban Redevelopment Plan will afford maximum opportunity for the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the area by private enterprise. The Urban Redevelopment Plan does not consist of any area of open land which is to be developed for residential or non residential uses or any agricultural land. And lastly, that the city and county of Denver can adequately finance and agreements are in place to finance any additional city and county of Denver infrastructure and services required to serve this urban redevelopment area. And the Urban Renewal Plan allows for cooperative agreements between the city and area to address additional infrastructure requirements should they arise. I do want to note that this plan does not authorize any acquisition by eminent domain. So Jura is pleased to work with the city and with the control group to bring forward this project. As I noted earlier, the city administration to find a good project when it required the creation of 200 jobs, delivery of commercial space and 150 units of affordable housing. However, the work of Councilman Cashman and the community he represents made it a much better project when they increased the open space requirement from 10% to nearly 20%. With the addition of the one acre park, when they cap the total number of residential units to serve to respect the surrounding area and required traffic mitigation not only immediate to the site but also to other parts of the neighborhood that will be impacted by the project. These are all very important elements of the project that cannot be delivered without the assistance of urban renewal and tax increment financing. That concludes my staff report, and we respectfully ask for your favorable consideration of this plan. Thank you very much. All right. We have 13 individuals signed up to speak this evening, so I will call first five up to the bench and then when your name is called to step up to the microphone. Our first five tonight are Curtis Roe, Chris Faskari, Jimmy Bull, Office Chairman Sekou and Jesse Paris. You'd come on up. And Curtis Rowe, you're. Good evening. I'm Curtis Rowe with Kimberly Artist Associates. I'm a traffic engineer, prepared the traffic impact study that was. Referenced for this project. And I'm. Available to answer any. Questions that you may. Have after the comment period. Thank you very much. Christmas card you. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Chris Vickery with the control group 1509 York Street. After our robust engagement with the neighborhood, the neighborhood really challenged us on coming out with the following outcomes focus on open space, balanced density with inclusion, housing, a neighborhood retail center, solutions for traffic and improvements of the tower that's existing. The proposal in front of you tonight, we've have we've created inclusive development that provides doubling the open space 10 to 20% with one acre community park and other open space that will focus on seasonal programing and art, limiting our residential density to 840 units. That's inclusive of the 150 units of affordable housing that we'll be providing on site. That makes up to 18% of affordable housing out of the residential units. Additionally, we're going to target the separate segments to really make this as diverse as we can, and that's getting age restricted assisted living, market rate and probably for sale depending on the market. The affordable housing is a part of the project with or without the TIFF. Really, the tiff is really just going to expedite that getting delivered outside of what we did committed in our development agreement neighborhood center, we really spent a lot of time here. We're trying to create what we call the heart of a project. And you can kind of see on the site plan that was surrounded around a plaza. We studied city centers in Europe, in other places in Europe to really figure out what what's the best size and how do we activate this and do something great since we're off of Colorado Boulevard and we think we found the right size and placement of that, and with the density around it could be successful. That's going to be lined with restaurants, a grocery, a cop shop, other neighborhood retail center services that the neighborhood will want to come to. And we're going to hopefully focus local traffic since the beginning of the rezoning. This is something that we've had a head on just with the change that's coming there. We've worked with the councilmen, the neighbors and our team. The proposed traffic improvements that we're making on and off site. Some of those are a mile away. Off site. We're actually making low level service better than what they are today, including our our traffic. So I think that's a huge step forward. The other really big thing that we need to focus on is the pedestrian, the biker and other modes to get to the site. And we're proposing a very robust TDM strategy with the mobility hub and other modes to really incent people to get out of the car rather than always using Colorado Boulevard and driving to the site . Luckily where we are, we're bordered by two bus lines, the 40 and 46 and where we have light rail that's only three quarters of a mile away. And we're going to have to create a way to connect to that. The existing tower is a unique beast. We'll get that one and get it redesigned. And we really envision this as the project, not Cherry Creek, not Rhino, not low, high. It's a culture and experience. It's our Virginia village. Thanks. Thank you. Next up, Jimmy Buffett. Good evening, counsel and councilwoman. I'm Jimmy Butler, office co-founder and principal of the Cancer Group. And we're the company that's developing this great project in front of you guys tonight. We're here tonight to seek your approval for a tiff. With this tiff, we can create this amazing project, and we can create this best community. We can create the best community possible with a set of enhancements that will help transform this great development into an unforgettable one. This quick recap This project is comprised of 150 units of affordable housing that we will be built on site. It also is going to include another 690 units, a market rate unit for sell units, senior living and for sale product. We also are planning to construct this vibrant, walkable community where we'll have a grocery store, cafes, restaurants, neighborhood, community, neighborhood oriented retail that will service the surrounding neighborhoods. We plan to create 200 permanent jobs, and then we also plan to reintroduce the street grid. Asch and Belair will come through between Louisiana and Arkansas. So these were all the requests that were put in development agreement. When we had our ten meetings with the community, we heard great things. That cannot be taken lightly. And so we heard that the community wanted a park, which we're going to deliver on this site. And that's taken the the open space from 10% to 20%. We're also going to deliver a rebuilt of a tower. Right now, the tower on site is an eyesore and we plan to beautify that tower and make it more of an icon than than an eyesore for the community. We also are doing a cop shop and we're also doing a vibrant, vibrant streetscapes that's very walkable for the whole community. I am asking you for your support tonight, but I want to thank all the groups that have helped shape this project from City Administration Public Works, CPD host the Division of Real Estate Cities Attorney's Office, Councilman Cashman. And of course, the neighbors and all those stakeholders have really shaped where we are tonight, and we're going to continue to work with all stakeholders as we built this great project. I'll be available to answer any specific questions once all the speakers have concluded. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Chairman Sekou. Chairman say who likes the arts movement? Self defense. Very rarely. After over 15 years of coming down here. Can I actually consciously. Support a project such as this. It is. Thoroughly organized. It includes. All other aspects that allows the city's poor, vulnerable community to be included. In terms of housing and jobs and being welcomed into a community that is privileged. And perhaps most importantly, because I can't speak to the good and bad intentions of any of the council members. I can certainly affirm without mentioning anybody's name that. This was good. This could. That's good. And the people of this neighborhood are very lucky. Could you speak to the microphone so everybody can hear. People and people in the neighborhood who've come here for support or against a very lucky to have the quality of leadership that currently exists for this district. Now, of course, that's no endorsement because rarely do we agree on stuff. But I got to go. I got to go get this one. And I'm glad I came tonight because this is one of those things that I didn't expect to happen here. So. Good luck. Congratulations. And Tracy. Smile. I'm not going get you this time. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Paris and I'll call the next five up to the front bench. Pamela Whitney Walsh, Debora Powers, Monte Powers, Brooke Webb and Russell Welch. Go ahead. Good evening. Council President Clark, members of council members of the audience, those watching at home. My name is Jesse. Listen, Paris. And I'll be your next mayor in 2023. And I slogan is Just for the poor people. Our prophet and I represent for Denver Homicide out loud, Blackstar, some more self-defense forces have actually come in for social change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and the Universal African People's Organization in my OHI knows I am still reluctantly against this because for the simple fact we were told we can do better this whole time. And all I keep seeing is rezonings for more housing that people cannot afford, you need to just stop corner at affordable housing and just say, Look, this is not affordable. You're just not going to be able to afford this 60%, am I really? That's that's the best we can do. While we have how many vacant luxury apartments in this town, it is apparently clear where your priorities are. And it is not affordable housing, let alone attainable house. And tonight I've heard two rezonings for housing that most people, especially people that look like me, cannot afford. But yeah, I keep hearing all this stuff about diversity and inclusivity and it meets this criteria. So systems are the criteria. You're going to approve it anyway. But logically speaking, this is not the answer. But I have a good relationship with Councilperson in this district, so it's going to be a reluctant. Yes on this. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Pamela Whitney off. Good evening. I'm Pamela Walsh and I reside at 1316 South Elm Street. And I'm here tonight in support of the financing needed for the redevelopment of this project. I participated in nearly every one of the ten community meetings hosted by Castro in my roles as a prior board member of the Virginia Village Community Association, as well as the East Evans Business Association, and tonight as a neighbor. I live just about half a mile or five blocks from the site, and I'm anticipating this new development to be my go to for all of my basic amenities and services. Potentially hair salon, dentist, veterinarian and entertainment like a park and movies and restaurants. I dream of living a mostly carefree lifestyle, and I think this site has the potential to not only provide for most of my household needs, but also to elevate the reputation of the southeast Denver neighborhood as a destination and something for other neighborhoods to aspire to. Specific to the funding being requested tonight, I believe that TIF financing is critical to address some of the fundamental components of the site redevelopment so that it can fully maximize its potential, including the creation of a neighborhood park and more open space that might otherwise not be possible. The ability to more effectively address traffic management and thoughtful design transfer to thoughtfully design transportation options like public transit and car share to minimize the impact to the neighboring community, to reconnect the grid that was previously obstructed by the on campus, and to beautify the communications tower that is currently an eyesore. Finally, I believe the program is worthy of this incremental financing because Castro group has demonstrated that they're genuinely interested in committing to creating the best experience for our community, as evidenced by their ongoing community meetings, adjustments to their plans based on our input, including the maximizing of low income housing units, and providing a park and engaging a local architectural expert to advise on their conceptual designs to ensure that it meets that it fits in with our community esthetic. So as a neighbor who stands to benefit from having a locally focused one stop shop that reflects the charming midcentury modern design of our special neighborhood, I ask that you vote in support of funding tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Debora Powers. Hi. I'm Debra Powers. I live at 4503 East Arkansas Avenue, and I thank you for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. January 2020 marks the two year milestone to my introduction to the project and my first Cantrell neighborhood meeting. The neighborhood embraced affordable housing as part of the project control grid. We wanted more open space and then we wanted more open space. And they went back to the drawing board and they gave us the park. I envision this development, bringing a vital, vibrant addition to our ever changing city. I will walk to many new amenities that the development will offer. I like that the retail will support local businesses. I am most excited when I hear that there is a discussion of a transportation hub being created here. It makes sense that a tip investment will be used for the redevelopment was a thoughtful inclusion by the control group to partner with Dora. One of Dora's objectives is to steward a citywide vision as Denver grows and changes. I find Dora had a hand in some of my favorite development projects throughout Denver. Larimer Square, the Pepsi Center. Ari, the Sauce and University Hills. Let's move this project forward and provide the investment needed. Tonight I ask for your support. Please vote to approve the partnership and tip investment that will help finance this redevelopment in my neighborhood. When we bring it across the finish line, I believe it will be exceptional. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Monte Powers. My name is Monte Powers. I live at 4503 East Arkansas Avenue. Thank you for letting me speak to you tonight about the redevelopment of the property of 4201 East Arkansas Avenue. I believe Cantrell has assembled the best team to do this project and the control group that proven that they care about my community. When other developers would have bought their way out of a 60% and my affordable housing, Cantrell chose to include these people in my community. I've been to all ten of the community meetings. Controls had controls listened to my community. The plan has evolved as a response to community input. I'm excited to have a new restaurant and retail opportunities with walkability in my neighborhood. I'm happy that there will be a small park as part of this community, and I'm also excited about the plans for transportation hub. This is a great project that can transform this part of Denver. The use money generated by the by the use of tiff money generated by the revenue created by this project are useful tool to let Dura and Cantrell have a development that will stand the test of time and be a model for future development. Please vote for TIFF funding for this development. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Brooke Webb. Good evening. I'm Brooke Webb. I live at 5382 East Colorado Avenue, about eight blocks from this the space. The reason I'm speaking tonight in support of the TIFF funding is because of many of the features that have already been mentioned tonight. So I'll just quickly run through them. But my understanding is we're getting around a one acre open space park, many restaurants and shops. There's going to be a mobility and transportation hub. And we need to retrain, retain and attract families to the neighborhood. My daughter attends Ellis Elementary School, which has a population that's been decreasing. We really need the affordable housing. As of right now, 85% of the students that attend Alice Elementary are on free and reduced lunch. So even though we're in a very affluent neighborhood, there's still a very big need for affordable housing in the neighborhood. And I also think that funding is very important for the tower. Right now, it's an eyesore, but it sounds like it's going to be a place finding landmark for the future for the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Russell Welch. And Stewart Anderson Jeff to Hardie and Bill James if you'd come up to the front bench. Good evening, everyone. My name is Russell Welch. I live at 1964 South Pontiac Street. I represent my family and they're probably the toughest constituents I'll ever face. So that drove me to be here tonight. You know, I've been part of this since the very beginning, and I've not seen a developer in my time working in commercial. Construction acts the way Castro does. They've not only spoke, but they've listened. They listened to all of our needs. They provided the open space and the retail that we so desperately need. I've lived there. For 15 years, so my kids have grown up there. We live across. From the Sears that we see that's. Dead. And hopefully soon it'll it'll come back to life. But we have no place to go when it comes to meeting our neighbors. And many days, we look longingly at South Pearl Street or South Gaylord Street in the festivals that we can't ride our bikes to, we can't walk to. And our kids need that. Our families need that. And I think our community needs that. We can look to other examples of projects that have had that have had TIFF financing in our area. Whether that's you, Hills or Tamarack. They've been successful. But you know what? Those are just retail. This project brings people together. Go have a beer with one another. Go out, play. Some horseshoes or cornhole or whatever. We don't have that and we desperately need it. This is a 13 acre site and this is your chance to make a good project. A great project. And I've lived in Denver a long time, and I don't know that our city council does things just good. We do it great. And in order to do that, we. Have to pass the TIFF financing. So my constituents will be very upset with me if I have to go home and tell them that this didn't pass. So I implore you, please pass the two financing. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Stewart Anderson. Street, Anderson 1041 Marion Street. I run an organization known as Transportation Solutions. We work in that area where the control was building and we've been working with them in good faith to address a variety of issues that you've heard about. And certainly there's three core components that we're looking at. One is to create a multimodal environment that means anybody can get around walking, biking, using a cargo bike, whatever it is that they need a car share, it'll be there. The focus is this mobility hub that will be placed on the east side that will not only benefit those at that site, but the residents around that area. It'll improve access to Colorado station for residents of that area. And the second is to connect the network. We're trying to connect to the Florida bike path so that so this property is connected to all other types of facilities that are available. But the third point that I'd like to call out and why I think this investment is very important, is that they've really focused on one thing , and that's called internal capture, and we overlook that too often. Internal capture means putting a grocery store in that property where you have residents. There's not going to be somebody getting in a car and driving to the grocery store. It reduces those trips, and a well-designed facility can reduce up to 30% of their trip generation by putting different uses and making those available. And one thing that we don't look at at the city is how many trips we reduce from people around the area. And I think having a grocery store, having restaurants, having the ability to walk in an area that was blocked by the court headquarters when you're going north and south, allows people to get out and to enjoy these things. And I really think it's going to be an asset for the community. And I would encourage you to go forward with the funding and make this happen. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Jeff Tardy. Good evening. Jeff Hardy, 1970 South Clayton Street. In listening to Tracy earlier tonight, she was talking about the financing package, which included about 23 million and change of eligible TIFF dollars for this project. And I'm thinking about that gap that's provided and that unique opportunity tonight to approve a package of public money, to go back into the community, go backing into the roads, allowing for a catalyst or for future development, open space. We're creating jobs, 200 plus jobs, commercial retail, affordable housing for sale, for rent, housing, product, a true mixed use community. We have an opportunity that's unique. I just want you to realize that as you make your choices, you have a good developer who stands behind their word here. We have a unique tool to take this from a good project to a great project and make this be almost a legacy model of what TIFF can be for future projects. So with that, I ask you to approve tonight's TIFF package. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Bill James. Thank you. I'm Bill James. I live at. 1145 South Glencoe Street for those council members that haven't met. Me before. I was on the board of directors of RTD. For two terms and then a. Couple of years ago. And I'm a commercial. Real estate appraiser. And consultant. I lived in the Cherry Creek area for a long. Time and now live in the. Virginia Village area. And I'm happy to do that. And one of the things that I found was there's an opportunity presented by this site, and I decided to support the site. Among the things I. Support because of my career are cost effective public and private resources, affordable housing and enhanced mobility. I'm one of the founding. Members of the Board of Directors of Transportation Solutions, which is run so well by Stuart Anderson. I'd like to say good real estate's supporting residents and businesses. And there's a number of things that this project that I see that I appreciate a lot among them, that the council's willingness to listen to citizens and the input that they were able to give. The city, taking the opportunity to take this site. And encourage its redevelopment. In ways that can benefit the community. As well as it can. The result of the site feel it took place a little while back. It was, I think, very helpful to allow retail and gathering place type uses. The the. I really appreciate the the outreach that Cointreau. Has done. I've watched some of the other projects that they do and it's and this. Is likely to turn out to be a very good project as a. Result of that, the affordable housing component that has been required along the way is is sure to benefit. The neighborhood, contribute to balance the. Mobility enhancement that is. Required. The team will benefit the neighborhood as well. I really appreciate the fact that the antenna tower. Will be beautified as. Much as it will be. And then Control's agreement to include a park in the in the development as well. The and some of the conversations that I've had with them. Encouraging things like a food. Hall. Developments that. Can cause people to be attracted to this location and make it so that this neighborhood has a a gathering place. Similar to the Cherry Creek that. I don't live in anymore. So I really encourage. The council to. Approve this TIFF financing. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers on this item. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. May I have a question for Director Huggins or a couple of questions? They should be quick, though. Thank you for coming. Does this application require a letter of support from a city council person? We have requested a letter of support from the councilperson, and through that, the conversations that we have had with the councilmen during the course of this have really stood in the place of that letter at this time. But we have we would always prefer to have a letter of support, but that has not been received on this project. Okay. Thank you. And that's it for direct or. Excuse me, Mr. Bluffs, may I ask you a couple questions? And thank you, Director Hawkins. Hello. Hi. How's it going? Good. Thank you for living in District ten. Sorry you moved out of District ten. Anyway, so I had a couple of questions about the development. Do you have. In the presentation, there was a thought of linking this site to the nearby transportation three quarters of a mile away. Do you. Since. Since it was brought up, do you have any ideas on how that might happen? Yeah, there there was the bus line 46 I believe that runs Belair, that runs North-South. It's still not running as efficient as it can, but we plan to sit down with our team, our multi mobile team and work with RTD to see how we connect to it. I know at one point there was a chariot that ran with Glendale that went away, so I think there's some ideas there, but I think it's going to take some discussions with some stakeholders that can get us to that stop. Yeah. Chariot actually went through your neighborhood between Camp Hill and Cherry Creek, so I'm familiar with the project was very short lived, but yeah, a just as other potential sites, Inglewood has the art bus that connects the transit station to the businesses surrounding the community. So if there's something that that could be similar. So I like the idea of of connecting the site to the transit hub because we've talked a lot about multimodal transit, and I'd love to further encourage getting people out of cars. Um, did I hear that you're restoring the grid, as in reconnecting through streets? Yeah. So part of the development agreement was to at least bring one of the streets through, and that was built there. And so right now you have Louisiana to the north and Arkansas to the south, and you have. A big block. That is stopping the Denver street grid. So with a tiff, approval will connect Belair and Astro. So and what was the thought process behind Reconnecting Through Streets? Is that I mean, was that a requirement from the city or one of the streets is. But I think we can we want to build this vibrant community. And a lot of the charm around the city is on a grid. And we just want to want to keep it. Why recreate the will? So we just decided to kind of continue it. Sure. And and I think your your plan is probably already well down the path. If we are encouraging multimodal modal transit, I would love to pedestrianize more streets rather than car and ize them. Yep. So just just as an ash is probably going to be more of a private street, the metro district will control it. And we want to make it all brick. And we we want to make it more of a private street that's more pedestrian friendly than car. I mean, there's not going to be any surface parking lot through this whole site. So this is going to be a very pedestrian oriented development. And that's absolutely fair to. There are a lot of European streets. I think someone mentioned European earlier tonight and a lot of European streets that technically allow cars, but it is designed more for people than it is for cars. So thank you for considering that. And then the last thing I'd say is you talked about how this is a community for a lot of people and you talked about age and income. I I'd just a do you are you putting in disability friendly units or are you considering that? I guess I would just say I would invite you to to make that part of your conversation as well. Yes. As when we get to the detail drawings, we want an inclusive community. So. Great. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I do have a couple of questions. But first, in response to Councilman Haynes's question to Tracy, I decided against providing a letter in advance, because this is a very serious, important discussion, and I didn't want to short circuit that discussion. It was neither. No inference should have been made from that. Let's see, Chris. Question for you. So the the area that the park. Will be constructed on is an area that historically has been connected with some environmental challenges. Can you speak about that? And does that affect construction of the park? We just. Yeah. Yeah, no problem. So the northeast corner is has a historical contaminated site. Cedar has been actually in the for a program with the Department of Health and being required to clean it since the eighties. They're making good headway. It's basically isolated to the groundwater now, and it's right at the northeast corner of basically Louisiana and Birch. So that doesn't mean you can't occupy. It doesn't mean before they see that had employees operating in the facility. And in this circumstance, how it'll work is Cedar still actually owns the underlying land. They're still going to be required to take care of the contamination and close out the site. And how we operate under that is it's actually a license agreement that will allow us perpetual use and to develop there. So once we kind of get along with design, we'll see that in us. We'll go meet with the Department of Health to then say what's safe here and what do we need to do? Does that mean we need to do a vapor barrier and take out some dirt to make sure it's publicly safe and then everybody will sign off and the park can be installed. Okay. And Chris, have you figured out yet the exact size of that park? I know it it has to do a bit with the tower and some other factors. So right now, we're still at probably about 1.42 acres we're getting close to. And what's been hard about this is we're trying to solve the tower site. The tower side only has about 9000 square feet. It was used utilizing all the facilities of seedat. So or trying to solve for them is what do you need? Is that bathroom? How big of a kitchen? How many employees you're going to have there? So we're getting close to that. I have a weekly call with the state trying to satisfy what they need. And that's really what's driving that. That size is they might need some parking. So it'll be above an acre for sure. And right now we're at 1.42 acres. And can you. Are there other one acre parks that come to mind? Yeah. So we've done a good study and that's a good idea. We took the councilman on a quick drive just to kind of give some scale to things like Governor's Park McKinley, which is in Cherry Creek. There's a couple in Lodi that are around that size. And it's all about quantity. And you know what you're providing in that quality of that park. We're working with a public it's called Gale out of Copenhagen that's going to help us program how that will work. And they'll we're going to treat it just as a it's like a city park. We're going to have neighborhood meetings. We're going to go out and say what's going to what's needed here. And this is a public park. It's not just for the developer. Correct? It's created. Okay. You know, that's that that's good for right now. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Sawyer. Thank you, Mr. President. Tracy, I just wanted to ask a. Couple of questions. I know the last time we met was when we were setting an urban renewal area up on East Colfax. And there were a lot of questions around gentrification and displacement and the effects of an urban renewal area on the community. And so I just wanted to ask a couple of questions about what steps you have taken in this area to help ensure that that those kinds of issues are not going to happen in this area. So I think that the first and foremost, the current condition of the site really is important to take into consideration. It is now, since the buildings have been demolished, it is vacant. So we are not looking to go in and take something that an existing business that was there because they already left the site to be able to to bring new opportunities. I think the addition of the affordable housing really helps to provide new people coming in, as well as people who are already in the community have new options. I think the considerations of the age, the the senior and senior assisted again allows people in the neighborhood who are already there a different alternative as far as being able to stay in their neighborhood even as their life circumstances change. We did look a lot at the demographic around the area and its location very close to Colorado Boulevard already provides some additional barriers to change, if you will. You already have a very well-developed commercial corridor to the west. You already also have very well-established residential, albeit highly rental. This is a portion of the neighborhood that has a high degree of rental housing. And so this will add to that. But it has been in place for a long time and see this as really complementing as opposed to competing with with that site. So thinking about jobs, thinking about the affordable housing, thinking about just the infill nature of the site itself, I think all work to help mitigate the overall impact of change in this as you move farther to the east, really established in residential neighborhood, some hope we believe that all of those things in combination will help address what might otherwise happen happen to the area. Great. And then in terms of this is a little bit different because it comes with the tiff attached to it. So is this a is this then for a specific project or is this covering the entire area? So clarify that a little. Sure. Sure. So the urban renewal plan establishes the urban renewal area, which is just the property that started on. That is also the boundaries of the tax increment area. So the taxes that are generated only from that area is what we will capture to then reinvest back into the project to help deliver it. Perfect. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for Council Bill one, two, four or five is closed. Comments by members of Council or Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. And my colleagues will indulge me. I do have some thoughts. I've been living this project 24 hours a day for the past couple of years. It's never been very far from my mind. I live about seven or eight blocks from the site and I love my neighborhood. I'm not moving anywhere. And so whatever form it takes, I'll be living with this project as long as I'm on planet Earth. From the first time I heard about the potential redevelopment of the 13 plus acre site at East Arkansas Avenue and South Byrd Street, I've had one concern, and that is that whatever is built on the site and I've said this a million times, that it enhances the Virginia Village community rather than overwhelms it. So what does that mean? To enhance the community would be to bring in a mix of housing and commercial uses that allow Virginia Village residents and other locals to live, work and or play on the land where Colorado Department of Transportation held forth for for many decades. To earn money there or to spend money there at neighborhoods serving businesses within walking distance of their front doors. Overwhelming the community would involve traffic going to and from the site that the nearby arterials and collector streets cannot handle, thereby sending traffic streaming on to local residential streets where it's not intended to go. So the previous zoning for the site allowed for substantial use of 12 storey construction after initially considering some 12 storey construction on the northwest corner of this site. Kentaro decided agreed to drop the maximum height for the development eight storeys as part of the turf negotiations. As you've heard, the developer has capped the total number of doors, residential doors at 840. The development agreement went well when the rent control engaged with the city to purchase the site. The requirement of 150 units of affordable housing had a buyout agreement on it, a cash in lieu. And as we would go to the public meetings and they would say of affordable housing, affordable housing, I would tell them, you know, it's just another maybe the way maybe it'll be a health club or maybe it'll be something else. And so as things move forward, the development agreement they signed and agreed that that 150 units of affordable housing was a definite must do as part of the project. And as as I believe Tracy mentioned, that takes the affordable component to 18% on this site, which is getting close to what we should be doing on every site , you know, where usually we talk about 10%. This is nearly double that. The developer's own estimates have predicted that traffic generated on the site is expected to grow anywhere from 5 to 7 times over what the old DOT site generated to reduce that number. At my request, early on, Kentaro contacted Transportation Solutions and ended up contracting with transportation solutions to devise infrastructure and processes to reduce auto trips to and from the site. Again, at my request, even though there have been no formal site plans available to work with. Courtesy Kim Lee Horne has and Kentaro have have worked with Denver Public Works in two different teams since we lost the first team to other cities, but have worked repeatedly to to get ahead of the game and assess traffic mitigation opportunities between Colorado Boulevard and Holly Street from Arkansas down to Florida and have come up with with a number of recommended improvements. And while that while the tiff includes some money that would go towards paying for these improvements, these traffic mitigation measures should along the way Denver Public Works decide. You know what, guys, that's not enough. We need more. That will have to come from the from the developer's pocket. And that's part of this of this TIFF agreement. And again, has been said, the agreement includes that whatever ends up being built needs to generate 200 permanent jobs, 200 new jobs, in addition to the construction temporary construction related positions. It is conceivable that during construction on this 13 acre site, multiple companies will be working on site at the same time. And so Control is also agreed to assign a single construction manager so that any concerns that might be related to construction will have one point of contact to. Carry that, carry the message where it needs to go. And in late in the project, realizing that Denver Parks and Rec now has a. Substantial fund for purchase of parkland along with Parks and Rec. We met with Castro and started discussions on wood with the city. Purchase some land and buy a park. And the city wanted two acres. Castro was unable to to work that into their plan, but then took the approach of they would construct a park in the 1 to 1.4 acres, a number, as you've heard, that will be accessible to the public. It will be designed with public involvement. And that brings that the normal ten again, the normal 10% open space figure, which should be more as we access as we evaluate projects moving forward, this gets us up closer to 20%. You've heard the money will be used to beautify the erector set my communications tower that has had nothing in the way of esthetics. And one thing that most people probably understand, some people may not right now. And while Seedat was on that land, it did not generate tax money. You know, the state was tax exempt. So while we are considering entering into a deal where for a couple of decades the taxes generated will not go into city coffers, they are paying for investment in connecting the street grid and all the other improvements. And after those 20, 25 years, substantial tax revenue in the millions will be coming in to the city annually. Let's see as far as the jobs. By involving Dora in a TIFF and managing a TIFF program, though, those 200 permanent jobs and the construction jobs are subject to a first source hiring dictate that requires that they welcome first application from low income Denver residents. It doesn't mean that the jobs have to go to those people, but it does mean they have to be given serious consideration. You know, in our current especially in our current construction, with so much building going on around the city, those jobs can be can be difficult to fill. What else? 23% of the total project budget, excluding the land costs, will be devoted to SB firms, small business enterprise firms. That number is not set in stone. It is a guideline. There are no penalties, particularly if they don't reach that number. However, they will be required to present a plan to doer to show how they intend to reach that number. One of my first requests, when we considered this project two years ago, there was a cop shop at Monaco and Lead Stale that had lost their lease. And I ask that they consider finding, you know, a couple hundred, few hundred square feet for a cop shop. And while the details haven't been settled, there's what I consider a handshake commitment that that will be part of this project in some form. Last thing as far as. Why would we want to enter into this agreement is it provides an overall degree of oversight over what's going to happen on this property. That wouldn't be there if there wasn't this involvement with Dura. I'm believing what the developer says, that they intend to sell the pads to other builders, vertical builders, and then take back management and ownership of the retail portion. I believe they'll remain on site should they decide to sell. Any sale needs to be approved by Doura to ensure that the plan that we're approving, whether it's Cantrell or anybody else, gets carried through. So this has been a real wrestling match for for a couple for a couple of years. As I said to Councilman Hines. You know, I don't know. It was a month or two months ago when this hugging said, you know, we really would like a letter from the council member and say. No. No, we're we're still talking about this. There's still work to be done. I don't know whether we've gotten to the point that I have been aiming for as creating a development that is going to enhance more than impact. I think we've made real, profound steps in that direction. So now we'll just continue as a community. Should my colleagues support this project to try to build something that I think is what my neighbors would want? So, yes, I will be supporting this package this evening, and I hope that my colleagues will join me in investing in the Virginia Village community. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. The city saw this as a great opportunity when Cedar was moving away from this site and we were given the first right of refusal in the city, said, Yeah, we want it, but we're going to turn, turn around and put it out to bid. And I had the opportunity to attend a couple of the community meetings and saw the incredible work that was being done by the Kintore Group in in terms of really listening to the community and incorporating that input into this project. Clearly, the TIFF piece is a critical component that makes the overall finances of the project work. But. I think in general, you know, the fact that you're doing more affordable housing on the site than is normally requested with other TIFF projects that you're doing more open space than is normally requested or provided is just speaks a lot to the commitment and the dedication of this team in bringing forward a project that the community was happy to support. And you had community people here tonight. We didn't see any naysayers. Even to have Sekou and Jesse here speaking in support. I guess Jesse was sort of on the fence, but. You know, Brother Sekou is typically very critical of development projects that don't incorporate, you know, certain elements. And obviously the affordability that is part of this project and the fact that it will it was going to happen regardless of whether the tiff was in, you know, Inc., I think speaks a lot to the the genuine commitment that this team had to making this a quality project for this neighborhood. I would love to be able to connect you guys to some local groups. We have some incredible models like The Prodigy Coffee, the work options for women, the commercial program over on the taxi site. These are all incredible services being provided to the community. But at the same time, they're they're working with different segments of our population and they're giving back to the community as well. So I would just hope you would consider some of those as as potential options to have as as possible tenants in some of the spaces that you guys are going to be having, depending on, you know, what that makeup or the mix of of those various types of businesses are that are going to be on the site. So I'm happy to support this tonight. I think this is clearly a model that I would hope that other developers take note of and really look to in in terms of. Actually what used to be provided to City Council on a pretty consistent basis before the zoning code was changed. And some of us are talking about trying to codify some of those old steps that used to be part of the zoning process. So stay tuned on that. There's there'll be a lot more conversations with the development community about that before anything is brought forward to city council. But great job. I think your your team did an amazing job in working with the community. I want to thank Councilman Cashman for his tenacity in continuing to push the envelope and really ensure that this is a project that was, you know, supported and welcomed by the community. Does it mean there won't be some challenges? I think with any project, it's all kind of continuing to work through those details with the community once the the development phase of it gets started. But this is a big step in moving the project forward. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I also will be voting in favor of this as well. But I part of the reason why I really enjoyed the message that you've delivered is something that I said in a in a previous conversation tonight. And that's you know, I'm very I'm a firm advocate of the 20 minute neighborhood. And and as Mr. Anderson had said, also a District ten resident, he had said that, you know, locating all the things you need to survive and thrive within walking distance or rolling distance, as the case may be, is is critical for us to get out of cars. And to President Clarke's point, getting out of cars is good for physical health. It's good for community, but it's also good for the planet, too. So so I commend you for your for your attention to it attention and intention to give us a place where we can have community. Apparently. Speaking of community, last thing I'll say is apparently you have a dearth of cornhole locations. So that was the as well. Geez, if there's if there's no cornhole and this will solve that, then I'm happy to support. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. All right, so no other comments. I will just say thank you all for coming tonight, sticking with us late into the evening to be a part of this conversation. Thank you, Tracy, for the presentation and for walking us through all of this. Thank you to the development team for all of your hard work, all of the meetings with community and with our colleagues up here to get to this point. I remember when we were debating the zoning on this site, I felt very, very strongly that night that the entitlements that were on the property, if left, how it was zoned versus what we were contemplating as a rezoning, that we would get a much better project and much better outcomes for the community. Under the proposal for rezoning. And I feel the same tonight that we will get much better outcomes and I won't go into the details of all of that because it's been covered and it's been talked about. But this will be much better for the community and for our city if we approve this than if we don't. And so I'll be happy to support it this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye to the Barca. I. Flynn. I. Gilmore. I. Herndon. I. Hines. I. PASHMAN. Yup. Kenny Ortega. I. Sandoval. I swear. I. Torres. Mr. President, I am secretary. Please cause voting. Announce the results. 1339 as Council Bill 1245 has passed. We're not quite done yet. We have that companion bill that we delayed earlier. Councilman Herndon, will you please put council bill 1246 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President, I move that council bill 19 dash one, two, four, six be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Are there any comments on this one or can we just get to the vote? Looks like we can just vote. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. CdeBaca Then I feel more. Herndon High. Hines I. Cashman I can reach. Ortega All right. Sandoval. I. Sawyer, I. Torres, I. Mr. President. I. Um. We're missing one. Did we miss somebody? Oh, all right. Madam Secretary, please close voting in those results. Oh. I think. No. Ortega, you didn't come through. I don't know what happened from. Where you and I. 39. 39, 39 As Council Bill 1246 has passed, seeing no other business before this body, this meeting is adjourned.

Recommendation to approve naming the green space/median located between 1st Street and Loma Avenue the John Parkin Green Space.

LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0343

We're going to move up to 25 quickly and take care of it. Thank you very much. Sure. The Communication from Councilwoman Price recommendation to refer to the Parks and Recreation Commission to consider naming the pocket park at First Street and Loma Ave in Bluff Park. The John Parkin Pocket Park. Thank you, vice mayor and council members. Just a moment. Councilwoman Price is going to introduce the item. I'm very happy to support this item. I'd love to hear from the public and then I'll give some closing remarks. Thank you. Let's go to the public. Go for. It. Okay. I'm here representing Jeff Mellon of the Park Neighborhood Association, as well as some of John's friends and neighbors. I'd like to read something prepared by Jeff Mellon. The Bluff Park Neighborhood Association on behalf of residents in the Bluff Park Historic District. Asked the small that the small garden in our neighborhood located at the corner of East First Street and lower to be named in memory of John W Park. And John was an iconic, longtime active resident who led and helped with many projects in the Bluff Park Historic District. He lived from 1926 through 2015. With many of those years spent serving the city. In the neighborhood. While living on his first street. According to the Long Beach Press Telegram, he is perhaps best known for being the petroleum. Engineer. A graduate of Cal Berkeley who helped save Long Beach from sinking as a result from oil drilling and turned oil into a major revenue producer for the city as oil was being pumped out of the underground reserves along the coast. The land began to sink, causing property damage. Structural, structural damage. It was John that proposed the resolution to that. John was an avid supporter of the Bluff Park Neighborhood Association for 33 years and. Served. On the board of directors. In 1998. After its former entity became a concerned citizen, was reorganized. In 2004, he helped conceive a project to bring the historic East First Street lampposts to all the neighborhood. Although it did not move beyond a concept at this time, his idea has been reinvigorated today as the association's Black Park Historic Lamppost project announced in 2017. The neighborhood convened a meeting with dozens of residents who strongly believe that John is one of the neighborhood's seminal figures in his history worthy of recognition and accolade by having his name placed in the garden just on a kind of a personal note. John not only served Long Beach, he served his country. He was awarded the Combat Infantry Badge, the European African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, the World War Two Victory Medal, the Army Occupation Medal, and two Bronze Stars. Thank you for inviting me to speak. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Joel Pyne and. I support naming this park after John Park and he's a he was a great. Guy and a good neighbor. And I think it's important. For the council to. Understand that the. Initiative, to name this small spit of land in the middle of the first. Street after John was a. Grassroots initiative, it was taken. It wasn't. Something that somebody. Came to us or the city asked us to do. He really made an impact, the neighbors, the community. And we recognize it. And we hope that the council supports this initiative to name this little spot of land. It doesn't take any city funds to take care of after John Park and my friend. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Price. Thank you. And one of the reasons I love it is because it was a grassroots effort that really came out of a community that is well known in this city as being a really close community, really engaged community, and a community where the people who live there genuinely love where they live, love the spirit of collegiality, love the friendship that they make with their neighbors. And for you to honor one of your neighbors in this way is truly impressive and inspiring to me. As was already mentioned, John Parkin was a resident of Bluff Park for 33 years and a strong supporter and former board member of the Local Community Association, the Bluff Park Neighborhood Association . Although he is known throughout the city for his role in addressing subsidence and the use of Long Beach oil revenues, it's his impact on his local neighborhood that many residents will most will remember most fondly. His friends and neighbors remember him as a humble and loyal man with great integrity and always willing to lend a helping hand . He was seen as an icon in the neighborhood who was admired by everyone. In honor of this resident and the positive mark he left on his community. Residents of Bluff Park have requested that. This pocket park at First Street and Loma be named in his honor. We would like to move this item forward to our Parks, Recreation and Marine Commission and request that the name of the park actually be the John Park and Green Space or something along those lines to reflect the geography of the park and really the use of this park. I asked my council colleagues to support this item. Thank you very much. Thank you. But I like the alliteration of Park and Park. Pocket Park. Park and Pocket Park. I think you make a mistake with the green green space. Members, please cast your vote.

A proclamation recognizing the 10th Annual Doors OPEN Denver event on April 12 and 13.

DenverCityCouncil_04072014_14-0288

Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. We have a second proclamation, proclamation number 288 that I have the honor of reading, which is recognizing the 10th annual Doors Open Denver event, April 12th and 13th. Whereas the beautiful city of Denver has a proud legacy of a variety of historic and contemporary architecture in its civic, commercial and private structures. And. Whereas, these buildings, their architecture, design, history and place in the city deserve to be recognized by a citizenry. And. WHEREAS, The Denver Architectural Foundation invites the public to attend the 10th annual doors open Denver and visit behind the scenes, learn the history of and tour more than 60 buildings, many not generally open to the public. And. Whereas, the 2014 theme is Celebrate Neighborhood Architecture. But participating sites free and open to the public include city, state and federal buildings buildings made of shipping containers, historic schools and mansions, gothic churches and new and repurposed buildings built green and sustainable enough to win LEED certification. And. Whereas, Doors Open Denver includes tours conducted by experts biking and walking tours. Architecture one on one, a photography contest, historic photo exhibits and other events free to the public. Whereas information, maps and sign up for guided tours and access to some specific buildings will all be available at the doors open Denver headquarters in the beautiful new white marble lobby at 1801 California Street. During this two day event, celebrating historic, new and innovative Denver architecture. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Council of the City and County of Denver, that Section one, the Council hereby recognizes the 10th annual Doors Open Denver event and encourages the public to take advantage of this opportunity made possible by the Denver Architecture Foundation. Many generous sponsors, volunteers and building owners and section to the Clerk of the city and county of Denver shall attest and a fix the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation and that a copy be transmitted to Ted Hulsey Denver Architectural Foundation and I will so move that the proclamation be adopted. Second we have a second comments. I'll just let my other council members speak first. Councilman Lehman. Thank you. Madam President. As a person. Who has gone to doors open Denver. Numerous times, I just want to share with you that this is an. Incredible experience to get to know not. Only your. City, but, you know, have you ever passed a building. At the courthouse. And say. I'd really like to go in and see that, but. I don't want to go there because I've got to go to court or. A house or a bed and breakfast or just anything. And in. Addition to being able to just go. Into those buildings. And just look around and come out, there's a whole series of wonderful tours that you can take. So I'd encourage each. Of you. To go to the website or. Pick up a brochure. Kind of plan out your day. Go down and get your ticket if you want a. Personal. Tour. And just spend one of those days seeing. Some pieces of Denver that you would have. Always wanted to see. Now's your chance. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Lehman. I just want to encourage everybody to do it, too. It's a wonderful experience. And you even get to be outside when you're not inside the buildings and you learn about a kind of art that we don't often get to know about. And sometimes it's not as accessible to us who don't know very much about art. But this is an a wonderful opportunity to take a look at the architecture of Denver, to appreciate the architecture of Denver, and to learn so much about why a building looks a certain way. Why is it placed there? What is it about this building? I know I like it, but what is it that I like about this building? It's a wonderful experience, and I thank you very much for putting putting it on every year. Okay. I think we're ready for the vote. Madam Secretary. Madam President. Hi, Brooks. Hi, Brown. Hi, Fats. I Herndon. I can eat. Lemon Hi, Lopez. Monteiro. Hi, Nevitt. Hi, Ortega. Rob. Hi, Shepherd. Oh. Okay. There it is. Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results of 12 eyes. The proclamation does pass. I'd like to invite up to the podium Ted Halsey with DLR Group and chairman of the Denver Architectural Foundation, and Britt Probst with Davis Partnership Architects, Board member of the Denver Architectural Foundation and Chairman of the Door Open . Denver Doors Open Denver 2014 Planning Committee. Good evening. I'm Ted Hall's, the chairman of the Denver Architectural Foundation. We're just delighted to be here tonight. Thank you for supporting us and helping us over the last ten years. This is another year you're helping us. We're delighted to have your help and it's just a bunch of fun. And honestly, I think that's what we're going to have this weekend and we really look forward to all of you being here. The mission statement for the Denver Architectural Foundation is to raise public awareness about Denver's architecture and understand its impact on our lives. And that's really what we're out to do indoors. Open Denver is probably one of our premier events. We have another one we do each year, which is an educational project. But tonight we want to talk to you about that. We have a great board and full support of the board for this event. I'd like them just to stand up the folks that are here from the board, please, just to be recognized. And we are just delighted for that and thank you for being here. And I want to turn it over to our chair and let him tell you a little bit about the event for this year. Thank you. Thanks, Ted. Well, Councilwoman Lehman did a great job of telling you a little bit about our events. So I'm just going to tell you that is this weekend, Saturday and Sunday from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., there'll be more than 60 buildings, some of them public buildings, some of them buildings you wouldn't normally be able to get into that will be open for your own self-guided tours or also expert tours. There'll be more than 100 expert tours given this weekend by people who really understand the buildings or the spaces that they are giving you a lot of information on. Come down to the headquarters at 1801 California to sign up for the tours and get a feeling for the overall event. In yesterday's Denver Post, there was an insert in the newspaper with all the sites and information. Also, if you get the New York Times, there was an insert in yesterday's New York Times. And lastly, there's a great website that we owe the city a great deal of. Thanks for helping set up the website, which is new this year. WW W Doors Open Denver Dawg and that will tell you everything about the event. How to make it work for you. We're expecting a big turnout this year. Thanks again to the city for all your help in the last ten years of putting this on. And we look forward to continuing it.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft an urgency ordinance for review at the November 12, 2019 City Council meeting, to prohibit no-fault notices and no-fault evictions through December 31, 2019.

LongBeachCC_11052019_19-1105

Motion carries. Thank you. Now we're going to move on to item 20. Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Councilmember Pierce, Councilmember Urunga. Recommendation to request a city attorney to draft an urgency ordinance for review at the November 12th, 2019 City Council meeting to prohibit no fault notices and no fault evictions through December 31st, 2019. Fine. Thank you, Janet. Switching. Okay, fine. Okay. We're going to have public comment when I'm public coming in. No, I'm ready. Okay, let's go. Let's. Let's cue the PowerPoint. Great. Thank you, vice mayor. So today we we're going to consider a the no no fault evictions. But I want to kind of start this conversation with a narrative of what has kind of gotten us to this point and that we are we cued up with the. There it is. All right. So as many of you know, AB 18, 1482, the Tenant Protection Act was signed by Governor Newsom October 8th of this year. This new legislation primarily does four things beginning in January 2020. Number one, it puts a cap on annual rent increases. It limits evictions without cause in the state of California. It offers relocation assistance or rent waiver in certain no fault cases. It sets noticing requirements to ensure tenants are communicated with throughout the whole process. And it sunsets in the year 2030. And, you know, it's the point of this law is to protect tenants. And it has good intention. It's a good intention law. However, it's created a significant policy gap that has placed residents across the state of California, including here in Long Beach, at risk. The time when the time between when the bill was approved by the legislature and the day the bill goes into a law, creates an unintended incentive for landlords to get ahead of this law. These laws that are being implemented January 2020 by raising rents set a sort of a flurry, a frenzy of increased rents or 60 day notices. So this law unintentionally creates the incentive to get it out before the deadline, get the rents up, or get the 60 day notice end before the deadline. This is a current problem and it will continue if unaddressed. It will continue to negatively impact Long Beach, the second largest city in Los Angeles County, where three we're almost three out of five residents in our city are renters. We know that this we've heard anecdotal evidence, but we've also seen real accounts, real documented accounts of strategies for landlords to to actually sort of game the system. You've got a quote here, you know, cited October 7th in The L.A. Times. It says, ways that landlords could evade rules that as of January 1st would cap annual rent increases for tenants at 5% plus inflation and require just call the evict is the quickly hand out no fault no fault eviction notices to tenants who play low rent or make frivolous requests. And this was a landlord attorney being quoted addressing other landlords, and it was covered in the in the Los Angeles Times. So we know that this we know that this is this is happening. So here's a timeline of major actions that have taken place in the state of California and here in Long Beach that have created this environment, this shifting legislative environment, that makes it hard for both landlords to navigate and for tenants to understand. So it sort of cuts both ways. So a list of these these actions. So the ones that are in blue sort of represent actions right here in the city of Long Beach that are along with city council has taken actions in black are actions that the state has taken. And then green is the proposed ordinance that we have tonight. And so you'll see a, you know, March 28th, the Tenant Protection Act of 2019 was introduced April 2nd. It'll be city lobby. City Council Adopts the initial motion to establish tenant relocation ordinance. June 11th, City Council approved that ordinance. August 1st, the ordinance went to effect. August 7th. Gavin Newsom announces his support and calls for HB 1482 and says, If you deliver it, I'll sign it. September 11th, the state legislature delivered HB 1482 and landlords are officially on notice. September 14th, three days later, proposed urgency ordinance. So October 8th, the Gavin Newsom signs AB 1482. November 3rd, six day notices can no longer be issued because they will expire in the new year. So they'll be effective. The new the new law would effectively make those unlawful. And then November 12th is when this potential ordinance will go into effect. And then January 1st is when AB 1482 will go into effect. So this just is to show you that there's a shifting there's a lot of actions that take place that sort of change the rules that created this frenzy, this enticement to issue these notices . Now, the dates within the red box, that's where the gap exists. So the gap exists basically between the time of 17 September 11th when the call went out, raise your rents now, evict now and potentially November 12th, when this protection would kick in. So there's a gap. So notices that came in during that time, a result of this this frenzy that was created by by the pending implementation of this state law. So we are not the only. So cities are stepping up to take an action to add additional protections to our citizens. And we're not. We're far from the only city. We're not the only city to consider taking this action. Several cities across southern California, across the state, are taking that same action to protect their tenants. Los Angeles City Council Spectrum has taken this action. City of Cudahy, Bell Gardens, city of Torrance. I had a good conversation with Torrance Mayor about it. You know, he had a dilemma, but he felt, you know, he fell on the side of this the right thing to do. City of Sacramento. Milpitas. Redwood City. Daly City. Santa Cruz. Just yesterday, the city of Pasadena took the first action and adopted the urgency ordinance of the same night at 1201 to add these protections. They took a step. They went a step further and they added actually a rent rent stabilization into the ordinance to said, number one, you have to roll your rent all the way back to March 2019 level and you cannot raise your rent more than eight point something percent between now and the end of the year until the state law kicks in. Today at 10:00 in the morning, Alhambra adopted an urgency, a, you know, an emergency and adopted the same thing at 10:00 this morning. These are cities that, you know, aren't don't you know, they don't have the reputation of being a, you know, uber liberal city or San Francisco. These are middle of the road, middle class cities just like Long Beach. Taking a look at an issue that impacts everyone, all of the renters within the city. And so. So compared to the approach some of these is taking or taking, the proposal tonight is really clean, simple, modest. Today's proposal proposed action requests that our city attorney draft an urgency, an order urgency ordinance to prohibit no fault evictions and notices on at our next meeting November 12th. To be clear, this doesn't stop evictions of individuals who are not paying their rent or violating the terms of a lease. This is no fault. These are people who are caught up in this frenzy that's taking place right now is simply says that through the end of the year, let's stop this frenzy, eviction that's that's impacting our residents and make sure that we keep our families in their homes through the holiday season. This is modest, but meaningful. But it will help us move into the New Year and continue our efforts as a city council to prevent homelessness. This is a crisis directly connected to homelessness. Thank you. So the last thing I'll say is last thing I'll say is, you know, wasn't a part of my comments, but I thought about it actually when I was listening to one of the folks who was speaking on the Belmont Shore mobile home situation about her personal life and not, you know, not really wanting that and wanting to speak up, but, you know, being compelled to. And I thought about my life. I thought about, you know, when I woke up this morning, you know, helped, you know, like we normally do get up, you know, get the kids ready for school, get ready for work. I had a meeting out in West Covina at 9 a.m. this morning, so I was driving. Right. I was nervous. I was nervous about this vote. I was nervous because I know that our city council has has had to deal with some very challenging things over the last couple of years. A lot of it linked to, you know, where people live or how they work or dignity. And I know that that's that's been the case. They've had to deal with some very divisive issues. And I know that this, you know, initially, you know, being on a supplemental item, being an urgency item, you know, it probably brought some of the same feelings back. But then I was reminded that I had a bed to get out of. I had a home to get ready and go to work from. And I'm not dealing with the stress of a 60 day notice delivered at the end of October that would have me on the streets at Christmas. I'm not dealing. That's not my situation. We have a responsibility to do the right thing and keep these people in their homes. It's not their fault. This is no fault. So we have a responsibility. Seek to add this protection to the people of our city, a majority renter city, the second largest city in the county, Los Angeles . I serve as I serve on the SAG Regional Board, the six counties with the second largest city in six Southern California counties. We have to do the right thing here. So that said, I submit the motion as written. Thank you. Thank you, guys. And I think before we get started, we're going to take some time because I think I have to. Yes. Yes, I was. Now you want. Yeah. Okay, fine. Go ahead. I didn't mean to confuse you like me or you. I want to basically reinforce the last comment that my colleague, Councilmember Richardson, said. At this time of year, this is the worst possible thing that we could do when we are looking at families who are going to be. Short on cash. We are going to be short on housing. You are looking at the holidays ahead and looking for celebrations and and having good times with family and get togethers. This is not a good time for this. So I totally support the moratorium to take place. And when it comes to a vote, again, I'm going to be there at the same way. I think that basically when we look at the the. Damage that this could do to families and putting them out, putting them out in the streets or in their cars or trailers or wherever, wherever they can find housing is in front of a front of a storefront or whatever. That's not good. So I totally support this and I hope that my colleagues will support it as well. Hi. You know, as vice mayor, I don't think many of us in these cases really are looking for any applause because we know and what we do tonight is only going to benefit those who are out there in the street, who are homeless and knowing that we can continue to grow at the rate we're going now. So I'm hoping that this will pass. And we with no disrespect to anyone out there, we have 60 speakers. And with that, I would like to move it down to one minute to each individual so we can get everyone a chance to speak. Yeah. Vice mayor. Vice mayor? Yes. I just want to make sure that there's no objection to that. Yes, I was with no disrespect from them and actually from the diocese with one man to be okay. All right. Right on. Good. Okay, here we go. In this order, we got 60 speakers starting out with Mr.. Very good here. Now we have 59. Okay. Yeah. Okay. We're going to have five at a time. Step in. Victor. Norma. Molina. And Natalie, would you please come up in that order? 7 minutes. All right. Stephanie Dawson, still a Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach chapter. The city is made of people, people from. A variety of backgrounds who create the distinct neighborhoods that make our city unique and special. And now these people, your neighbors, the people you see every day in your parks who care for your families and serve brunch on, you know, for you on Sunday, Funday are being evicted from their homes. They have held a failed housing policies. This item is welcome, necessary and hopefully not too late to. Reverse or at least negate some of the plethora of negative consequences. Created by the downtown plan. There should be no carve outs. The apartment. The clients of Mr. Murchison and the Apartment Association created this problem. They should not get special treatment. This moratorium should be permanent. It should be a first step towards full and uncompromising rent control. Housing is a human right, and it's time that our policies in the city reflected this moral truth. Thank you. Thank you, Victor. We are better. We're normal. We're more. Honorable. Vice mayor, members of the city council, and Victor Sanchez, director of the Language Coalition for Good Jobs in a Healthy Community. It's really important issue. We heard a lot about trust and the need to rebuild trust, right. That property management companies, landlords, those that are motivated by profit are taking advantage of vulnerable working class families. And that's really what this is about. It's about keeping working class families in their homes for the holidays. It's the easiest thing we can do today as a city is to ensure the. Promise that the state has. Passed in its bill packet back in September to close the gap so that nobody is left. Behind. I just got done talking to a family outside. They're stressed out. Not knowing whether or not their actual notice is valid or not, because that's a big concern, too. You can get a notice, but you don't. Well, you don't have the means to provide proof as to whether or not that's actually a valid notice but stressed out because now they had to find housing right before the holidays. The gentleman's a trucker. It's very difficult to thank you for saving your life when you don't have stable housing. We urge you to pass a motion with no covenants. Norma. Hello. My name is Norma Galindo, member of Birds Central. Remember of Star Center launch? I moved. To a38. Share window in 2004. I was current in a section. I began working in a mental health facility and ultimately battled mental issues myself, develop depression. My property owner unjustly evicted me because of my battles are facing 2015. We had to throw away our newly bought furniture and the. Rooms we were hoping to grow. I took my property owner to court. To have my deposit back. He then intimidated me from pursuing the case, which was made worse by my depression. I didn't have support because there is no right to counsel in eviction court and my husband's and I knowledge on the law was missing and we had. This is normal. I had a hard time. Thank you. Yes. Only. My name is Marlene Alvarado. I live in the First District and I am a landlord. I support. I'm 20. An eviction moratorium. Unscrupulous landlords are evicting community members as police response to AB, which protects tenants. Item 22 Eviction Moratorium Steps The privatization of Long Beach families, especially children. Unlike Scrooge, I would not put one single Long Beach child on the street for Christmas. Unlike unprincipled land, some unprincipled landlords, I would not kill the golden goose and evict a senior citizen who has put a renter out, who has been a renter for many years. Because I want to charge higher rent. Nor like King Midas. I would not wish that everything I touched turned to gold and evict hardworking families because they cannot afford to pay the speck of gold of higher rent that I require to prevent further homelessness and traumatization in families and senior citizens. Thank you. Pass a law. All right, sir. And your. It's Russia. And you. Okay. Marvin. In Darwin. I lost five in a row. This as close here. Come here, please. An angel behind and you'll hear. Marvin Emmanuel. Go ahead. Hi. My name is Clarissa Hernandez, and I'm here on behalf of my grandma. She and other residents in her building are members of the Section eight program. So under there notices that they got they they basically getting evicted because they're poor just like many of these people speaking today and families being evicted and being affected by the notices. The only fault that they have is poverty and lack of resources and support. So it is very important, as Councilman Richardson explained, you know, with the loopholes and the timing of everything, that this ordinance be drafted and be approved. Because, you know, going back to the theme in the beginning of this meeting, families important, you know, and we all want to have a safe home for the holidays and we deserve that. Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Greetings. But Mr. Andrews in, Councilman. My name is Marvin Duran with some a long term residents in city Long Beach, 50 plus years. I'm also an advocate for black people and other people of color. I would like to urge you to join Los Angeles in enacting an emergency law to stop landlords from evicting tenants before a new state rent cap just cause eviction protections go into effect in 2020. Evictions hurt our communities and in particular targeted our black women. However, social sociology professor Matthew Desmond, studying housing policy, homelessness and the policies of evictions, came to a conclusion that started stolen him. If incarcerated in Carter, incarcerated had come to define the lives of men from impoverished black neighborhoods, evictions was shaping the lives of women. Poor black men would lock up. Poor and poor. Black women were locked out. Thank you. Oh, yes. Sorry. Alex and Gretchen. Is Alex here? Gretchen? Randall. Karen. In any order. Just come right out. We'll get you. Karen Reside, resident of the First District and a proud. Long Beach Gray Panther. We're here tonight because this is just simply elder abuse. If you look at who's being evicted. Look at all those people from the mobile home park. Most of them are elderly people. They've worked hard all their life to have a stable retirement and the rug is being ripped right out from underneath them. This is elder abuse, pure and simple. We know the landlords do not have our. Community's best interests at heart. Nobody gave refunds on the rent increases that they did when the rent control ordinance was supposed to be passed. This is purely driven by profit, and it's destroying the fabric of our community. And to do it at the holiday time is just the cruelest of a cruel. And I urge you to do more. This is a good first step. But we've got to do more to protect our community because it's being destroyed. Thank you. It's dawn here. Would you please state your name? Is Darwin here? Okay. Just come right up, Miss. And state your name, please. I thought you said my name, but if you didn't, I'm sorry. Just stated. Please push your. Native Tushnet and I live in the third district. I've been a renter, a landlady and a homeowner at base. I'm a person who wants a stable and diverse community. As a senior, I'm particularly concerned about others in my age group. I can only imagine the pain and anxiety that comes with losing your home, and it's made worse at this time of year particularly. I'm approached almost every day. I'm approached by another senior who has been evicted with no cause. We are actually good tenants always. We've worked hard and we pay our rent and we have this kind of work ethic and responsibility that we keep. The state law addresses these problems, but it doesn't go into effect right away. And I thank you next weekend. Please send your name. Hello. My name is Cara McGraw and I am an attorney at Lifeline, the Long Beach office. In response to the term two, in response to the Tenant Protection Act or to cities regionally and statewide, have stepped up to protect residents who are at risk of losing their homes before the TPA goes into effect at the beginning of the New Year. These cities include Los Angeles. Pasadena. Bell Gardens. Santa Cruz. Sacramento. Alhambra. Cudahy. Daly City, Redwood City, Milpitas, San Mateo and Torrance. Some cities are going beyond eviction freezes and adopting rent freezes and caps as well. L.A. County and Inglewood have adopted local ordinances that are even stronger than the TPA and that are already in effect. If Long Beach does not join, it will fall behind regionally. Long Beach should join these cities in preventing its residents, including its most vulnerable, like seniors, disabled and female head of households, from being pushed out of their homes and becoming homeless over the holidays. A clean and simple freeze on all no fault notices and eviction. Thank you, actually. State. Your name, please. Good evening, Gretchen Swanson. I'm from Rose Park. We've been having a bad week. And it'll continue if we don't take action this evening. Someone mentioned Scrooge. That's how I think about this. I think about Charles Dickens, early 1800s, a Christmas Carol and all those ghosts. He didn't get the message until the end of the play. I hate that play. He is a slow learner. My city can't wait for this, and my neighborhood can't. So let's keep everyone home for the holidays. My city council should embrace the values of the holiday season. Don't be a Scrooge. I don't think you are. Vote for the eviction moratorium. Thank you. Thank you. And speaking. Good evening. My name is Alex Stress. I'm a staff attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. Today, the city is being asked to act fast and protect its tenants against invalid and unlawful evictions and to keep them home for the holidays. It is not being asked to draft brand new legislation. For better or worse, the state already did that. What we are asking is to pass a clean interim ordinance. What is crucial is that it protects all no fault notices where tenants are in possession and where evictions have not yet been adjudicated. I hope that there is no attempt to carve out or exempt any more tenants as that would be. This city trying to rewrite a state law that's by that by its own terms cannot be watered down. What the what the city should be trying to do is include as many tenants as possible in their interim ordinance, not figuring out a way how to exempt certain tenants. I hope that other council members will vote for this interim ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Brenda Velasquez. Good evening, Mayor and Council. God bless you guys. My name is Brenda. I'm a resident in District one. I'm a single mother. I have two children, three and four, Milagros and Genesis. And they have ADHD, autism with behavior. And I'm just asking for your help because I have a 60 day notice. They know this too well, and I'm sure that can help. And I've been slapped by my landlord and she hit my. Daughter, my four year old, and. She's having problems. At her school for. And mother would do anything for her kids. I hope and I pray that, you know, you consider. This and be on my shoes like I am right now. Thank you very. Much. Thank you very. Okay. The next six speakers Perlis, Jordan, Cathy Andrews and Martha. Hello. My name is Jordan Wynn. I am now a resident of the second district. I am here representing United Way of Greater Los Angeles and the everyone in L.A. movement, which is designed to help prevent people from experiencing homelessness. We had a big push in Los Angeles just a month ago in order to pass the eviction moratorium that they passed. And nobly, they passed that unanimously. I'm asking you all to do the same. Stand up with the tenants who are here in this room tonight facing these evictions right before the holidays. This is literally Christmas Eve. This is New Year's Eve. These are people who are on the tail ends trying to celebrate and live with their family, have a great time at the end of the year. And instead they are faced with greed and as many people have referred to already, Scrooge Yunis. So stand with other cities tonight and pass this eviction moratorium unanimously. Thank you. Thank you very much. Africa. Good evening. My name is Kathy and I am in the District six that I don't know. My councilman, but God bless you. It's obvious you guys are sensitive enough to know what's going on. Everyone is telling you it's because of the holidays and it's children. It's the elderly. I am. A street minister who has the passion and love. For the elderly, the disabled, the homeless and anyone else who needs some help. I want to love them and pray for them and help them. And I'm an advocate for them. But how do I help them? I don't have the I don't have the means. I don't have the money. Everything I do is for free and I don't ask for money. So what I'm asking is you guys, please just continue to do the things that you know are right. And it's not just temporary either just because it's the holiday. It's even after the new year. These people are being evicted because of other people want whatever they want, I don't know. But they become victims. And then my heart breaks for them. And I really do hope that you will pass this and I believe you will. God bless. Thank you. Hello. My name is Andrew Andromeda Hanna with Long Beach Forward. Supporting the best starts since a Long Beach initiative, an initiative of families, caregivers and organizations focus on the birth to age five population. These organizations include home visitation, child abuse prevention and child care programs, even including members of your own health department. If these professionals realize that housing stability is a public health issue, I hope each one of you realize that as well. I'll read some excerpts from our eviction moratorium, some support letters submitted yesterday, and one of our leadership team members will submit it to you today. Trauma informed practices, however, only go so far in preventing adverse childhood experiences, according to doctors Elizabeth Bone and Dean Martin. When social policy becomes more trauma informed, it will be better able to promote the safety and empowerment of its target. Constituents and ultimately disrupt trauma driven. Disparities in health and well-being. To adopt an eviction moratorium and pursue other tenant protections, we are ensuring babies, children and their families are healthy and safe with a passion for life and learning. Please keep all tenants. In all units. In their homes. I appreciate some of you for being vulnerable with me this weekend and I hope to have your support. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Pearlie Piggy and I live at Providence Garden. I'm the vice president of our association, which we developed to help. Our seniors, especially seniors. Seniors. It's of a background backbone to everything that we do. So, please, during this holiday, the next one and the next one. Think about the seniors. Think about your parents. Think about the people that you have in your life. They need to be home for Christmas. And everybody need to be together in peace. Thank you. Thank you. Next week. But I know she has me. Nobody is going to even go there to see Tono. Okay. Get all that silly council held on me. That much I will say so Corazon is coming in the saddle. Borromeo this will see horse imp inside a lazy. There was nothing else than a stack of money that. Good morning. I'm sorry. Good evening. My name is Dakota. I'm from District one. And I would like to say, Councilmember Richardson, that I'm really happy that you touched your heart this morning to think about your children and how the children will be affected. And not just your children, but others children as well. You could showcase this momentum. But instead this communist representantes boy that made a lot more than Mr. Familias. Either low capacity egg or nails. We be lucky. Well said here on again whether you want to think on it Carol. And I think it's good that you are able to see as council members the pain from the families and how they would be suffering if they were to become homeless. And somebody said or mentioned something about living in a car. I don't even have a car. Where would I live? Where would I go? We have Avenue Civic. I mean, we have an issue. But I get those things. Maybe I get no unique access for much of a family. It's kind of I mean. I'll come live here at the Civic Center here so that everybody can see, because I'm not the only one. There are so many people here as well in the same situation. As this case that no, god, I would not have been able to do this moratorium. So this evening, everyone should vote in favor of this moratorium. You and I, consumers and families. You estamos. That is the thing linked up with us on mass momentum established on me. Thank you. One minute, please. Come on. You have to do something. One more thing. I have interpretation. So I get one more minute. I get one more minute because I have interpretation. Sorry, Mr.. Hatari. Yeah. Okay. They gave it to. You for Q&A. No excuse for. How she gave it to you. Okay. Distrito. No Estamos. I think almost time of assumption did not. Okay. Yes, go ahead. No, I didn't. She already gave it to you. Just. Yeah, yeah. Okay. Yeah. Next. Okay, now we have Ozzy one and John one for. You have a question here. When one Garcia you have John Kendall. One force, Eric Bailly. Those people, please come up. Hi. My name is Jan Ford and I live in the second district. We're all here because we love Long Beach. And there's something about Long Beach I'd like to point out. Look at the demographics projected for the United States in 30 years and then look at the demographics of Long Beach. Today, we're living the future of America and we have the chance to do this, to show the entire country how to do this right. Let's start by protecting the most vulnerable and hardworking of our neighbors who are being thrown into the street at the holidays. Please don't let this happen in our beautiful, vibrant city. Please vote yes for the eviction moratorium. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Hello. My name is Aaron Foley. I live in the first district. As you know, at this time, my district is without a council person. So I felt like I needed to come down here and appeal to the rest of you in person to please pass this moratorium. Being a renter in Long Beach is scary. It sounds dramatic, but rents are continually keep they keep rising, and affordable housing is few and far between, as is the existence of small time property owners and landlords that actually care. Each year that I have lived in my current place on Pacific Avenue, my rent has risen to a total of 25% in the past four years without any improvements. A couple of times, once due to a clerical error on their part, someone from the property management code slapped a three day power, quit notice in my mailbox without even a word to me personally or a phone call. Each time my heart was racing, my stress level, shooting to the sky, and a feeling of being so expendable, so palpable. And we were lucky to work it out. But not everybody is that lucky. Times are tough, and though we are lucky to live in Southern California, it's getting cold and there are so many people out there struggling. So please pass the moratorium, but also continue to work towards viable solutions for keeping more of our community from being replaced. Good evening, members of the council. My name is Joshua Christian and I'm the eviction defense attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation for the City of Long Beach. I assume it was me that Councilman Adams referred to legal aid advocates, field calls from the community members every day. And in the last six weeks, those advocates have spoken to nearly a thousand individuals seeking legal advice. Out of a thousand calls, more than two thirds of them have been clients with housing issues, the number of clients with no fault notices is rising every week. And for every individual who calls our hotline, there are a dozen more who don't or who can't. And I know this because of my actual cases. It's not just people who say, I got a no fault notice. What do I do? What about my kids? It's also what about my neighbors? She's been here for 20 years. What about my whole entire building? Management companies are sweeping through communities with 60 day notices. There is an indiscriminate scramble to evict as quickly and efficiently as possible going on right now. So I hope that the Council will move forward with the ordinance and put a halt to this wave of evictions and give tenants the confidence that the law is the law and they are protected. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. My name is John Kendrick. I'm on the borderline of first and second district. I'm also a board member with the Long Beach Gray Panthers and Library. Here in the city of Long Beach. And I want to address the things that. Was not said. It is proven that by keeping people in their. Apartments. Is less burden on. The system. We spend more money when people are homeless. Especially if they're a senior or disabled. So if you're trying to save money, keep us in our homes. Also, look at your mission statement. If you do. Not vote for this recall, it's a. Holiday or no holiday. You're going to guess your. Own mission statement. And I think everybody here should read that statement, what it says. And remind the city council and everybody in. The city what it says, what we should be all about. Thank you. Thank you. Next week, speaker. Hi. Hi. My name is Ivan, who's writer is Juan. But it's Ivan. First District resident. Resident. Anyway, I just want to say. That the state we AB 1481 may have left a gap that when spans from September to January. However, it's the responsibility of the city to actually close the gap, to ensure that, for. One, families with. Children and elderly folk are able to remain in their homes over the holidays. I mean. What's worse then, instead of celebrating. You're actually having to worry about living on the street, having to look for a place to live. And that's not what the holidays. The VAT, the value of the holidays are about. So what I'm saying is please support. The moratorium is good for the families, it's good for the children, it's good for the elderly folk. And more importantly. It's. It benefits. Us as a as a city and as a community. Thank you. Thank you. Fine. The next speaker will be Lillian Wang. We are merciless. We are so fierce. And my watching you. Please come forward. Is that Lilia? Okay. Bye, Wayne. Cialis. My name is Leo Campo. I am a resident of the First District. And I. Am a mother of five. So I am a member of the Building Healthy Communities Planning Committee and based in Central Lombard, Madrid. My district has experienced many injustices when it comes to housing and myself. I've been in that position. So I urge you tonight to support, to keep their families for the holidays and also to take the lead. And when a moratorium for the rent increases. Nobody deserved to be out. In the cold. Nobody especially no families with children. And we want. You to support this moratorium and to keep their families and their houses. Thank you, Nancy Reagan. Hi. My name is Wayne, second district. Really awesome beginning there, Mr. Richardson. And you touched on a lot of things. It sounds like a lot of you were kind of lean in that way for the ones that aren't. We know who you are. They think about the money. And the money is that without this moratorium, there is going to be a whole lot more homeless and you folks are going to have to deal with it in one way or another so it'll save some money and put this moratorium in because that's going to save your money. Hi. I'm Don Watkins. I am a business owner in the ninth district. I'm a homeowner in. The fourth district. And I'm a landlord for 15 years in the second district. And I'm also a member of Black Lives Matter who supports this moratorium. My entire family lives in the second District. I'm at Fourth and cherry. My mom fought them on a pair of my in-laws that fought in Tampa. My other best folks off of seventh and Ohio, others fourth and Redondo. And my son's oldest son's father, a fourth and one that he was evicted. The guy who owned the building, Larry, his grandson and my son played baseball together at Sterns Park. He had some hard times. He owned for a place with a house on the corner of Fourth and Walnut and was on a refi. Someone came in and offered a cash out by. He took it, left town. The guy increased the rent from 900 to 1500 dollars, left my son's dad homeless for several months. He's a cook with a teenage daughter. And we know we live in a capitalistic society, but there's a difference between investing for some extra money and being greedy as hell at the cost of causing mass homelessness and citywide trauma. Good evening, Mayor Councilmembers. My name is Mike Murchison. I'm here on behalf of the Apartment Association Small Property Owners Alliance. I am a lifetime resident of Long Beach. I may not be in the majority this evening, and I appreciate the fact that nobody wants to be homeless during the holidays. I'm not advocating that you don't support an ordinance tonight. What I'm going to say is four facts. Number one, this was bought on the supplemental. There was no outreach to any of the business groups are going to be impacted by this from another perspective, none. I would encourage you on future ordinances, whether emergency or not, that you do appropriate outreach to the other side. Number two, you've got a situation that from November one to January one, 1482 applies. So doesn't really make a difference what a landlord wants to do. They can't do it because it's within that 60 day window. So if you're talking about the window outside of the 60 days, then by all means go ahead and do that. But think about this. Those tenants and specifically the ones have been reporting the Long Beach Post this evening have already been paid 50% under your own tenant relocation ordinance. They've already been paid. Keep that in mind. Thank you. I want to make sure we got this, as did Marcel de Rivera speak already. And so Ms.. I think it says here, please come forward. Marcella Rivera, Suffolk Media. And then I'm going to ask the next group, please, if you can please get in line. Fred Sutton, Julie Sorrow. Maria, I think, says Luisa and Daniel Lamping, if you can please get in that order. So we have Marcel de Rivera, Sophie Ramirez, Fred Sutton, Sally, Sara maria Luisa and Daniel Lamping. Thank you, Mayor Garcia. I'm sorry. I didn't hear my name earlier. My name is Maricela de Rivera. I am a ninth district resident. I'm incredibly grateful that my council member, along with my previous council member in District six, District two. Sorry. I love you too. I guess that's why I said six. Brought this forward. I'm. It's very hard to be here. Because my husband and I come from very humble means. Understand what it's. Like to be housing insecure and now have a better life. We are homeowners. This is our second. Home we've lived in in Long Beach. We have a six figure. Income family now. We are doing very well. I'm a city commissioner. Life is great. And we constantly think about the fact that if we did not have generational wealth that helped us become homeowners, we would absolutely have to leave Long Beach. We would be homeless, too. My mother lives with us because even with our generational wealth, it's not enough. Thank you so much. Thank you for this, I think. Hi. My name is so Pachomius. I'm here on behalf of the four monks out here. Two of them were evicted, wrongfully evicted from 2100 West Wall Street. And in the process, two other monks are left homeless and they're now or camping on the sidewalk in tents in the cold on 21 street west Willow. And the reason why for the eviction? Well, first of all, monks cannot get evicted. They don't pay rent. Monks live off of donations and offerings of the people and the the temple that the they had 12 board of directors who are so hungry for power push the monks out because they were not willing to conform to to to their to their means of corruption and lies in order to gain power to to to make something bigger of the organization so they can get funded from the government. And so I would like to ask for for you to assist in this matter, because it's getting out of hand. Parents, grandfather, grandmother, they're being dropped off to protect the monks. Thank you very much. Thank you. Honorable Mayor and City Council. My name is Fred Sutton. I'm here on behalf of the California Apartment Association. As was mentioned, there are many cities that are looking at implementing implementing the AB 1482 early. The big difference between those cities in this city is they had not spent the last year working on its own local ordinance, which went into effect on August 1st. Those include on non renewals, financial payment, everything's filed with the city, so the city should be able to tell us. How widespread. This is and they can no longer be served. Undoing part of the ordinance doesn't really make sense. I think this is a perfect opportunity to rescind the entire ordinance effective January 1st, 2020 and comply with AB 1482. That should be the priority going forward. Is how does the local relocation fit with a B 1482? And I think that should be prioritized for January 1st. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Honorable Mayor and councilmembers. My name is Doctor Sully Saro. I'm a resident of the sixth district. I know Long Beach can do better and it can be better, and we need to protect all tenants. And so I urge you to pass this or a moratorium tonight. No carve out, and that it should include all tenants in all units, and that many cities, including L.A., are already doing it. And the city of Karachi is doing it tonight. And so because Long Beach cares about all its residents, I believe we must and should pass this so that that we prevent homelessness and that we can keep our families home for the holidays. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Let's look at this one. And not just me. Nobody's Maria Luisa. We want to say even more representatives. This time I see the residents the longest relative, S.A. Ibrahim Yasmin with three step and sadness as familias stand up onto the set of this alucarda as much as they are not sufficiently cautious but are entitled appropriate that I'm just a little rent Dallas into the mass image of the nosotros not the name was instead the narrow papa gato the locus necesita. It's a lesson for commuters versus a stuffy window into Nakai the embarcadero point. That was then los gatos. It's not just a, you know, policy that might even be as easy as you say, Tony. That is also that as follows. When I said this Alcaraz de la Soto's Ojo, this was when I set up the casino session in Guam to read that this podcast will sit on. But I'm going to shut your. Good evening. My name is Maria Luisa and I come here representing Best Start. I live in District six and I've been a resident of Long Beach for the last 20 years. I'm here because I'm worried and sad, thinking about the families that are going to be evicted, that don't have the necessary resources to rent a decent property . And since the owners abuse and ask for much more than people are able to pay, it's a problem. That's the reason that many families end up in the streets, living in the streets, and the cars are underneath a bridge. I'm also here tonight fighting for Miss Maribel Mireles and 16 units, eight of which have been evicted and eight that will be. And I'm asking that as soon as these units are fixed, which was the reason they were told that they're able to go back. But then there's a renter who's. Paying a fair. Bit of property protection that others are keen to support and stuff such as Lazaridis and Okada. And I ask you to please protect all of these people that will be homeless during these dates. Thank you. Thank you. Before before Daniel comes up and like, let's call the next set of speakers. Please come forward in this order. I have a Jordan Dora two know. So Cynthia macias shamble. Yes. As Zo Nicholson believe it's Lilya Ocampo and Maria Lopez. So in that order, if you can please let it be Jordan. Dora to no. So Cynthia Macias Shamble. Yes. As AZO Nicholson, Lilly Ocampo and Maria Lopez. Good evening. My name is Daniel Lampkin and I'm a member of Council District Two. I come here not just as a community member, but as someone who manages an affordable housing community in Long Beach, California. I am the manager of Covenant Manor, which is on Fourth and Atlantic. And as a result of my work, I'm a witness to the devastation of the homelessness crisis on a daily basis. Daily, I mean, hourly. I field calls on a constant basis from people looking for housing who are currently homeless or about to become homeless as a result of the 60 day eviction notices that have been given out . My work has become more constant. I deal with seniors, people who are in walkers, people who are in the most dire of situations. I would urge this council to vote unanimously for this moratorium. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. Council and mayor. My name is Jordan Doering. I'm a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach. I'm here today. Not even to urge you to pass this emergency emergency moratorium because it's obvious just how strong it's going to be. I've got to ask, are you going to do what's happened in the past and put carve outs in it to have some families be homeless for the holidays? Or is it going to cover all tenants? Because for the past several years we've all seen it. A lot has been given away to luxury developers in the city, and it's finally time for something to be given to the tenants. For years, for example, the Affordable Housing Fund has languished without any type of funding or any money to supply that. The least we can do is make sure that tenants are not kicked out so landlords can continue to redevelop and get tax breaks to build new luxury buildings over the holidays. Thank you very much. Speaker, please. Hi. My name is Zoe Nicholson. I live in the second district. You know, I've stood in front of you for years now asking you for federal amendments, for U.N. accords and for protecting workers rights. Today, I came to give you something. I want to give you peace of mind. I want to give you a heart lit up. I want to give you a good night's sleep. You're going to do the right thing. I'm really proud of that. And I wish you all happy holidays for making sure that other people's holidays are with their family. Thank you. Because next week the first. Good evening. My name is Cynthia macias and I live in the second district. I'm a mother, daughter and organizer. But most importantly, I'm your constituent. I have been evicted during the holidays, Christmas, to be exact, and it didn't affect me the most. It affected my children the most. And when I speak about my children, I mean it affected them. In school. Their grades started dropping. They couldn't focus in school. They even began to get bullied in school because kids will be kids. And being homeless is frowned upon, right? Excuse me. With this in mind. I'm sorry I had to cut it down and half for you guys. So, yeah, let me see. As a mother, this broke my heart. But analyzing this as a brown mother, I realized that intersection of oppression and housing poverty is a symptom of poor policymaking. With this in mind, we need to push forth long term policies that give the community abilities to stay in place. The right to return. And a path to a community owned housing. We need an eviction moratorium now and continue the conversations on long term housing solutions that benefit those most marginalized. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks to the police. Hi. My name is Chembur Users and I am 12 years old today and instead of celebrating with my family. I'm here to tell you about how I felt my family was getting evicted during Christmas in 2017, when everyone was getting Christmas lights and decorations out of boxes. We were packing our clothes and toys in the boxes. I didn't know where we were going to sleep or eat. What? I lose my friends at school. As a good student, I am very focused and prepared. But knowing I was going to lose my home, friends in school and friends school, I couldn't sleep. And that made it hard to focus in class. I don't know anymore. I don't think anyone should be homeless, especially not for holidays, when is supposed to be fun and warm outside and clothed. So please don't evict families during Christmas. Thank you very much. We're not. No. Shows me. No worries, Dorothy. No. Go. Your botanicals return whenever they return. My name is George Tinoco. I belong to the ninth District with Rex Richardson. Ian is an old chap with Megan Blessing and Kathy also status tantamount to multiple are crucial, but don't get them been so we must get home now responsibility that Roger Garcia as in we took over here last time I was killed we put on a competitor. The Latino selection is to monitor their birth in a city and more commonly the Latin that I'm with different delta. And tonight I'm very happy that you've all taken the time to listen to us. But we all know that it's your responsibility. Robert Garcia It's been a long time. So my writing you the last time I saw you was at a conference for Latinos, an action, you know, that the way we were was very different than right now I'm a mother so. Madre that those communist system great one though thought I mean now my steria in social work getting me home business man in negocios Pedro me preoccupations can you tambien and a step is kiddo care you'll see an independent this the was very lamentably meant the aes de la Renta say you know but in my narrator. And I'm the mother of two young people who are about to graduate my daughter with her master's in social work, my son in business and as a mother, I worry. I want them to be independent, but they are unable to pay the rents at the cost that they are. See is as soon as he doesn't get affect that much of communism, the U.S. get on with risk of money that affect them as a partner. Kelly They are honest us is. Dorothy you must get. I told you at the end in thin air give me a big smile is having to give what instead of the central housing one get a memento. Nothing at all on the EU. And it's a situation that affects a lot of young people, a lot of children, and even more in our community. We have to fight against this racism. But it's a fear that we have that's even more about being evicted. What is honest and what are your let's be honest instead. Istomin is the partner doppelganger son on sun on group. Okay Necesitamos de la polio they and lament that they will not they will not a Latino they want to purchase American standpoint cumbia. If the Sistema get that don't give it out on so necesitamos competition carry that you know says Mother La caught up on anything and. We're asking that you come together as a group. We need the support of everybody, not one because they're Latino and others because they're American. We need this broken system to change. We need your compassion. Thank you. Thank you. And for having your local streets. The next group will be Gary Hightower better lopez Solana Singer in Savaii Mahi. I'm sorry if I if I'm not trying to do my best with the writing Carmen Mejia and Myron Wallen. So the next group after Maria Lopez will be Gary Heidrich. Norberto Lopez. Solana Cintron. Survi. Mejia. Carmen Mejia. Myron Wolin. And Maria Lopez is next. My name is Maria. And in a time when everyone's living in fear, I say I'm undocumented, unafraid and unapologetic. I migrated to Long Beach at the age of three, and now I'm the director of Community Organizing for Housing Long Beach, and I organize with the Long Beach Tenants Union. Today we are here in support of an eviction moratorium. If you're here, support set up. I want to see your sign. We want an eviction moratorium for all tenants, all units and all buildings, because our community deserves to stay intact during the holidays, during each and every day in the city of Long Beach. So I want to finish off with a chant in Spanish, but it's pretty much says Housing is a human right. Then they're doing that. Your food, then that's. Their narrow dacha. Their. That narrowed that you could get past an eviction moratorium today for all tenants, for all units, for all buildings. Thank you. I think I had Gary Hart next. It's okay. No, no. All right. You can tell you're going to. So I'm just going to cede my time to a tenant meeting. One of the. To me, number ten. Later. Garcia. Good evening. My name is Myra Garcia. So the residential district of Marisol in they only on this you say this capacity that is a problem other women really that. I'm a mother I'm a resident of district two. I'm a mother of a child with 16 different disabilities and mobility problems in Elmira. And Robert Garcia of Coachella, Mexico. Not only Robert Garcia, the mayor, has heard about my case and knows my son. Though, that you that me yourself the other way he seemed to me to tell him. He agreed to help me on December 1st. I'm being evicted. And because I follow the rottenness. Around my house, there were eight rats one. Day. The name of the future will be in the Tell Me More longer. We've been living. In the same place for 18. Years and the sun screaming under the weather if you're trying yours. And he gave you that reportorial problem. And there discriminate against me. After 18 years, I called the city to report the problem. In in front of the lepers. Nonetheless you that alphabetically certainly we had Matthew Departamento going to give us another look lady kidder. And in front of the city supervisor, he said that he was never going to fix the apartment and he would never do what he was being told to do. And he say, I'm out with VAC. You're not dealing with that. So American. Citizen, I'm not an American citizen. And you know that I still get those who stay there. They have the same rights as all of you and me. We didn't have the police. It's very difficult living. In this kind of system. Discrimination when everyone is discriminated against us. No, no. You're quite okay. Potentially. I would like you to support the. Local or. The eviction law. But Necesitamos we will conclude that we. Need quality of life. You will walk in May you the El Primero. They seem to think of me this. And I'm asking again for your help on December 1st. I'm being a. Victim. You're putting me at the end of this because I'm a single. Mother and I will repeat, my son has 16 different disabilities. You met him. You don't know me. And I'm giving my my time to the next person. Thank you, driver. Dr. Hutchinson. Good evening. Mayor Garcia, council members. My name is Gary Hetrick. I'm a resident of the fourth district. I'm also here tonight as president of the California Faculty Association and Long Beach chapter. We represent faculty members, coaches, counselors and librarians. And many and many of those folks are rent burdened and vulnerable, just like you've heard tonight. The stories we heard tonight are a little bit hard to follow. Excuse me. They're hard to follow. I have I don't I have no history of stories like that. But I want CFA to go on record as supporting the moratorium without any carve outs. I also want everyone here to know that that CFA is a union is not the only one that's supporting this moratorium without carve outs. Unite here Local 11 is also a supporter. You have CWA three, 24 is Teamsters 396 and I am District 947 are all supporters of this moratorium without any carve outs. I just want to end by saying there's no good time to push out a good tenant and this time is certainly not the best time. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Speaker, please. When I notice you know me here. Good evening. My name is Carmen Mejia. Our having a large sovereign mi sovereign castle and. Coming to speak about my case. Thing going on in. You. I have five children. Tengo, cuatro disability. Four are disabled going out this month. They have autism. Comparable to my most. Emotional problems. Being only Nancy. Either way. That I have a child in a wheelchair. In my car, they have light up in us as a quarter of the year. With a manager just called me four days ago. Miranda that my father this but think. I'm only allowed until December 30th. Araceli me to get. Out I. Involuntary sale of problema ninos he doesn't care my name That is how Maria Pasado. Nuevo. He doesn't care where I end up spending new year. Kamali Borja said what I'm going to do. The whole point. This hero, he. Said, I can go underneath the bridge. In Neul then. It's my problem, not his. Joke. Girls have enemies. The rituals Lord show and you'll baby. And why you? I'd like to know my rights. I've been living there for eight years. In my pocket. Get him in the apartment. And just because they want to sell the apartments. It was not the same as a hotel. It doesn't seem fair to me. I may not miss Ninos. Can I look at the end in the Rachel at least. I think my children so. Resident then that I must battle I mean innocence without and I'm. Just a resident. I see those happy. But my children are citizens. Problems. They have problems. Out dismal artist opposite are. For disabilities bad you'll. Not receive all takes your march on me now that I. Don't realize I mean anything Oh. Mitra the whole trabaho them possum No, I'm guaranteeing one. Are you there? I pay my rent to. You mean in your case on say what? Associate my husband's work. I don't get any kind of help other than for my kids which is Social Security ghetto. Get them in. Yes, I'm going to. Sorry, todo. No, put all up on me Nina. For last hint. This could be any last Navidad itself real ly dubious It's amazing who stock leading. I know those Mrs. Aquino meeting absolute. I'm in denial No problem other laboratories. But you'll see at the end in Gaza. I don't believe in the angels. No thought that I'm not anymore, Grasshopper. We might not get that in moderate or poor people. I'm glad to see a crisis. And I'd like you to keep in mind all of this, not just for my children, but for people. Christmas is coming. The cold, the rain. I think it's unfair just to get two months when people aren't looking at the lives of people just because they're poor. They have a house, the owners do. But I believe that we have rights because we pay rent. Thank you so much. Yeah. Yeah. This, I think. And that's why we must support the cause of this crisis. Just people. When does a motorcycle stand at present? Good evening to everybody that's here. Present Estonia key for Cabangon when he said Portavoz the mujer familias. And you're listening to me, he. Said on Saturday. And then this here tonight to speak my voice and to be the representative of other families. A bingo. To me in a contactless problema category as Alabamian as me, Massena Amiga. I'd like to tell you also. But the problem I have with eviction, she's my neighbor and my friend. Nice. Comforting me problem. A common problem. Acadiana. Yeah, my problem isn't as bad as her problem. Better met domain temple the venerable our ESL portable the tantas familias damn facilitate the government because having the latter legend adolescence anatomy CEOs but or no keys, they need police. They won't know whether as a la diferencia but Atlanta's familiar Afghanistan estate by the sea and that the policy question and tone, says Jones. I took the time to come here to speak as the representatives of all these families. It would have been so easy to stay at home watching TV, giving my children dinner. But I wanted to come here because if one person can make the difference, speaking for all of these families that are going through the same thing. It present is going to let them go. Updated Colonel Corazon de La mancha brought forward to Mama's concerns here because I don't know the status she has got. The name of embodiment of CSK tenemos Constancio de Jager done with left calf at this concert Adore Me e there they sit tranquilly maintain no personal personal claro to Pasando el Pakistan must be our returned of castles left persona stand indifferent the seat left the honestly feces left eco lap and boy the most conscientious of today. And before anything I'm coming to ask you with my heart in my hand that you be aware. If we feel bad about the way things are, we can go home and rest and sleep and act as if nothing's happening. But something is happening. We're seeing so many cases of things that are happening and I'm asking you to be aware. Thank you very much. That is necessary. Thank you. Tulip. So my name is Susanna Kim. I'm the executive director of the United. Cambodian Community, and I'm a resident of the fourth District. 75% of Cambodian residents are renters, and Cambodian families are being displaced due to deportation and also evictions. Already, a few of our commune members have come up to us about an eviction notice that they received within this month. In addition, as members of the Everyone Home Language Task Force, there are members that sign a letter of support. And in light of these unjust notices and evictions, we urge the City Council to pass an urgency ordinance to enact a moratorium on notices and evictions, to keep Long Beach families and their homes for the holidays and those that undersigned. This letter from the Everyone Home Task Force members are Andy Kerr from the Measure H Citizens Oversight Board, the MSA, Los Angeles, Palm Beach, Foreign Ministers Alliance Center, Child Jewish Family Children's Services, Women's Shelter of Long Beach, Lomita, Community College and Children Today. Thank you. Thank you so much. Let's be complete. Hello, I'm Myron Wolin. I'm president of the Long Beach Gray Panthers. I'm here speaking in support of the ordinance. I would like that to be no fault evictions and that it becomes particularly cruel for the senior community. We're a senior advocacy group. We see seniors all the time. I run into them. I hear the bells that that they are evicted, that they are have rent increases. They are on a fixed income. They can't stand they can't take a rent increase because their income is fixed. I would urge you also to think about having a rent stabilization after you do this right thing. Hopefully you will do it. I hope that you will join other cities that retreat just in mentioned that have passed ordinances that we we should pass that make me proud of living in Long Beach make me proud that we make you proud of being involved in a movement that cares for people, cares for unjust evictions, and that will pass such an ordinance. Thank you very much. I'm going to call the next set of speakers. Everything picked up in this order are. Nestor Escobar. Mario Medius Resolver. Ramos. Natalia Biran. Maritza a witness, Jennifer Milan and Yolanda Hobson. I'm sorry if I mispronounced it. Miss Escobar. Maribel Reyes. Presumably. Ramos. Natalia. Viviane. Russo voters, Jennifer McClung and Yolanda Hobson. In that order, please. And for an article, please come forward. Good evening, everyone. My name is Ernest Isaac and I reside in District nine. We are being evicted from a residence by December 17th, a week away, a week before Christmas. That is why I'm here today with my neighbors and my community to let you know that I don't. Training is extremely important and must pass. It is unfair and unjust to evict residents from their homes for the purpose of increasing brand before AB 1482 takes effect on January 1st. Item 20 must pass in order to protect tenants from evictions. Now and in the future. We have vulnerable citizens that need our help. Our councils help, but mostly be part of everyone. And just like our council member, Rex Richardson would want us to. Thank you. Thank you. It's good to please when I see when I'm not just me alone, but as Maribel Mireles, you're so part of the best staff and obviously the company that has got to catapult us to this. Your store, your keeper, is offering them the solution. Ease our little sticky note mission to solve the stuff. Keep me company that mithun S.A. means business if than me so organization is best are allow me to start Libra if the house in Long Beach Star Latino so NextGen is to ease jr Garcia has put up pianos. Yes no Ms.. Merkel is prosthetist Roberto Garcia tapioca por favor vote this off. Our National Medal of Integrity has another Richardson for Apple yet is the 16 is those he has a good opening you know the stairs I see though this hello huddle Roberto Dunga to Dennis Neto's I'll ask the taco I think about what do you do if does a quick massage like I said to Casado to me tranquilo nosotros? No, no, Satoru, start as not just a stump sandbag on the grass. Yes. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Maribel Mireles and I come from Best Start Long Beach from the leadership group. And I brought a letter for all of you here we are all suffering. We're suffering the evictions. And I'm not alone. I'm here with my community. I'm here with the elderly. I'm here with organizations. I'm here with Best Start, Leeward Housing, Long Beach, East Yards. Thank you, everyone, for supporting us. And Robert Garcia, I ask you to support us in this matter, number 20. And thank you, Mr. Richardson, for speaking up. I know that you mentioned you have two two daughters, I believe, and you're thinking of them. And also Robert Wood. And God, I know that you have grandchildren as well, and you are here and you're all going to be going home calmly and into your own homes and into your bed. And you don't have to think about being evicted, but we do. We have to think about that. And I urge for you to support us. Thank you. Thank you. So much. Next speaker, please. She's looking to speak what has not been resolved. So residential district and highway patrol resistencia the of Cynthia quatro you'll be one is terrific. Patricia is going to esposo Emiko and as Mrs. Movement we try to lose our on a moment someone we trust. But I'll come in person and this is very alarming. Supremos But in contrast to what I've been through in this business, Mrs. a commitment to Familia Alegria has been almost to the crisis in very bad so desperate distress that Theo one that is the it's been in the swap for you in this area and one of the by said let's call it they seem for me it's you that good I'm also an ambulatory other salud. There are no hospitals in communities but a third that is a proposal. City fees. You ought to know what a crisis that is. I'm sorry. In translation I forget that I don't speak Spanish. My name is Rosalba. I'm a resident of District nine and part of the Resistance for 64. I live in the bill. I've been living in the building for three years with my husband and now we have a seven month old child. We were living calmly and peacefully, but now we're in this moment of frustration because of the changes in the past. It happened to me. We suffered in. In our homes. And I. And I can call it a home because that's where we would spend our time. We need such great support for our family. And now, thinking about the months coming ahead and spending the time with our family in happiness, we are now actually in anxiety. And to have to go through this during the Christmas time, it's such stress and frustration. We hope that all of you are supporting us in this moratorium and that some of you spend the time with your families. If if some of you were to spend the time with your families without a home to think of this, please. Thank you. We want a moratorium for eviction for everyone, for all renters, for all units, for all buildings. Act now. It can be done. Thank you so much. Next week, Officer. All? No, not just all colors. E conceal. You mean like sevilla's be one? C Fuentes isn't like water. So it isn't like water for the cell walls. E e knows that in Houston there was. That much conditioners. John, this is it. So are you them? Is almost anything against them. Guess them moratoria then they get faster. Than them but thought they had this logos. But at the albinos. But at the dollars you need others. But at almost any you get a moratorium. Then there's the law. E As you said before, the soil mothers solid data. Those ninos e get the performance that you then cannot. Single but on the it those but can use. Performance in those boiling are you then. Good evening mayor and council members. My name is Maritza Aviles. I live at 550, 64th and I'm part of the resistance for 64 because we are being evicted unfairly by West West Star I my conditions are we have cockroaches in our place and we need your help because a moratorium needs to be passed. We need to stop the evictions for everyone, for all renters, for all units, for all buildings. We want a moratorium for the evictions now. It can be done. And I'm a single mother with two children, and I need help because I don't know where I would go. I don't know where to go. Thank you. Thank you so much. Makes me happy. Hi. My name is Jennifer Meehan. I live with my family in District nine and I'm here to ask for your support. The eviction moratorium. Evictions are a major problem, and this is not the first time we've been evicted. We're facing eviction during this time of year where we're supposed to be celebrating the holidays in our home and are struggling and stressed to find a new place to live. We've had many great memories in our home and live and lived there for ten. Years and don't want to leave our home. Thank you. Thank you so much. This. Yolanda when I noticed that the cops on me were convinced both time you don't see us or you. So, yeah, keep it up for you, you know. So are you. Then can we still see who's. See anything in the new knew myself. I mean, you don't mean sequels? No, no. Look, I don't know. Three. Then again, that was canon. Soon you'll see you. I mean, I don't know. I think I'm also too cynical. Don't be sorry to know that all these boys can and must get no support in on what it is us is moving through this thing. But I want to put a thought that was good to us. This is. My name is Yolanda Hobson. I live with my husband and my two children. I am here tonight so that you can support us in fighting for our rights, in not evicting people. I want you to help us out so that they don't take people out of their homes because it's difficult to find an apartment. We were evicted before and it was a difficult time. It's really sad when somebody takes you out with your children because I've gone through this with my family and I know how it feels to be evicted. We want your support. Thank you. Thank you. Our next our next speakers are Celie Medina, Peter Portillo, Antonia Marva Castillo, and Devon Allred. In that order recently Medina, Peter Portillo, Antonia Marie Castillo and Devon Allard, if you could please line up. Is our soul here. Please come forward. When that's not just health care reconciliation, said Medina. So just hit enter the language. Even now, including necesitamos parental moratoria, the disallow familia ticket in contest rental as the todos Camus's corporate donors they cannot select on the fees gratis. Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Araceli Medina and I am a resident of Long Beach and am I am a good tenant. We need your support in the moratorium for the evictions because. So that families can stay together during the holidays. We all deserve this. And we would like this. Protect everyone. All the tenants, all the units and all the buildings. Now. Thank you. Peter. Good evening everyone. My name is Peter Portillo. As a resident of this city, I believe that all residents of the city of Long Beach should have the right to affordable housing and should not be thrown out during the holiday season for landlords to raise rent and profit from displacing families this coming year as a member of an underrepresented community, all while having the first elected Latino mayor of Long Beach, you should have firsthand knowledge that we deserve a right to affordable housing during the holidays and an opportunity to live without fear of being evicted. In order for landlords to profit from displacing hardworking citizens, I urge you to consider the moratorium for all to have a warm home during the holidays, not for not just for the privileged few at the top. Don't contribute to the homelessness problem that has already displaced many families within Los Angeles County. Please keep all tenants home. Pass this moratorium. Thank you. Thank you. Antonio. When I notice. You're so street. Don't know whether I mean Antonio Zavala, the civilian at least get a sense that yes, you can find APARTAMENTO and DCM, but it also predominantly celebrities. You see other people call me call me as also call me seahorse in honor study episode B that Foreign Minister CASA. Gillies Boyle This year was a yellow sun. Unless people can monitor the Long Beach and then in Macau negative in the past and the moratoria meaning it. Those who want to them as that is. But as is. Good evening. My name is. Antonia Zavala. And I live with my husband and my children. And we received a 60 day notice that I have to leave my apartment on December 17th. What can I tell you? That what hasn't been said yet or already? I ask you to please give our community in Long Beach the best Christmas gift that you can give to pass this moratorium for number 20 and so that we can all enjoy our holidays. From District nine. Thank you. It is. Necessary, Maria, to steal money from a. Hi. My name is Molly Castillo. This is my mom. I'm a member of the First District, and I am part of the 1980 hybrid resistance. My family and I are currently going through an eviction for fighting against an unjust and illegal rent increase of 50%. My family and I have lived there for over ten years and we are now being displaced. We have, quote, just less money. And I move up to date is December 12th. Right before the holidays. Right before the holidays, we were given 45 days to move out. And this has taken a toll on all of us, especially on my mom, given the situation where we stand, having to stress about where we will live and everything happening right before the holidays. It is very emotional to think we will be homeless at a time that we're supposed to enjoy with our loved ones. My family and I could have benefited from this moratorium, but we're now being displaced. I urge to place a moratorium of all evictions for all tenants, for all units and all buildings so that they don't have to go through the same situation as my family is currently going through. We are language and we demand a moratorium now. And our last speaker. Hello, Honorable Mayor and City Council. Thank you for hearing this item tonight. Two things really quickly. Number one, I just want to thank everyone that was here to share their stories about this is a very important issue, not just here in Long Beach, but statewide. We are in the middle of a housing crisis that impacts lives daily here in Long Beach. And as a renter myself, as a representative of the majority of employees here in Long Beach, who the majority of them are renters as well that live within the city, I think it's an imperative for us to look at this situation and say the intent of the laws that were signed by the governor were to protect these renters and the gap in time had left them vulnerable. And we need to do our jobs to make sure that that does not take place and that everyone is protected, home for the holidays and well beyond that. So thank you for your time tonight. Thank you. Thank you. I know that the motion has been made and for the motion of the second, I'm going make a couple of just a couple brief comments and then we have a couple of councilmembers that are cued up as well. I just want to first I had to step over to Cal State, Long Beach for a remembrance ceremony. So I apologize for that. But I wanted to come back and just first say that I absolutely support, first of all, what's in front of us this evening. It's it's one it's the right thing to do, but it's also common sense. There is obviously an intent in the law that was created by the governor, and no one wants to see evictions happen that really go against what the statewide policy was really all about. The tenant the tenant relocation ordinance that was passed by the council was the right thing to do. The statewide approach, the statewide approach to tenant protections that the governor and the and the legislature did was also the right approach and the right thing to do. And and putting together this moratorium tonight is also the right thing to do. I will also just add, there are some concerns, and I think, and rightly so, from both tenant groups that I've spoken with and also apartment owner groups about how our our tenant protection ordinance that we passed marries the statewide policy that also just got adopted and how those two marry and how we move forward. I just want folks to know that that that's something that this council is going to address in the next week, in a couple of weeks ahead of us. So we understand that. And we want we don't want there to be the confusion that there is. And so we want to ensure that the statewide the statewide law that is quite broad, it moves forward in our community, but also that we understand where there might be differences and how we can also continue to address the protections that this body talked about, especially as it relates to some of the unfinished business around additional protections for seniors and people with disabilities. So those are things that are moving forward and will be in front of this body in the next few weeks. So I just want to thank you all for being out here and your advocacy. This is a very common sense and proposals, and I want to thank the council members that brought it forward. And so with that, Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I support this item. And I will say that I think it's incredibly frustrating when we have this gap in time between state legislation and our local ordinances in terms of what happens during that period of time. And I think one of the things that really came out a lot during the comments was that I really do think we're going to need to do some sort of education on. Whether notice is valid and assisting people in understanding whether the notice is valid, because we're now talking about a very specific period of time, which I'll say. Before coming into the meeting tonight, I thought the item represented something else. I actually thought that because we're within 60 days of the implementation of the state law, that we would not it would we would not be able to implement anything locally because it would be invalidated anyway as a result of the state law. But I appreciate the clarification on that. But I do think and I don't know if this is something we want to think about as we move forward in talking about this item in the coming weeks, this issue, whether we can have some sort of an education program out there on whether or not notices are valid and how people can get that information quickly from a neutral source. I think that's really important. I do have a question for city staff on this. Do we have a database where we keep track of the number of people that have been evicted pursuant to our tenant relocation policy that went into effect on August 1st? I think that's when it went to effect, right? August 1st. Yes. So as I recall, the ordinance, we had asked for that data because that is not data that the city has collected in the past, I believe it was, which helped me. It was a quarterly or monthly that we asked for it and I and we'll have to see what data we have collected so far. What we what the tenant relocation ordinance requires is that landlords give notice to the city when a tenant relocation payment is made. But there may be several other termination of tenancies or evictions where tenant relocation payments were not required to be made. I don't know if if the city has yet started to collect the data for when tenant relocation payments have been made. If they have, there's probably not too many given the limited amount of time that's elapse between August 1st and now. Yeah. So from August 1st until now, I mean, we tried to do some outreach in our district to see if there had been any. And when I talked with Councilman Richardson about this on Friday, I shared with him that obviously nobody wants to see mass eviction notices going out to thwart the intent of the legislation. I mean, nobody up here. So obviously, we we don't want that to happen. The concern, however, is taking away the ability of the landlords on an individual basis to make decisions about tenancy in a particular property, as were some of the issues that I that I shared when this item came to us last time is taking away their ability to be able to remove someone short of one of the nine enumerated. Items that are listed in in the California the state code. But I wonder. And so we did some research and we also did some research with newspaper articles and such to see if there had been any mass evictions in the city of Long Beach. We were not able to find any mass evictions in our district or others that had been reported in the city. But I know that when eviction notices have been given, there is a requirement under our approved ordinance that 50% of the relocation be paid within ten days. Of the notice. So I'm assuming and I read an article today that says that notices were where relocation, 50% of the relocation was paid. Do we have any way of tracking that? We can certainly conduct some outreach at this time. We haven't had anybody come forward to talk to us about those evictions. We can certainly look. But what the relocation payments aren't they supposed to be lodged with? Isn't somebody supposed to notify the City Councilmember Price? I found this section in what you all passed in July. It's an annual report, so it could be the case that the city has no information on a single relocation payment and landlords would still be in compliance with their obligations under the Hilo ordinance. But under our Willow Ordinance, if notice has been given, a 60 day notice has been given, then pursuant to the ordinance, the landlord would have paid half of the relocation fee within ten days of notice. It's certainly possible that there are tenancies out there right now where half of a relocation payment has been made. And if a 60 day notice was given on September 11th or after, and we move forward with this item tonight and a relocation was paid. What happens then to that relocation payment? The 50%, does it get reimbursed to the landlord? It should be in. I think September 11th is not quite the right date. I think it would be September 13th. Okay. A saying, assuming that our office receives authority to move forward to bring back an ordinance tonight that would come back on November 12th, assuming that that is passed on November 12th. Any 60 day notices that had not yet matured, so to speak, would be rescinded more or less. And so I think if you go back 60 days from November 12th, you land on September 13th. Okay. So if from September 13th to November 12th, anyone has been given a 60 day notice and 50% of the re lo given to them, they would need to return that relocation money. If they're planning on not vacating the property. That's exactly. Right. So I'd like to offer a friendly what happens. Is there a provision? Well, if we're going to be issuing are moving forward on a moratorium, what I would like it to include is that if a tenant has been given relocation money within this September 13th through November 12th period of time, and they decide to stay in the residence and not vacate the premises, they must reimburse the landlord as pursuant to our current ordinance. If they fail to do so, then that could be that would be considered cause for a subsequent eviction. Is that a an amendment that's agreeable? Makes sense to me. Is that something we can do? Absolutely. We can sign the ordinance that way. And I want to make sure I keep going along on the from the councilman in person. Things have accepted that. Can we move on to the backup? Sure. Thank you. Consumer. We're still not used to these minutes on here. I had a great speech written, but I think that the tenants and the people that they came today really just spoke to the issue. I do want not just to harp on it, but I think it's important. We had one person speak against this item tonight and the comment was about the urgency. And as the only renter on this council that moved while being on council, it costs me $7,000 to get into my little apartment in the lovely second District. I understand the vulnerabilities of being a tenant. A single mom in the second District is probably the hardest part about serving as your council member. But the city has continued to grapple with the challenges of being a renter. We did in 2010 with the downtown plan. 2016, we saw rents go up. 2017, rents went up almost 11%. 2018 went up again. And we've consistently, as a council, tried to continue to talk about the issues. We've got great reports. We've got policies coming. We did tenant reload, which I thought was great, but that night was a hard night for me to go to sleep because I didn't feel like we did enough to protect renters at that time. And sure enough, what happened was my my phone was flooded. My emails were flooded with people whose rents went up or they had eviction notices. And so I'm very pleased to hear that the majority of people on this council support this. It's the right thing to do. I hope that we can take the moment as a council, as a community, to kind of learn how we make policy and recognize that sometimes we let politics. Myself, including all of us, dictate how we are going to vote and how far we're going to go on an item. But we continually come back to this council, Dias to try to fix when we don't go far enough when we should. And so I want to applaud all of you guys for coming out today, applaud my council colleagues and Councilmember Richardson for for doing what was right an agenda using this so quickly. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I think this has been a very productive discussion this evening. For me, it's a no brainer. There's no conflict or equivocation whatsoever when it comes to my vote this evening. I will be voting in support of the item in front of us. Yeah. You know, a lot has been said about personal situations and, you know, you don't rent or you don't understand, you know, the the the where, where, where another person is. I am in constant contact with my constituents and I have a very, very diverse district, have people that are certainly suffering with financial issues with this housing crisis. I have family members who are dealing with these issues. And so I'm very, very empathetic and sympathetic to the to the challenges here. This is a what a weak impact. And so to me, you know, this is a holiday season. This is the best gift that the city council can give our residents is housing security. And so I'm happy to support this. I will like to say that that this new legislation, AB 1482, is something that we all should seek to understand better. And so I would hope that in the coming weeks that we can come together and continue to have this conversation and possibly even have a study session around the the impacts of this legislation so that we as a council have a greater understanding of it, but also the public as well as landlords as well. I think we have a responsibility to educate the public about the new law that that will be enacted in January. And so I'm hopeful that we can have that conversation in the coming weeks as well. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Andrews. Yes. First of all, I'd like to thank everyone for coming out tonight. I think what this really shows individuals and the people in the city of Long Beach. When you get tired of being tired, then you're going to stand up and let people know how you feel about the way this city is ran. And we have to give a lot of credit to the individuals who are behind it. But you have to understand, you're in a place that you like and this is a place that you love. You were raised here, and by being in all of a sudden, you get that notice of, I have to leave. That's very frightening to everyone. And she's not the only one. I'm a renter. I sleep at night because like I said, when I know that things are wrong, I'm going to speak up on it. And I think you individuals out there have made it very clear tonight as to understand that we have a problem here and we must solve that problem of the homelessness and renters, because the fact that that's where you live, it's not just about Thanksgiving or Christmas. It's about every day that you live. I don't want to be out after Christmas, so I'm totally going to support this and I hope we'll all be able to get this thing kicking gear and taking care soon. And I want to thank the young men for standing up for not only for Latinos, our Cambodians, African-Americans, but everyone who live in the city of Long Beach. And thank you again. Yes, thank you. Just got some more super now. Thank you. It's been mentioned by Al Austin and Suzy Price, but anyone who contacted my office in the last couple of days knows that the primary concern for me is the educational piece where you don't have that, you have disinformation. And I know the Saddam came quickly. So that was kind of a natural byproduct. But I think that everyone, all parties here, all stakeholders have to be educated on any type of legislation, either from the state or our local ordinances. So I hope we take that to heart, and I hope we can make very strong efforts in that area. And with that, I'll be supporting the item. Thank you. Councilman Pearce. Yes. Just real quick, I wanted to just ask I know that there are some properties that have changed hands. City Attorney, If you could just meet with any new landlords have just purchased property in the next week if they reach out to you before coming back. So with. Before coming back. I mean, you know, I've been I've been taking phone calls from constituents and advocacy groups on both sides of this issue. So I'll continue to do that. I just want to make sure appreciate that. You're. Not from Richardson. Thanks. I just want to just recap. First of all, thank you to the entire city council and everybody who spoke up. I want to recap what I picked up right now. So the two councilmembers mentioned that when the new state law goes into effect, they like to see the city have some local education land and as well as a potential study session. I support that. I think we should make sure that we do that. To me, that means informational on these TV or regular channels, so we make sure that we're proactively adding that education. There was a friendly amendment from Councilman Price. Did you capture what it was? I think I did. I want to make sure that the motion secondary council member Urunga is good with it. With that. Okay. Great. And can you recap what that was? So the ordinance that comes back and by the way, for a little bit of context for the public and behind the dais. My my plan is to bring back an ordinance that substantively looks very similar to the city of Los Angeles ordinance. That's what you're likely to see on November 12th with that as a baseline. The addition will be that any tenant who has already received half of a relocation payment under our ordinance and who stays in the unit because the termination is rescinded due to what I think will occur on November 12th. If they fail to repay that below, then that will constitute a just cause for eviction and the moratorium or the prohibition on evictions. They will pass on November 12th, I assume would not apply to that tenant. It makes sense to me would also say if in general someone, let's say someone already, you know, they receive that notice, they're willing to leave. Right. They've already found new place. They can leave if they want the. Full. You don't have to give their reload payment back if they're leaving. Absolutely right. That's right. They'll move forward. So I want to make sure a landlord, lord, and a tenant understands they do still have that option. Okay, we're. Clear. Thank you. Thank you. Well, thank you very much. Please cast your votes, members. Motion carries. Great motion carries. Thank you very much. We're going to go to item item 15, please.

Recommendation to request City Manager to expand the open streets initiative by extending parklet and parking lot permits at least until the end of 2020 and work with interested small businesses and business improvement districts to make some of them permanent, including a permanent closure of Pine Avenue from Broadway to 3rd Street.

LongBeachCC_09152020_20-0929

We're going to really do an item 20 out this. Communication for Mayor Garcia Recommendation to request city manager to expand the Open Streets Initiative by extending parklet and parking lot permits, at least until the end of 2020. Thank you. Thank you, madam. So I want to first just thank. The the full council have been incredibly active and involved in this program. Ireland has supported our Open Streets program. It's been a complete lifeline for so many restaurants. Our small businesses are hurting, as we all know. And the Open Streets program has really provided a lift to so many workers, so many small business owners that are able to serve their customers and serve their food all across the city. We have over 200 parklet and parking lot spaces that have been converted across the community. All over the city. It has been amazing to see. I have personally talked to dozens of these owners and they are they are so excited about about the program. We know that the Open Streets program has been a success, as we've seen it modeled across the city, where there's also been a lot that we have learned from the program. There's a lot to learn when you're changing and moving around infrastructure. But we know that it's critical for for small business owners. The the recommendation in front of us does a couple of things. The first thing it does is it formally is asking the city manager to extend the open streets permitting program that we have currently in place at least the end of this year. So that those that have these these parklets have the certainty that they're going to continue to be able to operate outdoors and they can plan as they go into these next few months. So that's the first thing, is to allow that extension through city management. The second piece of this item is to have staff begin to work with the business improvement districts. Obviously, the neighborhoods and certainly I would be with everyone on all the councilmembers within the districts to see which of these parklets or spaces could also become permanent. One thing I've heard from a lot of restaurants is they would love to have a permanent parklet that their customers love them. I personally think they're fantastic. They may not work, of course, in every space that they are in currently. And certainly there are going to be neighborhood considerations in some of these locations. But we should at least begin a process so that there isn't a permanent process that has to go through. Also, not just a staff process, but also one to ensure that there's going to be safety, that we're meeting all of the kind of drainage infrastructure requirements so that if parklets become more complex and possibly permanent, we're also following all of the rules and laws as it relates to traffic mitigation and safety. So but we want to get that started now. So that's the other part of this motion as well. And finally, there has been a, I think, rather successful closure on Pine Avenue currently. We'd like to explore to see if that's possible to make that closure permanent. We want to first ask staff to work with the Dolby and the businesses to see if there's interest. To gauge that interest and to move forward on a possible permanent closure or an expanded closure of what's currently in place. And so that's another piece of the motion as well. So that's really an exploration of that. And what I'll just add is I think the council has heard and I have I have heard from, you know , everyone from our of course, our Bixby Knolls folks, folks all across Second Street. I've heard, of course, from our downtown people, folks and and across the city on how how important these spaces have been for for so many restaurants and small business owners. A lot of them have submitted letters and comments. And so I wanted to go ahead and and put this in front of us today. And so with that, I want to bring it to the council. We do have a motion and a second on this item. So let me begin with the motion is from Vice Mayor Andrews and then the second is by councilman in Doha. So let me turn it over to Vice Mayor Andrews. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor, for bringing side forward. You know, in a community like mine where, you know, there's already a struggling, these partners are adding a nice touch, you know, doing the corporate and business owners get excited, you know, when we reach out and offer them help to get it set up with them. And most of all, I just want to thank public works. We're really, really doing this and put this process down to a science. Now, so I think this is a great, great you know, Artemis brought forward to us and thank you again. Thank you, Vice Mayor Councilman's in Dallas. Thank you, Mayor. And I echo Vice Mayor Andrew's comments in regards to what a success it has been. And it's a little positiveness in in all of the the chaos that we've been living in in the past couple of months. I, I would also like to say thank you to all the organizations that have been working together with the businesses in my district in particular. Lee is the LPA, which we have been seeing such great success of these open streets on on Pine Street, which is a little bit south of my district. And I would like to make a frankly amendment. Vice Mayor, if I could, to also extend the foreclosure to up more on pine through fourth and fifth. There has been a great deal of thought being put into it. And I think that right now we also need to focus on giving everybody an opportunity to be able to take advantage of this. So it is. Would you be open to that? Yes. Yes, yes. Very much so. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. And will we support I support that as well. So look forward exploring that. Councilmember Pierce. Thank you, Mayor. I definitely support this item. I know that I've talked to lots of businesses that are looking to keep the parklets that they have. I also know that there are areas that have denser business zones like Pine, and I just want to make sure that staff is working really closely with all the businesses, ensuring that this really is an expansion of of dining and that we have a good process in place to ensure the safety of all of the patrons to these locations, as well as people that might be passing through. So definitely support that item. Love the idea of a permanent closure on Pine, but want to make sure that we do that thoughtfully and that we are including all the stakeholders. So thank you so much. Thank you. And Councilman Austin. Thank you so much. And I think this is a it's an excellent item. We need to definitely do more to support our businesses, our small businesses, and particularly those who can benefit from this these type of street closures. We all know that every business district isn't made the same. But I will just just ask why we have staffs here that that they consider, you know, traffic mitigation efforts to slow down traffic, particularly. I can speak to the Bixby Knolls area. You know, many of our small businesses would love to be able to benefit from the the open streets closures and parklets. But as it stands, the traffic is is is too too fast. And so we've also been working with staff to look at areas and efforts and ideas to to slow traffic in and to provide those parklets along that business district. And I know that it's very important for our businesses to survive, particularly considering everything that they have endured during this year and this pandemic. And so I certainly support this, but obviously we need we have work to do in some of our business districts to give these businesses the support that this important that they need. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Marie Ringa. Thank you, Mayor, and I really am supportive of this motion, but I think it's a natural evolution. I think of the way that we conduct business and support our local businesses. So I'm very appreciative of you bringing this forward and making the pioneering avenue section of our city much more appealing. I think it'll be a great, great opportunity for people to visit downtown. Thank you. Thank you, Katherine Richardson. Thank you. So I obviously support this. I just want to elevate that. I think, you know, we're going to a place where we've got to sort of hunker down for the next potentially year as as we don't know the way we know what's going to happen with the pandemic. So these are innovative ways to provide, you know, assets and additional tools and a tool toolbox for restaurants and and businesses to be able to, you know, adjust through this transition and be able to survive. So I wholeheartedly support it. I think we need to be thinking about what we can do for. I know that certain businesses can move indoors, but some may prefer to stay outdoors, or so we should really just always stay open minded in terms of, you know, barbershops, hair salons, bars, you know, alternative ways for them to be able to conduct business over the course of the next year or so. I support this and look forward to seeing this continued, continued implementation. Thank you. That concludes council comment. Is there any is there any public comment on this item? Yes. First, we have Dave Clark. Hello? Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Hello. Was a written concern. For the record, the conversion of lower pay in a matter of months is an objective reason to love our fair town. The Open Streets Initiative kind of great. It's really. I'm really heartened to see the mayor's initiative here. And I agree with many of the points laid out, and especially for remembering what's happened with, as we all know, being better isn't in relation to one's fellow man. In relation to one form of health. I only thing I'd add is that we continue to think about how to localize, localize, localize and kind of, you know, help . A lot of folks. In towns kind of get through the next year and we start thinking holistically about the different types of police types and potentially uses for gathering spaces in a in a more walkable. Format. One of the great. Things for the assets was that we have or those parking garages on third and fourth off time that we can use not only for solar but for storage, for the insurance value, for a lot of different co-benefits beneficial uses. So please keep that in mind. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker is in control. Hello. I please begin. Thank you. This is Sam Cantrell. And by giving these extensions into Public Street's name of Parklets, it kind of disguises what is happening. I wonder if the. Public knows that what is going on here is that we are losing all of the parking spaces that were once along the curb. We are losing, in some cases, a lane of traffic. In Belmont. Sure. These Parklets extending out into the street. Makes driving very hazardous. If you're driving on a cross street, you cannot see the oncoming traffic because the restaurants are extending out into the streets. And I am in favor of helping the restaurants and the businesses, but I don't think this is the way to do it. I think you should close the streets to traffic and provide. An open space on the street and provide parking on the backs of the restaurants. I am definitely opposed to making this permanent after the pandemic is over. There should be no reason for the public having to give up their public streets. And especially in Belmont. Sure, the Street Olympic Plaza Drive has been closed off for a private business, a gym, parking spaces have been lost. And this is in the coastal zone. It is against coastal law to block access to the beach. So I think there's a lot of things that need to be. Tweet on this. Also, I'm wondering about the loss of revenue from parking meters. This was not addressed that I could find. It did say in the staff report that this is going to cost $300,000 through the rest of this year. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Thank you. Actually, I'm going to go back to the council. Councilman Price. Mr. Mayor. So I appreciate this item coming forth, and I also appreciate the mayor's words of prudence in terms of which ones we look at for permanency and all the different factors that we're going to be looking at, including neighborhood impacts. And as it relates to some of our parking impacted areas, parking impacts. So what I have committed to Third District residents is that we're it's very premature for us at this juncture to determine which Parklets might want to become permanent and whether that's feasible based on parking impacts and other impacts that may or may not have been realized by the residents up until this point. So I look forward to this process. I do. I we have received a lot of great positive feedback on the parklets in the Shaw. There are additional parklets that we have deployed, but really those have never been envisioned to be permanent. And the public speaker who just spoke a moment ago referenced one of those those are not ones we envision permanency for, but for those that might be transitioned to more permanent sites, those are ones we'll take a very hard look at parking and other types of impacts to make sure that we mitigate those. I just want to take a moment just to thank our public works and traffic engineering team. They've been incredible through this whole process and I'm really so grateful for all of them. April, Paul, Karl. Everybody has just been really wonderful in helping us get the parklet up and running. Help us feel questions from business owners and residents and really help us transition in this very unprecedented time and to an offering that we had not envisioned prior to March. So thank you, Mr. Mayor, for bringing this item forward. And I look forward to what I've committed to my residents to be a robust process before anything becomes permanent. Thank you. Thank you. And with that, I also want to as we conclude just to everyone from our city manager on down through our entire public works team and also our city attorney team who have all actually been working on this issue with our staff and also with all the staffs I know of all your offices. Just thank you all. You've been phenomenal partners and I know we have a lot of work to do as we move forward to support more businesses. So let's go out and do a roll call vote and thank you. District one. Right. District two, i. District three. I. District four. All right. District five. I. District six. All right. District seven. I. District eight. District eight. District nine. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. And now we will do open public comment, please.

Recommendation to receive a report on recommendations for streamlining City Council meetings; and Request City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code governing the City Council meetings according to staff recommendations and City Council direction. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05142019_19-0474

Thank you. And now we're going to item 17. Report from City Manager Recommendation to receive a report on recommendations for streamlining city council meetings and request the city attorney to prepare an ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code governing the City Council meeting citywide. Thank you. The first customer she recommended do a staff report. First, do I have opening comments? You know, in the spirit of this item, I'm going to make some opening comments, but they're going to be extremely brief. And then after the report, I reserve the right to make a few comments after that. But those will also be brief. So what I'd just like to say is that this item first came to council on October 23rd. So I just went back to my newsletter that we wrote on the 19th, and I just like to read what we posted then. And this is October 19th, 2018. I have authored an agenda item asking the mayor, city manager, city clerk and city attorney for a report on ways to streamline and shorten our council meetings with a third of the meetings lasting more than six and a half hours this year. It is unfair to expect the public to wait through the proceedings to speak on important issues. I just want to re-emphasize that that has always been the intention of this item, is to give the public greater access to these meetings and have their voices heard and to try to curtail the long waits they have. So with that, thank you to staff for the report and look forward to hearing it. Thank you, Councilmember. With that, we'll go to the staff report. Thank you, Mr. Supernanny. And so we have a staff report. We will also try to be brief. We'll go through a little bit of the history and the outreach we did, and then I'll walk through the recommendations. So for the beginning, I'd like to introduce Stephanie Zavala, one of our management assistants who helped us with the research . Mayor and members of the City Council. On October. On October 23rd, 2018, Council requested a report back on best practices for streamlining council meetings. The City Manager's office, City Clerk's Office and City Attorney's Office conducted outreach and best practice research to prepare recommendations for a council consideration. The Council Meeting Streamlining Outreach Survey was launched on November 18th and it was open for a month to obtain feedback regarding current meeting structure. The the survey contained six questions one asking for feedback on streamlining the meetings, and five related to demographics. There were 218 responses to the survey. These two charts. Demonstrate the breakdowns of who responded to the survey by council, district and ages. Survey results from the public resulted in the following themes limit public comment during high attendance meetings. Limit Councilmember discussion. Limit repetition of praise and agreement between council members. Adhere to agenda order. Establish time limits for agenda items. Limit presentation. Slash ceremonies at the beginning of meetings. Publish hidden agendas and estimated times for each meeting at at least a week in advance. The city clerk's office also reviewed all city council meetings in 2018. Out of 35 total meetings, 12 meetings lasted over 5 hours. For each of these meetings that went over 5 hours, they found that public comment took less time than council and staff time. In addition to the survey staff also reached out to specifically the ten largest cities in California to find best practices for council meetings. The city clerk's office reached out to other Southern California cities to see if they had undertaken any streamlining efforts for their council meetings. From this outreach and research, the this presentation contains ten recommendations for immediate implementation, three recommendations for future implementation, and five options considered but not recommended. Thank you, Stephanie. So I will walk through a little bit of the recommendations that we came up with. But before I start, I just would like to say that we were really looking for a direction tonight. We came up with some ideas and concepts. These are really your rules. So as a body you really need to decide what you're comfortable with doing what you would like to change. There may be other things that you're interested in, or some of these that you believe are inappropriate and just want to say these are ideas for debate and discussion. So the first one we came up with was just to continue to encourage the city council to reach out to staff prior to the council meetings. Any questions that we can help answer before the meeting? And we always are willing and able to do that to help you make an informed decision when you get to the council floor. Second, we'd like to suggest that we set schedule time and time limits for ceremonies and presentations. We often have the public come and that means a whole lot to them to come and be able to present to you or be honored by you. And so having a set time to conduct those presentations would provide some structure. And we we recommend setting a limit of about 5 minutes per presentation so that we normally have about two or three of those. And it would really be a structured part of our agenda. And we'd like to the city clerk to help keep us all on schedule by creating a timer for presentations to keep that on track. We also recommend that when we do get those meetings where we get lots of speakers on an individual item, that we basically continue the practice that you've put in place over the last year , which we think is working very well. Essentially, we would codify that when there is more than ten speakers identified for a specific issue, that the allocated time drops down to 90 seconds for everybody. We would then formalize this practice in the code. But of course, with exemptions for language access and ADA exceptions. We continue to encourage use of the consent calendar. If you've noticed, over the last year we have been putting more items on the consent calendar and I think that's been going pretty smoothly. We'd even look to do more as it makes sense. And those would be things like grant applications, contracts, receiving file items. And of course at any time if you think that needs to be on the regular agenda, any council member can pull those for discussion. Number five for content calendar. We'd really like to get those done before 630 as a matter of practice. Those are fairly routine items. I'd also like to say that often those are the items that we have some of the junior staff here who are there to answer questions and a lot of them are on overtime. So we'd like to have them if they need to be. Give you some information. Do that by 630. You can this item, you would still be able to do consent any time you'd want to if you needed a push it back. But we would just release the staff after 630 and then any items that we couldn't answer, we would just hold those over to the next council meeting. Number six. Where possible, we'd suggest keeping to the posted agenda order. But we know that that a lot of times you'll have different groups come up and that we do need to be flexible. So we're not saying not to be flexible, but where we can try to create some predictability. And part of that pairs with the idea of times certain. So where we know we're going to have big groups try to set a time certain so that that group can prepare and the groups before them know to be able to get there either before or after for their item. Number seven, we are suggesting kind of helping the council keep track of the discussion and creating 30 minute timer after city council or after the the public have spoken that we just create a timer for ourselves. And then at 30 minutes, basically the clerk would remind us and say to the council, would you like us to continue debate? Would you like to vote or would you like to table this and move on so you could continue debate and continue debate. But I think this would help us create some sense of, you know, that we've discussed for 30 minutes and let you come to a decision point on that. Number eight, we have a number of city council committees. When we do have items that are really lengthy, we expect lots of debate. We would encourage sending those items to committee. They can be heard in committee and we can get a lot of that debate at a committee level. Sometimes those meetings are even at times where the public can attend. That's not a normal Tuesday night. And then when it would come back, if we already had that opportunity for a lot of debate, we would be looking at a lower amount of debate level. So maybe a minute if it had already been hurting committee and is just being reheard at the council level for item nine. I want to take it back to the supplemental agenda and when it was created, this council created the supplemental agenda and it was designed to really handle those issues that were time sensitive and couldn't get on the regular agenda. So it was designed for really the emergency items are the ones that couldn't be done by that in that for eight days, which is what we try to do for all of our regular agenda items. Over time, we've seen more use of the supplemental for routine items and regular items, and that provides less time for you as the council and also staff and the community to kind of ask questions and debate. So we encourage kind of getting back to what the supplemental was originally designed for. And by doing that, you would add a statement of urgency on your council letters. Just to clarify, this is urgent because so if I'm putting it on the supplemental, I have to because of the following reason. Number ten. Sometimes our close sessions tend to go over. I think this council tries really hard to have them done by 5:00. But if they do need to go longer than that, we do have the option of continuing those to the end of the meeting or continuing it to another another day. So those are a short term recommendations. We do have a couple ones for future implementation that we'd like to let you know about. One is to hold a Robert's Rules of Order refresher. But there are also some additional council rules out there. There's Rosenberg's thank you. Rosenberg's rules that some of the cities are looking at. There are Roberts rules just a little simpler. We'd also like to really look at some use of technology in the new civic center. For example, some agencies, especially Metro, have sign up devices that you can sign up either on your personal device or at a kiosk, or you bring it down to the city clerk and you say, I'd like to speak on these items. That allows the chair to actually have a list of people who want to be able to speak. And then you would be able to do that at any time until it's time that the item is heard and then it's cut off so that there's a sense of how many speakers that we have. So we're exploring that technology. We can do a little bit of that with our Granicus system, but it would probably mean creating a new system as well. So we're looking at the metro system. We also, just as a fun idea, thought, you know, a lot of our a lot of you want to make sure that you're talking to the people that show up and letting them know that you support them. There may be other ways to do that through emojis or other kind of fun ways to let them know that you're supportive of what the speaker is saying. So we we can look at that. And finally, electronic board to announce the council meeting agenda order. So when we do need to move it around that we can electronically let the council know that. So I'm at the end of the presentation. I do want to point out a couple of areas that we looked at, but we aren't recommending. One was shortening public comment. We actually tried that as a council back in the nineties and that wasn't very well supported. You could also move public comment all the way to the end of the meeting. You know, that is an option. You know, it doesn't normally take that much time. So we're not recommending that you could add additional meetings. We heard that in the community outreach we actually found in the city of Austin that it didn't result. They tried that, they added it, and it actually resulted in more meetings and more discussion because there was just more time to have all that debate. So that actually didn't shorten meetings. Timing. Councilmember Comments. A number of cities have tried this and none of them actually found that they enforce those rules. We really didn't feel that, you know, that that would stifle debate. So we didn't feel that that was something to recommend and then stopping it at that time. Long Beach also tried that to set a curfew and that, you know, didn't really help move the meeting along either. So with that, we tried to keep our presentation presentation brief and we're ready to answer questions. Thank you so much. Let's start with conservatorship or not. Okay. Thank you. I'm anxious to hear my colleague's comments. Just one point there on on Robert's rules and maybe the city attorney would like to weigh in on this. And we are required to follow Roberts rules. Is that correct? Under our ordinance, we have adopted the council has adopted Roberts rules unless they conflict with the Brown Act. Yes. Okay. So it's a matter of how closely we adhere to those rules. I believe this is the point in the presentation. That's correct. Okay. So I guess part of this motion would be to, you know, adhere strictly to Roberts rules in our meetings. The second was on the. Well, not in order of priority, but. The the thing that wasn't added to the city of Austin trying additional meetings, I think I said in October, that's counterintuitive to what we're trying to achieve here. You give us more time than we're not streamlining our meetings. But beyond that, what wasn't mentioned is cost. And that would be a significant cost to the city, I assume, to add another meeting per month. We would expect each meeting. We have security costs. We have a cost for all the staff to be here where I'm doing free parking, all those things. So yes, we would expect each meeting there would be a cost probably in a couple thousand dollars. Okay. Thank you. Well, I promised my comments would be brief, so I'm going to defer to my colleagues now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I if I had an emoji, I would give a thumbs up to the staff's report. I think it was very thorough. The outreach and survey results are here and very, very telling. I support, I think, most of what has been recommended by staff to help streamline our meetings. And I want to thank councilmember member Supernova and my colleagues for bringing this issue forward. Obviously, we are here to do the people's business and oftentimes our city council meetings, I would say, devolve into theater and presentations in front of the council as opposed to public comment. But also what I'm seeing here from the the survey results is that our residents believe that the city council should be talking less. And so whether or not we put this in a policy, I think we need to govern ourselves accordingly. So I'm going to hurry up and get get through this. And with respect to transparency, I think obviously this is the place of the people's business. And so we should be as transparent as possible. I'm definitely always interested in hearing public comment. I learn something new every time we go through that. But limiting the time is, I think, makes a lot of sense and is consistent with what many other public agencies do. I think we're very generous here as a city council and compared to other other public agencies, other city councils, the county and others. And so thank you again for bringing this forward. And I look forward to supporting it and hopefully having more efficient meetings in the future. Councilman Councilmember Pierce. Hello and thank you for this item, Darrell. I support staff's recommendations. There's a couple of comments that I do need to make. I appreciate that for number three, you've kind of laid out for us today of a formal way that that would be done. I wanted to make sure that it wasn't done on an ad hoc basis and that there was a standard in place for reducing the time the council committee items is. I think it is something I support, but I want to recognize that it's a challenge. And so as much as we can try to schedule those so that we have full committees and we have full conversation and that it's not a 20 minute presentation and doesn't allow for community members to engage is really important. I think one of the things that was brought up by some of the committee members I met with was full time council and recognizing that cities that have committees where they do a lot of work in committees are full time council and that it is challenging to have real debate all night long till 1:00 in the morning without having a full council in a city that's trying to tackle some big issues. So I wanted to just say that publicly that doing the work in committees can be challenging. The other parts that I'd like to just comment, you know, for the presentations and for the hearings, I'm fully supportive of having those at 3:00 instead of 5:00, having them before a full council meeting start. So I'd be curious to hear from others, mayor council on what their, their thoughts are. But as much as we can here earlier, recognizing that we have working families that need to come at five, but if it's a presentation or we're giving a certification that those things can happen with with people that that need to show up for those specifically and absolutely in the staff reports in the council agenda, I've seen other city council agendas that do include staff reports in full or in those binders so that we're not looking and receiving the information for the first time or the Monday before so that we can really digest it. I think that that for me is the most important part too, is that the comments I think that was made around limiting the discussion and questions with staff on the floor. It might look like theater, but it's part of making sure that everybody that can go back, look at the videos, know that we've asked the questions, it's memorialized and that they have the answers to that. So I don't have a change on the motion, really, just making sure that that we have an ordinance that doesn't limit council engagement. I don't believe there's a price you can put on community engagement. We're here to govern for everyone. And so making sure that it's accessible and I'm hearing councilmember supervisors comments, there has been some conversation out there that this is about limiting public engagement and it's about making sure that public engagement is accessible and real for every single person in our community. So I really do appreciate this item on the floor tonight and I look forward to hearing my council colleagues comments. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. I'm going to start with a compliment. I know that we talked about. Over complement each other. One of the things that I often hear from my colleagues I'm sorry. From my community and. I agree as well as many of us have really successful newsletters. And I know, Jeanine, you're a Councilwoman Price or Pierce your newsletters well-written and I try to memorialize my comments through the newsletter instead of having to do it at the dais, because there aren't as many community members who want to spend the time fast forwarding and rewinding, but hopefully through some of the recommendations I'm making, it'll be easier for them. So having reviewed a lot of agendas and dealing with long meetings over the years, I'd strongly suggest the following. Friendlies Council consider that the order of agenda items are based on the attendees present with big agenda items given a time certain. So if we have 100 people here to speak on one item, that item shouldn't wait until 10:00 at night. Those 100 people who are here should be at the front of the of the agenda. And I think that the mayor's done that pretty effectively, but it hasn't been required. And I think that if it was required, it would give the public some knowledge and understanding. I recognize that there'll be additional resources available at the new City Hall at whether it's Metro or Coastal Commission or County Board of Supervisors. You can register that you want to make a public comment so that the staff know how many are coming in advance. But I don't think you should have to drive down to City Hall to register. So if it was possible to. Register for. Public comment when the agenda comes out stating that you plan to be there, I think that would be helpful so that we'd be able to get that picture further in advance. I don't know how you work that out, though, because oftentimes people then no show and so that gives a false number. So I don't want to people to game the system, so I don't know what that looks like, but I'll pass that to staff. But I would like to formalize that in the new city hall. Since we have a system for queuing that day, maybe that day you come and you click. I'm registered here. I attended that. The items with the most attendees or the groups of attendees should be at the front end of the meeting. I would like to have council consider moving any discussion of non agenda items to the end of the meeting and here's why. The first priority of the council at a regularly scheduled meeting to be do is to be doing and discussing the business of those things that are on the agenda. And we should give priority to the people who came and waited and want to speak on items that are advertised to be discussed. Because we aren't able to take action on non agenda items anyway. And so for that that would be my an additional friendly. Public participation on general matters, not agendas, are important, and we need to be able to have those opportunities. While many council members have a lot of community forums, not everyone from every other district goes to each other's community meetings. And I can understand why this forum is appropriate. But I also don't think that if there's a ton of people here on agenda items, that they should have to wait. I've had many business owners and community members wait until ten, 11:00 at night to make a comment on an agenda item that they were planning on, on commenting. So I think that those are important specifically to council. I am sorry. Staff Recommendation number seven. I would be in favor. I appreciate the point of order at 30 minutes. I would be interested in having a count up clock on these screens for us to see what that looks like. I would also be okay with every council member having the unlimited amount of times to queue, but for them to only speak in five minute increments. And so I think that that helps because if you're going to have a 30 minute clock. What I would be concerned about is a filibuster of one council member, not necessarily intentionally, but that they have 30 minutes of things to say and the other eight council members don't have that opportunity. So I would recommend a count up clock with five minute limits and then you can recue and get back in line with with no penalty. I would also feel strongly that the number of signatures required to be placed on a. A supplemental agenda. If you would like to be a supplemental agenda and you feel it is an urgent item, I think you need to get 200 signatures because there are way too many items have been active. So it is actually not against the Brown Act. I'm not saying you'd be signed onto the item. I'm just saying that you would sign to open the discussion. Is there any way that that's possible? No. Okay. That's okay. Well. Would it be possible to take a vote at the beginning of the meeting of whether or not all agenda supplemental items are able to be tabled to the next week? You could take an action that night once the agenda has been published, you could take an action to table or continue and item anything. Rolonda. Yes, I. Will put that in my personally. But just one thing for us to think about. Over here taking notes, I'm not sure I'm going to be. Writing at the end for an acceptance of my friendly. Yep. Okay. First friendly council member. Super. Now would you be open to formalizing that agenda? Items with the most speakers would be moved to the front of the meeting. Yeah, okay. It. Since we're into Robert's rules, does the chair recognize me to speak? Yes. Council member. All right. Thank you. Yes. Wonderful. Would you be open to my friendly that there's a 30 minute count up clock of point of order with a five minute friendly for each councilmember. Yeah. I would like to ask staff if if that's something that's feasible. I think it sounds like a great idea, but. So we could do a count up clock. We could do count up or count down. I'd actually need to ask the clerk about, you know, whether you know what that would mean to track each council member and whether we could do a sub clock of 5 minutes. Okay. So if the friendly is. Let's explore this. I'm on board with that. Wonderful. And then and. Just if I can get some clarification, what happens at 5 minutes is the chair is supposed to then cut the council member off and move to the next. One. I'm happy to time it myself. Okay, so 5. Minutes at. 5 minutes, the next person cued up would go and the person that spoke the first 5 minutes is welcome to cue back up. But other people get to go first. Understood. Wonderful and then giving first priority to agenda items and second priority to people who want to speak on items that are not agenda item. And if I could ask for clarification on that, is are you we're discussing public comment here on non agenda items. So you're you're recommending that the public comment on non agenda items is moved to the end of the meeting. I actually would say that, yes, I feel that the number of people who come here to speak on agenda items, or at least if we have a system that shows cueing, that if there are a number of agenda items that have no one here to speak, then of course speaking on non agenda, these items could come. So if I understand correctly, currently we have kind of a hybrid where we allow the first ten members who sign up and then our second public comment period is really a continuation of the first one. We just allow ten at the beginning. So if I understand your motion, an amendment would be to move all public comment to the end of the meeting. I'll wait on that one, but I would just like to hear my counsel colleagues ideas related to. Well, it's. Hard for. Me. I'm not sure we can wait. If you're making a friendly, it's either making the point or withdrawing discussion. I'm not going to make that piece of friendly. I'm just open to hearing my colleagues here. It's hard for me to see many members of our community here to speak on a specific item and have to wait for non agenda item. So just something to think about. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Vice Miranda. Yes, yes. Thank you very much. First of all, I want to thank Coach and Superman for bringing this. I just want to say that. That the intent on this item is very thoughtful and that I do appreciate all our public speakers and that's what it's all about. I think certainly it's about the public. It's not about we want to do it dices because we say what we have to say and I think we should get it over with. But it's all about the public. This is why you had us, you know, to be your, you know, our individual that you chose to be your your your our council person. But what I'm saying is that I like to listen to the public more than like to listen to ourselves because you make a lot more sense than we do. That's the way I look at it. So I want to thank you guys for your engagement and your involvement. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor. Councilman Richardson, I. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So there's a lot that I first of all, I want to recognize staff. They got their staff report in in 10 minutes. Good job, staff. That was a lot of slides and got it done. So I recognize that few a few thoughts, a few notes. So one, I'm not sure that our compliments are really that big of a time. Drainer saying saying nice things to each other goes a long way. I remember some councils when they had very few nice things to say and I know sometimes we get reprimanded for being positive sometimes, but I think I just want to say I don't think it's that big a deal to give someone a compliment. It's not gonna take that much time. Secondly, on the on, I support all of the recommendations that are listed and I want to raise up one issue about the committee meeting times. I feel that the committee meet when we start committee meetings on Council Day, you can't get through a lot of work, especially when they're big committees, economic development, budget oversight. These are these are committees with a lot of conversation. And so I think we need to we need to implement a time certain to end those. When you use your bucket of time, your 30 minutes or whatever it is, your committee meeting, you can't take any more items. Is there is there a way to do that? Mr. PARKIN Yes. The committees could decide that on their own, or we can. We as a council set that as a policy for the committee. You could set that as a policy for your city, for the council. Committee for committees. Yes, you could add that. I'd like to I'd like to add that as a friendly. Councilman Huebner So can you restate so this is if there's a committee meeting taking place prior to council, you cannot go beyond the time that you are budgeted like you were scheduled. I enthusiastically okay. I think that helps. And then in addition to that, I think that the council committees in almost every city in most cases should meet on days other than council Tuesday, and that should be lifted up. I don't know that we can that we should make that the law, but we should like we should use other days and evenings to come in and do council committee meetings. And I know because that's the real opportunity to get people to come give public input if it's a canned one hour before the council meeting, I don't think that that's realistic and people aren't off work then. So we need to think about taking at least setting one additional evening per month where we just do, you know, council committee meetings, something like that. So when you think about that, is there something we can sort of work with on that? How can we hold people to that or encourage that if that's on the clerk can do when we schedule them? I think really that's up to the nine of you and what time you have available. So right now we really know that you're you've got other responsibilities. So we try to put things on Tuesdays, but the chair of the committee can call that time for whenever they want to do. It in the way I see it with the structure of our council, if we have, you know, you know, folks work and all that, I think it's not too much to ask for one additional evening. Like doesn't have to be a Tuesday to try to get your committee work done. And then the next thing I would say is I love the friendly amendment that Councilman Mongeau put forward about sort of we're moving up the folks who brought out a bunch of people because I think it rewards civic engagement and it rewards organizing. There's been a lot of times when we've had a bunch of people from North Long Beach, but their item, their issue just wasn't as hot as some other item with fewer people, and they've had to wait til ten, 11:00 at night because their issue wasn't really that sexy citywide. Right. But they turned out and they did it and they deserve to be be brought up sooner. So I support. That. If I could ask for clarification on that is that if we're trying to write that into the ordinance, it's going to be more than 75 people. It's more than 25 people is more than 50. I, I just want to stress. I think it's the discretion of the chair, but there has to be a mechanism. We're going to have to figure out what that mechanism that I don't think 75 is the number. And I don't know what I'm asking. I think it's like a show of hands, right? If there's 30, 40 people in there at the end of the meeting, they raise their hand. That's something the chair has got to recognize. So it'll be we'll write it as the discretion of the chair. If there's a crowd, the he or she, whoever the chair is, can call that item up. That's the current policy we have right now. And I don't know. That's what I'm asking. We need we need it to be codified somehow. Well, you need to give me. I need to have some way to codify it in that we can. Let's what? I said we keep going. I think I know where committee member and Councilman Mongo trying to get to. So let's clarify that in a minute here. Okay. And then the last thing I would say is, you know, I think two or three of us probably might be some offenders on being a little long winded. You know, it's okay. I get it. Recognize that might be one of those offenders. And I'll say I think the five minute clock could work. I think in cases where it won't work and we just need to call it out, is when the maker of the motion is making a presentation. And I don't think they should be making 30 minute presentations. But in all honesty, if you put something together, we can say if you're the maker of the motion, you have 10 minutes. But every comment beyond there's five. And if you want to queue up after your ten, but you've got ten to get your presentation, I think that's really reasonable. So would you accept that, Councilman? Super now. I'm seeing some nodding heads. Well, I'm a little unclear on this when that starts happening. This term not accusing you of gaming the system. At a certain point, we're going to look at who who's conducting the presentations. And I didn't want to go there tonight and have a count on, gee, which council office is doing the most presentations and whatnot. So that's a little bit of my concern there, if that makes sense to you. Well, this has nothing to do with tracking. I think we should be, frankly, tracking how much time council members are taking. That's not one of the friendlies right now. Okay. The friendly right now is simply I'm concurring on the five minute clock and I'm saying the maker of the motion, I think is a bit different if you are sort of making the motion and you're making a presentation. Staff got a really efficient presentation done in 10 minutes. I think council members and the public, I think really realistically, if you come with a motion in 5 minutes and the mayor says it, that's 5 minutes, it's going to happen a lot. And so I think having a reasonable cap and saying ten is fair. If I can add a suggestion. Yeah. And I, I understand where Councilor is going to go to the city attorney really quick. I saw people, people queued up. For clarification on the maker of the motion. I think if I hear it right, it's if that's their item, they're bringing their item and they're introducing that. I am not. Hey, I signed up as the maker of the motion for this item, so I get 10 minutes. No, no, that's. You're right. If you're present, like you prepared this item. And the intent of the item here was that the speaker, whoever it is, whether it's the council member or the staff, the 30 minute clock happens for debate. So that wouldn't apply to that. You know, the council member presenting or staff presenting it wouldn't apply to the public. It's when we say, okay, we'd like to have councilmember debate. That's when the 30 minutes would, sir. I think that's right. And so I think that clarifies the point. And so the 30 minute clock is on debate. And so if you're presenting the motion, the clock's not on during the understanding. Okay. All right. Got a. Five minute clock. As well. There is no five minute clock if you're presenting a motion. That. Is not part of the debate. Thank you for clarifying. That's helpful. Councilman Ringo. What's nine times five? 45, 45, nine council members hear 5 minutes each as 45 minutes and then the mayor always has to put in his is just 5 minutes. So you're talking 50 minutes, a five minute thing or 3 minutes? I love it. Just like the crowd. Just like everybody else. Just like everybody else. And without. Without rescuing. Because you're going to go into another person's time again. I don't know. But I'd like to refute the fact most council meetings when we like going to midnight is because we're having a healthy or a robust debate. There's point, counterpoint, recue, kind of the point substitute, substitute and substitute a substitute that takes long. I mean, there have been council meetings that I've been here. In fact, it was more so in the beginning because we had a lot of inexperienced rookies. Or. Sophomores who didn't really or were not really aware or trained in Robert's Rules of Order. And I really, totally agree with the Robert whose order I saw some comments that saying it would be a waste of time. It is not. We need it because there's a lot of people who haven't gotten formally through it that works with it or within it, but not fully trained in how it works. I'm saying that because it's I've had 20 going on 20 years of this, but the bottom line is that if you want to make council meetings efficient and streamlined , it's something that we have to monitor ourselves and, you know, and and when we get into a debate or we get into a a robust discussion or whatever it is that we want to make a point, you know, there's got to be a time where we have to agree to disagree and move on. And if it's such that we can't come to a consensus, then let's table it for the next for the next meeting. If it's not time sensitive, that is I mean, I know sometimes we have time sensitive issues that we have to absolutely deal with that now. But if it's not time sensitive, then we will move on. As many of you know, I also belong to a coastal commission and how we handle those meetings basically is that it's a time set for public comment. And I'm not I'm not in agreement. We're moving from the comment to the end of the meetings because some people are here precisely for that. They want to come to make a public comment in the beginning of a meeting, put in their their comments, put it on the record and then leave. And for a lot of individuals who are here, even for controversial items that we have to have a lot of interest, we could probably move that up also to to get them to have their say and then they could move on. So, I mean, there's a different there are various ways, obviously, of of using time more efficiently. And another recommendation this would be more accurate to the public than to us. If there is a item out there that is highly controversial and there's going to be more than ten people would say 15 to 20 people with 3 minutes each and then going out to one or two, they could, you know, do a group presentation themselves, you know, like like consolidate themselves to say that, you know, if, if we are part of a of a I see, I see. I know. Kilkenny as an example, there's five of you here, you know, you want to make one presentation for maybe 4 minutes, that's it. And not each for again need to speak for 12 minutes. You could have one presentation for four just as an example. The, the other parts, you know, and there's, there's going to be a lot of other controversies. I mean, we deal with controversies every, every, every minute, every, every council meeting. So that's going to that that city that I know. I'm getting the word over here from American media that I don't I think I read about 5 minutes. I think a right. About 5 minutes. If you would interrupt me, I'll finish up. But but the bottom line is, is that there's other ways of measuring and counting our time, but we have to self monitor ourselves. That's making council member Councilman Gonzales. Yes. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilmember. Super not for bringing this forward. This is a great item. I'm an agreement with one through seven on the city staff suggestions, but I will emphasize a few of them and get through it really quickly. Of course, one thing I'll add is absolutely, I think we need a better guidance and proper use of consent versus supplemental versus regular agenda and committee meetings to so that we're not, you know, crowding the regular agenda with. Things that could be added to the consent calendar. And I think we just, you know, need to be maybe told a little bit more directly that that could be a potential versus adding more and more to the agenda number to the public comment side, I would be in preference of keeping it in the beginning just because there are people that, you know, want to get through public comment first and not hear all of the back and forth through council comment. And given that we're talking about potentially 45 minutes plus, I mean, I think public comment deserves to be first and we keep consistent and ensuring that and what I'll say to. Believe. We were going back and forth about like what would the limit be for people in the audience? And I think we could possibly keep it consistent, keep it consistent with what we've said here in the city. Staff report that after ten people we reduce down to 90 seconds. So that could be where we move it up in the agenda as well. That could be a potential and. I'm also in favor of closed session at end of meeting. Sometimes it's hard as working full time as well to get to closed session at 330 or 4:00. And I know city attorneys like, no, don't do that to me, but I'm sorry. Sometimes it's it's really difficult having another job and having to come in and kind of rushing to closed session. That's just the fact of the matter with many of us. And then lastly, I will emphasize that the city staff presentations, a lot of times I know that I'm caught in speaking, you know, on some issues on the dais and asking more of the technical questions. Because I haven't seen the city staff report and I haven't seen it until I sit down in the dais at 5:00 and I have to kind of thumb through it beforehand. So it would be really great to have that. And I know a few colleagues have mentioned the same 1 to 2 weeks in advance, if possible. So we can have some time to review and digest and we can come a little bit more prepared to council meetings with that information. That would be helpful. And I know we have staffs here, too, but you know, again, many of us. Work. Other jobs and it's a little difficult. And I'm also of the same mindset as Councilmember Muranga on the 3 minutes. I'm totally great with that. If we want. To go along. That I think the public has 3 minutes. I think we can also, you know, work with 3 minutes as well. So that's what I will say. But I want to thank Councilmembers Hooper now again and city staff for bringing this forward. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Price. Thank you. I actually wasn't going to queue up on this topic because I like all the suggestions. But I will say that sometimes the process of debate takes a long time and a lot of times we're asking questions of staff and I want staff to give detailed responses. So if my clock is going for 5 minutes and staff takes 3 minutes answering a question which I want them to answer, then it limits my ability to talk. And I'll tell you, I mean, this is great. These are all great guidelines. But I was elected to be an advocate on behalf of my residents, and I'm going to advocate in the way that works for me. And I'm going to take the amount of time that I need to advocate for my residents so we can set these as guidelines. But I am I'm not going to be limited from queuing up again. I'm not going to be limited from asking questions. I'm not going to be limited from being heard. I'm not going to be limited from asking questions. I have a right to be heard and advocate so we can set the standards as guidelines. But there's just no way that, you know, we always talk about language access and making sure that everyone feels included and all this stuff, you know, it might take people a little bit longer to articulate what they need to say. It may take people the opportunity to hear from all of their colleagues before they might change their mind. They might hear something they like a colleague say and say, you know what that makes? That's a really great point. It's not about rushing through. I understand the intent of this, and I think it's great, but. I'm going to advocate and I'm going to represent the way that I know how in my time frame. That's the bottom line. So if the chair wants to hold me in contempt, the chair can do that. But I'm going to advocate for my residence. So I think these are all great guidelines. I think we can definitely stick to try to stick to the 5 minutes and really try to respect that spirit. And I think it was Councilman Richardson that said, you know, we monitor each other in the spirit of what we're trying to do, but there's no way in hell anyone's going to limit what I have to say and how I have to say it. Not going to happen. So thank you. Let's go to the public comment and they're going to come back to the council. Oh. Yes. It's. Larry Goodhew What I'm adamant about is returning to work to what worked so well for so long in terms of public comment, i.e. after the opening Pledge of Allegiance and any special recognition of various different paradigms and so forth. The first ten people that signed up to speak will speak. And that has always been the process until we had our criminally complicit mayor come in and jerk the council speaker list and the council items around like Seinfeld's Kramer enters and leaves room period. Stick to work what works so well for so long. Then you'll have the you'll have the backing of the community. Once you start doing what the mayor is doing. You lose the support of the public. Thank you. Karen replied. As someone who regularly comes to the council meetings, I was pleased to see that a lot of my suggestions were adopted. I was one of those that wanted to limit the council member time because it's obvious when you haven't had time to read about the issues that you're kind of just talking, and that's not a productive use of time. So that's my comment on that. The awardees, you know, I come and I see the same awardees year after year after year. I don't think that's necessary. I think there should be a limit to the number of times when the awardees come forward. All the nonprofits want to be honored. All the nonprofits in our community do valuable work. So it's really painful to see somebody come up here five years in a row and be recognized that many times when other organizations are excluded. So that would be a suggestion for that. One of the few issues that I agree with, Larry Good Yuan, is that the ten people should be able to speak at the front of the meeting. However. I don't want those ten people to all be for the same organization presenting the same position. A lot of times that blocks some of us that come and can't get here early enough from being allowed to speak in those comments on the non agenda item. Sometimes we have important things to say that are time sensitive and that blocks that out. So I'd like you to think about that. And then the other suggestion is, you know, I handled the legislation for the Gray Panthers and I utilized the register. They have a system where you can sign up to be notified when legislation is coming forward that you have an interest in. I'd like to suggest that the city look at doing something like that. So I was watching a public safety committee online yesterday and I would have liked to have been at that meeting. They were talking about the group grant. I was one of the original four matters of the group grant. I would have liked to have been at that meeting. I didn't know that that meeting was happening. So my other pieces, we need a full time city council. You guys do amazing work for part time staff and I know you probably all put full time in. I think we need to recognize that as a community and work to making that happen. Thank you. And our last comment. To make sure it wasn't like 15 people bothering me. I agree with Karen there. Um, you know, some of us, me personally, I work 60 hours a week, so it's kind of hard for me to get here at 2:03 p.m. and sign up with 1015 of my friends that we're all going to talk about the same exact thing. You know, I think that's just like a clear abuse of the system. Um, I agree with Councilman Mongo in relation to you said something about figuring out some kind of app or a way to register our comments beforehand so that you can see the queue and judge in amount of how many people are queued up to move agenda item up or down and due to how many people are outside waiting for it. Personally, I would say that it would be great. You know, I know there was a lady the other day, she was complaining about some million TV or whatever. Maybe you'll be great whenever that TV screen comes, you know, as soon as it goes, you know, over the time limit, it just sounds like like a nuclear bomb. Like this starts blinking. And then you can just cause I see, you know, the the mayor and the vice mayor, you know, these some of these people, you know , they don't got a lot going on in their lives. So it means a lot to just be like yelling at you guys for whatever the 90 seconds or whatever. So it's like, maybe you can just shut off the mic. You don't even have to say, excuse me or whatever you can. Maybe you can queue up, Madam Clerk, you can just like shut off the mic and time's done. You got to get out of here because it's just it's it's crazy. In relation to maybe the awards. Yeah, maybe. You know I know it's good to see the children with the, the Boy Scouts and a lot of these non-profits. I'm not technically opposed to it. I do think if we're going to be trying to figure out a way to be timely, maybe maybe on another day from 35 minutes , 45 minutes, you can just knock all them out. And, you know, you can open up the time for more, you know, retirees and come out here and be young. And but in the meantime, the friendlies, if I see people, you know, you know, that's us over here. As far as you guys. Yeah, some of these friendlies, it's crazy. Like, it's like nine friendlies that are friendly, that are removed. The friendly. So I hear, councilman, you're wrong. It's like, you know, and not to minimize, of course, public discourse as important as our representatives to, you know, use you are representing us. But sometimes I'm like, I mean, where are we even? I like the semantics of where these things are. Sometimes I'm looking at the city attorney and like, do you know where where the position is or the friendly is at this moment? And I'm looking at him. He's confused. He's looking at his notes, too. So, you know, we can just figure out a way to streamline. I'm with you, Mr. Supernormal. Time is of the essence, and time is important. And I would like to be leaving here at maybe like 8:09 p.m. instead of, you know, these midnight hour. So it's like this are. Thank you. Thank you. That closes public comment. Let me go back to the council. Councilman Richardson. Thank you. I'll be quick. Just two things I want to clarify with our city attorney. So, number one, we have the process of let's say that an item here warrants more debate or whatever. We could suspend rules or move to extend debate on all those. That council has the ability to do that, correct? That's correct. Under the current municipal code. And we would imagine doing it similar in a in a revision to the municipal code. The first section reads The Order of Businesses City Council. It all regular meeting shall be as follows unless otherwise waived by the consent of the Council. So with the consent of the Council, you could waive your rules. Okay? And I think that's important to say. We can, you know, we can go along with these guidelines, but if we're going to break them, we should just try to get consensus or approval from the council to do it. And I think if it's an important issue, council will approve that. And then secondly, in terms of committee work, just one thing I want to clarify I think is a bit redundant when you know sometimes it's okay, but sometimes redundant if an agenda item starts, that council gets referred to, a committee committee does work, refer back to council and and the distinction between our commissions and our committees. I understand work can originate at the committee level. It ultimately has to come to council, but it doesn't have to initiate at council and go back to a committee and back to council. And there's been some, you know, some questions about whether you know about that process. But it happens all the time. The B or C has originated work has ultimately made it. The Council Economic Development Committee is rejected works ultimately ultimately, you know, made it to council and it cuts out council time having to come back for those two bites of the hat. And council member. I agree, but it's not a very clear bright line in the origination of the work because if if you have a chair that starts directing staff and starts accumulating and using a bunch of staff resources in time or in the city manager's opinion is excessive. Then that work would have to go to council and have it be referred back to the committee in order to do that work. But but generally speaking, on small items. Yes. So and that makes sense to me. What I mean is the ability for a council, for a committee to refer work to council committees, have that ability to refer something. The Council doesn't have to direct staff to build something or do a lot of staff time, but simply referring work, the council committee can do that. Yes. Great. That's wonderful. Thank you. And actually, Councilman Longo is actually cued up first and we did public comment and didn't go back to her. So, Councilman Mongo, I think Councilman Austin. Perfect. I just want to appreciate one of the comments that came forward about legislation you're interested in. One of the items that I brought forward was about how to better. Pull in community input. And I would love for members of the public to be able to register in our new system that says, I'm interested in anything related to the elderly or housing or whatever it is to notify them of those key words in an agenda item. I think that that's a really important second. I am completely supportive of the recue idea. I think that I want to support a lot of the things Councilman Price said in that we each have different ways to advocate for our residents. I've actually even heard through the grapevine that she's defended the way that I advocate for my residents. And I appreciate that. I also recognize that sometimes each of us spend a lot of time writing up a list of questions. And I know I've done this before where I will go through all my questions and then. Sitting next to me. Daryl's like crossing off the same questions. And so I think that we can gain some variance in the way the questions are asked if we go through a campaign process. And I also believe that the count up timer is just a guide, not necessarily a hard and fast. And so I appreciate the comments Councilman Richardson made on that as well as for the other days of the week and meetings. I can't speak for other residents, but it is a trek for my community to get downtown. It's a trek. And so if there is an agenda item on the city council meeting that they might be interested in. That's one of the values of having the Budget Oversight Committee meeting right before so they can kind of speak to both components of it. I'm open to exploring other days of the weeks and meetings, but I also recognize that that can be a challenge. And I often, instead of having committee committee meetings, I try to just do community outreach meetings in the neighborhoods that are impacted and then gather that information. But one of the components of that is that the EA comment, the number of characters allowed is very limiting. So I don't know if there'd be a friendly to explore both the number of characters allowed and what an appropriate number would be. And second, the community comment period is too short. People want to spend time writing them out. And I know that the city the city clerk has made some exceptions on big agenda items. But I would love for even when the agenda item isn't posted, they're often people who have very distinct comments. And what they do is they then email all of our council offices, see all of us, and I think that it would be much better for it to go to the city clerk and have a place that we can all log into and check that the public can also check, too. I think that transparency is really important. So if you'd be open to having the city clerk look into that, that would be great. Um, okay, so we just talked about staff time, so we have different entities who've weighed in on this. So I guess we have to ask the city clerk individually if that's something feasible that she can look into. Okay, then we'll accept that. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. I have a question for the city clerk regarding this. If this is voted on and approved this evening, this will go to you to create an ordinance. Is that correct? Yes, sir. And in terms of it being an ordinance with the the I keep hearing guidelines, but I don't feel like they're guidelines if it's an ordinance. Right. That's correct. This would be come the new order and proceedings for the council meeting. So I'm not going to ask again on some of the clarifications on the 5 minutes and the 30 minutes. Are we putting those in there? And I've heard they would be guidelines. They would be a recue for the 5 minutes, but there's unlimited recues or so that would then become part of your rule unless you vote to suspend that for a particular item. You know, I do appreciate Councilmember Price's comments and all of our my colleagues comments regarding this. I know that we all endeavor to to to have more efficient meetings and and council members who bring our brought this forward. I seconded the motion this evening. But I'm I'm a little concerned that we may be over restricting ourselves if we put this in an ordinance. And so I would just ask if, Councilmember Suber now, would you be friendly, open to a friendly to to create created council policy that that that does all that we've discussed here this evening as opposed to an ordinance. Well, if I understand what we have in place right now, Mr. Parkin, just an example. We have a moment of silence. It wouldn't make sense to eliminate that. We wouldn't gain a lot. But by ordinance, we're required to do that. Would that be correct? You currently are required to do it unless waived by consent of the Council. So right now all of these are how the meeting your rules that the Council has approved to how you're going to conduct your meeting so that the public has an understanding of what we're going to do. So we do the moment of silence. We do the Pledge of Allegiance, we're hearings, public comment, etc. All of those can be changed by a vote of the Council or consent to the Council being moved around. But this lays out the framework for how you're going to conduct your meeting. So if we're directed to make these changes in the staff report, we would come back and come back and bring an amended ordinance to you with the revised rules. And the first sentence will say, you can waive these if you with consent of the Council, and if you like them, we will adopt it. If not, you can send us back and tell us what to change. Okay, so that that was my point. That was my starting point, if you don't mind me saying our city attorney suggested I start there. And just as that is a guideline, we're working with a current ordinance. So my proposal was let's bring forward a new ordinance. And I think some of these things are still a little bit fuzzy. We need to sort them out tonight. But at the end of the day, you're coming back with an ordinance that we still have a second shot at. A second and third shot. Right. We would bring back for first reading. And if you make changes, we'll bring it back again. And until you're satisfied with. And our understanding from the council direction tonight is that you'd like this to be flexible. So, you know, we would create that 30 minute time period, but then you have as a body the ability to decide what you want to do. Those 5 minutes would be there, but then, you know, it all is within the 30 minutes where then we would get direction from you. Do you want to continue debate or you as a body want to stop debate? So we think we'll bring back something that has a lot of flexibility for you. Okay. Thank you. And then just just to well, I think the overarching point here, the overall goal is that we would we would exhibit self-discipline. We would try to adhere to these. And I think there's more pressure on the chair of every meeting to adhere to these. And if he's agreeable to that, I think I think we've got a winner here. So I'd like to stick with the ordinance. Thank you, Councilmember Country Ringo. Just out of curiosity, how much time we've been spending on this so far? So, Councilmember, we actually looked at the debate, that original debate before we went to council comments, believe it or not, was exactly 30 minutes. There we go. We're almost downtown. Sorry. Had to recue when I think another thing a lot of this has to do with the the the the agenda itself some of the agenda items that we have in here can be in hour long. And there are some agenda items here that we can basically maybe even flavor into the consent calendar without having to. A vote on them at the end of our debate, because I know some of our council meetings have gone on and on and we still have a we still have an agenda to deal with at the end of a long debate. So I think maybe staff can look at these agenda items much more carefully and make more of a of a call whether we could put more agenda items on the consent calendar. And as states are here in number four, you know, we can always pull an item from the consent calendar if if any of us feel that we need to talk about it a little more. So I think pulling some items from the from the general regular agenda into the consent might help streamline some some of our meetings as well. Yes, sir, that would be. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I agree with that. I think that's an excellent suggestion. I want to go back to this flexibility that we're writing in about the debate time. And here's the problem I have with, you know, with consent of the council, we can extend that. What does that mean? Do we have to then vote on it? And it has to be by majority vote? It's kind of sounds to me like a call for the question type of process. And that's a problem to me because every member of this council should feel like they could they should be included in the process, even if they're saying something or advocating a position that others don't agree with. Obviously, when we have people here who are advocating for one position or another, the council members with whom they agree, they'd love to hear more from the council members with whom they disagree, they'd love to hear less from. So I don't want it to turn into, you know, a popularity contest where we do. That's why I hate that call for the question, because even though I may agree or disagree with my colleagues, I still respect the fact that every single one of them worked really hard and makes tremendous sacrifices to serve in this position. And I want them to be able to say what they need to say on Tuesday nights. And and so for me, you know, it's not I don't who's the judge of if what you're saying is significant enough to continue talking. I don't. So that's the part that I really don't. Don't like is that fact that we'd have to take a vote. And by consent of the majority, a person would be allowed more time to talk. I just. I don't understand what we're trying to achieve with that. And I would I would I would ask the maker of this motion to rethink that, because I think, like like I said, I mean, there's no. I don't know what the deterrent would be for someone to violate that policy. I if I could answer just a little bit of that question, the the way I would interpret the if you wanted to suspend the rules for that evening or for that particular item, that would be done by consent. If there was if someone objected to waiving those rules, then there would be a motion, a second, and it would be a simple majority vote to either suspend the counsel rules or not to end the debate at the end of the 30 minutes you would need, unless it was by consent a motion, a second and two thirds vote to end discussion. It's similar to call for the question. So you would need as a majority to and discussion not just I mean a two thirds majority supermajority, six votes, not just a simple majority. Yeah. Again, I would just ask my colleagues to really think about that. What are we trying to accomplish there? How much time do we think we're going to save? And can you foresee a situation where we are? Excluding a member of this body based on either their content or their style or their tone. And is that fair? And so that I would just ask my colleagues to think about that. I do not think this should be an inclusive process where every single one of us who's worked, regardless of whether we agree or not, we all have families at home. We all you know, most of us have other jobs. We've all worked really hard to get here. It should not be a popularity contest. And not that this would ever happen in this body, but. Political bodies have been known to have filibusters and random things like that that happen. This is part of the democratic process. It takes time. It takes time to have debate and get through that process. And so I just I don't want to feel I don't look a lot of people here know this. Maybe they don't. English is my second language. Sometimes it takes me a little bit longer to process what I'm thinking. I have to hear from other people in order for me to get to the point where I need to feel comfortable in my decision. It might take me longer to articulate what I'm feeling, thinking than others. I shouldn't be at a disadvantage because of that. And I'm not just talking about me personally. Put someone else in my position who also English as their second language and needs more time to process. I just I don't want to feel rushed because there's a timer on, on on me. And I want to be able to listen to my colleagues because there might be a possibility that something they say changes my mind and requires additional debate. So that's the only problem with this that I have, is that it limits our advocacy abilities. And I do believe that it puts some at a disadvantage based on their content, their tone, their style, or possibly the way they think as adult as adult learners. And I don't think we should do that. Thank you. We're going to we're going to go to a vote. The one thing I'll add to what the and then and I want to make sure we we get to the vote, I think and I you know, I can support what's on the table, as is councilman. Maybe what we do also just to address some of Councilman Price's concern is we do keep the five minute, but instead of doing that hard stop at 30, we just allow for now to continue that process going so that people feel they can come back to an issue. And we're not limiting that. I could support that. And I think that at least that is heard. If the council's okay with that, councilman. Yes, ma'am. I just want to make sure the city attorney is on, if that's that's clear enough. So we're not. Well, the staff recommendation was at 30 minutes. Will there be an automatic point of order which the council would then have to extend debate? I think with were what we're saying is there wouldn't be an automatic point of order, but the five minute clock would continue. So I'm not sure. I just need a little clarification. I think that there would be five minute. The way I understand it now, at 5 minutes, you would move to the next speaker and everybody can read. That's correct. At a total minute of 30 minutes. Then there would be some sort of notification to the council and you make a decision whether you continue. I think what I think. Going to eliminate the 30 minute I. Think I think what we're saying is we keep a. Five minute, 5 minutes, but we're. Not doing the 30 minute cap. What people feel comfortable, they can come back in and continue if they need to continue. Okay. So we'll take the 30 minutes. That's correct. Five minute caveats. That's correct. As many times. Okay. Thank you. And then the the other amendment was that at the chair's discretion and that's subject to override by the council, the chair will determine the order based upon attendance. I think I'd like you guys to come back at that first reading and make that and make that suggestion of how we would do that. But I think we're trying to basically enshrine the practice we already do. Okay, we'll put something together and. Then count from super or not. Nope. Please cast your votes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you very much. And thank you, Stephanie, who is also obviously putting a lot of work into that. With that, let me move on to item number 16.

A bill for an ordinance designating certain properties as being required for public use and authorizing use and acquisition thereof by negotiation or through condemnation proceedings of fee simple, easement and other interests, including any rights and interests related or appurtenant to properties designated as needed for the Sand Creek Project. Grants the authority to acquire through negotiated purchase or condemnation any property interest as needed in support the Sand Creek Project, including easement interests, access rights, improvements, buildings, fixtures, licenses, permits and other appurtenances, for the portion of the vacated North Ulster Street right of way located at 8101 E. 40th Avenue in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-15-20.

DenverCityCouncil_01112021_20-1534

I could just jump in with a couple of well, a comment and a question. So if you could share that information with us on the schools, that. Would be. Very helpful. And it would also be helpful to know how those schools were selected. So if you could get that information to all of us, I think that would be much appreciated. Yeah, absolutely. Also note to everybody. Okay, that was it. Thank you. Very good. Sorry about that, Councilwoman Ortega. All right. Now we're on to the next item up and it is Council Bill 20, Dash 1534. Councilmember Sawyer, would you please put Council Bill 1534 on the floor for final passage? I move that council bill 20 dash 1534 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of Council. Councilmember CdeBaca Thank you, Madam President. I just called this. One out for a vote. It's not one that I've supported since. The beginning and wanted to go on record with the vote. All right. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Roll call. CdeBaca No. Clark. I. Flynn. Herndon. I. Hynes I. Cashman. I. Can each i. Ortega. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer, I. Torres, I. Black I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. One knee, a lemon ice. One, the 11 Eyes Council bill. 20 Dash 1534 has passed and I wanted to make a quick announcement. Councilman Flynn is sorry that he missed that vote. He was having computer issues and had to reboot his computer. And so he will join us momentarily, as soon as he has that done. And so, unfortunately, he missed the vote on Council Bill 20, Dash 1420, Dash 1424. But moving forward or I'm sorry, excuse me. The vote on 20 dash 1534. The next item up we have now is Council Bill 20, Dash 1424.

A bill for an ordinance approving the Service Plan for the creation of Football Stadium Metropolitan District. Approves a service plan for the Football Stadium Metropolitan District in Council District 3. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-26-18.

DenverCityCouncil_07302018_18-0686

Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to the Council as a whole and refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilman Espinosa, will you put Council Bill 686 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the Council Bill 18 0686 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Councilor Bill 686 is open. May we have the staff report? Take it away. Good evening. My name is Andrew Johnston with the Department of Finance. I'm here to give you the staff report on the new metropolitan district. It's a Council Bill 686 Series 2018 four, an ordinance approving a service plan for a new metropolitan district titled Football Stadium Metropolitan District. The service plan is being submitted to City Council for approval on behalf of the Metropolitan Football Stadium District. Pursuant to the requirements of the Special District Act, sections 32, dash one, desk 201 and more particularly 32. Dash one, dash two or 4.5. The land on which the football stadium and its parking lots are built is owned by the Metropolitan Football Stadium District, which is created pursuant to the state statutes. This is the Seven County District created to initially fund the existing stadium with a sales tax. The sales tax supporting the stadium expired in December 31, 2011, when its related debt was paid off. The stadium is 18 years old and leased by the Denver Broncos and Stadium Management Company, LLC. The purpose of the new development on the Southern parking lots that will continue to be owned by the football stadium district is to create a sustainable revenue stream over time to contribute towards capital improvements and repairs at the stadium without having to go to the taxpayers for additional funding. The sustainable revenue stream will come from the long term ground leases that developers pay to build on the land. The new Metropolitan District will facilitate the needed public improvements and financing required to prepare the southern parking lots for vertical developers. The new Metropolitan District will be responsible for coordinating the financing, acquisition, construction, completion operation and maintenance of all public infrastructure and services within and without the service area, including without limitation, all streets. Safety. Protection. Water. Sewer, storm. Drainage. Transportation and park and recreation facilities. The new metropolitan district will have the power to raise revenues pursuant to the authorities granted by the Special District Act, including the imposition of up to 50 mills plus rates, fees, tolls and charges. The new metropolitan district will also be authorized to impose up to five mills for regional improvements at the discretion of the city. The total estimated costs for the public improvements necessary to serve the contemplated development are approximately 146 million. In order for the new metropolitan district to have the fiscal wherewithal to provide the funding for the upfront costs of the public improvements needed in the service area, the new metropolitan district shall have the ability to issue debt and impose a debt mill levy to provide funding for the upfront infrastructure costs. The new metropolitan district will have the ability to impose up to ten of the 50 authorized mills to raise revenue for operations and maintenance at the completion of the current Plan for development for development projects. An estimated population of up to 2000 people in 2022 and include up to 3.5 million square feet of retail, restaurant, hotel, office space and other commercial space, which will provide for a long term recurring income stream to support football, stadium repairs and capital improvements. Under the supervision of the football stadium district, who will continue to own the stadium and the property, the planned development will offer opportunities to better connect downtown Sun Valley and the West Side neighborhoods with transit corridors and the South Platte River, including park and riverfront enhancements. The planned development is located in the city's 2013 Decatur Federal Area Plan and conforms with the Area Plan's recommendations to create a year round mixed use site and to improve connectivity within the service area. The new metropolitan district is not currently located within an urban renewal area. The new metropolitan district will cooperate with the Metropolitan Football Stadium District, Stadium Management Company to support and strengthen the long term viability of the stadium facility. The approval of the service plan establishes the following. There is sufficient existing and projected need for an organized service in the area. The existing service in the area is inadequate for present and projected needs. The district is capable of economically providing sufficient service to the area within the proposed boundaries. The land and proposed development to be included does and will have the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. The facility and the service standards will be compatible with the facility and service standards of the city. Staff is here and recommends approval of the service plan. The applicant, their representatives and city staff are here tonight to respond to any questions you might have regarding this bill. Thank you very much. All right. We have six individuals signed up to speak this evening. If you are sitting in this front bench and you're not speaking on this issue, I'd ask you to please make room for our speakers. I'm going to call up the first five speakers, and I do apologize if I mispronounce your name. If you could make your way to the front bench as soon as I call your name, there will be a slight delay to give you time to get to the podium and then your time will start. So our first five are Michael Pierce, Jerry Leslie, Tor Gorski, Rudolph Gonzalez, Craig Umba and Mack Freeman. And Michael, you're up first. I'm Michael Persichetti with RBC Capital Markets 1801 California Street, Suite 3815. I'm just here to answer questions. All right. Thank you very much. Next up, Leslie Tarkowski. I thank you, counsel, for hearing my comments. My name is Leslie. Terry. Gorski, and I'm standing before you as director of the Federal Boulevard Business Improvement District. We are so supportive and excited about the concept of development in the Broncos stadium and I was asked to be. Part of the stakeholder. Group and our first public meeting. My job was to stand at one of the boards where we got to hear feedback of what people wanted to see in here on Federal Boulevard, and we heard nothing but positive comments. In fact, in the weeks since this has been going on, I have yet to hear one negative comment about the concept of developing this stadium. I will continue to work on the public outreach. We're very excited. And I do want to give a big thank you to Councilman Lopez and Councilman Espinosa. When this started, we were very concerned that the master plan would be limited to the actual property line. And with the help of Jason Whitlock and Karen Goode and Public Works, they have drawn the plan to include thoughtfully West Colfax Federal Boulevard and the surrounding neighborhoods. So we can have a more holistic view and not just not just have all these different plans that are not talking to each other. So again, we're very excited and we thank the Broncos for bringing much needed development to Federal Boulevard. Thank you. Next up, Rudolph Gonzalez. Hello. Thank you. City council names Rudolph Gonzales. Rudy Gonzalez. I'm the executive director of Servicios de la Raza right there on 14th and Grove, serving primarily West Denver. But I'm also coming to you as a committee member of the redesign committee for the West Colfax Clover Redesign Committee. What, Dan? So I'm first, I want to thank Councilman Lopez for his invitation to sit on this committee and to do more work. But it's important. I think this committee was very inclusive. I saw representation from the Sun Valley Housing from GI Forum, which has been a long time entity right there on Colfax and 17th, and other Latinos and Latinas who sat on this committee and worked at these meetings. And I'm here in support of this bill. And but I also want to city council to remember that when this comes to reality that we are talking about not just affordable housing, but low income housing to augment the 333 units at Sun Valley, we need more. And that's why I'm also on the West Colfax Clover Redesign Committee, because there's a lot of acreage there that also can be some of that dedicated to low income housing. We need that in Denver to keep our diversity. Thank you also for the rezoning. Right. We await the rezoning on this property. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Craig Omar. Good evening. I'm Craig. I'm bar 1601 Water Street. I'm here as general counsel for the Metropolitan Football Stadium District. We are in support of the creation of this new special district. This, as Andrew did, a great job of describing this. It is an attempt to put into place the financing for the infrastructure that will allow us to do and look at development on the south parking lot. We are doing this as one of the many ways to try to generate. I think our estimates are over the next 30 years will need 500 to $700 million to maintain the stadium as the first class stadium it is today. So I'm also available to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. And next up is Mack Freeman. And then if we could make room on this front bench for our last speaker, David Roy Moore will be next. Go ahead, you guys. Good evening and thank you for your time. I'm Mack Freeman, the chief commercial officer for the Denver Broncos, and I reside at 758 Franklin Street in Councilman News District. I'm here obviously in support of this bill. I think as you've heard from a couple of previous speakers, we have a daunting challenge maintaining the the taxpayer owned asset in the stadium. It's 20 years old. It's getting it's getting older. It's getting more expensive to manage. And as Craig said, we've done a deep facility dove and it's about 500 to $700 million over the next 25 years. This effort is to is to try and preempt a real problem and solve it now and and why the metro district in particular is so important to what we're trying to do is our project does not have a for profit developer involved yet. This is something we're trying to do with the community. And obviously from the Broncos standpoint, this needs to be a really important focus that we're able to operate and deliver a great gameday experience for our fans during periods of disruption. So the Metro District formation allows us the early funding to get ahead of certain things. Infrastructure wise, the most important for our forward operating is the parking. We need structured parking built before we can start addressing the surface lodge that that we plan to to develop on. I think, you know, this is sports facilities being used as as demand generators is happening all around the country. Atlanta, Tampa, Boston, L.A., Detroit, Dallas, San Fran. Many other cities are using the same plan of using the demand generator to support a new development around them. AS And thank you all for your time individually. We've had a chance to discuss these face to face, but this is a unique development and the revenue generated from these ground leases are going right to the Metropolitan Football Stadium tourist district. None of this money is going to the Broncos. And as much as I appreciate their compliment, we're trying to be to be a instigator of this development. But we are not a for profit developer. We don't have any desire to be we're trying to run this process the right way. We're involved in a in a really great public process. You heard about some of the comments about how positive they've been. They've also had phenomenal turnouts. I think we had in excess of 160 people at a stadium meeting. So we're getting great engagement from the community. And again, I'm running out of time. I just say, you know, I appreciate your your consideration. I humbly ask for your support. And I think we'd like to be a part of. Delivering Denver's next great neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker, David Roybal. David Roybal, where's Denver United? Live in Lincoln Park West, 9742 Avenue. And I just want to bring up you know, I've been there since beginning since Mike Nichols Arenas is Mile High Stadium Sports Walk. I mean, that's my neighborhood. Born and raised and growing up there, I feel that you can have fun as a kid, the community had more fun with less money. There was always events going on. Now it's expensive. Can't even afford a Bronco game, can't even afford concerts. I mean, look at all that that's going on now. I mean, the Sun Valley redevelopment, Federal Boulevard redevelopment, it kind of seems that, you know, why did it take up to this time to do it? You know, when Sun Valley was going through so much change, having the highest crime rate nine years ago, you know, I mean , that's a big thing. Not one thing was brought up about that. I mean, it's the same neighborhood. But is this going to bring the neighborhood? Is it going to bring stronger? I mean, how are the residents in Sun Valley? Are they going to be able to benefit, start their own businesses? Is there going to be more affordable housing there? Because remember, just ten years ago, people really want to park their car down there. Now, it's a culture shock. It's the other way around. I mean, look at how much has changed. And I just hope that the history and the culture is represented within this. And when they say community, I hope it is a business community. Is it the homeless community? Is it who is it when they say community, if people could be more specific and I'll speak it for the people that's been removed. My grandma lived in the Sun Valley for 52 years and I know lots of people that's been moved out and I just hope that the new generation can benefit from this change and that the people set the right example for the youngsters to stop seeing it as money and being about greed. Because it's more than that. They're putting all this money in all this project, 2000 people. And then on top of that, the Pepsi Center property, they're going to put housing there. Like, is that bringing unity? Is that bringing in new people? Is that, you know, where's the culture? Where's the history? I hope that's represented very well. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Lopez. Thank you. Mr. President, I wanted to actually bring my Chris Parker. I see you over there with the. Chris has been involved. You've been involved just to the south with with the with Sun Valley, the planning in Sun Valley. I know the answer to this question, but I think for the record, and just for the folks who are here and watching at home that can be here, in a nutshell, what's going to happen in Sun Valley? Our folks who are living there and there's a lot of question this is a serious question from folks, our folks who are living, they're going to be displaced. Are we redeveloping it? And if if we are redeveloping it, what's going to happen? Are we pushing people out? I know the answer to this question, but I want you to address it because you've been working on it for quite a while. And I want folks to hear it in the chambers. What the intent is in the future of Sun Valley. I think Council Chris Parker, Director, Sun Valley District Trust, working in partnership with Denver Housing Authority, is my guest here as well. Thank you. And you're exactly right. I think we counted up a little while ago. We're about I think we're in our eighth year of planning in the Sun Valley neighborhood. And that was born about with the of federal stationary plan process. When that started, that really activated the overall planning process with Sun Valley. And I think that's the key is that we realize that we can't just look at, you know, drop a drop of station in, but we have to look at the whole neighborhood and really look at what the dynamic is. And, you know, we really know looked at Sun Valley. It's about six years of overall larger disinvestment. And so we're missing many services. So I think I think that's something we hear. It's deprived of services. We have concentrated poverty in Sun Valley homes. And, you know, but the flipside is the neighborhood is very vibrant, it's very proud. And it's it's been a really interesting process to work with the neighborhood and go to that. I think the key is at the end of the day, because we have we always call it the gift of time with the planning process, that this has not been a story about redevelopment coming in and then what happens with affordable housing, but it's been affordable housing led process. That's been the conversation from day one is what does it look like with development where we start with the conversation around affordable housing and then how does redevelopment occur from there? So to answer specifically with your question, so many homes, approximately 333 units of Sun Valley homes are public housing. And this gives us the opportunity with the land that's available as well to come in and triple that density. And so we are more than doubling the affordable housing and that will come at different scales with AMMA using low income housing tax credits apparently through the Denver Housing Authority, but then also with private development coming in through social impact financing as well, bringing additional affordable housing. And so I think that's that's the key that we're looking we come in and triple or quadruple the density because some valley homes itself right now is very low density site and then opportunities there. But it's actually an opportunity increase. And for all the residents here, there, they, of course, have the right first the right to return as well and the opportunity to try to develop to the greatest extent possible offsite. You know, again, there will be there will be demolition, displacement at times. But I think that that's the point, is that we can bring back that housing a much more vibrant structure. So you're looking at I mean, and Chris, quickly on a third, which is 333 units of public housing right now, DHP operator owned and operated public housing, those are being replaced 141141. Not just the units, but the bedrooms. Okay. Yeah. Then you have the other. So we're looking at tripling was just tripling for example. What are the other two like the other if we were to divide into three, what are the other two. Is that all market rate is just 33 unit 333 units market rate or is there affordability and market rate mixed in? And what's the purpose of that? Yeah. And then next that next bucket of affordable housing is going to be blended with 40, 50, 60% of the area median income. So that's true. That's usually in predominately the low income housing tax credit program. And again, those will be developed directly by the Denver Housing Authority, which they can speak to as well. And then with market rate. And I think that's part of the to the next group is market rate and that brings more disposable income to the neighborhood. But many times that market is comprised of workforce housing as well. So I think it's very, very important understand that this product is delivered in a mixed income format. So it's not it's not bifurcated with different buildings, but it's mixed income throughout. So that's a rough description. Okay. Thank you. And, Mr. President, if I may ask one more person to come up, and I appreciate that. But, Mr. Freeman, if you want to come up Macarena, can you talk a little bit about the process and this you talked about a seamless neighborhood. I we sit on the steering committee. We help, you know, we're helping participate. It's very exciting. Folks are mentioning things like affordable housing. They're mentioning things like, you know, jobs, things especially affordable housing right now in this crisis. What kind of commitments, what are what's at the table with the intent in terms of what happens on the district? And I think this is something that also the metropolitan football stadium district wise, want to. Answer that question as well, too. You're welcome to as well. Thank you for asking that question because I think I would love to have more concrete answers because, you know, we're still in our public process until we know what we're able to build. It's tough to talk about specific units or or the specific benefits. I think we're maybe two months away from being able to do that. But what I what I think I've said to every one of you is we're committed to making this a brilliant opportunity for our neighborhood. This this is a neighborhood that that I personally have driven to work in for 20 years. I worked at the old stadium and I've been there since we opened the new one. We we have we have always tried to be good neighbors. We want this development to be the thing that, as Chris Bar talked about, this Sun Valley has been sort of isolated from everything. What we can do, we can connect through the gulch to them, the bike paths. There's so many things we can do to to break down the walls that have sort of isolated that neighborhood. Again, as as you get to specifics relative to affordable housing, I've several of you, when we had face to faces challenged me on that directly. And, you know, without knowing the numbers yet I don't want to get over my skis and make promises that we can't deliver on. But I can tell you, the first thing we're going to do is try and figure out whether we can exceed some of the requirements. I know. I know. You know, we're going to get our feet held to the fire when we get to the zoning aspect of this. I get it. But I think, you know, our plan is to come to you when we get to that window and you're going to hopefully look at us and go. Wow, all right. You meant what you were saying. And so that's that's how we're operating again, until we know. You know, we've tried to again, our process has been really unique. We're not backing into the square footage of development based on what we bought the land for and the ROI we needed to return. We've backed into this rough three and a half million square foot number based on what the street and the traffic and those studies suggest the system can support. So we're trying to do this the right way and not not be guided by financials or anything, you know, specific to to return. We're trying to do what makes sense here. And I think, as I said, we're I've been in a number of public processes going back to when we built the stadium. And I would say the positive engagement that we've had in these public meetings and steering meetings is unprecedented from everything we've seen. And I think that's because we're not we're not going in with a plan and trying to jam it down anyone's throat. We are we are truly we want we want this process to tell us what some of these community benefits are so that I answer that appropriately. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll hold my rest of my questions because I know the council members are trying to write. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Councilman Espinosa. So, yeah, I apologize first to my colleagues, but I do have a ton of questions and I'll do the same thing. I'll start some and then defer. But it's along the lines of to whom much is given, much is expected. And so I you were right. And Mac, in saying, we know we're going to get our feet held to the fire. So my questions are going to primarily to get things on the record here in this public hearing so that, yeah, I'm going to hold your feet to the fire if I'm still here when this all starts coming to fruition. With that said, the first is this is not I'm not putting you on the skewer here, Chris, but I do have some questions based on your comments. You know, you're doing a mixed use development in the eco district. You know, is there if you've seen the makeup of this, what's in the service plan, the 2000 units versus three and a half million square feet of nonresidential, primarily commercial hotel retail? You know, will that be a you know, how will that impact the plans for the eco district? And your commercial viability there as well. Yeah, I want to make sure I answer the question appropriate so I'll I'll answer it in this way that I think, again, going back to the fact that we've had a handsome time process associated with this because we've had a great opportunity through the community process to going back to the stationary plan, to talk to the community and think about what the comprehensive development looks like. You know, I think we need to include obviously not just the affordable housing piece, but, you know, we as we say, a lot of words that don't sometimes land on plans, but they don't have the time to come up with strategic planning around it. So we talk about jobs without the hot buttons, affordable housing jobs, transit, lowering utility costs, things like that. By looking at this as an overall district, I think the same decision. The Broncos have been a fantastic partner in that conversation. They've allowed us to bring our conversation about development to them over the years. And so right now we are a point of at a point of many years deep in the conversation. So when we see what could be here, we don't want we want to look at this as a overall holistic neighborhood. So not every single site has to solve every single problem. And I think that's why we look at the whole area as a district. You said, how does it work as a district? We're excited because this technically you talk about the square footage of commercial that puts jobs within walking distance to all the residents in Sun Valley . So that's a very key piece. Now, is the plan done? Know that that's what Mack's referencing, that we need to get into a lot of details. A lot of things have not been figured out, but that opportunity is exactly what we want to look for, for that type of holistic, well, well-rounded development. What worries me in that response is a lot of words and nothing about how you might actually structure some sort of agreement so that you don't get a situation where it's an us and them situation. Because that's part of the historic problem in and in Sun Valley. To David's points originally and what your comments about 60 years of disinvestment is if you're doing mixed income development, the idea was, is you have a fully healthy community in the eco district. But if there's if there's a market segment that migrates to something north of Colfax and the residual properties in your development just cater to the lower end. How do we how are we structuring something so that actually there are some some some sort of cross-pollination of those two development and enterprise opportunities, not just in jobs, but in actual service and community. And and and so I don't hear that in, in your eight years of planning and whatever has transpired thus far. And that's concerning to me. Yeah, that's never been part of the conversation. So I think there's a lot of details in the plan. So I think that's if we need to do a deeper dove on what that looks like. But again, they're starting their planning process. But that's always been a piece of our conversation. And why specifically, Councilman, to your point, there has been a separation physically across the neighborhood. We've done a lot of work among the parties, but also with the city and looking at different land utilization. So how do we start to close that gap, how we activate the station and take away this North-South barbell effect and actually close that gap physically because the physicality and making a walkable neighborhood is a big piece of that equation as well. But everything you're talking about is definitely in our conversation. I think we're excited to bring forward what that would look like. Great. So the thing we're holding to the fire is the connection and that in that and everything you just said there. Okay. Thank you. You can do. So, Andrew, sorry, does the city need. So you talked about why the service plan. So does the city need this facility? Why or why not? So the question I heard was, does the city need the metropolitan district? Why and why not the facility? So you said that the service plan, the metro district is there to, you know, to essentially support a service. I forget how you actually worded it in your presentation, but it's there. We're doing this metro district for a reason. Or are you just talking about for the purpose of the infrastructure? Yeah. So that so there's two metropolitan districts there, right. One one is the one that was used to help the seven counties and they used had a tax issue, sales tax issue across the seven counties to help support the repayment of the debt that built the original stadium. That that tax is sunset. Now, we are looking at putting a new metropolitan district on top of that metropolitan district that was existing. And that one is going to be used to impose a series of property taxes to help pay for the bonds that will then have proceeds that will be used to put infrastructure in place that will allow for vertical construction. The ground leases that will be used to go towards that will come from the vertical development, will be used to help support a capital program at the stadium, which will then give it a sustainable revenue stream for capital improvements going forward. So the purpose of the metropolitan district, that's a floor before you today is a really an infrastructure financing tool. So that's what I'm saying. So it's all financing this this the maintenance and operation of the stadium. So do we need the stadium? Why or why not? Do. Does a city need a stadium? Yes. If you want to have an NFL football team to have a place to play, then you would need a stadium. So okay. Now that gets back to your other answer. So actually, the state didn't pay for the stadium. The seven counties did. So the seven counties built this facility. Do they similarly? Do they? So they obviously also they need it. So what is their mansion? 146 million? Towards this end. So the question I think I'm hearing from you is what is the infrastructure that this stadium metropolitan district is matching? Is that the question here? So the stadium metropolitan district, which is the existing stadium, just because there's so many stadium districts being set here today, the existing stadium district has no revenue stream. And so without that sits, it doesn't have a revenue stream. We're putting the new proposed metropolitan district in place to create that revenue stream. So there is no if you want to say to looking forward to the new infrastructure that's being put into place, there is no match coming from the existing metropolitan state stadium district. Okay. Thank you. And so then I the rest of my questions are towards Mal, actually. Is the stadium district property subject to property taxes? So it is a it is tax exempt. But when they do that, they do ground leases out and it'll be a tax exempt entity that is doing ground leases. And when you have a tax exempt entity that does a lease like that, much like how when there's a rustles in the web building that creates something called a possessor re interest and that possess free interest is actually creates a property tax event. The improvements upon the land are generally not part of those ground leases and the improvements upon the land are subject to just standard property taxes. So I'm glad you mentioned the possessor interest because that's our infamous Clayton property deal. Clayton Trust the Park Hill deal. But that said, once these convert to ground leases. You know, there is a revert or clause when the land no longer needs is no longer serving stadium purposes. It goes back to in the case of Denver owned land, it comes back to the city of Denver to do what we please with our own property. If we're ground leasing to an agency, I mean, to somebody that can then be taxed. How do we justify statutorily that it is still for stadium purposes? So it's an interesting question. Thank you very much for asking the. I would I think I heard you say is. The. The land has a revert or clause. I think it's a right of reentry so that if the stadium ever stops being used for stadium purposes, that the city and county of Denver has a right of reentry and that. Q I'm going to call someone up who may be more educated on how to answer that question. Thank you, Craig Amber, again. If I understand your question correctly. So the property was acquired was purchased by the Metropolitan Football Stadium District. And I guess I should clarify this at the moment. The confusion created by the state legislature naming this the Metropolitan Football Stadium District is not a metropolitan district. It is a district akin to the scientific and cultural facilities district or artist. It is a statutorily created district. So I wish they would have given us a different name. So the MFS acquired the property for approximately $28 million from the city. There are land use restrictions on that property, as Andrew just referred to and as you councilman just referred to regarding the use of. It can be used for football games, concerts, parking ancillary uses to the football stadium. If it has ever ceased to be used for those things, then there is a default provision in the city after five years. If the default isn't clear, it has the right to come back. And if they want it, take the property back. We're in discussions right now with the city attorney's office and others in the city, obviously using this property on the south lot. Will I fall into one of those categories if the building is a hotel? If it's affordable housing, if it's an apartment, it's not going to satisfy that. So we're going to have to have a discussion and we'll be back and I'll have to come before city council on that thing. So I believe most of the discussions we've had with the city to this date have been if the football stadium and the football use went away. The city at that time would have the right to look at those rights. At that point, the Metropolitan Football Stadium District, the original entity, probably doesn't have a lot of reason left to exist other than. Operating those ground leases. So that is something we'll have to do. We're in discussions about you're going to have to continue to discuss. So thank you for the candor and in response, because that has long been my concern. When I first broached the subject in early June, which was that this stadium district and the conversations that had to have gone on with Mortenson to produce ay ay ay ay ay estimate and the parcels that had to be considered in order to produce the map and the conversations that must be having to address these sort of statutory concerns and whatnot, involve conversations about what might go there. And all of that went before we had one meeting about what the future of that property was from a master planning, zoning, land use sort of standpoint. And so it's always felt like cart before the horse. So I hope whoever you're working with in the administration will start to be more transparent in meeting with members of council or coming to committee on progress of this. And it doesn't get too far ahead of the planning process. Councilman, I don't want to stop you too much, but I do have a question in there. Can you save some of that for comments, you think. I will say. Well, yeah, that's enough comment because that's again that's again why I'm going on record with all this. Thank you. And I the rest are sort of more nuts and bolts on the actual service plan. So I'll defer those to till later. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Flynn. Thanks, Mr. President. Andrew. Maybe you could help me see things a little more clearly than are evident in the map in the service plan. But the one in the service plan, inclusion of land, says the district shall not include any property outside the inclusion area boundaries except as set forth in the Special District Act and with the manager finances written approval. So the inclusion area boundary I've noticed, is much smaller than the district boundary. Can you explain where the taxable properties will be and why are the district boundaries so much larger than the inclusion area boundaries? And so to that to that is the fact that most the area is going to be actually included in the district right from the get go. And so there's only small amounts of land that are going to be included at a later date. So that is why the inclusion area is so much smaller. It's almost inverse to how we see some of our other metropolitan districts start where they have an inclusionary that is actually very de minimis and it grows to the inclusion area as the development phases out. Okay. You said he inclusionary. It looked like it was a very small portion. So. The exclusion area should is not the is is like maybe like three or four parcels of land. Five, six. Yeah, but very small. And the initial district boundaries though is a much larger area. Right. So you'll start off with a full large area as the district boundaries and then as those other parcels are developed, they will add in to the main area in the future. Mm hmm. So the hundred and some odd million and improvements will be conducted throughout the entire district boundary, not just in the inclusion area. That. That is correct. Yes. Thank you. Light bulb. Just turn it off now. Thank you. I think also Matt cutting. With the need for the for the revenue stream to maintain mile high stadium at such a at a serviceable level as we go into the future by the way is at mile high stadium right now. I believe it's Broncos stadium. Broncos stadium that's currently. Okay. We're we're working on that as well. Okay. The pressure to achieve to maximize revenue. What is you? What is your feeling about the impact of that on plans to include affordable housing and other aspects that might not generate as much or might require subsidization? Well, I think we're again, we're trying to approach this in just a really logical way. And again, until we have square footages of what we're planning on building, getting into those specifics are tough to to handle. But I believe we're coming we're going to go to market with with something that is going to have a unique value proposition for for the people who are going to build it. And we will have things built in that they may not like. We may have some things in there built in that they do like just going through the process we're going through. I mean, being able to have the Metro District and and get to that infrastructure early and how that's going to make this more attractive. There will be some things, again, I think once we get there, community benefits, they're not things you would normally see developers embracing. But I think we hope in the aggregate that we're creating a very attractive deal. And it can it can deliver for the community, it can deliver for Broncos fans and and deliver for the partners we engage going forward. And and you're committed to a high level of community involvement in this? Yes. Again, I think our our public process to date is somewhat unprecedented for my experience. So I think we're very encouraged. And again, I, I took over management of Old Mile High in the late nineties for the city and I went to neighborhood meeting after neighborhood meeting and got absolutely destroyed. And we have we have tried for the past 20 years to be better neighbors, to build trust and rapport. When we had the first meetings in Sun Valley a couple of years ago with the neighbors, it was one of the best meetings I've ever been to because for the first time ever, kids and adults and others were . When asked what the biggest assets in their neighborhood were, they said the stadium, which is not what I had experienced in other neighborhood meetings. So I think we we've got a great engagement level right now and I think we we have a great ability to to, in fact, impact Sun Valley, everything the CRISPR and VHA are doing with the eco district as well as connecting all of these neighborhoods. I think there's been an awesome collaboration with both sides of the river, north and south, and trying to make this a real hub and connection point for for the entire community. Thank you. Thank you. So, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. Now, if you could step there for a second. I have a couple questions for you. Would you remind us what the anticipated square footage buildout is for commercial? And then it was, what, little over 2000 residential? Yeah, all those are the breakdown is I again we got two, three and a half based on what the traffic in circulation suggested made sense. As far as that breakdown, I think we we've come to that rough mix that's out there just talking to to people in the marketplace, knowing different uses and where demand is. It also had a thoughtful approach to having a balance of all those. But those are those are definitely very early estimates of what the breakdown would be. So I I'm not sure there is there's too much depth into each one of those does break out square footage is okay. Andrew, would you come up, please? So obviously the amount of meals that are being factored into this particular metro district anticipate a certain scale for a project, because if we were talking about something much smaller, we probably wouldn't be looking at 50 mills. Correct, depending on how much infrastructure needs to be built to support that? Correct. That is a correct assumption. It's a it's not exactly cut and dry because it's also, you know, smaller sites sometimes need smaller amounts of infrastructure, but they also contain sometimes less assessed value that's lost revenues. So there's there's there is a relationship of looking at the whole in order to understand that the number of mills necessary. So I want to get back to a question that Councilman Flynn was asking about the adjacent parcels that are not currently included in this metro district. Are any of those parcels currently owned by the city? I'd have to take a look at my map. So, for example, the old public works maintenance facility that's that's owned by the city. Still, correct? Correct. And that may be one that would be added in at some point in time in the future. Right. So, yes, if that's in the inclusion boundaries, I'd have to look at my map to reconfirm. Okay. So has there been any internal city discussion about parcels owned by the city that we should retain for the purpose of ensuring that we have affordability? You know, I don't know what kind of cleanup that site might need, given the kind of use that was on there or any other parcels that might be owned by the city. So rather than just assuming they're all going to be absorbed within the metro district. You know, was there any internal conversation about the city just keeping those sites for some of the priorities that we have identified for this city? Affordable housing being one of those. Obviously. I'm not aware of all the conversations that go on in the city. I do know that there have been conversations about working collaboratively with DHS and help and supporting their the movement of affordable housing onto this site while they're going through their redevelopment activities to create the eco district. But I am not aware of any specific ones to where we've talked about the public works facility. Okay. A couple other questions. So when we. Look at the amount of development that's being proposed on this side of the South Platte River. So we've got 62 acres. That's part of the Ilitch Gardens site. 52, roughly for the football stadium. About 80 acres for Sun Valley. Burnham yards, which may or may not happen in the in the near future. That's 70 acres. That's obviously on the other side of the river. And then just down the road at the Denver Post say we've got 41 acres. And I want to know what kind of conversations the city has had about the cumulative impact, particularly if each of these large parcels are looking at building to maximum maximum density. What kind of discussions have there been? Who's looking at that to to ensure that we're not overtaxing the adjacent infrastructure like Federal Boulevard, which is already one of the most unsafe transportation corridors that we have in the city. Some of us are involved in discussions around safety on Federal Boulevard with CDOT, for example. So can can you talk a little bit about that? Sure. So you're right, there is a there is actually a tremendous amount of development occurring when you look at, you know, the things along River Mile. You look at Sun Valley and what's going on there and the proposed development here for this metropolitan district right just south of this football stadium. And there's a lot of plans going on. And some of the city council members have been sitting on steering committees. And we look to like what does when we go through the zoning applications and things of that nature, there is a look at how does that particular development, as well as what is adjacent to that development, impact the infrastructure to not just the roads, not just sidewalks, too, but we also are going to be looking at those wet and dry utilities and just making sure that if that maximum zoning does come to fruition, it doesn't say that it will. But if it does that, the systems can handle what it is going to what what is going to come to fruition. Now, it may mean that there still has to be things that have to be built as part of that development when they come in for site plans and things of that nature and that will they talk about it at that time. But it's an ongoing conversation and it has to do as each side comes forward through the planning process. So how much of that gets covered in the rezoning conversation versus, you know, getting it rezoning, waiting for a developer to then look at putting, you know, their their overall site plan together, assuming that they're looking for one master developer to to. You know, come in and assume that responsibility for the build out. I'm going to bring up Karen from our planning department. She's. She can probably best answer that question for you. Good evening. Karen Champine, Director of Planning, Community Planning and Development. Let me make sure I understand your question. So you're asking at what stage do we start to look at the cumulative infrastructure? Exactly. That's great question. So it comes in multiple stages. So at the first stage, as Andrew articulated, there's a planning process. And as we go through that process, there's always an initial analysis to just sort of gut check the policies and the vision against sound engineering principles. So we always do that at the beginning of the planning phase. And then with a large scale site like this, we always then do concurrent with a rezoning conversation. We do and we do more detailed infrastructure master planning so that we can take a closer look at pipe sizes and all of that fun stuff so that then we can dial in a little bit more specifically, the zoning, the regulations, other development agreement needs, as Andrew mentioned, what other upgrades will be needed to the infrastructure to support what could be allowed by zoning? So that would be the second opportunity to take a closer look at infrastructure. And then the third opportunity would be when they actually come through with a site development plan, that means they're ready to go vertical, as we call it. There's a building. We know how many stories. We know what kind of units. Then we take another look more specifically to say, okay, now that based on what they're actually proposing, do we still have the right infrastructure in place? Do we need additional investment or is everything that we plan for appropriate so we can make calibration adjustment along the way once a particular developer knows more about what the project will actually be. So at which point do you all normally see a community benefit agreement tied to that process that you just described? So community benefit agreement is an official is not an official terminology in our work. However, where we have seen community benefits sort of guaranteed through the developer is at a development agreement, through a development agreement. And typically what we've seen as very good practice in the last few years is at the time of rezoning, because what we want to do is make sure that before we change the entitlement to the land, we have clarity on the other goals that we want to accomplish. So we start to look at it as a regulatory implementation package of all the ways and tools we have available to us to help implement the vision and guarantee the outcomes that we want. So, Mack, I'm going to bring you back up just for a second. Yes, ma'am. So part of this is is about timing. Right. Ensuring that the discussions that are being had with the community around some of the benefits that the community wants to see, whether it be affordable housing. Looking at the impact to the adjacent infrastructure, I'm sure the city will weigh in on a lot of that as well. But. What what commitment is there that as this moves forward? You know, this is a little different because. You all will continue to own the land. This. The Metro no metro district will continue to own the land. The stadium metro district. And and there's that relationship between that and this metro district that we would create here tonight. It's a little different from from some of the other processes we've had where, you know, there's an agreement that gets crafted with the neighborhood association and the developer coming in asking for the rezoning. But in some cases, unless that is a covenant placed on the land, if that developer sells the land to somebody else, that agreement doesn't necessarily carry forward. And so, you know, there's going to be some commitment to assurances that whatever these commitments are that come out of this process with the neighborhood will carry forward regardless of whoever is selected to do the development on the land. So I want you to speak to that. Yes, ma'am. I think, you know, the the one of the big differences of this process is there is an a for profit developer who's going to move on. I still have to go to work there every day. The Broncos are still going to play there and hopefully as a part of this will play here for decades going forward. So I don't think we we look at this as, oh, we just got to get through this date and we get then we're free and clear right where I've been going to that office for 20 years and that neighborhood, I hope to be going there for another 20. So I don't think I think the idea that us falling down on the commitments we make, that's not something any of us want to live with every day. And I think I think our record in this community and in that neighborhood speaks for itself. We we we fulfill our commitments. And I think I think you should all feel confident we will be doing that going forward. Thank you. I appreciate your your response. I have no further questions at this time. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Freeman. Sir. How are your knees doing? Getting up and here? Still functioning well. That's good. So I was going to address this in comments, but realized I might have misunderstood something that was said. So I wanted to ask it as a question and give you a chance to respond. So I'm well aware at this point that there is a difference between the Denver Broncos football club and the Stadium District. But at times I think that difference is is made to be more than it is. And what I thought I heard you say was that the money from the ground leases will not come to the Denver Broncos. They'll go to the stadium district. That is correct. Right. That is technically correct. But the repairs made with that money on on Mile High Stadium and should I live to be 155? It will always be Mile High Stadium no matter what you or anyone else should name it. But the repairs that go to that stadium, as well as if everything proceeds and you get this district and you get this rezoning that somewhere down the road this vibrant community which is potential extremely exciting. Will also those two factors I would assume will greatly increase the value of the Denver Broncos football club. So while those dollars may go into a bank account called the Stadium District, the benefit as well will accrue to the value of the football club. I would not argue the fact that we will benefit from what you're saying as far as valuations of teams and things like that. I think a brand new stadium would do a whole lot more for the valuation of the team. And but but we're again, trying to do the responsible thing. We've put a lot of our own money into this building, and it's in great shape. And we shouldn't. We're not we're not interested in heading down the path of a discussion of the next one. We think, again, we have the solution in front of us to get another 20, 25 years out of this building. And that's the right thing to do. The taxpayers, to the question of, you know, do we need a stadium? The taxpayers voted for this stadium. All right. And so I think we have that answer and we're just trying to be responsible and keeping it up. Absolutely. Our fans and the organization will benefit from the stadium being in better shape. I wouldn't disagree with that. But I'm sure the greater things about valuations of teams, I think that there are lots of different things that go into that. Sure. Thank you for that. And my my other question is, again, let's assume all this happens and we maintain this stadium at an even higher level with the monies that are generated. Are you able to give any sort of a guarantee as to how long the Denver Broncos remain in the city and county of Denver? Not at this point, I think. I think it's obviously you know, I think the demonstration of our commitment to pushing this process forward, we are we are the ones funding the front end of this process with no promise of even being reimbursed for this, even though that revenue will not go to us. So I think we're we're in this. We're in this and putting our own money out there to push the process forward because we want to be here. The path to even talking about stuff like that, it's not necessary if we have a functional building to do plans. Well, it's necessary. We're committing we're in a position to make a commitment like that. But this is this is part of the process to getting there. Yeah, it's. As a fan. I think while it's I understand that the technicalities of the little bit I know of life and as a professional sports franchise but assessing deals of this nature it would be nice to have a guarantee that we'll be around for 20 years, 30 years, whatever. And we've all seen franchises pick up and move on because the decision is made that dollars outweigh loyalty. So when this does come to rezoning, I think this will be a little bit more difficult discussion. Yeah, but I would just. One perspective I would share is that, you know, relative to that part of it. We still need to see this development generate the revenue, we hope. I think so. You know, the approval of the service plan or even zoning, you know, none of that guarantees that that revenue will be realized. But I think if we're in a seat where we feel like the financial future of the building is in a good place, I think we have been open. I think the stadium district would tell you that we're open to having those discussions. Thanks for those answers. Appreciate you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilman New. Just those knees again. Can you. One thing I keep seeing is I 25 separate new and in the downtown area. Can you talk a little bit about the connectivity between this project and downtown? And I think that's a real asset, but I still have a hard time visualizing that. Yeah, well, I think, you know, the city has obviously spent the last ten years growing toward us. I think when when I first started working in the neighborhood, downtown felt like a ways away. The area plan obviously continues to evolve and everything's moving closer to us. Again, I can't speak for all the various projects that are happening around us, but we have made great efforts and I think tried to collaborate with all the different entities that have things going on. I mean, Councilwoman Ortega, Ortega's comments about all the stuff, you know, we're trying to be mindful of all the different things that are happening so that we can create connections. And and again, with Sun Valley break down isolation walls. And I think where we're located with the with the river, the highway, the bike paths, Federal Colfax, we have the the ability to connect a lot of the city. And even earlier the discussion about bridges. I think it's amazing what's happened in the Highlands by having bridges and ways for us to do that with River Mile connecting to the south, the Sun Valley. I think there and even to Colfax, obviously, you know, there may be opportunities in this window to to to help support, you know , some solution for the Cloverleaf and things like that. So I think we're trying to be mindful of all of our edges and trying to reach out and collaborate and connect with with everyone who's working on stuff so that we can hopefully make this is as good a project and a smarter process as we can. All right. Well, I hope that comes true. That'll be a great, great advantage. What's the timetable on this project? I couldn't tell you. I again, this is. What's your best guess? Well, I think if if if we had if we get to the end of the public process on the master plan and we feel like the for the first couple buildings that there's some sense of we know what we should do and how it ought to occur. I think I think two years is really the thought. I think I mentioned it earlier, but the parking structure and that's again back to the the creation of the metro district, the ability the first thing that needs to happen before we build any buildings is a is a structured parking facility so that we can operate as we as we build out the site. So I maybe we'd stay if everything works out the rest of this year on a on a really fast timeframe, maybe we're talking about a parking deck next year, but I don't I wouldn't say a building any time. Okay. Thanks. Last question. City risk or cost to Denver taxpayers or to Bronco fans in this project? Not that I not that I would see. Now, I think, again, we're trying to avoid the bigger risk, which is going back out to the ballot. I think for any of you that follow this and I think I raised it in in a lot of our one on one meetings, the Los Angeles building for the Rams is now north of $2 billion. The building in Las Vegas is 1.6 billion. You know, we we were fortunate in the window. We built this stadium. I think we ended up with 460, something like that, all in. So the idea to go out and talk about those kind of numbers when, again, we've invested in this building, both our money, the district money, it's in good shape. We we we were trying to avoid the taxpayer risk. To be honest with you. And the fan risk cost, too, right? Yeah. Well. You know, I wouldn't I wouldn't want to leave anyone with the idea that, you know, we're capping everything going forward. We're in a very competitive business. I think anyone who's followed our team knows that Mr. Bowling has not been about making money. Yes, the franchise is appreciated, but that's all on paper. Our ownership has been about winning and the dollars we make go right back into the football side so that we can compete. We always like to say, I know Councilman Lopez is a fan of this. You know, we our punch, our weight, and we continue to do that because we've had a commitment from ownership to to put resources into our on field product. And I think it's one of the reasons that this community is so proud of our team. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman to Councilman Espinosa, you back. I'll try to save you. Go ahead. Hey. Yeah. Doo doo doo doo doo doo, folks. First thing for the record. Councilwoman Ortega, if this if you were talking about the public works space between the river and old Colfax and Canosa that what that is being held by. Hey, good things. So the. So the series of questions are not intended to embarrass their intended to just get things on the record. And again, things that you've already actually said. But in some cases they but just not explicitly the. But what we're approving is the service plan. And there's a lot of language in the service plan. And in later, I'll come to ask the city attorney how how. The prescriptive. This language is the. So how much? So this is speaking to section four, which is description of project and plan development. So how much mixed use neighborhood development experience does the Metropolitan Football Stadium District have? Yeah. Look, Craig answered for himself. Craig I'm off for the Metropolitan Football Stadium District Plan. We have our experience has been limited to constructing a football stadium. And those facilities, as I think has been mentioned, is kind of the first step in a long process. At some point we'll be. Looking for smack has said. They're not developers, we're not developers. Whether we look for multiple developers or a single master developer, that will be another step in the process. So the second part of that, and MCC didn't want to answer for you, but maybe I'll answer for him is how much does the stadium management company have in mixed use neighborhood development? I would I would say similarly very little. And again, not trying to be a developer of mixed use. So in the plan, how was the 2000 population estimate arrived at? So you're looking at the estimate that was in the narrative. That plan development is projected to have an estimated population of up to 2000 at buildout in 2022 and include up to 3,500,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, hotel, office space and other commercial space, which will provide long term recurring income stream to support the football, stadium, maintenance and improvements. All right. So the question is actually going to be both. How did you get the win there? I can take a stab at it, but if you're looking for the exact count, I'll call up the specialists that worked on the study. What was your what would be your preference? Sure. Yeah. Because 2000 is a pretty what I'm trying to what I'm trying to understand is District one also had the St Anthony's redevelopment. And in that proposal it was all five story and it was expected population was 1800 and then it ended up it's going to be something far south of that with eight and 12 story development as part of that. And so I'm just trying to understand the difference between projection and reality. So how close to this is is is this number. Sure. Let me try answering that for you. Like whenever. We. Were doing service plans or any sort of planning exercise, these are estimates. And what you do is you look at what is possible out there and you're still going to have to do the community outreach and you're still going to have that community planning effort. And that will really drive what ultimately gets in there. And then that could be a year or two from now. You may have some actual market changes and it'll drive what the market may or may not want in the future. And all of those things mean that there's an estimate today. And when we leave this public hearing today, those estimates will be wrong. They're they are estimates. I think what we get to is that there is a contemplation of a certain number of residential units that will be put in there. We had they had a real estate specialist look at what those residential units would be, how many units they would have, and an estimate of usually about, you know, what a certain number of people who would live in those residences. And then you come up with an estimation of their population and then you usually rounded up to the nearest thousand. So I'm guessing then there's nothing about this project and planned development description that is at all binding, both on the square footage or the delivery timeline that is laid out in it. Is that correct? You're saying you didn't see anything in here? No. I'm assuming these very specific statements about how many, you know, the estimated population, the the maximum square total square footage and the delivery date in 2022 are not at all binding. They are not binding. Okay. So I just want to confirm, you know, that the billion dollar stadium, which is probably easily its value over 20 years next door, does not generate enough income to support its existence, meaning 146 million. That is needed to maintain that. Correct. So the 146 million that you referenced is the amount of the dollar estimated for the infrastructure that is going to put in horizontally. 300 to $500 million. That was that was cited as what they would need to maintain it. Right. They do have higher estimations of like about over the next 25 years of nearly like 7 to $800 million worth of capital improvements to be made to the stadium of which the ground lease revenues that are what you referenced is the 3 to 5 million hopefully potentially estimated that might bring forward something to help offset those capital infrastructure costs to help maintain a productive football stadium. So they they are all estimates, but they are that is that is a piece of a sustainable revenue stream to help make future football operations possible at the stadium. Okay. I think this question has already been answered and there's no answer to it. But I still want to say that I had this question because the next line is the planned development will offer opportunities to better connect downtown Sun Valley in the West Side neighborhoods. And so I was wondering how but we clearly know that we there's a lot of ways. And so I actually appreciate the responses that came from Mac previously to my colleagues because you're it it represents a level of understanding of the complexity of the problem and an openness to having that conversation as part of this development plan in a way that I wasn't comfortable with a month ago. So thank you for for for for learning, I mean, feeling what the commentary and where everyone was going with this process. It also says including a riverfront park, including park and riverfront enhancements. I was going to ask what those enhancements were, but I think what we're going to say is we're going to have dialog, but it will be it's part of the development plan and it will be part of this infrastructure improvements. So then the next question was along those lines. So is how will a parking structure connect to downtown or Sun Valley or the West Side neighborhoods more than surface parking? How will a parking structure connect to the adjoining neighborhoods? Is that what I'm hearing you say? Yes. So the parking structure is, you know, as you think about the stadium, there's there's a parking lots there now and there's a requirement in order for those cars to be able to park on game day. So they need to have a facility as they start rebuilt, redeveloping all those areas in order to park on game day. Those those vehicles that come to that hold people and come to the games. So the connectivity doesn't come from a parking garage. The connected the garage is part of the entire development. It's a whole package. And the whole package of the development will connect those neighborhoods, as you've heard Mack talk about, like looking at their borders and working with the neighborhoods and working with the FHA and Sun Valley. If this is not the answers, don't lie in one particular aspect, like a building or a parking garage or a park. It's how all of those things work together to bring connectivity not only to the neighborhood, but throughout the city. Yeah. And so the reason why I'm asking that question is I'm trying to get some sense of how this project is going to be faced, because the connections to these surrounding communities, the the river connections as well, those don't interrupt necessarily game day activities because they're and so what is articulated is sort of the first thing we're going to do is a parking structure. And so it tells me that some of these connections and even as soon as next year, that some of these connections we're talking about are not primary. And granted, you probably want to cash flow on some other things before you do those. But I'm looking at this service plan and what I see is a bunch of structures with some timelines, but I don't see amenities listed at all. And so. With any sort of timeline. So I am assuming they're dead last or no. Councilor, if I could jump into that one, I think the reality is we've you know, from the first utterance of the idea of redeveloping the South lots, I would say nine out of ten questions and inquiries we've gotten from either fans, the public, the media has all been about the parking. And so I think that has risen to our priority list because, one, it's a function we absolutely have to have to operate. Once we started addressing surface parking lots to say we wouldn't consider any of those things that they possibly could go on in those earlier windows. If you if again, this is part of the public process, invite if there are things you think we ought to consider that don't could coincide in the same window as the parking structure. I'm not sure we're opposed to that. I think we've focused on the parking because it as it one is the most critical thing for us to continue to operate. It also has been the single sort of highest anxiety topic that's come out of mentioning development around the stadium. So that's why I think we've had an increased focus on that. It is not to say we wouldn't consider anything else. So then it says the district under district governance, it says the district board shall be comprised of eligible electors residing within or owning property within the district, as provided by the Special District Act. How many? Groups make up this group. Craig. I'm back in the. Current contemplation at this time when we initially create it will be it will be steady management company and the football stadium district. So two owners. Will vote on the creation of the district for how many acres? For the 52. Acre 62 acres. And. Okay. And then increase. So this is the last bit. So increased mills and increased costs in relation to the same land uses that don't have this obligation. So you're going to build retail, you're going to build housing, you're going to build hotels and commercial and all these things, but you're going to have additional millage on this and and a piff. What's Piff stand for? Again, they said, look it up here. Piff stands for project improvement fee. So so there's no added cost that won't be on other properties in the city of Denver that don't have metro districts in pass. So to some degree, that cost will be transferred over to the people engaged in that in this location, making it even more cost prohibitive to to to interact down there. How are you addressing likely inclusive inclusivity of both residences and nonresidential opportunity in the in the stadium district. Hi, my name is Jim Cobb and I am working with the Broncos in the Metropolitan Football Stadium District on this development. And Councilman. Could you repeat the. Question? So basically, I'm saying they're inherently going to be added cost to anything that you do relative to somebody doing it, say, on federal that doesn't have the burden of infrastructure. And if so, it's going to sort of inherently that added cost is going to make it slightly more exclusive of a of a place. So how are you going to address and make these areas more inclusive, both to to to residents and nonresidents alike, as far as, I mean, commercial properties and opportunities for for establishment of business or whatever. So the Metropolitan Improvement District that is. Before you tonight is is really no different than any other. Across the city. To my knowledge. And so, yes. With a if it ends up being a 50. Mil levy. On the improvements within this district. Sure that's going to. Cost more. Than, you know, across the street on federal where there's not industrial. However. Our ground lease. Yield assumptions are based on land values that we think reflect that that. Location versus, for instance. Union Station, where, you know, those values are just. You know, out of control, to be honest. And so we think from a developer. Partner standpoint, we're going to be offering. More. Attractive. Ground values. If we if you will, even. Though we're not selling the land, we'll be leasing the land. Secondary. Andrew mentioned a possessive interest tax. Versus a standard real estate tax. And as we've looked at possessor interest tax. Taxes. Around the city, they are generally at a fraction of of what a standard real estate. Tax would be. So that tool. Will. You know, provide, you know, sort. Of financial advantages for development. Partners within. This project. So when we did the stadium and I, I wasn't here for this, maybe Councilman Ortega can't speak to it. There was some sort of commitment, I think, to involve and engage small local business providers as part of the concessionaires and things like that. So you're going to be leasing these spaces. Is there any commitment to that and to sort of make sure that there is some sort of local aspect? I think we we consider all that to be part of the community benefits discussion. I think all of that plays into it, whether it's wage related or or minority women business participation. I think we view that as all part of that community benefits less that were again, we're we're looking at some of the standards that Councilman Lopez mentioned. He was in Seattle and saw some interesting things being done there. So I think, again, in full transparency, we're we're open to ideas and talking about how we can make this as impactful as it can be. But again, we haven't really gotten to the specifics, but I think we know those are part of the community benefit discussion. That's great. That's sort of music to my ears. The because the. You know, there's another opportunity here that I don't think we've mentioned, but with the eco district to the south, local higher provisions, you know, that were our emphasis to try and actually create job opportunities as this bill gets built and sustains itself. Because if the plan is 30 years, that's that's a career for somebody. And so building I mean, there's win win here, but only if we're mindful of it in the process. And I think. I believe. That does it for grandma. These assumptions? Yep. I believe that does it for my questions. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilwoman Ortega, you back up? Yes. Two questions. Current zoning on the property is C, Amex C, CMU 30. Is there any anticipation to build to that height limit on this site? I don't think nothing that I've seen in any drawing or contemplation has as looked at anything that I, I don't believe will be sticking with the same obsolete zoning. I think there there are more applicable codes within the city now that will be looking to move to and I don't think we'll be asking for 30. Even in even under the what we would anticipate being a different code. And it guess Karen are you guys like guiding them towards a certain zone district as they're looking to do this buildout? Yes. One thing to clarify, the current zoning of CMU 30 to 30 does not indicate maximum height in the old code. So the 30 is just a number that was assigned to the zone district. Don't ask me why, but the the height under the old code is just a floor area ratio. So yes, looking ahead, we always support a project or a site moving into the new zoning code because there are more new standards. We there's access to a lot, lot better policies and updates over time. But at this point, we have not dialed into anything specific. I mean, certainly something mixed use something with a walkable urban standards will help implement the vision. But we're not that far along to know more specifics. So you can't speak to a maximum height that the city would consider on the site. We're too early in the process to really speak about building heights yet. We haven't talked to the community about that yet. Okay. And I know that will come with the zoning, but I want to make sure that we're cognizant of the fact that part of this area is within the state capital view plane and want to not continue to, you know, penetrate that. I know when the stadium was originally built, part of the not the roofing but the rim around it had to have a waiver. I don't know if that's the right terminology. That is the old city hall view plane. The site really isn't subject to the state capital view plan. It's the old city hall view plane. Okay. I know that discussion is is being had right now with some of our folks doing development across the street and concerned about how high some of the development that may occur in this area and what impact that might have on the Mountain View from from the capital. Yeah. And I don't know whether this includes any of it at all, but potentially with the Sun Valley development, it may if there was any proposal to go very high. And you all know that the view plane ends at the river and this is all on the other side. So potentially they could do that. But so I'm just curious how much you all at the planning department are, you know, paying attention to that and trying to work within that as opposed to, you know, just say no, that's on the other side. Don't worry about it. We'll just you guys can do whatever you want. As I mentioned, the site is within the old city hall view plane. So as we have the conversations around building heights for this site, we will look at all those types of applicable regulations to see what's feasible and what's not. If the heights we're talking about are not consistent with the View plane, we will take a look at that and see and see what what the right path is. And so, yes, we're very mindful of the existence of the view planes. Okay. And introduce one very last question. The pith is that on top of the 50 mills or is that within the 50 mills? So the PIFF is a fee that is not collected, administered or any way managed by the city at all. It's a private covenant that's managed by the landlord, which would be the existing stadium metro district, I imagine. But it is it's a it's a it's a fee that's based on retail sales. So it's not I would it's it's another revenue generating source, but I don't know that I would call it like on top of the 50 mills. So it's a fee for anybody that is a consumer purchasing goods, services, whatever that will be on the site at the time the development is there. Very similar to Ballmer. You know, you go there, you pay the extra because that developer was able to. I'm assuming. That. Yes, that is that is true. It's a it's a it's a it's a taxable sales, usually. An. Additional fee. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's a great question. Thank you. Councilman Ortega, Councilman Lopez, do you have more questions or. No, I just want to just just to remind that, you know, a lot of this will be discussed at a later at a later date, when we actually look at the plan that's going to come before us in council that we have to adopt. And I think a lot of those questions in that process, when it does can when it does come, will come and we'll have an opportunity to really hash out a lot of those details. I think right now, I think the the district, the financing mechanism, the horizontal thermal development is is is on the table. All great questions. And for us that I'm taking a lot of notes, but I just wanted to remind that and I do have a comment on the comment period. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilman Espinosa, to have another question, could you make it quick so we can move on? One more on Exhibit H. That is the development summary divided into 14 blocks, but it has start dates for all the proposed developments. And I'm just I mean, I don't know if you're guy who whoever did this, you know, is the the last two buildings out of all these proposed projects. The second to last one is the A4, the only one, as noted as affordable apartment. You know, is that the you know. I don't know. Maybe that's just a question I just want to point out to my colleagues think, you know, if you look at Exhibit H 2 to 2 of 13, you will see that everything starts according to this plan in February of 19 or February of 20 or 21 or 22. And the only three projects to start in 22 are one of the three is affordable housing. And I think that's a mistake. Ah. Didn't sound like your question or comment, but I. Wanted to make it a question. I couldn't resist a question. All right. So we are going to move on. The public hearing for counsel because 686 is now closed. I will remind my colleagues that we do have a courtesy public hearing. A lot of folks are hanging out late to be here for that. So if you could please keep your comments to the subject of this bill and as concise and quick as possible. Councilman Lopez. Thank you. Mr. President. I did. You know, there was a lot of questions tonight, a lot of very good questions. We've hashed out a lot of issues, I think, in committee as well in terms of notification and what we can negotiate with, with with the district and what we know and what is being asked of us today. I you know, I I've been in the process with the with the state, with the football stadium match upon district, with our task force and kind of looking at through the steering committee, how do we how are we going to build the extend this neighborhood of Sun Valley, right. I mean, it is Sun Valley. This isn't a brand new neighborhood. It's Sun Valley. It's always been Sun Valley. But we've we've never had the appropriate land use. He's never had the appropriate planning or foresight or even population to be able to do that. And when you look at the history of Sun Valley and you look at the history of this stadium, I mean, the stadium has been there since 1948. It was a former landfill. It's the stadium isn't going anywhere. This neighborhood has been built around the stadium, for crying out loud. I think I can think of Westwood. Westwood. He was there was even the city county in Denver before Barry Stadium existed on that site. And so a lot of what's happening there has been just we haven't done it from in a strategic or a coordinated effort until now. Right. And then and how do we build a neighborhood that is seamless to the rest of the surrounding neighborhoods right there at Mile High Stadium using those lines? So it is an absolute necessity. This task force is convening and looking at everything from transportation to land use to what, you know, how do we envision it? Where does it open? Where do you access? So there's a lot of that, right? And in my heart and I'm very excited about that process, however big. And I want to make sure I mean, I know that Max spent a lot of time up here, man, but the Broncos spent a lot of time up here answering questions . But at the end of the day, this is the football stadium, metro district, and this is indeed the public entity, the governing entity of the site. Right. And with every public entity like this, it has to be held accountable to public priorities. Right. To though, what are those public? Public priorities, right. When it comes to housing, we have an affordable housing issue going on and a crisis in Denver. We got a lack of connectivity. We have aging infrastructure. And so it's it's looking at jobs. It's looking at opportunities. So when you think about this and not just necessarily in the built environment, but you look at it as an opportunity. Right. It's a highly under-utilized opportunity that's and that's in front of us, an opportunity to create local jobs. And now opportunity to create opportunities for local businesses. An opportunity to create housing that is also affordable. I mean, just because we have housing in Sun Valley that was affordable, you heard Chris PAs up here doesn't mean that that we can't meet that mark as well, too. And it's a heck of an opportunity to create this neighborhood that is seamless. And I want to really point out that at that at that word, seamless, because of a lot of these developments around the country are on these sports arenas. And sports facilities are seamless. The good ones are seamless. And you want to kind of build that in. And you want to make a neighborhood that doesn't just operate for eight home games out of the year. You want something that operates year round and you want that opportunity there. And I think when you look at that in that valley, you know that Cmax is going to turn into something different. Right. When you look at the land uses on the on the south side, that's a it is. I mean, sorry to see Sammy the C it's a CMCs eight, it's an IMX eight, it's an IMAX five cinema x five in some areas and some value so that that'll all work itself out. At the end of the day, I think we do have an opportunity we have been engaging with, with, with the Broncos on the conversation of community benefits with the ministry on this idea of community benefits and what that looks like. Right? Those jobs, those business opportunities, those burrito vendors that turn into restaurateurs. Right. Or I can think of myself when I was just a kid living in South on second and play in Valverde. I was 14 years old and ride my bike down to the stadium and I worked for it for 25 an hour, taking tickets, sweeping concourses. Right, and working as an usher. Although it was an opportunity for me, it was one of my first jobs. And I work there with so many other people who did so many different things at that stadium. So if you can amplify that and use this as an opportunity to amplify that, that's a neighborhood that does create that's an economic engine for the rest of the city, but also for that immediate neighborhood. Right. We have a housing crisis, but we also have an opportunity crisis. And I think this we can we can use this as an instrument to be able to move that forward and also maintain an iconic piece of architecture in our city, an iconic history and something that's helped put us on the map. So I do look forward to that. I have been in conversation. So I have you know, I talk to my colleagues as well, too, and we've heard from folks in the community and at least I know for the remainder of my term on this council is to make sure that that this that we do reach those kind of agreements, that we do reach that kind of acquire them. Right. To make sure it's an opportunity for the community. The last thing I did want to address. Well, something that Mr. Roybal said from the neighborhood. So why all at this time? Why is it all happening on this time? We have all this pressure of development, all this build. It's because it's been ignored for so long. Right. And so if you see those street pavers cruising down there, if you see that plan rolling through and being adopted, if you see all this happening, it's exciting time. But we want to make sure that folks who live there now are still able to enjoy it. And that's a and that's a big deal. And these are those commitments. We have a commitment from the Denver Broncos to sit down with the stadium, to talk about with community, to talk about what exactly those benefits look like. Right. How exactly can we expand those opportunities? And then and then coming back and being able to to bring something that not just is done to the neighborhood plan, just for planning sake, some document, some pretty little documents going to sit on the shelf collecting dust in the city, but something that is actually going to be living in implementable and also have that social side of it, that economic side of it as well, too. And so with that, I do have a lot of I do anticipate the plan moving forward. Hopefully it comes forward. I know that we've had a lot of public engagement and I feel good about it moving forward. I had a lot of questions on the on the map district and the timing and the that coming to council. We like to see these things come to council way ahead of time. We like to be I'll be brief and make sure that. The the. Council and the executive branch are communicating when it comes to this. But I do support this moving forward and look forward to the plan, bringing the plan to this Council for adoption as well as a a robust and I think unprecedented community community benefits agreement as well to. So. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Councilman Espinosa. I spy Ismael Guerrero with DHEA in the in the crowd. And so I'm going to continue on the housing part of the service plan. Why I think it's a mistake to put it last or near the end is is a 60% Army unit, can can can house can capture an apprentice sheet metal worker or electrician or something like that. And so it's a chance for them to, while they're learning to trade, live affordably and in with the potential amount of development that's going to happen in Sun Valley. And now this hopefully they can find work proximate to that. And I understand, Ismael, that, you know, the the metrics of building affordable housing, they tend to like having a bunch of amenities there in order to support. And in land you have LAX that right now but getting people into the neighborhood early gets them established as part of the neighborhood. There's a mistake that we made in Stapleton, which is we built all Northfield before we started putting affordable in, when if we could have gotten them there, these units there, then we could have maybe again helped create jobs, you know, find work opportunities in the neighborhood and from from early on. So I think there's too much opportunity here. The city has too many resources to not move quickly on housing down here, where the opportunity lies, both in the eco district and closer to the site. Once this planning process is concluded, I do think that it is a bummer that this service plan does not include the federal boulevard parcels to the north of 17th because that's in the view plain shadow. So if you're going to ever have a fighting chance at breaching the view plane with some from some buildings, it would be the ones that are behind the building from Old City or Old City Hall view plane. And so having those included in the plan would have given you an opportunity to sort of think about that entrance on both sides of Decatur Boulevard rather than half of it. And I've said that before, and I'll make my case here again. The so I just I do have concerns that with this language and the ability to do everything that it does, that we might the group might start marching forward on something that is is incongruent with any potential plan that might get adopted, and then you'll have to work around it. And so I would like this council to possibly consider a temporary moratorium on development on these in the in the plan district area until the plan is adopted. Yeah. So that is something that I want to throw out there. The but and it's partly because of what you said about this being a hub. It is. It could be a hub. I mean, it already is. Right. That stadium in a park was part of the whole conversation 20 years ago, and it gets way more used than the old stadium did. Omar I never had people jogging around it all the time, and you can go there at any time of the day and you will find people utilizing that as in a minute of public amenity and building off of that and figuring that out. How do we just how do we activate it but not actually can be a passive sort of activation when it's not in use and still be there because it's clearly going to be prominent. So the fact that you're thinking that way and the fact that we as a community already recognize it that way, this process will, if done right and can build upon that. And so the structure is there. So that gets to why I will be supporting this is as Andrew made it very clear, this is just the enabling language. It's not determinant. But I think we've made it very clear in all of our comments and continue to do that, that we can create enough partnerships, synergy around this place, the proximate proximity to downtown, where it is centrally located with all those transit options that we can sort of pair. However, we need to pair with all the different agencies in the state to sort of make this a real vital part of Denver going forward and this tool. Is one that you guys can use to be wildly successful in that process. So I will be supporting it for that. But I'm going to throw this in there because you set it back. And this is only especially because Mr. Bolen is not about making money that yeah, this is a $146 million contribution towards the naming rights of that stadium as Mile High Stadium. And I do think to your other point, that that actually would increase the valuation of this team more than having the ability to negotiate that on a sort of rotating basis. Because the reason why people from those seven counties wanted in on this team, you know, on the stadium is because of that team and is because of that history of the old stadium, Bears Stadium, becoming Mile High Stadium. He had no problem naming many Mile High Stadium, Mile High Stadium. Let's make mega mile high stadium. Mile High Stadium as well. Gentlemen, before. We get too far down the tangent on naming, could you stick to the bill? So, I mean, to me, it's all rolled up because we're community building and we identify this region invested in that stadium. This metro district is investing in its perpetual maintenance, locking in the mile high stadium name. Is that investment that the sort of the community contract that that will always maintain value for that organization and so that so with that, I'll be supporting this. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I fully understand, Mr. Freeman, that you cannot guarantee how long a sports franchise in this case our Broncos, is going to remain in any given location. And I don't mean my comments to be confrontational. I hope when you come back with your conjoined twin, the stadium district, with it with a rezoning application that we have a Kumbaya moment and we all do a conga line through through the chambers. But these agreements that we talk about, whether it's some sort of a neighborhood agreement with the community or a development agreement with the city, those are our chance to guarantee something that will last. I mean. The Broncos are not leaving Denver is what I want to believe. Dodgers left Brooklyn and the Colts left Baltimore. I have no idea where the Raiders are at this point and don't really care. But I think they're gone again, aren't they? Off to somewhere else. So in all seriousness, these agreements are critical to the future of the city, because unfortunately, I can't imagine a Denver without the Broncos as horrifying as I personally find that. So when this comes back a while, my loyalty to the Broncos, which is strong and needs when I'm sitting in this seat, needs to take second place to my loyalty to the residents of the city and county. So we will have a good discussion on on what those plans turn out to be. But tonight, at this point, glad to move this stadium district forward. And I appreciate the and the answers from all around these difficult questions. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilman Lopez, you back up for some quick. Yeah, I just wanted to I know that the statement was made out there about development. And why not now is because we want to make sure that the community I from from my part as the councilman in the area want to make sure that the community is engaged in the process of making those decisions. We can make easily make those decisions at those standards, but not even an understanding how big of buildings that we're going to build or what we're going to actually put on that site or what that foreseeable future it looks like. I want to make sure that the community is engaged and we are in that process. They are at the table. I want to continue to make sure that they're are the framers, because without community, there's no ownership. You want to make sure that there's ownership for from here on out. And that neighborhood, that neighborhood could be named. I mean, we can name the neighborhood, Mile High neighborhood, right? It can be the new neighborhood amount. I'm just getting it. Sun Valley will always be Sun Valley. And I just I wanted to thank the Broncos and even R.T. for making sure that. We're up to date and. Looped into the process and actually coming to the table, making sure that community's at the table as well, too. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. I think there's one thing that's evident from the conversation that you all have a lot of work to do. This is step one, but a lot of work to do on this community benefits conversation, a lot of work to do on how this will be a responsible development and what it means to our city. But tonight, we're voting on this service agreement, and I will be supporting that with that. Madam Secretary, roll call. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman. Black tie. Espinosa. Flynn, I. Gillmor, I. Carson. Can I. Mr. President. Madam Secretary, please close the voting, announce the results. Lebanese. Lebanese. Comfortable. 686 has passed. Moving right along. Councilman Espinosa, will you please put Council Bill 788 on the floor?

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the Fiscal Year 2017 budget as listed in Attachment A. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0809

Great. Thank you so much. We are now going to move into the hour items which are our budget continuation, the budget hearing. We have a variety of budget items. Once you get past the budget hearing, then we're going to go into the council agenda. There's probably a few of you for some of those items from the council agenda, but those will wait till after the budget is passed. To do this, what we're going to do is I'm opening up the hearing. I'm going to take all the public comment, any additional public comment that maybe we have not heard up to this point. And then from there, I'll turn this over to the chair of the Budget Oversight Committee to go through a variety of of items that she's going to have to go through. So at this time, if we can just take all or any public comment that want that want to be address in regards to the budget. Now would be the time. Am I seeing? No public comment on the budget. Okay, here we come. We figured there'd be about 2 hours of you guys talking, so he turned it on us. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson, council members. My name is Margaret Smith. I am a resident of the third district and I am speaking tonight, as I did earlier at the BBC as a representative of the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, which most recently has raised over $1,000,000 for the new Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Thank you. We couldn't have done it without all of you, especially Vice Mayor Rex Richardson. But on behalf of library supporters and users throughout the city, we are extremely grateful for this budget, which includes measure a funds for infrastructure improvements to five libraries , one time funds to continue sun hours at three branch libraries. And we are also very grateful that it also includes a recommendation for an additional $65,000 to fund sun hours at the fourth Branch Library in Long Beach, El Dorado. Sun hours are a critically important time for a lot of people. In fact, for some people, the only time that working parents and school age children can share a library visit together. In fact, Sunday hours are important for a lot of people in this city who work or otherwise occupied between Monday and Saturday. Sunday is an important investment. It has immediate benefits to many people throughout the city. In fact, on Saturday at the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library opening. Mayor Garcia, you emphasized the importance of providing library access to everyone in our community. Access to technology and education and jobs and information and culture. And unfortunately for some people in our city, a safe place just to be. Sunday hours are about that kind of access. And so we thank you, Mayor Garcia, for your continued support of libraries. We especially want to thank Council member Susie Price for initiating the pilot program for Sunday hours and for continuing to support the expansion of Sunday hours at other branches. And we thank all of the council members for considering this additional funds of $65,000 for a fourth branch library. And we hope that in future budget discussions, there will be an opportunity to fund Sunday hours for every single library in Long Beach. In this information age, libraries are more important than ever to everyone every day of the week. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Share your thoughts. And Consultants Form Group and Associates 2007, the city entered into, I believe, what was a statewide, if not countrywide resolution to end homelessness in the year 2007. As of to date, we are at a deficit. Council members. We have a new mayor now. When God told me that you were going to be mayor in 2006, I didn't even know if you had considered to run, but God showed me that you would be the mayor and here we are. So I know that I have arrived at this moment, both in spirit and in person. In his will, as I address this issue. Next year, you will be at a deficit. You will not have met your objective, although you might have received millions of dollars from the federal government to end homelessness by the year 2017. You have not met that objective contrary, and in spite of that, you're giving many of your employees raises. And I'm not going to argue that right now, but you're in arrears and you had a client here with her, her her crippled son, who needed you to meet that objective this year. Gina, your new Rex, your new Al, your new but a host of us, we've been here meeting about this issue since 2012 is when I showed up on this assignment. You are in arrears. To have met this objective. And there's no one in line to applaud you for having met this goal. Think about how many goals you have met for which you have been applauded and commended. But you've not met this one. That should have been at your top of your agenda. The homeless needed you seven years ago and you did not meet that objective. Now I'm a fast forward. This is how God works. First he talks to your conscience. This is how you learn to hear his voice. When you follow his conscience. When you don't follow your conscience, then he sends a person when you don't listen to the person. Then he starts letting walls fall down. Ocean start opening. And you are without any assistance. So we're in we in this warning process. He sent ten signs to Farrow before he dumped him in his chariots and in soldiers. In the deep. In the Red Sea. You may not get no. Other warning if you don't put this at the top of your agenda because you have not met it and you cannot be commended in this regard. You stand guilty and I may be the last warning you get. Thank you, Mr. Assad. Next speaker, please. Good evening. And Cantrell. And maybe the reason you didn't have a lot of people come rushing down to talk is that many of us have not heard the recommendations of the Budget Oversight Committee. That's what we want to talk about, is what those recommendations are and whether we want you to approve or disapprove of it. I missed the beginning of the Budget Oversight Committee, but I understand that there was a recommendation to take the $500,000 from Measure A and the $500,000 of the budget surplus. Out of the giving it to the pool. And I'm not sure what is going on. We need to have information before we can discuss this. May I reserve my comments until after the Budget Oversight Committee recommendations are made? This is the public. The public comment period. So there was no objection to that. So we're we're doing a public comment period. Mr.. Mr.. Parkin. I think all the public comment period right now, ma'am. Thank you. Will there be public comment period after the motion is. As follows. Robert's Rules of Order. Well, we checked this with the city attorney. We're going to one public comment, period. Is there any change to the city attorney? It would be up to the chair to allow additional public comment. This is the public comment period that the mayor's designated for the budget. Well. Isn't there supposed to be public comment on a motion? There's supposed to be public comment on the agenda item. And today the agenda item is the budget. And so that is the commentary. And it's a continuation of obviously of a hearing we've had multiple times. And so that's just the process. So please continue. Well, I am opposed to taking measure a money or budget surplus money for the pool. And I'm also I've never gotten my questions answered about what parks are receiving artificial turf and the cost in the budget is $2 million. I'm wanting to know if that's new money or if that is the money that was approved in the 2014 and 2015 budgets and which parks are receiving this money. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. I'm Laura Spinner. I'm a second district resident and also a member of the friends of the Long Beach Municipal Band. And first, I want to start out by again thanking all of you for partnering with us to bring the six week of concerts this last summer. And also want to applaud and thank Mayor Garcia for recommending six weeks of concerts for this next summer in 2017. In the 25 years that I've been attending band concerts, it's been an amazing thing to watch grow because right now many of you know that the band is servicing over 10,000 people per week at the concerts, and I think it's now up to seven different districts that are being serviced. And I know that many people would like to see all the districts serviced. And I know we. Heard from Dee Andrews last. Week and Rex Richardson, and that is so encouraging. I think that we are all very positive about that. We would love to see more band concerts. Everybody wants more. We want to see 20,000 people. And all these things I'm sure. Are achievable over the course of many years. What I would like to say is our friends. Group, we are very committed to continuing to work with the city and work with partners of parks and work with Parks, Recreation, Marine to help continue to support the band. And we would be happy to to be on a committee and discuss about how perhaps we can continue to increase the number. Of concerts so that we can get to all the different districts. At the same time, understanding the proposals. Of trying to move it. From six weeks to eight weeks and move it all around, I think I'd have to agree with what Miss Price said during the B or C, that it's a little bit complicated to try to figure that out for the next year. But having said that, please let us all continue the discussions with Parks and Rec and the conductor and all of us to try to figure out how. We can continue to bring concerts. To more and more areas of the city. So that's all I wanted to say. Appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Sandra Krall. I live on Atherton Street in the third District, and I hadn't planned to speak at all tonight and accept that there have been things talked about and things that are in the budget. I know that. Take me back over the last 14 years that I've been working on issues of homelessness and affordable housing. What I want to say is that my spirit is really lifted these days and not so much by the specifics of the plan, because I've not paid that much attention to that. But I know there are there is money going there, but it's the spirit and the tone of the discussion that I'm finding so encouraging. We are now looking at what we can. Do. For the homeless instead of. What we should do to the homeless. And that makes me very, very happy. I've been involved in this since somebody referred to the ten year plan for the to end homelessness. I've been involved in that. Some of the people who were involved in writing that plan, which was published six years ago, are no longer among us. They have gone on to a better life someplace that we can't quite specify, but I know they would be happy to see. Finally, the council is. Aware and most of you are new to the council since those days, but you have an awareness that this plan exists and possibly something will come out of it. There's lots of stuff in that plan and nobody expects absolutely everything that happened. But I hope you do look at it very closely and find the things that are possible in this day and age and onward and upward. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker. Thank you, Mayor Garcia and honorable mayor and members of the Council. As I'm beginning to speak, I would like to ask all the rental housing owners who are here in the audience tonight to stand. Please. Honorable mayor and members of the council. My name is Elaine Hutchison. I come to you as an property owner in Long Beach, but also with many of my fellow owners and as a member of better housing for Long Beach. I want to especially thanks Stacie Mongeau, the chair of the Budget Oversight Committee and the committee members for their support of the rental community in curbing rate hikes in inspectors in the city of Long Beach. The pier up is now is new and we support waiting to have the full data on the rental communities across the city before making any adjustments. Thank you for helping us let the process play out, including the focus on slumlords. Thank you very, very kindly. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Carolyn Burns. I live in the second district. At first and Falcon and I'm. Here and I know. You can't parcel things out of the budget. You've cobbled it all together and each. Department has worked very hard at putting the budget together and sharing it with all of the districts in the city. However, I. Protest the budget for the water. Department and I protested on the grounds of. Proposal. Prop 218, which states that. A utility in the state of California. Cannot raise the rates unless they can justify that an increase in rates is necessary due to a shortfall. In their budget. Period. Unfortunately, it's come. To my attention and that of several others. That. There has been a very. Large quantity of money. $10 million that has moved from the water. Department to the city Department. Of Revenue. For some reason, that number doesn't even show up on the income part of the statement for the budget. I don't know how that can be. Maybe someone can. Explain it to me some. But I'm also honored to speak to the people who. Are watching at home, because this budget item has not gotten very much attention. But maybe you're the silent ones at home that would like to come out. You'd like to speak out, and maybe you can call your council. Person, or maybe you can send an email. But it's been my understanding that only. 14 people. Have communicated with the water department about this issue. And four. People attended one. Public meeting. There were four public meetings. So I invite everyone to take the risk and come out. People do listen. People are being polite and is being heard. And I would like to have the oversight committee guide. The. Council would like to have the council guide the council that it would be in the city's best interest not to follow a precedent that Burbank and Fullerton have followed in which their citizens. Had rebates. Once the water budget was really analyzed. It would be best not to go down that road. And so I strongly encourage that type of activity within it. At the very least, the water department and I thank you once again. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Yes. My name is Josh Butler. Executive director. For housing Long Beach. And I guess renters and landlords tonight also have. In common the color red. As our folks are hearing. Red tonight as well. Everybody can just where we don't need to stand up and take that kind of time. Thanks. The city of Long Beach. A majority of our city rents. 58%. And that number is on the rise within with more units being put online here in the city of Long Beach, especially in downtown. So we need to make sure that we have a robust. Inspection program where we'd like to see improvements to our current inspection program, not expanding the program to meet the needs of Long Beach renters who are living in increasingly aging housing stock would be a failure. This is a community health issue. We have a tenant. Here tonight who has a. Section eight tenant. She could not speak. She had to go. She's going to likely lose. Her Section eight housing because of deplorable conditions that are being kept by that landlord. She's been cited by our program. But when. Housing authority went to do their inspection. Those. Violations were not fixed. They told her that she's going to. Have to very. Likely relocate. We also had something here tonight from the Department of Family and Children's Services. He also could not speak tonight, but. He's going to be speaking in. Soon. He's at a point where he's going to have to break. Up a family and take. Kids out because the families. Living in such deplorable conditions and they can't get the landlord to fix those things. So we have a serious problem. And that's just the tip of the iceberg as we know that many. Residents are fearful of even speaking out or saying anything or reporting problems for fear of retaliation. If they speak out, their landlord can hold over their head an eviction, a rent increase, and oftentimes they do. So we need a program. This is a great this is a great. Start to have a. Program that we can point to. It'd be nice to. Increase the opportunities. For tenants to feel like they. Can call that program without fear of retaliation. We're hopeful we have that conversation. But for the right for right now, to not move forward with this program would be an error. And so we encourage the council to adopt the recommendations made by the Department of Talent Services, and we look forward to improving and expanding the program. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. I want to. Address the budget issues around the Belmont Plaza pool. First of all, like Ms.. Cantrell, I was just informed that about $1,000,000. Half of it. And general funds. The other half in Missouri funds are now not going to be directed toward the pool, which I think, as I learned by going to four budget meetings in one week, is a is a really good way to make difficult choices. So I think that's good that that makes you feel like maybe somebody is actually. Thinking and being open to change. So while you're at it, there's another million dollars going to the pool from the Tidelands Oil Fund. It's in 518. Hard to find on that thing. It's a tiny little triangle, but it doesn't have to have a description of what what it is or when it is, because it's not for 17 , it's 18. So why? Why is it even bad now to spend our tidelands money? Why? Because it's a money pit. One location. Because the Belmont Pool Project is to be built on sand at sea level. And projected sea level rise must be calculated into the design. It will be constructed on top of a seven foot high cement base. I have it from a member of the committee that the base alone will cost $500,000. It has plumbing in it, though. Still, there is other possible sites able to receive Thailand. Fund moneys that would. Not be on sand. And so you don't have to spend half of the budget on a seven foot high piece of cement size. It is not a replacement for the old pool complex, as people like to say. It will not have one but two Olympic size pools, a diving tower and a diving pool. Others smaller pools. And a restaurant. A good community pool. Again, 10 to 12 million for community pools could be built for the cost of the base that block of cement time. Due to falling oil prices, the Tidelands Fund has not provided the income that was expected. The savings set aside are not keeping up with the projected four plus million dollar cost increase. In reality, we have. Less funding every year, so I'm here. Strictly on a budget related matter to say why. Not? As long as you're at it, take that million dollars out of Thailand's. You could hire a. Couple of lifeguards. Then maybe those kids you honored last last couple of weeks, you know, you wouldn't have to count on them. You know, they were only there that day because the wind came up. Spend it on lifeguards and better yet, swimming lessons. Then you wouldn't need so many lifeguards. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Vice Mayor, an honorable council members. My name is Matt Barnett. My address is on record for ID. I am also serving as the president of the Eldorado Park South Neighborhood Association. I want to echo my comments I made earlier in front of the Budget Oversight Committee to fully support the Budget Oversight Committees recommendation to increase funding for homeless services and the Neighborhood Safety Campaign Program. And additionally, I want to provide my input on a conversation that was had during that committee meeting on using Prop eight fund for other purposes. When the campaign was kicked off, many of you sent out fliers showing exactly which streets would be repaired. And I want to make sure that we stay true to that promise as a city, to make sure that we are always repairing our streets, that if that's what the campaign said, we would do. The fifth District has the most streets and the most sidewalks of any other district, and some of the streets are often damaged by large trees and need constant repair. I use my Long Beach job whenever I can to repair any potholes or sidewalks. But the plan for Prop eight as it was presented to the voters was very clear on which streets would be repaired. And I want to make sure that we stick to that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment? Please come forward. Okay, guys. So let's go to the lineup. If there's any more public comment, please come forward. Mr. Good Hugh Laurie, good to you. CLARKE As he dressed like a number of other people, I want to repeat because of the import of what I had mentioned at the budget hearing . And let me start with the. This situation you face is in large measure of your making. You made a choice to urinate away near $9 million. On this build on a. Replacement building here. Excuse me, $90 million on the replacement of this building, which, if my information is correct, you were told face no imminent danger. Though the elevators should be replaced. On the pool. Its design. I'm not a swimmer, but I would. I'm hopeful the city will rely on those who are. Well skilled in designing and using such pool pools. But as I. Pointed out. Last week. Also to think of it just as a pool is. Rather parochial thinking and the playing the. Race card really doesn't serve the public well. There's a full. List. I read them off and I'll read them off again. Bike paddling. Board paddling. Stand up paddling. Canoeing. Kayak surfing. Kayaking. Outrigger outrigger canoes. Sailing, windsurfing, even skinny dipping. And watching. The sail with the submarine races are a whole variety. Of things. That are not available in other parts. Of the city, period. Again, it's design. I would leave to. Those people that are skilled in that and it would. Be an outstanding facility for people that want. To be another Michael Phelps or Patty McCormack. I personally am not that enthralled about swimming, but if you come down and swim, get your butt out of there and avail yourself when you're finished are the full range of other. Activities you can have in terms of an overarching position relative to the budget in an ad hoc, unrelated conversation. Our city attorney. Seemed to have opined to me that he seems to think that the price of oil will soon reach $300 per barrel. So I don't think the financial situation is as dire as people projected to be. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Roman. I'm from District five. Um, I am like, to compliment the mayor or someone named Daniel. I don't know what he looks like, but he has. He said that one of the best things to do is to get people together and sign documents. In the more people I get, the better off, the easier it's going to be to get some of the stuff that we want. So, um, I've been in communication with my district office and went through some of the neighborhoods with some of the others. And I've got about, this is just one set of about 500 signatures and it basically says that we want to have our parks fully watered. We got we're only watering about 80%. And so it's asking for more money that we have not budgeted currently. So, um, this is just one package of about six or eight more. So there's about 3000, maybe more or less of how many people I just got these documents from some of the block captains today. So, I mean, it's here. We're we're wanting to have that. We're also asking for the there is $1.7 million that have been, we believe, been allocated for artificial soccer fields. And we want to keep that money, even though we're not going to use it for for artificial turf. We want to keep all of that money for District five and not give any of it to the seaside park or to the admiral kit. That's what we're asking for, and we're going to keep pushing for that. Also, this document doesn't have that. But but Marie has asked for more bands to go from 6 to 8 weeks. District five has been pushing for that for a long time. And I understand. Ms.. Price doesn't quite understand things. It's more convoluted, but I think that if she looks at it more closely, she'll see that it's a very sound plan and it's something that we support. I'm going to continue to try to get more money or not more money more more people to sign this thing. We've got about 3000. My goal is to top about 5000 to make sure we go over the top. That's pretty much what I think Daniel said. So I'm going to keep going. That's about it. I thank you for your time and I'm going to give my time to someone else, whoever's got it. But I appreciate you listening to me and we're going to keep pushing for that. It's going to be even stronger because we need to get more signatures from District five. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Honorable mayor and council members. My name is Maria Lopez. I live in the first district. My address is on file. I'm here to support proposal for more funding as well as more code enforcement for our communities. But I have to say that efforts to weaken program, this program, especially from districts that don't have high numbers of renters, would be selling out our single mothers, our communities of color. But especially our low income communities. There are many communities where we see more problems. Especially slumlord problems, old housing stock, as well as our residents being taken advantage of because they don't know their rights because they have a language barrier or because they have children that they have to fend for. And so they don't put up a fight because their children need to go to school tomorrow and their children need a place to sleep. So, P.S., please remember, don't sell out our communities. We all deserve inadequate. Housing in the city we love. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening to the ladies and gentlemen of the council member. My name is Harriet Lawless. I live in 4109 Massachusetts Long Beach. I have been a resident of Long Beach since 1970. I bought my first property, then unit apartment in 1978. The experience that I have gotten over the years. I own steel, a few properties. Is that an investor or a property owner who is going at today's market, invest two $300,000 for eight or ten years in an apartment. He's not going to let it go down or, you know, become a slumlord. There is some slumlord I dealt on the west side of Long Beach back in the eighties. Yeah, there are few, but I think there are very few. I look at my property tax bill and a lot of things think one thing that many tenants do not realize is that the property bears unified school, district taxes, community college, and every time that there is fees against the property, the rent is going to be going up. So if you really I mean, there is a department in Long Beach. If a tenant has a problem with a slum landlord with an issues with their you know, with a unit, you can always call the department and, you know, there is a person or an inspector goes and inspect the property. Over my 35 years of owning your property, I had one time a tenant who moved out after he messed up the apartment, who called the city. And they come out and, you know, we have a nice talk. And I explained to him what was going on and the damage that was done. So by creating another department and hiring more inspectors and go in and knock doors, eventually you're going to be imposing fees against the property owners, which we're going to be passing to the tenant. So before you know what basically you're trying to do or try to accomplish, helping tenants is, you know, is going to be backfiring. It's not going to be helping them because property taxes, unified school district, everything goes on the property and the rents are going to be going up. So that's another view that I want you to take a look or see before you make a decision. You know, hiring more inspectors and spending more money. Thank you very much. Thank you. Seeing no other public comment, I'm going to close public comment period for the budget hearing. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and close that for the budget hearing. Thank you. So we're going now transition on to the budget. We just need a minute to go over the order. Just give us one sec, because there's a series of votes that have to start. So we'll just resume on that in just a minute. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and turn over the floor to the chairwoman of the BBC. There's a series of actual votes that have to be taken on a on a series of different items. And so the way this will work is Councilman Mongo will call the number of the item. Madam Clerk, I'll have you repeat the number of the item and then we'll turn it back to the chairwoman who will walk us through each one. That makes sense. So I'll turn this over to Councilman Mongo. So I hear a lot of talking in the crowd. This is similar to last week. We're passing each budget of each department, one at a time like we did before. So the first one will be item 16, dash 809. Is that what you'd like me to call it? Which is the citywide? Originally noted on the agenda as item one. Yes. Wonderful. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the fiscal year 2017 budget citywide. So there would. Be no motion or a vote on this item. You would go directly into your next item.