Datasets:

huuuyeah

/

meetingbank

like 8

A bill for an ordinance to amend Article IV of Chapter 27 (Housing) of the Revised Municipal Code relating to affordable housing. Amends Article IV, Chapter 27 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code relating to affordable housing to allow for the execution of a performance deed of trust for settlements of disputed matters and to allow the recapture of lost affordability terms. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 9-12-18.

DenverCityCouncil_10152018_18-0975

11 eyes, one abstention. Council before council resolution 1086 has been adopted. And now, Madam Secretary, if you could put the next item, a council bill 975 on our screens. And Councilman Herndon, if you can put a motion to delay consideration of 975 until after the public hearing tonight, the courtesy public hearing tonight on 1089 is due. I first need to order it published and then there needs to be a second motion to delay. The word I got was that we needed a move to delay consideration, but we need to put it on the floor first. I think I think you do your vote on that, but then you'll go ahead and. All right. So go ahead and put it on the floor. Yes, Mr. President, I would move that council bill 975 be ordered published. Right. It has been moved and seconded. And now do we need Councilman Espinosa then to make a motion to postpone? Correct. All right, Councilman Espinosa, I want to make a motion to postpone consideration of this until after the public hearing. Yes. President, I moved to postpone this till after the public hearing of. 86. Has been moved and seconded. Any comments or questions by members of council on this? I'm guessing, Councilman Flynn, that that's still just you hanging around on there. Correct. And not that I'm trying to. It just won't go away. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black Eye. Brooks. I. Espinosa. I. Flynn. I. Gilmore, I. Herndon, I. Cashman. I can reach Lopez. All right. Knew Ortega. I Susman. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close voting. Announced the results. 3913 Eyes Council Bill 975 will be postponed for consideration until after the courtesy public hearing tonight on 1089. I believe that concludes the items to be called out this evening. All other bills for introduction are ordered published except for Council Bill 8-0189 which council will vote on after the conclusion of the one hour courtesy public hearings scheduled later this evening, we are now ready for the black 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. Councilman Herndon, will 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 the resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in the block for the following items. All serious 2018 unless noted 1076, 1068, 1049, 1067, 1069, 1085, 1087. All right. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye Brooks. Hi. Espinosa. Hi, Flynn, I Gilmore I Herndon, I Cashman I can canete. Lopez Hi. New Ortega I Susman. All right, Mr. President. I Madam Secretary, please close voting and announce results. 1313 I As the resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass tonight, there will be a one hour courtesy public hearing on Council Bill 1089, amending Title 27 of the Revised Municipal Code of the City and County of Denver to revise

Order for a hearing on the civil rights and liberties of returning citizens and re-entry into their Boston communities.

BostonCC_03022022_2022-0324

0323. Committee on Civil Rights, Immigration and Immigration Advancement. Docket 0324. Mr. Clarke, please read 03240324. Council Illusion offered the following order for a hearing on the civil rights and liberties of returning citizens and reentry into their Boston communities. They did she recognizes counsel counsel Luann and and on docket 0324. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I offer this order, hearing orders that we can really evaluate and see what we can do more to support our returning citizens. Many of us participated in various forms of the budget listening tour that the mayor held, and we heard again and again the ones that I attended from returning citizens themselves about the lack of resources and lack of. And what we have we now have an office of returning citizens. What we can do to further buttress that office, to support the more than 3000 people a year returning to the city of Boston from prisons and jails who are in need of permanent housing or in need of employment or in need of driver's licenses. The very basics. And sometimes we need more than just referrals. We need people who are actually able to do case management and, you know, help people interact with them through the process. And we know that this is an issue that disproportionately affects our black and Latinx residents who are overrepresented and disproportionately represented in our criminal legal system. And we know that there are particular burdens, burdens that are that returning citizens face when it comes to placement in public housing because of because the very stringent rules around who can reside in public housing. And we also know that the prison system has long housed and held a significant portion of folks out front for mental health issues. So this is really when we're talking about folks returning our returning citizens, we're talking about connecting them to the mental health resources that they should have gotten in the first place. I had clients as a housing attorney who were I had to go visit in jail when they really should have been receiving services from a psychiatrist and got caught up in a very, very punitive system. So this is a hearing order to bring together voices in this space, a lot of them being led by returning citizens to really put our money and focus on really helping people to become whole. We too often are focused on individual decision making by a by an individual and not systemic problems and not bad policies that lead to people making sometimes decisions that are that lead them to this to places of incarceration. So this hearing order, I hope to discuss these issues and bring our office of returning citizens together with a lot of folks just for housing has been very active in this space and a number of returning citizens are hoping that we can get this out as part of the discussion to also talk about it as part of the budget. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. Which and would anyone else start? Sorry. I'd also. Like to add Councilor Ryan. We're out to this to this here in order. Thank you. Sorry. Council of Wirral has added Council. Where would you like to speak on this matter? The Chair recognizes counsel role. Thank you. Chair, and thank you, counsel Louis. Jahn for bringing this quorum. Issue to the floor. And with the shadows, mass incarceration. Has cast upon too many of our communities. Especially. Black and brown neighborhoods. In our city. We need to ensure that those who have served their time. Can return to their communities with the opportunities, services and support they need to reintegrate successfully. Too often, residents end up in our correctional facilities because our city has failed to deliver them. The Education Economic Opportunity. As Counsel Louise Diane said also said mental health. Services and stable housing. They need it and to which they are entitled to. These systemic failures are exactly why we need to assess. How we can ensure every returning citizen has a. Civil rights restored and that our reentry efforts adequately address the root causes of criminal criminalization incarceration. I'm proud to support this here in order to better support our return to citizens and in assess how we interrupt these cycles. Thank you. Thank you, Counsel. Earl. But anyone else like to speak on this matter? The Chair recognizes counsel of our counsel. Why? You of the fourth. Thank you, President Flynn. Well, that feels nice. Thank you, Counselor Eugene and Counselor Morel for bringing this hearing order onto the floor. In a previous life, I served as a street worker and a direct violence intervention worker here in the city of Boston, first in Mattapan and then in lower Roxbury and in the South End. A large part of the work that I did was to support young people and young men and women who are not only systems involved, but who are currently and previously incarcerated. And so this is an issue that's very near and dear to my heart. I think when we're having conversations, particularly around the civil liberties of people who are currently or formerly incarcerated, we need to expand what civil liberties are afforded to them before they become systems involved and also after they come home and want to expand the way that we think about reentry, not only with a problem, with a problem free solution frame, which calls on whether they have education, have a house and so on and so forth. But to think about the emotional well-being and how they are reintegrated into their community and into the civil process, whether it be through community organizing, voting and so on and so forth. So I'm really looking forward to this hearing. I'm looking forward to hearing from folks who are currently or previously incarcerated on what the levels of support they need from the city of Boston. And I would also urge us to look beyond the supports that come from city government and look directly to communities to offer the support to these folks. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. Laura. The chair recognizes Counselor Arroyo. Counsel Royall, you have the floor. Thank you. President Flynn. And thank you, Counselor Louis Gen and Counsel Ralph for offering this. Over 90% of our incarcerated population returns back to our communities. That's that's the number. And so often what they need and what led them into the to be system involved in the first place is stabilization and resources. And often when they are entering or exiting, they are not receiving those resources. And that's actually a detriment to our public safety, a detriment to them, a detriment to their families. And if we are serious about ending cycles of trauma, ending cycles of of harm, we're going to have to be serious about providing resources and dedicating resources to folks. I know this deals specifically as well with some of their civil liberties in the actions we take there. But I also know that it has to deal with and does mention the things that we have to do to make sure that we take care of them from a resource standpoint. And so this is incredibly important work. This has a direct impact on so many people's lives and family's lives and a direct impact on ending cycles of harm and trauma. And so please add my name. Thank you for your leadership on on presenting this. And I look forward to hearing not just what comes out of this hearing, but what we do from the from that hearing on. So thank you all. The the chair recognizes the council region. Okay. Anyone else like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes Councilor Baker. I just want to say. Okay, please. That council. Baker's name, please. That council box name. Buxton, Councilor Brading Council. Royal Council. Edwards. Councilor Fernandez Anderson. Councilor Clarity. Councilor Laura murphy. And please add the chair. I also wanted to highlight that myself and Council have already had several hearings in the past on quarry reform, which is also a critical part of this as well. Governor Patrick did an outstanding job working with the legislature in making reforms to quarry, but we need to go even further than that. As a as a former probation officer, there's nothing more frustrating for someone coming out of jail or coming out of prison to have that quarry hang over their head for their entire life, not being able to get a job or get into housing. But just want to say thank you to my councilors, fellow colleagues, for the incredible work that they've done on this work, on this issue. Docket 0293. Okay. 0.20234 will be referred to the Committee on Civil Rights Immigrant Advancement. 3240324. Mr. Clarke. Please read docket 0325. Docket number 0325. Councilor Braden and Councilor Flynn offered the floor for the following order for a committee meeting to discuss the organization of plays a public and semi-independent entities related to the city of Boston. Thank you, Mr. Clarke.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the City Light Department; accepting various easements for overhead and underground electrical rights in King County, Washington; placing said easements under the jurisdiction of the City Light Department; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_12072020_CB 119954

Agenda Item 16 Council Bill 119954 relating to the City Department accepting various easements for overhead and underground mutual rights in King County, Washington, the committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Madam Clerk, because, Mr. Peterson, you are recognized in order to provide the committee report on this council bill. Thank you. Council Bill 119954 is very similar to the one we just passed its various easements for Seattle City Light and the committee unanimously approved it. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson, are there comments on the bill and. Are there any additional comments on the bill? Hearing now, will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the Bill Peterson? Yes. Strauss Yes. Herbold Yes. Suarez, I. Lewis. I. Morales Yes. Macheda i. President Gonzalez, i. 18 favored unopposed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Item 17 Will the clerk please read item 17 into the record?

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 54956.9 Number of cases: Three (As Plaintiff - City Initiating Legal Action)

AlamedaCC_01202015_2015-1210

And the fire chief is going to us. Uh. I think we have some that's going to lead us. I pledge allegiance to the flag for which it stands, one nation. Under. God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Chief. Okay. Next agenda changes to this reaction. Yeah. Do you want to? I think you have a lot of agenda changes. But also, do you want to hold the joint meeting first since that has auditors present who are being meetings. Okay. So quick. So I don't know if any of you realize this, but we actually have another meeting that starts 701. That's council, a joint city council and successor agency to the Community Improvement Commission, S.A. CIC meeting. And for this it's my understanding that, okay, due to the interest of time I was going to request if staff if council is

Recommendation to request City Manager create a child care pilot program for meetings in the Civic Chambers, using $3,000 of Second Council District One Time District Priority Fund. Additionally, request the Mayor to put a time certain for all family-related policies to be heard before Council.

LongBeachCC_10222019_19-1076

Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here. We're going to hear. She went 28 and 23. I'm 23 is communication from Cam Smith appears Councilmember Durango Councilmember Richardson recommendation to create a childcare pilot program for meetings in the civic chambers using 3000 of second Council District one time District Priority Fund. Thank you. Councilman Pearce. Yes. Yes. I want to say that this is an idea that's been around for a while. I think a bunch of us council members have kicked around what it would look like to have child care provided at city council meetings. We know that in the city we often have families come to city council meetings. We often have families that bring their their children up front. I know when we had our breastfeeds month that there was a packed house. And so we wanted to provide a divide by nine funds that would allow us for a pilot program. And the reason we wanted to do a pilot program is so we could make sure that we track how many people from outside the city are using these services and then how many city employees. We want to make sure that this is something that's available right to city employees as well. And so I want to thank the city manager's office for working with us. I want to thank my staff for working with us. I look forward to hearing from the community members. Thank you. Councilmember Durango. Now you got to remember, Austin, I want to show my strong support for this item. I know people probably do not recall, but back in the back, in the seventies and eighties, even through the nineties, there were two classifications city called child childcare providers. And it was a program that was run through the Parks and Recreation Department that offered child care throughout the city. It was a classification that we tested during the employment process. Of course, after budget crises along the years, that program went away. So I want to thank Councilmember Pearce for bringing this forward. It's a much needed service that the city should provide. And we'll start here with the city council meetings and hopefully over the years we can grow our child care program back again into the glory that it was back in the in the late 1780s. Thank you. Let's remember, Mongo. Thank you. I just had a couple of quick questions. Are we thinking that this would be licensed childcare or babysitting? And how would it be paid for? Would there be a stipend? When people pay to A to utilize it? Would there be a differentiation between employees that need it versus. Public members that need it. I just want to make sure that some some of our employees work council meetings and some of our employees work during the day. And so I just didn't want there to be a. Favoritism or any of that to the staff that support us. So the recommendation is using 3000 a second District Council one time funds. So my officers should be paying for this. The pilot program is for city council meetings and meetings held in this chamber. And so if somebody requests during those hours of child care because they're attending a meeting in this chamber, they would be able to request that per the item through the city clerk 48 hours prior to the child care services that we have lined up actually carry the insurance required by risk management. It is child care. And so you could bring your child regardless of age? No, not regardless of age from 2 to 13. So if your child is two years old, up to 13, you would be able to bring them here during business hours. I mean, not business hours during a meeting in this chamber to have child watch, we have a secure location that our city manager has worked to make sure we have a site that is appropriate. And I think that answers your questions. Well, I get $3,000, but child care is expensive. So would the person who's dropping off the child also pay like a a deposit or a. It would be completely free. It's completely free to the public and to our city employees that need it during those hours. And you use the word child care, but. Would it be? Because I think child care, at least again, it's been a long time since I worked in child care, but I did work in child care. There's like age separations by group, right? So when you have child care at a facility like something like this, that is it's done in public meetings in other places. Very often it is it's not that complicated. They bring a couple of different people. They are licensed. They have the insurance that they need and it's based on request. So if you have a request for two people, for two kids, then you have one staff person. If there's another request, there's another staff person. We're allocating $3,000. If that money runs out ahead of time, that is the time that will bring it back to this council to discuss. We've allocated this based on the number of of hours that we think there will be requests and added an additional amount to cover on top of that. Okay. And so the the caretakers would be licensed, but we're not trying to license a site on a child care facility onsite. Not at this time. But I would love to see that in the middle of this. But in between the library and here, when the middle part gets developed, I think that having a child care facility there that would be accessible to city employees would be absolutely something that we should strive towards. I ask a lot of these questions because I've recently researched a little bit around being a county employee and having child care available to employees in that model. It is a licensed site and it is available to employees, but it also is available to the public and there's some preferential variances. And then there's also a recommended donation that allows the program to sustain itself over time for a longer period of time. And so I was just kind of trying to better understand. Especially coming from a budget perspective. $3,000 is a great donation to get it started. I just recognize that depending on the criteria that we start the pilot that visioning might have been on on a go forward basis. So the pilot you're hoping for lasts through. How many months? It's a 12 month pilot. Oh, $3,000 for 12 months. Yes. I don't want to go back and forth. I can reread the item for you if you like. Respectfully, I have the opportunity to ask questions. I didn't appreciate that a lot. You ask all your questions and then I'll queue up again to answer them. Okay, so I'm here back. Let me let me just make sure we're where we're at. Did the motion get read in the. We haven't had any public comment yet, but the moment. Okay. Councilmember Turanga ah you did second. Okay. Let me do the public comment. Okay. And then we'll come back and this order, Larry Goodhue, Stefan Burson, Suelo, Maricela de Rivera, Lily Ocampo and Carmen de Marzo. Please come forward in that order. Very good to hear the suggestions before. You are certainly good. I'm going to suggest this also. It's sitting, examining. Hiring someone trained in mental care to help guide some of our more problematic council members. I think that would benefit. In fact, if we had that long ago, we wouldn't have the problems that we have now. So if you're going to do this, let's go all the way and get some mental help for. Particularly the councilperson from the second district. And. Also. I'll hold it at that for the time. Well, with the exception also, of course, of the mayor. You know, he's facing the prison sentence he's going to be facing. He's going to need some mental health. Thank you. Thank you. Also, Madam Clerk, I know we have over ten speakers who goes down to thank you. Our next speaker. Stephanie. Awesome. So Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach branch coming here in support of the strong support of this item. This is an issue of an excess of accessibility and public access to that. You had two public meetings. I believe $3,000 is the least amount of money that you could possibly delegate to this, especially given the importance of making sure that families were represented at these meetings. We here at our organization, we prepared childcare at every single meeting because we believed that having our children there is accessible and required part of making sure the democratic process. Whatever is necessary to make sure that this goes through. I think that you should be pursuing this because this is a basic issue of small business, small D democracy. Thank you and have a good day. Thank you very much, Marcella Rivera. There's two of us and one hiding. Hello. Good evening. I'm Maricela de Rivera, ninth District resident, the co-founder and director of. Long Beach Breastfeeds and a city commissioner. And I am so very grateful. To. To Council Member Pearce. A council member Turanga and my council. Member Rex Richardson for bringing this forward. I have tried to model much as my grandparents did for us and then my parents civic engagement. For my wild. Non whispering children. I think it's really important that all people in our society are welcomed and included and whether that is very young children, very old people, people with different abilities, physical, cognitive and different languages. Just everything that I've seen today in this meeting is why I love Long Beach and I'm really excited about this program. I know that running a group that hovers around a thousand local Long Beach women breastfeeding and raising children in the city, I can say that civic engagement is something that everybody's really interested in and this is going to help. And I really, really appreciate you and your inclusion. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Online. Menominee Escamilla Damaso Will Ecuadoran Literature Mosul's Ninos Emmanuel Aliquippa The Little Rascal steps into Long Beach in the stars central on this green damask with the ninos and Moses into personas Jesus familias but active within this Trojan that has gone important information and assume that much of the rest is going to Thomas and Maestros Miembros con opportunities this devil Garcia como estas sin embargo Lauren Jonas and us you that much are the basis on the sleeveless especialmente paper the los ninos same kids then después this better than the ample yet aguado personas maintain I must neto's eyes that on newness experimental quando a use opponent in courtesy Gonzalez Perla tanto no thursday releases a working la that is that Armando and Gwen tell as much as moreira's game for intent los padres yellow squee the daughters can look irritable ga versus familias carousel caressed appaloosa is baroque proportion then with other the ninos la proxima is giving grass is this is. Thank you. Hello. My name is Carmen. The Muscle, a grandmother and caregiver to three beautiful children and a member of Best our central languages leadership team best, our central Long Beach. We provide childcare to over 60 individuals and their families so that they are able to develop their leadership and connect to important resources and information in the city. Oftentimes we connect our members to advocacy opportunities such as these. However, city meetings are often inaccessible, especially because children get restless after waiting for so long. I've personally brought my two grandchildren with me to these meetings and have experienced what it is like for them to get restless and tired. So we were happy to hear that the city has taken into account the many barriers parents and caregivers face when trying to advocate for their families and looking into providing child care. Thank you for this policy and I hope to have childcare provided the next time I come. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Lilia Campo, and I want to thank Councilwoman Jeanine Pirro, Jeanine Pirro and Robert Otunga in some form for bringing that item forth, because it is always better when we come and talk to you to know that our kids, we're going to have we're going to be in a place where they're not going to be like call or they're going to have a place where to play and to sit or to lay down if they feel, I hope, because right now my kids were with somebody that it was taking care of thing. But since you guys closed that outside and it's kind of cold, so I will really appreciate if you use your support for this item and. That will help to get more public anger and civic engagement. And that's it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Our next five speakers, Andrew Manzano, Maria Lopez, Jeremiah Roseboro and town and city to really please come forward in that order. Andrew Manzano, Maria Lopez, Jeremiah Roseboro. And Town and city really. Hello. My name is Andrew Montano with Long Beach Forward supporting the best central Long Beach Initiative. We would like to extend our thanks to the council members who sponsored this item. I remember last year in October, we brought parents out to support the LBC strategic plan, and many of the parents had to leave because their children were extremely tired. It's important we move all. It's important we remove all barriers to participation, whether it's language, access or child care. And when these barriers aren't removed, we are only allowing a certain demographic to be civically engaged. There is language in the agenda item that states all family related issues be put to the front of the agenda . I would like to highlight that issues around housing, immigration, environment and so much more are intersected with family issues. So lastly, thank you all for providing this item and I look forward to more parents turning out in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. I'm sorry. I'm looking at the wrong list. I'm really Lopez. Good evening. My name is Maria Lopez. I'm the director. Of Community Organizing for Housing, Long Beach and the Long Beach Tenants Union. I'm also a very proud daughter of a single mother who worked really hard to give us food on our plate. Our shelter, pretty much our means to live and sadly was unable to be active in my school, was unable to be active even in my soccer games. And so when we talk about the work that we do in organizing, everything is centered on families. Everything is centered on the ability to bring the most vulnerable families that are struggling, complex situations, to bring truth and power to their stories. But they are unable to do that because we lack affordable childcare and accessible childcare and meetings like these. Right. It is important that if we center families in our policies, we also center them in the actions that we take on a daily basis, like meetings like this. Right. And so I really applaud the fact that we're taking on consideration starting a pilot program. Thank you, Janine, for the money. It shows a lot of pretty much proactive ness from your district and from yourself. And so I would encourage that from everybody else. And also realizing that family issues are interconnected. Like Andrew said, we have complex families and we're trying to have complex dialogs to be able to best serve them. So thank you today for your time. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Jeremiah how you doing, mayor? City council. How y'all doing? Most y'all know me. I'm a single parent. And in order for me to be in the in the room, in order for me some decision to be made, I have to be here. And I can't be here if I have to watch my child and we have to sit here for 2 hours. She gets restless, tired, sleepy, wants can be run around, can't make noise, can't do nothing. So therefore, I have to leave. Most of you guys who have kids, you know this. So this is this is a lot of a lot of common sense. So let's just put it all together, you know? So I'm trying to raise my two daughters and also trying to be civically involved in some of the decisions is being made that affects us. So I can't be in here being here. Listen to the beautiful mayor and the city council with these rules and regulations that I have to listen to and be a part of and watch my daughter at the same time. So let's use our common sense. Ladies and gentlemen, peace and love. Thank you. Thank you, Jeremiah. And tell. Good evening. I'm in. Hello. My name is. I'm told that I'm falling asleep at the mamba out of my state of central language. And at a rate the body body over in a healing center and then at least rewarded and wanted for posterity. Avenue, Long Beach, California. Nice little Israel 4 a.m.. The murder of the four children I hope is in danger. The City Council so many time when advocated with no Jew see, or when it was Cambodian genocide. I remember day I had taking my son with me to meeting with a different group and always the childcare. I think Turkey is a city council is important for family that to come and help the dear boy had to the this meeting sometime sometime when we come to the meeting there is no one to take care of them at home and then how to bring down is we want to parent to be and getting engagement with the city. We need to have the family especially when children get boring. Please provide childcare at the city council and under city meeting. Thank you. Thank you. So truly. Well, good evening, Mayor. And good evening, all the city council members. My name's Atari. I live here and work here in central Long Beach. The reason I'm here tonight is trying to advocate for parents that lack of childcare. Say, example, like in the city council, we need a childcare service provider for the woman that family that attend city council meetings. Because I work in the community, I often seen moms and families that they are pressing about the issues and they want to attend the city council, city council to address the issues, but they cannot be here. So working in the community, I often hear a lot of story and also lack of childcare. Service provider to a woman who just having children and want to go back to work of woman who are on public service and want to go back to work. So this very important not just for the city council meeting and also for across the board, across the city in any meeting so that the city can provide childcare. Please. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Councilman Austin. Actually, Councilman, let me let me go back to Councilwoman Mongo because she had the floor when we went to public comment. So, Councilman Monroe. Thank you. A couple of things. I'm a huge supporter of childcare. I actually worked in childcare. I want to take a first. Moment to think. But fell out of language. Breastfeeds. I'm a member of Lemmy's Breastfeeds. I read the stories sometimes at 3:00 in the morning when I'm breastfeeding. I'm also a pumping mom, so I often leave from here and go in the back. I want to thank acting city manager Mr. Modica, who, when we moved into the new building, quickly recognized there wasn't a breastfeeding option on this floor and made one available to me in the back immediately. And so I really want to appreciate that childcare is important. The logistics of what we talk about and what we decide to go forward with is also very important. I heard a couple of comments related to. Low income families. We have lots of resources available. And if the the child care provided is child care, not child watch, there's funding available. And so the types of questions that I'm asking aren't to be critical of the program, but more from my background and experience in working in licensed child care, starting a licensed child care site from nothing, and working through the CHC and again and all the different programs that are available, I think it's important that we be sure to leverage as much funding as is possible. To keep a program like. This going on an ongoing basis because $3,000 couldn't run my sight for a month. And so I recognize that this is just at night and that's great, but I see a bigger long term. I know that when we were building the Civic Center, I was approached by a couple of different licensed childcare facilities and asked what the vision was, was their space set aside and all of those things, what rent would look like, and those aren't within our purview. We handed that off to economic development. But as a mom and as a daughter of a single mother, I've been to a many, many meetings like this. And I think that child care is important, but we just have to make sure that we're using the right words and creating the correct expectation, because what I also am concerned about is the expectation that $3,000 is going to go very far. I think that it's also important for us as a council to look at ways for you to engage and be a part of the meeting very actively without sitting here for 5 hours. And so we need to think about that, too, whether it's Facebook Live or we have public comment, you can submit in advance. But what does that look like and is it engaging? Because oftentimes it's not. And so I think it's a whole a whole picture. So I'm supportive of this item and I look forward to hearing more about it. But I also recognize that. $3,000 might not go very far. And we need to think long term about what our options are in partnering. And so I'd be really interested in partnering with a licensed childcare organization or your child watch program like they have in a lot of our fitness facilities. But but also recognizing that there are programs that will pay for part of it. And so if there is a quote unquote fee for service, there are agencies and entities that will pay for that for them. And so to make sure we know what that is. So thank you. Councilman Austin. Thank you. Thank you. And I appreciate the public comment. I think I also appreciate the the impetus of this item. And, you know, many of you may or may not know my my wife was a staffer here at City Hall for many years. And my kids literally grew up in the old city hall in the back or in the offices while while she was working and I was working. And so the for for city employees, but also for folks going to public to participate, child care is always a consideration. I do agree that the $3,000 is a is generous from the second council district with priority budget. But at the same time I think it's grossly underestimating the cost of what this world will will be. And this is a pilot. So we certainly hope that, you know, we will learn throughout the process. I'm supportive of the item and will support it because I think it merits at least a study to look at the possibilities. But. In my my day job. I also have the opportunity to to work with a licensing program, analysts who who license child care facilities, who inspect child care facilities on a daily basis. These individuals are in and out of homes of providers. And it's not just the provider that it needs to be licensed is the facility that needs to be licensed. And so certainly I expect city management to do their due diligence right and contact the appropriate state agencies and get the right licenses to do this, because it's not as easy as just, hey, you know, there's a room and, you know, and a babysitter to go watch your children. There are liabilities that come with that. And the facility has to be completely up to code four four to protect the safety, obviously, of the kids. And then the the other piece of it is also, do we have any ideal and I'm certainly I'm sure that we don't have of how many. Children or what will be the capacity of such a program? You know, this could it could be three kids. It could be 50 kids. And I think those numbers really make a difference with the licensing agency. So just my thoughts, I'll support this item. I think it's a it's innovative. It's something that, you know, as I see a few children out in the audience today, it will bring more relief to parents who are engaged in the city process. But it does have, I think, some challenges that we need to get some answers to. Thanks. Thank you. I'd like to call on Councilman Pearce. Yes, thank you. So perhaps me talking while there are about 50 people leaving the room made it a little distracting in the beginning. So let me clarify some of the questions for folks. The $3,000 was based on many conversations with the Los Angeles Education Partnership Group that works with Long Beach Forward and often provides child care services to many of those that are in the audience today. That was based on an estimate of 10 hours a month. Now we know that there might be months that we go over. We also know there are months that we never use child care. And so it was based on 10 hours a month. And it is done as a pilot with the idea that we are going to ask them to make sure they share with us all the signs and information. And we've identified the areas that we would like them to to track so that we can say this is what a real program would look like, and that if we get an assessment, you know, that that $3,000 has been used in six months or we're getting a a flag of that, then we can make some adjustments and we can bring something sooner to the council. While this item is just for providing child care during meetings in this chamber, obviously I think all of us would love to see some child care facilities closer in downtown. We've only really had one down here. Most of us have kids and know how expensive that is and that none of those are open at night. And so this is just a quick item to get the ball rolling so that we can start doing that work. There's a lot more work that we can do to make sure families are involved in council meetings. And absolutely, I know many of you guys watch at home, but there are some items like whether it's it's reflow or something like that. You want to be here and you want to be present, but know that this item we did work on, we do have a group that's going to provide that. It's not required to go to an RFP because it's only 3000. That way we could get a pilot program up and running quickly. And again, we did have many conversations with city staff as well as a Los Angeles Education Partnership Group. So I think that that answers those questions. I do want to also point out it is child care. I thought also it would be child watch based on the group and the certifications that they have. It is child care. They do bring everything that they need to the city to be able to entertain those kids and engage them. I'm so sorry that I didn't do a PowerPoint or make it more clear in the beginning, but I'm really excited about this program. I'm excited to put forward some of those funds for this. And Mr. Good, you I never respond to you, but my mental health is tiptop because I have great health insurance here. And I, I go see my therapist every two weeks on Saturday morning. So thank you for your care and consideration every single meeting. Really appreciate it. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I want to just comment in support of this item. You know, child care, child watch, whatever it is, it's expensive. I represent a district among the youngest districts in the city, and it's working families, people, they go to work. They want to be engaged in their city, in their in their government, in the decisions that impact their their lives. As we're here making decisions that then do impact their lives. And we have to think about the barriers that keeps people from being engaged in the decision making process. And it's unfortunate that we have to think about children as as as a barrier. But the reality is, you know, babysitters you know, babysitters are expensive and you don't trust, you know, everyone with your children. I don't. We don't. And, you know, not everyone has grandparents, things like that to count on. So if it's important to us as a city that folks have an opportunity to come down, if an issue truly is important to them that we have that service to offer, I think we have to go through the process of exploring it. You know, I agree 3000 is this is certainly going to cost more, but I don't want to sneeze at the fact that a councilperson said, look, you know, we're we're coming up with 3000 as a start. If we find out this costs more, we want to explore what that looks like. So I acknowledge that. Councilwoman, I appreciate you offering $3,000 of your one time district priority funds for this issue. I've seen we've done that on Kiva. We've done a number different programs is an important program. And I'd like to know if if the pilot requires more money so that we can we can talk about that in general . Again, child care is incredibly expensive in general. And I think it's just sort of a standard that we need to we need to begin to think about providing as we as we engage with the public. This is just the cost ultimately of cost of doing business. I don't know that it needs to happen at every council meeting we may need to look at. Sometimes we you can it might be a by request kind of situation. We've done that with language access and other things. We've piloted different things and we're in the new building. We talked council on Mungo mentioned this and I mentioned this to Tom, our city manager earlier. We talked about a child care facility and in conjunction with with the building. So we have been talking about this. And the response was we can explore potentially in the middle block a potential child care tenant there. You know, that may be a few years out. That might make it a bit easier if there's a facility on site that maybe we can contract on Tuesdays to stay open. But in the meantime, I think this is something that we can figure out. It's completely doable. I'm optimistic about this and staff and I want to see you be creative and figure out a way to make this happen. And I don't you know, it will be expensive, but probably not as expensive as as it won't be a number that will be incredibly scary to the city council. All right, thanks a lot. Catherine Tauranga. Thank you. During the interim of May 2nd in emotion and to now I checked with my chief of staff and our budget. Would you be accepting another 3000 for the CD? Seven? Absolutely. Thank you for your positive. Please amend the motion to include another 3000 word Kd7. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Mongo. So just to know next steps. So there's $6,000. Is there going to be a memo coming back to answer? Specifics for us or because there wasn't a contract attached, it was a pilot. Do we have a contract? So we were asking this to be a pilot program with direction to the city manager to be able to to put some of those in to get some of that input from the council on the details and put it together. So we need to understand the insurance. We need to understand whether this was child care versus child watch. We obviously want somebody a qualified and be licensed. The group that was identified is one that we are becoming familiar with that that they do some of this programing. And in fact, workforce development has been looking at using some of them through their federal grant. So we are taking all this information. We would come back with a report and do that research. How many events or how many? How long do we think this is going to last? What's it going to cost? And then we would come back with either a contract or. A purchase order. Thank you. And thank you for mentioning workforce development because they do have funding available for child care. And I'm glad we're going to use that. Thank you. We're going to vote, but we're back. So, Councilman Richardson. I'm not about to offer another three K. Just more comments. So you guys know, separate question about this, folks that I was probably queuing up for. I want to see the pilot kind of get there. But I was going to say, don't we have public agencies that do this within the city? Public entities? So the ones that I'm familiar with is mostly the workforce development. So there and they're starting that process. We do have, you know, if you come into a drop in center or something like that in. A parks, but those those tend to be at parks, you know, very specific. We don't really do it just for public meetings and stuff. So this is a space that we're getting more familiar with. And the council has been asking us about this. So we're going to do the research and let you know what we can do. Okay. Yeah, I just think it would be good if there's already something working that we can deploy here, figure out some economies of scale or cost savings to make it happen. I think it's probably the best, best way to go about it. Thanks a lot. And that partnership with Workforce. Thank you very much for that immersive discussion. Caster votes. Councilmember Pearce comes from member Price. Motion carries. Thank you, James, Nino, Larry Goodhue, Stella, Miguel, Ines and only winter them here. Please come forward. And that order. Is James. Nina here? Please come forward. Yes, go ahead, sir. Can I just set this down right here? Sure.

Proclamation Declaring June 2019 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month and June 15, 2019 as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. (City Manager 2110)

AlamedaCC_06182019_2019-6701

So we do have an a proclamation because this is Elder Abuse Awareness Month. And hello, I think I have some folks here from District Attorney's Office and. Protective Services. And Adult Protective Services. So if you would like to come up to the podium, I'm going to read the proclamation and then you can make some brief remarks if you would like. But once you come out of it, go ahead and tell us your names. My name is Dina, and I'm an elder abuse specialist with the district attorney's office. My name is Vincent Gordon, and I'm a supervisor with Alameda County Adult Protective Services. Thank you. Thank you for being here and for the work that you do. So this is our proclamation. Whereas the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that the largest growing age group in the country are people 65 and over, and that as of July 2018, more than 11,000 Alameda residents are 65 or over. And. Whereas, elder abuse occurs among men and women of diverse educational, ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds who have been victimized by strangers and or by persons they know who may occupy a position of trust, including family members, friends, neighbors, and others with whom the elder interacts, and that elder abuse can be physical, emotional and or financial. And. WHEREAS, the Alameda County District Attorney's Office, through its elder protection unit and Victim Witness Division, provides a network of services to elders in danger of becoming or who have become victims of abuse. These services include community workshops to promote crime prevention awareness, helping elders access services, working with the Alameda Police Department and other professionals, and prosecuting cases of elder abuse and neglect. And. WHEREAS, The Mastic Senior Center provides a comprehensive array of services as well as recreational and social programs to meet the needs of our elder population, enhance their quality of life, and help them remain active, healthy, independent and safe. And. Whereas, The City of Alameda recognizes that the awareness of elder abuse and neglect, including reporting instances of suspected elder abuse and neglect, helps keep our elders and our community safe. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Marilyn, as the Ashcraft mayor of the City of Alameda, hereby proclaim June 2019 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month and June 15, 2019 as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day in the City of Alameda, and encourage all residents to recognize elders as valuable members of our community who have the right to live safely and securely in. Our city. And with that, we thank you for all that you do. And why don't you tell us a few words about that? Thank you very much. Your Honor, council members, I've received humbly and happily received the proclamation from Alameda City Council. I think about four years now, and I always vie to be the one to come here because I am from Alameda and I'm very proud of our city. I read on our Facebook, your Facebook, that there are now changing tables in the men's bathrooms and. I smell yours. I almost bust in there. I wanted to see one. So thank you for that. And my husband, who is a grandfather and who takes kids to the movies and out and about, thanks you as well. So I would like to say that The New York Times has designated financial elder abuse as the crime of the 21st century , and it is the majority of the cases we work on. They aren't as splashy and exciting as the unfortunately the murders and rapes and assaults that we also have worked with elder victims with. But the financial fraud is devastating and it is really impacts elders and the future and they're their last years to go out with this pain is really a traumatic and horrible thing. And I'd like to thank our partners who will speak at a moment. Adult Protective Services, Alameda Police Department, who I couldn't be I couldn't be prouder of, and our fire department as well, who also are at our beck and call when we have an elder who has fallen or needs help. So thank you very much. Thank you for your kind words. And may we hear from you. And you might want to raise that microphone up. Hello? Yeah. So my name is Vincent Gordon from Alameda County Adult Protective Services. It's my first time here. Thank you for having me. And I want to thank you, Mayor Ashcroft, city council members and residents of Alameda for this proclamation in honor of June, which, as you point out, is Elder Abuse Awareness Month and June 15th, which was the World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Adult Protective Services. And the district attorney's office are honored to be here to bring attention to elder and dependent adult abuse prevention and to be recognized today by your council. Throughout the year, APS actively combats elder and dependent adult abuse by providing services to our at risk clients and through our efforts at the county and state level to identify additional resources to aid in this fight. The month of June is particularly important because we highlight our efforts and bring attention to this fight by organizing events to bring awareness on a daily basis. This evening, I'd like to share just a few of those events with you. We've launched an AC transit campaign and shopping center ad campaign, so keep your eye out. When you're riding AC Transit and when shopping in the community, you'll see the big billboards that say trust but verify is the slogan that we're using. We've also expanded our Baat advertising campaign this year throughout our with our partnership with AC Transit and Contra Costa, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties. We are airing our APS commercials throughout the month and we'll have a social media presence working with partner agencies to tweet and post about elder abuse awareness. We have swag bags to giveaway throughout the county with the goal of working with our partners to become ambassadors and raising awareness. And lastly, we will continue to receive proclamations from many of the individual city councils across the county and from the Board of Supervisors in recognition of this important month. As you well know, support of our city governments is paramount to elder and dependent adult abuse. And we greatly appreciate your support not only in June, but throughout the year. So thank you very much for having us. Thank you. And then we can present the proclamation. Well. See you, house. Oh, yeah. There is a. Protection. Oh, thank you, Your Honor. Between the two of you. And then you're going to have to get a second certificate, actually. Yeah. Are you done? Thank you. It's hard work. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Council members. You. But. Okay. We drop a leaf, which means. You know, the issue of adult financial abuse hit home, not literally home, but a close friend of mine. And, oh, this is we're getting Julia back on the line. Her father is 90 years old, but very, you know, lives on his own. And he's very alert, except that he heard from someone, I think, either by phone or email, telling him that his grandson was in danger and in trouble and he needed $40,000. And this gentleman sent $40,000 in cash to envelopes. And then he was told not to say anything because that could further endanger his grandson. And, of course, eventually the family found out the grandson feels terrible and guilty, not that he had anything to do with it, but it's just there's so many different vulnerabilities that go into being a seniors. So for all of us listening, you know, if you see or perceive something suspicious or or look out for those vulnerable, lonely seniors, it can make a difference. Anyway, thank you so much for all that you do. And now we're going to oral communications. This is a time when a limited number of speakers can address the Council on Items, not on the agenda. We take 15 minutes for oral communications now and then any that weren't heard from will be heard at the end of our meeting. Do we have speaker slips? We have no. Speak. We have no speakers that. So before we go on to the consent calendar, I'm going to call on the voice vice mayor to make a comment or two.

Adoption of an Urgency Uncodified Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Alameda (A) Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to Civil Unrest; (B) Ratifying the City Manager’s Decision to Order a Curfew on June 1 and 2, 2020 (Ending at 5 a.m. on June 3); (C) Provide Direction Extending, Modifying, or Discontinuing the Curfew; and (D) Authorize Staff to Take Further Action to Implement This Declaration. (City Manager 2110)

AlamedaCC_06022020_2020-8038

Adoption of an urgency and kind of fide ordinance of the City Council of the City of Alameda, declaring the existence of a local emergency in response to civil unrest. Ratifying the city manager's decision to order curfew on June 1st and second 2020, ending at 5 a.m. on June 3rd. Provide direction extending, modifying or discontinuing the curfew and authorize staff to take further action to implement this declaration. Thank you. And so this item is being presented by let's see. Sorry, it's the city attorney, is that correct? It'll be me, Mayor. This is. Okay. Oh. Assistant City Manager Jerry Bowden. Yeah. Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft. Thank you very much. Members of council. Everyone can hear me. Okay? Yes. Okay. Great. Perfect. So, my name is Jerry Bowden, assistant city manager and staff recommended recommendation tonight as as the mayor just mentioned, is related to civil unrest in Alameda County and locally since the tragic and unfortunate death of Mr. George Floyd in Minnesota on the 25th of May, as we've seen, in addition to the many lawful and peaceful protests, there have been events and gatherings that have turned violent, resulting in injuries, death and significant damage to and loss of property. Tonight's staff recommendation includes four parts. First, to address the unique local public safety and related demands and better position the city for the possibility of recuperating funds associated with our response. Staff is recommending that the City Council declare a local emergency related to civil unrest. This action does require a 4/5 vote and we sincerely hope that the need for this is short lived. Second, consistent with the city, charter staff is recommending that council ratify the city manager's decision to order a curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. on June 1st and second, ending at 5 a.m. tomorrow morning, June 3rd. And third staff is seeking Council's direction regarding extending, modifying or discontinuing the city of Alameda curfew. For context, I'll note that some communities are taking this decision to have a curfew day by day in the area, and others like neighboring San Leandro have a curfew in effect until the morning of June eight unless it's decided that it should be lifted earlier. And as you all know, the county has implemented a curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. until the morning of June 5th if the city's curfew is extended, if that is what council decides to do. We have seen correspondents today asking for a little more flexibility with respect to the allowed activities, including volunteers helping homeless individuals or elder elderly population in the community that needs that help. The request is that they are also exempt from the curfew or given flexibility and council may wish to consider that or provide staff with direction. And should that be the direction the council goes? The fourth and final part of this recommendation is to authorize staff to take further action necessary to implement the declaration related to civil unrest should that become necessary. And an example of that might be if there's a decision to not continue the curfew today and and ultimately in a few days it becomes necessary. Then staff would go ahead and do some take that action if if that was deemed necessary. So that concludes staff's very brief presentation on this topic, and we're available for any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bowden. Council and anybody any other staff, some city attorney or city manager want to weigh in on what was just said. City Manager Eric Levitt. Fat man, mayor and City Council. I'll just add that this is a difficult issue because I think any time you restrict people's rights, it's a very serious issue you need to look at very carefully or even in doing it for the last two days. Yesterday and today, I took very seriously their discussions over the weekend and I felt that it shouldn't happen. But yesterday, especially with neighboring cities doing it, I felt that was the appropriate thing to do. So I would ask that anything we do that we we try to keep it as narrow as possible in a decision and not take it out too long. Thank you, Mr. Levitt. Council comments are city attorney. Mr. Shen, did you want to comment? Sorry. Not at all. Other than to say that I reviewed the legality of the city manager's declaration and find it to be fully compliant with all applicable laws. And I'm happy to answer any questions that the Council has. Thank you. Okay. I see Councilmember Desai with his hand up. Quick question. We had a nice email come in from a resident named Susan Rios who asks how many residents are working from home and can only shop after 8 p.m.? What should we do? Which what would what do we say to Mr. Rios and others who are like her? Well, staff can certainly respond, but my understanding is businesses are covered by this curfew as well. Is that correct, Mr. Shin? Yes, that is correct. And so I don't believe that stores would be open after. Okay. Okay. That's the answer, then. Yeah. And again, the curfew these two nights last night and tonight, 8 p.m. to 5 a.m.. So, um. Okay. Councilmember o.T. Thank you. I mean, I guess my question is just hypothetically, say hours expires at 5 a.m. tomorrow and we're still under the county. I mean, just the interplay of that and what happens or what happens tomorrow night if we don't have a curfew and the county has one? Okay. City. City attorney Mr. Kane, I know you emailed us about this, but do you want to share with the public? Sure. At this moment, unless the county order changes or a judicial decision is issued, altering that order, the county order purports to apply to all incorporated cities and unincorporated county areas. So as of this moment, our understanding is that that order would apply within the city of Alameda. And therefore, based on the text of that order as it exists today, it would apply. So an ATM curfew would still remain in effect even if the council discontinues our local curfew. And then if that happens, I mean, right now, our city manager is, you know, our emergency director, if I remember correctly, going to our emergency plan . And, you know, our police department reports up to him. I mean, would that change at all if we didn't have a curfew and suddenly it was just the county one, which I don't want to get into legal argument here. I still think we have some sovereignty issues. But regardless, I mean, how would that work? I mean, what are we would we be forfeiting our city manager's authority and our police chief's authority? No. The city manager remains the director of emergency services. With respect to the enforcement of the county's order, any California peace officer could enforce it anywhere within the county. And so law enforcement decisions within cities are made by the police chief. And so the police chief would have discretion in how he wants to deploy his resources and undertake enforcement. I believe he may even be in the audience and may be able to answer further questions in this regard. And additionally, obviously, county sheriffs, to the extent that they are operating within the city of Alameda, for example, pursuant to mutual aid, they would also enforce that they would have the authority to enforce the county's order. And do we know is is the police chief on hand to answer any questions? I don't know that. But. Okay. Who else? Council. Is a merely a council member of the Surrey. My question is, and I don't think we're the only city grappling with the two questions raised by Councilmember Odie is if there are other cities that are challenging the authority of the county ordinance. Or. Where does that leave us? That's part one. And part two is. You know. But I understand the law that was was cited or the decision that was cited. But is I guess my concern is the overall enforcement of this and how we would go about actually enforcing a county ordinance. If if, if the word gets out that we don't continue our curfew and people are confused about what's going on. And, you know, like Magic Police Chief Porter Larry just appeared on the screen and have these magical powers. So, Chief, for Larry, if you'd like to meet you, unmute yourself and answer. If you're able to answer the question posed by Councilmember Vela about how does it how does enforcement of a county or two right now we are under both our city's order, but also the counties. And so if the this went on and the city didn't choose to extend until Friday morning, when the county order will be rescinded, if not sooner, how does enforcement work? Chief for Larry. Drew. Thank you for having me on. I. My understanding of the county order is that much like the health department order for the COVID crisis, that the more restrictive order would would rule the day. I was on the phone with the business leaders earlier, and I understand the inconveniences, but we also have a fairly significant public safety concern that's happening right now with not the peaceful protest, but with some of the looting and the burglaries that have been happening, including here in town. So my my stance would be that we would be operating I would be operating the police department under the county order. If the council did not extend the local order, I would I would intend to to follow the county order until its expiration, which I believe is June 5th. 5 a.m. just I think. Yeah. Okay, Counsel. Anyone else want to want to weigh in? So I have a question. I think it was discussed in the staff report that we could delegate to staff. I think the city manager, the police chief, probably conferring with the city attorney and I would include the assistant city manager as to this. Well, what the police chief said, I agree with if the county's order is continuing, the county's order is continuing. But if for some reason, the county says, you know, things are looking pretty good almost everywhere and rescinds the county order, we could still defer to staff to say, okay, what was the situation in Alameda last night ? And, you know, moving forward, what do we think is the best course of action? So is that is that a possible approach? I'm seeing the city attorney nodding. You want to weigh in, Mr. Chan? Sure, Mr. Mayor. The council could give direction tonight to authorize staff to take actions necessary to further the declaration of the local emergency. If the council chooses to do so and give direction for the staff to work together to implement it and to report back to the council, which I believe is consistent with what you've indicated. Councilmember Avella. I wanted to go back to my question about if there are cities within Alameda County don't or challenge the county order. Is that something that our staff is going to be following up on and the implications of that? The case law that was cited was, what, 40 years old or something like that? And so maybe I'll start and I'll turn it over to the chief. To the extent he has additional information, my understanding is that I'm not aware of any city that has that is preparing to file a legal challenge, though any moment could change. I understand that there are certain cities, certain elections, elected officials from certain cities have taken the position that does not apply or it may not apply to certain jurisdictions. And we are certainly following each of that closely. And the city attorney for the city of Alameda, for the county of Alameda have requested an additional conversation with the county council to have continuing dialog on this topic. And we've not received a confirmation that that conversation will happen. So we we at in your city attorney's office will continue to follow this on all fronts. And did I know if another councilmember wants to weigh in now, I would be interested in hearing from the chief. What you were hearing from the business community. But I see the vice mayor's hands went up as I was speaking. Do you want to go next to vice mayor? Sure. Thank you. So I think this is I think we're in an awkward position right now. I so I would like to thank the city manager and the police chief for making the decision you made yesterday. I believe on the information that we had at the time that this decision was made, it was probably the right decision . I have struggled very mightily to figure out what I would do had the question come before. Should we do it again tonight? I think at 45 minutes before it's about to kick in, it's whether we decide it's not a curfew or not, I think is go communications. Why? It's problematic. But I'm not confident that I now that we know where things went yesterday and where things have been today. And, you know, with hindsight, whether or not we would have continued this. I am extremely uncomfortable with the county sheriff implementing something at a county level with very little input for such a long period. And I understand I'm going to guess that it goes through Friday morning, because there are some significant concerns around unrest on Thursday following the memorial service for Mr. Floyd in Minneapolis. If we were to move forward tonight, what I would like is some sort of reporting about any police action in Alameda related to the curfew tomorrow morning . I'm not expecting any. But if there are any, I would like to I would like to have some sort of report back. I feel that this is a very significant act that we have taken on, and I want to treat it as as that. Similarly, I would be willing to support providing. Mr. Vice Mayor, I mean, forgive me, all of you. I quickly texted the city clerk to ask if we had public comment. And we do. And so before we get and this is I guess there are shortcomings to a virtual meeting, because if we were in chambers, she would be hissing or, you know, they'd be sending a note to me. So I will reserve my comments. Thank you, sir. Just hold your thoughts. But unless someone else has clarifying questions about the report, I would request that we hear from the public on public comments. Does anybody have any clarifying questions they wanted to put in first? Councilmember Vella And then if I know we're being asked to adopt the emergency declaration, there's the second question, which is about what we do with the curfew. Could we adopt the emergency declaration and not continue the curfew? And then what would that look like and how long would the emergency declaration be in effect? If you could just clarify that. Yes. That's. Yes, Mr. City attorney, please. Yes. If the council chooses to adopt the emergency declaration, it currently does not contain an end date. The council could either set an end date right now or allow staff to bring you back when staff recommends an end date. With respect to your second question, if you adopt the emergency declaration and direct staff to discontinue the curfew, it would just it would be discontinued. And then the council would have to make a decision on whether to allow staff to reinstitute a curfew in the future if facts warrants or to direct staff to not institute a curfew in all circumstances. Those are decisions that the council could make, either give staff the direction or give clear direction one way or the other. And our city manager, Eric Levitt. And I would recommend that at the longest period for a declaration of emergency for this particular event would be through June 16th would be the absolute longest I would do and I would but I'm not staying for the curfew. I'm just saying. For the declaration of emergency. Okay. And any particular reason why that particular date, Mr. LEVITT? Because that's the next city council meeting had it. All right, then. Okay. Without it, there's no further clarifying questions. Um, the let's. City Clerk, will you please introduce the public comments or call on the public speakers? Yes. So if anybody present via Zoom would like to comment on this item, which is the curfew matter, please raise your hand now. Okay. We have three people who wish to publicly address you. And then I had three comments to read. So everybody will still get 3 minutes. Perfect. All right, who's first ready? She will promote you and you can speak. Good evening. Can you guys hear me? Yeah. Thank you. Hi. My name's Diana. I'm a registered nurse here in L.A.. Is it Mr. Singh or is it Diana? It's both of us. I'm with. I'm with him. Well. You got it. One person got it. Okay. I didn't want your need from me to be so distant. That sends its regards to you guys to arrive late. We're going to. Take. A look inside. I promise. Yeah, I guess we're 8:00, but. But I'm so sorry. Call. We are. I remember the surfers here in the Bay Area, and I'm very concerned about the mental health of our guardians, our police officers during all of this. And. And I have friends that have cuts that are partners and husbands. And, you know, it's really, really tough. But I'm just wondering what is being done to address the mental health with with these officers. And because in the here has actually we've recently featured in the area news we're launching a six week long series about as a police department last year which ran over six weeks and they brought that run the mindfulness and just know you know just. It really it really helped the officers it was like really, really simple easy stuff to do that helped them with their sleep to help them with their. I've been sober for 99. Please forgive me for the interruption. I think you might not have realized that this is specifically to communicate comments about the emergency declaration and issuing a curfew right now. However, I love what you're talking about. And if you could possibly hang on when we finish the special meeting, we are going to move into our regular meeting. And there is an item, oral communications for speakers who want to speak about an item not on the agenda. Okay. We'll get to that shortly. Can can you hold on? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Apologies on. That. No worries. It's a little confusing when we're virtual like this, but thank you so much. All right. Um. Okay, Madam Clerk. Okay, now we have. Elizabeth Douglas. Hi there. Good evening, Miss Douglas. Thank you. In terms of the curfew, I just I don't know if you have enough data to make a decision on the curfew. It seems it seems like what I've heard so far, it says that there's nothing. No concern. From the protesters, but there are concerns about looting and burglaries. But I have no hard numbers to here. I don't know if it's correlated to. Two as a result of the protests that are going on. I just I really don't think that there's enough data. And I would be. Hesitant. To make any decisions or I implore you to be hesitant about making decisions without. Data to back it up. So I'm not in support of extending that curfew. Thank you, Mr. Douglas. Thank you. Our next speaker. Josh, he's being promoted now. Good evening. Oh, he's still muted. Mr. Ryan is. You know. Can you hear me now? Yes, yes, yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening. I'll just read a brief statement I prepared. I'd like to register my disapproval for extending or creating any curfew in Alameda. This measure is a failure of imagination and only supports those that would drive our communities apart. As a new homeowner now, I feel more of a threat to my young family by the powers this gives the police than in the promise of safety. Simply put, there is no basis of fact for any emergency in the city. Furthermore, curfews only create confrontation, not de-escalation. Other local and national police forces have used this crisis as an opportunity to brutalize protesters in feeble attempts to justify their outsized budgets. By adopting curfews, this city effectively endorses that brutalization. This measure is a direct attack on government and police accountability. We should be encouraging our neighbors to come together as a community and heal and be a model for what this town can be. Instead, this motion for mass panic and further drives the already loaded reputation of Alameda as a place where people of color are unwelcome. We can be better. We must be better. We should be. Instead of voting to defund and demilitarize the police department and find better means of preventing crime and keeping our community safe. Thanks very much. Have a good evening. Thank you. And our next speaker. I think that was it for Zoom speakers. And now I will read two comments and take. The first is from Linda Asbury, executive director of West Alameda Business Association. Representing the West telling me to Business Association, please consider the curfew for the city of Alameda to reflect the curfew of Alameda County through June 5th. If necessary, this can be rescinded at any time. Thank you for your consideration. And next we have. Rob's tenacity. Size Kony, size Kony. Hopefully I'm not pitching that too badly. Okay. Council members, not only should you not ratify the decision of the city manager to impose this tinpot faster curfew order, but it should be rescinded immediately. Moreover, you should take any available steps to lodge the city's dissent from the county's curfew. Your colleagues in the city of Santa Clara have already taken those steps. Beyond, no doubt, nothing that has happened on the island this week remotely justifies the extraordinary limitations on citizens freedom of speech and movement. Curfew orders do not keep us safer. They serve as a legal fig leaf. For the police to initiate violent confrontations with unarmed protesters. To impose this curfew is to ratify and stand with the actions of authoritarians like the president and to equate the brutal police violence we have seen all over the nation in the past week with the chanting and marching of protesters calling for an end to brutal police violence. A progressive city like Alameda should be making every effort to oppose police violence, raise up the voices of oppressed communities that are the most frequent victims of police violence, and demonstrate that our city rejects the quasi military weaponization of police forces nationwide and the turning of those weapons against poor, black and brown people. Please do your duty to stand with the George Floyd's of the world and against the Derek. Sherman's up to oppose the curfew. And then the last comment I think was by Josh and he already spoke. So I will not read his since he spoke instead. All right. Okay. And that was the extent of the public comments. Act. Madam Clerk, is that the extent of our public comments on item two? Yes, that's correct. No more. All right. With that, I've closed public comments and we will return to council discussion. Vice Mayor, I think I cut you off. Excuse me. When I realized we had public speakers said, Do you want to resume? Sure, I'd be happy to. Thank you very much. And I will also acknowledge my clock hasn't moved yet, but I will not use the full 9 minutes that I still have. So thank you. Yeah, I as I was saying, I appreciate knowing knowing what we know about what happened on Sunday. The reasoning behind making the declaration that we have today. I was going to ask the police chief if he would be comfortable talking a little bit about what happened with our local law enforcement resources on Sunday, the day before the curfew that helped to inform why why we decided to move forward. Is that something that would be. Appropriate to speak about it at the council meeting? Certainly. I guess I'll ask that through the city manager. Yes. Well, actually, you you ask. Oh, well and I'll sit through the chair, but, um. Yes, Chief. Hilary, can you, can you comment about what we knew on Sunday or, you know, leading up to this probably Friday, Saturday and Sunday? Because I don't think the decision was made just in one day. But tell us if you can for sure. Thank you for the opportunity. I mean, I'll tell you that we you know, we really didn't know if there was going to be any violence or any crime or looting in the city. We were obviously concerned about it. I received several emails, some phone calls and texts from concerned residents, from concerned business owners, from the business districts, specifically on Webster Street. And we had information that there was possibly going to be a plan to shoot the target at Alameda Landing, which fortunately did not occur and has not occurred yet. Sunday night into Monday morning, between around 9 p.m. in the evening and about four or 5 a.m. on Monday morning, we had about a dozen incidents of either straight up looting or smash window smash burglaries, which is highly unusual for the city of Alameda, has not been happening in anywhere near those numbers so far this year. So we did not make arrests in all those cases. So I don't know what the motivation was for all of them. We did arrest three people for breaking into the Walgreens at South Shore. Three adults and then four juveniles for attempting to break in with a window smashed into the CVS in Santa Clara. I don't have the final numbers in front of me, but I believe we were somewhere between 12 and 14 ish. Either burglaries or windows smashes the CVS at Harvard Bay, IL, the Bedford Express on Blanding, the AT&T store at Alameda Landing and several others. So we it was a super busy night. We had 25 officers on the street, which is double more than double what we normally have. And that's what we continue to do right now in order to keep the city safe and hopefully deter additional stuff. Last night was much better. I believe we had one or possibly two incidents overnight compared to what we had on Sunday night. It was much quieter. We had. It was nice to have more police officers than we needed last night, which was not the case in some of the surrounding jurisdictions. And it's my understanding, even today and tonight, Oakland and Fremont have been very active again. San Leandro and Hayward were hit probably the hardest on Sunday night. So there's been a lot going on. Great. Thank you. And could you also if you're if you're able just talk a little bit about mutual aid and what was available on Sunday? Sure. So typically what happens on mutual aid is that the city the city in need, which in this case was the city of Oakland, they know that they've got this unplanned event. And so they make a request through the Office of Emergency Services at Alameda County. Sheriff Ahearn, as the emergency services official for the county, is the person who makes the decision whether or not to authorize the deployment of mutual aid resources. The sheriff, based on the Oakland request, the number of reports of people that were going to be down there protesting and demonstrating, he ordered or granted the request and then outreach was made to all the various agencies within the county. Alameda being one of them on on Sunday night, Saturday night and Sunday night, I'm sorry, Friday night and Saturday night, we sent about a dozen officers, I think it was 12 on Friday night, 14 on Friday night and 12 on Saturday night. Sunday night. We were not there because we needed to be here because of everything that was going on in Alameda. We are not in Oakland. Glad to get back. We were going to send somebody to Oakland earlier today, but we we wound up not having to do that. So anyway, the mechanism is that the city in need, Oakland asks for the county's help. The county makes the assessment, authorizes the mutual aid. And then all of the individual jurisdictions, if they can provide, people do. And we did. Great. Thank you. And my understanding is on Sunday, not only did we not were we not able to on to Oakland, but we were not able to ask anybody for help when it seemed like we might need it as well, because everybody was basically staying home because this was so widespread. Is that correct? In general? In general, it was partially correct. I was I did ask for and request for some mutual aid. I called over to the EOC and I was able to get and briefly and it turned out we didn't need them for very long. But I did briefly have a squad from the Berkeley Police Department that arrived. I think they got here about 1030 or 11:00 in the evening. I don't think they were here for more than an hour. And then we were able to kind of get our arms wrapped around everything and they returned to Oakland. Okay. I guess for clarification, Chief, when you reached out to the EOC, would that be the Alameda County Emergency Operations Center? Actually, no mayor on that particular case. I had somebody inside the EOC and the city of Oakland. Oh. Oh, okay. So I went, okay. I just called somebody over there directly and said that we needed help fast. And they sent me they sent me the 12 officers. Okay. So thank you for all that. I just I wanted to kind of explain some of my while. I heard a lot of comments that I certainly understand and at a gut level agree with. Again, I think that, uh, curfews are extremely, um, there are a significant event and they're not something that we should take lightly. I really do. Again, my comments about why I support what happened yesterday is based on the fact that from what we saw Sunday, we were stretched. And not only where we were stretched, but all of our neighbors were not only stretched, but really hit very hard. And it was, I think, a rational and reasonable response as we move forward in considering this curfew. I would certainly agree with the city manager's recommendation that we declare the city the state of emergency through the 16th, and I would be more than happy to give some direction to the city manager that would allow him to declare a curfew on a day by day basis based on information that's coming up, knowing that there are probably a couple of dates in the next week in which we should at least be alert to the fact that that, you know, we may need to join our neighbors in setting a curfew just to to to keep our region a little safer. Again, as if if we do so, I will request that we get a report early in the morning of any action that is taken related to the curfew and that all discretion and be be used in reporting out of when that decision is going to be made. You know, my hope is that we don't have to do it. I would also hope that if this council does not extend the current curfew to match the county, that that be at least a signal that we're not looking to overly enforce the curfew of the county. I do not really believe that. I do not stand in support of that decision. I think it was made far too quickly with very little input. And I think we're going to you know, if our county sheriff is going to act like this, there needs to be a lot more input and verification before just announcing it. Thank you. Done. Okay. Next, Councilmember. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thanks to the city staff that put this together. One suggestion I would have said murder instead of death of Mr. Floyd. But that that word is important. And I'd like to thank our chief for everything he's doing to keep us safe. You know, when I read about this, I was, like, super queasy. And it is the first thing that pops in my head is that 250 year old Benjamin Franklin quote that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. And watching the news yesterday, I think New York was under a curfew for the first time since 1943. New York City. And to show how things haven't changed, you know, that was when a white police officer murdered a African-American service member during World War Two. So these decisions are not things we take lightly and. I read the Supreme Court decision that came out over the weekend about Governor Newsome's limitation on churches. And there was a line in there that says our Constitution principally entrusts, quote, the safety and the health of the people, end quote, to the politically accountable officials of the states to guard and protect. And to me, you know, when it comes to public health, we don't have a public health department like Berkeley has or, you know, San Francisco as a county. We have ceded that authority to the county. So when they make orders on public health, then, you know, we've we've pretty much subjected ourselves in their jurisdiction, but on public safety. We have not on public safety. That jurisdiction remains with the five of us here today and through our manager come to form a government, the city manager and his direct reporting to the police chief and the police department. So I am extremely concerned about the sheriff exerting his authority over the city of Alameda. I believe we are a sovereign city. Um, my colleague, Mr. De SA brings up often that we are charter city and charter cities have certain rights. And to me one of those rights is that, you know, we are not going to be subjected to the county. So I am loathe to give up any decision making authority to the county sheriff. And, you know, we all know the reputation of the county sheriff. And this, taken in in isolation, you know, may be a great thing. But when you consider that the sheriff, with his history of heavy handedness and his treatment of people of color, is now asserting his authority. And the occupant of the White House is threatening to unleash the power of the American military on our citizens who are peacefully protesting. Then I can't consider it in its totality, and I think it's in isolation that's considered in its totality. So this is where I stand on this. I think we need to be in charge of our own destiny. And I completely trust our city manager. I completely trust our police chief. I do not trust anyone else. So I am comfortable giving them temporary authority to keep our our city safe. But if I my fear is if we decide we are going to let this die today or tomorrow morning at 5 a.m., then we we fall under the jurisdiction of the county. And I know this hasn't been litigated, but it's entirely possible it could be litigated tomorrow. And a judge could say, you know, cities, you have responsibility and the county can't control a sovereign city. And then where are we left? We're left with kind of a patchwork where these these perpetrators know who's going to be open and who's not going to be open. And the one advantage we have, and I hate to say this because it just but my my colleague from the NRA called me and they have the most porous borders, you know, around and they're just inundated. We don't have that. We only have five ways in and off. So I think I'd much rather trust our folks, our city manager, our city council, our police chief, our police department to enforce these things. So that's what I was saying. I can envision a situation where, you know, other cities have a curfew and the county, one is overrule four charter cities and then we're stuck, you know, having porous borders because we don't have the ability to control. And our city managers stuck with our direction saying we don't believe there's a city or a state of emergency and we don't believe and we're not giving the authority to extend a curfew. I'm a little uncomfortable with, you know, two weeks, but, you know, that's the consensus of my colleagues. I'm fine with that. I mean, it might be interesting to get back here in a week and have a special meeting, but I understand the request for two weeks. I understand the extension or the request to go out to Thursday, because historically, when we have had unarmed people of color murdered by white folks, whether they be law enforcement or not, law enforcement has said a lot of these things happen from non-law enforcement, the funeral and the memorials, our days of protest and unrest and the weekends are our days of protests and unrest. So I can understand the rationale for, you know, going out to Sunday morning. So I guess I say that I don't if I've given any direction, but I mean, I, I will agree with the staff recommendation. But, you know, this is a very short leash and I completely trust our local officials and I don't want to do anything that would see any control over Alameda. And I'm going to get very provincial, appropriate, whatever you say. But, you know, last night when I saw what the occupant of the White House did and I read the county thing, I went outside, I put my Alameda flag up because I'm in Alameda. And if anyone's going to be in charge of Alameda, it's all meetings. And I'm perfectly comfortable with Alameda as being in charge of Alameda. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Eddie Councilmember Vela. So I do know in a number of other cities are considering various curfews tonight. And some of those cities include cities that have spoken out about whether or not they believe the county has the jurisdiction over their individual city. Berkeley being one of them. I guess where I'm coming from on this is I think it's a very and I had this conversation with the city manager to very fast slide into what I feel are very kind of fascist type. Uh, scenarios, and I feel like it's been a conflation of a number of different things that have led us to where we are. So I actually I will stand by the city manager's decision to implement the curfew. But I also am very much opposed to curfews, and I'm going to get into that right now. So first, we've heard a lot about curfews, but we haven't really heard about why we think they're effective. What we know is and I and again, when I say there's a completion of a number of different issues that I think are lending itself. One of those is the shelter order. There are fewer people out. A lot of the places hit have been large shopping centers where there have been no one, no nobody, no customers, no employees at these sites for almost a couple of months now. So they're filled with inventory, but no one's there. They can't really operate. And all of the things that make those spaces safe, namely the people utilizing the space, are absent from it. The other thing is that the shopping centers are not anchored by things like grocery stores where like Alameda, where we have people coming in and out and still using these. Or other. Types of shopping malls. I know the Walmart was the exception to that as well as a couple of the targets that were hit. But I haven't really heard about how this curfew is going to make us safer. My concern is also that we have a number of exemptions under the curfews. One includes people going to and from work. And I, you know, in my day job, represent a lot of workers. Many of them are people of color. They're traveling to and from work. And they are terrified of being pulled over. And they're they're worried about what that interaction is going to be like. I think things are already heightened. We have high tensions because of what's going on throughout the country. And I'm just worried that having a curfew is going to give cause to pull people over, specifically people of color. And I'm not saying that that's necessarily happened here in Alameda, but I also know that the curfew itself gives the cause to pull people over for being out on the roads. And then people have to explain why they're there. And that gives me concern. The other thing is I think that we are lending to some of these rumors and fears. I heard from a number of business owners who were talking about they had heard chatter, they had heard rumors. I think it's definitely important to take steps to secure your business and to be safe. But I'm wondering how much this is actually lending itself to that fear that something could happen or will happen. I think that we need to move from a place of data. And I think curfew, certainly if we are going to impose a curfew, it needs to be a database. It can't just be that we heard a chatter. I want to see what probable what what real what actual information we have. I can understand a curfew. If we have credible evidence that there is going to be major violence or harm in many ways, I'm actually very frustrated that we're talking about taking extreme steps to protect property when a lot of the conversation should be about the sign that is behind my colleague Mr. Odey, which is that Black Lives Matter and that a lot of the unrest that's going on is the result of government, local government, governments like ours, the city of Alameda, failing to hold people accountable for police brutality, for actions that I think we should all be able to agree are not just and not from a place of what, you know, law enforcement should be doing. And our chief said that yesterday. So I think that, you know. I'm willing to support the declaration of emergency. I am not in support of further curfews or granting that authority. I think we need to give some more direction and guidance before I would be willing to do that. I again, I'm hearing about potential. What would be the trigger in order for the city manager to actually call for another curfew? I'd want to know what factors he would look at, certainly for me. And again, I would like to hear more information about how the curfew actually is going to be helpful in deterring crime. I think that, again, I haven't heard I've heard about reason, again, mainly based off of threats to property and merchandise. And while I don't condone vandalism or looting, my number one concern is the safety of human life and protecting human life. And so I would like to know how this curfew is is. Going to achieve the goals that are stated, which I fear would be to me protecting the safety of individuals that would be first and foremost. And then I would want to know also, for those of you who are concerned about merchandise and buildings, how the curfew is going to protect against that. And then finally, I would just say that I know that our city manager didn't take this decision lightly. And I very much appreciate the thought that he put into this. I personally do not want to be spending our forces of our police officers enforcing the sheriff's curfew order. And that's why I asked that question earlier about how are we going to go about enforcing it? Because if we're going to be going around giving citations to people, I'd like to know about that and I would like to know what that citation would involve and how much resources, how many of our resources are going to be spent doing that. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember DeSantis, you want to weigh in? Well, sure. First of all, let me say thank you very much, you know, to all of us council members, the mayor, city manager and city attorney, chief of police, everyone who is here tonight, as well as the assistant city manager. I think we can all agree that these are historic times. To say nothing about COVID 19. But certainly, you know what's going on throughout our nation, start having started in Minneapolis and perhaps, you know, it's gotten steam. And as a result of things going on in Washington, D.C., and I think, you know, the looting and the mayhem that we saw occur in neighborhoods, cities like San Leandro indicate that we need to play it safe in these historic times. And so I think for that reason, I certainly support the the emergency declaration and the length that we're looking at the declaration until June 16, so or so. I also support the curfew. And my my take on it is that I think we have an opportunity to look at the curfew on a case by case basis on a day to day basis. So that would be my druthers. But as I walk up and down Webster Street, because, as you all know, I live close to Webster Street and I talk to business owners, many of whom themselves have single handedly beautified Webster Street, not just by one store's that they opened, not just by two stores that they opened, not just by three stores that they opened , but by four beautiful stores that they opened. You know, shop owners on Webster Street certainly have concerns about what's going on. And they know that situations can be incredibly volatile so that something that happens, say, in San Leandro could, for whatever reason, spill over into the city of Alameda. And so for that reason, I think we do need to have the flexibility to have our public safety, whether it's the police or the fire, be able to respond on a moment's notice. And if it means one of the prophylactics that we would employ is a curfew, then then I think that has to be one of the arrows in the quiver, so to speak. It's tragic what had happened in Minneapolis. It's tragic that that has been going on for for generations and for centuries. But it certainly has been picking up steam for whatever reason since 2000. But I think, you know, we here in the city of Alameda, you know, we have the police force in place that can understand how to respond to these kind of situations and as culturally appropriate manner as possible. We've grown so much since the early 1990s and we all know what I'm talking about. And ah, but you know, the progress that we've made notwithstanding I think we owe it to the residents and we also owe it especially to the shop, small shopkeepers to be proactive by allowing us to have the curfew as as at least one of the areas in our quiver. So I certainly support that. I really wish everyone to be safe, not just in Alameda, but in San Leandro and in the city of Oakland. But I also want to say to the men and women who. Who serves in the police force and often the fire departments. I want them to be safe as well. So I think one of one way to achieve that in this very, very difficult time is by having a curfew as one of and done on a case by case basis. By the way, I'm not sure I want to have a six day curfew, 8 to 5. But I think I have full confidence that the police department, as well as the city manager's office, can, can on a moment's notice, pull a curfew. For the right reasons. I have faith that they would do so. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Desai. So I will go last. And I want to say that we balance a lot of competing interests always, and this is particularly true in this particular instance. So we're balancing personal liberties. On the other hand, I have zero interest in protecting looters. We are not talking about peaceful protests or even protests that get noisy and messy. I will support those. Every day of the week. But what we have seen in other cities and right next door in San Leandro is not only looting, but also gunfire being shot and not by not by police. And at some point, someone's going to get hurt. There have been some pretty outrageous burglaries at cannabis dispensaries in the area, and one of them involved an armed carjacking. I understand. And at some point, someone, some citizen is going to get hurt. And we also need to look at the the personal safety, certainly, of our residents and our businesses. And these are businesses I mean, we never prioritize, prioritize public safety or, you know, businesses and merchandise over personal safety. But what we're talking about is allowing our businesses to open up again. And so these are folks who are employers. These are small businesses. We're helping them with a community fund because some of them are close to going under. And we we want to make sure that this is a safe city for people who live here, for people who come to visit, for people who work here, who have their businesses here. And I did get some emails this morning asking me as well as mayor, are you going to. Are you following, you know, the president's directives about getting tough? And, you know, I can't even use the sort of language I would like to in public. But, no, I absolutely am not. And in fact, what I've told more than one person who inquired is that I, as a mayor, one of many mayors across this city, know how hard we have all been working, along with our governors, to keep our residents safe during the COVID crisis. And we have implored the federal government for help from our for our cities. We haven't gotten it. All we have gotten is trash talk from the the current occupant of the White House. So, no, that is that is not my motivation whatsoever. And so I don't want to conflate those incidents, you know, last night in Lafayette Park and using tear gas to disperse peaceful demonstrators so the president could have a photo opportunity in front of Saint John's Church. This is not what we're talking about. And I can assure you that our police department, our police chief and working with our city manager and city attorney, they did not take lightly the decision to impose a curfew. And certainly, you know, working within the structure that we find ourselves in, in Alameda County, this is not a decision that is taken lightly. I, too, would like to see it be as brief as possible, but I am willing to cede that authority to our city manager who is in charge in an emergency informed by our police chiefs, and they'll run it by the city attorney. The city attorney has already advised us that, well, maybe I won't go into it. The city attorney has advised us, come to think of it. But but we we followed the city attorney's advice as well. So I am I think the vice mayor summed it up pretty concisely the way I would. And I, I think I've heard more than one of my colleagues say this as well, that you would like to see a curfew declared maybe on a day to day basis. People have. I've made suggestions about what I think is very valid about some upcoming events that could lead to, again, protests, demonstrations, outpouring of emotion. Those are all protected by the First Amendment. Violence and looting is not. And so on. And I do believe that our city manager wants to weigh in, since we're all talking about what we'd like to give him authority to do so. And Councilmember, a councilmember would welcome to the council, the city manager, Mr. Levitt. So I appreciate all the comments. And I think I'm I think I'm out. No, you're good. Okay. I've heard all the comments. And and I do want to explain a couple of things, because the public comments came after my initial discussion and after the assistance they meijer's presentation. There were factors that were looked at some of the factors, and I want to just for public purpose, talk about them for the two days. One was I knew the councilmember was councilman was coming in two days, so I wasn't going to do it for more than two days because I wanted to give the council the opportunity. The second was the vandalism and damage that occurred on Sunday night and surrounding communities was a factor in the decision. And rumors of potential targets in Alameda coming Monday night was a factor also. And then when many of the cities around us started doing it, that became a factor also. Those were some of the factors that led to it. On Monday I was talked about, it was brought to me as an option. During the weekend I did not see those same factors during the weekend. That and that's why I waited till Monday. And even on Monday was a difficult decision because I agree with many of the council members when you talk about the liberties and that being the foundation of our country. And and so I think that this is a concerning issue when you look at all of that. So one option I do have the declaration of emergency in my in my view, is different than the the then the curfew and the declaration of emergency is because we may have to have more . And I do see this happening probably over the next week or two where we'll have to have more public safety resources, either fire or police or a combination of the two. And the declaration of emergency allows us to document that if we were to get reimbursement from the federal government through the county. And so that's where I see that through the 16th. One option on the curfew, as are two options I would give, is either not provide me with the authority to do the curfew or provide authority through maybe the 10th. But if I am going to do more than one day or more than two days in a row, it has to come back for council action to go further than that. Those would be the two options I would recommend. So to just restate that, so separate the declaration of authority, declaration of emergency from issuing a curfew. And if you issue a curfew, it would not be for more than two days without going back to the Council for authority. That would be correct. That would be my recommendation. Or not give me authority for the curfew at all. Either of those. Okay. All right. I see the vice mayor had to say, oh, I think council member Ella had her hand up sooner. So. Councilmember Vela, vice mayor. Not quite in that order, please. Thank you. So really quick. I think, you know, I have a couple questions again, how well the curfew is that? Could you explain how that how having the curfew will make it safer in those events that the city manager listed? I think the answer to that would be helpful is, is that we think clearing off the streets will make it safer. And then for individuals who are traveling under the exemption, what do our police officers, what do they need to do to make sure that it's a safe encounter? Because there are people that have to go to and from work and our police chief, our police officers are just going to be pulling people over. I would like to put out there what people need to do to ensure that they're not going to get hassled or detained or anything or cited unnecessarily. The other thing the other thing that I want to put out there is, you know, I think these are this is a major decision to cede authority to three people who are unelected. And so, you know, I feel very strongly about that. My question is, could we have a special city council meeting in a week, for instance, to see about extending the declaration of emergency? So could we do it for a week and then have another special meeting in a week to decide if we need to have it extended a week? You know, it's interesting. I just. My thoughts. We have a council referral later this same meeting about special meetings and how much notice needs to be given. So, you know, maybe we'll have to weigh all that at the time. I'm not sure what the answer would be, but could we hear from Chief O'Leary as to Councilmember Vella's questions about how there's a curfew make us safer? And what sorts of advice would you give to someone who might be pulled over? And maybe just let's start with a threshold question of who who is likely to be pulled over in a curfew in Alameda. Okay. So I'll try to answer answer this on the fly as best as I can. I'm going to make a make a quick comparison. Just like a couple of months ago, the thought of a county health order and a shelter in place for a pandemic was kind of, you know, off the radar for all of us. And when we jumped into it, what happened was we found that we were we everything that we've done for the last couple of months has been uncharted territory. This is uncharted territory. I've been a police officer for 31 years. This is the first time this has happened. So we're so everybody is trying to still figure it out. Electeds, police departments, the sheriff's office, everybody. You had civil unrest before. We've never in my career gotten to this point. So the only you had a call earlier that asked about data, the how do we know it's successful? I guess my honest answer is the only the only data I can give you is that on Saturday and Sunday night, we had lots of activity on when the when the shelter or the curfew went into effect. Everything dropped. And it wasn't just here. San Leandro, Hayward, Fremont, every everybody that had problems, big problems the night before, they all reduced last night. Maybe it was a coincidence. I'm trying to be as honest with you as I can. I don't know. My my role as an unelected but appointed police chief is to try to take care of public safety in Alameda. That is both protecting people and property. I'm trying to do that. We are trying to do that the best we can. I think we've done a good job. I will continue to try to do that with or without a curfew. The the reassurances that I could give the council and the public are the same as I would for any other law enforcement interaction. We try all the time to do the right thing, the right way in practice, constitutionally sound policing. Not to profile. Not to violate people's civil rights. We have not written any tickets on since the curfew was issued. We have only written a couple of citations on the county health order. We are primarily trying to educate people and get them to just be in compliance with the order so that we can, in the case of COVID, stop the spread of the virus. In the case of the the curfew that the sheriff imposed is to try to keep the city safe. Having fewer cars and fewer people on the road helps us with our response times. There's fewer cars on the road. There's fewer obstructions we are able to get from point A to point B more quickly. Does it guarantee prevention of crime? Absolutely not. Nothing does. Boarding up a business doesn't. Having 50 police officers on the street doesn't guarantee that we will stop crime. So if the notion is, well, we stop crime by having a curfew, the answer is no, we won't. And do we have a shot at maybe reducing it or helping our chances of catching people who are who are committing crimes? Yes, I believe it does. But we are still in the first couple of days of this, and it's uncharted territory. Thank you to you for Larry. Okay. With that counsel, do we have a vice mayor? Yes. I'm so sorry. You were. You were next. Sorry. Sorry. That's okay. It's just procedural question. With an emergency urgency meeting. Is that a 24 hour notice? Is it possible for us to do it on any shorter? A I'm sorry, I'm looking at even, but of course you can't tell me. I'm the city attorney. Okay. Mr. said. Yes. So the under state law, there are two ways to do an emergency ordinance. You could do it with a 24 hour notice. And if there are severe enough emergencies, we could even do it with a one hour notice. If it's just totally necessary. We have to make the finding under both that there are serious public public health and safety concerns that require the Council to meet under those circumstances. But it's either 24 hours or one hour of absolutely necessary. Thank you very much. So I would be interested in considering whether we could put a couple of special meetings on the books for later this week, possibly for Thursday afternoon and Friday afternoon, just to have a space where people know we may be we can always cancel them, but that we would have the House in our reserve so that if it looks like things are, you know, a curfew is going to be needed, we can have, you know, I believe Thursday is probably the next likely place where if something was going to happen, where where a curfew was probably going to be necessary for the city to respond to. I know I know the county has declared this. I really don't you know, I'm not confident they have the authority to do that. I'm not I would prefer our council, actually our city, take that decision. And if there is a general feeling this is coming, I don't know why it would we wouldn't just put that on the put that on the books and cancel it. If it look if if if that feels comfortable in that way, we could have the conversation before that before the curfew is called. And I just I hear. Right. A couple of my colleagues having some some big concerns. And I do think we can just proactively solve those concerns. Um, masks the city attorney. I, I guess I don't understand. Or maybe I need the vice mayor to clarify if the county's order is in effect until 5 p.m. Friday morning. And if you believe that we are. Bound by that order. I do. Not. I'm sorry. I was asking the city attorney. And so, Mr. Shin, if if you believe that we are bound by the the county's order, what would be accomplished by a special meeting and what sir just explained what emergency we would be moving forward under. Right. And so so that relates to a recommendation I was going to make to the council, which is that the council could call an emergency meeting with 24 hours or one hour notice. At this moment, if the council wants to schedule a meeting, let's say, two days out based on certain emergencies. It would be helpful for staff to provide you with some emergency basis as to what imminent threat to health, safety and welfare that would justify the the calling of the meeting. The police chief could probably do that and you may want to call on him. Alternatively, you could just reserve time if you wish, so that at least you are available to the extent that staff believes that there's need for you to to to convene without actually calling for the emergency meeting. If you believe that there's not enough factual basis at this moment to call an emergency meeting within 48 hours. I hope that helps answer the question. Sure. So I. Yes, Vice Mayor. Sorry, this pertains to the question I was asking. So could we also continue the discussion of the curfew to a time certain two days from now? You see Mr. Sandia? Yes. My apologies, sir. Yes. You could continue this item to a time. Certain? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. All right. So what's the. So, Councilmember Vela, you are out of time. I would need a motion for you to speak again. And I will just remind people that it's 830. So how much time do you think you need? 20 seconds. I had a question. Okay. Do I have a we'll give you a move. To give the city councilmember an extra minute. All right. And it's been seconded. All in favor, a roll call vote, please. People shouting, Madam Clerk. Councilmember Daza. Yes. Knox Light. Yes. Odie. Yes, Bella. Yes. Mayor has the. Yes. Okay. Go ahead, Councilmember. Thank you, Madam Clerk. There were there was a question, I thought, by the vice mayor that if we don't agree with the assessment that the county has authority over us, what can we do about the curfew if we don't believe that the sheriff has jurisdiction? What, if anything, can we do? Okay. So for the city attorney, correct? Yes. Okay. Yes. Councilmember, if you're if your question is whether or not about whether the city could implement a curfew, I think you have complete discretion whether to continue, modify, extend or terminate the curfew. That's the city's curfew. I have I hope that the question that you're asking. You know, if we if we don't have a curfew and we disagree with the authority of Sheriff Ahern to implement a curfew, like if we're saying we don't want a curfew, and then the county has said, no, we have a curfew. What, if anything, can the council do? Do you want to challenge that authority? The council could. So I would suggest that we agenda this as soon as possible for the council to direct our office to take legal action. And then it's about a curfew that has to last until Friday morning or if it goes beyond that or what Councilmember Bell helped help me understand. If we do not vote to extend the curfew tonight, then, but we don't want to recognize the existing curfew for this week. Understanding that he could extend it. And so came city attorneys. And you were you were starting to say we would need to. Get the council to take a vote to direct a to convene. My recommendation will be in closed session to discuss the potential initiation of litigation, and we'd be happy to have that conversation with you. All right. I think I saw Councilmember Otis hand up. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'd be interested in having that discussion. I appreciated the chief's response about constitutional policing. And through no fault of your own or any of your officers. There's still a fear among people of color doing day to day things that people that look like me can do without any any fear. So you know what? What can we tell that? I don't and I'm not expecting you to answer this. Maybe the city manager I mean, what can we tell? But people of color that live in town, you know what they can do? Well, what can we tell them to help with that fear that when they get pulled over, you know, something untoward is going to happen? Because like I said, it's not anything you had done or your officers have done, but it's just institutionalized in their in their brains. That's what I wanted here. I'm sorry, Councilmember. I understood you to say you did not need me to answer that question or you want me to. I mean, you could, but, you know, it doesn't matter. I don't I don't care who answers it. It's just something I'm struggling with and. I don't. I don't drive or walk. I don't run. But if I did, I wouldn't run with that fear. You know, so I think people's emotions are heightened now. And, you know, we're basically taking a day implementing a very strong law enforcement policy at a time when emotions and feelings are pretty highly wrought and tight. So how do we what do we tell people that are people of color that are driving to our city after 8:00? To help him, you know, navigate, pull over. Or, you know, a neighbor calling the cops on them. I'm just. I don't know. So I'll take a stab at this. And I think we're going to be coming around and talking about this more a little bit later in the meeting. I'll tell you what I told the people that were demonstrating in front of the police department yesterday afternoon, what I've told people in emails and other statements that I've made over the past week. We can all talk. Police chiefs. Elected officials. We cannot talk about things that are broken and wrong in this country. In this country, and and specifically with policing in the United States. And the history and the. The absolute valid concerns that people have about what happened to George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and to Eric Garner and to a number of people around the country. We've all seen those stories. That's real stuff. And I understand it and I get it. It doesn't matter what I say. It matters what we do. It's words and deeds. You all need a police department. Knock on wood has not been involved in a shooting in 15 years. We have 64,000 calls for service and about 3500 or 4000 arrests per year. We have about 30 uses of force per year on average. At 64,000 public interactions, it's very low, less than 1%. I can say whatever I want. I'm a white male police officer. Police chief. I'm asking people to consider the fact that despite things that have happened in the past, that this police department being run by me today. That you are safe in this community. We're going to talk about an incident later tonight where people might beg to differ. But all the facts aren't out yet, and I'm going to fix that. 30 uses of force per year on average for the last five or six years running without the stats in front of me. I'm pretty confident that's the right number. Less than 1%. Very few personal complaints. And not a shooting in 15 years. We're doing things right. We're doing something right. Are we perfect? No. Well, we make mistakes. Yes, we will. Absolutely. And it's my job. My job as the chief to own up to those when we do and to fix what's wrong. That's what I would tell people if they gave us the time when we stop them. If we stop somebody now in the middle of curfew, it's going to be please go home. It's not safe. Go home, be with your family. And as a and as a double bonus, help stop the spread of the COVID virus. That's what I would tell them. Okay. MORODER Thank you for that. And I guess I would say. To those of us who are not police officers. Stop calling the police. When? People of color are doing things that you get to enjoy freely, whether it's exercising, whether it's jogging, whether it's birdwatching, shopping. Having a picnic in the park. You know, it's just got to stop. And I wanted to see. Well said. Thank you, Councilmember Brody. Um, Counsel, do we want to. Call a special meeting to possibly bring litigation? Or do we want to give our city manager narrow directions, possibly following up on his own suggestions? We've we've heard it said this evening that Thursday, maybe even Friday might be pivotal days. And the county order extends until 5 p.m. this Friday morning. Do we want to initiate or have some limitation of if that curfew were extended beyond 5 a.m. on June 5th, then we might call a special meeting. What do we think counts on everybody? Yes. The city manager can hurt me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the curfew was for five days. But there was discretion to go to seven, right? I read in I read the order this morning and it said it was in effect until 5 a.m. June 5th, unless rescinded earlier, unless there has been an update today. But I, I went on the website this morning. Am I missing something? I thought there was a two day. I thought there was a two day. Maybe someone can help me on that. Okay. And I'm actually going to ask the city attorney or the city manager have it have information specifically about the order. And I'll get to you in just a minute. Vice Mayor. Mr. Levitt? LEVITT Let me look at that. I had the same understanding and understanding as the mayor that it ended on Friday. There are other cities that are through the eight, but let me double check if I can find anything more other on the county order. Maybe I should have asked. Assistant Manager. City. Assistant City Manager. Mr. Bowden, since this is your item. Yeah. Just put everybody on the staff on the spot. We have the version that was available publicly yesterday attached to the staff report. And the it the exact language of the order shall remain in effect until June 5th at 5 a.m., or unless rescinded earlier due to restoration of public order and safety. That's the that was the guiding language that we use to draft the staff report, and that's what's attached. I read that same language this morning. Vice Mayor, you had your hand up. Do you have a more current version or something? No. I was going to point out that the sheriff took the authority and used it. Whether it says it ends on the fifth or not on the fifth, he could say it goes to the 10th one. And precisely the distinction I was trying to make was, could we have something that said we would call a special meeting if there didn't appear, you know, without any indication of necessity, the county order was extended that. But again, I'm just going by what a couple of my colleagues have pointed out about events to be anticipated this week. So if I were to make a motion and I'll make it an offer, I will I will offer a couple of possible alternatives. But I would I would move that we declare this the state of emergency for the next two weeks. The state of emergency allows us to collect the funds that we need to if there are any costs that come up and does not give, I think undo. We already have a state of emergency in place that gives the city staff the authority to do a lot. So I think that's insane to me. That is mostly about about that. I would I would grant if it were me, I would grant our staff the ability to identify two days for curfews and if we were going to engage in more than two more days and I have two specific days and I'm thinking possibly could come up that there would be an emergency council meeting to discuss further, and that I would suggest that we'd prioritize enforcement of the counties. I don't want to get into a legal fight with the with the county in the middle of this, in the middle of this emergency. I think that that's just not a that's not where we are at this point in time, although I do think we need to kind of address this ongoing issue, given that this is coming up at some point in time in the future. But I would ask that we prioritize enforcement of the curfew unless the city has declared there's a curfew in our city, and that would be the way we would do it. And if people are acting badly, that doesn't mean we can't fight them if we're acting badly. But we would not pull people over because they're out after curfew. Mr. Knotts. Mr. Vice Mayor, may I ask you to tell us what the additional two days are would be that you referenced? Well, in my mind, it would be the memorial service on Thursday and then possible and then the the funeral in Houston on June 9th. I think those are the two most likely times. And then if they decide not to charge the officer, I mean, things are going to come up. So I think I have two ideas where I think it's probably likely that, you know, we could see. For me, this is about the stretched resources of our of our officers and the region's officers and keeping people safe and much. I think the chief was correct. At the end of the day, we are talking about you were never going to be able to prove it worked, but we're certainly going to prove it. Did you know, we should have done something? And, you know, I personally believe that our chief and the city manager will make or will take the series the decision very seriously. Thank you. Is not going to be made lightly. Thank you for your comments. I see the city manager is indicating he'd like to speak. Mr. Levitt, please. I just had a clarification. My clarification is if within your motion that it would be no more than two days cumulatively. Yes. Okay. Correct. Okay. Without getting special counsel permission. Right. Right. Okay. Got it. Okay. We have had a motion. Do we have a second? I think I see. I see misdirection. Okay, counselor. Everyday. Third question, then I'll go to you, Councilman Brody. So I guess I just need to understand the practical effect of this. So what does this mean? Does this mean that. Let's see. Our current curfew ends tomorrow morning at five. Right. Is that right? Friday morning at five. Friday morning at five. So does that mean that if we want to extend it for two more day. Hours in the city? Uh huh. So. So I guess I just need to know, what does the two day cumulative mean? What's the practical effect of that? If we can explain it not just to me, but to the residents. Yeah. Mr. Levitt, back to you. Well, the way I understand it, so just so I'm clear and it helps me to and just explain it, we understand it as our curfew ends tomorrow morning, Wednesday morning at 8 a.m. and at 5 a.m.. And so then if I were to let's say, just for example, to declare a Thursday and a Friday, let's say Thursday , let's say let's even say the next two days, Wednesday and Thursday, which that's not my intent. I'm just using as an example, Wednesday and Thursday, 5 to 8 or 8 to 5 and then 8 to 5. Then I would not again have any more authority until it came back to council. Okay. That was Wednesday. And then it just wouldn't have any more authority. Just needed to have that spoken out loud. Thank you. I think it's a good idea. Okay. Councilor Brody. Thank you. Also get the motion, but. I think at least until Thursday. In the county on Friday morning when the county order expires. I would give the city manager discretion. And after that, I'd want to weigh in like. Whether it's Friday or Saturday to extend it over the weekend. You know, Monday. I'm sure you would give the city manager discretion to extend the curfew until. Until the county one is set to expire now. And then if we want to if he feels we need to go further, then we can meet on a Friday and have that discussion. I see. Okay. I mean, I guess so. I mean, what I worry about is that county shut down and that we're technically not shut down. And then, you know, it's open season on Alameda. Right. I mean, no. Way to be covered again. Mr.. I think you're out of time. And I believe Madam Kirk, you might have added the extra minute. Yes. Already. Dickie has already said that. Okay, um, let's see if we're getting close to wrapping it up as you've made the second call. That has already made the second. Okay. Any further discussion? Yes. Councilmember Vella. Quickly. Could it be could the motion be separated out? Because there's some parts of it that I would be willing to support, but I'm not willing to support granting additional authority for a curfew without counsel weighing in. I support Dee Dee prioritizing stops when we don't have a priority, when we don't have a curfew in alameda and I support the emergency declaration. The maker of the motion vice mayor. Happy to bifurcate that. And can I maybe even the city attorney can clarify better than me. But the urgency ordinance you are adopting both declares the emergency and has curfew language. So, you know, whatever curfew language you decide will be imposed in that ordinance. And so that will be one motion on that ordinance. Just to clarify and then any other direction on prioritization would be the separate motion. So just so everybody's clear, what's in the ordinance is being okay. Okay. All right. And then the separate about deprioritized enforcement. If the curfew goes more than. Now. Correct. That's. For now, prioritizing, prioritizing enforcement if it's only a curfew and there is no city curfew. Got it. Okay. All right. So, Councilmember Dessa. Just quickly, I think I understand the energy behind the position of the prioritizing a county curfew when it does not coincide with the city of Alamitos curfew. I think I understand the energy behind it. But I'm concerned, though, that that we as a city, we still have to coordinate with the county on a variety of things that are public safety related. And I don't I'm concerned that things are not as easy as they might seem. So my my encouragement would be to phrase it in the positive. But having said that, I understand I think I understand the energy behind, you know. Where that. Language is coming from. And I'll just leave it at that. Thank you. All right. So. And, Madam, quick, are you clear on the motion we're about to vote on? I believe the will take two votes. The first vote will be on the ordinance itself, and then the second vote will be on the direction item. So we'll have two votes. All right. Maybe we have a roll call vote, please. On the first I. Wait, wait. Um, I can't. I mean, city manager. Mr. Leavitt. Mr.. Lemieux The first motion I understand the declaration of emergency. I don't I I'm not sure if it's to. To. I'm not sure if it's. No. Um. No curfew. Days to curfew a few days cumulatively. Or curfew days only through the end of the county order. I'm not sure which of the three that motion is that at this point. Mr. Vice Mayor, as make of the motion, you want to clarify. That that's too cumulative. To me, it's it's we are we're in Section four. We're ratifying the city manager's June 1st. Curfew order is ratified. The council extends the curfew until June 3rd, 5 a.m. five. That that's tonight. We would I guess here's my question, because I know that Councilmember Vela is concerned about the curfew language. That is the piece that she is would like to vote separately on. Is there a way for us to vote on the giving authority as a second to ordinance? And I guess that the question for the city city attorney. Mr. Shin. You're muted still, Mr. Sheen. My apologies. My suggestion to actually vote on the curfew language first. So that will be clear whether or not there are four votes for any amount of curfew and what it is. And then you take an overall vote on the ordinance. The ordinance is one ordinance, but take the vote on the curfew language first. If it doesn't garner four votes, then you take a vote on the ordinance and essentially just take out the curfew language if it's if they're not four votes to move forward. Sounds like the curfew is the one that will have a split of votes. So my suggestion that you whatever curfew direction you want to give you vote on that first, then you vote on the ordinance recognizing that you have four votes to do something about curfews. And if not, then you just strike it. Okay. So we've got to or we've got the curfew regulations. We have to ratify those, don't we? So I suggest you do all of that last. So I think the first vote might suggest that the first vote you take relates to the curfew language, and then you either find four votes to agree on curfew language or if not, then we'll know that there is no agreement on curfew language which must be struck from the ordinance. And then you vote on the rest. And when you say curfew language, are you referring to the language in the curfew regulations, which are exhibit one? No, no. Talking about curfews going forward. Choose to live day. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So a suggestion would be that that that the motion that was made, whatever motion about going forward gets made, whether it's two days, two days cumulatively or no curfew, and see if you can achieve a four vote on something about curfews going forward. And if you're unable to then work a strike that's actually completely from the ordinance, because you if you could not achieve for both going forward on the curfew, then, you know, you can vote on the rest. Sounds like there is unanimity on the rest. All right. And so the city manager's had his hand up. Did you want to address this to. I think, though, what the two council members are asking for, is there a way to split split it where you could, let's say, not to the curfew, take the curfew out of the ordinance, vote on that, and then vote to amend the ordinance that way. Kashmir Valley could vote on the ordinance without the curfew language, and then they could have a second vote on adding the curfew language. I think that's what the question is, that I've heard both from Councilmember Bhalla and Vice Mayor. Not quite. Hey, Council Vice Mayor, you're smiling. Did you. Say that? Wasn't my question, but it was a really good idea. Yes, that's what I would like to do. Okay. Um, okay. So. So my proposal would be to amend the amended motion to approve the the emergency declaration as written, allowing the current curfew to extend through 5 a.m. tomorrow. And then we will take a second to talk about whether or not we give additional to amend to amend the ordinance, to give additional authority for future curfews. If that. Information. Mr. Councilor BRODY. So then Section four, we'll just have a period at the end of city council. Right. No and extends the curfew order until June 3rd, 5 a.m.. So it extends it through tonight? Well, I think it's Section four is ratified with the saying the city manager's June 1st order is ratified. Okay. Put a period there that would that would suffice. Great. Perfect. Brilliant. Even better then. Okay. Okay. Okay. Was that a second, Mr. Rudy? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Maybe we have a roll call vote, please. Madam Clerk. Councilmember Desai. Okay. Not quite. I. I. I may or as the Ashcroft. I. That carries by five eyes. Okay next I move that we that the city council amend the order. The ordinance we just passed to provide the city manager with the authority to institute two curfews. No more than two nights of curfew from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m.. During the extent of the of the current state of emergency. All second. And is that consecutive or any two days? Any two days. All right. Executive or. All right. So we've had a motion by the vice mayor who seconded that councilmember. They say, in fact, make us one riverside discussion. Councilmember Odie. Quickly can we add on there without. Unless there's further authorization from the council. Sure. Okay. Yeah. Uh. Uh. Okay. Yes, exactly. Yep. Okay. As the make of the motion, I accept. All right. Okay. So. Okay. Okay. So the modified motion has been remade or remade as modified. Seconded a motion by the vice mayor, seconded by councilmember. Suddenly we have a roll call vote with. Councilmember de sag. Night. Not quite. I. Hi, Vella. No merit craft. I. That carries 41. Okay. And then was there one more mission? Or have we taking care of it all? I believe we want to do it. Yeah. Okay. So who wants to make that motion? Castmember Vela. So my motion would be that where there is no city of Alameda curfew in place that our police enforce spend their resources prioritizing and enforcing non curfew related incidences and reports. Is that. I'm trying to get here second that motion. So I. I have a I have a technical question maybe for the city attorney. Is is that within the authority of the council to direct police enforcement activities? I just, you know, love tossing hard balls. So, yeah, I think so. Yeah. I think I. Can reword it. Um, well, let's hear from the city attorney. And what, you know, how this might work or not is. You know. I think if the council provides overall policy direction, then the police chief undertakes its enforcement duties consistent with its obligations under state and local law. So I think they have stated policy preference. Okay. Any. Any language modifications you want to make? Councilmember fellas. Okay. Could we. Could we hear that motion restated, please, madam, quick. So I have that. There. The police would not be involved in any curfew related incidents when the city is not under a curfew. That they said. I don't think that's you know, I don't think. Okay, wait, wait. Let's let's wait. Let's wait in here. Speak one at a time. I'll call on you if you want to raise your hand that you want to speak. And then I think let's hear from the city attorney first. So so I think the motion with it, the council's policy preference would be that the city prioritize its use of resources to enforce laws other than the county's curfew order, to the extent reasonable use of resources would allow for that, consistent with the police chief law enforcement discretion. Councilman Avila, as maker of the motion, sends out. Okay. All right. Do and and that a matter of ice monoxide would be a second, correct? Yes, that would be confirmation of my second. Great. Oh, you've signaled already. Okay. So I wasn't sure what we were voting on, but I'm glad you were. So let's have a roll call. This. Oh, this guy. Sorry, sorry, sorry. So, Councilmember Dave. I think the one change that I would suggest is unless there was a call for mutual aid where our our police are going to go outside of Alameda, because I think the literal interpretation of this is they can't join in mutual aid activity if we don't have I mean, that's my that's my literal interpretation of what what's before us. And that's get back to what I was getting at earlier when I mentioned that there might be some wrinkles to this that we're not really. Go ahead. Let's go back to the Make or the Motion Council regardless. In my opinion, if there was a call for mutual aid, they could still respond to a call for mutual aid. It's just that I would want them to prioritize non curfew related calls that we're getting here in Alameda. What I heard was that the reason for the curfew in the city of Alameda is that we have a concern about overstretching our resources. And to that end, I would want to make sure that our resources are spent on responding to other reports. So if there's a report of a 459 or something like that, I would want us to be responding to that, not just pulling people over for curfew related things in town. So just to clearly you wouldn't be referring to a request for mutual aid? No. Okay. Does that satisfy your inquiry? Councilmember Garza. Actually, whether it does or not. We need to vote people. Okay. And this one also takes a does it take for affirmative votes? It's a 3 to 4 policy. It's direction. Okay. It is the council expressing its policy preference. Okay. Okay. And Madam Mayor, you are not a man. I am the mayor. Madam City Clerk. You got the the the clarification from the maker of the motion. Yes. Correct. Yes. All right, then. May we have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember de SAG. Yeah. I'm satisfied to be delayed. Yes. Next time. I. O.D.. Yes. Bella. I may or has as Ashcraft. High. That carries by five vice. All right, I want to motion. Sorry. Oh, one motion. Yes. To schedule a special closed session to discuss legal issues regarding the sheriff's order. A second. Okay. A motion to schedule a special meeting. Okay. Okay. Closed session. The potential litigation. All right. Um, okay. And city attorney, I'm trying to read your expression. Do you want to? I'm not a mind reader. All right. Let's hear from the city attorney, then the vice mayor. City attorney. If the council wants to schedule a initiation of litigation, the council can certainly direct us to do so, though, given that as soon as we would be able to do it, it's probably tomorrow and the order expires on Friday. Timing wise, it's not clear to me when you'd like to have it. We certainly could do it as soon as tomorrow. If you would like. And so I think, you know, obviously, we want to understand when you're what your timing looks like and whether or not it's tomorrow or your next regular meeting or a special meeting next week. And I'm happy to you know, we're obviously happy to take your direction however you like to proceed. Councilmember Ody. I hope it's moot by next week, but. I don't know. I don't know what he's going to do. I don't know if we would be interested in joining or some other city challenges. Maybe we're not. I don't know. That's why we would have the meeting. If I might comment, I. These are certainly important, serious issues. I'm also trying to be mindful of the amount of work our city staff is juggling right now with all the things that are before us. And so this is not to diminish the significance of what you're suggesting. I just wonder if if it has to be as soon as tomorrow, that makes people jump through a lot of hoops to get to pull together some sort of preparation. But I'm wondering if you had a, you know, some sort of. A how about we do it on Thursday? Because I think. I think we could give a different direction based on different possible outcomes. On Thursday or not, I mean, I don't know. And now pre-judging what decision we're going to make. All right. We do need to keep moving, people. That's past 9:00. So I guess if you want to make a motion, I not I guess you have every right to make a motion. So let me. Get a motion in a second on this. I think I think it was modified, actually. Because yesterday. It's Thursday. It's not tomorrow. Right. Okay, second, I second the modification. I mean. A comment. Can somebody say. Well, thank you. I do have 2 minutes, though. Um, I will say this much, you know, with the looting and mayhem that are going on in places like, uh, San Leandro and Fremont, I think now is not the time to go after the sheriff's department. We need to work with them. Um, through the mutual aid approach. Um, and I think this goes counter to that. In fact, we might need the help through that process. So you pursuing litigation now, I think is, is not the right time. If there are concerns about the way in which the sheriff's departments operate. I think there are better times than that now to deal with those policy issues in as clean a manner as possible. But right now, we're in a whirlwind of sorts. And so we're just trying to hang on on behalf of our residents, in terms of keeping them safe and our small businesses and keeping them safe as well. So I don't support litigation against the sheriff's department. Um, and my, my preference would be to wait and see what happens in the, in the days that you've noted that some very significant events are going to take place. And then, you know, I have I have concern, too, with with blanket orders. But I was also very alarmed over the weekend, not quite knowing where this was all going to end. But I, I think this week might be a little too soon, especially given the fact that Thursday is a day that was out, is, I believe, said the memorial service. But we. Did anyone want to comment? Anyone else? One comment. Okay. Vice Mayor. I. Struggling. Sorry, I am unmuted. I am struggling on this. I am Thursdays. I mean, the problem is, is that right now the thing ends on Friday, 5 a.m. at 5 a.m. If we wanted to schedule something for Thursday because it got extended beyond Friday, I would be able be willing to do that with the idea that we would cancel it if it had not been if it had not been extended. I just I it feels a little odd. I agree with councilmember deciding if things are really going crazy on Thursday. I don't really want to be pulling our staff resources into a into a conversation at that time to talk about something that's going to end before we could do anything about it. And so I would be willing to support them if we could have that kind of qualifier that will move forward. If not. If so, if not, we can I would say let's see if there's a way for us to figure out how to schedule this conversation in closed session for potential litigation moving forward at our next session meeting, I would be supportive of having it in two weeks. Make sure of the motion, Mr. Cody. Real briefly. I mean, I think I hope it will be moot by then, but I'm willing to agree to scheduling it Thursday if the sheriffs order is extended. Because if it ever dies, then it's going to be moot, in my opinion. Okay. And if it's extended for any length of time, even 24 hours. Well, yeah, because that's what gives us an opportunity to do something on Friday. But personally, I think this is a constitutional issue and I feel like our our sovereignty is being infringed on. I could be wrong. But as a discussion, it would be good to have. So I'll call the question. Now you've got a motion on the floor. You need to call the question. And I. I believe it's been modified. So anything more? I mean. Okay. I mean, let's have a let's have a roll call. The Madam. Quick. Council member said. No, not quite. I just want to ask to clarify. It has to take the soccer ball. It has the modifier that if it is extended, is a part of the motion. Okay. And I. Odie. Hi. Vella. I may or as the Ashcroft. Oh. Well. Hi. Or we can just. Yeah, I, we can discuss it, but, um. This like Kerry scored to one. Okay. All right. Um. Thank you, everyone. So with that, we adjourn this special meeting of the city council, and we move into our regular meeting. Anybody want a quick break? Okay. Okay. We are. And apologies to the audience, but we are going to take a what time is it? It is 911. Okay, everyone, can we be back in our seats by nine 2020? Yeah. Okay. See you. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thank you to for Larry. We are now starting the regular city council meeting. And could we please have the roll call? Madam, quick. Roll call has been noted. Five present. Thank you. Do we have any agenda changes? Hearing. And then we're going to move to proclamations and special orders of the day. Well, there are two proclamations that are entered into the record. They won't be presented today because when we do our remote meetings, we try to condense things a little bit. And that is a proclamation declaring the month of June 2020 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Pride Month, and also a proclamation declaring the month of June 2020 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month. And there is, however, one exception I'm making, and we are presenting a proclamation on behalf of someone that I think everyone on this council

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Molina, Wu, Network, LLC (MWN), a California limited liability company, for the lease and potential development of property owned by the City of Long Beach, located at 1720 Termino Avenue, 1760 Termino Avenue, and 4111 East Wilton Street; Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to accept the assignment, management, and revenue collection for existing leases between Long Beach Memorial Medical Center (MemoriaICare), and tenants located at City-owned property at 1720 Termino Avenue, 1760 Termino Avenue, and 4111 East Wilton Street; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to express the position of the City Council that maintenance of uninterrupted emergency services is critical and urging MemorialCare to take steps necessary to ensure a smooth transition to a new operator. (District 4)

LongBeachCC_06192018_18-0543

And so item 27 and 28 are going to be moved to future meetings. And with that, if we can have the clerk, please read item 45. Report from Economic Development Recommendation to execute an exclusive negotiating agreement with Molina Woo Network for the lease and potential development of property owned by the city located at 1720 Termino Avenue 1760 Termino Avenue and 4111 East Welton Street District for. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and have a pretty extensive presentation by our staff who are going to go through all of the information on community hospital. And then from there, we will go to the city council for any questions and comments. And then, of course, we will open it up to the public for any questions on the on the community hospital issue. Mr. WEST. Mr. Mayor, council members, we've been working on this for quite some time now, working very, very closely with memorial care, as they have chosen to close the hospital and working with them to try to find a new operator. We found a new operator. We're very excited about that. And we're looking for. An exclusive. Right to negotiate with this new operator. And with that, I'm going to turn over this presentation to John Keisler, our director of economic development, who has been leading the charge on this. Effort as the hospital does belong to the city of Long Beach with a team of other folks from Long Beach. So go ahead, John. Thank you, honorable mayor and members of the city council. I'm going to give you a quick overview of the progress since our last open study session on April 23rd. Give you an update on the seismic and PED state requirements. Talk a little bit about our due diligence process to identify a new operator and recommend some actions from the city council tonight. So in terms of our progress since the last study session, there's been a number of of important steps taken by memorial care, as well as the city, in partnership with our regulatory agencies, including the County Emergency Medical Services Agency Public Hearing. We testified to the State Health Committee to support Assembly Bill 2591, sponsored by Patrick O'Donnell on Arnold to delay state seismic compliance at the facility. We've conducted weekly tours of community hospital with potential operators conducted. We contracted with our architects Perkins and Will, and meet with our state regulatory agency to prepare the seismic compliance plans. We've worked with Memorial Care to renew state hospital licenses through this year through April 28th of 2019. Memorial care issued a workforce adjustment and retraining notice or a warn notice for 363 employees at community hospital, indicating the employment that will terminate July 3rd. And the County Board of Supervisors adopted an impact evaluation report from County Emergency Medical Services Agency for the Closure of Community Hospital. And additionally, we've completed extensive engineering, financial and operational due diligence associated with potential new operators. A quick overview of the seismic compliance issues at Community Hospital, Long Beach Senate Bill 1953 and subsequently Senate Bill 90 require that all acute care hospitals must meet seismic regulations by June 30th of 2019, or they will be shut down. Non-Acute care facilities are exempt from this requirement. And Memorial Care conducted a peer review that confirmed that there was an active fault at the line in the city, subsequently conducted its own third party review, which we contracted for to confirm that the fault did exist and that there was an active fault line on a portion of the site. The city confirmed with a state agency, the Office of Hospital Safety, on Monday, June 18th. That Memorial Care never actually submitted a plan to retrofit the facility, and that the statements regarding the feasibility of an acute care facility on the site were not attributed or attributable to our spend. Over the past six months, city staff has worked closely with Ashford, architect Perkins in Will and the State Geological Survey to establish plans for providing acute care services in seismically safe buildings on the site. So just to review what's actually we established going on on the site. So this conditions report has actually been completed but that it establishes that the Alquist pre all of fault line is established there is an active fault zone identified within the AP zone, which is the red zone that you can see on the image in front of you. We've also confirmed that new development has to set back at least 50 feet away from any active fault line for hospitals in the state of California. But we've also confirmed that up to 50% of construction on safe buildings is allowed on these sites. And so in meeting with the state officials on hospital safety, the proposed solution from occupied indicates that the city or the new operator could consolidate all the acute care services that are associated with operating an emergency department in a licensed hospital in the heritage building, which is considered seismically safe. You'll see that it actually the the SPC rating, the seismic ratings that the state attributes to these buildings allows for acute care services to work in the heritage building. But we would have to move the central plant or the utilities to a seismically safe area on the site. So in working with our architect over the past few months, we've established a conceptual schedule for how we would go about designing and ultimately achieving approval and permitting or entitlements from the state agency. We would also need to complete a process whereby we establish the construction costs and ultimately come up with a financing plan for construction. But we believe that construction, based on the design elements which we reviewed on the previous slide, could be completed sometime in near 2022 at the end of 2021. So what this means is that we still would require to complete this construction plan and achieve compliance and extension from the state of California for an extension of our deadline for seismic compliance. So in terms of our size, seismic situation and next steps, we would need to complete a feasibility study that demonstrates the ability to maintain an acute care facility with the essential services on the campus. We also still need to complete a cost estimate and then schematic drawings, basic drawings for the construction at the site , and we would need to develop construction plans. It's important to note that construction level drawings cost approximately $1 million to prepare. So this is not a small endeavor. It's actually a complicated one, and we need to identify the funding sources ultimately for the construction when this is completed, when we have achieved the the objectives of the construction plans and have negotiated a transition plan for operations of the site, we would have to reconnect with the State Assembly Assembly Health Committee to present the new operator and the operating plan, as well as a viable seismic compliance plan prepared by our architect and. Approved by. Occupied. And we're working on advancing the slide here. So next slide. All right, one more. All right. Very good. So I'm happy that tonight we get to present to the city council and to the public a potential operator for the community future of community hospital. In their conceptual proposal, the group Melina Wu and Network Medical Management LLC, or M.W., and proposed to operate a smaller, fully licensed hospital of approximately four beds located on the 2840. Beds used for 40. To 40 hospital beds. My apologies. All right, we get that. All right. Great. To do this and to warrant the type of investment that's needed for this type of project, they would need a minimum of a 40 year lease at the same term that was provided previous operators at $1 a year. The hospital operator agency would operate the hospital. They currently operate seven other hospitals in the region and network medical management would manage the care contracts. They operate a very extensive independent physicians association network as well as many other administrative services that help move a hospital there. Also, the partnership is exploring a potential joint venture with Cal State, Long Beach School of Gerontology and the School of Nursing. And they proposed to reconfigure portions of the hospital which actually meet the seismic standards to maintain an acute care hospital with an emergency department, 30 to 40 inpatient beds, as I mentioned, as well as the capability to receive advanced life support and paramedic ambulances, which is important, of course, to our police and fire departments. They would add complementary components such as independent and assisted living services, inpatient, outpatient, behavioral health services programs for potentially all inclusive care for the elderly, or space programs and medical education in conjunction with CSU, L.B., Outpatient, Medical and Surgical Services and a possible additional non-medical residential. They proposed a substantially higher community hospital employees. In fact, they would do that immediately to continue the expertize and training that already exists at the site. And they're requesting the city to explore financial participation in the immediate transition and then ultimately the seismic retrofit of the facility to be determined and to be negotiated for bringing back to the council in a public meeting. So to introduce you to the members of this partnership, Molina is represented by Pacific Six and Golden Shore Clinics, which include Dr. Mario Molina, founder of Golden Shore Medical Group, and John Molina, a partner and principal of Pacific Six. These fine gentlemen have over 30 years of experience in working in Long Beach health care, and they're the former executives of Molina health care who serve over 5 million clients and employ over 25,000 employees nationwide. Dr. Mario Molina, also as the founder of Golden Shore Medical Group, operates 17 clinics located in California across multiple counties. And John Molina, with Pacific six, invests in real estate development partnerships and has capitalized at $100 million, invested in both nonprofit and for profit real estate ventures. Alhambra Hospital Medical Center or HMRC Health Care, is owned by Dr. Jonathan Wu, who is also the chairman of H.M.S.. H.M.S. is a for profit, privately held hospital corporation based in the Greater San Gabriel Valley, with over 30 years of experience in hospital management. Currently owning seven community hospitals with over 1200 beds and 7000 employees in Southern California, there's a list of those hospitals, some of them near Long Beach, and would like to add Long Beach to the portfolio, including their membership with California Hospital Association, who is advocating for our bill to extend the seismic compliance. Network Medical Management or NMC, is actually led by Dr. Kenneth SIM, who is the chairman and a practicing physician. He has over 25 years of experience in managing physicians and working with managed care organizations to improve patient care. In addition to his practice, AMD provides service in ten counties throughout California and provides management for over 650,000 members who provide services in case management claims, contracting, credentialing, finance, accounting, member services, and many other administrative tasks associated with hospital management. They currently serve thousands of physicians in Long Beach, as well as contracts with Golden Shore Medical Group and as well as the Accountable IPA, which is Independent Physicians Association, a large Long Beach based group. So something that that I wanted to make sure that we addressed were recent statements from Memorial Care that indicated that it would be impossible for Community Medical Center to comply with applicable seismic requirements for an acute care hospital due to the hospital being located on an active earthquake fault. Memorial Care suggested publicly that these conclusions were confirmed by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, or occupied and later by the city's own outside experts. That was in a letter dated July 15th. Occupied has actually confirmed with staff. I was personally on the phone that they never formally received a construction plan for memorial care. Isopod also confirmed that they only comment on plans submitted for review. So it would be inappropriate for Occupy to make a statement or to confirm the statement from Memorial Care. Additionally, our city seismic expert confirmed the quality of the seismic study. It was not their job, nor did they claim to, to establish the viability of an acute care facility on the site. Additionally, another statement that is important to consider with for the recommendation tonight. Memorial Care on July 15th indicated that an interim management agreement, quote, would enable the private group to benefit financially by avoiding the need to make costly safety and other improvements to the facilities that would otherwise be required. This statement is just not true. Memorial care itself executed a 2010 management agreement with the community hospital of Long Beach, and our operator will still be responsible for making all safety improvements to the facilities. I want to make sure that I correct that the presentation says July 15th. In fact, this letter was received on June 15th. So the recommendations that staff are providing tonight to the city council for consideration is, number one, to authorize the city manager or designee to execute all documents necessary for an exclusive negotiating agreement with Molina, Wu Network, LLC or MWI, and for the lease and potential development of the property at Community Hospital. The use would require these or general terms and conditions to be negotiated an acute care hospital and other health care facilities at the site. A lease term of approximately 40 years or more. Rent of $1 a year. As a starting point. And staffing. A good faith effort to hire current hospital employees. The negotiating period would be 180 days with up to two periods of 90 days extension. And this is important because of the aggressive schedule we have for construction and licensing that is required to operate the facility. And any due diligence would be the sole cost of the lessee. Council approval would still be required. So although Council would take this action to authorize staff to negotiate, any terms or conditions would have to come back to the City Council for final approval and of course, public review. The second recommendation contained in this staff letter includes the authorization of the City Manager to execute all documents necessary to accept the assignment management and revenue collection for existing leases between Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, Memorial Care and the existing tenants at the site. As you may know, there's approximately 30 tenants out on the site in the medical office building and other parts of the facility that currently provide outpatient services. This would allow that city to take over the operations, management and security of the site during the negotiating period with NWN, and it would allow for the city to immediately negotiate leases with existing tenants in the medical medical office building on the site. This would include physicians as well as our sexual assault response team sought to make sure that those programs which are important to our city, continue to provide service. Finally, the third recommendation in this action would authorize the city manager to express the city's position that maintenance of uninterrupted emergency services is critical and urging memorial care and its board to take steps necessary to ensure a smooth transition to the new operator. This is a choice that the Council or the city would request memorial care to establish a transition plan with NWN and avoid or limit closing the emergency room before the state established seismic deadline. Suspend the license for hospital beds or transfer responsibility for hospital operations through a management agreement to NWN and to work with area hospitals and partner agencies to limit the negative impacts of emergency services. Disruption to area residents identified by the county's Impact Evaluation Report. To conclude some of our next steps that we are recommending would be to enter into a negotiating period with M.W. in return to counsel for approval of negotiated terms and conditions. Continue to work with our architect, our operator and the State Ocpd to finalize the seismic retrofit plans and provide a cost estimate back to Council for construction. We also would like to return to the state legislature once we have our operating plan and our seismic plan in hand to advance legislation that would extend the seismic compliance date and continue our work through Pacific Gateway, our Workforce Investment Network, to provide rapid response and continue weekly meetings with community hospital staff to make sure that 100% of our staff are placed either with M.W. and or another area hospital. And then we all know that memorial care has indicated that they will cease operations of community hospital on July 3rd. But we would want to make sure that we immediately transition those operations so that the new operator can take control of community hospital, submit their change of ownership application, and achieve licensing with the state of California. With that, I conclude my staff report and I'm happy to answer any questions. But first, I want to make sure that I introduce the Council to the spokesperson and representative of MWI, RN, Dr. Mario Molina, who's here tonight to give a brief statement. And secondly, Ray Burton, who is the chair of the Long Beach Hospital Community Foundation, to give a brief statement of support after Mr. or Dr. Molina. Thank you. Dr. Molina. Thank you. Mayor Garcia. Members of the city council. I think you all know that I was born and raised here in Long Beach and. Went to school here, went to. College here, and has spent most of my life working in health care in the city of Long Beach. I appreciate and understand how important Long Beach Community Hospital. Is to the. Community of Long Beach. And I think it would be terrible. For this important asset. Which is owned by. The city to close. A few weeks ago, my brother contacted me and told me that the hospital was. In danger of being. Closed and asked if. I thought there was anything that could be done. I contacted Dr. SIM and Dr. Wu. I know them over the years from what they've done in the community. They have a. Track record of operating. Hospitals, smaller hospitals successfully. They went out and hired a hospital administrator. Who has operated a 70 bed hospital here in Los Angeles County. And network medical management has a history of running outpatient facilities. So I. Helped to. Assemble a team. Which I think has the. Ability. To. Keep the hospital open. I believe we have the backing of the physicians on staff at the hospital. I think we have the backing of the nurses. I was contacted by St Mary Medical Center and they have said that they are supportive and are willing to help as well. So I think that this is a realistic plan. I've seen the plans the Perkin and will put together. They're very impressive. I think this is a very doable plan and we could submit this to ash pot and find out if we can get their approval. So, you know, my father always said there are. Lots of ways to solve a problem. And I think that as we. Attack this problem, we have to go into it with. A broad vision. And look at all the possible. Solutions and not limit ourselves. And I think that, you know, what we would like to do is get into negotiations with the city. The staff has done a magnificent job of pulling together a lot of information very quickly. And see if we can't find a long term workable solution. To keep the hospital open. Thank you, Dr. Melina. We're going to also hear from the foundation. Mayor Garcia and council members. I'm reporting. I chair the foundation at Community Hospital Long Beach at the direction of our board at a meeting last night with a unanimous vote of the. Members. I was directed to present a letter. To the city leadership and the effort of achieving the goal of continuation of emergency and critical care services, and to investing in and supporting the best possible health care solutions and services and programs for. All of the members of our. Community. In anticipation of Memorial. Care's signing, an interim. Operating agreement with Molina Will Network LLC Community Hospital, Long Beach Foundation Board of Directors has voted unanimously to support purchasing at a cost of up to $1 million to the extent allowed under the CHL. b501c3 tax exempt status and indemnification insurance plan to insure memorial care against any damages or losses as a result of. Actions. Related to the management. Or operation. Of community hospital Long Beach by the interim operator EMD and LLC under the license issued to Memorial Care. We encourage Memorial to act in the best interest of the community they serve and live up to their own mission statement by cooperating with both the City and M.W. and LLC in facilitating the transition of the new operator of Community Hospital. Community Hospital, Long Beach CHB Foundation Board has further agreed to explore. Conducting a capital campaign. Related to supporting the hospital's seismic needs. The foundation met with the new operator and is engaged in discussions to develop a partnership to support the hospital and the medical needs of the community. Be assured that we remain fully. And totally committed. To a successful. Durable result for our community. And we look forward to our important role as a philanthropic partner to ensure that vital health care services remain immediately available and accessible to our community for many years to come. I'd also like. To point out. That I have a copy of the management agreement here Memorial signed with Community Hospital when Memorial took over. So we're merely asking them to respect the tradition they were part of by signing a management agreement with AMW. And on a personal note. Please recognize that memorial, a public benefit, nonprofit, tax exempt organization, has several billion. That's with a B like burden, billion dollars in the bank and reportedly. Had a net income. Last year of over. $346. Million. Memorial raises a lot of money. From donations from. This community. Friend of mine just told me today she raised almost $50,000. For the last dancing fundraiser they put on. It's time for Memorial to act on their mission statement to, quote, improve the health and wellbeing of individuals, families and our communities. Thank you for your time. I have a copy of the letter I'd like to submit to clear. It to the clerk over here. Thank you very much. And thank you to the foundation. So in talking to Councilman Zupan, I'm going to make some some comments and some clarifying remarks also just to staff. And then we're going to open it up for public comment and then and then Councilman Super. And I want to kick it off right after the the public comment with emotion. And then we have some other members that want to that want to have some questions as well. Well, let me let me just say a few things. First is, I think it's important to note that we know that memorial care has and will continue to be a very big part of our community. They operate a world class facility. A lot of us here have relatives and friends who either work there or have certainly received there. They're still in health care. And memorial care, as we know, has a large presence here in the region. And we're and we're grateful that they operate a hospital. We also know that community is an incredibly important part of our health care system here in Long Beach, and that having an emergency room in East Long Beach and one that has done so much for so many people is also critically important. It's it's really, I think, amazing to watch the community come together to support community hospital. It has been the physicians, the nurses, the folks that work there, the community members, the foundation and our our stellar staff that has, quite frankly, had to move quickly and with very little notice to put a plan forward so that we can continue to have an operating hospital with an emergency room in in this part of of the city. And so I commend all of you for just the quick action, really much less time than anyone should should have to put this kind of proposal forward. And so I want to thank all of you for doing that. I also want to be very clear tonight that the ball is in Memorial's court. It is up to memorial care as to whether or not we will have a open, functioning hospital for the remainder of the year. We're looking forward to going into this partnership, of course, with NWN, and we're excited about the future. But we need and have asked Memorial Care formally to please work with us as a partner and the partner that they have been to ensure that the process continues and that there isn't a lapse in service that would be disruptive first and foremost to emergency care. It would be disruptive to our fire department and the paramedics who are trying to help people across the city. And it would be disruptive to the people that work at the hospital that are counting on these jobs for their livelihoods and that have been members of our community for a long time . I want to clarify, there have been some remarks by some that this group doesn't have hospital management experience, which I find odd considering the group manages seven hospitals and comes with an incredible amount of experience. So I just wanted to reiterate to our staff and I know you listed them on here, but I think it's important just to bring this home at this point home because it's been brought up a few times by by certain folks. But the group that we are partnering with and part of the Molina who network is H.M.S. Health Care and now H.M.S. Healthcare operates the Alhambra Hospital Medical Center, the Anaheim Regional Medical Center, Garfield Memorial Center, the Greater El Monte Community Hospital. Monterey Park Hospital. Whittier Hospital Medical Center. San Gabriel Valley Medical Center and Montclair Hospital Medical Center. Every single one of those facilities actually has more beds than the proposed hospital that is being proposed by the group today, which is really a a smaller boutique hospital of 40 beds, but with an emergency room. And so I'm very grateful that we have a stellar, experienced and well-respected and regarded group in front of us that has stepped up. And as I said, we want and we know how important community hospital is to the community. And so for that, Dr. Molina, and to the group, you have our you have our thanks for that. I also want to just note that I am concerned that I was told and I think this this body was told on a couple of occasions that that there had been some conversations, of course, that that that were that were had between memorial care and the state. And I want to pull up the exact. And John, can you pull up the slide so that I can refer. Really quick. I don't want to get any of it wrong. If we could get some help from the back just to put the PowerPoint back up on the screen, please. Thank you. But I know I know that we we had received an indication that our pad had made some declarations and some assessments of the. Of seismic compliance, as well as the ability of an emergency room on the site due to the state regulations when it comes to seismic compliance. And that's something that we took as serious, and it certainly guided decisions that we made early on about the complexity of of this of this negotiation. But just to reconfirm with you, Mr. Keisler, that the ash pit is very clear to you that there actually was never any sort of formal request to actually study the seismic issues or to make an assessment. Is that correct? Correct. So as recently as yesterday in our regular meetings with Ashford, they confirmed that no construction plans had ever been submitted to the state for review and that they do not take a position one way or another, on and on hypotheticals. And so that you know, that the statements that were made by memorial care and I'm certainly those assumptions are not are not correct. And so I say that because I think that's a critical part of this conversation, is that we're all moving together as a community forward with accurate information and that we're all able to work, work , work together in the in the future. Let me let me also just add that what's critical right now is we need to ensure that the license that the memorial court has, the ability to keep this license operating. I believe it's until April of next year. And so that is there. And they have every every opportunity to continue operating until April of next year if they take that decision, which we certainly encourage them to do. That would give the amount of time that's appropriate for our new operator to come in and to provide quality health care, ensure that people have their livelihood in their jobs, and provide this important service for the eastern part of our city. And I'll tell you, quite frankly, it will take a lot of concern off of our fire chief and our fire department and our paramedic units, who are incredibly distressed about their ability to provide strong paramedic service across the city at appropriate response times. And so that is something where we have been told that memorial care is considering moving on from the hospital. I believe it's July, July 3rd. That is that is something that we hope that they choose to extend or go into a management agreement quickly with our new operator or put some kind of deal in place where they suspend the beds and don't allow the license to actually expire. And just for the community to understand that expiration of the license is critical and changes our ability to provide consistent service. And so, again, to our partner Memorial Care, thank you for all you do. And we really look forward, hopefully to working with you as we chart this course forward and with our with our hospital. And so with that, I'm going to turn this over to public comment. And then when we come back, we're going to start off with Councilmember Supernova. So please come forward for public comment. Hi. I'm Linda Chico. I'm the field deputy for Supervisor Janice Hahn. Supervisor Hahn would like to commend city staff for working so diligently to find a new operator for community hospital. She understands that this was a monumental task that was performed on an accelerated timeline. And she thinks you for all of your hard work. The County of Los Angeles is very familiar with the respective work of the recommended operator Molina Wu Network, LLC, and Supervisor Hahn is pleased to offer her support for MWI and to transition as the new operator of Community Hospital. Early on it was important for Supervisor Hahn to get everyone to the table to ensure we were all on the same page and moving forward in the best interest of the community that we all serve from. That meeting, the city, County, State, Community Hospital Foundation, Memorial Hospital and California Nurses Association all agreed the closure of the hospital would have a detrimental impact on the residents in Long Beach and the surrounding area. This determination was underscored by a report from the County of Los Angeles Emergency Medical Services Commission, which highlighted longer travel times, longer wait times in local emergency rooms, the loss of 30 critical care beds, the loss of the only sexual assault response team in Long Beach, and the loss of 28 licensed psychiatric beds just to name a few. Each stakeholder at that table also committed to doing everything possible to minimize disruption and service to the community. It would be ideal if a break in service could be avoided altogether by executing an interim management agreement with service transfer by July 3rd or that memorial, Kirby urged to suspend their license rather than terminating it outright. Doing either would truly compliment the city and MWI n's efforts to minimize disruption in service to the greatest extent possible. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Mayor Garcia. Vice Mayor Richardson, City Council members. My name is Margaret Smith and I'm a resident of the third district. Tonight I am speaking from four perspectives. First of all, as a resident of Long Beach, so I see the health care needs of our community. As a consumer. Secondly, as a retired health care executive who worked for many hospitals. Over a 30 year career, including memorial care. So I understand their concerns about. The continued operations of community hospital on an active. Seismic fault. But I also have huge respect. For the Molina's and their. Health care expertize. Third, as a member of my family, who for 75 years owned and operated a private psychiatric hospital in Pasadena called Lawson Seniors. So I understand the importance of mental. Health to a community. And fourth, I am now an appointee of Supervisor Janice Hahn. To the L.A. County Hospitals and Health Care Delivery Commission. We oversee the entire. L.A. County health system. So I am concerned about the broader impact of the closure of community hospital. From these four perspectives. I respectfully voice my concerns. About the. Loss of the. Emergency department. But also about the loss of the 28 mental beds, mental health beds. That is a critical component of community hospital's range of services and the loss of the sexual assault response team. The. If the community hospital closes, the next closest program is 12.1. Miles. Away in San Pedro. If you are a victim of sexual assault in Long Beach, you should. Not have to. Travel 12 miles to San Pedro to get help. So for all of Long Beach, we need these services. So please ensure that the next operator of Community Hospital. Hopefully the Molina Food Network, maintains these critical services for all the. Residents of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. The honorable mayor, ladies sitting City Council. Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Mike for Solomonov. Like yes, I am a former chief of staff at Community Hospital. First of all, I want to thank the mayor. Mayor Garcia and. The Council for all your support and help. In this matter. I want to thank John Keisler. Who has done an. Incredible job. He has great expertize, great personality, and it's great working with you. I want to especially thank our champion councilman, Darrell Super now for his unwavering support and diligence. What a snake. Susie Price, who attended some of our meetings. I want to thank the foundation and everybody who's here. First of all, we want to welcome the Dr. John and Mario Molina, Dr. Groom and his network for all their expertize. And the hope that they give us as. Community closes. We know that people's lives are at risk. It compromises the health and well-being of people. People lose their jobs. Livelihoods are affected. Even local businesses are affected. That's why it is imperative that we open this hospital as soon as possible to limit the consequences. Period. A seamless transition is needed. Long Beach is a diverse city many ethnic groups, cultures and businesses. But as diverse as it is a common person, the common purpose is that we care and we help each other. If Memorial was hurting, Community would be there to help. I would hope that in the goodness of memorial care that. They would help their sister hospital get back on its feet. The world is too small and our time in this world is too little not to want to help each other. Thank you for all your help. Thanks so much. Thanks, Speaker. Good evening, Mayor and city council members. My name is Sarah Patterson, and I'm speaking here tonight on behalf of Assembly Member Patrick O'Donnell's strong support and. In the effort to keep. The only East Long Beach hospital operational, Mr. O'Donnell says it is painfully clear that memorial care wants to be the only provider in town. Since announcing their intent to leave community hospital last fall, Memorial. Care radically accelerated their closure timeline again and again. Memorial Care appears to be actively working to ensure that no other entity can take over the hospital they are leaving behind. But Memorial Care cannot have it both ways. Community Hospital offers the only full service emergency room on the east side of the city, and closure would significantly impact the region's trauma care system and further strain the health care safety net. Memorial care has made their business decision. The rest of us are doing our part to protect the public's health and safety, save local jobs and keep community hospital open. Assembly member Patrick O'Donnell would like to thank the city and stakeholders for working diligently to find a new provider to potentially take over the hospital . It is the expectation from Sacramento that Memorial Care will work with the city to seamlessly transition the hospital to another provider. This should be done without any interruption in critical health care services. For these reasons, Assemblymember Patrick O'Donnell is in strong support of the Molina Wound Network, L.L.C., to run Community Hospital Long Beach. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Good evening, mayor garcia and council people and. Dr. Molina needs to hear this. Too. My name is Charlene Ouray. I'm retired from Long Beach City College and Program. I was a professor there for over 35 years. And I wouldn't I didn't intend to speak tonight because I just came to support community hospital. But what I did see was that you have mentioned Cal State University of Long Beach Nursing program. And I never heard one word about the ADN program at Long Beach City College and the students that should be attending this hospital. The one thing you don't know historically is that Long Beach Community Hospital has been supported by Long Beach City College nurses for over 35 years. And I think. I think Dr. Molina knows that. But I'm just bringing it to the board attention that that was a little slip, as much work as John has done. That was rather left out, considering that the nurses are so supportive. Here are the ones from Long Beach City College. Thank you. Thank you. And and even even John Cassidy is not perfect. And so we we do know. We do know that in talking to the new partners coming in, that they are very interested, of course, in working with our educational partners. And, of course, that includes a one beach city college. Absolutely. Yes. Good evening. My name is Jackie McKay. I'm an ICU nurse at Community Hospital for 33 years. And I have the privilege of working with John Keisler on the technical workforce. And I'm so grateful to all the work you guys have done. Amazing. And we're so happy that we found a new operator. I have a side hustle at community hospital, like the nurse rep for when the nurses get in trouble, they call me. I go to H.R. with them and I know firsthand how Memorial believes in rules. They make you follow the rules. They're on you. So for them to not be completely honest is just amazingly awful to me. And I think for the council, I hope you find a way to hold their feet to the fire to make them follow their rules. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, everyone. My name is Milton Dana. I'm a third district resident, a machinist and a member of Save Community Hospital, Long Beach Coalition member. And we have been working to try to save this hospital since November. We finally get an operator who's willing to come into the site and memorial. Who do you think would be a good community partner is refusing to enter an interim agreement with a new operator. This is sad that memorial would sacrifice our community hospital for their selfish reason to keep out a competitor. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. I'm Ellen Markovich. I work at Community Hospital, Long Beach. ICU for 35 years. I'm a Long Beach City College grad class of 83. I come to you not wearing my usual red. And where am I? Community Hospital. T-shirt today. I am frustrated and excited at the same time, excited that we have a group that is very interested in running our small hospital and providing services to East Long Beach, which is a huge population of people. Huge. I am frustrated in that it feels like. Memorial wants doesn't want the competition. And feels like I'm back out because of that. And it kind of reminds me a little bit on what's going on at the border right now. You know, it's like it's a policy change. People just change the policy and everything is can proceed much more humane. And I just feel as though we are under their thumb only because they don't want the competition. Dr. Mike was saying how it's not just the patients, the community, its employees, and it's the. Surrounding. Businesses. And to that I say, what is Biggie's going to do without all of us ordering food to be delivered? Okay, this is. A big deal to them. We keep them in business. So just anything. That we can do to keep our place open, you know that you have the support of the nurses, you have the support of the California Nurses Association, of which I am a member, and they have been instrumental in trying to help keep this hospital open. And I ask that we do the same thing and hold Memorial accountable. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Council members and Mayor Garcia. My name is Jim de la Russo. I'm a physician. I'm kind of a newbie at community hospital. I've only been there like 20 years. I'm also an ex chief of medical staff there, as well as Dr. Mike. I wholeheartedly support all the efforts and the recommendations that you're currently making. I, too, am very, very grateful to all of you who have clearly been very vocal in supporting community hospital when all this came down in November. Your staff is unbelievable, John, especially the work groups that have been together, the the Community Hospital Foundation, all the local community members. I know you've gotten together many architects and other people. It's just phenomenal that all of this has been able to come together in such a short period of time. It's quite remarkable. In speaking with a number of physicians at Community Hospital, I believe I can say that that I have not heard none of us have heard anybody who is opposed to any of this. We all wholeheartedly support a new operator in the Wu Molina Wu network. And it goes without saying too. We're all concerned about everybody that works at the hospital. But don't forget, many of the physicians have worked there for years and years as well, and many of them actually depend on their livelihood for that facility's care too. I also support the mental health initiatives at the hospital. I think that would be very, very painful to lose that service. I also support the emergency room services, but also the acute care hospital is very important, including the surgical services. That's where I work and it's also a big need in the community. I want to thank you for all of your support and I know that memorial will do the right thing going forward. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker. I name's Alison Miller and I've addressed council before. I am an employee. I'm an R.N. with Long Beach Memorial. I work the oncology unit. I'm also an independent contractor for SA. I respond to the sexual assaults and CHB is one of those with forensic nurse specialists. My heart's racing. I'm still blown away at that seismic study and the big reveal tonight. But, you know, working for memorial, I know with memorial care, we do do a lot of good. We do do a lot of good. And I know that the closure of CHP is a crisis. No doubt. We all know that in this room. I'm so proud of the council and the city. And I want to thank Dr. Molina and Dr. Wu and and the foundation with the generous contribution. 1 million should cover a lot from memorial. I want to appeal to my employer to enter in some sort of agreement to see a transition that's smooth so that patients aren't left out on the street. We're concerned with behavioral unit. We're concerned we don't want to close. We're not sure what's going to happen with this heart. Patients that are raped, they shouldn't be transported to another city. And this is ridiculous. This doesn't need to be about competition. Hospitals join mergers to make profit every day, and we should be able to, even if it's on a temporary memorial care, should be able to work with the Molina's to to get this done for a temporary basis. I just want to. I've been looking around the room. I don't know if anyone here is is here for memorial, but I just want to appeal to my employer to do the right thing. And thanks for having me. Thank you so much. Next speaker. Hello. My name is Michelle Pimental. I'm a registered nurse. I worked at a community hospital and the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment center. Because of their announcement and their closure, I had to leave for my own family's well-being. And I work now in Newport Beach. And because the community has closed their detox unit, I have seen patients come from Long Beach all the way to Newport Beach for substance abuse treatment. I hope that you'll include that in your mental health. I'm I know I can speak for my colleagues in mental health. They are grateful to hear that Molina is considering maintaining those services. Those are critical services in this city. Most of all, I want to say thank you to everybody that has been involved. The day of their announcement, myself and Jackie and Ellen were in a meeting with the nurses union and we contacted Darryl Super Now and he came over immediately and met with us. And and in this current political environment, it's hard to know who to trust. And I've been overwhelmed and impressed with how much. Time and devotion, the city, the doctors, the community has put into saving this because this is really important. I asked my daughter to come with me today because she was there with me. She heard me making phone calls and trying to help do everything I could to get people riled up. And she came to the parade with us and she said to me on the way here, she said, Sometimes it felt like we couldn't do it, but here we are. We did it. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Mr. Mayor, council members John Hanna, Governmental Affairs Director for the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters on behalf of the 1000 carpenters and family members in the city of Long Beach. I first of all urge you to adopt agenda item 40 580543 and I want to join the Amen chorus here. And the last speakers talked about the political climate. There's a lot of cynicism about elected officials in government in this day and age. What you've done here on this issue is kind of throw a lot of cold water on that, at least as it appears applies to Long Beach. You've done exactly what I think our forefathers who helped form this country had in mind when they wanted local control. And you've taken an issue and rather than take the easy way out. Oh, there is you know, we can't do this. You've found a way to say yes to serve the community. Now there's just one problem. Memorial care. And I think. Somebody earlier said it I think best. They they do do a lot of good things in this community. But on this issue. They've lost their way. They've lost their moral compass on this issue. They've let, whether it's money or whatever, get in the way of doing what's best for this community. And so I want to commend the nurses union, the community foundations, the the people in this community who've worked with the city staff and the council to come to a good solution. And I think by doing what you're doing, you're going to help. God willing. Memorial. To find that way, to find their way and their inner compass. So thank you very much. And please stay the course on this. Thank you, John. Next week, bigger piece at Mayor City Council. My name is Marcus Hesse and the community manager at a nonprofit known as Anxiety Gaming. And this is our founder, Jason. Dr.. And we're coming here as supporters of the mental health initiatives going on in this community and hoping to bring ourselves along to support this initiative . Our father wanted to give an idea of who we are and what we do in this community so far. Hi, counsel. I've been running anxiety gaming out of Long Beach for the last seven years. At first I ran it at home as somebody struggling with agoraphobia who took their first steps out of their home here in this beautiful city. Since then, with the support of many people within Long Beach, we've helped over 27,000 people beat their depression and anxiety. Our team has been looking to start a clinic for some time now, teaming up with some of the greatest psychologist clinicians across the country. We want to be able to step in and help in the same way the city has helped us for the past so many years, for my entire life. We have a team that's willing and able to take over the behavioral health unit, and we're willing to work with anybody and everybody that is already stationed there and worried about their situation in their job. We focus entirely on youth and young adults. We have programs at 36 different universities across the country that involve thousands of students. We have a team network with a high school program where we also help over 10,000 high school students. For us, this is everything. Mental health care is what we live and we breathe, and we want to make sure that we can take care of the youth, especially within the city, through our initiatives. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. And we will be closing the speakers list. So the lady here is the last speaker. Go ahead. Okay. Good evening, honorable mayor, councilmembers and city staff. I wanted to let you know that I'm so appreciative of all of your efforts and how expedient everything has been thus far. I also want to commend the potential new operators, Melina Wu Network. I had the opportunity to actually I was CEO at Community Hospital, spent 47 years there of my career. So working with the nurses and the physicians and then had the opportunity to transition and work as a hospital administrator for Molina Health Care. And I wanted to offer support because the Melina's had been very honest, very straightforward and a wonderful employer. And I'm so proud also of our community staff and the physicians because they've really continued to deliver exemplary care for our patients, what they what community is known for. And I do want to say thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Helen Naha, resident of Long Beach. I'm going to be very, very brief. You some of you know that I can be lengthy. I'm not going to tonight, I want to take a moment to thank the mayor and the council for standing up for something that matters a lot. We're talking we're talking buildings, we're talking companies, we're talking money. We're talking a lot of things that really, really matter. But we're not talking about people that much. And when you're talking about getting in an ambulance or in your own vehicle and going from your home on the east side of town, as I've done, and you have to get to Memorial or to St Mary, you may not make it. You've only got time to get to community. My mother crashed and we call 91191 once and I said, Where are you? Take her. And they said, We're going to memorial that. We're going to community. And at that time, I didn't know what a phenomenal place community was. They just and I said, Why aren't you taking her to memorial? And they said, Because she's going to die on the way. My mother did not die. I had her for another ten years and that's because we had community hospital all over the east side. Those minutes matter to a lot of people, and if we don't have that hospital, those people are going to die. And I am so grateful that the city is on our side this time. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Next, Mr. Goode here. Please last speaker. Very good. You. I am either qualified to speak in terms of the medical aspects of it or the financial aspects, notwithstanding the fact that either last week of last year I ended up there. And somebody took me there. And when we arrived, the record show, I think there were eight or nine people that have been waiting for for four or 5 hours. To be even triaged. And I had them ask them to check with memorial. And memorial was the same thing, period. I'm not sure what the answer is, but I. I listened to representatives. Of Janice Hahn and. Others that we're talking in terms of regional aspects. So forth. I'm not sure what the answer is, but one of the things we might take a look at. Because, again, if it's there. And you. Can't get in or can't get in memorial, it doesn't do you any good. One of the things we might take a look at. Is entering. Into a paradigm where we helicopter people and obviously the helicopter location. Is where the police would have the person would be taken. We wouldn't have it in a residential neighborhood. And I'm. Again thinking in terms of the future, as. Our population is not going to decrease, period. So we've got to figure out a way. To address the problem. And I'm not sure, but I think we should, you know, all of the specifics. But I think we should look. At the merit of seeing if we can really enlarge our paradigm in terms of offering that and figuring out a way to get people there. Because even if. Memorial is if a community hospital is. There. And you can't get in. That doesn't do you any good. Like last year when I had to go to and they ended up in, I went up into a Burbank. And made it up in 57 minutes and so forth. I spent 13 days there. But I think we have to look into terms of the future because the problem's not going to get any. Lighter, so forth in terms of need. Thank you. Thank you. That will conclude our public comment. So thank you all for speaking. I'm going I go back now to the council. We do have a motion and a second motion by Councilmember Supernanny, so I'm going to pass it over to him. Thank you. At first I could thank everyone for attending and especially our speakers. I want to mention a few others. Again, Dr. Molina, thank you for and your partners for stepping up to the plate in this critical situation to the Long Beach Community Foundation. You folks have worked so hard for the past six months and to cap it off tonight with this incredible offer for $1,000,000 insurance policy. All I can say is thank you. To our nurses. Thank you. Boy, you mentioned that first meeting. Wow, that was a long time ago, but we've been in support from day one. And thank you for holding the line and being there for the rallies and everything and and the parade. So, so happy to support you in that too. Staff John Kaiser I don't think you're infallible. I think you're perfect. But I also want to mention Diana Tang, who's sitting next to John there. Thank you, Diana. You did an incredible job, especially for. Sacramento and to ask or see who is part of our development services team. What he's doing there out on the site is incredible to all the volunteers who may not be a member of the foundation or whatever. Thank you. I think in particular of Ruth Lau. We have about 20,000 reasons to thank her. So thank you, Ruth. And also, I just have to mention the mayor and my council colleagues, you know, their support has been there from the beginning. I never had to explain to them what an asset this is, city wide. But they backed me from from day one on this. So I do appreciate that. I did want John Kaiser to explain something for the viewers and the audience in particular about this handoff. If you can just kind of delineate, John, how the handoff would work or what are the pitfalls of this doesn't happen, if that's enough of a question for you. Councilmember. Super, not yet. So. So there's something important about a transition of the hospitals that there's a a license which allows the hospital to operate at a site. Right now, the license for community hospital on the site is is held by memorial care. And Memorial Care has an active license through April 28th of 2019. So for a new operator to come in and not experience a 6 to 9 month wait, which means no service for 6 to 9 months while their application is approved by the State California Department of Public Health, we would need some sort of agreement between the two entities. And so that's that's one of the things that's important about any good handoff is that, you know, the time of disruption is is minimized. And so this is very common. It's something we've seen happen throughout the region. In fact, Memorial Care participated in a similar process with community hospital Long Beach back in 2010 to minimize the amount of disruption while the new operator gets a new license for that site. And so there's many options to explore. One would be a suspension of of the beds so that the license does not expire or is not surrendered. And that's what we've asked for memorial care to work with us. And if the memorial care board desires to work through that process, then it will allow the operator either to step in at an earlier time or at least minimize the length of disruption. Okay. Thank you for that explanation. And the dollar amounts are staggering as to whether we do a warm handoff or not. Are you at liberty to discuss any of that at all. At this time? We're we're in the initial discussions of reviewing pro formas that the operator has been preparing, as well as looking at what would be required for startup cost or transitional costs, even in the environment of a warm handoff. There's there's costs associated with emergency medical records systems, which are very expensive. There's costs associated with equipment. And to the extent that memorial care could sell or lease, the existing equipment to the new operator would minimize the cost as well as minimize the disruption. Also, entering into a management agreement whereby they could operate under memorial care's license would allow them to start the process of providing service and hopefully generating revenue cash flow that will help in the transitional process. And then finally costs like an insurance policy to protect memorial care from any liability. The fact that our community foundation members of the community will donate their own money in the amount of $1 million certainly helps to defray those costs and reduce that liability for memorial care. All of those things can help diminish startup costs, which are estimated to be depending on the type of handoff. Anywhere from ten and up to $30 million is our initial estimate. Thank you. That that gets our attention. I guess I'd like to limit my comment tonight here to just one basic statement, and that is a lot of the speakers refer to the fact that memorial care may not have done the right thing to date. So my message is to memorial care. Here's your chance to save face. If you can step up and make this transition now. I think that would really reinstate the citizens faith in Memorial Memorial Care, doing the right thing for the community. And so I'd just like to hand off to my colleagues now for their comments. Thank you. Thank you. Got some more super now, Councilwoman Bass. Thank you. I, I first, I want to thank my colleague, Councilman Super. I know we spend a lot of time up here thanking one another. You must wonder why we do that. It's because there are hours and hours of hard work that go into every item that comes before council. And every time one of our colleagues is leading on an item, we know the amount of work that they've put in behind the scenes and out of respect for one another. We try to support projects that are going on in each other's districts to the extent that that feels right to us, and we want to acknowledge the hard work that they've done. And he has worked really hard on this issue. That really is a city issue, but certainly an east side issue. So I want to thank him for for his partnership and his leadership on it. And, of course, our city staff deserves a standing ovation. I mean, they have done in three months what prior operators had not been able to do in many years. And so I'm incredibly impressed with their leadership, their tone, their sentiments and the hard work that they've put into really walking the walk and not just talking the talk , because that's what's gotten us to this point. I myself was taken to Community E.R. two weeks ago. I had emergency spine surgery a couple of days after I went to the hospital. And it was a huge reminder to me of how important it is for us to have an emergency room on the east side. Certainly it was not a life or death situation for me, but for anyone who's ever had a ruptured herniated disk, you'll know that you're in excruciating pain and screaming the whole way. And, you know, all I just kept telling my husband is, can you please call and make sure community is still open? Can you please make sure they're still open? Can you make sure there are bodies there? And we got there. Of course there was. No, wait. The staff was amazing, as they always have been in terms of my prior experience with them. And it just was a very personal and timely reminder to me of this amazing asset that we have on the east side. I think the car ride for me from our house to memorial would have been excruciatingly painful. Every speed bump was felt. Every pothole was felt, every stoplight was felt. And it was for me a not a life and death situation. So I think it's really important for us to realize how important it is for us to have acute care services on the east side of Long Beach for east side residents. And the option for me of driving to memorial or driving to Los Alamitos. Would have been the only options I would have had had community not been open on that day. And so that was just an eye opening experience really. I think that we have a potential operator here who we believe in. We believe that this operator is certainly qualified and capable and vested on many levels in the future of Long Beach. And that means a lot to us. And frankly. We've worked really. Hard to get to this point. And the ball is now in Memorial's court to partner with us. I understand the reservations well to some extent, and I understand the hesitation. But at the end of the day, we've had a tremendous working relationship with Memorial up until this issue, and there's no reason why this can't be an opportunity for us to work together to really make sure that we preserve this asset. They know that without their help and their support, we're in a much more difficult place than we would be with their support. And so I think that knowledge alone should really empower them to do the right thing in this situation, despite the concerns that they might have. I think, given what Ray announced Ray Burton announced earlier tonight, and the great work that the staff and the supporters of community hospital have put into coming up with mitigation options to help mitigate the risks. Associated with this partnership. I think that makes it a lot harder for Memorial to say no to or to turn away this opportunity. You've made it a little bit more. Beneficial. For them to participate in this transition with us. And I thank you for doing that, because it really does help us give them some further assurances. This really is our. Only meaningful chance right now to move forward in a smooth process and transition. And I ask Memorial really to think about that. Will we be able to. Do it without memorial? Absolutely. Will we do it without memorial? Absolutely. We're committed to that as a council. But the issue isn't will we do it is do we have a meaningful shot at a smooth transition? And we do with and only with their partnership. So I reach out to the audience and to anyone watching. Many, many people that are involved with Memorial and have helped memorial through the years. Our third district residents, I myself have helped fundraise for Memorial by participating in various fundraisers, very, very supportive of memorial. But this is the opportunity for us to try to look at a path forward and move this process to the next phase. And really, it does fall on memorial at this point to help make this transition possible. They've been a great partner and I look forward to future partnership and I thank everyone that came out, especially many residents from my own district who are here have been here every step of the way, fighting for community to stay open. I thank you for the countless hours that you give to this issue every day and of course, to our nurses. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I wanted to just chime in and just join in on the chorus of attending a lot of council meetings in the last eight years. And I got to tell you, this is this is one for the history books. This is incredible, the response that's come together on behalf of Councilman Super. Now, the mayor, the city council, city staff here, the community coming together. This is one for the history books. Dr. Molina, I have to tell you, your values, the commitment to the community that you've demonstrated is not lost on me. And there's about 30 youth here in the audience that have an item coming up. And I can tell you what you've demonstrated today of growing up in a community demonstrating the community commitment through corporate responsibility. That's a message that's not left. Don't lost on them as well. So I want to say thank you. You know, I have to I have to say a few additional things. There are a lot of great things, great things that I want to call out about this this proposal. So, one, we've identified a qualified operator with roots in the community and the right experience. That's one. We have a commitment to retain 100% of the impacted staff. This doctors, nurses and miscellaneous staff. That is wall to wall. That's two. Three. There is a willingness to work with memorial care. So those are no lapse in service that help support your paramedic services, that help support just the quality of life of residents in the East Side and citywide. And then Fourth Community Hospital stood up today with the biggest surprise of the night, committing $1,000,000 to cover Memorial Corp memorial care through the transition. Those are four amazing, amazing elements of this proposal that that that really need to be applauded. All the boxes are checked, all the bases are covered. And and this has been said numerous times tonight. And I'm going to just join in in the choir, join in the chorus. The ball is in Memorial's Cares hands. We've all demonstrated support from oral care. We all understand that this is a sum of all of its parts a closure of an emergency room, a closure of the hospital on one side of town. Impact services for All Long Beach and surrounding communities from Lakewood Regional is gone. That's the, you know, emergency room closest to me. They're going to see impacts the emergency room, you know Long Beach Memorial and all our emergency rooms are going to see impacts. You're going to see paramedic response times increase if we don't have this. So the ball is truly in their in their court. And so we ask them to step up. Demonstrate corporate responsibility and partner with us so we can have the best the best result possible. So just one of the jack to chime in and say, I'm really proud of tonight and really proud of this work. The ball is in their court. Thank you, Councilman. Super. Now, it's just been amazing to see your sort of level, hand level head, your steady hand through this whole process. And and, you know, this is just a great moment. And I wanted to acknowledge that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Pierce. Thank you. There are often times, whenever we sound like an echo chamber up here, and I don't think any of the times in the last two years I've been on this council have been as important as tonight. And so I want to really thank everybody that's already been mentioned. The board members are really coming together, strategizing the staff. I echo the same sentiment when this was presented to us. My jaw dropped and that gut wrenching feeling of, oh my God, are we actually going to be able to come through on the other side and and make this a reality? As a city council member, as a mental health commissioner at the county and as a patient of community hospital, today's a really proud day. I'm really proud of the team, Dr. Molina, and everybody that stepped up. It is exciting to see somebody that has roots in the community invest back in and think creatively outside the box. I'm not going to take too much time. I do think that the questions that Councilmember Supernova asked that got the answer, that 10 to $30 million is the difference if memorial care doesn't step up and do the right thing. And that's why we are an echo chamber tonight. That's why we continue to say memorial care. This isn't about profits. This is about people. This isn't about competition. This is about saving lives. This is about saving face for some people. But this is about our residents making sure that they have access to health care, which we know has been a battle in this country for a long time. And so to leave nine months where people have to travel that much further, nine months, we're not only do they have to travel farther, but their wait times when they get to your hospital are going to be longer. Nine months where we have nurses and doctors that don't have a place to work at that current time is just unacceptable for this city. And so while we appreciate everything that Memorial Health Care has done, today's the day that you can stand up proud, put your shoulders back and say, we're going to do the right thing for this city. We're going to do the right thing and continue our license to spend that license instead of letting it go. And so I'll just leave with that. And again, really, really proud of the Long Beach community. Everybody that's committed their time not only in this fight, but in the decades that came before this to make sure this hospital was in existence. And I'm excited about the potential of what's going to be there. I know we've heard a lot of creative ideas and this is just the beginning, so I'm really looking forward to the work ahead. And again, congratulations, Zuber, and all for your leadership and everybody else. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Andrew. Yes. First of all, I want to thank you, Mayor. Mr. Super. And I just can't really tell you how much I appreciate the hard work that you put into this situation, because the fact that everything that we talked about, because remember, the members in my district and we always talk a lot about what we're trying to do and what we're trying to get done. But I can feel the compassion of all of the individuals out there, you know, you knowing that what you're up against and I can't see that our voices can be come back void because of the fact that this is a city that works together. We strive together, we live together. And I think this situation with a hospital that I know that you individuals know that we are with you and this step up here. And I can't even take time to thank our city staff for the hard work they've done. But Mr. Superville, I'm telling you, you can be Superman to me, because the fact that what you're doing and what you continue to do, and I hope everyone this will work out because I can't see memo being that insensitive to your cause in the meaning to be able to keep this hospital open. It's going to be open, I tell you that. I know that. So you guys continue to work hard. And you, Dr. Merlino. You guys are always there. This is why I know these things are going to work. Thank you guys again. Thank you, Councilmember Tauranga. Thank you. Barry and I echo many of the comments already been said by my colleagues here. But one of the most important things that, you know, we're always faced with as elected officials is we're given a choice. You know, we do the political thing or we do the right thing. And there's no question that our support of community hospital is the right thing to do. And we're asking our our colleagues at Memorial Hospital to also consider doing the right thing and not the political thing. The line that was crossed back in 2016 when this new law came into effect that basically affected community hospital, that put it in the condition in the position that it is today. Was unfortunate and it's political, although there are some safety issues in play here. The need to save community hospital is overwhelming. There is no question the impact that closing the community hospital would have on our entire community, not only in Long Beach, but regionally, as well as as was mentioned earlier. And again, when this first issue came up, know, one of the main concerns that I had was that what's going to happen to all of those 340 some plus staff that work at community hospital? What's going to happen to them? And I was very concerned that some of the plans for transitioning some of the nurses from community hospital to memorial was basically increasing the requirement. So you have 30 to 40 years of service. That community hospital is being forced, if you will, to reconsider the positions and the jobs and retire. And I want to thank Dr. Molina and his group for stepping forward and say that they will 100% accept that the step up community hospital, because that's the right thing to do. And that is one of the best proposals that I that I've come across in any transition from one company to another is having that willingness to take on the staff of a predecessor. So we are urging memorial care to please do the right thing and suspend the license so that we can continue this transition in keeping community hospital in service. And the young lady who mentioned Lombard City College, I was a 14 year trustee at Long Beach City College, and I went to many other graduations. And I know that there are many students that did their internships at community hospital and went out to get jobs here. And and I congratulate City College. I congratulate you for bringing this forward because it's we have a great city. We have a great, great educational institutions here. And a few years back when Mayor Garcia and I were got voted in and we talked about the college promise and we said we going to close that loop and get the city involved. And we are we're there. And hopefully we can come out with a very positive outcome as a result of excuse me, of tonight's meeting. Thank you very much. Thank you. And Councilman Gonzalez. I would just like to extend my support as well. I think Councilmember Super and the mayor for really setting the tone ahead of time, wholeheartedly supportive of all of my my council colleagues comments. I think it's extremely important even being a councilmember from downtown, I care about the whole city. This is more a city wide issue. This is no longer districts. And it really matters to many of us who, especially a person like me, I delivered at Memorial and had the best, best nurses that helped me in basically an emergency pregnancy situation that I had. And it was yeah, here at council actually from council to memorial had a child in 2 hours and but with the best staff. And so my support wholeheartedly to our nurses, to the physicians, to the administration, to all of the various unique services that we have, they're hoping to continue that and make sure that we have the best outcome for all of our residents. Thanks so much. Thank you so much. And Mr. City Attorney, we just need I know we have multiple actions, but can we do them all in one vote or. Okay, great. So we have all the actions that were described in the staff report. So as we just go to a vote, also just to end on a on a positive note, I think on behalf of the community, just to the to the Molina and Woo Network and the group, we just want to thank you for stepping up. We look forward to many years, many, many years of a fully functional emergency room hospital with a partnership with our foundation, with incredible services for the mental health care needs of our community, as well as the important needs of Islam Beach and really the whole city in the county. And so we're very grateful and of course, to our partners at Memorial, who I know are I'm sure are watching this hearing as well. We thank you for your partnership that we've had for many, many years, and we look forward to continuing that, especially through the process as we transition to our new partner. And so thank you again. And with that, please cast your votes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you very much. Congratulations to our new partners. And I want to I want to you know, this doesn't happen often, but I do want to welcome our new partners on board at Community Hospital. And with that, we're going to go and take a one minute recess so that folks can exit. And I know we have some of the presentations coming on board. Thank you. So. Your great, great. The. Okay. We're going to call this meeting to order so I can have everyone please grab a seat or exit one of the two rooms. Okay, everyone, please grab a seat or exit and stop talking, please. Thank you. That includes our staff. Thank you. Please grab a seat. Madam Clerk, please welcome Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pearce, Councilwoman Price, Councilmember. Super Now. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Your. Honor. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia. Thank you. If I can please again have everyone take a seat, please. And if you're. Thank you. Three. Nope. I'm still missing council members for a quorum. Where is. I think I feel comfortable sitting out there. Okay. Councilor Richard Panzer. But yeah, that's right. Okay. We're going to go ahead and move on to item hearing number item number 31.

Introduction of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Fifteen-Year Lease with Two Five-Year Options to Extend, Substantially in the Form of the Attached, with Nautilus Data Technologies, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, for Building 530, an 82,251-Square Foot Building Located at 120 West Oriskany Avenue, and the Adjacent Building 529, a 3,200-Square Foot Building, and Building 600, a 343-Square Foot Building, at Alameda Point. [Requires Four Affirmative Votes] (Base Reuse 819099) [Continued from April 2, 2019 to May 7, 2019; please note: public comment was closed on April 2, 2019]

AlamedaCC_05072019_2019-6780

Good evening, Mayor. I am Ninette Mercado and from the Community Development Department. As was stated, as has been a topic before the council in three closed sessions and tonight is its second time in the public. At the April 2nd City Council meeting, the Council received a public presentation of the proposed lease with Nautilus Data Technologies for the public. Nautilus Data Technologies uses innovative water cooling technology to operate data centers that reduce the costs of computing power usage, eliminate water consumption, decrease air pollution and lower greenhouse gas emissions. This would be their first site for this technology. And so it's it's a cutting edge technology at that meeting. At the April 2nd meeting, Nautilus provided an overview of its project, but consultants related to its proposed technology. Environmental engineers who would lead the permitting process and the consultant we use to locate and construct the harbor seal haul out advised them and spoke about the project's input . Our impact on the SEALs. In addition, there was a representative from the trade unions and a high tech tenant from Alameda Point who spoke in support of the project. The council asked to postpone the decision on the lease until the city had an opportunity to discuss the Site B development project and any impact Nobelist might have on the development. During the tour, the broker pointed out that we crafted and and novelis accepted a smaller parcel to allow for a greater development opportunity for site B. So tonight we're returning to ask for lease approval for for this lease for a term of 15 years with two five year options, which was negotiated as a result of council direction. The tenant has agreed to pay a development impact fee, also requested by the Council for a total of $1,562,971. At filled out, the project will contribute one and a half to two and a half million dollars in revenue for Alameda Municipal Power, which will help AMP keep rates low for residents. I hope that tonight you will consider this recommendation and support the lease approval. Thank you. The applicant is here if you're. Any questions that you might have for them. Thank you. Okay. Council. Question. Council Member Vice Mayor Nothing like this. I'm not sure this might be my first vote. This requires four votes. Yes. So I guess my question is, before we have any conversation, it seems like there have been a number of council members who have voiced strong concerns about this. If there are two or more of those, I think in the idea of expediency. I would love to know if there are people who are concerned not going to have talking. We can we can take a straw poll. Does anyone have any questions they want answered? However. Odie. I'll wait to the straw poll. I mean, I do. But it's not. You want a straw poll to asking any question? It would just be to reinforce my opinion. So maybe I'm not going to ask them. Why? Well, I should. Be honest about it. So. So. Well, for one, I'm not ready to vote because I want to hear council's discussion. But if you I mean, do people. You mean do people truly know how to vote now, how they're going to vote now? Councilmember De So you look quizzical, I'll say. Yeah, well, I'm kind of quizzical because I know that for the most part I've been quite supportive of this project and I don't see any reason to change my mind. Since we first discussed this, at least I first discussed this in the closed door, largely because I like the impact, their contribution into the into the feet. So it's not the 100% fee, but it's. But at 1 million plus, it is something. So the developer. Devoting. 40% of their to. That. I know that I could just speak for myself that, you know, I will continue to be supportive of this project. Okay. Councilmember de SAC Gleaning Support. Vice Mayor. I you know, I would want to have a conversation about some monitoring and and outcomes of the monitoring issues that I think would be problematic for the applicant. But I think if we could get there, it's a project that I could potentially support. Okay. Leaning support. Um, yeah. Councilmember Vela asked me to. Just logistically, it's easier. She goes last in the comments, but are you ready to comment? Well, I was skeptical before, and I'm still skeptical, even more so based on the tour that we did a couple weeks ago. Okay. Leaning skeptical. Councilmember Vela, who's going to come to us over the say? Are you there, Councilmember Vela? Yeah. Here you are. Hi. So you followed that. We're taking just a little informal straw poll here. I still have some outstanding questions. I think I think they're you know, the thing right now, I think, um, you know, potentially could be helpful to our conversation. Well, I think I think probably. And then questions regarding the the police. Um. And, uh, including the length of it and. The actual what was something about the lease? The term actual term lease? Got it. Okay. So is it you could be persuaded. Potentially. Well. Well, yeah. So it's worth continuing the discussion because I'm going to say that I'm going into this with an open mind. So we have four potential justice to continue the discussion. So to be the fifth to comment, I will say that I think by now applicants have had a chance to see the letter that the counsel received late last night and I forwarded to staff this morning from the Northern Alameda County chapter of the Sierra Club. And I. So I do want questions, answers to the concerns that were raised and specifically the the issue of the data center requiring constant cooling and the impact on contributing to the appearance of toxic algae blooms. Um, and also, um, well, and with the warmer temperatures and I will note that just this week, earlier this week, you may be aware of the report that the United Nations would publish, noting the dramatic decline in biodiversity in the world, largely the result of human activity. And I do think this is potentially one such activity. I will say, and I see one of the applicants is here to respond, and I'm happy to see him, because this environmental issue has been a topic that has been raised by this council in closed session the however many times we've met with you. And so that's why I was disappointed. When in the staff report referencing the project in Stockton, all I saw were bullet points of the permits that you you received or have applied for. But as I said in my email, the staff bullet points don't provide any information. I wanted to see specifics, and I will also note that I think there is some material difference between a data center that is located on a barge in the port of Stockton versus what we're doing. But I did see that there was some communication with the author of the Sierra Club letter is Sophie Hunter, City Council Member in Berkeley. So with that, my biggest concerns are the environmental ones. So please, please address that. Thank you very much, Madam Mayor and council members. So I want to begin just the high level on the environmental question. Our company was founded to be a solution to a very bad problem, which is the current technologies around data center. So our objective was to design our project to dramatically contribute to the abatement of greenhouse gases, to the reduction of air pollution, and especially in California, to provide a technology solution that will be able to showcase here that will eliminate the consumption of water in data centers, which is common throughout data centers all over the world. And there are other environmental features, too. So so the project is to produce a significant environmental benefit. That's the objective of the technology. And we went through quite rigorous review, federal, state and local regulators with respect to our first effort in Stockton. And the. Madam Chair, you quite thoughtfully asked for the actual permits. We've been happy to provide those. I thoughtfully asked for them and they were voluminous and I would have appreciated having the opportunity to review them before this meeting because that's what allows me to make an informed decision. And so I directed to specific actually while voluminous, the specific conclusions, especially of the state regulators, including the State Lands Commission, which involved now Governor Newsom and Alameda resident Betty Yee. I put very specifically to the page where the you know, where the determinations were made about the environmental benefits as well as the lack of any significant adverse impact. So if I can help you find that that would be that would be great. It would have helped to have found it in its entirety in the actual staff report. But let's talk about the Sierra Club letter that you've had a chance to review now. So in the the second full paragraph, there is the reference to the projected volume of 10,000 gallons per minute. The heat being transferred to the bay will maintain a permanently warmer zone of water next to the Rockwall Jetty at Alameda Point. Movement of the tides will not permanent. They dissipate the relentless infusion of warmer water into the bay? And can we at least agree that that's significantly different than the condition with the barge in the port of Stockton? Well, actually, we welcomed the engagement with the Sierra Club, as we have with the SEAL folks. What lies ahead of us is actually do the modeling work and the technical work to specifically go after those questions, which are quite important and in which we are 100% aligned to prevent anything like that from happening. So so I want to begin with that if something that were happen, we don't want to do the project that that is not the objective of our project. Now specifically on the on the technical aspects of it, the in the materials that you asked for, it is it was well studied and part of the secret process and part of the state water quality permitting as well as the State Lands Commission process to look specifically at the thermal discharge issue. The thermal discharge, the way we're engineered is the thermal discharge. Well, it's four degrees Fahrenheit difference in temperature leaving our facility when the water hits the nearby receiving water. So the area that's being discussed in the Sierra Club letter, it is highly likely. And the the work ahead of us in the permitting and the modeling will bear this out, that that water impact will be less than 1/10 of a degree Fahrenheit. So it is highly unlikely that there'll be any contribution to algae formation. But the point is, with the least, we can conduct the studies and working with the Sierra Club and working with the Harbor SEAL people and anybody, any other environmental interests, I'm an environmentalist to get that technical information and have the state tell us whether there's a problem or not. That's the advantage of the process that lies ahead of us. And in the interest of fairness, I should note that this letter was received. I flew in from New York last night, and I think this came to me just before 10:00 at night Pacific time, and I glanced at it. But you didn't get it until today, because that's when I forwarded it to staff. So, I mean, you know, it's in the interest of fairness. You haven't had a lot of time, although again, we've been asking for things from you. But I think the point you're making is that the list of regulatory bodies that you will come before and need to satisfy will be addressing this thermal discharge issue. Is that. Correct? That and many, many other issues that we know we will be studying and encountering as a result of our experience up in Stockton. So then in the second paragraph of the Sierra Club letter, they talk about how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA, describes how warmer water could contribute to the growth of harmful algae. EPA Website States Toxic blue green algae prefer. Warmer water. Water. Warmer temperatures prevent water from mixing, allowing algae to grow thicker and faster. So I think I mean, as far as my concerns, the the issue of algae, these algae blooms, toxic algae blooms are certainly not something we would want to be fostering. Not not something you would want to be fostering, not something Nautilus would want to be fostering. And, by the way, certainly not something that the state regulators would approve if that was a projected outcome. The advantage of the lease is the leases expressly conditioned on us going through these regulatory processes, getting the approvals and getting the signoff from the regulators that we will not have any significant adverse impacts. So that's that's our commitment. That's what we're about. And so that's why we embrace the Sierra Club letter. I immediately sent actually a letter back to Ms.. Hahn outlining these very points and actually looking forward to a meeting with her and her colleagues so they can be part of the public process that lies ahead. Should the you know, should the city council decide to move forward with the conditional lease? Okay. Councilmember Vice Mayor. So thank you. I also received a letter very late last night and actually responded to. At the club and received a response to my questions. And my questions were about this. And so Richard Banger, who is the lead on this project, responded. From what I could tell, his concern and and position was that. It would be untenable for your company to meet any needed. The state could say, go ahead. They could be wrong. What happens if they're wrong? It's going to be very difficult for you to shut have spent millions and millions, millions of dollars and then just shut it down because algae is detected or whatever that is. You know, I have been operating and I was going to ask Mr. McConnell if because we had had to I believe there were two things we asked for. One was clarity on which are the, you know, the state water board, which are the regulatory regulators that addressed this issue. And the other one was some sort of monitoring. And what happens if section I can't find the monitoring section in the exhibits. I can find the no loitering and other. So so my question would be if we were, you know, the only way that I could see us moving forward would be something where we have weekly , you know, I don't know what the frequency is, but some kind of monitoring of the water temperature and some kind of, you know, and possibly even spelling out for the water board what it was that we wanted to make sure that they were confirming in there. Right. So so the Sierra Club has raised very, you know, credible concerns. I would want to make sure that, A, the water board has that they are literally that is what they're approving. And in from talking to some folks there, I imagine that is what they would be confirming is that their belief that this would not lead to those outcomes. But then also what kind of monitoring do we have so that if it starts happening that, you know, essentially those pumps are shut down, which I know is a problem, but, you know, and is that something that could be built into this project so that there is a conversation that could continue? And if I could just piggyback on your question I'm monitoring sounds like a good idea to me. And I would want it to be independent monitoring as opposed to the monitoring from the the tenants themselves, from models. Is that what you were thinking? Yeah, I don't think I. I may not have thought it through with that. Yes, as long as we can figure out who that person is. And. Who's paying for it. So, I mean, because my guess is it's the city. So the state water quality board is actually very good at this and they impose actually quite substantial monitoring requirements with respect to their permits, as do some of the other regulators. You know, for example, we have for endangered species permits up on the San Joaquin River. That's how our impacts are so low that we don't have any effect on endangered species in the river. And so we are more than happy to do monitoring and we are more than happy to bear the business risk. So the risk is is ours to bear because we do not foresee this being an issue at all, because of the way we've engineered this, we are very focused on and it is complete a minimization of environmental outcomes as possible. I would note that, you know, at a 10th of a degree in the nearby water, when you move beyond the nearby water, it's you won't be able to measure the thermal load with the heat transfer we're doing is against a modest heat production by the data centers. It's enough that it requires cooling, but it's not a massive amount of heat that we're actually putting out returning. The other thing you should know, because it will be likely be a mile long pipe run, there'll be a lot of exchange, heat exchanges on the way out to the water. It's highly likely the numbers will be even lower just from natural geothermal cooling that will occur. So but we're happy to model all of that. We use an independent modeling firm for this. You met one of the individuals from that firm at the last meeting. She's she's great and her team is great. The models they use are the ones that actually the cities all rely on as well. We'll be working with Dr. Harvey on the the harbor seal question to make sure that there's the complete protection of the whales. So, again, we are so committed to. A positive. Outcome. Well. I think there SEALs, unless there's been a whale spotting. I'm sorry. I must say, I misspoke. Sorry. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So that. So monitoring. Happy to do it because it will be required of us by the by the state as part of our permits. Okay. Are there other comments from you guys? Anyone else. So, Councilman Brody. I guess I'm concerned, like, okay, we monitor what happens, we find toxic algae. Then what? I mean, some of these environmental disasters, once they happen, they're too late. Right. Like, if the SEALs somehow get disturbed and they never come back, that's too late. They're gone. I mean, that's just the way it is. So if we have algae. Toxic algae develops in a year, two years. We've gone down a path. We've tied up a building for 25 years or maybe three. If some for some reason, they have to get out of it. We've limited our marketing opportunities for those three years, lost opportunity cost there, and we may have an environmental thing that can't be reversed. Maybe it can. I don't know that much about it. Or somebody's sunk a lot of money into a building that now they're not going to give back. So when we come back in three years and we're all lamenting, why don't we just do the right thing in the first place and, you know, prioritize the environment? And so I think we'll ask the applicant to answer that. But as far as you're concerned, that we're locked into a lease. I imagine that we could add a clause or a condition that indicates if some environmental I mean, significant environmental impacts were determined that there would be some some recourse. I see Mr. Roush moving towards his microphone. So please. Marin Counsel. I think that's correct. We would have to add some provisions into the lease that would basically have a, for lack of a better term, a poison pill provision such that if there were significant environmental impacts, that the applicant or the property owner or or tenant could not mitigate adequately, then it would be grounds to terminate the lease. Obviously, that's a huge risk that the developer tenant would have to take. But if that's the the kind of provision the council wants to see in the lease than we would we would have to draft that and and bring that back to the council. Well, and that's something to consider. Something else to consider is perhaps some of these concerns will be answered by the regulatory bodies who are looking at the impact to the water and the likelihood that these conditions will lead to the toxic algae bloom. But I do think that there's there's some ways you can address some of the concerns in the lease and. I you know, again, I don't think there's answers for every question, but we certainly want to address the most significant environmental ones. Councilman Rudy said, I see your hand. I would just say that if this project moves forward and the project proponent goes and attempts to get approvals from the regulatory body, that the city staff also needs to be involved in that so that they clearly understand the technologies that the regulatory body might be suggesting and be able to evaluate, you know, the adequacy of those technologies, all the while recognizing that the regulatory bodies have a lot more competency in the area. But we've got to be a part of that, that process as well. That's us. That would be my suggestion. So, Councilmember Desai, if I might, we actually initially at first have to go through the secret process. And because this is a lease on city property, the city will be engaged through that whole process. Actually, the process calls for the city to be involved and then the city will also be involved in each of the permitting processes . So so the answer to your question is it's well answered and there'll be extensive process. This is actually a relational contract. We'll be side by side on this all the way through the period where we are well assured that there's no significant impacts. And if there are significant impacts, we won't go forward with the project. We won't need the city to tell us or the regulators, because the mission of our company is not to produce significant impacts. Okay. Okay. Councilmember Vela, your thoughts? I think my. Concern is that they've all been fine in terms of getting off the ground. But if there's an issue I and we've discussed this in the past, I would want something that's concrete and laid out, will define what is significant, what we what we deem to be a significant impact. Because I'm not necessarily of the mind that that one of these regulatory board is going to have. They don't have the city's best interests at heart. They have a mission statement that I think how they define significant impact might be different, how we work our decision. So I think that becomes a reality for the people that have done that. From my perspective, it makes me feel a little more secure in how to take it out of the other ways. If we think that there's some risk to our. Okay. And you've heard you've heard what the acting city attorney said. So. Okay. The poison pill provision. Yes. Okay. And then and that's what you're thinking of as far as something concrete. To state what we deem as significant risk. Yeah. Yeah. That's I think the other problem. You know, the other question that I have is has to do with the location of the input and output of the water intake valve and discharge. And again, having some sort of provision, not just for me, I guess, if we're going to be probably going to get installed, but for the removal of that and that we actually have a bond on deposit to cover the cost of removal. So one of my questions was, what do you think the cost of installing that system is going to be? Because certainly the security deposit is $68,000 or something like that, and it could cost a significant amount of money to remove the . Casing this time. Yeah. That for a location. And you know, will there be opportunities for input from the club or some of the other groups? So I'll deal with this last point first as part of the secret process and then consistent with the other follow on processes, including the involvement of the B, C, D, C, we'll have a very intensive public process to get input as to the location of the intake and the discharge. We offered what we think is the best solution. That's the least impactful. But we are open to other alternatives. We're not dogmatic about that. The pathways we identified were done in consultation with the city engineer. But again, if there's a if there's a different path that folks want to look at, we're happy to do that. That is part of the secret process. You have a proposal and then you also look at alternatives. So that's an explicit part of the secret process. What is that from the contract to the lead as we look at one of the factors, the actual construction, I think that concerns me more aspect is now. I think that, you know, other groups like the Sierra Club or some of these other environmental groups might have a difference of opinion in terms of the best location for in taking this charge high good faith, not not having to do with the connection to other infrastructure already in the building, but. With the overall environmental impact, my disapproval of the current calculations about water quality but that we have any idea out. Yet by the way you are correct we went with that route based on the the discussions related to infrastructure. It may be there's a better environmental alternative, and certainly that's what the secret process will, in fact evaluate. On your second point, I would prefer not to call it a poison pill. I don't like that expression, and we'll call it an assurance of environmental protection provision. We are more than happy to have that included because as I indicated, it's not a problem for us because our objective is not to create that kind of risk. Finally, on the removal we have, actually there is a provision in the lease now following the actually before the last meeting to ensure that we have an obligation to and have posted funding for the removal of the of the intake structure when we're done. So that's included in the lease. Okay. Can you talk a little bit about what that would look like to remove that those structures because it's fairly, fairly involved? You know, we saw the drawings that were included in the packet. Yeah, I suppose, Madam Mayor, it's a matter of perspective for us, actually. Wouldn't be involved at all. It's a relatively minor. Whatever it is, infrastructure project happen. Well, the proposal is there'll be the intake box that has piles and so the structure actually sits on top of the piles. So we'll use the same process to take pull it out as we would as we as we used to put it in. And so it's just it's just civil works. It's good old fashioned maritime civil works. There's great contractors. We have representative of of the group here. Folks know how to do this. And what we're doing is relatively simple. Think of the pier. That's big. That's complicated. This is a very simple thing under the pier in relative comparison. So and again, you are happy in this process over the next year to put together the plan for how that would be done and make sure that folks are comfortable with that. Because, again, our objective is not to have any, at the minimum, the smallest possible impact on the environment that we can achieve. Okay. Any further questions? No questions, but comments. Mayor, can I ask please. Mr. Roush. A clarifying question that I know is part of the the lease provision indicates that the lease as the project would make the council's making a finding that it's categorically exempt under secure based on existing facilities. The applicant has indicated that there is a some sort of separate secret process that the applicant will go through. So the Council may want to ask the applicant to explain that secret process further so that the Council is has assurances that the city and others will have an opportunity to weigh in on that, seek that separate secret process, because this finding will make the project categorically exempt under sequel. Good point. Okay. Went to the acting city attorney's point. Can you explain that separate secret process? Yes. As I understand it, actually, the category exempt exemption applies to the existing facility and the property. But it is our belief that our intention will be going through secure for the intake discharge component, the off it's called the offsite improvements. So the lease is split between the building and offsite improvements. The buildings categorically exempt, as I understand it, but the offsite improvements will have to go through secure. And who will be the lead agency with respect to that second aspect. Is my understanding will be the city of Alameda. Thank you. And if it isn't, let's make sure it is. That would be our view. Okay. QUESTION All right. Councilman Brody. So can I just. Say something just so on that on that point, I talked to the the director of Planning and building, Andrew Thomas, as part of this process. And he said that the entitlements that we that are on Alameda Point envisioned an industrial use in the enterprise zone, but not this this intake, the system that Mr. Cunnington was talking about . So he is correct that that process will have to go through a secure process. And Andrew said that the city would be the lead applicant and require almost the exact same studies that they would have to provide to the state regulators. But with the cost of the secret process being borne by the applicant. Absolutely. Councilmember. Thank you, Madam Chair. So questions for the interim city attorney. So can you remind us, like the secret process, how it plays out, like what they have to do an application and go and. How long is that take? Once the application comes in, there will be a determination as to whether or not the the project as as described will have a significant environmental impact on the environment. And depending on what that answer is, there could be a that would mean there could be an exemption or more likely, there would need to be a determination whether a mitigated negative declaration would be sufficient or whether a full blown EIA would be required, depending on what the answer to that is, is going to drive how long that process takes. Typically, a mitigated negative declaration can typically be handled in a, you know, 3 to 6 month process once it's prepared. I mean, from preparation to to approval, if it's an air that can take anywhere from depending on how long it takes to prepare the air and then go through the review process can take anywhere from six months to, you know, two years depending on the on the severity of the project. I would assume this would probably take six months to a year, just as that just kind of my sense of it. And then thank you and then the other agencies as the review concurrent with that process or do they have to wait to the the secret process is finished? I'm not quite sure how the timing on that would work. Typically, the the regulatory agencies would want to rely on a city environmental document where they would be considered. They would be part of the review process as a responsible agency. And then once if the environmental document were approved, they would then rely on that and going through their review process. That's typically how. Okay. I wasn't quite sure either, but that's why I asked the question. So then if somebody opposes a secure approval, they would file a lawsuit and we would be the defendant in that lawsuit and we would we would be the one footing the bill, right? Correct. But typically, when an application comes through, part of that application process is that we would look to the applicant to provide the legal defense if there were any challenges to the project, either on environmental issues or for other reasons. So even though we would be certainly the the defendant in the case and we would certainly keep control of the litigation, we would expect the the applicant to, number one, have its own counsel and number to be involved very closely with the city and defending that if the council had approved the project and certified the environmental documents . So we expect mean is that that seems a little squishy to me, but I mean, is that an ironclad this is how it's going to happen or. That's our normal process for when we have a project that comes forward that, you know, the applicant's going to bear that financial cost if there is a challenge to the project on either the merits or the environmental documents. And I think the city manager wants to comment. I would concur with how many cities actually put that, and I think Alameda does to put that in the agreement that it would be their obligation. So the lease agreement or the secret application or. As a part? Well, I don't know whether that precisely is in the lease currently, but typically as part of the conditions of approval, it is usually embedded in those documents. So we feel that there is adequate, adequate coverage to make sure that that, in fact, happens. Well, okay, I still have more, but thank you for the high level overview of a super complicated process. Yes, he has every day. So, yes, you know, one word that I heard earlier this evening kind of made my ears pick up. I heard the word developer. So the question that I have is, do we know if the project proponent is going to if it goes through the approvals, local approvals, as well as regional approvals, if the project proponent is also a going to continue with the project itself or if they're going to sell the project to some other person once the entitlements are obtained. The applicant is going to do the project themselves. I mean, the only thing they could do is sign the interest in the building. They can't sell it because we own it. But there this is a project that is theirs they're committed to. And if they even had to assign it, it would have to be a similar use and we would have to approve it. Okay. And the B, I said A, so B is if they do the project, do we know if the applicant will do the project with the current corporate structure that's before us that came before us? Or will they create a separate corporate structure? Do we know anything about that? I believe they're going to use the existing structure that they have now and bid the project out with contractors and project management, like similar to all of our other tenant improvement. Okay. And could that be a part of the understanding, the legal agreement, that if if if they get council approval? Well, here, let me get maybe I'm being a little opaque. You know, if someone can make agreements, do a lot of things, but maybe they and I'm not a lawyer here, but maybe they can create a limited liability corporation so that, you know, if something goes bad, that that's the responsibility of that separate corporate entity, not themselves. So. Well, typically the the lease provision will have that that it would typically allow a lessee to assign it to some other similar corporate, you know, where the same people are basically involved. But it may not be have the same exact name as the lessee if the less lessee intends to actually to wants to assign its interest, for example, to a separate, you know, completely separate entity. For lack of a better description that would need to be approved by the city before that that assignment could occur. Okay. That's again I mean, again, typically, if it's sort of an internal restructuring, that's usually allowed sort of by matter of course. But if it's going to be a whole separate new company or entity or whatever you want to call it, then that's going to require an approval by the city for that assignment. Great. But you get what I'm kind of getting at. What I'm kind of getting at is if the worst case scenario happened and suddenly, after having sunk in all these investments, now they have to pull out the the some of the equipment that was out there. It's completely possible that someone might simply declare bankruptcy and say, well, you know, wait, you don't have the wherewithal to do it. And and by the way, you have to go after that that entity. And that's, I think, has been brought up as to make sure that there is adequate security with that that the city has access to, so that if the if the improvements need to be removed and the and the responsible party is financially unable to do it, we have a source of funds to go to to make sure that it can occur. Thank you. And I'll just interject. And I just skimmed this this lease, and I'm not pretending to be the attorney, I think. Did Miss Maxwell leave officials there? So I just want to confirm, because I'm not acting as the city attorney, but I do see that on page 20 of the lease agreement under assignment and subletting landlord consent required and we're the landlord that this is section 13 that landlord consent tenant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law mortgage pledge assign or transfer this lease or any interest herein to another. So that would have to come back to the city. Correct. And it's is that address the concern that Councilmember de Sug was raising. It does. And it generally tracks what Mr. Ash was explaining as well about sort of the assigning permitted assigning, as opposed to a unrelated assignee which would need to return. Okay. All right. Another question. Yes, Councilmember. Thank you. I mean, since you brought this up, I don't I get too much in the weeds here, but just say there is a need to pull everything out. So what type of environmental review of that process of pulling anything out is going to happen? I mean, could they just go in there and, you know. Come in with their big equipment, pull it out, and then it's gone. Who cares about what the environmental impact of that is? I mean, there does seem to be any standards around this. Maxwell, this you want to introduce yourself? Hi, I'm Lisa. Into the microphone with. Lisa maxwell. I'm the assistant city attorney, real estate area councilman Odie. The restoration and surrender provisions in the lease, they expressly obligate the tenant to make those to remove their alterations at the end of the lease term. However, it wouldn't be something they'd be able to just do blindly on their own. There'd have to be a consultation with the city and there'd have to be a coordination about the way in which those were restored. And as I mentioned to Mayor Ash, as he Ashcraft this morning, there may be a determination that it was not best to remove all of them, but instead it was better to cap some and to cause them to be inoperable because disturbing them would cause other improvements that maybe had been laid over around them to be just to be damaged. So that would just be something that would have to be determined at the time. But we have the right to cause it to happen. It would just be a matter of making sure that was the right decision. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Mayor, at this time. Housekeeping detail. It is almost 11:00, and we need a motion to consider the remaining items on this this agenda that looked relatively short. But there are some of these are time sensitive and really must come to tonight. That's item 60 is the CDBG item. And then we have six D and six. These are Park Street and Webster Street Business Improvement Associations and then six f is our city attorney contract. We have to approve his arriving next week. So what I'm looking for is a motion to go past 11. I do have a motion. Yes, I have a motion in a second. All right. All in favor. I rise upstairs. Know she's just. Okay, that's unanimous. Let's go as quickly as possible. Actually, I'm wondering whether we're ready to. To to take a vote. Any any more concerns that I see, please. By Ms.. Vela. So and we previously talked about the threat to the about 40% of the. But 40% of the victims only stayed with the execution. Of his options which is to get a full amount applied to of the. One of my questions is what are we getting in exchange for the fact that we are considerably better than the kind of woman in the city of New York City? I mean, we have Ms.. McIntyre here to respond. To the council directed staff to try to get some payment for the deaf. So the calculation was based on the lifetime of the life of the building. And we assumed that the building was was a 60 year life or 66 year based on the wheelchair building that was directly adjacent to it. And so we just did a straight percentage calculation of the first 15 years and then the additional two five years being was seven and a half each. What we're getting from from this lease for the option periods and for this term is we're getting money for infrastructure that we wouldn't ordinarily get. And in a in a ten year lease we wouldn't get, we would just get straight lease revenue. On this deal, we're getting lease revenue plus funding for infrastructure and an acknowledgment that this is a long term lease and this is almost similar to ownership. So we are getting an investment in infrastructure for the for the base, not necessarily for that area, but it's revenue that we can use base wide for infrastructure. We have approved it, but not until. Yes. 25 years. So I do have. A couple to the point $3 billion in capital, $300,000. That building that nobody likes to come here. There is more than $100,000 investment in the building. I mean, there they're they're going to put millions of dollars in the building. They're just not getting credit. They were not offering a shell credit for. Much of the work that's being done in the building, back to improvements for the building and the transfer of over to the equipment that they're getting from such. A great deal that building needs an entire new roof. Mr. McConnell, I wonder if we might bring Ms.. Maxwell up and the two of the two of you can? Sure. I'm also the applicant if you. Want to nap. Yes, ma'am. Sure. Come on. Up. I was going to clarify, was that the $100,000 was during the first 12 months of the lease term. And then there was the six plus million dollars that would be put in in the next few following years. Right. But now that you see the building first, as I mentioned, you know, the high the high intermediate price will be the fiber because 5 million for high performance Internet fiber. Do you. Want to offer a breakdown. Of where the applicant will come and give a breakdown of the the 6 million estimate? So the 100,000 is merely to fix up the place so we can all access it better and better lighting for just working in and out of the space. The main money comes after our permit approvals and almost all of it goes to the building and will be part of the what's left for the city when we depart . You know, there may be some small things that come with us in the 6 million. We'll be putting in tens of millions of dollars of overall improvements in equipment and fiber and other infrastructure. I mean, the whole project initially will be about $100 million project and we'll be employing a lot of craft labor in doing that work . So but the 6 million at least is what the city will inherit. You'll get a class industrial building as a result of what we're doing. And so. But what are the other outside improvements? I can't remember. Like, just one more thing before I let him answer that. What I can tell you is this when we have had other tenants interested in building 530, we require them. Some of them you heard from tonight. We require them to do extensive work on what it would take to bring the building up to occupancy standards. And that number is about $2 million because they've got to put in a completely new electrical system and it's required by app. So just just for the building alone. So if you want to enter the offsite improvements that you're that she's asking about. Yes. In addition, on the building there'll be water as well and other associated infrastructure of the building. We'll also be improving the offsite. We'll be improving the exterior areas including landscaping and parking lots and other components and fencing that will go immediately offsite will be bringing two loops of backbone Internet fiber, immensely valuable because once you bring that fiber through and it's in two loops, which means it's redundant inside, highly reliable, and others can access it. So it will be. And that's you know, it's a huge benefit. We did that in Stockton. We ran 20 miles of brand new backbone fiber. And the community is going to be able to access it, especially the least advantaged part of the community. So that's that's a big deal. And then we will be depending on the sequencing of your other infrastructure work, we will pay if it can coincide with our work, laying our pipes. There's other infrastructure that can be put on top of it. And so there'll be a net savings to the city, modest net savings the city, if it were to come in on top of what we're what we're doing and then we'll be repaving the roads and other infrastructure related the roads. In addition, they'll be a substantial upgrade of the electrical infrastructure to that zone because Alameda will be installing and giving us also dual feed. So it'll be good back up. It'll enhance the reliability of the electrical area, not just our area, but the area around us that's fed from the two substations. So those would be the core benefits that that we would see. So that's going to be one's first requirement. But that will be some contribution to the expansion. You know. The facility is amazing, but there's only if it is divided. The problem with that is that your usage is going to be high. You think something like that might indicate that the amplifier is only if you're reading this? We expect the project to go in two phases. One is with respect, we'll take advantage of existing spare capacity from AMP, which will be beneficial to everybody. And then in the event we choose to expand further inside of the building, then there would be a follow on upgrade in the addition of new facilities and new capacity by AMP. But that would be, you know, that's several years down the road. Okay. She did the right thing for developing the funding for the. And as we understand, it's negotiated directly with AMP in accordance with their rules and procedures, and they've got a set schedule and methodology by which they do that work. And I will note the amp is governed by the Public Utilities Board in our city. Manager is a member of that board. And not him. And so we have been performing that work so that while performing that work. Yes. Ample perform the work. They'll enter into an agreement with the applicant and perform the work. At the applicant's cost. Okay. The power a 1.5 to $2.5 million for you. I've been talking for. The number in the Senate report, the 1.5 to $2 million is what AMP estimates will be the revenue generated from the project at Build. I do not know what that translates in. As for usage. Do I have a representative from AMP who wants to address that? Once might not be the term. He would have. Welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair. Members of the Council. Do you want to introduce yourself? Baba Beetham, the AGM of Administration for AMP. And then that's right. As to initially after about a year of the fall or some roll out, it's about 1.9 million in revenue for the year. You know, depending, as the gentleman said, on the full roll out, it would be about, you know, 40% of what we currently use today . So. Thank you. 40% of what? The current load of the city of Alameda. If the if there's a full roll out of the data center, you know, down the road and we're talking like five years or so down the road is our understanding that's that's the type of usage we're talking about. Then 40% of the correct. Roughly. And if the Nautilus representative wants to comment. Yeah. So the initial ramp, so let's assume it's 18 months from now, will be about a million or more. The phase one of the plan is for ten megawatts of use. AMP has 30 megawatts of available capacity, ten megawatts of use. That'll be about 10 million annually to AMP. So we'll grow as we go to 20 megawatts, it'll be roughly $20 million to AMP. Okay. Um. One more. Councilman Rudy. Is there a project labor agreement on the construction work for this? That was in Luis agreement? No. Okay. Um. Okay. Ah. So what we are looking at is, um. There is a we have an ordinance authorizing the city manager to execute a 15 year lease with two five year options to extend substantially in the form of the attach. I know the contract has been being updated almost daily and for the you've read the staff report, you know, the buildings we're talking about and the location. So do I have a motion to approve this ordinance? Well. Councilmember de. So do I have a question? No. Frankly, I am happy to move the approval of the ordinance, recognizing all the time that went into this by our city staff and also our colleagues here on the dais. I think we've all asked really probing questions. You know, I'm satisfied that that regulations are in place to address the concerns that people have raised. And I've got to believe that the regulators and the people who attend the water quality meetings or any of those are even much more vigilant than we are, as well as being expert. And so I've got to believe that if they don't think that, if they think that this project puts at risk or any part of our bay, especially where the water or the water from this project meets the bay, I've got to believe that they will take the steps internally. I am hearing the what staff has to say as well as our legal staff. It seems as though we're being vigilant and making sure to include controls within our lease agreement. So in terms of how this is unwinding in the past few weeks, I believe that procedures are in place, regulations, regulators are in place. And in terms of moving forward, are that part of of what used to be NASA Alameda? I think this fulfills the process that we put in place to to spur economic development there. This has taken a little bit more time than I would have thought. But but I think it's been well worth it. Will there be four votes? I don't know, but I am certainly supportive of it. Much for the same reason I was supportive of it several weeks ago. But but. But I'm ready to to to move forward. And if there are four votes, that would be that would be great. And if there is not, then. And I would. Yeah, that would be. Thank you. And do I have a second? Okay. So what I would want to see actually, I mean a second because then we can do discussion. So I will, I will second the motion that's been made. Um, I think that it is appropriate for us to move forward to allow Nautilus to go through the regulatory process. I would want to see the lease conditioned on what was discussed earlier by the acting city attorney. If. Um. If, um, to add a condition to the lease that if serious environmental impacts were discovered, the project would shut down. Um. Which might be redundant to the. Um. To the regulatory process. But I would just want that, that safeguard because this would be assuming that the approvals were obtained. And then as the project went forward. Um. Some serious environmental impact or condition was discovered. So I would want that in there. But with that, I would. I mean, so you would you would accept an amendment to the motion. Okay, so we have a motion, a second further amended. Sorry. So I. Give. I appreciate that when I hear you say this is the and with all apologies, the poison pill, just because we all well, we all know it. We all know it. Okay. Take us to questions. Are we asking for it to come back with new language so that we are approving the new language? Are we asking are we are you is what's being proposed a approval of the lease with staff executing the following recommendations? Because those are two things. The latter. The latter. Okay. Because because I just answered your question. I think we've given sufficient direction to the city attorney. And I think. His his. Assurances were. Complete, at least to me. It's going to play out in a couple. So I have a couple of other I think I think other things I heard was that I would like to see in this something that requests that the water that that as a part of the state water board analysis that we are specifically asking them if we were going to move this forward that we specifically asked them to include, not limit their analysis to algae blooms and long term multi year impacts of warmth to the water. Yeah. So then the next one is going to be weekly ongoing monitoring and reporting. I think, you know, we are I guess what I want to what I have heard from the applicant is that they are very concerned about the environment and that is a core value of their endeavor and whatever from the council is. We do not want to be the council that develops the killer algae bloom of the you know, the great killer al the algae bloom of the 2020. And so I think, you know, at least for the first five years, there needs to be some sort of weekly ongoing monitoring because we don't know what the long term you know, I think we can model what we think the long term impacts are, but there needs to be. The reason I ask the question of whether we're giving staff direction or not is to the Councilmember Village Point. It probably would make sense for us to be a little bit. I guess. I don't know if staff feels they have the. Sense of the council in terms of what we want monitored. Exactly right. And and the reason I say that is because I'm not sure I could tell you right now. So it might be that we need to come in without apologies, come back with with with something. And then the last one is that we definitely talked about and it may be in here and I missed it, but it report back to the council after the state water board gives the clearance before the end. You're off. Right. So there's there's a check in here to make sure that there is agreement. So you I think those are the four conditions I've heard related to the environment, that that if something was going to go forward, I think it's probably the only way that it would be able to go forward and. Mr. O'Connor So what I think I understand and what I might suggest is that the items that you identified are the things that you definitely want us to monitor. But I also think that we're going to learn a lot from the state water board about what their concerns would be and to be able to identify what things we're going to be monitoring in addition to the items that you listed. And then I think that we could also add another layer of protection for us by consulting with our environmental consultant who helps us with bass cleanup on what he might suggest that we monitor or test based on the operations. And then we have yet another layer that we could add on. And we have a biologist that helps us with some projects with the endangered species. And so we have we have some resources. We could put together a list of of what we would be monitoring so that you could get a pretty extensive report on on what's happening out there. So so for me, we're monitoring with the idea that if something is found that that water is shut off, not we're going to spend another couple of months trying to figure this out. Right. We find my assumption is we're going forward with the idea that everybody is feeling very confident there will not be bad out. You know, I'm going to call it bad algae, but algae, you know, toxic, toxic algae. Something shows up and, hey, there's toxic algae, boom, we're shutting it off. We're not going to spend another three months saying, don't worry, we're tweaking the pipes and whatever else and the toxic algae is growing and whatever else. So my my question with what you just said sounds fantastic. Is the applicant sitting there going great? Well, Senator, you know, we're ready to move forward with the least developed list in the future. And whatever you put on the list is just fine and that will be acceptable to shut. Ah, you know, like shut it, you know, throw the kill. Switch. All of that is perfectly fine with us because that's what the regulators would require us in any event and to have you include in all of that. The only thing I would note that we work together. It needs to be standards based. Yes. We just can't shut down because somebody thinks there's something going on. And so whatever language you're working on, I just hope we can all appreciate. Let's agree that there's a standard behind it, otherwise. Otherwise we could, you know, we're just in an unmanageable situation. Absolutely. Thank you. And Mr. McCann, I just want to comment. I, I did. I did. I, I, I really like your suggestion of consulting with both the environmental consultant we've used around me the point and also the biologist, because they may see this and come up with things that we hadn't even contemplated tonight. So I think that's good since, you know, the question was asked, could we have the Sierra Club do this? My problem with that is the Sierra Club is an organization of individuals. I think we need to have measurable standards. I understand Bccdc and the State Water Control Board, when it comes to the secret process, there's certainly the opportunity or at any time they can comment. But I, I don't I don't think I can support adding the Sierra Club as a list of entities to to check this off. I mean, I guess for me, I don't necessarily mean that they're going to rate our things. But I think as the the one organization that's written in with concerns, if they were able to speak, say, to the biologists and say here are concerns, the biologists might be able to help find some standards to make sure that we're not going towards those things. Well, certainly their correspondence can be shared. I'm assuming they raise their concerns and they're certainly can do do that. Mr. McConnell, share their correspondence. Yes. And I also would just like to add that I think that once I think we all have a lot of education to raise around this issue because of all of the anxiety that we feel about it. And so I believe that the communication that about standards, about monitoring and everything that we learn can come back to the council via the city manager to city manager communication. I'm happy to just give you more than you ever want to know about inflow and outflow and what the regulators say about it so that we can kind of feel good about this as we're moving forward. Okay. Can I ask one last. One last question related to that. Will there be an opportunity within that communication if the council says, ooh, I've got a problem with that, I guess, right? That's only meaningful if the council can say I have a problem with that, add this or change this, or we've got to stop this project. This isn't working. Out. So okay. I think the. Fact that you guys are having to say and I want to be clear, the project applicant and the city are arguing over what what objective standards are and can't come to an agreement. There might be a point in time. That's where I'm just a little worried about having this, like, yeah, just create a list and whatever is on the list. I want to make sure that the end of the day is the leaseholders who are raising the concern that we have the. Ability to say, yes, that's the right list or no, that's not the right list and it's not moving forward until this thing is on the list. I would say that if we're arguing over the standard of the list, that and we have the recommendations from our biologist and our environmental consultant that there shouldn't be any argument. It should be the cities cities requirements. But but just be. Clear, Mr. Leavitt. Just to be clear. Vice Mayor Knox Why? You're just saying that you want to believe that if we're going back and forth on the standards, on the standard objective criteria, that if there's disagreement that there is ability to move that. Back to the council. Oh yeah. If if there's at that at that point. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We can definitely do that. We can make sure that's in there. Okay. And I would envision that this is going to be a process. So you'll be getting information as we move along and and happy to get feedback and questions and and to to craft it in a way that that works for us. I mean, this is our property. And you said, Councilman Brody, you had your hand up. Thank you. I was going to just get my comments. So to me, this is a risk versus reward type of analysis. And to me, the risks still totally outweigh the rewards. So I'm not going to support it. We're talking about the environmental risks, so I'm not going to rehash those. But it all the remedy seems to be trust us, we won't let that happen. And if it does, trust the agencies. Yet at the same time, you know, in one presentation today, one presentation last time, and in the letter to the Sierra Club, there's name dropping of Gavin Newsom and Betty. So, I mean, I'm not saying there's any problem with the state regulators, but, you know, the name dropping is a little off putting to me as someone who worked in the state. So and then, you know, some of the regulatory agencies miss it and we still do something bad to the environment, then we'll shut down. It just seems like the risk on that is, well, one, the risk that the environmental problem happens and then too, that it's going to be extremely costly either in litigation or clean up or undoing this lease. That that to me is just not that's not an accept amount of risk I'm willing to take. So and then the other, you know, reward I hear is will we get to, you know, lease a property in in the middle of the enterprise zone? But then the risk on that is that and as staff has been telling us that, you know, long term leases or options to buy of that property are not in the vision or not in the plan yet. This one basically, you know, by the time this lease expires, I'll be 80 years old if I'm still here. So I don't look that old now, but that's a long time. So we're basically tying up the prime property right in the middle of the enterprise zone for 25 years. And to me, the risk on that is that we're going to lose the opportunity to develop something even better there. And everyone's been saying, well, this is, you know, we don't want this type of use. We don't want that type of use. We don't want, you know, minimal job creators. We want maximum job creators. We want a campus. We want tech. We want something shiny, something glass. Well, we're not going to get that if we tie up this building for 25 years. So then the the analysis is, well, okay, but we're going to benefit AMP. Well, and I appreciate that we had the the comments from Mr. Bang are put it in the agenda because I think he kind of debunked a lot of those those myths. I mean the purpose of Alameda point and and our leasing structure shouldn't be to increase revenue for rent for AMP it should be to increase or take care of the well one create jobs and to take care of the infrastructure. And I guess we have the dif but you know, we're not going to see hardly any of it in the first 25 years and then we're not going to see the other of it unless there's two extensions. So when you look at it in the big picture, it's really not a lot of money we're going to see . And then the idea that somehow this is going to create a greener, you know, amp by 2020, as Mr. Banger points out, all of AMP is going to be green, all of it's going to be renewable. So we're not going to create a better source of renewable energy on the island. And I just I'm just not there. And, you know, there's the reward that the trades are going to be able to, you know, do this construction, but the trade to be able to build whatever is built out there. I mean, I personally think that building needs to be torn down after going through that tour and seeing the shape of that building and seeing the position of it in the middle of the enterprise zone. You know, I don't really think we should be spending our time trying to lease that. We should be trying to sell that property and develop something, you know, pardon the trite word at 11:30 p.m.. Something nice. And I don't know how a building with no walls that needs a new roof, $6 million worth of work really is going to be the catalyst to that to that side beat that enterprise zone because we didn't see any market case studies or market reports or analysis that says data centers. Suddenly you put a data center in and all of a sudden all this tech sprouts out around it. I mean, this is the cloud now. You know, we don't need to have people right next to each other. So I didn't even see that it was a, you know, hypothetical was a hope. Maybe it was a business model from 15, 20 years ago, I'm not sure. But I'm just not here on this and I'm not going to be supporting it. And, you know, I think we can do a lot better. Thank you. Ms.. Feller, did you wish to comment? Yeah. There's a lot of things that I'm not okay with currently in the first place, so all kind of started. I think that the concept of monitoring is completely unacceptable to me. So if there were any monitoring going on, I don't think it's for the first five years. And frankly, I think the build up over time, if it weren't, I think that the monitoring needs to continue throughout the duration of the lease, not just for a short period of time. I think that much like with other projects, the applicant should be paying for monitoring, but somebody else should be in charge of it. Um, insofar as we talked about standard and 20 to 7 standard, but I'm, you know, it may see our problem is there have been other questions raised. I think that, you know, we need to have a fair conversation about what the standards are, because I think what we're concerned about and what other entities may be concerned about , maybe different things that are and I think biased. So I would actually want to have, you know, a community discussion about what the standards are. I think it's great that we can consult the specialists that we work with and get their input, perhaps setting up a meeting with the interested community members and groups and the people that we already work with to see what standards might make sense for me if something I'd be interested in and support and frankly, that I would want to have for coordination here. I'm very concerned. Not one little thing. And actually three five 3529 is the climate. So he's talking about one building, not three buildings, and we're talking about roughly 85,000 square feet in the enterprise zone. And that's creating very little jobs long term. So we've talked about this before. I'm actually not okay with the the lease option, the renewal option. I don't think we're getting 7.5% death rate in the workplace because we're tying the property for, you know, a quarter century. So, Mr. Keller, if I if I could just make an inquiry of you because it's almost 1130 and I'm also mindful of not giving you out too late. But I think I'm hearing that you're a no vote and that Councilmember Ody is a no vote as well. So if I'm laying out what I would want if I'm not saying no, I'm saying these are the things that I want. I heard everybody else kind of go through what they want and believe. These are the things that I find like. Okay, I'm in the I believe Mr. McConnell said that it would be the state water board that would do the monitoring. And the Nautilus representatives said they're happy to bear that cost. You want it to be more than five years? I think that's a reasonable suggestion. But but if you're saying we can't go forward until we'd had the community conversation, I don't know how we can move forward tonight unless you're saying that in some particular standard. But people are doing something. I think that there can be a compensation of what many are not. Right. And secondly, we're talking about perhaps consulting with our biologists and. Our other folks. Oh, okay. Got it. And then you have a conversation on this as part okay. As part of that community conversation. That's what you were referring to that with. Okay. Got it. It's it's it's hard not having you in the room. There's something about being able to see somebody, but. Okay. I'm understanding. Go ahead. You know, my concern is the usage of I guess it by my name, you know, these green goals. I am concerned about the amount of consumption and pressure being put on our overall system. One of the things that we've heard is about the impacts where system operators that monitor these lines are line workers and everything else. I think it's great that AMP management is fully on board for for having this happen. But I also, if you're talking about 40% of the current load, that's substantial. And you know, I don't know that we want our staff to handle that kind of increase and to tell you about your plan for it and whether or not we actually have the ability to staff up to meet those needs. So I do have concerns about that and partially why that and the fact that we're talking about so much square footage in the enterprise councilmember only point I'd be fine to initially, but two options I want to support two options. So to expand, I don't think that there's enough there for us. And just looking at development timelines and things like that, I wouldn't want to hold the property up for that long. So you wouldn't support or you wouldn't support two options to extend, but you would support one. One five year option is on the park. So the 15 year lease plus five years. So 20 total. Yeah. And we're talking about I mean some of the technology, you know, the technology is constantly evolving from the start. Before not even know you 15 or 20 years, you're going to need to a program that size we're running that level you know. Okay. So I am seeing a thumbs up from the Nautilus representative. Was that the thumbs up to the wench? Come on up to the microphone. So all of that is perfectly acceptable. I would just note that in terms of the consultation, that's exactly what the secret process will do. And so if we are able to move forward to the secret process, that is where all the regulatory requirements are discussed and all the requirements that aren't focused on by the regulators. And so and so for us, we need the approval of the conditional lease in order to initiate all those processes where we're in a catch 22. And so and so I really, you know, we would appreciate just the first step of getting the conversation initiated in the forms that are designed to do exactly what it is that everyone's been discussing. Because I would note, again, we share we are 100% aligned as to as to the end outcome of this. So thank you. Okay. Um. Can I ask? So the vice mayor. I just want to clarify that what Councilmember Vela is asking and what I was talking about, as well as a community, is a city led community discussion with the consultant and biologist or whatnot, not giving the community an opportunity to write letters to a secure process. I just what I heard at the diocese or at the podium and I think what was requested, I just want to make sure that there was clarity on that. Can I ask Councilmember Vella it? I've written down all the different conditions. I'm not clear how to write a condition related to your AMP concern. It was that just a statement or was that a we have to do X in the in the lease. So that's it. I mean, I have a concern about that legislation that wouldn't be negotiated with the Raiders and come here. You know, one of the things that we talked about was the increase in policing that we needed. And I don't I don't think we've had that conversation with AMP about how they actually plan on drafting up. You're talking about 40% of our current load. I mean, that's right. So I guess the question I'm asking is, if we're if we're talking about. You said you were. With the right conditions, ready to approve the lease. But that sounds like there's a conversation that before we could we could make that. I would just I would add that. So I was in Washington, D.C. last week with Nick Operacoes and two members of the Public Utility Board for the Northern California Power Association Conference and some lobbying on the Hill. And he is very supportive of this. And he and the PBE have given lots of thought to this. They this is not something that is an afterthought. And so, I mean, we certainly want to know that our other aid, other departments are, you know, well-run. I, I do think that the due diligence has been done. And we. Think. That, yeah, we know that our system operators are currently understaffed. They're currently working on significant amount of overtime, and we're talking about ramping up. They're the ones that monitor the system. 24 seven So if a power outage or a disruption program that we do rely on. I also know that we've been having a hard time maintaining apprentices and getting them up to the journeyman position. Um. With regard to the Green Line, we're talking about adding in a significant amount of, you know, lines out there and everything else. I want to know what the plan is, but I think the vice mayor is going to find at the end of the night considerable amount of. But what I. Actually I'm the mayor. The vice mayor was asking, what did I what would my thoughts on, you know, how to try to get there? You know, I do want to get a report back from and at some point I then, you know, to say that he put a lot of thought into this, I would like to know what the actual rollout plan is, how we plan on standing up for a 40% increase. And I'm I'm sorry. I'm sorry we weren't able to address that question when we were in closed session with Mr. Perot, cos he's not here tonight. But if that's a question that your vote hinges on, then I'm afraid we can't answer you tonight if it's something you want consultation with as part of this community conversation. I heard her say that she wanted a request. She went to request a report back from Apple on how they're going to handle it, but not necessarily contingent on moving forward with this. Is that correct? Councilmember Bell? Correct. Sorry. Sorry. I must have missed that. Yeah. And then the other thing, the second option I'm not supportive of. And the second option? Only do one five year option, not two. Yeah, we already got. We got agreement on that. Okay. Are we ready to take a vote? Because we've got three more items to cover. But I think we've also covered this extensively. Okay. Can I ask one last question? You can. And I think we may actually have a. Okay. Before you ask questions, let's hear from the the legal team here. The the question and it was raised and I'm not sure that we got a clear answer if the council moves ahead with approving tonight is staff directed to include in the lease the comments which have been made and then we will just go forward based on that? Or does the council want to see that language before the sort of final vote on the lease is taken? I think we need that. Okay. I and I thought that I heard Mr. Makana read back to us, which she understood, and that that was sufficient to you. Is that your. Understanding? I mean, I think that's a part of the question is, is the motion to give. What I heard was the motion was to give direction to address these and that it didn't need to come back. Yeah, that's what I heard, too, so. Okay, but now. Well. Jody. I have a. Question. I mean, is it going to come back in second reading on modified or come back modified? And I still get to ask questions, even though I'm not going to support it. I mean, I know what you were going to say. You do so. And I think, you know, I have still 2 minutes left. So it's it is an ordinance which needs a second read. And what what I'm I guess what what I'm asking is if there's if there's four votes to sort of move ahead with this, I think the the better course of action would then would be to bring the ordinance back with these revisions for the first reading. The first reading. Okay. I mean, I think we need to do whatever is most legally correct. But but it will be it will come back and it will be. I mean, does it open it up to something? Is it going to be on consent? It will be it will be a regular agenda item, because we will need to have the council introduce the ordinance. So there will be a chance for the people to speak about the lease again, just like we did a couple or three weeks ago now or something. But that will give the council the opportunity then to see what language has been drafted. Okay. My concern is that given the time frame, we may not get this back to you on the 21st. But that's I mean, that's yeah. That's just the turnaround time. Right. And plus, your May 21st agenda has rent control on it, which may take some time. Yeah. So we, you know, we're just sort of how we will bring this back as quickly as we can. But obviously, there has to be some drafting. Certainly the applicant is going to want to have some input in terms of what the language says, but we will get it back to you as quickly as we can. Well, and I think for a number of reason that that works out, because then you'll also have an opportunity to address some of the questions that have been raised tonight in this draft. And try to translate what's in the leaked document itself. Your next. Just a minute. Okay. Yes. As we put that plan in action, I just want to point out, we have somebody on the phone right now who is going to this requires four votes. Yeah. We currently if I were to read the votes have four votes plus Mr. Odey. Yeah. It's about to go over. One of the four votes is about to leave. So I just want to write to you. Yeah. This could become a. Am I putting. Yeah, I got it. And so can I, if I could just ask. So hearing that as a good reminder, is there any way you could see the structure that so that this is a first reading? I mean, I don't I well. Okay. And there's a. The if I. Misspell it. I didn't plan on not being up at the meeting and what I mean and one final the really going into labor and you plan on calling the upcoming meeting. So I, I want to make that clear. I'm fine with this coming back after first reading, I, I think that some of we've given them a lot to put into at least. Yeah. And I think it's that we certainly rather than draft or. You know we. That we're talking about a 78 pages so I'm a little hesitant to find a draft or find a way to make it fit within the first reading. And I think that gives us the opportunity also to have Nico come back and be present to collect a little bit on the plan. Yeah, I don't know Mr. Bercow's schedule, but I will say, and by the way, the 78 pages of the list are not all necessary to. I've gone through that. A lot of that is boilerplate language that's in every release. But I you know, it's probably a stretch to make this a first reading with staff direction. I can just read your face, Mr. Roush. It's okay. I would not. I would not recommend it. I got you. I Mr. Levitt, did you want to comment? No, I would agree. Yes. Okay, Attorney. We have a person in the second. All right. Okay. So in that case, we have, um. Do we need a further motion at this time? Let's. Well, I think we would like to. I think from staff's point of view that, I mean, maybe there is a consensus there's for the time. And if that's the case, then we will proceed accordingly without necessarily a vote. If that's if that's a fair characterization of a fair. Fair point. Because we don't want to put everyone through this excruciating exercise only to come back and have it fail. So it's. So do you want a vote to approve us going forward with a modified ordinance or. I'd like. I think it would be helpful for us if there was a vote to direct staff to return to the Council with a revised list that encompasses the discussion that the council has made tonight, I think. Thank you. As a for one, I think that will be okay. Okay. Got it. Do I have such a motion? Actually, I could second that one because it's just to bring back revised lease. I have a second. All in favor. I missed it. Oh, I. That's five, right. Okay. Technically, four other actions will roll. Oh, I'm sorry. You know what? In the clinic, this is what happened to me late at night. Because we have a member who's not in the room. We actually have to go by a roll call vote. So we had a motion by Councilmember de Saka, second by Councilmember O.D. and now we're going to vote out, start wherever you want. Councilmember said. I'm not. Quite. I yes. La Bella. Yes. Yes. Mia as. I. Then. All right. All right. Thank you, everybody. So now we are moving on. Does anybody need a break? We need a five minute break. Okay, but really, 5 minutes. We are keeping people up way past their bedtime. Okay. Why don't any of them are here any more? Because this. Okay. So we are. We have a couple more items to here. My suggestion is we're now on six C and this is adoption of the fiscal year Community Development BLOCK Grant Partnership Investment Action Plan, etc.. I am going to respectfully suggest that we dispense with this staff report. I understand that we do have speaker slips and I understand that they have committed to speaking really fast. And and I first of all, I apologize for keeping you out this late. Sometimes, you know, you can look an agenda and go, oh, how long could you know? It's mostly just regular agenda items. How long would it take? Well, you never know is the answer, but you do. This is a very important program and you do important work. So let's call you up. You've got 3 minutes, but don't feel that you have to take your full 3 minutes. But you have our rapt attention. Okay, Madam Clerk. There's five speakers and Stan Ashbrook, Alison, Diane, Aaron Scott, Liz Varella. And we think Catherine Schwartz left and Angie Larson has Watson. Okay? Yeah. Come on up. Sure. Hi. My name is Dan Ashbrook. I'm the development director for Legal Assistance for Seniors. And of course, I want to thank you for your support and ongoing support. And briefly, I just want to say the importance of this funding cannot be understated. Especially as we all. Know, more and more seniors are entering our social service systems, the increased senior population, as well as challenging socioeconomic conditions. I just want to say that this funding will help us address elder abuse involving financial exploitation, domestic violence, or neglect. Health law. Advocacy for seniors falling through through the cracks of our Medicare and medical systems. Senior immigrant legal service services to assist in obtaining citizenship, public benefits. Protection to ensure our seniors have access to entitlements which keep them financially independent, legal guardianship advice, education and court representation for those caring for other other children. And also the launch of our Housing Legal Services to. Prevent senior evictions. And then finally, a series of community education. Programs and very. Importantly. Our Medicare counseling, as. We do our high cap counseling through the domestic senior center. Thank you. Thank you so much. Just over a minute. Okay. Next speaker. We have Alison and then Erin. Hi. Hi. Good evening. I'm Alison DeYoung. And I'm the. Executive director of even INR, which is the nonprofit that operates 211 Alameda. County. I've spoken before, mostly before. Just a quick. Reminder, 211 is the three digit dialing code available, 24 seven in multiple. Languages to connect people. To health, housing and human services. I'm going to dispense with a lot of stuff. I'm just going to also remind you just some updates from the past year. We are the county wide call center for the coordinated entry system, which the county rolled out about 18 months ago. To serve people in a housing crisis, literally homeless folks. 211 screens callers. To ensure that they meet HUD's. Definition of literal homelessness and then. Warm transfer them to one of the housing resource centers. Since we launched. We have screened and transferred a total of 383. Callers to the Mid County West Housing Resource. Center, which includes Alameda. The only other thing I'll just share updates. From the past year we've migrated to a new cloud based phone system that also has a number of enhancements. We've launched two way texting. I'm very happy to announce we're sort of in a pilot phase with that. And we're partnering with cities. As you saw in the letter, on a sort of. A. Different funding model, which comes with some enhancements, including data visualization. Disaster preparedness trainings and embedding. Our online resource. Directory on the city website. So thank you for your ongoing support. Thank you for your good work. Next speaker. Scott and then Liz. Brook. Good evening, I think. Yes, almost. Good morning. Aaron Scott, the executive director of the Family Violence Law Center. Thank you for your ongoing support. We provide legal services for domestic violence survivors, as all of you I know are aware. One new thing I just want to make you aware of is that we have recently received a grant from the state to provide more direct services around housing, keeping people stably housed. And so we have a new case manager position and an in-house attorney. So not only are we going to be able to provide help with restraining orders and other limited family law matters. But we now have an attorney in-house who specializes in housing and housing matters so she can help people with evictions, keeping people in subsidized housing, etc.. So thank you again for your ongoing support. Thank you so much. Under one minute now Liz, really top that. Thank you so much for your support of Midway Shelter once again this year. This funding is really core to keeping our shelter running and going. One thing that's new this year is us really connecting with our services to outreaching to folks on the street to are starting the warming shelter this year in our office on the base we've really made a connection between those three and we hope to do more this next year. So thank you. Thank you so much for all you do. And then I believe Kathryn's not here, so I think it's A.A.. I can make Liz take it away. So. Hello, I'm Angie Watson, Hugill, and I am the peer housing coordinator for Echo Housing. We are the young fair housing and today landlord program that serves the city of Alameda. We investigate discrimination complaints in housing, and we work with tenants in which they know what their rights are. And we. You really. Are about keeping people in their housing, making sure that they have their rights and that they. Have support to keep and build this place. And we thank you so much. For 11 years you supported. Echo Housing and thank you so much for your continued. Support. Thank you. And really to all of you, we can't thank you enough for all you do. And our community, we've seen it up close and personal and you're all awesome. All right. So what we're looking for is a motion to adopt the fiscal year 20 1920 CDBG Home Action Plan and authorize city manager to negotiate and execute grant agreements, grant modifications and other related documents at funding levels approved by Congress to have a motion. Is that a motion or comment? I want to make 10 seconds just to thank everyone for staying, and your dedication to this work is amazing. Also staying till midnight to speak about it and I wish we could do more, but I'd like to move approval of that item. I have a motion to have a second. I will second that and Councilmember Ortiz comments and also just apologize that you've had to rush through this. At the end of the day, it does. It's not a reflection of our appreciation for all the work you do. Thank you so much. Councilmember Vela. Do I hear you up there? Out there? I'm ready to support this. All right. So then we've got a motion in second. All in favor. I'm sorry. It's a roll call vote, Madam Clerk. Sorry. I'll get to say hi. Nice. Like I O.D.. Yes. That La. Mer as. I try to. Make a transcontinental phone call. Thank you, everyone. Okay, that motion passes now. The next. The next item is six D. And again, we're in a speed contest. Ma'am? Madam Clifford, do you want to introduce that one?

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Pike Place Market Historical District; amending Chapter 25.24 of the Seattle Municipal Code to adopt an interim boundary expansion for the Pike Place Market Historical District.

SeattleCityCouncil_08132018_CB 119330

Okay. Those in favor of adopting the resolution as amended. Please vote i. I those opposed vote no. The motion carries a resolution is adopted. Same. The next agenda item into the record. The report of the Finance and Neighborhoods Committee to name three resolutions excuse me accountable 119 330 related to the Pike Place Market Historical District amending Chapter 25.24 Estate Code to adopt an interim boundary expansion for the Pike Place Market. Historical Districts Committee recommends the bill passes amended. Very good, Councilmember Baxter. Why don't you introduce the matter? I'm sure folks have something you should amend. Go ahead. Amended version and then. Yes, that's what I was going to bring forward this amended version. But if you would like to do that first, please go ahead. No other way. But I don't know what the familiar is specifically. Why don't you go ahead and make the motion for the amendment? That's what I thought you were going to do. So very good. Last week we looked at an ordinance which we amended a couple of times in my committee, and we have provided another amendment yet this morning, which, like I would like to put in front of us for discussion. Okay. So what let's describe with a little more particularity, Councilwoman Swan, would you like to describe this amendment a little more specifically or. No, you don't have to. Would you like to? I I'm sorry. Who would like to describe them. And I'm. I'm not. Go ahead. It's. Yeah. My legislation, I'm probably in the best position to explain it. So, first of all, I. I'll just make the motion. I moved to amend council bill 119330 by substituting motion for for version to. So second. There's second. Okay. And this version has been approved by law. Yes. And as a matter of fact, just to quickly explain the the amended version, it actually and this came after the committee vote on Wednesday. It incorporates recommended amendments from the law department itself. And I can go over it again if you want. But these were the things that we discussed at the briefing. Yep. Okay. I think we're ready to vote any of the comments before we vote on the amendment. All those in favor of the substitution version for for version two, please vote I. I opposed the ayes have it. So now we have a version for for consideration. We'd like to speak to the version four of this ordinance. That could wait. I'm pretty informal on the process here, since we all worked on it. Sort of collectively, consumers don't like to tear up. Thank you. First of all, I wanted to thank all the all those who have been fighting to save the shoebox for also supporting the MDC in their fight. I won't really make too many arguments for why we should save the shoebox. Because you all have said it more than eloquently. And I didn't hear what there was, but. Related. It. It is. It is absolutely all related. I could not agree more. Yes, it's about saving our city. So just to let everybody know, the petition that was started by Jay Middleton, who spoke in the public comment this morning, when I checked, it had 92,975 signatures. And we have we have had tremendous outreach from the music community. You all know last Monday, Ben Gabel from Death Cab for Cutie was here and he called my office saying, I'm just calling as a constituent. And we've had now the Pearl Jam concert on Friday. I don't know how many of you were there, but but they some somebody somebody I know message me a clip a video clip from that concert where everybody was saying, save the shoebox, save the shoebox. So thanks to all the the music community for putting their weight behind us. We also know that a number of music musicians and music bands, everyone from Katy Perry to Sir Mix-A-Lot, you know, it's every genre you like to go out a two page ad in the Seattle Times, I had my staff member check how much it cost, and it costs roughly $22,500 for a 42 page ad. So now, granted, the musicians may be able to afford it easily. But I think what that ad represents is the tremendous commitment of the entire community, not just the most well-known musicians, to saving the shoebox. So this is really, really important. And it's it's been my honor to be able to be there with you. I think it is important to underscore the points that we made earlier, which is that this is not and again, I'm going to quote only one of the employees of the Showbox was sitting right there who I think said something like, this is not a conflict between culture and affordable housing. This is a conflict between culture and profit. And he asked City Council, Which side are you on? And I think somebody else also captured that sentiment. And I think it's important to clarify that this is this is not this entire community, which is probably far more than 100,000 people. Not everybody who wants to save the shoebox has openly spoken up or one has signed the petition. This is not against change. The question that all community members and working class people are asking is on whose terms does change happen in Seattle? That's the question. And I am. So I mean, I don't have words to describe my gratitude to everybody who has stood on the front lines of this, because that is the only reason we are here today. I thank all the council members who were there at the Wednesday committee because we were able to have a discussion and be voted the legislation out of committee, six votes for, no votes against and no abstentions. So that already shows how much how much support there already is for for this legislation. But again, I will also say that this won't be the end. This legislation is very, very important today, but that is step one. We need to continue to get organized. So those of you who are here, those of you who were here last week, we need to come together again, maybe in September and discuss our next steps for organizing. But thanks to everyone and. I know and I know. Special thanks to the Showbox employees themselves. I think the bill has been properly moved. And second, it is ready for vote unless anyone has any. Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. So one of the findings of the Arts Office's CAP report, which is the creation, activation and preservation of cultural spaces. I know there are a lot of people involved in it, but I want to recognize Matthew Richter in the office, who is one of the primary authors. Really, this report really does a great job. Of highlighting. Why this is an. Issue that is much. Larger than just a shoebox. That that report says, despite cultural. Spaces role in strengthening neighborhoods, creating and maintaining these spaces in strong real estate markets can be extremely difficult. The older, smaller. More. Eccentric spaces that often house cultural uses and small businesses are particularly vulnerable to development driven displacement. And I bring that up because. The CAT report itself has. A number of different recommendations to deal with. This larger. Larger issue. One of the one of the recommendations is to actually look at creating a cultural space management public development authority that we're going to hear more about that actually in my committee tomorrow morning. This council worked with the arts office in developing an implementation plan for its recommendations. So really, this is really about, I think, a much bigger issue. One of the things that we've been talking about since last Wednesday was the talk. About whether or not we should hold the legislation. And I'm glad that it appears that we've decided. Not to hold it. But I do want to. Yeah. I really want to sunlight the issue. The fact that the developer of this site agreed to voluntarily take steps to delay vesting in the hopes that this council would delay the vote. And happily, again, it appears that that we're not doing that. Though a hold would. Provide an opportunity for the developer to develop another plan. The description I've heard of, the plan that they're working on, calling it a win win solution gives me great pause. The developer's legal counsel contacted SGC last week in their agreement to delay vesting, and the description of the Win-Win effort was as follows We look forward to working with you on a win win solution that could sustain the performance history of the shoebox into the future. So as I. Understand the words, sustaining the performance history, this, of course, could result in space within the new building. Being dedicated to live performance rather than a preservation of the structure, like was successfully done in the instance of the sanctuary on Fifth Avenue, with construction costs approaching over $900 per square foot for some of the new high rise buildings in the city. I really doubt that any performance venue could financially support that cost per square foot. So that's to me, I think that's a it's up it's a hollow effort. Because one, as as you. Have really made. A great point of there are things. About this structure. That are so important to maintain. I'm really glad that somebody mentioned the spring loaded floor. That is really one of the things that makes. Makes a show at the Showbox, a really life. Changing experience. Almost in the stage from the floor. And so so all of this brings all of this brings me back to, again, the recognition that the CAF report has identified, which is that because we have. Such a hot. Real estate economy, we have to be creative in finding ways to save these venues. So thank you. Thank you. Okay. So I think we're ready to vote. Not quite. Oh, quite. Okay, well, now. Now we get down to the procedures, and I know you're all excited about how this is going to work. I am very much presuming that this is going to be a unanimous vote today. And what's going to happen is that it's going to bias about ten months time to consider how the Showbox property can be included as an interim basis and working toward a more permanent basis to be part of the market. But it's also going to take us some time to get there. The Pike Place Market itself, tenants, board members, many people in the music community, property owners, both people who are living there now and businesses have said that they would like to be part of this. They want to be part of the conversation about how we preserve the shoebox and this and the floor and the wall, as you've talked about, and the stage. So it's not anything that is going to be preserved if it is scraped and then something else is built there and the shoebox is put elsewhere. We have heard that loud and clear. Preserving the shoebox and its history and the cultural value, however, is going to take every tool in our book. And I think that already our historic Seattle. Thank you all for coming today and for getting in the landmark nomination. It was pretty amazing. For those of you who are not here on Wednesday, my committee people are sitting there working through talking about the conversation. Eugenia Wu is sitting there completely poker faced, and at the end of the meeting, we find out that they had submitted a landmark nomination in the middle of it. So we appreciate the fact that it's moving forward. But the plan and this is something I think is really important for people to work on with us together is to explore the potential impacts on the neighbors and the neighborhoods. And I want to get more specific about that. But the impact to the market and the key organizations could be profound. We want to make sure that they've got the time to think this through and what it means. And we've got to rely upon the roles and responsibilities of those who have been engaged in the market for over 50 years now. And it includes our preservation and development authority. I want to recognize that Mary Vaccarello was there on Wednesday, our market historic commission and Friends of the Market. Sarah Payton was there with us as well. The Day Stall Tennis Association, the Market Foundation, the Merchants Association and downtown neighbors and property owners that are around there, the market operations in them. So sells for maintenance, security facilities, the buskers, the events and all that, something that has to be considered as well. Also, just from the standpoint of what we will be looking at, First Avenue mobility is a big deal. Many of you have been listening to this for years about whether we have a First Avenue streetcar, yes or no, what we can do during this. What I love the marketing term of the period of maximum constraint, but freight deliveries are critical for markets, for merchants, for the hotels and residents. And a gentleman that was here from the Newmark mentioned that the alley is critical alleys all through. Whether it's between first and second or second and third are things that we really haven't come to grips with yet. And we're going to be working, continuing and call upon escort to make sure that the transportation mobility all around those blocks is really addressed while we're doing this kind of work. And many of you remember that the pipeline corridor improvements are something that this council has been working on. I don't want to see one of them get behind this other work. I do want to say thanks to my council colleagues, all of you who are here, every one of you have paid attention. You jumped on it. We had an excellent meeting on Wednesday where this came through loud and clear that preserving the shoebox was important. And at the same time, we have affordable housing we're trying to accommodate. We want to include more people in the neighborhood. So that said, the market charter itself are market guidelines. They provide the time tested kind of public processes. I'm looking forward to working with that. And I want to thank my colleague, Councilmember Gonzales. She's putting together a resolution right now that's going to set forth a schedule and how we're going to proceed that will probably be in front of us in September. I want to thank her staff as well, already is working with mine because as we're moving these conversations forward, I can just see that we can expand this conversation to the downtown neighbors as well as to the music community, residents and businesses. So that people see this. We're bringing the collective wisdom to the table, figuring out the best way that we can to preserve the shoebox without negatively impacting the market or in the neighborhood around it. So with that, that's the process you can expect. I want to say thank you. You've got my vote on this. Thank you very much. That's why I'm a skater. Thank you, Mr. President. One of the individuals who came up to testify said that they moved here many years ago and they moved here for the culture. And we have people who are continuing to move here every single day. In our region, we have over a thousand people who moved to our region because of the culture, because of us, the community, because of the environment that we've created and because of our progressive values. And another person who came forward testified to say that past city councils should have taken opportunities to up zone, up zone throughout the city so that we can have housing and density and affordable homes and cultural centers and child care and access to grocery stores. Those are the things that I hope that we can do together, because it doesn't have to be a false dichotomy. We must be able to preserve cultural hubs for individuals to come together, to gather, to either create activism or art or music. And we also we also need to have the ability to afford to live in this city so that those who are performing at the Showbox, those who are cleaning up the buildings, those who are building the buildings, those who are stocking the grocery shelves are taking care of our kiddos. And seniors can afford to live in the city. And right now. And right now, our restrictive zoning laws have focused most of the development to 15% of this city. And when 15% of the city is focused on development. It's no wonder that the cost of housing continues to go up, that folks are being pushed out of the city, that mostly black and brown and low income workers are being pushed out farther and farther and having been too forced to commute, commute to their jobs. And you know what? We want to make sure that this movement continues so that we can do development done right, so we can create affordable housing and more music venues and art centers and childcare facilities and grocery centers. So I want to keep working with you to make sure that we create that density throughout the city so that we can create the homes and the public services and more artistic venues. So we can truly be that creative hub that brought many folks here and that keep many people here. I know it doesn't have to be a false dichotomy. I'm hoping that we can continue to work through this committee and the effort that's been laid out in this new legislation to make sure that we can create an actual win win, because we have to not just say protect this one piece when what we want to do is protect cultural hubs, especially in black and brown communities that don't often have a historic designation. We want more affordable housing for those who are performing and wanting to raise their kiddos here and stay here as seniors on fixed income. So will you work with us to create affordable housing and a cultural center going forward? All right. I look forward to working with you, and I so appreciate all of the activism and I really appreciate you all coming forward. I did have my life changed by another motley concert at the Showbox, although Motley and really I think, you know, it helped that she kind of like me roots in the community and want to continue to be here so looking forward to working with you. Same saving the Showbox. Step one. So Councilmember Gonzalez. Thank you council president serve my remarks are I'm going to be a lot more boring than that and I apologize in advance because I use all my energy already on the first agenda. You know, I just wanted to I just really wanted to talk about what I keep hearing from folks about how much the show box means to them. And I know that there are some people who might be listening to this conversation. I don't know who they are, but there might be some people who listen to this conversation and think about how it's just a building. And and I think that what I hear from the public testimony, from the countless number of people who've been emailing and calling my office, is that this represents much more than just a building. It really is about who we want to continue to be in the future in our city. And we and and it's about taking a position that we value the arts and culture and music community and those who participate in it to be part of our story moving forward, not just in history, but in present and in the future. And I really want to thank you all for just reminding us as a city that that's important. And as as somebody who's who has participated and going to concerts at the Showbox or just going in to get drinks at the Showbox as I'm working my way through downtown and whatnot, I, I understand and appreciate and what this means to our community. And so I'm really proud that we're going to be able to take a step forward now to hit the pause button, really, and to make sure that we send the message to those who want to see the Showbox go away that the Showbox isn't going anywhere. And I'll just I'll just end by by talking a little bit about how I hope we can accomplish creating a path forward to making sure that whatever tool we use to create the greatest opportunity possible to preserve the shoebox through community driven approaches is is a resolution that I'm working to pull together that I'll be working with my colleagues on. I think I think you all should walk away with a sense of understanding and belief that we are unanimous up here on this city council, on this dais, that we need to create as many tools and options and pathways and rooms available to have a conversation about what the appropriate tool is to preserve the shoebox. And I'll be working really closely with my colleagues to do that. But I also want to work closely with a lot of you and with as many of you who are willing to continue to engage over the next several weeks and months to make sure that that that the tool that is chosen is one that is going to be most viable and most workable for everybody who's interested in making sure that we preserve the shoebox within our arts and culture community. So I look forward to working with you on that. For any of you who are interested in continuing to work with me and my office on this, you can reach out to my office and I'm literally one of the most easiest people to find. So just, you know, look, look, look us up. Give us a ring sheet, drop us an email, let us know how you want to be engaged and involved, and we'll keep you posted on making sure that the work plan is one that is going to keep up, keep up the urgency, but also create an opportunity for for the most creative solutions to to win out, to accomplish the common goal that I think we all have here. Thank you. Councilmember suarez. Councilmember war as you have the floor. Thank you. Thank you. Council president. I'm not going to be specifically on point about the Showbox, but I have an overarching theme here that has always concerned me since I've been on Seattle City Council that is with CCI or any of the PDAs or the Design Commission or the Historical Commission. While I appreciate that you're all here and the shoebox is important to you and you all have great memories as a Native American person is indigenous people that are this is our land. People have been deliberate in erasing us and making us invisible. What is more important, from what I heard today in this conversation, I've heard it my whole life is what is history and what is culture? And who gets to decide? Who gets to decide what's important? What is your soul? And I'm here to tell you that the soul of the city are the indigenous people that were here. I'm hoping that when it comes, when we have our issues, that we can count on you to step forward and support us in making us in seeing that we are the indigenous in the original folks here and that our culture and our history has to be represented. And I say this not to be on a down note. I say it because, again, these institutions that were put together, these commissions, these PDAs, these committees, were deliberate in keeping our voices of people like me who don't get to be on these committees and commissions and decide what is culture, what is important, and what is soul. Because I believe that this is Indian country and we should be. Represented across the board. So I'm hoping when some of you come forward and like listening to you today, I was mildly listening about your great memories of coming to Seattle, of your memories of going to a concert there. Imagine people who have been here for time immemorial in which the only thing that shows that we're here is that fake cheese Seattle thing over there and some other issues down in the market. So I'm hoping when the time comes, I can look for your support to talk about what it is to be indigenous and what it is to be representative. And that has that's neither here nor there for me about the Showbox. So I just want to end on that note. Thank you. Councilmember O'Brien. Thank you. I am thrilled to support saving the shoebox today also. Someone said in public comment that what makes Seattle great is change in progress, but not at the expense of things we care about. And obviously. Councilmember Whereas I appreciate your comments about how we decide what that is. But clearly, we've heard resoundingly from the community that saving the shoebox is critically important. And it's amazing to see how many people come together so swiftly around this. And it was great that we've been able to find a legal path to move forward, to put a pause on this, to have further discussion, and to figure out how we can have a long term, permanent solution to saving this shoebox. I really appreciate all my colleagues work on this legislation and excited to go to the next step. So thank you. Thank you. Has asked, why would you like to close debate? Yes. Thanks to all the council members who who've spoken in favor of saving the shoebox and to the council members who participated in the discussion on Wednesday. I also wanted to thank Kittle Freeman and Lesch Watson is right here. These are these are staff members who serve all council members. And they are the ones who worked with my office to develop this ordinance. So they they certainly deserve a big measure of the things. And also, Kirsten arrested central staff director, historic Seattle who've been on the forefront of this from the very beginning. I also wanted to thank all my staff members Doug Vardon, Ellen Anderson, Nick Jones, Sasha Summer Adams and Koski, Jonathan Rosenblum, all of whom who worked on both the EMT resolution and the shoebox ordinance. We weren't expecting all of it to come all at once, but in a way, it has been a beautiful confluence because the shoebox struggle has supported the Mdhhs and the Mdhhs have supported the shoebox. And as you yourself said, it's connected. I also I. Also wanted to thank Joel Sanchez, who's standing there in the back, who's who's a Ph.D. doctoral student, you know, physics doctoral student at U Dub. And I first met him when his union was on strike for a fair contract a few months ago. But he's also happens to be a musician. So he's been on the forefront of the, I should say, the show back struggle as well. And and it really shows that a lot of these issues are connected in our heads and also in reality. You know, nearly 50 years ago, it was a community uproar and community organizing that saved the Pike Place Market. The shoebox is our struggle of our times. So it's really exciting that we will be able to take this first step and then move on to the next one. But also, let's remember, one is we need to come back to organizing. So, you know, please stay in touch with us. Make sure you're signed up on the sign up sheet that my staff have handed out, because we want to make sure we have an organizing meeting in September. But also, let's not stop. There are a lot of people who actually who are affordable housing activists and didn't didn't weren't immediately in tune with what was happening with the shoebox. Have said perceptibly to me that this this this need not just be about the shoebox. We could but we we we will succeed in saving the shoebox. We need to get organized for that further. But but what they said was, interestingly, was that this could be the catalyst for future struggle to build affordable housing. So how awesome would it be if you all became part of the people's budget movement for this year that we will be launching and maybe we can win the Amazon tax that was repealed. Maybe we can win a tax on big business to build affordable housing. Why should we stop at just saving the shoebox? We need affordable. Housing as well. You are. And after this vote, let's keep fighting. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Let's vote. Please call the roll on the passage of the amended bill. Whereas I macheda i. O'Brien. All right, so on. Make sure Gonzalez Herbold i President Harrell high ed in favor and unopposed. Bill passed Cheryl Senate. And. They? So. If you could hear me, Madam Clerk, please call Mother. Please read an agenda. Item number four. Agenda item 41193 ten Williams The City of Sails Volunteer Deferred Compensation Plan. The committee recommends the bill pass. A very quick go. Forward. Yeah. Transition to. Oh. Can take a minute to go down and look. Okay. I'm a little bit what we want to say. I just want to say. I think it's. Okay. As you exit, please. Order restored. So go ahead and read the next gen item. Sure. Ciao. Thank you. Agenda item four Council Vote 1193 ten Relating to the City Seattle's Volunteer Deferred Compensation Plan amending Section 2.5 of the Deferred Compensation Plan to clarify existing immunity from liability for offering certain investment options. The committee recommends the bill passed.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute an amendment to the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility Operations and Maintenance Agreement No. 23336 with Covanta Long Beach Renewable Energy Corporation (Covanta), in an amount not to exceed $8,700,000, to provide for capital investment by both the City of Long Beach and Covanta for facility equipment replacement. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_08142018_18-0670

Councilwoman Mongo. Motion carries. 21 please report from Energy Resources. Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an amendment to the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility Operations and Maintenance Agreement number 23336 with Covanta Long Beach Renewable Energy Corporation in an amount not to exceed 8,700,000 to provide capital investment for facility equipment, replacement city wide where. We have some some interests on the dice on this issue is there is a report that we want to report, Councilmember. Okay. So we are going to follow up on this. Sure. We have Bob Dole and Charlie Trump. Yeah. The furthest to Charlie trip. Our manager. Of surf. Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council under the current operations and Maintenance Agreement Surface operated by Covanta Energy. And this agreement goes until July one, 2024. Covanta is the world's largest operator of waste energy facilities in this country and also abroad. In 2017, Covanta notified the city that equipment in the facility had reached its end of operational life. The city contracted with another engineering independent engineering company named HDR to perform a facility assessment report which concurs with Covanta notification. The amendment arranges for a total investment of $13.7 million for the replacement of 30 year old equipment in the facility. That has reached the point where it may fail without the investment. The equipment, which includes things like conveyors, motors, control systems, could fail and would cause facility availability to be compromised. What that means is we would have to shut down and repair the facility with unscheduled outages instead of a planning and and doing it in a scheduled way. Under the terms of the amendment, Covanta will invest $5 million and the city will invest $8.7 million, which total the 13.7 total investment. In the spirit of collaboration. This proposed amendment will also allow for those seeking opportunities to accept higher value waste. This is just to to improve facility revenues going forward, and it also secures a more stable operation until 2024. That concludes my report, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Yes. Mr. Speaker. Oh, excuse me. Very public comment because. Come down. Yes. Hello. My name is Whitney Amaya, and I'm here as a representative of Eastside Communities for Environmental Justice, as well as a constituent of District seven. I asked the City Council members do not approve the recommendation to invest $8.7 million, not extend the contract of the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility. The incineration of waste releases thousands of pollutants that contaminate the city of Long Beach. Among those pollutants are dioxins, which, according to the EPA, are highly toxic. And can cause cancer. Reproductive and developmental problems and damage to the immune system. As a resident of West Long Beach, which has an 85 to 100% pollution burden score, according to Callan via screen, supporting this recommendation would be a blow to communities. There are so many parallels between the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility and the Commerce Refuse To Energy Facility, which was decommissioned June 30th of this year. The Southeast the Southeast Resource Recovery Facility is an expensive facility to operate, and with the power purchase agreement with Southern California Edison coming to an end, it will face a loss in revenue when faced with a similar situation, the commerce incinerator increased tipping fees. However, it was not enough to sustain operations. The City of Long Beach should instead begin to invest in zero waste strategies, especially when more than half of the waste being. Sent to the Southeast Research Recovery Facility can be recycled, composted or reused. I have these factsheets also. Hopefully councilmembers can look over in regards to incineration. I don't have enough copies for you all so I can provide copies tomorrow. But if you guys do want to take a look over and share, I have some copies here. Thank you. Thank you. But. Good evening. Mayor and council members. My name is Kobe Sky. I'm speaking on behalf of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, where I serve as a principal engineer on our Environmental Core Service area. I wanted to speak in support of this item. For a decade, surf, as it's affectionately known, has helped Long Beach divert waste from landfills and generate electricity to power homes and businesses. This is an important service. And it's good to see that the city is. Looking to continue to invest in. Improvements to surf. Which over the years has continued to improve its operations, reduce the impact to the community, and serve a very important resource not just. For the city of Long Beach, but for the region. For that reason, we hope that the city. Will move forward. With this item to continue this important capacity and have it available for the city and for our neighbors. And the county would be happy to provide assistance or technical expertize in terms of solid waste if it's helpful to the city. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. To Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. My name is Angela Logan. I am a fourth District resident and a member of our Communities for Environmental Justice. I want to urge the Council to pause on spending $8.7 million on a facility that is antiquated, the industry is adequate, and the approach itself in addressing waste is what we look at is, I think, in the past. As you heard the first speaker mentioned, the City of Commerce Refuge, the energy facility, which is also a waste to energy facility, just folded because the feasibility and economics of it didn't pan out. And so it folded. The risk here is that the same thing may be in front of us here at the surf facility. And after investing $8.7 million into that, if there face closure, that would be an appropriate use of our resources. To say that $8.7 million is a significant amount of money to invest in something at such high risk, something that the amount of resources that we can use for libraries, for the police, for fire, for all these vital, vital issues that we have just heard you talk about earlier today during the budget discussion. I want to ask the council to really consider this issue pause, take time to really study these particular issues that are and that we should be considering that if you don't have all the answers to these questions, that you should take time to make a really well informed decision on spending that amount of money. The questions I would pose to you are if you are not clear on the implications to investing this money into this facility as it relates to. The California Renewable Portfolio Standard program, the change in the power purchase agreement. The length and terms of the existing contract, and the existing lifespan of the equipment in question. If you're not clear on all those parts and pieces. Making the decision on spending $8.7 billion tonight would be poor decision making. So I want to urge you to pause, to take time to study this issue closely and make sure that you are looking out for the health and well-being of your residents, both financially and within the environment. Thank you. Thank you. And our last speaker. And then we'll go to the council. Dr. Mayor. City Council. City Clerk's Department, City Managers. Department, city attorney. Thank you for allowing me to speak. My name is Daniel Greenwald. I live in Sydney to this. Item. The subject is very important to me. The whole reason I am here. The reason I live here in Southern California is because my father found a job here in the ports of Long Beach. And then he spoke to me and I live my father's legacy where as. He told me that where he worked in the ports, it was a. Zero waste facility. And by that I mean there was no waste. But then he told me that the the waste there was burnt. At Surf. I couldn't believe it. They burn trash here in the ports. It didn't make sense to me. But now we have mercury, ammonia, chlorine led zinc. Everything here because they burn trash here in Long Beach. It's ridiculous, and dare I say shameful that this happens. The fact that we're putting $8.7 million into sustaining this is shameful. We should be putting $8.7 million into. Closing the facility and moving towards a more sustainable green, something where fresh air happens and where we burn trash and breathe these emissions. Additionally, regarding the staff's economic analysis, the service revenues will drop from 25 million to 10 million, and that's based on the assumption that people will pay more for tipping fees, etc. and elsewhere. The city is currently researching and looking into how we can make our revenues green and efficient. Pardon me. This is. So important to me. I'm just at a loss of words that we would put more money into burning trash and not putting into green and sustainable things. I'm sorry. No. Thank you, sir. Let me go back with. There's a motion in a second to authorize this agreement. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. I want to thank our committee members for staying late. I know we've got a healthy agenda for staff. I want to thank you for the presentation, but I know that this item was slotted to be last week. We held it off so that we could all have conversations and hopefully have a full presentations. I'm was hoping for a more full staff presentation. I know it's late, so I'm going to run through a couple of questions to try to tease out some answers for my for my colleagues. The first question I have is regards to the the money that we would put through is only to get us to 2024. Would the facility be viable after that date? So the facility to continue to run part of the independent engineering study an analysis we did we would have to invest additional funding if we wanted to operate past 2024. This funding is needed to continue to operate the facility until 2024, and this acts as a bridge to get us through to whether there's another alternative technology at that point or another way to go for waste diversion. One of the one of the great things about surf is it really is a a environmentally responsible way for handling waste management. It actually reduces greenhouse gas emissions when compared to landfilling and is also employed. This technology is employed worldwide and specifically required by the European Union to handle solid waste where they don't allow landfilling in Europe. Okay, I've got a few other questions, but I want to let me back up a little bit. I think I want to just paint the tone. I think the surf plan has been a hot item for a long time. We know that it is a discussion where a lot of community members, both labor versus environmental, through the port. The discussion has been what are we doing with surf? We know that there are options to come in and do anaerobic digestion and several other options that could be done there. But we have not had that conversation at council. And so for me, the reason why last week I asked to pull it was because I felt surprised by the dollar amount and not being able to have that conversation yet. And by saying in your staff report that it says that the economic impact was unknown of what the future would be. And so for me, that raised another. But I had my notes on my laptop. My laptop died because I love my charger at home. So just bear with me and how choppy my notes are. Okay. But I think for me, the question for us is how do we move forward with an energy efficient, an option for us to have a community choice in where energy comes from? And does it make sense for us to invest this type of money for a short term goal when we don't have a feasibility study or a plan for that next step? So my next question is for to highlight for the community members to the funding that's coming from this. Is that coming from the general fund or from surf? The funding so far operates under an enterprise fund and the funding for the the the work and capital replacement work that's required is coming from that fund. It's not coming from the general fund, nor would it come from the general fund. We're a self-sustaining fund in the city. And as a matter of fact, in the past we've actually had that revenue and have contributed to the general fund over the life of the facility and over $70 million. Right. And familiar with the past and knowing that there have been changes at the state level that recyclables are different. And so what would it cost for us to do a feasibility study on the options for a sort of plant moving forward? Well, currently the options are landfill and you could handle greenways through or food waste through an anaerobic digestion system if you could find it. But that's a very minimal amount of the solid waste which needs to be handled for the city a size of 500 or 500,000 people. So in putting in a full scale facility. Comparable to surf. You would you would be looking at a that's a almost an impossible task from the standpoint of the cost surf facility nowadays with the same pollution control equipment would cost half a billion dollars. Our our facility out there is an asset to the city and still has usable life in it. The amounts that we're actually investing is very small. When you look at an investment to replace the whole facility in the neighborhood of of $500 million is small. As far as a feasibility study to do that, to do that type of report that's why we we handled ah we we hired HDR last year to give us different scenarios. How much will we need to invest in the facility to run to 2024? How much we would need to to invest in the facility to run to 2030 and how much to invest in the facility until 2040. When we use those numbers and we use what our projected revenues were in a proforma to see whether we can afford to actually continue the run and operate the facility and perform upgrades that might be required by law or by regulations. Can I ask our director what it would look like to get an economic impact report for Cerf in the next year? Because we don't have I mean, it's a one and a half page report that we have in front of us. Councilmember We can certainly do that. We could use the report that Mr. Tripp just talked about and expand upon that and provide you something with the next year that talks about all the viability of surf and where it's gone, where it's been, and what alternatives are. We can certainly do that. And that is the conversation I would love to have. Let me also ask, is my understanding that these upgrades do not fall within the project labor agreement that we have in the city? That's correct. These are not this is not a construction project. Okay. Just simply because it's not a construction project, even though the. Okay. Let me ask one last question. Is there. Excuse me. I want to hear from my colleagues and then I might have one other comment. So go ahead. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce. So I seconded the motion to approve the recommendation, which is my position would be some. I'm hoping that we're still going in that direction. Okay, good. So is it possible for us to maybe get annual reviews or updates on how the facility is doing? Absolutely. Nope, no question about that. We have those and we can deliver those to you right away. Yes. Yeah. We meet for 30 minutes. We do make those available through our JPA agreement. And also, we we are required to do a a revenue report for our partners, the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. So we do do those annual reports. That be great. And that way we can continue to monitor the progress, opportunities for improvement, etc., as we continue the discussions. But that's really all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. So I cued up and I'm supportive of the recommendation, I think and I think Sirf is actually a resource for the city. And we've been working on our state legislative agenda for the past four years, at least in Sacramento, trying to get an extension for Cerf, because we recognize it is a benefit. You know, we can have the conversation and debate about the merits of incinerating trash and having minimal emissions versus landfilling. And you know what that does for in the capacity for to landfill trucking trash, you know, 100 miles across the Southern California. And what that does in terms of fuel, I think there are some some some merits to us investing in our surf plant. But also, I'll go a step further, further in saying that I think the life of surf should be a priority of this council to extend it. It pays for itself. It's a it's a self-generating or enterprise fund that now, I think, has has benefited the city tremendously. And it also has the potential to to bring other revenues in and be a resource not only for our city, but but other cities as well. And so when you look at the $8 million talked about, these are not necessarily tax dollars. It's not general fund dollars. These are not dollars that are coming away from services. These are dollars that are generated within surf itself. That Enterprise Fund, and I think is like any other enterprise fund that we have, our port, our airport, allow them not to to to invest in the upgrades. And then we as a council, I think we really need to have the conversation about the really getting behind state legislation to to still extend this facility. So I'll be voting to support. Thank you. And I just want to go to councilman among I know that Councilman Austin is chose to stay let's committee has been working on this issue for years for for many years at the up in Sacramento. I've been there and accompanied him on this very on this very issue as well. So I just want to thank the councilman for I know his constant advocacy on this issue. Councilman committee I cued up because I am 100% in support of Councilmember Austin's efforts in serving on state ledge and extending surf. So far as not only is the pollution of trucking terrible, but the byproducts of surf are so low that my husband volunteers there. So I put my personal family in. Literally, my husband takes actual reference product up to the incinerator and hand puts it into the incinerator. So he's standing in the thick of it on a regular basis, and he's read the reports on what the potential carcinogen options are and all of the specific wipes that they use to keep their employees safe. I mean, it is a safe plant. I am so thankful for the efforts of Councilmember Super and as chair of Surf and of Councilmember Austin of as chair of State Ledge, that we need to do what we can to extend the life of surf. It is the most environmentally friendly option we specifically cover the trash with. Our clippings. This is something that the Department of the Energy Department, under previous leadership, came out and talked about at community meetings about how people are confused often of why they don't have a green burial. And the reason they don't have a green bill is because those green clippings in the burning actually make it more environmentally friendly. And so the detriment to the 710 corridor and the communities that live by trucking and moving trash would actually be much worse off. So thank you, Councilmember Austin, for your overview and thank you for your work on this and also thank you member Councilmember Superhot for your work on this. I think that that there are a lot of misinformation out there and we need to do a better job of informing the community and getting out there and letting them know what a Jewell Cerf is and how many agencies across the region use it and how powerful it is. Thank you. Councilman Pearce. Okay. So a few things. One is I want to clarify that my number one concern is about process and the fact that this council has not had a discussion about surf and the options while Councilmember Austin works at the state level on this. I'm on the surf committee. It's a 30 minute committee and I've asked to help agenda things and I have not had that opportunity. So four and I've only been to one meeting, to be clear. Okay. To be clear, there was one meeting that I that I attended since serving on it. So it's really the fact that there's so much conversation out in my community and my district with the community partners we have with IBEW, with those that came here tonight and that we're not having that conversation here. And so while I am supporting moving this forward, I do want to move it forward, but I want to move it forward with coming back. And that's what we talked about whenever we had our meeting last week was coming back with what is the feasibility moving forward. So if we invest this knowing that it only gets us to 2024, what are we doing to not only get an economic impact because we don't know what the changes are ? This council doesn't know. While it's been good to us in the past, we don't know what those state changes are going to do. We can sit here and rave about how great it is. But we're we're smart council. We need to see some numbers. We need to see some options. And so my request, what I'm asking for is three things. One is that understanding that we want a presentation and we can work on agendas in something on the council side around options but that we come back with a report on possible alternatives to surf after 2024, including potential anaerobic digestion, better source of separation programs, increased reuse and recycling, and any necessary and any necessary other changes that we need to do knowing that this plant creates energy, that we we use that, what are the options? And so how can we get that report in front of us in the next, I'd say year two? Is that knowing that they're not for construction jobs, that there are jobs in there, that I think from talking to folks in labor, that they feel like they would be their skilled workforce, might be a good partner if we could just make sure that staff is working with them to identify any skilled work positions. That would be great. And then I said I had three, but but those are my two. Those are my two. No problem. But we can get all the two. Okay. And so just to clarify, we just we're ready to have the choice around the conversation, around community choice. And that's why this is such a big topic for me. So thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Cipriano. Thank you. First Councilmember Mongo just mentioned the 710 corridor or so since the 605 quarter appearance next to her district. I want to let her know that this land fills up there, too. Actually, I think I think I just want to give Mr. Dao or Mr. Tripp an opportunity to speak on any of the points they're made tonight. Anything else you'd like to say? So how about it? Thank you. No, I'm fine. Thank you. Constable Richardson. Said no. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a couple of things. So I think folks would be more comfortable if maybe there was that check in in general about it. You know, I, you know, took the opportunity when I first got on council to go to serve, take the tour, understand the sort of the challenges with serve. And it's very complex. It is it's difficult to explain to the public. And I think the biggest heartburn that I hear consistently is what is the future look like beyond 2024? And, you know, there are a lot of other conversations happening that are around the fringe of what our waste reality of waste looks like and the future of Long Beach, whether it's the conversation about the zero waste and the franchise hauling, whether it's the conversation about community choice. So I believe I don't know that today is the time. I actually think, you know, we take some time and think more fully about whether these, you know, serve funds can help contribute to a broader study about all these sort of outstanding issues. The the other piece of this is I just want to be clear, and I know this question has been asked, but this special fund serve these are resources that are generated from staff, correct? That's correct. So these resources cannot be directed to building to funding public safety or enhancing parks and things like that. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. After we expend these resources, what is the condition of the survey fund? So the fund is kind of a fluid fund. We keep a fund balance. The current fund balance is 22 million. We are going to spend these resources, but on the same and in the same at the same time, we're going to be also operating and maintaining the facility. So we're going to get revenues during that period while we're replacing and refurbishing equipment so that the fund will will get down, I think, through 2024 to a point of about 10 million, and then it will actually increase again by 2024. So we're not really the point. The reason I ask that is that we're not sacrificing any real opportunity cost to, you know, study or evaluate or have a conversation about the future. What it does is guarantee that time period that we we understood we would have, which was to 2024, it diminishes that risk of, you know, the early termination of the contract and it gives us some time to actually figure it out. And for those reasons, I support this move. Thanks. Thank you. Before I go back around to Customer Austin. I want to just a couple just a couple comments. So I do appreciate the conversation that we're having tonight. I want to just add that there is a really broad, robust conversation around stuff that's happening in Sacramento. We've been working directly with the speaker's office, with Assemblymember O'Donnell and directly with a bunch of our other representatives on this very issue to look at how we both modernize and plan for the future as it relates to surf. I think that there I think everything that was said tonight was is valid in the sense where we know that there's a lot of conversation about what the future looks like of waste and how and how the surf plant adapts to that, because it certainly is something that we are very interested in partnering with the state on . And so there is a there's a larger state effort that that we're engaged with within the governor's office and within our legislative representatives around the surf plant. And I know that while Councilman Austin has been helping kind of lead those efforts for us, I think it's always valuable to have a presentation or a conversation to the remaining members of the council, even beyond the committee and the work that's happening with Councilman Super Anna and the rest of the surf committee. I think if there's interest in that, I think like any topic, we can bring that forward to the council and have a broader conversation. It never hurts to have more presentations, but I do just want to make sure that people are aware that that that the surf plant and its future is, is is a very, very broad conversation happening with a bunch of partners, including the Port of Long Beach and including all of our state representatives. So I just want to leave it there. So I'm glad that we're moving forward tonight, and I appreciate all the all the input. Councilman Austin. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things in terms of the issue coming before the city council. And it has it's it hasn't been you know, we haven't had a detailed, focused conversation on this. But like we mentioned earlier in, the mayor has mentioned as well, this has been a priority for our state legislative agenda for the for the city. And so this council approves that agenda every every year as we the last two cycles or couple of years that we've been in Sacramento, I think are one of our major partners. And Labor has been the IBEW helping to move this bill and to move this agenda because they represent the number of workers who who work at the surf plant. And so I would say most of those jobs are IBEW jobs there. There was it was a covers he requested. And I guess I just want some clarification from from Charlie. Is this more of a maintenance effort than a construction effort? And who will be doing the work? Yes. It's it's not a it's it's a rehabilitation and replacement of of motors and conveyors and things like that. The work will be performed by Covanta staff and then subcontractors during that scheduled outages, which are a week or two at a time. So it's not a and it's and the work is spread over three years. It's not a typical construction project like for City Hall where you bring in a contractor and you build city hall for a three year period. It's just it's it's scheduled maintenance that happens six times a year for about a week, week per year or week at a time. Okay. And lastly, thank you for that clarification. I would I would just encourage, you know, as all the city council members to schedule tours and bring in constituents and anybody interested in learning more about serve to those tours. I think there's a lot to be a lot of information that can be gleaned from that. So. Thanks. Thank you, Councilmember. Constant repairs to last things. I did enjoy my tour when I went, even though I forgot I had a tour that day. Showed up in heels and a dress, still had to wear the paper outfit. So I would love to take some second district residents. The second thing, it's great to hear that we're having all these conversations surface in the second District. And I know it's at the port, but I respectfully ask that this office, my office, be included in those conversations because I do have constituents reach out to me. And if we're having conversations at the state level ongoing and I don't think we would do that for the airport, then we would leave out a councilmember who runs the airport if we're lobbying at the state around that. So I just ask in the future if. If I could be kept in the loop on those so that we can all. Just win out. It's in District one, you know. So Lena has told me that it was. And when we've done the map, she said, and when I met with you guys, it's. In District one. Okay. So I will calm down. It's still really upsetting, but it is the whole time I've been on this council, my conversations with with the staff and with people that call my office have been that it was in my district and that's why I was on the serve committee and not the First District. But forgive me. So at one point we were in District two, we're right on the Ocean Boulevard Saline. I think the last when they redrew the council districts and it caught me a little bit by surprise. Also for 2000, after the census, the new line turned out to be Ocean Boulevard, which flipped us and the one at that. So I'm not absolutely crazy. Okay. So just give me that. Thank you, guys, for all the efforts on this. I know that we're working hard and it has been a hot topic, which is why it's so important to me. Thank you. And Councilman Mongo. I just want to kind of bring something back because one of the things that I get really frustrated with is I know that there are more than a dozen, if not two dozen city staff members here. And I don't agree with. A statement that was made, even though I truly respect the mayor, that every presentation is a good presentation of a council, the council dais. We have business to get done. And these meetings last to 1130 at night and my residents don't want to stay up until 1130 at night to hear their items or to come and speak on items. And I think that we as a council need to do a better job of handling these kinds of things at committee. Specifically, one of the things that I really respect about Councilman Price is how she's taking her committees out into the community. And so when there are those topics to get those in the communities where people are so that we don't have seven and eight people who have had to sit through a council meeting for 7 hours to talk about one item that's important to them. I hope that as we move forward in the new year with the new committee announcements being announced, any day now that we can bring the committees into the community where the real dialog should be happening and that that real dialog and and taking that community input can happen before this dais where a decision has been made tonight . And I know that when I talk to my residents, I often say things like, it's great to come to the dias and speak for 3 minutes. But what we really need is an ongoing dialog where people are sitting in a room together, dreaming up the future, and those discussions are consistently happening at the committee level. So I encourage you, if you've never been to a committee meeting, to attend a committee meeting, if you're passionate about getting something on an agenda, write a letter to the chair of the committee. Those are the kinds of things that can really make a difference in your cause. And and I think those tours are also great because I know there are so many misconceptions about so many different things we do because there's so much fake news on social media about what is and is not healthy or good or all of those different things. So I look forward to working with any community member who's passionate about this. There are a lot of great things about surf that we've been working on for a very long time, and at any dialog related to State Ledge or surf committees, you're always welcome to come and bring your opinion or a dialog can happen. Thank you. Thank you. Are we did public comment already. There's a motion second to approve the motion members. Please go ahead ancaster votes and it sounds like the motion is the staff recommendation, but we're also going to make sure that we bring back an update and some a more robust report to the to the council members. Absolutely. Did I get that right? Okay. Motion carries.

Recommendation to increase appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Public Works Department by $7,500, offset by the Third Council District One-time District Priority Funds transferred from the Citywide Activities Department to provide funding for the installation of speed cushions on Ximeno Avenue between Broadway and 2nd Street; and Decrease appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Citywide Activities Department by $7,500 to offset a transfer to the Public Works Department.

LongBeachCC_04062021_21-0278

We'll do those all as one item. This is here. Any objection from the council? I do not. Madam Clerk, please read 14, 15, 16, 17 and 21. Item 14 is community. Item 14 Communication from Councilman Price. Recommendation to increase appropriation in the Public Works Department by 7500 to provide funding for the installation of speed cushion on Examiner Avenue between Broadway and Second Street. Item 15 is communication from Councilmember So Pinol. Recommendation to increase appropriation in the Public Works Department in the amount of 2500 to install a new street light in the fourth Council District. Item 16 is communication from councilman have been a recommendation to increase appropriation in the city manager department by 500 to provide a donation to Cambodian Town Inc for the 2021 Virtual Cambodian Town Parade and Cultural Festival. Item 20. 17 Item Seventeen's Communication from Councilman Super NA recommendation to increase appropriation in the city manager's department by 500 to provide a donation to CSU LP 49 year foundation for the second annual Wings of Hope virtual event. Item 21 is communication from Councilwoman Mango. Recommendation to increase appropriation in the Public Works Department in the amount of 2500 to support a critical needs. Safety improvement in the Fifth District's. Thank you. I have a motion by Councilmember Supernova to approve the items in a second by Councilman Price. Councilman Supernanny comments. No. Just you, sir. I appreciate everyone's support. We have some charitable contributions here and a street light. So there's the breadth of these motions. Councilwoman Pryce. I just want to acknowledge the residents who are going to be the hopefully the beneficiaries of this traffic mitigation enhancement that we're installing at this location. This was truly such the quintessential democratic process. The residents got together. They had multiple meetings with me and my team and really advocated for this. And then they did their own community outreach. And I'm just really grateful to to them, to the residents for bringing this forward. And I just want to give a huge thanks to Carl Hickman and Elias Garcia from our traffic team, who really have helped us a lot with this issue and everything that they do. We'll see if this works. It's a pilot program, but I'm grateful for the opportunity to be able to fund the pilot and to have the residents support and traffic support to do it. Thank you. Thank you, Counselor. Murray. Ringo. Look, Simon, thanks for the good. Luck and councilmember Mongo. Thank you. This recommendation comes from our police department in partnership with one of our local community groups. And I'm very supportive and I really appreciate the number of comments we receive from the community in support of this item. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes council comment. There is some public comment. I believe we might have a public comment for item 16 and public comment for item 21. Yes. We have Patricia to Pat for item 16. And. Oh, there we go. Patricia to Pat. Cooney. Yeah. Sorry. Good evening. Same console. My name's Patricia, but I'm here to speak on behalf of the youth and which I believe that tobacco should be banned because according to research paper, products are more used in young adults than older adults. Younger adults are more likely to use. Favorite product by 85% compared to older. Adults. Who mostly use 10% to 20%, according to an article. On Truth intuitive Blackhawk youth prefer sweet taste and snuff compared to regular tobacco. This shows how flavor products can be addicting. I urge you to pick this audience as it is. Thank you for your time. I think your next speaker. Sorry. Our next speaker is for item 21. Carol Mayor. Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Carol Meyer, living in the third district and I am first vice president of the Long Beach Community Garden. And speaking on behalf of our 15 member board and 300 garden members, we are asking for support of an allocation to improve security. In one of the corners of our garden, we unfortunately have experienced theft by people without homes. They come into the garden at night and opportunistically steal vegetables, tool machines and other equipment purchased either by the garden. Or. Personally by the members. This garden is a gem that many Long Beach residents don't even know existed. It is nine acres and likely the largest community garden in Southern California. We work very closely with the city through our Councilperson Stacie Mango and the city department, particularly the Department of Parks and Marine. We have members from every city district. We provide fresh, organic vegetables year round for our family and friends. Further, we do share the garden members contribute over £60,000 of vegetables to the Long Beach Rescue mission on an annual basis. During COVID, we were inundated with requests for membership, and all plots are now assigned with 35 applicants on the waiting list. The garden was an oasis during COVID for its members, some with with us. For nearly 40 years it has been and continues to be that peaceful, productive place. We request your vote to secure critical funding to deter nonmember entry where access is most frequently violated. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker for item 21 is Milton Johnson. Give me a favorite. Sure. There's a comment that says you guys are a good unanimous vote. Mr. Mayor, you're not muted. Oh, thank you. Thank. And that concludes public comment for this item. Mr. Mayor, that concludes some time for all these items. Yeah. Councilman Price is up next. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm sorry, but I didn't realize that we were talking about item 1/2. Item number 29. The flavored tobacco ban. Is that up for a vote right now? Because we had some public comment on it. No, that was not. That comment was was attributed to item 16, which was my item. And the comment did not relate to the item of my. I understand. Okay. Thank you. Then I have nothing. Thank you. Thank you. Please roll call. Vote, please. Councilwoman Sun has. I'm Councilwoman Allen. I'm Councilwoman Pryce. I Councilman Sabina. I Councilwoman Mongo. I. Councilwoman Zahra, Council Member Oranga. By. Councilman Austin. Hi. Vice Mayor Richardson. All right. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Now we're going on to item number 19, please.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to amend Agreement No. 28164 with the Long Beach Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, Inc., to provide a one-time increase in funding in the amount of $300,000, for a revised amount of $5,358,676 for Fiscal year 2020; and Increase appropriations in the Special Advertising and Promotions Fund Group in the City Manager Department by $300,000, offset by funds available. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_07142020_20-0659

Item 17. Please note would you please see that. Report from City Manager Recommendation to amend agreement with the Long Beach Area Convention and Visitors Bureau to provide a one time increase in funding in the amount of 300,000 for fiscal year 2020 citywide. Is there any public comment on this item? There's no public comment on this item. Hmm. Okay. Look at the office. Their emotions are in a second around this item. Then they have succulents. I'm okay. Thank you. I took a number of peers. I sent in my motion earlier. I'll withdraw my motion so it'll be Pearson's and De has. All I have to put in my second. Okay. We have a person, the second federal police. District one. I. District to. I am. Thank you, Susie. District three I. District for. My. District five. I. District six. All right. District seven. District eight. All right. District nine. All right. Motion carries. All right. Thank you. Item 18, please. And, clerk, would you please read that. Report from City Manager Recommendation to review a report on the CARES Act funding and potential uses. It gives me great cause. Could we please do item 21? I'm sorry.

A MOTION requesting that the executive transmit a plan for addressing major technology emergencies that might occur the in the office of emergency management, the department of natural resources and parks and the department of elections, and departments as requested by department directors.

KingCountyCC_10032016_2016-0473

grade you. Thank you very much. Okay. Let's bring up our next panel, which will be 2016 0473 and in a minute. Yeah. Okay. This is developing a plan for addressing major technology emergencies that might occur in three different departments that we wanted to start with. The Office of Emergency Management, Natural Resources and Parks and the Department of Elections. Mr. Hamburger, would you begin? Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. For the record, Patrick Hamacher, I'm I'm apparently being joined by Mr. Gillis. I'm also delivering a report for Mr. Giambattista, who's there in the office today. The proposed motion before the committee would call on the executive to work with three departments between the departments and committee to come up with a plan to address emergencies and the way that they would handle it. Related Emergencies within the department. The project, which essentially would start out like a pilot project, would require the departments to work with KCET on how they would be alerted on upcoming events, a schedule for major events that could be adversely impacted by I.T. emergencies. The how the how KCET would be alerted if there were issues to come up and the a resource or on call plan for dealing with those issues. That plan would be required to come back to the Council in April of next year for review and could lead to more widespread roll out throughout the county. And that concludes my staff report. Madam Chair. Thank you. That's pretty straightforward. Thank you very much, Mr. Key. How would you like to make any comments? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. For the record, Bill Kehoe, King County Chief Information Officer I think this is a a very good ordinance. It will improve the coordination between city and our separately elected agencies in our executive branch agencies when we have an event and an event can be a flood warning and could be an election cycle . There's many events that could occur that require our assistance and coordination. So this will formalize what we are trying to do today, which is to coordinate much better with our agencies around these events, make sure that we have the right recovery plans. If something were to go wrong, make sure we have the right resources on call, make sure that we have alerts so that we don't make any changes to our technology during one of these events. So there's moratoriums that we have to adhere to. And so we're looking forward to working with our with our agencies, in our executive branch departments and increasing the coordination and collaboration to make sure that nothing goes wrong during these critical events. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Robertson. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think a couple of weeks ago we had the emergency management program leadership. Judy Miller. Who was it? Judy Miller. Yeah. That was before us. And she said that we're trying to get cell phone numbers into our system, but we have to rely upon people calling that registering. And what that did, to my mind, is say that a lot of working class and poor people get different cell phones every four or five months, and they rarely would think about even if they saw ADVERTISMENT on TV to register with anybody. So my question to you is, how do we get information about an emergency that has are out the down quickly? Are we just we're out of luck. Thank you. Mr.. Mr.. Gossett, I think for this, this audience is really for internal coordination. For external coordination and our residents. You know, that's difficult for, you know, the folks that you mentioned. I think there's email, there's texting potentially is other technologies that we could look at in addition to the cell phone. But unless someone has access to that, it is difficult. Yes. And there's no way that every time someone gets a new cell phone number, it just automatically goes into our system. That was that technology doesn't exist yet. It probably does exist, but it certainly isn't something that we have available. You have to work with the various phone carriers and sometimes their cell phones that are, you know, just for day use or, you know, they're free, essentially. So those are more difficult as well. But that's a that's a real that's a really good problem to look to solve in the future. All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. And thank you for remembering that we were briefed on some of the emergency needs and the coordination. And so I'd like to thank Carolyn Whalen, Judy Miller. Christy, true. And of course, you, Bill Kehoe, for the coordination on this and being willing to put this together so that when there is an emergency that the phones don't go to get overwhelmed or the computers slowed or crashed. And if they do happen, where do we do next to make sure that that doesn't happen for very long? Council member of the Grove. Thank you, Madam Chair. Bill, do you anticipate you can do this with your existing staffing and resources yet? That's a great question. I was actually thinking about that as I was walking up here. We have a lot of processes in place today, so we're not going to request any additional funding or resources a change management process. So I think it's just increasing the level of coordination. So I don't think there's a huge impact on on our staffing. Thank you. The other questions Councilmember Dombroski. Thank Madam Chair. Please to a to move for the do pass recommendation propose motion 2000 60473. Thank you. Any other questions? Please call for the vote. Thank you, Madam Chair. Council member Belushi. I want to come to Members and our city council member. Then Council member Gossett I. Council member Caldwell's I. McDermott, High. Council member of the group. I am. Some are proven right. All right. All right. Madam Chair, I am sure the vote of. No, no, no, no. Thank you very much. And with that, I think we can put it on the concert calendar, since it is an internal working document. And well, I don't know, Mr. Goss, that might want to talk about the idea of mentioning again to various people. Let's just put it on the real calendar and very good timing. Thank you very much. All right. Let's go on to our next item, which is the briefing 2006, Briefing 187, and that is our four culture update. Two weeks ago were updated on what they've done in the past and this update as required by code is what

A MOTION directing legislative department staff to prepare a report, in consultation with all councilmembers and the executive branch that provides strategies for how King County can engage stakeholders in a public process to determine how to use proceeds from Sound Transit 3 in the Puget Sound taxpayer accountability account.

KingCountyCC_07262017_2017-0231

That's the plan for tonight. And with that, unless there's any comments by members, we will move right on into agenda item number five, which is an initial introduction to the newly formed Puget Sound Taxpayer Accountability Account. I think we are going to have a number of conversations about this, but we're going to kick this off tonight with Jeff, mom of our council staff, who will provide us a briefing on the state law that created the account and on the motion that we may take up hopefully later this evening. So welcome, Jeff. Look forward to your briefing. Thank you, Madam Chair. Go ahead. For the record, Jeff. Council staff. And so tonight's briefing on the Puget Sound Taxpayer Accountability Account, you'll find it on pages three and four of your packet. The Washington state legislature created the account in 2015 when it passed the state's transportation revenue package, and the account is to be funded by a sales tax offset fee of 3.25% and all sound transit three construction projects. So transit three projects are exempt from sales tax and the offset fee is equal to about half of the state sales tax. So transit will pay this quarterly, this fee quarterly. That's not me. I left my cell phone in the car until the until they they pay a total of $518 million initially. You expecting that to happen in 2035? It's also important to note that these that these funds are subject to appropriation by the legislature so they don't automatically come to the county. But in whatever budget vehicle, the legislature has the appropriate the funds and from now until presumably 2035 and then I included a chart on page four of your packet. This is a this is the preliminary estimates of how when the funds will start flowing into which counties. And you know as any as any forecast this will be inaccurate. But I wanted to show how lumpy the distributions are. You'll see that early on. It's in the early years, it's less than $10 million a year that will be coming to King County. And in some years, it's as much as 44 million. So it's really it's a it's a volatile source. It's based on sound transit's construction schedule. So if there's any delays or issues with this schedule, then the the funding amounts change. And, you know, that's based on logistical issues and also the economics behind the revenue streams. So the use of the funds state the state law is fairly broad regarding the use of the funds. It says that counties may use the funds for educational services to improve education outcomes in early learning in K-12 and higher education, including but not limited to for youths that are low income, homeless or in foster care or other vulnerable populations. So those are all voluntary, are all allowable uses. It's not those aren't exclusive uses, but it's basically the legislature giving examples of things that they wish the funds to be spent on. There is no appropriation for the of these funds in the current state 17, 18 or 1719 biennial budget. And we are doing some more legal analysis to see, you know, if these funds can be spent on capital and operating or that those types of examples, the work is still very preliminary. So that's the the the account in a nutshell and happy to answer any questions. Any questions for staff about how this customer benefit manager. This one definitely will come down to King County, because I was concerned that you said there's nothing in the current state. Second, 2017 2019 budget that indicates this money is available. It's for education. Why is it going to come to King County and how much potentially is the amount that might be available for educational purposes? In total, Councilmember Gossett, it is estimated that King County will receive over the next 17 years $315 million for educational purposes. The funds are the 580 million that is total is split among the counties based on the population that in the county that lives within the sound transit service area. So 61% of the sound transit district lives within King County. So King County will receive 61% of the funds over the that. It is $517 million. 518 518 million total. For the three county area. Correct. And we have the potential of receiving 60% of that. And are they specific as to what we can use it for in terms of education? Because I'm trying to figure out, is it primarily for poor and disadvantaged youth or what? The way I read the state law is that it's very broad, is for educational services to improve educational outcomes. And then the law goes on to say, including but not limited to specific populations, foster youth, low income youth in others. Finally, you know, you just mentioned that that to answer the first part of your question about why it's not in the 1719 budget, I presume because the if you look at the chart on page four, the funding amount is is in it. Well, significant to my family, but it's insignificant in in if you look at the the overall amount, it's a little bit over $360,000 might wind up in the account. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Any other questions? I understand, Madam Chair, if I may, this was not your first staff report. This is your second staff report. But you didn't get hazed for your first one. So consider yourself. Hays Jaffe did a great job. Thank you. That's the same thing as I understand it. Put it on the right. I can do better than that. But do you have anything council. Member have to give? I am a lot. Yeah. Okay. I think the only thing I would add, just following up on Councilmember Goss, it's the question. And the answer is, is that just to be very clear, as it says on the chart, these are estimated projects, distribution. These are projections we're projecting based on when sound transit spends money by implementing the transportation projects in 83. If those are, as you said, delayed for any reason in S2, we had a retrenchment where the number of projects was cut back. That would have if that had happened with this, we would see different numbers. So we can't really we can't plan on something. I think that relies on these being the exact numbers, but it does give you in order a sense of magnitude and of how it ramps up kind of gradually and then becomes a very significant resource in outer years, like in the late 2020s and and on. Yes. So it's an estimate. It's also true that if certain transit were to speed up implementation of its program, when it would come in sooner. That that is. Possible. Thank you. I just wanted to make sure we were considering. The full range of options. I admire your optimism. Thank you. I share it in some sense, but we like to keep expectations down. Okay. So. Okay. You wanted to talk a little bit, Jeff, I gather, about the motion as well. Or do you wanna do that when when you have it in front of us? I prefer to do that when you have a attorney. Thank you. I will. In the in the along the vein of of hazing. Jeff wrote me some really nice chair remarks here that now say thank you, Jeff, for your. Excellent staff are. Just happy to be here today. So if there are no more questions for Jeff, let's move on. Thank you for that report. Okay. As I said, unfortunately, we have to move around just a little bit because of some of the schedules. But we now will go to our panel and I want to invite them to come down at this time.

On the message and order, referred September 15, 2021 Docket 0957, authorizing the City of Boston to accept and expend the amount of Two Hundred Fifty-Four Thousand One Hundred Ninety-Four Dollars ($254,194.00) in the form of a grant, for the Challenge Grant, awarded by the William T. Grant Foundation, passed through Northeastern University, to be administered by the Department of Youth and Employment. The grant will fund research by Northeastern University Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy that inform the design of a more inclusive workforce development system for the youth in Boston, the committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_10062021_2021-0957

Docket 0957 message in order authorizing the city of Boston to accept and extend an amount of $254,194 in the form of a grant for the challenge grant awarded by the William G. Grant Foundation. Pass through Northeastern University to be administered by the Department of Youth and Employment. The grant will fund research for Northeastern University, Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy that inform the design of a more inclusive workforce development system for the use of Boston. The Chair recognizes Councilor Julia Macchia, Chair of the Committee on Small Business and Workforce Development. Councilor Councilor, here you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. On Monday, we held a hearing on docket 0957, during which we discussed a debt awarded to the city of Boston to be administered by the Department of Youth Engagement and Employment. We were joined by Rashad Cope, director of Y E, along with my council colleagues, Councilor Bourque and Flynn. During the hearing, we heard about how we had a lot of stuff. Let me put my pager. We heard the grant will be used to research ways to build equity and youth employment opportunities. In this grant, youth is defined as anyone between the ages of 14 to 24. We also learned that the director will be working to ensure that there is feedback in real time from the young people participating in this research council. Park also advocated that these young people be paid for their role in this research project. Overall, this is a grant that is going towards a good purpose, and at this time I move that we passed this order and accepted the grants. Join me here. Chair of the Council on Small Business and Workforce Development seeks passage of Docket 0957. All those in favor please indicate by saying I oppose any way I have it. The docket has passed. Madam Clerk, would you now please read docket 0567 Docket 0567?

AN ORDINANCE granting MCP Alley24 East, LLC, permission to maintain and operate a skybridge over and across the alley in the block bordered by Pontius Avenue North and Yale Avenue North, and John Street and Thomas Street; amending Ordinance 122113, updating the insurance and bond requirements, amending the annual fee and other terms and conditions of the permit, renewing the term of the permit, and providing for the acceptance of the permit and conditions; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_09182017_CB 119068

The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Careful. The clerk please read the report of the Sustainability and Transportation Committee. The report of the Sustainability and Transportation Committee and Adam to cancel 1119068 granting MCP Ali 24 East LLC permission to maintain operate a skybridge over an across the alley and blocked bordered by Pontus Avenue North and Yale Avenue North and John Street and Thomas Street. The committee recommends the bill pass. Councilmember O'Brien. Thank you. So a little over ten years ago, the city granted the permission for this SkyBridge. This is it, a project known as Alley 24 in the Cascade neighborhood. This is just west of the RCI flagship building there. That original ten year permit also had 210 year extensions. And this is the first of those ten year extensions. And as consistent with our laws, they will be updating their insurance requirement and the annual fee will be updated to. Are there any comments? All right. Well, the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill. Burgess, Johnson, Suarez. All right. So on. I beg your. All right. Gonzalez, I seven in favor. Not unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Next Agenda item. Short title. Agenda item three Resolution 317 67 Granting Conceptual Approval of City Investors 25 LLC Construction Solid Maintain two sets of Private Communication Conduits Committee recommends that the resolution be adopted.

AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance 126490, which adopted the 2022 Budget, including the 2022-2027 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels, and from various funds in the Budget; revising project allocations for certain projects in the 2022-2027 CIP; creating positions; modifying positions; abrogating positions; modifying or adding provisos; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_07262022_CB 120366

Agenda Item five Council Bill 120366 An ordinance amending ordinance 126490 which adopted the 2022 budget, including the 2022 to 2027 Capital Improvement Program. The committee recommends the bill pass as amended. Thank you. Also known as the supplemental budget, this is both the budget and the capital improvement program, which both Councilmember Lewis and I just referenced. Councilmember Lewis also noted for budget bills we require seven votes in the affirmative. We currently have six council members present and so we will hold the bill for next week. So I move to postpone Council Bill 1 to 0 366 to August 2nd, 2022. Is there a second second? It has been moved and seconded. Are there any comments seen or comments with a quick please called on the motion to propose postpone cancel 120366 by one week. Councilmember Nelson, I. Councilmember Peterson. By. Councilmember Sawant. Yes. Councilmember Herbold. S. Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Council president pro-tem Strauss. Yes. Six in favor nine. Opposed the motion carries comfortable 120366 is postponed to August 2nd 2022 City Council Meeting I remember six with the court read item six into the record. Agenda Item six Council Bill 120367 An ordinance accepting the gift of a hybrid government performance lab zero and not a fine confirming certain facts. The committee recommends the bill pass.

A proclamation in honor of Stella Madrid upon the occasion of her retirement from Denver Housing Authority.

DenverCityCouncil_05032021_21-0531

Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. We echo those accolades for Angela and wish her best of luck in this new chapter of her life. And so thank you. All right. Seeing no other hands raised for announcements, we will move on. There are no presentations this evening and there are no communications. There is one proclamation being read this evening. Councilmember Ortega, would you please read Proclamation 20 1-0531 for us, please. Happy to do so, Madam President. Proclamation number 20 10531 in honor of Stella Madrid on the occasion of her retirement from Denver Housing Authority. Whereas, Stella Madrid has been a proven leader for 30 years of success in areas of affordable housing, community development, sustainability, community involvement, resident civic engagement, communications and leadership. And she has retired as intergovernmental and Community Affairs Officer from Denver Housing Authority of the City and County of Denver. Whereas Stella has worked on many of the A's in Denver housing and community initiatives that provided safe, affordable housing and community engagement. And. Whereas, Stella led changes including staffing, all of DHS, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, oh six and HUD Choice, Community Revitalization and Transformation Efforts from Newton Homes in 1994 to 95 and Curtis Park Homes in 1998 to Benedict Park Place in 2002. And. Whereas, Stella helped lead the successful team that was awarded a $22 million oh six grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, leading to the transformation of the former South Lincoln Homes in West Denver and into the award winning mixed income Mariposa District, preserving 250 units of public housing and addressing over 300 workforce and market rate units in 2010. And. WHEREAS, Stella worked on a team that was awarded a $34 million choice neighborhood implementation grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to transform the Sun Valley neighborhood as a transit oriented development, preserving 333 units of public housing and creating over 800 units of workforce and market rate units in 2016 and 2017. And. Whereas, Stella has been a community and civic leader in the city and county of Denver, serving on numerous community boards, working with the Colorado congressional offices and state and local elected officials. And she was active in community campaigns for the complete count U.S. Census and voter registration and outreach. And. Whereas, Stella was lead staff for COVID 19, funds for onsite testing and vaccinations to reach the most vulnerable residents in partnership with Denver Public Health and Environment and Denver Health and Hospitals Authority. And. Whereas, Stella's colleagues, DHS residents, the Board of Commissioners and her city friends and associates will miss her compassion, empathy, dedication, tireless work and leadership on behalf of the Denver Housing Authority. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Council of the City and County of Denver, Section one, that the Denver City Council hereby recognizes Stella Madrid's years of service to Denver citizens and her professional and personal dedication to the housing authority of the city and county of Denver and thanks her on this occasion of her retirement on April 30th, 2021, that the clerk of the city and county of Denver shall affixed the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation and a copy be transmitted to Stella Madrid. Thank you. Councilmember Ortega, your motion to adopt. Thank you, Madam President. I move for the adoption of proclamation number 20 10531 second titled. All right. We've got the second there by Councilman Hines. I heard him first. Their comments by members of council. Councilmember Ortega Thank you, Madam President. I also want to thank Council President Pro Tem Torres for co-sponsoring this proclamation with me. I've known Stella for all these years that she has worked for the Denver Housing Authority and had the opportunity to interface with her on many of the projects that were just read aloud. Stella is an amazing individual who has been just an incredible champion for the residents of Denver Housing Authority. She has done that with the utmost professionalism and advocacy on their behalf, many times interfacing with all of us, but also her work with the congressional delegation and with the state in in her work of trying to speak out on behalf of the residents. There was an event held on Friday for Stella. I was unfortunately not able to be there. I had a plumbing problem at my house and the plumber was here and they just had things kind of torn apart. But. So, Stella, I texted you expressing why I couldn't be there, but I'm really sorry. I know it was a great event. I talked to people who were there. You're going to be missed. And I know you and I will have a date on the golf course where we'll get a chance to go out and play some golf. And to the comment that was made earlier about individuals in our city who dressed to the nines. Stella is one of those individuals and she doesn't really do that in her professional life. You could best assure she's the best dressed person on the golf course as well of Stella. You're going to be missed. Thank you for your many, many years of service to the citizens of the city and county of Denver. And I know this isn't goodbye. You and I will continue to be friends for many years past. You're leaving the city, but I wish you all the best. And God bless. And your retirement. Thank you, Madam President. Luke, you council member Ortega. Next up, we have Council President Pro Tem Torres. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you so much. I think the ordinance gave just such a great synopsis of your influence. You have. Been such a a commodity for me as I'm kind of coming up in the city and getting used to the way things work and challenging things and just really appreciate your guidance and leadership and getting to know you even better. Through the DOJ board. I want to just quickly thank you for the work that you do and probably will continue to do for the River Sisters Organization in connecting Denver's River Network. To that of. Our community and our ancestry in Mexico. And so it's just really appreciate that and giving that it's not in the Sun Valley Park planning and really looking forward to that coming to fruition. So just thank you so much, Stella, and you will be missed. Thank you. Up next, we have Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I want to second what Councilwoman Ortega and Torres have just said. Stella has the Stella and I actually met many, many, many years ago when I was at the newspaper and many, many executive directors of DHS ago as well as well, most likely. And it was a pleasure to work with you all that time. And now, especially even before I got on council working with you here. Stella and I were chair and co-chair respectively of our House District one Democrats, and we worked well together. We were a great team. Ben and I and Councilwoman Ortega. I was able to get up to the to the reception up in that up in northwest Denver on Friday and say my personal thanks to her and my and my wife as well. And I think, Stella, you told me and you can confirm publicly here that your intention in retirement, when a lot of people say, you know, what are you going to do now that you're retired and and you're going to follow my wife's footprints and say, I'm going to do nothing? That's what retirement is. You know, go play golf, just enjoy yourself. But if you choose to re involve yourself in any social or civic activities, you're most welcome back. And as a constituent of Council District two, especially, we would we would love to hear your voice continuing. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. Councilmember Kenny. Thank you so much, council president. Thank you to Councilwoman Ortega for sponsoring this. And Stellar. I'll just be brief and say thank you. You know, I was saying to someone else who is departing the city today that their legacy that sometimes public servants leave behind is the impact they have on lives who may never know their name and may never know the impact. And so but but we here can bear witness. And I actually do wish for you that you get to have fun and continue to stay engaged right in your retirement. I think you deserve both. And we're you know, just I was blessed as I learned about housing and the world of affordable housing before I was elected. You were in that world already someone that I met in that pre council life. And so I just want to thank you in particular for the dedication you've had to housing for our residents from so many different walks of life. So thank you and good luck to you and congratulations. Thank you, Councilmember. Up next, we have Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. And Stella, you'll be greatly missed. So our families go long back in northwest Denver. And as I was learning to navigate being a council aide and figure out this city and not long right after I had started working, my dad had just passed. And you always just allowed me that grace and consideration because I think you probably saw it on my face during those first couple of years of how much I missed him. And you missed his guidance and you were just so kind and loving and always just reminded me that he was watching. And so that I always think of that when I think of you and I always talking about my mom and the work that you did. I'm sorry I wasn't able to be there on Friday, but I know that it was a great year, said Northwest Denver. And as everyone else said, Please don't be a stranger. I know that you're not going now. I'm going to call you and we'll catch up and I'll see you around because our paths crossed prior to council and the do it after that. Just you've left a legacy on me and my family and all of us. And so thank you for always considering everyone else in my family. When you talk to me and what was going on, it was so helpful and enjoy your retirement. It's well-deserved. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. And see no other hands raised. I'll go ahead and chime in. Congratulations, Stella, on a job well done. And it's been an honor to get to know you and work with you. And it all works out in the end. It's such an honor to have you celebrating your retirement through this proclamation. And you also helped craft some of the exemptions for the rental license policy that we're also hearing tonight. And so I appreciate your partnership and your legacy. Your legacy will definitely live on and hopefully we will be able to see you around, if not in a housing capacity, in some other community capacity. And so sincere congratulations to you as well. Madam Secretary, roll call, please. Ortega, I. Torres. I stand all. I. Sawyer. I. Black. Hi. CdeBaca. I, Clark. I. Flynn. I. Hi. Hi. Cashman. Hey. Can I? Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. 12 days. 12 eyes proclamation 20 1-0531 has been adopted. We have 5 minutes for an acceptance speech or proclamation acceptance. Councilmember Ortega We'll go ahead and start that timer if you'd like to call up who you would like to accept this proclamation. Absolutely. So as you can see, we've got Stella Madrid with us. And so she got a chance to hear all of your comments. So stellar. Now your turn to make some comments. So thank you for being here with us tonight. Oh, well, thank you. I'm honored to have this proclamation tonight and certainly honored to hear all the words and kindness that you've all expressed. As was mentioned, I. Joined that housing authority in 91. And I have worked with every single city council office through those years. And each of your office does. And I want to thank you, all of you personally, council, council, as well as your staff. They have always been accessible and responsive. You know, I know Councilman Flynn mentioned his work through all the past executive directors, but I also want to acknowledge my work with with them specifically Kevin Markman, who was our former HUD assistant secretary for public housing. In addition to the DHS director and our wonderful dear friend Salvador Carpio, former Denver city councilman, oh, God bless his soul and his smile. Get a little who all of those executive directors believed in community and the residents. So there was a natural match for us to move down the path of. Serving our community. And meeting the needs of our residents. And I will say, you know, working for DHS was one of my most. Rewarding and enriching work. Since the eighties that I've been in public service with the state, with the city, the Mayor's Office of Employment and Training, DHS, and all my work in the community. And in closing, because I know it's a short it's a short night tonight on your agenda, and I don't want to lengthen it. But in closing, I really want to thank my family, all of you and all of us in public service. We know what a sacrifice our families make. I want to thank my sons for all their support, all their understanding and their encouragement. They shared me with my work. Right. And they share, you know, just like your families. My sons shared me with all my work in all these years, the many nights, the early mornings, the many, many, many community meetings during the week and on the weekends. We all know what we do, and we all do it because we do it from our corazon and we do it because we believe in what we're doing and who we're serving. Not for the accolades. But again, I'm humbled and I thank you all so very much. I will be around. And like many of us say, it's not goodbye. It's just we'll see you down the road. So thank you. Thank you again, Stella, and congratulations. And enjoy that retirement. It's well-deserved.

Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute an Agreement with the Economic Development Corporation of Los Angeles County, a California non-profit corporation, for the commissioning of a report regarding the potential implications of a minimum wage policy for the City of Long Beach, in an amount not to exceed $65,000; and Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Economic and Property Development Department (EP) by $65,000. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_09152015_15-0925

Thank you. Item five relates to our agreement with the L.A. EDC on the minimum wage, as well as the nonprofit and business incentive agenda item that passed out of this council, I think unanimously. The only change here is going to be in discussions with L.A., EDC and staff. They're recommending that we add a contingency even though we think we're going to stay within the 65. If there is additional outreach that needs to happen to the business community in particular, include more of their of the of that voice or workers. We want to make sure we have that in place and don't have to stop the process and come back to council. So this is the recommendation from the city attorney and city staff. So the contingency would be a $10,000 additionally to the 65, of course, to be used only if necessary as part of the contract. There is a motion any second, any public comment on concerned calendar item. Say Nonmembers, please cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. And moving on now to item. And I believe we're going to do the first source item, which, if I can have the clerk read, should be item number 11.

A RESOLUTION retiring introduced and referred Council Bills, Resolutions, Clerk Files, and Appointments that have received no further action.

SeattleCityCouncil_04012019_Res 31875

For adoption of other resolutions and agenda item number six Resolution 318 75 Written, retiring, introduced and referred Council Bills, Resolutions, Click Files and appointments that have received no further action. Thank you. As I describe this morning, this is just sort of our administrative legislation where we have the process according to Rule 186, where we retire, legislation that has been in a standing committee or before the city council for at least one year. And again, this refers to bills, resolutions, clerk files and appointments. And we've made this a list, of course, publicly available as attachment one to this resolution, and it's something we do every year. Any questions or concerns, if not those? In fact, I will move to adopt resolution 31875. Okay. Has been moved in second. In those in favor of adopting the resolution, please vote i i those opposed vote no. The motion carries the resolutions adopt and Cheryl, sign it. Please read the next agenda item.

Recommendation to Reorganize the City’s Parking Management Program and Parking Fund; Adoption of Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2021-22 Parking Fund Budget to Restructure the Parking Fund; and Adoption of Resolution Amending the Salary Schedule for the Alameda City Employees Association (ACEA) and the Alameda Police Officers Association, Non-Sworn (PANS) to Move the Two Parking Enforcement Positions from PANS to ACEA and Reassign Two Full-Time Parking Enforcement Position Allocations from the Police Department to Public Works. (Public Works 265) [Not heard on November 2, 2021]

AlamedaCC_11162021_2021-1391

A recommendation to reorganize the city's parking management program and parking fund and adoption of related resolutions. All right. And so. Look. At that. Like magic, they appear. So who is? And I just want to say to Miss Smith, who I know we had a conversation maybe a week ago, and I told you we'd hear your item today. We did it. All right. Look at all of you. Hi. Hi. We've got Captain Jeff Emmett from HPD. We've got our public works director, Aaron Smith. We have our planning bill and transportation director Andrew Thomas and Lisa Foster, who has a title in transportation that is escaping me at the moment. But she'll introduce herself. Who's going to take the lead on this? I'm going to jump in. It's Andrew. Thomas, my planning. Director. There's more. Listen, the. Board. Where this has been a multi departmental effort, some just want to recognize and thank the public works department and the police department for their help on this as well. It's really been a big team effort. And I'm going to turn it over to Lisa Foster, who will present our joint recommendation for moving forward with the reorganization of the parking program here in Alameda. Take it away, Lisa. All right. Thanks for that introduction, Mr. Thomas. Good evening, Madam Mayor, and members of the Council. I'm Lisa Foster, senior transportation coordinator with the City of Alameda. And I'm here with colleagues to represent the staff recommendation that the city council approved resolutions to make two things happen, and those are to move parking enforcement, parking enforcement from police to public works and establish a single inclusive parking management fund. And both changes were endorsed unanimously by the Transportation Commission. And since we haven't spoken about Parking Management Program as a whole for a while, I wanted to put this effort into context. Public parking and curb space usage are part of the transportation system in the public right of way. And when we manage parking, that is part of managing transportation and can be used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If we can use parking, pricing and time limits to achieve an 85% parking occupancy goal, which means that a driver is able to get into a space more quickly, thus reducing circling and double parking. And it can also be used to create incentives for people to use other modes. Managing parking also increases safety whenever we reduce circling. That's less time for drivers driving across crosswalks in dense areas. Reducing double parking keeps vehicles out of bike lanes and red zones, and many of those red zones are there for very important safety reasons. We can increase economic vitality by ensuring parking space availability for visitors and facilitating loading and short term parking. We support transit by reducing double parking and incentivizing transit use, and we protect the environment not only by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but when we enforce street sweeping that can help prevent stormwater pollution. We have several plans that call for parking management, the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, the Alameda Point Transportation Management Plan, and the Transportation Choices Plan. All call for parking management, including paid parking at all ferry terminals, adjusting pricing to 85% occupancy. And then the Commercial Streets program that you discuss the council discussed at the last meeting speaks to have a new short term disability and loading zones on Park and Webster. So in 2019 and early 2020, staff were working on improving the parking management program in general and gearing up to meet the increasing needs of Alameda Point and City Council approved expanding the parking enforcement program with two new full time parking technician positions and continued use of part time positions. Council also approved amending the Alameda Municipal Code to enable mobile payment and electronic permits and to set parameters within which the Public Works Director can adjust hourly parking meter rates to achieve an 85% occupancy target of the code. Also defined specific uses for excess parking rate funds, including alternative mode programs and painting curbs for loading and facility parking. And then the pandemic hit. And, you know, it changed everything in our lives. Parking is a small part of it relative to everything that was going on, but it did impact the parking program significantly. So with the shelter in place, order meter revenue plummeted 92% between April 2019 and April 2020. And then at the request of businesses, the Commercial Streets program shifted almost all of the parking along core business areas of Park and Webster to free 15 minute pick up and drop off. Our meter revenue has increased in 2021, but it's still about 40% lower than we had in a similar month in 2019. So the results are we have not filled those full time parking enforcement positions. We haven't established paid parking at our very terminals. And we had to decommission multiphase meters on two blocks of Park Street because they were old machines and it wasn't worth paying the monthly fees when we weren't using them. So having the parking program so diminished provides an opportunity to think about how best to rebuild the program and what structure would best help the city achieve its goals related to transportation, safety, economic vitality and more. And staff from police, public works and transportation planning have collaborated to develop a plan, two steps of which were taken to tonight. First to create a public works parking enforcement program. This would move public parking enforcement from police to public works, allowing a greater focus and connection to transportation goals. Unlike moving violations like speeding, parking enforcement does not need to be done by sworn personnel. And it's very common for parking enforcement to occur in departments that are responsible for transportation or public works rather than law enforcement. The Public Works Parking Enforcement Program would have a new look and feel with a new logo. New uniforms with a feel of more. Speaking more to parking as a service rather than about law enforcement. The public works parking enforcement technicians without clearance to access personally identifying information which simplifies hiring, training and privacy. But because you need to be able to run a plate to tell those technicians to coordinate with police when a vehicle needs to be towed because it's in the driveway or in front of a fire hydrant, etc.. This is also another common setup. So to support that, police would retain for those for currently filled part time positions for this, as well as traffic control and other police support. Second, we recommend creating a single parking fund. An effective program requires financial planning and the ability to allocate resources to improve the program. Currently, program revenues and expenses are tracked in separate funds. Parking revenues from meters and larch are placed in the parking fees of civic center garage funds. Expenses for parking enforcement are in the police department. Budget and parking citation revenues go into the general fund. So staff recommends bringing these together into one fund with three divisions as shown here. We see several benefits of this. It would allow financial planning across all facets of parking management, with the goal of meeting no general fund support in the short term citation revenues being in the mix will help the parking fund recover from the pandemic revenue losses and invest in the equipment and staffing needed to meet the growing needs in commercial corridors, ferry terminals and Alameda Point. In the long term, we expect the fund to generate excess revenues, which council can decide where to direct. So the next priorities that we see are to establish that public works enforcement program and equip it, recruit the enforcement positions, reestablish parking management and enforcement on commercial corridors, and begin paid parking at Seaplane Lagoon. Prioritizing that particular terminal because of the AC Transit pilot bus line that is going to that terminal and will go away if people don't take the bus. Achieving these priorities will include steps that require more involvement from council moving forward. So this is just the first step. Things like we might need to change the Alameda Municipal Code to allow non-police employees to enforce parking violations. Approving rates for seaplane, lagoons, purchasing meters and more. And we we do plan to include additional budget allocations for these things in the Midcycle budget review. So in summary, we recommend that the City Council approve this to recommend these two resolutions, and I will close there. As you heard, there are many staff members here to help field questions and join in the discussion. Okay. Good timing with 37 seconds left. But he wanted to say anything quickly. How about if I will? Let me ask this, Madam Clerk, do we have any public speakers on this item? Yes, a few. A few. Okay. Counsel, do we have any clarifying questions before we go to our public speakers? Councilmember Harris Spencer. Thank you. In regards to the theory, parking, any moneys received, do they get split with Rita or what happens to money collected for ferry parking? That if if the city initiates parking fees at the ferry terminals, that the revenue would all be coming to the city. Into this parking fund. It's not split with we. Thank you. Okay. And other clarifying questions. Let's take our public comments. We have five right now, so they still get 3 minutes. The first is sack bowling. Good evening, speaker bowling. Evening Council. I just wanted to voice my support of moving parking enforcement out of the police department into public works. I'm also in favor of ferry terminal parking fees to help limit excess parking at that facility and encourage more bus and transit usage to the ferry terminal, which should help spur at least some encouragement to AC transit that that line, the new 78 bus line that we have installed is going to be widely used and not competing with car traffic. And I'll leave my comments there. Thank you. Thank you. Your next speaker. Amanda Chair. Good evening. Speaker Cheer. Thank you. Thank you to staff for the presentation. It was really thorough. I didn't catch who was doing it, but it helped me understand the issue a lot better and just appreciate the time that you spent on it. I just want to support this move from parking enforcement to its public works out of PD. As you all know, a parking employee and slash volunteer slash wannabe cop is a person involved in the murder of Mario Gonzalez. So it's very clear that APD doesn't really have the capacity to handle managing that particular staff. I appreciated that separately. The vision was also outlined in your presentation about how this ties into a larger transportation issue. And I would encourage, as you move through these issues council and it comes up again and again that traffic also be considered in this traffic stops are really deadly for black and brown people and in our country. And we all know that because, you know, you just have to watch the news to know that and and that this be part of a larger conversation of how we can move away from traditional policing and think about different ways to keep our community safe. But definitely support this and appreciate you taking the time to hear it tonight. Thank you. Our next speaker. Ryan read. Good evening, Speaker. Right. Good evening, Madam Mayor and city council members. I am calling because while I am in favor of that and of of the parking being being part of the of the new program, I am against the paid parking at the ferry terminals. And the reason why is because the ferry tickets are already quite expensive and increasing the cost of people's daily commute is extremely burdensome on families and it continues to create inequities in our community. So I ask that you take that into consideration where we what we would likely see are wealthy residents being able to park their cars at the ferry terminals and maybe the average resident who is trying to make their way. Maybe also people who have other other financial stressors wouldn't be able to do so. And especially as people are dropping their kids off at school or, you know, trying to do other things for their families anyway. So I'm I'm against the paid parking at the ferry terminals. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Ju, dara abrams. Good evening, speaker dara abrams. Hi. Good evening, mayor, vice mayor and council members. I just wanted to offer some brief positive comments on this proposal. A good complement to the item two weeks ago from remembering last meeting on a parking parking maximums. And so I got to offer some positive comments on that, both as a resident of the East End and a co-owner of a small business on Park Street in a built in a building that has no off street parking. So it's really great to see these programmatic levers that the city can potentially make use of to now make better use of the parking that is built. So very much glad to see this coming along at the same time as the changes that remove parking minimums and replace them with parking maximums. I just want to very briefly offer one additional thought in case it isn't under consideration by city staff that thinking of a parking brokerage model for the business districts where I know lots of folks have talked about how they park in other businesses lots when those businesses are closed. Technically speaking, you look up at that sign and it says, legally, you can't park here. There are ways that the city could make that more straightforward for businesses to pool their parking, whether it's in a parking lot that is legally branded as a city facility or through another means. Because I think as the city makes parking easier for residents and shoppers to use, there are other ways to expand and brand other parking lots as well. And finally, I do also want to echo the comment made earlier that a good goal that out of way out of context or scope for this item. But I think a good ultimate goal is also moving traffic enforcement out of the police department and looking at traffic and transportation issues in a more holistic manner. So thank you for taking this feedback. Thank you. Our next speaker. We have three more speakers now, which puts us at the seven limits of the speakers we'll get to. And next is Morgan Bennett. Morgan Bellinger. Good evening, Speaker Bollinger. Good evening. I applaud the city's efforts to bring as many services as possible out from under the purview of our violent police department. I have a simple question for you all. Who should pay for parking? I can tell you who pays for it now. When we use the general fund to pay for parking maintenance expenses, all Alameda taxpayers pay for it. Even seniors and folks who can't afford a car. When we fail to enforce daylight and bike lane violations, cyclists and pedestrians pay for it with their bodies. When we declined up zone because it would impact street parking, the unhoused in Alameda paid for it. I'm begging council to go beyond the proposal in front of you. It's clear from comments on numerous items tonight that we need to separate our parking problems from our housing problems. Parking as a function of public works is a great first step, but why draw the line for 85% occupancy at the business districts? Some of you know how hard it is to find a spot at night when neighbors have no motivation not to park six cars on the street. Please consider implementing street parking permits from 2 to 4 a.m. across the entire island so that people who use parking can be the ones who pay for it. This will allow us to build housing while limiting the number of cars and traffic that prospective residents bring with them. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker. Jim Strelow. Good evening, Speaker Strelow. Also on staff California law enforcement transactions class does not allow non sworn law enforcement officials access to their vehicle data. Thus, illegally parked vehicles blocking bike lanes or streets cannot be checked for stolen or all points. Bulletin status. All the public works can do is just take up that vehicle, move along when the police could have run the vehicle for its history. Yeah. Your put public works employees and general public at risk with the inability to check license plates for crimes. As a public works employee approaches the vehicle, that employer will be at risk if the vehicle was reported stolen and the driver of the vehicle's occupants are potentially dangerous. I trust law enforcement officers. I do not trust elements of public works, discriminatory practices of favoring bicycles against vehicles. Well, public works employees choose to not ticket illegally parked bicycles. Bad guys from Oakland and other nearby cities can also double dump their stolen vehicles or parked their vehicles in Alameda parking spaces. How does this program reduce circling and double parking when parking spaces are not available in the city continues to reduce the number of parking spaces . I see Amazon, FedEx, UPS, double parking throughout the city daily, particularly blocking bike lanes because you must coordinate with police for towing vehicles. It will then take paying to Alameda City employees to enforce towing when it used to take just one employee. Also, I'm against paid parking at Seaplane Lagoon in order to promote fair use. There is no paid parking at the Main Street Ferry terminal now. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. And that's our it'll be our final speaker, Dennis Anderson. All right. Good evening, Speaker Anderson. Good evening. I just wanted to echo Savannah and say that I support this. I think that the fewer. People on the street with guns interacting with our community better. And I also wanted to say that I don't support paid parking up a very maybe some at some point in the future. But right now, I don't think that it's appropriate. And we never did it at the Main Street terminal. And when somebody doesn't, to my knowledge, go out there on the weekends, which is when it's really popular to be used. So I get somebody working. Thank you, Adam. Thank you. Okay. We had one more speaker right there speaking. Evening. Speaker Jeopardy! Good evening, council members. I'll keep this really brief. I know it's a long night. I just want to say that bipoc alameda strongly support staff's recommendation, especially around the paid parking at the ferry terminal. Yeah, it's true. We haven't had paid parking at the ferry terminals before. We also haven't had transit access to the ferry terminals before. And it's also my understanding that this paid parking would only be during the week. But I could be wrong about that. But anyway, we strongly, strongly encourage anything that will help us capture some of the the costs that we are supporting as taxpayers now, where we're subsidizing driving in Alameda by providing free parking. So strongly recommend this proposal. Thank you. Thank you. Any last speakers, Madam Clerk? No more. Okay. With that, I am going to close public comment on item seven. D. And we will return to the council. So, Councilmember Harris Spencer. Thank you, Mayor. I want to follow up on some of the comments that were made from the public speakers, and I'll I'll try to remember them. And you might remember better than I do. In regards to currently the police is that sworn officers that are doing the checking the meters. Oh, no. Right now. Okay. Where we left the map did better. Thank you. And by the way, I'll call on the people to answer. Captain Emmett, can you address us? Yes. So small officers can enforce parking violations. We try not to use word officers for that. We are a little short on the parking technician side, but when we have them available, we do use our parking technicians or our police service technicians, which are also professional staff. They're not sworn police officers. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. So when there's a car. So how do we know? Like if someone does have a stolen car, do they do well? Will these people now be able to run the license plates or will they have the I think some cars, some of our police cars, these have the cameras so that they can check to see if they're still already here, if they have a plate on it, what followup will there be when it's moved over to public works? Captain Emmett. Well, I'll speak to the police involvement side. When a public works parking enforcement employee finds a vehicle that they believe is stolen or comes back as stolen, they will contact the police department. If a vehicle is stolen, it will necessitate a sworn police officer to respond. If it is a vehicle that needs to be towed for blocking a private driveway or that needs to be cited for parts on private property, which would require to run the license plate to identify the registered owner, they would be able to call the police department and we would send an employee out that has access through Platts to run that license plate to identify the registered owner. And Captain Emmett. How would you? I'm assuming you'll do some or APD will do some obstruction. How? How would a public works parking enforcement person suspect that a vehicle was stolen? Outlet public works. Take that and fill. My understand. Actually. I've got. Okay. Public works. Go ahead. Go ahead. Matt Smith. You go first. And so my understanding how that works is the police department will be able to give us what's called a hotlist. So those are license plates that can be loaded into the handheld device that although the public works parking technicians aren't certified and aren't seeing any owner information, we are able to confirm if it on the hotlist and then coordinate with the police department as needed. Thank you. Go ahead, Councilor Spencer. Thank you. So we get, you know, Amber Alerts on our phones with those be immediately put into this hotlist then. As stolen vehicles are entered into flats by the agency that takes the initial report. It depends on when that originating agency puts the vehicle into the system. So sometimes it's immediate. Sometimes it could be several hours after the report is taken. It depends on the agency. And Captain Emmitt, if I could just ask you to tell us what the acronym stands for, if you would. It's California law enforcement telecommunications system. Thank you. Okay. Yes, it's going normally. Okay. Since I made this information, I go to the police, LAPD, but now it goes from APD to public works. So does that happen seamlessly somehow whenever APD does find out? Ever. Yes. Miss Smith, do you want to talk about the devices that you referenced? But what will these parking enforcement folks be using? I can speak generally. I will say I don't have the level of detail that Councilmember Herrera Spencer is getting out, but it is an item that we will work out the details on. So tonight, obviously, we're seeking direction for this transition. So we've done a lot of a lot of legwork to assess the viability. Of moving in. This direction with the specifics of how frequent the hotlist will upload to the handheld devices. I don't have that answer for you tonight, Councilmember Spencer, but I know we will work out those details. But when I'm mentioning a handheld device, I had the opportunity to go on a ride along with actually our existing police technician, parking enforcement technician in the police department. And they are the devices that issue the tickets we might get into the discussion. It's the license plate reader that's different than the automatic license plate reader policy that's being talked about separately. This is literally just a handheld device that is able to scan the license. And then instead of the technician having to punch that license plate into the handheld device that issues ticket, it puts it right in there and it enables the parking technician to take a couple of photographs to document. Situation and. Then to issue the ticket, print it right from the handheld device. So that's the unit that I'm talking about in the specifics of how that hotlist gets on to that, we will, following this meeting, work out those those details. Okay. And do the cars currently of our parking technicians have cameras on them? No. No. Okay. Okay. So there's no loss of services in that respect. Someone raised the issue of. If we have. Anyone that's getting a ticket that is not happy to be getting a ticket. Will our text from Public Works somehow be trained similarly to the text that we have from our police department currently? Yeah. Many are. I'm sorry. No, go ahead. I was calling on you. That's fine. We have Waiting in the wings following the nine Dixon Consulting, their parking experts that we will be developing a program manual that will include training specifically training generally and specifically to target issues of any sort of altercation while issuing a ticket. Okay. And then the parking meters that we used to use pre-COVID, they would operate, I believe, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. and then people could parking spaces before or after those hours for no charge. What is the city's plan moving forward in regards to hours of me having the meters, the active? We don't we don't and haven't gotten to that level of detail. And that's something that we don't plan on changing any and in the immediate future. And it's not not been brought up at all. I mean, I think our immediate priority is is going to be enforcement of of what is the the ferry terminal has been talked about that's not being voted upon tonight. That's going to take a separate effort in and of itself to establish those rates. Okay. So. But tonight, are we being asked to approve paid parking at the site? No, no, that's not what I'm things. So in regards to what we're being asked to approve tonight, it. So the first would be to transfer it to public works. And then there's this budget. And can you go over how much more money is is going to cost the city? The next hour. I missed you, Thomas. Yeah, I'm. In terms of how much more. Okay. I think. I think Miss Smith had a go ahead. It's all right. She's right above you. My script. Was taken. We're actually voting on is the establishment of a new fund. So single parking funds, like an umbrella fund where they'll be three divisions within there. The program is anticipated to be self-sufficient, so we're not infusing money. And as the program continues to grow, it's going to take us a bit to kind of constitute the program, but it'll generate sufficient revenue and then they'll likely be excess revenue, which will be a council policy decision on what to do with that excess revenue. And when I say excess, meaning the revenue will support operations and then anything above and beyond operational needs would be able to be transferred elsewhere for other purposes. And so I won't add one more item. So for tonight, we again, we're just seeking direction that this is acceptable to council. We do have a bit more work to do to really detail out the total cost of the program, transition, things like. So I keep bringing up the handheld device, but it is one like the police department has four of them and well they will, they need to keep two and we need to buy two. Like there's just some real specific stuff that we didn't. Want to get. Too far down. There's also vehicles that have come up. We will we do anticipate needing additional vehicles as the program grows, but we're not asking for any money tonight. We'll do some homework. And Lisa, I thought your presentation was awesome. There's one thing at the end. Where you said mid-cycle I think will probably be coming at mid-year with any sort of budget, new budget appropriations for any program expenses, because I think by February we'll know what we need. So will you be coming back? Also, when you the current rates do use the meters. Will that be changing without just fluctuate whenever you think 85% is there or is that part of what we're being asked today? We're not asking for any change in meter rates this evening. Thank you. Okay. As their council comments are a motion council vote next Friday. Phil, I see your hand about to go up. Thank you. You seem to do a lot of clicking without hitting that. But I want to I want to both thank our staff for the great presentation and work I as a point of personal privilege, I'm just going to recognize I think I have done this in the past, but Miss Fosters has been a part of some of the US kind of leading parking policy and program development and operations around, around the country. And so I just want to say we have, you know, we have so many great staff working here, but I want to recognize her specifically in this in this arena. I plan to support this. I really want to encourage our staff as we're starting to put together the work program, to really think about how we can make other cities like San Francisco do use these parking control officers to address issues like double parking. Well, just parking in the middle of a traveling around schools. Right. So we know that would middle school 15 minutes before school gets out. You know, you have cars in both directions on Grand Street just parking in the middle of the street and waiting to pick up their kids. You know, they're not moving. They're double parked. We can we can issue double parking tickets for that and address some of the key safety concerns that are being raised by parents around those schools using these parking tickets at a time when when other parts of the city are less used and they probably need less and less parking enforcement. So I just I want to encourage us to really think about how we can deploy these folks in ways that other cities do to address a wide, very wide range of different. Issues. And then also just want to encourage that as as necessary. You know, we we know that before the pandemic, you know, this this will allow us to start putting into place our parking pilot, our parking program. But we know that parking was heavily impacted in the evenings. It was very hard to find a parking space around Park Street and Webster Street Street at seven or 8:00 at night . And people complained that they were they were leaving. We can use parking pricing in those hours to actually make sure that there's always spaces to be found for people who want to pick up food, etc.. And so looking for ways that we can have those policies kind of come back as a part of our economic support, you know, outside the current hours, I think will be really important. So yeah, I'm happy to say I. Want to make was a motion. To make a motion motion that we approved that we adopted the staff recommendation. We don't start with seconds. I want to make sure. And vice mayor of. That a second. So I have a recording. Okay. We've had emotion. We've had a second. I'll say a couple things. Councilor Woodside, go ahead. Right. Well, thank you. I think that parking enforcement is better left in the hands of our police department. I think they're neutral. Unbiased. Individuals who just want to enforce our parking laws. And I think that's what the residents need, is people who are able to enforce our parking laws in a neutral, unbiased manner. So I'm not going to support the staff's recommendation. I'm I'm going to just chime in as I'm not so muted right now. I'm just cause I'm the keeper of the council rules on meeting conduct. I get a bit concerned when I hear what sounded like an inference that some of our city staff are biased. I mean, there may be reasons you think that police should continue doing this. That seemed a bit accusatory. So I will express my dismay because we try not to our council falls state that we do not make personal attacks on each other, staff, members of the public. So I would just ask all of us to please bear that in mind. Councilmember Herrera. Spencer, you have your hand up. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I'm not sure that I heard the comments the same way you did, but I wanted to get back to in response to our police, it's my understanding that our police is agreeable to transferring this responsibility to public works and after and I don't know if our police you do if you review the program that you could give any reasons supporting why you think this could work as opposed to having police here. But if you are in fact supporting this transfer. You're asking Captain Emmett. Captain Emmett, please. Yes, we do support it 100%. And it's going to be a process that we're more than happy to help them to be successful. And we have training outlines and training programs that we can provide to public works to help them create their own and to train their staff and to take on the responsibility. And for us, it's we've had a difficult time hiring for those positions in the past. And I think transferring it over to public works hopefully will be the city will be more successful in being able to staff those positions. So we do we do support it and we plan on being there to support them and help them through the process. Thank you, Captain Emmett. Yeah. Okay. Offer you say thank you. And I really appreciate that insight in regards to the hiring. And I thought that was a very important point that I hadn't thought of. So thank you. And I found a supportive. Thank you. And I just want to say that I also support this and thank you to all the staff members for bringing this forward. We talk about how short staffed we are in police, in the police department. And so this is a better utilization of resources. And I have no misgivings about transferring this responsibility over to the to the public works department and that the training sounds more than adequate. So we've had a motion, it's been seconded me. We have a roll call vote please. Come from member station. Career Spencer. High. Next light. High valley. High. Near as Ashcroft High. That carries 4 to 1. Thank you. Okay. You all can go home or you're home. You can go to bed or do whatever you want. Pat, Liz, hug while. Sure. I mean, it's fine with me. Yeah. Why not? Tuesday. Right. Okay. Going once. Going twice. Tuesday, November the 30th. You don't get to vote. Tuesday, November the 30th, 5:00 start. And remind us again what we're we're going to do the housing element and the general plan. Is that the plan. DNC? Well, I'm just making sure council tax rate raises. So is that was that you're thinking you can unmute. Yeah. It was nice. Yeah, I think it was everything. We did move to item six. I mean, if we wanted to think about some of the things we moved item six and just get them all out of the way. So then we're really moving into Vision Zero on the seventh, which I just think is going to be a big one. Yeah, I think we should give lots of time for the housing element in the general plan, myself and not you, and not keep people up to all hours doing it because that's, you know, that's that's also not as accessible as we'd like to be howsoever Harry Spencer thank you. I agree with just limit it to the housing element and the general plan but I would ask that staff really try to push out to the public that we're starting at 5:00 that day, that we're having a meeting that day on these items because that's unusual, right? We know we don't normally meet on that Tuesday. So everything the staff can do to really alert because we're going to have the same problem we had earlier today, people not knowing what we're doing. Okay. And, Madam Clerk, you want a motion? I mean, you want to vote on this or. That would be fabulous. Fabulous. Can't continue it specifically. Council member in Knox White is going to make that motion, right? Yes. I move that. We schedule a special meeting for November 30th at 5 p.m. to hear items currently or that were identified as items seven B and seven C on the current council agenda in that order. And Councilor Harry Spencer, you're going to seconded, aren't you? Your muted. Now. I'm happy the second. Thank you. I thought we had to push it out. Right. Okay. Let's take a roll call vote, please. Councilmember de thank. Right or center. I Naxalite. I well, i there is Ashcroft and I'm just laughing. I wasn't shaking my head. No, my neck is just stiff. Yes. Bye. Yeah. Yes. Okay. So Council, we move now. To. Man and agenda gets really dogged by the end of a meeting. So we go on to item eight. City Manager Communications. Mr. Levitz.

Recommendation to receive and file the Fiscal Year 2015 Year-End Budget Performance Report, and increase appropriations in several funds across several departments for various purposes to reflect final expenditures and carryover clean-up. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02162016_16-0150

Well, Mr. Good, he wants to Skype into the meetings is what he's working to. We're now moving on to the next item. Please report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive and file the fiscal year 2015 year end budget performance report and increase appropriations in several funds across several departments for various purposes to reflect financial expenditures and carryover cleanups citywide. Is there somebody born in this place? Yes, there is. Leah Erickson, our deputy finance director. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor and city council. This is the urine performance report prep by 15 for the period ending September 30th, 2015. It reports that our performance for the fiscal year 15 and also includes a few technical adjustments for the year. Generally, the report is good news. Citywide urine spending came in under budgeted appropriation for the general fund and for all other funds. After factoring in into technical adjustments in the general fund, department spending was under budget due to some 14 and 15 fiscal year budgeted one times that could not be spent by year end due to the timing of projects being extended and savings for most departments, including the police departments, plan savings that has already been included in the budget to cover a portion of the Academy class scheduled to begin in April of 16. On the revenue side of the general fund, revenues did exceed estimates primarily due to some one time revenues, including revenue from the realignment of funds from a ground lease at the park. State reimbursements for mandate related costs incurred prior to 2014 or 2004, and reimbursements for wildland fire deployments. In addition, there were structural revenue growth in areas such as property tax, transit occupancy, tax, electricity related revenues and business license tax, among others, which has been factored in the projection shown in November or ever. Overall, the general fund had a 4.2 million surplus and there was also a surplus of approximately 900,000 in the Uplands Oil Fund in accordance with City Council policy. The city manager is proposing that 5% of those surpluses in both the general fund and uplands be set aside for unfunded liabilities. The city manager has also proposed setting aside funds for conducting two police academies in 16 and funding for a police department police department pilot program for additional helicopter flight hours, and also setting aside the savings from the legislative and city auditor's departments. After the recommended use of funds available, the remaining ending funds available for the general fund is approximately $1 million. This provides the ability to cover the election cost of any potential city wide revenue measure that may be put on the ballot for June. Lastly, there are some technical adjustments for appropriation increases offset by revenue and budget reallocations in Parking and Business Area Improvement Fund and the Community Development Grants Fund. This concludes the staff report and I'm available for any questions you may have. Thank you, Councilman Rich. Thank you, Leah. Mr. West, thank you so much for for presenting this. Let me just take a look at this again. So I think it's fantastic that we're making these investments because we have saved this money and congratulations and great work on saving this money in the last fiscal year. I think it's important to note, and I think this is a is prudent that we're maintaining this 5% policy on unfunded liabilities. In terms of the I see we have extra hours on our police helicopter into academies. I think that's certainly in line with the theme that we've had tonight. I think setting aside funding for these other purposes and and in terms of the election is good. So I guess my question would be, after those are set aside, we make those allocations. Are there was there anything left over that the city council can allocate, let's say, on a divided by nine basis to make. Councilmember Richardson there is at ending funds available projected of about $500,000 in the general fund, which we do recommend as a minimum funds available, especially since oil prices are or were closely monitoring oil prices this year. So at this point, we are not recommending allocating any of that those funds available. Help me understand that. So there's $500,000 left over and you're saying we're going to put it in a reserve or what are you saying we do with that? Council member we're using we're just keeping that unspent in case there are problems with oil revenues that happened later. Oh, okay. I get it. I'm good with that. Thank you. Councilman Mongo. Thank you, John and Leah. Excellent presentation and well-written document. I think that maintaining our prudent fiscal practices is warranted, and I hope the Council will be supportive of maintaining that. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? St Andrews cast your votes. Councilman Andrews motion carries.

A bill for an ordinance creating a Fund Number in the Wastewater Management Enterprise Fund for the “Water Quality Capital Projects”. Establishes a new storm capital improvement fund for the Public Works Wastewater Management Division for the Regional Water Quality Program. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 11-10-16.

DenverCityCouncil_11282016_16-1087

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn, we all have our nemesis Sunk City Council. Madam Secretary, next item. Council on article. You are calling this item up for a vote? Yes, sir. Right. Councilman Espinosa, will you please put Council Bill 1087 on the floor for publication? I move that council bill 1087 be ordered published. All right. It's been moved the second. Now it's been moved, and second it comes. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. This item came to committee and we had a discussion about it. I believe because we do water quality as part of all of the wastewater projects. There isn't a need for additional. Fund to be created. The explanation we were given in committee is that they wanted some transparency in segregating out the water quality projects. And I just I don't agree with that thinking. I think since these are all part of an enterprise fund already where the water quality is being addressed as part of them, I am going to vote no, thank you . All right. Any other comments? So in other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Ortega. No. Sussman. Black. Clark. Espinosa. Flynn. Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Carnage. Lopez. I. Mr. President. I close voting against the results. 11 eyes, one knee. 11 eyes, 1a1. Hey, not a constable. 1087 has been ordered published. Madam Secretary, next item. Councilor Lopez, you're calling on Constable 1143 for a question and a vote to postpone final consideration to December 12th, 2016. That's correct. The other Lopez Councilman Espinosa.

A proclamation in observance of the second annual Indigenous Peoples’ Day in the City and County of Denver.

DenverCityCouncil_10092017_17-1127

None, Mr. President. Communications. Do we have any communications? None. Mr. President, we. Do have one proclamation this evening. Proclamation 1127, an observance of the annual Indigenous Peoples Day in the city and county of Denver. Councilman Lopez, would you please read it? Thank you, Mr. President. With Pride Proclamation number 17. For me to say this department. Proclamation number 1127, series of 2017 and observance of the second annual Indigenous Peoples Day in the city and county of Denver. Whereas the Council, the city and county of Denver recognizes that the indigenous peoples have lived and flourished on the lands known as the Americas since time immemorial, and that Denver and the surrounding communities are built upon the ancestral homeland of numerous indigenous tribes, which include the southern ute, the Ute mountain Ute tribes of Colorado. And. Whereas, the tribal homelands and seasonal encampments of the Arapaho and San people along the banks of Cherry Creek and South Platte River confluence gave bearing to the future settlements that would become the birthplace of the Mile High City. And. WHEREAS, Colorado encompasses the ancestral homelands of 48 tribes in the city and county of Denver and surrounding communities are home to the descendants of approximately 100 tribal nations. And. WHEREAS, on October 3rd, 2016, the city and county of Denver unanimously passed Council Bill 801 series of 2016, officially designating the second Monday of October of each year as Indigenous Peoples Day in Denver, Colorado. And. Whereas, the council, the city and county of Denver continues to recognize and value the vast contributions made to community made to the community through Indigenous people's knowledge, science, philosophy, arts and culture. And through these contributions, the city of Denver has developed and thrived. Whereas. The Indigenous community, especially youth, have made great efforts this year to draw attention to the contributions of Indigenous people, including Confluence Week, drawing record attendance to a National Indigenous Youth Leadership Conference. Leading conversations on inclusion with their peers and supporting increased Indigenous youth participation in science and engineering. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by this Council of City and County of Denver, Section one, that the Council of the City and County of Denver celebrates and honors the cultural and foundational contributions of indigenous people to our history. Our past, present and future continues to promote the education of the Denver of the Denver community about these historic and contemporary contributions of indigenous people. Section two. At the city and county of Denver, Colorado does hereby observe October 9th, 2017, as Indigenous Peoples Day. Section three at the clerk of the city and county of Denver shall attest and fix the seal of the city and county Denver to this proclamation and that a copy be transmitted trans mitted excuse me to the Denver American Indian Commission, the city and county of Denver School, District number one, and the Colorado Commission on Indian Affairs . Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Your motion to adopt. Mr. President, I move that proclamation number 1127 series of 2017 be adopted. All right. It has been moved and seconded. Council and council Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. It gives me a lot of pleasure and pride to read this proclamation. Officially for this for the third time. But as Indigenous Peoples Day in Denver officially for the second time. It is. It's always awesome to be able to see not just this proclamation come through, come by my desk, but to see that so many different people from our community in our in our council chambers. It was a very beautiful piece of artwork that you presented to us earlier, and it is exactly the spirit that we drafted this proclamation and this actual the ordinance that created Indigenous Peoples Day when we sat down and wrote it and as a community we couldn't think of anything else to begin except for the confluence of the two rivers. And those confluence of two rivers created such a great city and we live in such an amazing city, and we were all proud of it. And sometimes we and a lot of people from all over the country, all over the world, are proud of it and sometimes a little too proud of it. It's time to go back home. But I'm I'm kidding when I say that. But the really nice thing about this is that we are celebrating indigenous peoples day out of pride for who we are, who we are as a city, and the contributions of indigenous people to the city. Not out of spite, not out of a replacement of one culture over the other, or or out of contempt or or disrespect . You know, I think of a quote that Cesar Chavez made very, very popular. And it stuck with me for a very long time. And in any way any time I have the opportunity, I do speak in front of children and especially children in our community that, you know, they often second guess themselves and where they're coming from , who they are. And and I always say that, you know, it's it's very important to be proud of where you're from. And the quote that I used from Cesar Chavez is, you know, pride in one's own cultures does not require contempt or disrespect of another. Right. And that's very important. It's very important for us to recognize that no matter who we are, where we come from in this society, that your pride in your own culture doesn't require to not require the contempt or disrespect of another man. What a year to be for that to just sit on our shoulders for a while for us to think about. Right. And so I wanted to just to thank you all. I think the commission there's going to be a couple individuals that are going to come speak. Thank you for your art, your lovely artwork, for us to see what's in your heart and what now has become a probably is going to be a very important symbol for the community and also just for the work, the daily work every single day. We still have a lot of brothers and sisters whose ancestors once lived in these lands freely, now stand on street corners, right in poverty without access to services, right. Without access to sobriety or even housing or jobs. And what a what a. What a cruel way to pay back a culture that has paved the way for the city to be built upon its shores. Right. So we have a lot of work to do and these kind of proclamations and this day is not a day off. It's a day on. And Denver. Right. And addressing those those as critical issues. So I know that my colleagues are very supportive. I'm going to ask you to support this proclamation, as I know you always have done in the past. I'm very proud of today. Oh, and we made Time magazine and Newsweek once again today as being a leader in terms of the cities that are celebrating Indigenous Peoples Day. I wanted to make a point out of that. Thank you, Councilman Lopez, and thank you for sponsoring this. Councilman Ortega. Mr. President, I'm going to ask my name be added. I don't think I could add much more to what Councilman Lopez has shared with us. I want to thank him for bringing this forward and really just appreciate all the contributions that our Native American community has contributed to this great city and great state. I worked in the lieutenant governor's office when the Commission on Indian Affairs was created and had the benefit of being able to go down to the Four Corners for a peace treaty signing ceremony between the Utes and the Comanches that had been sort of that at odds with each other for about 100 years. And just being able to participate in that powwow was pretty awesome. So and for those of you who continue to participate in the annual powwow, it's it's such a great opportunity for everybody else to enjoy so many of the contributions of the culture. I mean, to see that the dance continues to be carried on as well as as the native language from generation to generation is just so incredible because in so many cultures, you know, people have come here and assimilated to the the you know, the norms here, and they lose their language and and lose a lot of the culture and in the native community that that hasn't happened. That has that, you know. Commitment to just passing that on from generation to generation is so important. And so I'm happy to be a co-sponsor of this tonight. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega, Councilwoman Kenney. Thank you very much. And I also want to thank my colleague for bringing this forward. And I just wanted to to say a word to the artist about how beautiful and moving I thought this logo was and your description of it. And I think one of the things that is clear is, you know, the words sometimes don't convey the power of imagery or music or the other pieces that make up culture. And so I think the art is so important. And when you talked about water, I was also thinking about land and I guess I just wanted to say thank you. Many of the Native American peoples of Colorado have been at the forefront or actually nationally of defending some of the the public lands that have been protected over the last few years that are under attack right now. And there places that you are the communities have fought to protect, but that everyone gets to enjoy. And so I just think that it's an example of where cultural preservation intersects with environmental protection, with, you know, recreation and all of the other ways that that public lands are so important. And so I think I just wanted to say thank you for that, because I think we have some very sacred places in our country that are at risk right now. And so as we celebrate, I appreciate that there's still a piece of resistance in here. And I think that I just want to mention a solidarity and a mention, a feeling of solidarity with that resistance. So thank you and happy Confluence Week. Thank you, Councilwoman. Can each and see no other comments? I'll just say a couple. And in a time of such divisive ugliness and just despicable behavior from our leadership, the reason I'm so supportive of indigenous peoples days because it means inclusivity. It means respecting all, respecting those who have been silenced on purpose for a long time and whose history has not been told. And so we celebrate inclusivity in the face of such such evil times. Honestly, it is really evil times right now in confluence and inclusivity, in communion with community is what we're trying to be about and what we're trying to do. So thank you, Councilman Lopez, for embodying that and reminding us of who we are with that. Madam Secretary, do you think DC is listening? I'm just maybe not okay with that. Madam Secretary. Raquel Lopez. I knew Ortega I assessment I. Clark. Hi. Espinosa. Hi. Gilmore, I. Herndon. Cashman. Hi. Carnage. Mr. President. I play salsa. Very. And as a result. Are you missing one? Okay. Got it. Lebanese. 11 ays note the zero nays proclamation 1127 has been adopted. Councilman Lopez. Anybody want to bring up? Yeah, it was two individuals. Kimberly very like who was the chair of our american indian commission. If you want to come to the microphone and Martin strikes first his obituary, I gotta. Want to come up. Thank you. Would you? I'm sorry. Yes. Pronounce that wrong. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you. City Council, City Council President and council members, we really appreciate your support and your commitment to continuing to recognize Indigenous Peoples Day. We know we established this as a city holiday or in your name. We recognized in proclamation and we recognized it formally. And we are here to continue to be supportive of you and of the Indigenous community for Denver. My name is Kimberly Barwick. I'm Eastern Shoshone from Wyoming, from my mother's side. I'm Oglala Lakota and Hung Poppa from my father's side from South Dakota. And I'm the current chair for the Denver American Indian Commission. And I would like to introduce you and acknowledge our youth that our indigenous youth who are here in the council chambers as well. I'd like to introduce you to Martine Jerome. I'm sorry, Martine Jerome. I keep putting an hour in there. He is going to sing an honor song for us today. And as is appropriate in our culture, we would ask you to rise as he sings. I would also like to acknowledge some of our students here in the council chambers and as this proclamation does, recognize the contributions of youth, it would be appropriate for them to stand at this time. We have a couple and some from high school and college who are commemorating the day. And as in, I'm going to turn this over to Martin. So. So I. What? I. I know. And so. I know that. Thank you. Thank you, MARTIN. Thank you. City council members, city council and Denver community members on behalf of the Denver American Indian Commission. I would like to again thank you for your continued support and appreciation and appreciation of Indigenous Peoples Day. For a long time, in many years prior till now, many community members have sponsored, have put together, have created events surrounding Indigenous peoples and in both before, on and after the second Tuesday of October. Since the adoption or since the since Indigenous Peoples Day was established here in Denver firmly as as a holiday for the city. We continue to see our community members still putting together events before, on and after Indigenous Peoples Day. And so in honor of that, we have recognized, and as you saw, the artwork from Christina Bad Hand. We recognize this time period to be Confluence Week. And this year it's October 4th through October 14th, 2017. So in addition to some of the events that folks have put together and even though we've created a community calendar to highlight some of those events, I'd like to share with you that there are Indigenous youth who have taken that initiative to organize, participate, host and partner with community members to provide a public forum for Indigenous film, Indigenous discussion and Indigenous social events. So at this time, I'd like to share with you a recognize the native students of the University of Denver Native Alliance, the University of Colorado, American-Indian and Indigenous students, the University of Colorado at Denver, and the Metropolitan University Students Associations who have partnered with our community members at this time and also recognize and like to share with you. As Councilman Lopez mentioned, we had several high school and college students conference or focused conferences this year focusing on American-Indian science and engineering. We had also the United Native Indian Tribal Youth Conference, which is a leadership conference, unity that took place here in Denver at the beginning of June or in the middle of June. During this time, we had a record participation for Indigenous students at the Unity Conference. And I'd like to share with you a couple of the chapters, the Unity chapters who helped put together some of the local participation excuse me, participation pieces. That would be the the Metro, the Denver Metro Unity Chapter, Mile High Unity chapter, Northern Colorado Unity Chapter and the American Leadership Alliance in Boulder, the American Indian Youth Leadership Alliance . So I wanted to recognize and share that with you, to let you know that our students have been ambassadors to natives from across the country, Accra and internationally, that they represented themselves well, that they have organized themselves well. And as part of the community members, we have thousands of native youth who are students here within the front range area and we have over 1500 Indigenous students in the Denver public schools alone. And so on behalf of the Denver American Indian Commission, we appreciate your recognition and support of them today and their contributions to the community . During Confluence Week, during Indigenous Peoples Day and would like to recognize that your support, your recognition of them is important because they are community members more than just their family, more than students at school. They are community members who provide community service. They are they participate in community organizations and are avid participants in some of our local communities. Our local organizations like our medicine heart dancers, our the local cafe call, Twitter, the Four Wins Council and the Stronghold Society. All of these indigenous groups are youth focused. Their empowerment, they're expressive, they get students involved. And as you have recognized today, and we hope that you continue that support, it sends a very clear message that we recognize our cultural leaders like Mateen, to carry on not only are our indigenous ways to be our future leaders for the indigenous community of Denver. So thank you. Thank you and thank you, Councilman Lopez, for bringing this forward. All right. Madam Secretary, can you please read the resolutions.

Final Passage of Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager, or Their Designee, to Execute an Amendment to the Lease with Pacific Shops, Inc. for the Tidelands Property Located along Clement Street between Alameda Marina Drive and Willow Street, Commonly Referred to as Alameda Marina, to Allow Pacific Shops, Inc. to Exercise Its Lease Option. [Requires four affirmative votes] (Community Development 216)

AlamedaCC_12032019_2019-7502

Okay. Thank you. So, then, Councilmember de. So you pulled item five J. Yes, I did. Okay. And whose? See, this report is community development. Do we have somebody who's on this? This is the, uh, the lease with Pacific shops for the second reading, correct? Yeah. Come on up to the microphone, just in case. Do you have questions or is this just you want to vote? No. Yeah, I want to remain consistent with my no vote the last time by voting no again. Okay. Thank you. So then let's take a motion. So this is the we're voting on the final passage, passage of ordinance authorizing the city manager, their designee, to designate to execute amendment to the lease with Pacific Shoppes Inc for Tidelands property located along Clement Street between Third Avenue, Clement Avenue, whatever, between Alameda Marina Drive and Willow Street , commonly referred to as Alameda Marina to allow Pacific Shops Inc to exercise its lease option requires four affirmative votes. Okay, Madam Clerk, we need to vote. Oh, we have him. I'm sorry. I do have a motion. So move. The. Have a second. Second. I have a motion from Councilmember Odia. A second from Councilmember Vela. Councilmember de san. Nope, not quite. I. I, i may ask. Why the motion carries for 2 to 1. Thank you. Okay. So we have dispensed with the consent calendar and we move on to our regular agenda items.

Recommendation to direct City Attorney to review the Convention Center Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) from comparable cities including, but not limited to, Los Angeles and San Diego with the Los Angeles Federation of Labor, Orange County Federation of Labor, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 11, and Painters & Allied Trades, District Council 36, Teamsters Local 986 and Teamsters Local 848. Request City Manager and City Attorney to meet with SMG to discuss execution of a similar MOU for the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center operations. Also, request City Manager require a Labor Memorandum of Understanding in future contracts for the operation of the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center.

LongBeachCC_02192019_19-0140

Okay. So we're going to move over to item 16 and 17. I think both have folks here, some large groups. So I want to get to those two items. So we're going to do 17 and then 16. Item 17 A is a communication from Councilmember Pearce, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Karenga and Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to direct city attorney to review the Convention Center Memorandum of Understanding from comparable cities and requires City Manager and City Attorney to meet with SMG to discuss execution of a similar MRU for the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center operations. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. The item came up quickly, so I don't have my awesome talking points about our convention center. But I do want to say, you know, the convention center is a huge economic driver for us in the city of Long Beach. We know that we've got millions of people that visit every single year. And SMG and Steve Goodling have done a fantastic job about ensuring that we have a property that is unique and flexible to the needs of convention goers, as well as the needs of our city. And we want to make sure that across the board we have a skilled workforce that is trained at the highest level, doing the work that allows our convention center to thrive. And so I am thankful for the work that I've done with Charlie Parkins, with Steve Goodling, with SMG, to get us to a place where we can start some good conversations and put our best foot forward. So I urge my council colleagues to vote yes tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Ringa. I have heard those comments. Okay. Let me go and go to public comment. Is there any public comment on this item? Kate, seeing no seeing no public comment. Let me go ahead and go back to any other council discussion. CNN members, please go out and cast your votes.

Recommendation to request City Manager to develop a plan and vision for a Long Beach COVID-19 Memorial that will be dedicated to those lost during the pandemic. A community advisory group should be formed for the selected project.

LongBeachCC_05112021_21-0419

Thank you. Item 17, please. Communication for Mayor Garcia. Recommendation to Request City Manager to develop a plan and vision for Long Beach, COVID 19. COVID 19 memorial. But yes. I just wanted to object. First of all, just thank the staff and the WHO has also been working on this and have had some conversations. Um, we've talked about this already I think in public and there's been a lot of community conversations around how we honor really just a horrific event that's happened in our city and of course in the history of our city appropriately. As of today, we've lost 933 members of our community. And I've said this before many times, that the single largest loss of life we have ever experienced through an event in the history of the city since the beginning of the founding of language. And so how we honor will be more than these 933 lives, but also provide a space that is healing for their families and for the community. It's something that could be very important for us to do as a city in the years ahead. Just thinking about it as a community. The fact that we have responded in the way that we have, I think also gives us an opportunity to respond in a very powerful way through this memorial process. I've talked to our city manager, and this certainly is not going to be a fast process. It's one that has to be done very respectfully and thoughtfully engages the community and community leaders from across the city. I also want to make sure that in this process that whatever is developed is really something that comes from the community and especially so the those that have survived the pandemic and seen other folks that have passed . The families of those that have been victims of COVID 19 should absolutely be involved in what this would actually look like for us as a city. There is no set idea what whatever this memorial would look like or where the location would be or what it would represent. I think it's all up for for for our city wide conversation in the months ahead. The recommendation asked the city manager and and our team to develop a process and a vision for what the COVID 19 memorial would look like. I've also asked city manager to select individuals from the city to form a advisory group to the city to help give ideas and will need to be involved at some point, also in outreach and possible raising of funds for a project of this magnitude. I've also engaged Ron Arias, who all of us know as the former director of the Long Beach Health Department, to be involved and take a leadership role. Having been, you know, kind of the someone that guided and created the modern health department that we know today. But beyond that, it's important for the public to also know that this item is just to move forward with the process as far as location and what the cost would be. Those would be conversations for the future. We don't know. A project like this could have significant costs in the future. We just don't know what those what those would be. And certainly there will have to be some serious fundraising efforts to get support and even federal and state support to be looked at as well for a project of this magnitude. I want to thank again the team for this. And with that, I would like to get a motion, please. I see it as a motion by councilwoman that they have trying to get a second piece. And second by Councilmember Ringo. I got some of the deals. Thank you very much, Amir. As as you well know, this has been an incredible time that has taken some of our loved ones way too early. COVID has has been, like you stated, one of the hardest hit things that has ever hit Long Beach, the city of Long Beach, and not the one that has also taken the most lives in such a short period of time. So I really thank you for for your efforts in in making this memorial as special as possible. And the only way to do that is, like you said, getting everybody involved, especially the victims of COVID 19. Every single person that was taken from us was a child, a father, a mother, an uncle, a grandparent to somebody. And with their loss, they leave behind devastation that it cannot be replaced. And so having a memorial and having it be community led, I think it's going to be extremely important. And it honors those that that unfortunately lost their lives to COVID 19. So for that, I just wanted to thank you and your staff and thank in advance our advisory committee and also thank Ron Arias for accepting this this opportunity to be a leader in providing this kind of special memorial here in our city of Long Beach . Councilwoman Catherine Tauranga second. Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank the comments and I agree with the comments that the council members and their has put forward every single one of us. Was touched by COVID 19 in one way or another. Personally, I had my my daughter and my son in law contract COVID. Thank goodness that they were able to get over it very quickly without any major symptoms or anything underlying with them either. So I appreciate the effort, Mayor, that you're putting forward on this. I strongly support the fact that we're going to make it community based. I think it's something that we need to memorialize how we went through a pandemic in 1918, that unless we read the newspapers and go into the archives, we we would have forgotten about it. And I think that this event in our history needs to be memorialized and never forgotten. Thank you for putting this forward. Thank you. Council member Sara. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank your leadership in helping our city navigate. And the best, I think the motto in the way that in how to how to manage the pandemic. Right. And as best as we can, and also bringing forward this proposed. Opportunity. To do a memorial, given that, you know, it's it's going to be it's going to be more than a lifetime to process the impact of this pandemic. And I think it's still helpful to have a process to heal through this development of memorial. And I also would like, if we can consider to ensuring we have members of the heroes at the front line that's helped us, such as possibly health care workers and and others that could contribute to the memorial, given how much they. Have helped us. And save lives as well. So that that is a suggestion I'd like us to consider in addition to our residents. Our health care is in the front lines as well. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Allen. Just thank you, a mayor, for your incredible leadership. During this time, losing over 900 people to COVID is just unbelievable number. Just a lot. You know, so many friends and neighbors and loved ones that we lost here in Long Beach. I know that we have absolutely never seen or would never possibly expect to even be in a position that we're in today. But I think that it's going to be important that we memorialize all of these lives. I think it's also going to be important that we develop a plan that helps everyone grieve and also is the kind of place where people can start that that healing process. And I think a memorial is a perfect point for us, for us to do that. I also agree, I think it's important that we find a way to honor all of those that were on the front line and help us get through this really tough time in our community. So I just look forward to seeing how the committee does that, and I just thank you very much. Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with everything my colleague said. I would I would just underscore, you know, the city's this this event changed our city, changed our region. And, you know, when we look back on this moment, you know, we want to we want to make sure that this sort of represents how we came together as a community to really overcome this challenge. And so I certainly am most interested in this as a device for healing and sort of allow people to cope with what we just went through because there will be trauma from for years to come. Based on what we just experienced. But I agree with what what everyone said. I look forward to helping be a part of this. Thank you. Thank you. And I just wanted to just add. I really love what was said about finding ways to honor our healthcare workers within the memorial space, because that's something that I personally also believe is would be great to see. And obviously all of those ideas will be part of the broader conversation. But I do think that is really a really great and really appropriate. I think the other charge I would just leave with Mr. America and the team is just to recognize that. A moral of this type is is significant from a healing perspective for our community. But it will also reach a lot of folks from outside our community. And the truth is, is that not every city is going to have a memorial. There will there will probably be few of them in the state. And so it's also an opportunity for us to provide this healing and special space for those of us in the city. But also we have to be prepared that many others will visit this visit this memorial from, you know, from across the state and in other places. And so that that's going to be an important space for those folks as well, who also had similar experiences and similar trauma. So I think it's a big it's a big charge, but I think all of us look forward to seeing the progress and what what's developed in the months ahead. And so with that, is there any public comment on this item? No. There is no public comment on this item. They will do a roll call vote, please. District one. I district to my district three. My district for. My. District five. I District six. I District seven. I. District eight. All right. District nine. All right. Motion carries. Thank you. Is there regular public comment, please? You want to do that now? Thank you.

AN ORDINANCE relating to establishment of an electric scooter share pilot program; amending Ordinance 18989, Section 2, Ordinance 18989, Section 6, and Ordinance 18989, Section 8.

KingCountyCC_07142020_2020-0237

Thank you. That takes us to item nine. Proposed Ordinance 2020 307 237, which will adjust the start and reporting date for the Electric Scooter Pilot Program established by Ordinance 18989. Miranda Le Lone Askin will brief this on the item. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. And for the record, Miranda lessening with council staff. The materials for this item. Item number nine began on page 53 of your packet. Just a brief background. Last October, the Council adopted ordinance 18989, which required establishment of an electric scooter share pilot program in the North Highline urban unincorporated area of the county for a pilot period of up to one year beginning in January of this year. The pilot program would be developed, implemented and administered by the Records and Licensing Services Division of the Department of Executive Services. With regards to program reporting, the Executive is required to report to council twice during the pilot period regarding program implementation. Each of those pilot reports would include the most current information available on program feedback and usage and costs. Turning to the proposed item before you proposed ordinance 2020 0237 would amend ordinance 18989 to adjust the start date and the reporting due dates for the pilot program to reflect additional needed time for program development and implementation. Under the proposed ordinance, the program's start date would correspond to the date upon which the shared scooters became available for use instead of a date certain. Although the proposed ordinance does include a recommendation for the program's start date to occur by the effective date of the proposed ordinance. Due dates for program reporting would correlate to the program's start date as well, meaning the date upon which the scooters became available for public use and would continue to continue to be do six and nine months respectively from the program's start date. Lastly, the expiration date of ordinance 18989 would also be updated to correspond with the start date of the pilot program expiring one year from the date upon which the scooters are available for use. All the other program provisions would remain unchanged. Mr. Chair, that concludes my staff report. Thank you very much. As was explained, we've already adopted the Scooter Share pilot program. And when we did so, we had no idea pandemic would come in. And so the dates were our calendar dates for the start. And when the 6 to 9 months before it started, 12 month pilot project would be. So here we are about to implement and they'd already be late in the first report. So that was supposed to come at six months. So that's what's before us today is moving. The report dates to 6 to 9 months out from the actual start of when scooters would be available. Questions from members. See. Not I'd entertain in motion to approve the ordinance. Don't move, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. Councilmember Dunn is moved to adoption of Motion 2023 237. Further discussion? Would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Belushi, I don't remember telling you about the council members and asking why. Council member Dombrowski Bow tie. Council member Done. I Council Member Dan Goldstein Council Member Coal Wales. I remember Colwell spoke to Councilmember Council Councilmember Lambert Goldstein, Councilmember of the Grove High Council, member of the group outside Council Member Monmouth. Ah I. Council member one. Right. They were both council members. Hello. I'm council members on full time. Mr. Chair. Hi Mr. Chair. Votes I vote as nine zero noes. Thank you. By your vote and pass recommendation of ordinance 2020 237. And barring objection, we will expedite that in place that I consent. So it would be a next Monday, next Tuesday's Council meetings consent agenda. See no objection so ordered.

A proclamation recognizing the annual Brothers Redevelopment and Denver Employee Volunteer Opportunities Paint-A-Thon Day in the City and County of Denver on Saturday, August 18, 2018.

DenverCityCouncil_08132018_18-0892

All right. I see a proclamation coming on next July. All right. Thing no other announcements. We're going to move on. There are no presentations. There are no communications. We do have two proclamations this evening. Councilman Brooks, will you please read Proclamation 892? Mr. President, it would be an honor to read that. I appreciate the time in front of the dais here. Proclamation 1889 to recognize the annual Brothers Redevelopment and Denver Employee Volunteer Opportunities Paint a thon in the city of Denver on Saturday, August 18, 2018. Whereas, through the Partnership of Denver Employees Volunteers Opportunities, we call it Devo and Brothers Redevelopment Inc. 100 plus Denver city employees will volunteer their time to paint homes of deserving senior Homeowners for Brothers Redevelopment Inc 40th paint a thon. And. Whereas, all painting will be completed free of charge from homeowner homeowners, saving the city's fixed income seniors thousands of dollars in home maintenance costs. And. Whereas, volunteers will be beautifying homes and preserving home values in Denver area neighborhoods as a result of their participation. And. Whereas, The Paint a thon is a great way to show that city employees take pride in the community and take care of the residents. And. WHEREAS, the paint a thon truly makes a difference in the lives of Denver's residents. Now, therefore, be a proclaimed of the city and county of Denver. Section one. The Denver City Council recognizes the day of August 18, 2018, as Brothers Redevelopment incorporate on day in the city and county of Denver. In Section two of the clerk in the city and county, Denver shall attest in affixed a seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation, and that a copy be transmitted to the Deveaux board. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Your motion to enact. Yes, I move that 892 proclamation 89 to be adopted. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of council. Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm always honored to, uh, to bring this proclamation forward. I think Brothers redevelopment does an excellent job there. You know, Jeff, I was looking for you. Jeff Martinez, CEO, does an excellent job of taking care of elders in our community and and doing the hard work to ensure that financing is in place for affordable housing for those residents as well. And, you know, Jeff and I met each other when I first got elected. And there are several affordable housing, senior affordable housing units that needed to be attended to. And, you know, you work with a lot of nonprofits and organizations who let's just say Jeff gets it and he cares about the community. And it was it's been such a blessing to have someone who understands the community and cares about it. And I last year next door to me, one of my neighbors who's been living in the whole neighborhood for 46 years, got her house painted. And so I got to see firsthand what that did. And what you don't know, Jeff, is that, you know, our neighbor lost her husband didn't lose. You know, he didn't he didn't die. But he was he's in prison and is not able to help out around the house. And so her house is falling into shambles. And when you all came and there's a whole team of folks from the business community and from the community painting and helping out. I mean, she had tears in her eyes. And you can never measure the impact that you're having on some of these elderly folks in our community. And so this is just incredible. And also, I want to point out that brothers redevelopment is part of. The Land Trust that received $2 million from Seedat to invest in affordable housing. And I can tell you right now, it's great that the GSA coalition came together and got $2 million, the most money towards affordable housing from any community group in divorce history. But it wouldn't be possible if it wasn't because the brothers redevelopments all have anything but good things to say about this. And I'm excited about the number of seniors in our community who are going to be touched by this. So thank you for what you guys do. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to make sure that my name was added to this proclamation and just. State. What an incredible organization Brothers has been. They're one of the long standing nonprofit development organizations that's been in our city for almost 40 years, maybe even in excess of 40 years. Started by Manny Martinez, who lived in West Denver, and Joe Huron, who was originally from my dad's hometown of Trinidad, Colorado. And, you know, it's great to see that it's an organization that is still around doing incredible things because we have seen some of our nonprofit housing groups that have. That that no longer exist. And so to know that they not only continue to develop housing, but have continued this annual pain to fund program, it's been amazing. I've had the opportunity to participate and it's a lot of hard work. But you know, the families who benefit are so grateful for volunteers coming out and assisting them with the improvements that they probably otherwise would never be able to afford to do on their own. So I just want to thank them for their ongoing work in our city. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Great organization, awesome event and excited to support with that. Madam Secretary. Raquel Brooks. Clark. Espinosa. Flynn. AI Gilmore. Herndon. Cashman. Kenny. New Ortega. Sussman Black. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close voting and note the results. 1212 by proclamation 892 has been adopted. Councilman Brooks, is there someone you'd like to invite up to the podium to receive the proclamation? Yes. The man, the myth, the legend, the CEO, Jeff Martinez. Please come to the. I mean, I thought everybody's going to clap and, like, give it up. And I was like, so. It's so underwhelming. I'm sorry, Jeff, but there it is. Okay, good. There you go. Thank you. Thanks. Council President Clark and members of the City Council. You all did the best job of promoting the paint a thon than I could ever do. You just that testimony that you both shared as is so true. So right on. And that's the way, you know, so many volunteers feel after having painted a home for a deserving senior homeowner in our community, and of which there have been so many over the past decade, 12, 14 years. This is Chad LeBlanc, our volunteer manager, who gets up there and coordinates our volunteers every year. And this is that the Saturdays would be such a tremendous opportunity again to work alongside City of Denver. Employees got about 400 City of Denver employees that are going to be out on those ladders throughout the city on Saturday. And you're going to see them impacting every one of your districts, every one of your neighborhoods, from Ruby Hill to my neighborhood. Park Hill, Chaffey Park, Berkeley to Cold Whittier, Montebello, Overland. So we're going to be all over the city volunteering and you're going to have some great events. So we'll try to push our volunteers, their events when they're done on those ladders, helping our seniors. But it is a tremendous effort. We're so grateful, thankful that this is James who's come on up, James. He's working to bring up the Bring Together the City of Denver volunteers with Deveau this year. And again, just such a tremendous opportunity to work alongside the city employees in this effort. Yeah. Hi. Like he mentioned, I'm. My name is James Warren. I work as a judicial assistant over in the county court. I'm also on the board. For Devo Denver Employee Volunteer. Opportunities. As the name might imply. Our goal is to bring Denver employees into volunteer opportunities. We are. Our board is made up from people around the city, not just the county court, the public library, Denver Human Services, and the people who come to our events, our volunteers, our city employees, as well as their family and friends. For us on the board of Devo and I know for the other employees of the city and county of Denver, Civic Service doesn't just stop when we set our office. We have a sense of civic duty that goes beyond 9 to 5. Devo serves to promote the opportunities. That those people hope for. That those people look for to serve their city on a deeper level. And paying a fine is no exception. If anything, it is actually our biggest event of the year. No surprise with that. For the past 40 years, Brothers redevelopment has been and a central asset in the lives of the people. Of Denver, particularly. Some of the more vulnerable citizens of fixed income seniors in our community. But in our partnership with them, which has been going on since 2004, we've been able to dedicate thousands of volunteer hours. Last year we painted our 100th home and we've been able to save. The. People of this city. The. Fixed income seniors of the city, hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs. I think when people see volunteers from the city and county of Denver who work for the city in kind of Denver out painting homes or doing any of the other volunteer projects that we have throughout the year, they're able to see something that makes this such an amazing place that something that makes Denver an amazing place to call home. I think when you see civic spirit, civic service go far beyond the workplace and extend into the community and to service in that way, you get a sense of what sets us apart as a city. And so we're excited to continue our partnership with the city of Denver, with TiVo and with with Brothers redevelopment this Saturday and in many years to come. I hope to see all the letters with us this Saturday. You want to know where any of those sites are? Just feel free to give us a call and then we'll set you up to go out and visit those hardworking volunteers that are going to be on ladders, paint those homes this weekend. So thank you so much. We appreciate you and can do without you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. For our next proclamation, Councilwoman Ortega, will you please read proclamation eight, nine, eight?

Changes the zoning classification from R-MU-30 with waivers (former code Residential Mixed Use, higher density) to G-MU-3 (General Urban Context, Multi-Unit, max. 3 stories) for property located at 3099 Arapahoe Street in Council District 8. (LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE) Changes the zoning classification from R-MU-30 with waivers (former code Residential Mixed Use, higher density) to G-MU-3 (General Urban Context, Multi-Unit, max. 3 stories) for property located at 3099 Arapahoe Street in Council District 8. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS AFTER PUBLICATION. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 12-3-13.

DenverCityCouncil_01132014_13-0862

Ortega, i. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 12 eyes. 12 eyes. The bill does pass. Councilman Herndon, we're going to our next hearing. Will you please put council bill 862 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President, I move that council bill 860 to be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Okay. It has been moved and seconded. I'm going to open the public hearing and we're going to ask for the staff report first. Good evening, Madam President and council. David Gaspar is with Community Planning and Development. With the rezoning of 3099 Arapahoe Street from RMU 38th wavers to GMU three. This is a parcel that's located in Council District eight and is in the Curtis Park neighborhood. It's right adjacent to Curtis Park itself. It is an existing parking lot on the northwest corner of 31st and Arapahoe Streets. And and there's a visual of it right there. It is formerly used for the Epworth Church, which is just adjacent to it. So approximately 12,000 square feet. There's no structures on the on the property. And like I said, it's an existing parking lot. The property owner is a mixed constructors. Representative David was here tonight on behalf of McSwain and the reason takes from our new 30 with waivers. That waivers is for a height limit of 55 feet to the new zoning code, which is the general urban neighborhood context, multi-unit residential with a three storey maximum height. And I think the driving reason that MAXINE is looking for this reason to go to a new zone district that allows a consistent lot with to the historic Curtis Park neighborhood for some single family homes. The existing zoning, besides the AMI 30 adjacent to it, there is JMU through to the north and south, as well as an urban rowhouse to the east. And some more to our new 30 on the block to the west. And the land use includes multi-family and single family residential, the former church that I mentioned in the park. This map here kind of shows where that all lays out from our church. Just to the west there, the villages of Curtis Park, DHEA property is to the north, the single family homes, both to the east and south and west. And the Generator Enterprise Center is also on this block on 30th. Few visuals here at the Villages occurs part to the north, the historic single family homes to the south. There's the park and also some new single family homes to the east, just on the other side of Arapaho. Those are actually built by Mark Steyn just earlier, I believe, in 2013, I believe. I wouldn't be similar to the product that would go on this lot. I do. Here's the Epworth Church to the West. During the process, Planning Board had unanimous approval on November six, 2013, and Faludi in December. And we have a city council here, a public hearing on January 13th. We did receive a letter of support from Curtis Park neighbors supporting this rezoning. We took a look at five different review criteria for a rezoning. We'll focus on the consistency with adopted plans with a comprehensive plan. 2000 Blueprint Denver and the most recently adopted Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan Conference. The plan does have multiple strategies that are consistent with this proposal, including promoting infill development at appropriate locations, development that's consistent with the character of surrounding neighborhoods, investing in neighborhoods and citywide goals, providing a range of housing types and prices. Here's the map and blueprint. Denver. It is urban residential. It is also an area of stability, but very close to an area of change and could be seen as a reinvestment area, acting as a buffer between the historic neighborhood and the kind of changing, mixed use character along Larimer and Lawrence. The Street Classification, Street Classification and Blueprint is residential collector, which again is consistent with this rezoning. Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan speaks very specifically about this stretch between Larimer and Arapaho or Lawrence and Arapaho having a designation of urban residential to reflect the more dense residential land uses that comprise the villages of Curtis Park development. And that three story building height is also a recommendation in the plan. So CBRE does see this rezoning is consistent with those adopted plans with the existing Jami three nearby. There's uniformity this regulations as well as furthering the public health safety and welfare there justifying circumstances in this case is changed or changing conditions that was adopted plans support redevelopment of the site and there's also consistency with the neighborhood context zone, district purpose and intent found in the zoning code. With that, CPD does recommend approval based on the findings of all the review criteria have been being met. Any questions? Thank you very much, Mr. Gaspar. As we have four people signed up to speak, and I'm going to ask them to come up to the front pew while they are David, where Joel Noble, Sekou and Keith Prior. And I'll call Mr. David. Where to the podium first. Thank you, dear member of the Council. Madam President, I'm David, where I reside in Denver. Before you tonight is a public hearing and consideration of council to rezone a vacant parcel at the corner of 31st and Arapaho from AMI 30 with waivers to G three. And this low this parcel location is within Curtis Park neighborhood and is in council. Brooks's district is bound by the Epworth Church. Narrow, single, narrow lot, single family, Curtis Park and the project mixed. Dane is requesting the rezoning of this parcel, in essence to reduce the minimum zone lot size and reduce 34,000 square feet to the allowable 3000 square feet within the GMU. Three Zoning. The reason we're requesting this is to facilitate the construction of four single family detached homes with two car detached garages. The existing ami you 30 zoning will not facilitate nor allow the smaller lot zone lot size predominant within the neighborhood. The rezoning request will also remove the current 55 foot tall height restriction and will establish a new height limit of three stories or 30 feet. Based on our residential context, I bet it's not often you get a developer before council requesting a reduction in height and density. These days the GMC 30 excuse me, the GMC three zoning is the predominant form within the immediate vicinity of the person as found throughout Curtis Park. The Zone District is compatible and consistent with the existing neighborhood forms and context. Some exchange strongly believes this is the best solution for this location and reestablishes the narrow lot residential ideology upon which Curtis Park was founded and extending neighborhoods is about building a better world for us all, our neighbors and our customers. Neighborhood context based development seems to be missing the mark these days. It's being a good steward, listening and understanding and making the best decisions for all those involved. These underlying principles have laid the groundwork for our success. The first project shown was a mixed lane project right across from Curtis Park. We won the 2013 Mayor's Design Award. I Want to Live Here. This evolved into our second project on Curtis Street. We won the 2013 Mayor's Design Award. It just fits in. That same project is up for Best Urban Infill Project, 3000 square feet and under in the Nation, which we will find out in February. All this is done with working with the Curtis Park neighborhood landmark and others. Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. I strongly and I strongly believe our intentions for this development are aligned and consistent with the neighborhood and its neighbors. Ask your support of the rezoning from AMI 30 to Jim three, and I'm available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Joel Noble. Good evening. Council President Council members. I'm Bill Noble live at 2705 Stout Street and I'm president of Curtis Park Neighbors in August of 2013, Curtis Park Neighbors took a vote to support this rezoning. It was taken at our regularly scheduled board meeting, which is noticed throughout the neighborhood in our Curtis Park Times newsletter, delivered door to door and with open participation solicited. We're fortunate in that we've had two neighborhood plans the 1987 Curtis Park Neighborhood Plan, which was then updated, I believe 2011 with the Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan. These collaborative documents give space for neighborhoods to talk about their vision and to debate ideas independent of the heat of any particular project. And I would strongly advocate that any neighborhood that doesn't have a neighborhood plan should have one, and CPD should have the resources for doing that. Because later, when there's a development that comes up and it wants to have different zoning than it has today, the the person who owns the property in the neighborhood can look at the vision the community adopted. And city council ratified in the area plan. And it's easy. This is easy. What's being proposed here is exactly what was called for in the area plan, as the staff report said, and we wholeheartedly endorse it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Noble. Sekou. German siku bless our action movement. I was a group of poor working poor homeless people reside 2514 Chapel Street right down the street from this project. We stand opposed to the rezoning of this project. As for real simple reason. Listen. At some point, we have to declare ourselves opposed to the illegal ethnic cleansing of this neighborhood. And as we speak, city council, along with neighborhood associations and those who have been participating in this process over the last 25 years are under review by the United Nations Committee on Ethnic Cleansing, who indicted Yugoslavian government. And as we speak, you qualify for nine of the 18 categories and you only require one in order to go to jail or suffer the death penalty. Now, I know you've taken a serious and as you continue going on in Bolton for this, you are indicting yourself in a process that has been declared illegal. Who going to be in these units? Ain't going to be no black people is going to be further white settlers coming into the neighborhood trying to get a real estate deal, because now there is a focus on this area as prime real estate, because there's $4 billion of investments coming in here. And now folks are scurrying like a bunch of bloodsuckers trying to capture this moment. So you asked them about the previous projects when you did those other things, how many black people were in that? And you make it financially responsible and possible for poor people and people who were born and raised in that area. To dig in. Please keep your voice down, please. And so, yeah, we raise our voice in opposition to this because it is a part of what we do here. And there's no shame here. And the hypocrisy is evident as you proclaim out Nelson Mandela and you will proclaim Martin Luther King and you participated in everything that was counter oppose to everything they represented because you refused to stand up and bring the pressure to stop this menace. But it's okay because I guarantee you to my last breath, I won't be here every day until I die. Keith Prior. Thank you, Madam President. Keith Pryor. I reside at 2418 Chamfer Street. Just better disclosure, I'll be one of the ringleaders that'll be listening this project. But I've been a resident in the community for over about 20 years now and have worked with Mr. Kane on their other two projects that have been amazingly successful. And the main reason for their success is because they've listened to the neighbors, they've met with the neighbors, they've redesigned their projects. They've asked us what it is that our community needs and how that product fits in with the existing fabric and and nature of our of our neighborhood. And the zoning that we currently have was a part of the overall enterprise center. And when that got resound because of its main tenant on that block, the Enterprise Center in zone, which was a great incubator for the city but no longer had that way of that zoning no longer fits. And having this down zoned and fitting back in with a 25 foot lots of what has historically been there since the development of this neighborhood as a mixed income, as a mixed use neighborhood with that fabric coming back into light. It's been phenomenal to work with mixed staging because they have really focused on good design and their first two projects were on vacant lots. This one is on another vacant lot. So we're actually re fabricating what, you know, this community once was and that was a great community with a lot of mixed income, different sizes of houses , different price points of houses. And it's just going to be nice to see this lot, which again is a blight of a vacant parking lot become back into life and having some really nice neighbors coming back to the neighborhood and seeing that revitalization. So we look forward to working, you know, further with McSwain on some great other infill projects in the area and getting rid of these vacant lots that have been an issue for the neighborhood and seeing that fabric come back together and as this neighborhood just continues to see itself revitalized. So thank you. And we definitely would like your support on this. Thank you, Mr. Pryor. That it finishes our speakers questions from Council Councilman Brooks Yeah. Devitt I have a question for you. I had a question for you in committee around this is to folks they don't know this is on the Enterprise Center which has been it was bought by Indigo Development, sold into three parcels. And this parcel is there is a piece of the parking lot. And I talked about, you know, when we begin to divide up parcels in red zone, what kind of you know, what kind of level do we set around parking, right? How do we know we're not taking up parking for the next development or anything like that? So were you able to look into that and do you have an answer? Because I am kind of concerned about it for this, but it's more of a macro question for more developments and infill now. It's a good question. I brought up the map here. And as you mentioned, the Enterprise Center and the Upper Epworth Church was one ownership, but it has actually been split. I spoke with the owner of the Epworth Church, and that that split actually occurs in the parking lot that's along the lawns between the former Denver Enterprise Center and the Epworth Church. And so any, you know, re-use of the church would actually have off street parking on that parking lot. Okay. So when they, you know, you know, separate those two parcels, they had a discussion and and were able to split the properties of both would have access to parking in that parking lot along Laurens . Okay. So, but on a, on a larger perspective, you know, around the city, how do you how do you go about that? Well. You know, parking is tied to the use, whether it's in the new code or the old code. So in Chapter 59, it would depend on what use would go into that that church, which is in the army throw. So it's hard to know until you actually have that use whatever parking requirement is necessary. And here's where I feel like we're in a pickle because we don't exactly know the use of the church just yet. And so, yeah, how do you know if it's you know, they're saying it's not going to be residential, but, you know, how do you know? You know, do we set some kind of standards as a city? Yeah. I mean, I guess that's a broader policy discussion. But from a from a zoning perspective, you can only look at the actual parking requirements within his own district. So I did look at the the potential uses in AMI 30. And you know, if you look at, you know, an office use, for example square footage, the parking that's associated with the former church would would accommodate that off street. And there's always always the. Beyond street capabilities as well. Okay. One more question. Go ahead. So this is kind of a larger question as well. And it has to do with when a developer is going through a rezoning process. They have to first, you know, we have to approve it. And then they go to the building department and submit their application. Mm hmm. Are you all working on dual tracks so that, you know, running these deals on parallel tracks? Once it maybe passes planning board, it passes committee. And it it looks like it's getting that nod for approval that they can submit there to the building department. And just, you know, just so we don't get so many so many issues clogged up in the building department. No. And I believe they might have actually done that with this case because they're doing a he's doing a lot of amendment as well to split up these this one one lot into four and then as well go through the typical building permit process. So whenever a rezoning comes in and they're looking to do that, we try to accommodate. And I'm more talking about the building department, you know. So let me let me actually ask David just to just ask him about his process. And as we were in this and you've submitted your zoning, were you able to submit into development services and, you know, submitted to the building department as well? Not right off the bat. You know, that's the goal of most developers. We know that this has multiple tiered parallel processes based on the complexity of sites. Some are more complex than others. We felt that this was very straightforward and the developer was willing to, you know, take the risk of plan, review fees and everything else. What our main intention was was to meet with David, have a pre-application meetings, prepare a planning board commission, and then shortly after Planning Board Commission, go on and, you know, attempt to submit the building permits to the city. Building permits take now 60 to 80 working days. And if he'd back that up to where we are tonight, that would have been the absolute trigger to come out of here tonight with the rezoning work with Kimber and the group and development services to record the zone, layout amendments to split the floor, take that information over to the building department process, tie out the addresses issue permits. However, we were only able to submit permits to the city and county of Denver upon first reading of City Council after January 3rd, December 13th, which now is going to push our permit timing back to March. So, you know, now I'm on hold a little further and I would like to, you know, the city to look at kind of these parallel green light, other projects that are very complicated. We definitely understand that. But in other jurisdictions we work in around the front range, we're willing to take the risk. We're willing to invest the time. We're willing to coach and learn and listen. And I think, you know, it's a proactive approach the city can take. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Burks, Councilman Nevett. Thank you, Madam President. This is a question for Mr. where it's maybe just a little bit off the subject. I was a big admirer of Maxine's work. There was a big mixed team project down in South Denver, and I was under the impression that Mixed had gone under. But here you are. You risen from the dead or were you just I think every developer in the recession went under one way or another. We were able to recapitalize. We shed some assets, we capped some projects and kind of hit the reset button in 2010. So an exchange not gone away. We rejuvenated, along with the rest of the economy and the booming that we see going on. We're much smaller or much a number now, more nimble or smarter than where we were. And when you have, you know, millions of assets that overnight turn into dollars of assets, that creates problems. And that's where a lot of us got caught in it, especially on the residential game. So we're glad to be back in here in front of you tonight. It's great to have you back. Thank you. Counts benefit and I see no other questions. So I'm going to close the public hearing and ask for comments from council. Councilman Brooks, do you have a comment? Yeah. Thank you, Madam President. This is this site has a lot of history. Obviously, the old Enterprise Center, which many of you know about with the city, and it was bought by Integral Development. And Integral Development does affordable housing within the neighborhood. And they team up a lot with the VHA and do a lot of developments. And so they purchased this whole parcel including and sold it to me, saying a piece of the parcels to me saying sold a piece of the Epworth Church to Saint Charles Town Company. And in the church, which is a historic church there, they're going to be there like. You get office uses and also a restaurant. But this parcel and and then there's this. It's almost looks like a school building where the old enterprise center was. And it's a lot of square footage. And they're looking at a food co-op in that place where you can you can go and buy your groceries. But also, you know, it is an opportunity for folks to to get fresh food in the neighborhood, especially at affordable prices. This is a and you know, I want to credit Antiguo development with just having a vision for this property and mixed in and jumping at the opportunity to continue the the excellence in their design and building some single family homes. It looks like we're going to reuse a space, a space that has has gone dormant for many years. And so we're excited about that. And we're excited that there's someone coming in who is not just gonna throw something together. But as David said, he, he's received many design awards and I didn't even know about the national awards, so congratulations on that. And so, you know, I'll be supporting this, you know, for just the conversation about affordable housing. And in the neighborhood of Curtis Park, Denver Housing Authority is the largest landowner in Curtis Park, and they're doing some of the most creative, affordable components. I mean, it's a really a national motto, as you all know. And so I'm very although things are changing in Curtis Parks and there are you know, there are other houses that are incredibly expensive. They're because of the creativity and creativity of VHA. There are some incredible affordable components. And so I credit film a lot for this, but I'll be voting in favor of this and be excited to see this entire development. All three parcels come together and activate this part of the city. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Brooks. Hi, Brown. But I Herndon. I can eat lemon Lopez Montero, Nevitt Ortega. I Rob Shepherd. Madam President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Close the voting and announce the results. 12 eyes. 12 eyes. The bill is has passed. Now we come to our last public hearing. And Councilman Herndon, will you please put Council Bill 950 on the floor for final passage?

A MOTION acknowledging receipt of a 2017 Solid Waste System Tonnage Report prepared in accordance with the 2017-2018 Biennial Budget Ordinance, Ordinance 18409, Section 107, Proviso P2.

KingCountyCC_01172018_2017-0505

By your vote. You have. We have passed proposed motion number 2018 0062 of the do pass recommendation. That is to accept the report and it will not be able to consent calendar. So I'll move on to the last item on our agenda today, which is proposed motion number 2017 0505. It's another solid waste motion, this one accepting a report regarding system tonnage because the county Cedar Hills Land Regional Landfill is nearing its capacity. As we all have discussed here many times, it's important to carefully monitor the tonnage that we're disposing and study options for long term waste disposal. As part of that effort, the Council adopted a proviso, you will recall, in the 2017 2018 budget that required two reports from the Solid Waste Division. The first, which we will hear about today, is on 2017 system tonnage. The second is due in June on long term options for the landfill. So once again, we have with us Mary Bergeron and Tara Rose to help us with a briefing. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mary Bergen on from the council staff, for the record, and you have introduced the council's rationale for this proviso. As you noted, this system tonnage report from 2017 is the first of two reports that will be required on this topic. And if you will move ahead to page 155 in your packet, I will share the results of the analysis that the division did to prepare this report. What they did because this report was due on December 1st of last year, this report provides actual tonnage figures from January through August and then estimates for the remainder of the year. And when you see the second report, which is coming in June, you'll see actuals for the entire year. I will note first that in preparing to do this report, the Solid Waste Division had prepared tonnage estimates through the year 2036 and they had presented those to you back. At the same time, you adopted these provisos when you were adopting the solid waste rate. These and if you look on page 156, you can see a table that outlines what the projections were for each year. And if you look at the shaded row 2017, you'll see that the division was estimating about 851,000 tons last year. They had estimated, if you look, a little bit of a decrease from the year before because of the reopening of the city of Seattle's North Transfer Station and Recycling Center, which they estimated would take some of the load off the county stations. If you then jump to the bottom of page 157 and look at the actual results that the solid waste division has transmitted, you will note that tonnage, in fact increased 10% above those projections. So 932,000 tons rather than the 851,000 that were projected. This has implications for the landfill capacity estimates that this additional 81,000 tons will shorten the landfill life by about a month. And moving on to the next page. Also has operational impacts because this additional tonnage was about 230 more tonnes of waste per day that were transported to the landfill than had been estimated. That resulted in about 3700 additional roundtrips between the transfer stations and the landfills last year. The division has noted that they have been addressing these operational impacts through overtime to date, but may be coming back to the Council for additional appropriation or possibly even FTE authority. And finally, I'll note that this additional tonnage resulted in about $11 million in additional revenue above and beyond what had been forecasted for last year. And the division notes in that case that they recognized they don't have appropriation authority to use that additional revenue and expect they may be coming to the Council through one of the supplemental budget ordinances. I will close by noting that the additional unanticipated tonnage for last year will be addressed in more detail. In the second of the two provides a report to the one that will be coming to in June that will also include more information about the landfill. And I think this does provide a good segue way for the Council to your upcoming discussions and deliberations on the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, a draft plan of which was released last week. And the executive's recommended plan is anticipated to come to the council probably mid this year. So this kind of sets, I think, the ground for what you will be looking at. And with that, Madam Chair, that concludes my staff report. Okay. Thank you very much. Councilmember Lambert has a question. Thank you. So help me on these charts. So special waste is going to go from 1500 to 2500 in approximately 20 years. What is changing that? That is going to be so substantially the same that that's going to happen because it increased population. So I think we've got staff from the division here and I think they might be best to answer that question. I had been focusing mostly on the total column and focusing mostly on 2017 things. That was the topic of this report. And talk about that when we meet next. And the same thing in the next column, going from 1300 and 13,500 in yard waste down to 16. But, you know, lots of people are doing rock gardens and other kinds of gardens so that there aren't as many yard ways. So we'll add that to our list next time we talk. All right. Thank you. Okay. So one of thing, please. Anything is I. I just saw and something that was written that that a clean wood is no longer going to be accepted at the house and transfer station. And I didn't know that was happening until it apparently happened. So I'd like to talk about how that happened, and I'm not really happy about it. So thank you. Okay. I don't know if we do have executive staff here. I don't know if they want to come forward and say a few words before we go ahead and accept the report. But yeah, only if you want to get in and you're not required. If you have a question that we'd like to. Hear enough. I do have one question, and that is when this projection comes in a significant marginal but significant amount higher, this actual annual tonnage comes in at this level higher. And it says that that would that would mean the capacity of the Cedar Hills landfill be reached about one month sooner. Does that assume that the rest of the projection comes in as previously projected, or do we now reset the rest of the projection and say even if things increase at a rate similar to what we assumed before, but now we're up to 932, we're starting with a different base. Is that how you get to one month? I mean, I know that this is we're prejudging the question of the next report, but it seems to me that that seems odd that that much of a change to the curve would result in such a small impact to the life of the landfill. The Please Make Morehead King County Solid Waste Strategy Communications and Performance Manager. This provider was very specifically focused on 2017. And so the one month change in the landfill. Life is based on the change in tonnage for 719 2017 only. And it's the second proviso that speaks to the broader change in the overall projection. Manage and so forth. Okay. Once again before us, today is just the motion to accept the report, and that's motion number 2017 0505. If there's no further discussion, I would entertain a motion. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to propose a proposed motion 2017 0505 with a do pass recommendation. All right, it's been moved. Any comments or questions saying nonetheless the clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilmember Dombrowski. Councilmember Dunn. Councilmember Gossett. Council Member. Cole Wells. Council Member. Member. High Council Member McDermott. High Council member of the Grove Council. Member of one right bar. Madam Chair. Hi, Madam Chair. The vote is six eyes. No nos. All right, by your vote, we have approved proposed motion number 2017, dash 0505 with a do pass recommendation. This one also, I think should be on the regular course along with the other one. And that brings us to the end of our agenda today. Our next meeting will be Wednesday, February 7th, when we anticipate continuing our work on the King County Code, changes to make it before gender neutral, and receiving a briefing about the Hearst Supreme Court decision and for cultures budget and.

Consider Directing Staff to Install Flashing Pedestrian Crosswalk Signs at Two Locations: 1) Maitland Drive and Mecartney Road, and 2) Mecartney Road and Belmont Place. (Councilmember Oddie) [Continued from January 20, 2015]

AlamedaCC_01212015_2015-1267

Consider directing staff to install flashing pedestrian crosswalk signals at two locations, Maitland Drive in McCartney Road and McCartney Road and Belmont Place. This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Odie. You may proceed. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So again, take into consideration some of the comments earlier. I'll go through the referral and then maybe entertain some some changes to it. But another thing I heard from from folks living out on Bay Farm and Harper Bay was pedestrian safety. And there's two intersections in particular that they identified as being particularly dangerous and particularly busy. One is Maitland Drive and McCartney Road, and the other is. I'm sorry. It should be Maitland Drive and Island Drive. I think I made a mistake on that. And McCartney Road and Belmont Place. And the referral is to direct public works to install flashing pedestrian crosswalk signs similar to what we did on Otis after we had a tragic pedestrian death there. And since I've made this referral, I've been asked to also ask about Broadway and San Jose. So given the discussion we had earlier, you know, I'm amenable to changing this and maybe getting a report back on, you know, as the mayor said, what the priority areas are as far as crosswalks and and flashing crosswalks. But, you know, these are two that, you know, somebody said in one of the communication that they're medium priority. But the folks at Harper Bay, you know, they're kind of getting tired of being medium priority. They would like to have a little bit more attention. And, you know, I hope that through this process, we could give that to them. So just a moment in response to your comment. I really appreciate that. So now follow up. Yes. Member Ashcroft. Sure. The one amendment I would make is rather than. Well, and again, we demand the language, because rather than having city council direct a city department, we'll go through the city manager. But to implement that particular remedy, I think I would want to hear from a department like Public Works as to whether the flashing pedestrian crosswalk signs really are the best the best remedy. Because if I'm picturing the what is that down at the corner, at the far edge of the shopping center that we're talking? Because that's that's a big wide interface. Yes, it. Is. You know, maybe that's the best remedy that that. Well, and my point yeah. My point is just that probably as council members and laypersons, you know, I mean we all have some special here and other but it's we're not as well equipped to decide what something needs to be done. I agree to address the issue of pedestrian safety. This might be one thing to consider, but there's probably a whole toolbox that public works. And I know the Transportation Commission looks at these things to the police department as well. I'm amenable to, you know, modifying it or, you know, coming back with a different referral if if my colleagues would prefer. But, you know. If I can make a station manager. And this, I think goes towards what comments have been made so far, I'd recommend if we. How do I put this? Demote this from a council referral to putting it into the public works queue as three individual intersections and will go to work, as Councilmember Ashcraft said. There are many tools in the toolbox that they would have to study it and recommend the best one and or bring it back in and you can see how that works. Juxtaposed to the one guarding the bridge as the bridge. And because those are very two different scales of request, I would just add one more thing. Normally an individual or a group of neighbors would make a request and it would go into the queue and we would follow up and do the studies and public outreach. And there's a process which we'll talk. About when we come back. But we also view this body, each of you, as elected. Representatives. From the people. And when you bring these. Our assumption is that you're representative of more than one neighbor. So I understand, you know, and that's part of the balancing. Act of why some things, of. Course, referral or when it goes to the Q. So if we can take these and I can insert them into the Q. As. As if. Any neighbor lets in a quest, we'll bring them back to you and you can see. The difference in the. Procedures. I'm fine with demoting it. The neighbors that I spoke to basically said they had no response. But I know we have a new team at Public Works, so this was before the new team got in place. Member Ashcraft And I would also remark that I'm not sure how widely known this public works system is. So maybe just by holding this public meeting and discussing it will help increase public awareness because I, I think, you know, it's one of those things that some people know about, but maybe not widely across the island. So we can we can always do a better job of spreading the word. But with that, I would be happy to live approval of the motion as the Council referral as amended. I just have a question for staff before we have a second. Do we still have the TTC in place, the Transfer Transportation Committee, I mean, which goes through requests like for stop signs and things like that. We end and one of the controversies over that in the past was the use of state warrants, etc. Is that. Still in place, that. Process staff? Does that work? And we work with the immediate neighbors and public notice for the process. And if there's an appeal from any one neighbor, then it gets elevated to the Transportation Commission for a public hearing. Their decision is appealed by anyone which has happened in the recent past. It comes to this body. Okay. Okay. Well, perhaps one of the issues then is and this is a side note is to, you know, improve the way in which we let our residents aware of that process. So. So and so we have a motion, a second. And I'd like to comment that when we get to the the other items that we were going to be discussing at our special meeting, I did have a suggestion in regards to having an open house that we will be talking about allowing our department to improve that communication. So we will be discussing that at that point. So we have a motion and a second all those in favor I oppose and motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. And I really appreciate staff's assistance in helping us through that. Thank you. Thank you. Next item. As 3-D and 3-D. He insisted directing staff to collaborate with the East Bay Regional Park District on acquisition and expansion of Crab Cove. This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Vice Mayor Matt, R-S.C..

Councilor Flynn for Councilor Mejia offered the following: Order for the appointment of temporary employee Sandra Sanchez Saavedra in City Council effective January 31, 2022.

BostonCC_02022022_2022-0251

Thank you, Mr. Clarke. Mr. Clarke, please read docketed 0 to 5 one. Buckingham A 0 to 5 on counsel of Flynn for counsel. Let me hear. That. The Chair seeks suspension of the rules and passage of talk in 0251. Mr. Clarke, can you call the roll, please? Lucky number 0251. Councilor Royal. Yes. Councilor Roy. Yes. Councilor Baker. Yes. Councilor Baker? Yes. Councilor Buck. Yes. Councilor Buck. Yes. Councilor Brady. Is. Not celebrate me as Councilor Edwards. Councilor Edwards? Yes. Councilor Fernandes. Anderson. Yes. Fernandez Anderson. Yes. Counsel. Clarity? Yes. That's authority as counsel. Flynn. Yes. Counsel of Flynn. Yes. Counsel. Lara. Yes. That's. O'Mara. Yes. Of Louisiana. Yes. You also lose in. Yes, Councilor. Me here? Yes. That's not me here. Yes, Counselor Murphy. Yes. Counselor Murphy. Yes, counselor. Where I am. Yes. Counselor. Well, yes, Mr. President. Docket number 0251 has received a unanimous vote. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 025 to please.

AN ORDINANCE relating to Seattle’s construction codes; amending Sections C404.2.3, C404.2.3.1, C406.8, C406.8.1, C503.4.6, and C503.5 and Table 406.1 of the 2018 Seattle Energy Code, adopted by Ordinance 126279.

SeattleCityCouncil_12132021_CB 120239

Agenda Item 19 Council Bill 120239 An ordinance relating to Seattle's construction codes amending sections of the 2018 Seattle Energy Code adopted by ordinance 126279. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Thank you so much. I'm going to hand it back over to Councilmember Strauss to walk us through this item. Thank you. Council president. And I do believe that Councilmember Lewis will be speaking to this. So I'll just share that. At the start of 2021, we adopted the strong synergy code, my nation, which banned the use of gas or electric resistance for space or water heating in multi-family residential buildings and for space heating and commercial buildings. I'll pass it over to Councilmember Lewis and follow up with any further comments if needed. In summary, Councilmember Strauss, Councilmember Lewis, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. And just to follow along with Councilmember Strauss's remarks, this legislation extends the impacts of the legislation we passed last spring by encompassing most commercial construction, with a couple of exceptions that are itemized in the bill to be included under the requirements of that bill to include electric water heaters in new construction of commercial structures. As we've discussed extensively over the last two weeks, we expect this legislation to have a positive impact on our efforts to fight climate change. Appreciate the efforts of stakeholders in this legislation over the course of the last several months in order to answer a lot of questions that were left outstanding from the process in the spring , necessitating a little bit more discussion and appreciate Councilmember Strauss making space for this and in his coveted committee spots during this month. Given the limited amount of work that we are putting through, I also appreciate the work of Noah on in Councilmember Strauss's office and his effective working with Parker Dotson and my office to shepherd this through , as well as the work of Stsci and other external stakeholders who have been working on this over the course of the last six months plus. And with that, I have nothing else to add and look forward to. Thank you so much, Councilmember Lewis. Are there any additional comments on Agenda Item 19 Council Bill 120239 Strauss, please. Thanks. Just wrapping up Council President, this legislation includes several exemptions that did result from compromises made at the Construction Code Advisory Board, including existing upgrades to existing commercial buildings. And this type of exemption doesn't exist in other parts of the code. And I just want to note that as we transition in this type of work to addressing the climate crisis, we must ensure that our workers are also taken care of. And so this compromise does continue to move us forward, and we still need to do more to meet the needs of our workers who are earning family wage family wages. Thank you, Councilperson. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss and Councilmember Lewis, that does conclude the debate on this item. So will the first please call the roll on the passage of council bill 120239 Agenda Item 19 Lewis. Yes. Warhol's house was set up by Peterson. I. Strauss Yes. Herbold Yes. Whereas I council President Gonzalez. I aid in favor and unopposed. Thank you so much. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the please to fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the Court please read the short title of item 20 into the record?

AN ORDINANCE relating to the financing of the West Seattle Bridge Immediate Response project; creating a fund for depositing proceeds of taxable limited tax general obligation bonds in 2021; authorizing the loan of funds in the amount of $50,000,000 from the Construction and Inspections Fund and $20,000,000 from the REET II Capital Projects Fund to the 2021 LTGO Taxable Bond Fund for early phases of work on the bridge repair and replacement project; amending Ordinance 126000, which adopted the 2020 Budget, including the 2020-2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to the Seattle Department of Transportation; and revising project allocations and spending plans for certain projects in the 2020-2025 CIP.

SeattleCityCouncil_09082020_CB 119858

Agenda Item 21 Council Bill 119858 An ordinance relating to the financing of the West Seattle Bridge Immediate Response Project creating a fund for depositing proceeds of taxable limited tax general obligation bonds in 2021. The committee recommends the bill passes amended. Thank you, Madam Clerk. This is agenda item 21. In the previous conversation, we had a conversation about agenda item 20 and 22. As I mentioned, we will vote on items 20 and 22 separately and in the order that they were published on the agenda. So we have this minor interruption of item 21 to have a conversation about this particular item before we take up the second scooter related bill. So item 21 and Councilmember Peterson, you are chair of the committee and are recognized in order to address this item. And you? Council President Yes. So Council 119858 is for the West Seattle Bridge and it's authorizing to enter fund loans. That state needs to have sufficient funding to conduct the preliminary work on the bridge. The total $70 million. The loans will be repaid with a bond sale in 2021. So obviously lots of choices that will be coming up later in terms of repair replace that this money is needed now just to do the shoring up work. And I want to thank Councilor Herbold for her leadership on this issue as well. Thank you so much, Councilmember Peterson. Councilmember Herbold, would you like to make some remarks? I would very much just want to really uplift how important this funding is and for what it's actually going to be used for. Not only is it going to be used for the stabilization work that and the monitoring that has to be done regardless of whether or not there's a decision to repair or replace the bridge. But it's also being the funds are also going to be used for repairs and enhancements to the lower bridge, which we're also reliant on in this time during the the closure of the upper level bridge for priority transit, use of freight use and emergency vehicle use. In addition, this funding is going to be used for the traffic and mobility mitigation projects, including the West Seattle. The Reconnect with Seattle Project. That DOT is circulating a draft set of recommendations for all of the communities that are most impacted by the closure of the bridge with a really strong equity focus on on focusing on making important transportation investments to mitigate the impacts of having all of these vehicles going through their neighborhoods as part of the detour routes, specifically in neighborhoods that have suffered for lack of from lack of investment over overpass years. The funding is also being used for the planning and design of a long term replacement. Again, we're working on designing a long term replacement because even if we choose repair, there will be a need for a replacement some time in the future. And so it makes a lot of sense, I think, to to do that design work on the on the front end. Also included in the in the funding package is a preliminary to your work plan with an emphasis on broad community engagement efforts. And it includes emergency repairs, bridge stabilization, work monitoring, planning and design, repairs and enhancements to the Spokane bridges, as I mentioned earlier, and traffic and mobility mitigation projects that is all contained in this two year work plan. I also want to thank Chair Peterson for his work in stewarding this legislation, my colleagues, for their consideration of passage of the legislation. The West Seattle community, as well as the South Park, Georgetown and SODO communities have been deeply impacted by the closure of the bridge through at least the end of next year. Many have lost the access to the rest of the city in the region and others are seeing increased traffic in the southern portion of the peninsula, near access points in Highland Park and south Dulwich. While South Park has seen increased traffic as as has Georgetown as well, looking forward to continue to work with Massdot and the technical advisory panel and the Community Task Force on that cost benefit analysis to inform that decision in early October on whether to repair or replace the bridge. This is this is all really important work not just for folks on the peninsula, but for the region. This is a major a major thoroughfare that serves the entire region and is really important for for for freight and and other other other economic development needs for for our entire region. It's really, I think, important to emphasize that this is the decisions we make are broader than the needs of just West Seattle. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Herbold, for those remarks. Are there any other comments on the bill? I just want to say thank you to Chair Peterson for the Transportation Utilities Committee and of course, to you, Councilmember Herbold, for your ongoing work and advocacy on addressing the regional impacts of the West Seattle Bridge Safety Project. And I know that there were there will be a lot of tough decisions coming before us about the bridge and financing and addressing the long term needs and impacts of that of that failing in structure, infrastructure. And really do appreciate your all's attention to the details and ongoing advocacy on behalf of not just District one and portions of District two, but for the entire region. And I just think that's absolutely worth emphasizing one more time. So thanks again for all of your work. Looking forward to supporting this particular council Bill. Okay. If there are no other comments on the bill, I would ask that the clerk. I will ask the clerk. Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Revolt. Councilmember her goal. She's working on it. We're just a. Yes. Thank you. Whereas I. Lewis. Yes. Burrell's as. Musharraf? Yes. Peterson Yes. So. Arndt Yes. Strauss Yes. Council President Gonzalez. I. Mean, in favor and oppose. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the court please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Item 22 This item has already been read into the record and we have also addressed the substance of this bill and had debate.

AN ORDINANCE relating to City employment, commonly referred to as the Second Quarter 2019 Employment Ordinance; designating positions as exempt from the civil service system; returning a position to the civil service system; and adjusting salary ranges for certain pay titles; all by a 2/3 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_09162019_CB 119626

And Neighborhoods Committee Jan 16 counts about 119 626 relating to city employment, commonly referred to the second quarter 2018 Employment Ordinance Committee recommends the bill pass. Has been back show. Thank you this emergency or it's not an emergency it's the second quarter 2019 employment ordinance. The next one's the emergency. It designates a number of positions exempt from civil service system as 11 positions will be exempted. The nature of the work to be performed by the positions consistent with the exemption criteria that set forth in municipal code . We also reached out to the labor unions to make sure that all applicable and interested unions had been involved in the conversations. And it returns one position to the civil service system and adjusts the salary ranges for the work training employee tier to pay title. That's it and we recommend passage. Thank you. Comes back to any questions or comments now please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Herbold i Juarez, Macheda O'Brien, Pacheco, so on. I beg your I. Gonzalez President Herrell. All right. Nine in favor. Nine Oppose the Bill Parsons. Excuse me. In the chair. I'll sign it. Please read agenda item number 17 the short title. Agenda Item 17 Council Bill 119 642 Relating to city emergency purchases of goods and services. The committee recommends the bill pass.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for a Third Amendment to Lease No. 32944 with the Friends of Colorado Lagoon, for the continued tenancy and operation of the Colorado Lagoon Wetland and Marine Science Education Center, located at 5119 East Colorado Street, for a term of three years, with two, two-year renewal options, at the discretion of the City Manager; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary for a Third Amendment to Right-of-Entry Permit No. 32943 with the Friends of Colorado Lagoon, concurrent with the recommended action above, to allow for continued third-party maintenance of portions of the Colorado Lagoon, and authorize City Manager to amend the Use and Permit Area to add or remove areas of responsibility, as needed. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_01212020_20-0058

Item 11. Recommendation to authorize city manager to execute all documents necessary with Friends of Colorado Lagoon for the continued tendency and operations of Colorado Lagoon, Wetland and Marine Science Education Center and authorize city manager to execute all documents necessary. For Third Amendment right of entry permit number 3 to 9 three with friends of Colorado Lagoon from Parks and Rec District three. Yes, that's one question. Putting the effort that they put into this lease agreement. I want to acknowledge very publicly and very enthusiastically the great work that the Friends of Colorado Lagoon does for our city, the efforts that they have been involved in for a number of years, many, many years prior to me getting on council and with my predecessor and with his predecessor has just been tremendous. Through their great efforts and partnership with the city of the Colorado Lagoon, water quality has been restored to a place where we can be very proud of getting a ratings year after year. And that has a lot to do with the advocacy and the passion of SoCal. So I'm happy to support this lease agreement. I did want to call out one thing, and that's an amendment to the lease that's in here. And I want to thank staff for putting it in here, but it basically highlights the focus of the city, which is to work collaboratively with our nonprofits, not work competitively with them, to encourage them to apply for grants to support them in their grant funding effort, and to also allow the city to analyze whether those grant funding opportunities are going to encumber the city and if they are whether it's it's feasible for the city to support such endeavors. And so. I'm grateful for. The language on page three that has been and added to reflect some of my concerns in that regards. And I want to thank staff for working collaboratively with my office and with SoCal to make that happen. So thank you. Meredith Reynolds has been our lead on this. I appreciate your service. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Price. Now we're going to go into any comments on this, the item, any public comments. There's no public comment on this item. We're fine. Thank you very much. We don't have to vote on it either. We do. Okay, fine. See? No further comment or digest. Would you please cast your vote? Council memo appears. But she carries. Thank you. Now we have a special presentation and. I saw a presentation tonight. And that presentation and the Peacemaker celebration tonight, the peacemakers presentation were honored. Some great individuals, as some of you may already know, each year after our annual Martin Luther King parade and celebration, I would like for us to honor a few individuals in the

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3178 South Dayton Court in Hampden. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from S-SU-F to S-SU-F with waivers (grants a variance for the lot size for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 3178 South Dayton Court in Council District 4. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-18-22.

DenverCityCouncil_02282022_22-0044

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? My pleasure. I move that constable 20 2-004 for be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for Council Bill 20 2-0044 is open. May we have the staff report? I really. Just a minute. Okay. Go ahead and introduce yourself. I'm Libby Adams with Community Planning and Development, and I will be presenting the MAP Amendment at 3178 South Dayton Court as soon as the PowerPoint opens. Okay. So this application is located in Council District four in the Hamden neighborhood, and the applicant is requesting to rezone from suburban single unit F to Suburban Single Unit F with waivers to allow for an accessory dwelling unit. The applicant has proposed waivers to allow the aid to use the detached edu building form and then to waive the minimum zone. Lot depth of 150 feet. As stated previously, the property is currently zoned SNCF, which allows the suburban house building form on a minimum zone. Lot size of 8500 square feet. This site is currently occupied by a single unit home with single unit and park uses surrounding the site. This slide shows the existing building form and scale with the subject property on the upper right hand side. Then a postcard notifying neighboring property owners within 200 feet of the site was sent out on October 19th. Planning Board unanimously recommended approval on January 5th of this year. And to date, staff has not received any public comment. The Denver zoning code has five review criteria that must be met in order for a rezoning to be approved. The first criterion is consistency with adopted plans. This rezoning will meet several of the strategies and comprehensive plan 2040, including creating a greater mix of housing options in all neighborhoods and promoting infill development where there's already services and infrastructure in place. And then in Blueprint Denver this the neighborhood context is classified as suburban. These areas are a range of uses from single uses to commercial corridors, and then block patterns are generally irregular with curvilinear streets. And Blueprint identifies this property as the low residential place type, and these place types are mostly single unit residential uses on larger lots and accessory dwelling units are appropriate. And then both South Dayton and Dartmouth Place are local streets, which are mostly characterized by residential uses. The Growth Area Strategy and blueprint. Denver is all other areas of the city. This is where we anticipate to see 10% of new jobs and 20% of new housing by 2040. And then blueprint also includes specific policy recommendations. So land use and vote form housing policy for strategy states that individual rezonings to allow AIDS are appropriate and should be small and area. And then Blueprint Policy five discusses removing barriers to constructing use and then Blueprint also has guidance for when to use waiver. So it recommends limiting the limiting the use of customized zoning tools like waivers to unique and extraordinary circumstances. So customized zoning tools are most effective when a standard zoned district does not exist to implement our adopted plans. So CPD uses waivers in situations where the waivers help solve an issue the department is committed to resolve through a future text amendment. So, as seen on the previous slide blueprint, Denver recommends removing barriers to Adus through a text amendment. Until those changes are made, it's appropriate to consider individual rezonings to allow adus and the suburban context currently has a limit has limited adu district options. So this waiver is a bridge to a district that will be created with the ADU Use and Denver project. And so staff believes this is an appropriate circumstance to use a customized zoning approach. Staff also finds the requested zoning meets the next two criteria. It will result in uniformity of district regulations and will further the public health, safety and welfare by providing a new type of housing in a largely single unit area. And then blueprint serves as the justifying circumstance for this rezoning in its recommendation to allow to use in all residential areas. And lastly, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the suburban neighborhood context, the residential districts and the specific intent of the SUV Zone district. So based on finding all five review criteria, have the net staff does recommend approval. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you, Livy. We have one individual signed up to speak this evening. Jesse Paris is joining us online. You're ready? Yes. Good evening. Members of Council for Black Star. Can you hear me? My name is just a the person I'm a present for. Black Star salute a self defense positive actually come in for social change as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and East Denver Residents Council and front line black males. And I'll be the next November 2023. I'm in favor of this rezoning to make it meets all five of the criteria. Consistency what adopt the plans uniformity of district regulations for this public health, safety and wellness. Justifying circumstances and consistency with neighborhood context and so district purpose. And since I'm in favor of rezoning, I just wanted to know what this idea was going to be used for so I could please answer that question. I would really greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 004 for Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam Pro Tempore. Thank you, Libby. You just said something at the end, which is contrary to something that I believe. So you referred to the ADA in Denver Advisory Committee. And you said something about that committee making a recommendation about changing the zoning for ADAS. And it's my understanding that's not what that committee is doing. That's yeah, I won't change the zoning. My understanding and we do have Josh Palmeri is here from the Eighties and Denver project, but that one of the potentials is that more adu districts may be created, people will have to rezone into them. But I think the the creation of new districts. Okay, good. I just wanted to clarify that. Um, so. This is an interesting application in a very suburban neighborhood. If you look at it on a map like every street is a dead end and there's paths and park. And it's a it's a lovely neighborhood, but I have concerns about the building form. And I know that I've talked to you about this before, but this house is a single story and it's surrounded by one story. Houses, potentially someone could build a two story house five feet from the back fence. Is that correct? Correct. And I think that was really my only question for now, all that my fellow council members asked questions and then I'll probably get back in the queue. Okay, thanks. Next in the queue, Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. Pro tem. My questions are about in the application. It makes reference to 150 feet. Is that the that lot depth on the frontage of the property? So that would be the depth from the street frontage to the rear and that. So we only have one ADU district in the suburban neighborhood context and it requires a lot depth of 150 feet. And so that's why that's waived because the waivers point to the form standards for RSU F one. Okay. So looking at the photographs of the homes in the neighborhood, it looks like there's a very long set back in the front of these properties. Is that consistent throughout the block? Yes, I would say so. Okay. So then how much space does that leave in the back for an end to you, given the fact that part of the law is already taken up by a front yard excuse me? And then it has a single family home, and now we're talking about putting a unit in the back. So I'm just trying to understand how much of that 11,900 square feet is actually available for construction of a another single family home? And is there a limitation on the size that it can be? Yes. So there is a limitation on the size as far as the actual square footage that would be in the backyard that could be taken up for you. And I don't know the exact numbers for that. I do know it needs to be in the back 35% of the lot. And given this lot size of 11,900 square feet, you know, I would imagine that that still leaves a general. I know that this particular applicant has already worked with development services on the site plan. And so does the developer, the homeowner available to answer any of the questions. That Gavin built. Gavin Belt Pldt. Nope. He's not online. Okay. So nobody's here representing the applicant. They're just letting you all present it to us without being available to answer any questions. That's unfortunate. Okay. Is this an HOA community? I did not know that, Councilman. No, she's. Okay. So we wouldn't have any of those e2e restrictions that they have to deal with. I think those are my only questions. So. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, madam president. Pro tem Libi the you mentioned that in blueprint rezonings for Haiti use are appropriate, particularly when a text amendment may be in the offing. You mentioned Josh is in the audience. Josh, could you come up and take a couple of questions pertinent to this application? Because I'm very concerned about the prospect that a vote on this tonight by this body might prejudice the outcome or predetermine or dictate an outcome for a process that hasn't even started. So when when is your first meeting? Is it's this Thursday. Yeah. Good afternoon. Council Josh Omari, senior city planner, CPD. Thank you. Yes. As Councilwoman Black alluded to earlier in. The meeting, our first meeting is this Thursday, this evening. I'm sorry, could you speak a little more into the mic for me? Yeah, thank you. Yeah. I also would not want to speculate on that process and what the outcome might be. We are kicking off this Thursday. It will be ideally a one year process. And so we'll be back for you guys and adoption. In early 23. But without knowing, you know, kicking off the process, having the discussions, we're not sure what building form will end up with. Josh, could you tell us what what is the full scope of the project? What are the areas they will look at? Are there any areas they will not look at? Yeah, certainly. So we are implementing land use recommendation five from Blueprint Denver, which is tasked with removing barriers to a new construction. So not only looking at what zoning regulations are getting in the way of construction issues, but also building context sensitive form standards. And so currently the ADA standards are the same. Citywide, you can do. A 24 foot all edu. Building form throughout the city. Mm hmm. And so we know that potentially that it doesn't match with all of our other contexts. And so we're going to look really closely at suburban context neighborhoods and figure out what the setbacks should be there, what the height should be, etc., etc.. Okay. And as I think that Councilwoman Black brought up the this application, if this lot in question 3178 South the court if it were 25 feet deeper, this would be a straightforward application reason to assess. You have one presumably correct? Or maybe Libby is more. No, I think everyone still allows the tandem house form in this district, so it's unique in that sense. This application waves the tandem house. Correct. Yeah. So we would also we would want to waive that and I think as well, if this was the straightforward Adu rezoning. Correct. Libby, is that the other waiver? Is there waiving the the tandem house? So we're not we're only waiving in the 80 you use for the tandem house will not be allowed. But that isn't allowed. Use and building form in the SCAF one. Correct. Okay. So we're not we're we're just doing a waiver. This is on. Yeah. Yeah. You're using by waiving. Yes. Yeah. The context here is is on is difficult for some people to grasp because usually a waiver means you're giving up something. And here we're using a waiver to give or. We're waiving here. And so the tandem house is not permitted in these waivers. Right. Okay. And Josh, how many how many meetings do you anticipate this group to have? I think there were going to be for now we have seven meetings guaranteed and room for an eighth meeting just in case if we need to really hash out some of these details. So eight meetings throughout the year. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Pro-Tem. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Thank you, President Pro tem. So there are five criteria with which we should make our decision, correct? Correct. Then only those criteria. Nothing else? Correct. So if someone were to ask you, I'd like to know what the area will be used for. Kim, is that a question that we can use the answer to shape our decision? Well. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Pro tem. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman Sandoval. Thank you, ma'am. President pro tem. Um. Thank you, Libby. Thank you, Josh. A couple of questions. When the application came in to CPD, did the applicant come up with the idea for waivers, or was this a collaboration with CPD and the applicant? Yeah, I would say it was a it would be a collaboration just because when they came in, they said they wanted an EDU. And we currently don't have a district that will allow them to have what they wanted, which is a detached adu. And so that's where the collaboration and looking at CPD policy and a waiver might be the best fit at this time. And how was the decision made to waive that? So if you went to a standards and district with a that allows accessory dwelling, does it automatically allow a tandem house form as well? So the SDF one is the only one that also allows the tandem house building form. And that's the zone district that's closest to this area. Correct? That's the only district within the suburban neighborhood context that currently allows the 82 use and building form. So it also allows that tandem house building form. Okay. And have there been? Outreach to the neighbors. Have you heard anything from the neighbors on this application? I have not heard anything from the neighbors. In the applicant's narrative, he did say that he reached out to the registered neighborhood organizations, and I believe he did speak to his neighbors. I have not received any comments. So in these areas that have this suburban form and usually that means that they don't have alleys. I have some areas in inspiration point that have don't have alleys and they usually are not your traditional rectangles or not. They're probably a little bit different. How do these building building firms, such as an accessory dwelling unit, do? Have we looked at any of the unintended consequences of building an accessory dwelling unit with standards that are meant for more of a probably, I don't know, like the one we just did, the urban town, the form in northwest Denver, where it's predominantly a rectangle zone. It's deeper, meaning they get it's the front zone on the front light for the public, for the front lot is smaller and it goes deeper in the back and you have alley access. Even if you don't have the access, I don't have the access and I live in as an urban zone, but I do have still that traditional rectangle zone. Have we looked at unintended consequences and how these building firms actually exist in the built environment? Because I think that's something that is important and that's why we have this edu task force is looking at these unintended consequences of trying to fit a circle into a square peg. Mm hmm. Yeah. So, I mean, my answer to your question was, yeah, that's why we have the AIDS in Denver project. And I would also say that these waivers, they point to the as you F-1 standards. And so if those get changed based on the aid use in Denver project, this law will still have to comply with that. So it doesn't point to specific like it has to be five feet from the property line so say that you use in Denver project does come up with a different step back from the rear this project would have this development would have to follow that if it's done after that project. And remind me when my last question in that zone district, can you go 2.5 stories as well with that other how high can you go? It's 24 feet. 24 feet over the primary. So we have the primary is two and a half storeys across the whole zone lot. Okay. And then the health talk in the Adobe, the detached 24 feet. So 30 to 35 feet for the primary, depending on width across the whole zoned lot and then 24 feet for the adu. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Yeah, thank you, Madam President. Pro tem. Let me just more direct this planning. Think it makes sense? To zone a 24 foot structure five feet from a back property line. With this, with this project, the edu project, beginning with that being acknowledged as a problem area, I'm mystified how we get a recommendation to do that. Yeah. You know, I think we we have guidance that says 80 users should be permitted in all of our residential areas and we have applicants that are coming forward. And so I think, you know, we we kind of have to work with the standards that we have. And so we have this guidance that says 80 you should be permitted here from our in our plans. And so I think that's why we did this waiver. And I think that's why we did the waiver the way we did. Because, like I said, if you know the applicant, sometimes these processes take time to actually develop. And so if the views and project comes in with something different and changes the text, then this will still be subject to that change because it just points to the standards. And so, you know, Josh's project here could change what the actual ADA will look like on the site. Okay. Thank you for your answer. Thank you. And Councilwoman Black. Thank you. Along those same lines, did you guys consider halting these in suburban sound districts until after this process? Yeah. So my understanding is that I don't think CPD has the authority to. Stop projects to do a moratorium on use in urban context. But that could be in the question. You know, that makes sense for, you know, can you commit to that piece? Hi, Nate. I sincerely believe that members of Council, Navy Services and City Attorney, Councilwoman Black, can I have your repeated questions as I have a little trouble hearing? So we were wondering if CPD considered not. Supporting these applications in suburban zone districts until after the advisory committee some of its work so just. A temporary pause to the. 80 rezonings in suburban sound districts until after the committee makes its recommendations. That that would be a policy consideration either for council or CPD. Um. And there would be. Something that that you could take up as a council or take to CPD management to see if they'd be willing to do something like that. Okay. Thank you. Libby, I have a question. The applicant's not here. And then you said you knew that he had talked to building services. Do you know anything about his proposed plans? I do not know specifics. I just know that he has spoken to them. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. You're not an excellent Councilman Flynn. Thank God the President made in your reply. I seem to recall in the last term of Council we we issued a moratorium on slot homes. Until we figured out how we wanted to alter the rules and regulations and the zoning criterion for slot homes. And so we did not accept any new applications for that building form until we settled that. So would this be this policy you say would be in our hands, or is this something, in your opinion, CPD could simply. Since Josh's committee is just getting started, say, you know, look where we have tons of zoned districts that allow you to use and we will continue to process those. But for areas where we're going to study how to incorporate them into the context and character of suburban context and other zoned districts where we might not have the Dash one available, we're not going to process any. It's going to just going to be a year. Heck, if we approve this tonight, this fellow might not be able to get his permit for another two years. The way you are considering my my neighbor trying to build a deck took nine months to get a deck permit. Right. Moratorium is certainly one option that council would have, but there would be legal criteria that council would have to meet in order for a moratorium to. I'm sorry. Could you speak up a little more? I'm sorry. What's into the mike. Okay. Yeah. So a moratorium would be an option that council could pursue, but they would have to, of course, check with Legislative Council and make sure whether or not for that type of more time would meet the criteria. But would it be something appropriate for CPD to administratively say, we're not going to consider applications with waivers at this point until this process is done? Well, I think that's a question for CPD management, but I, I don't think that that is probably the direction that CPD would like to pursue, because there's so much guidance within the current comprehensive plan and blueprint Denver that are calling for addus throughout the city. Certainly. Certainly. But the blueprint also has direction to do certain things in order first, such as this study, which has not yet been done. So. All right. But they don't have there's no legal prohibition to them saying we're not going to consider issuing waivers or recommending rezonings with waivers until the new standards are figured out. No legal bar to that. I'm not understanding your question. I'm sorry. Could could CPD say to applicants who come in like like this one, that there is no zone district that allows in to you on 125 foot deep lot in suburban context. If you were 150 feet deep, you could go ahead with it. But we're not going to process applications for rezonings that rely on waivers from current forms in the code, current standards in the code. Until this effort that kicks off on Thursday comes up with consistent standards that we will then follow. Is there a legal bar to CPD taking that policy with the public? Well, if if council approved this rezoning with waivers, then the applicant could move forward with building their aid. Right. That's that wasn't my question. How could CPD say to an applicant, we are not going to advance this application? They could or they could advance the application with a recommendation of denial if that if that's the direction they wanted to go. I understand that they currently they wouldn't want to do that. Thank you. That's all. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. To answer Councilman Flynn's question about the moratorium. That was Councilman Espinosa. And Councilman, we knew who proposed the moratorium, and they used the criteria that we were trying to solve a problem for. There's only a certain reason why you can use a moratorium. So I've often thought about that in certain in certain areas of development. So it gets complicated when the moratorium. But I do understand that we do have this process and it does seem like we don't have a zone district in this area. And I know that it it it's not best practices to use waivers and conditions on anything in rezoning. I know that's not looked highly upon for CPD. So for you to be coming forward with a recommendation to use waivers for an accessory dwelling unit. I don't think I've ever seen that before. I'll just say that. Thank you, Madam President. Okay. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Thank you. Madam President, pro tem Nate. Sorry to bring you up again. They? We have a question for you. Welcome back. So the so I'm going to go down the same kind of line of question. I think that Councilmember Flynn was going down so we could, as a council, pass something that issues a moratorium on any new development at all if we wanted to. Is that right? Yes, sir. That would be legislative. And and we could, as a council, pass something that limited to use in suburban contexts if we wanted to. That is also correct. But it is not possible for us to consider and pass that before we pass what we're considering right now tonight. Is that right? That's correct. So. Okay. So while we could consider that, that is only theory and conjecture until we make a determination tonight. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. I see no others in Q Libby, just one question that I have on Slide 16, I think. Strategy. Just if you can clarify for me, it says unless there is a neighborhood plan supporting any use and we don't have a neighborhood plan here, rezonings should be small in area in order to minimize impact to the surrounding residential area. What does that mean, small in area? Yeah. So for us, you know, a lot of times it's these individual rezonings that come in. You know, the an impact of one eighth you won't necessarily be a huge impact on the surrounding area. Now, that doesn't preclude the neighborhood wide aviaries because we have other guidance that talks about large legislative rezonings. Okay. So the area is are there other edu rezonings that have come through in this neighborhood? I do. I don't know in this specific neighborhood, but I know that there have been others that have gone through in the suburban context. Okay. Did those those revised F-1? Yes. The one that has gone through, I think went to SC F1 because it would have met the parameters of the depth and the size. Can you remind me what the F one depth is? Yeah. So it's 150 feet and then a minimum zone lot size of 8500 square feet. Got it. Thank you. Okay. I don't have any other questions, seeing no one else in queue. Public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council and Council Bill 20 2-004 for Councilwoman Black. Thank you, madam pro tempore is the the other one that was approved actually was in this neighborhood and. There were a lot of questions about it, including some opposition. In this neighborhood and in my district, we're starting to see some of these applications pop up. And I do have constituents who don't want to use. There's those people. I actually am very supportive of ideas. Well, I also have heard from a lot of people who are very concerned about the building for. And they live in a suburban neighborhood. They don't have an alley. And the thought of having a two storey structure looming over their back fence with windows, looking in their backyard, shading their garden is not something that they bargained for. And I I've never used the health, safety and welfare criteria. I don't believe as a reason not to vote for something. But I am not going to support this for that reason. It's just not something that community members bargained for when they moved to these suburban neighborhoods. And while I do support HD use, I feel like we need to have an agreed upon building form that is more conducive to these kinds of neighborhoods. These houses are all single storey, and someone could build a two storey structure five feet from the neighbor's fence. And I'm just not comfortable with that. And without the applicant being here to answer questions. I'm sorry, I just don't think this is something I can support tonight, but thank you for your work and I really look forward to being on the committee and resolving this so we can move forward with rezonings in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam Pro-Tem. In my analysis, this application fails to meet four of the five criteria. I don't believe it's consistent with adopted plans. Sometimes it seems to me that we cherry pick statements and adopted plans here and there with which the application can be seen as consistent. And it does in the ones that we choose to highlight in the staff report or the presentation. But then we ignore other statements in the plans with which the application is inconsistent. So in blueprint land use and built form recommendation for a study quote study and implement allowances for aid use study and implement allowances for 80 use , including those attached and detached from the primary home in all neighborhood contexts and residential zone districts use an inclusive community input process to respond to unique considerations in different parts of the city. This recommendation was not done and this application is not consistent with that 40 recommendation and blueprint quote A citywide approach to enable aid to use is preferred until a holistic approach is in place. Individual rezonings to enable to use in all residential areas, especially where proximate to transit parenthetically which this one is not, are appropriate unless there is a neighborhood plan supporting a to use rezoning should be small an area in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding residential area. So here the property is in a suburban context district that would accommodate a rezoning if it met the form standards currently in the code. But it does not it's only it has insufficient lot depth blueprint would support a rezoning to F1 is consistent if the parcel were 150 feet deep. But in light of the fact that in three days the city is kicking off a project to come up with the recommended standards. Waivers are inappropriate and in my view, not consistent with Blueprint's guidance on 82 rezonings are proceeding after an inclusive community process and study prior to implementation. And then finally in Blueprint five, see states revise detached adu form standards to be more context sensitive, including standards for height, mass and setbacks. We've done none of that in the context of this application. Mr. Pomeroy's committee is going to come up with those, and I'm sure that in a year's time we will have something like that , so that, as the councilwoman said, where you have a parcel with a one storey house in the front, you don't end up with a two storey separate dwelling unit five feet from the back, from the neighbor's back fence. So we have not yet revised those form standards. And Blueprint says we should do that. We have not done it. CPD staff and Josh, you might remember this. I pulled my hair out when I got these emails. CPD staff recently sent a representative of a property owner in my district. To me, he was applying to rezone a property for an idea in a district that as of now doesn't even have such an option in the code. I think it was opseu c 6000 square foot lot minimum, which it matter was 6200 square feet, but there was no way for me to form for that. So this representative told me that he was advised to come to me and to the R.A. with a remit, with a proposal to rezone it into a totally different context. Urban edge right in the middle of this vast sea of suburban context, we were going have one parcel on a lot in Brentwood that would suddenly have an urban edge context completely not appropriate. And my understanding is that maybe he might have misunderstood the guidance from staff when when they sent him to me. But I certainly hope we don't get any any more represent any more applications like that. The next criterion I believe, it fails to meet is uniformity of district regulations. It's not consistent unless this criterion is completely meaningless. The very nature of this request is precisely to be inconsistent with the s as you f zone district regulations. That's the point of the of the waivers. I don't believe it meets the fourth criterion justifying circumstances. In fact, in my view, the circumstances justify holding off on this rezoning because the project is coming up in three days to come up with the standards and building form standards and regulations for ADA use in areas like suburban without alleys. This application puts us, this Council, in the position of signaling to the advisory committee that has yet to meet what the outcome should be and we should not be determining the outcome this way. We could end up with an inconsistent zone district in this. In this instance, if we were to approve this, as I mentioned, we had a moratorium on the new slot home form. I know that we don't have time to do that here. But for that reason, though, Madam Pro-Tem and colleagues, I'm going to vote against this application. I also don't believe, by the way, that it meets Criterion five consistency with neighborhood context description for the reasons I've already stated, which I think are very obvious. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Thank you, President Pro Tem. The stakeholder process that we're about to kick off hopefully will change the policy that we currently have. But we should make a decision to nine based on the policy we currently have. We shouldn't kick off a stakeholder process that would retroactively go back and apply to this, or we shouldn't try to predict what that stakeholder process might give us and a year or so in the future and try to vote tonight based on what we think that stakeholder process might give us. I'm not saying that your other ideas are right or wrong. I just mean we shouldn't try to. That seems like a lot of work. It seems like way more work than just using the criteria that we have today to judge today. Thank you. Councilwoman Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. Something that Councilman Hines just said I think is really important. And I just wanted to flag Councilman Flynn talked about it a little bit as well. We need to follow the procedures we have in place. And the purpose of putting. The form base zoning code. In in 2010 was so that we didn't have waivers anymore. And whether a waiver is. Granting something or whether a waiver is limiting something. The use of waivers is pretty rare. And so to me that says this doesn't belong in this district at this time. And so I'm also going to be an alternate thinks thank you seeing no others in Q I know one of the things that we've discussed a lot in West Denver are issues in lots that are smaller than the current criteria allows. And so but we've also seen single family homeowners fit to, I think, the neighborhood context and not exactly go to full entitlement either. So I think there is some flexibility around desiring and wanting to see things like 80 use permitted to be built, built in anywhere in Denver and working with residents and homeowners to make sure they they fit. If they tore down that single family home, they can build a bigger home. It takes up much more of the envelope of that property without, you know, without rezoning either or or additional waivers. So I appreciate, I think, the discomfort with flexing what is currently in the zoning code, but I don't know that it was it necessarily goes against, I think, the intention of blueprint. I will I think this one, though, really does, I think call into question a couple issues that have come up with smaller lot sizes and just guidance on whether something that applies in an F one with 25 additional feet still applies as is in a smaller lot. So I think that kind of guidance is desired here. And one of the things that I won't be supporting it tonight either, but I do know that that is one of the things that CPD is responding to in terms of really making it use accessible and flexible for lots of different lot sizes. So I appreciate that from the department that the public hearing is closed. Oh, we already did that. Right. Uh, Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 22, dash 004 for. Black. Clark. No. FLYNN No. Herndon No. Hines No. Cashman No. Ortega No. Sandoval No. Sawyer No. Madam President? No. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. Ten days, ten days. Cancel Bill 20 2-00 for four has failed. There being no further business before this body. This meeting is adjourned.

A RESOLUTION designating the monthly President Pro Tem of the City Council of The City of Seattle for 2020-2021 and superseding Resolution 31884.

SeattleCityCouncil_01062020_Res 31924

Okay. The Council will now discuss and consider one motion to suspend the council rules before we consider item four on the agenda. The Council rules require that the Council adopt by resolution a monthly rotation for the position of Council President Pro Tem in order of seniority and requesting that this Council rule be suspended to allow consideration of Resolution 31924, which does not delegate the Council President Pro tem rotation in order by seniority. Two thirds of council members must vote in favor of this motion for us to consider Resolution 31924 as proposed. If two thirds are in favor, the Council will then consider Resolution 31924. So I am going to move to suspend council rule one as yeah, one de point one relating to the delegation of a council president pro tem rotation in order by seniority. And I think this has been motion and it's been seconded. Are there any comments? You see no comments from my colleagues. Those in favor of the motion vote i. I. Those opposed vote no. The motion carries in the council rules suspended to allow consideration of the resolutions. So now the Council will consider resolution 31924. Which has not been read into the record. And we lost our clerk. Let me read here. We're going to go ahead and read it into the record first and then we'll we'll move through. A resolution designating the monthly president pro tem of the City Council of the City of Seattle for 2020 through 2021 and superseding Resolution 31884. Thank you, Judy. So we have now read. Agenda item four into the record. So I'm going to move to adopt the resolution, ask for a second and then we'll call for any comments. So I moved to adopt resolution 31924. It's been moved and seconded that the resolution be adopted. Are there any comments? Seeing none those in favor of adopting the. Sorry. No, it's okay. Those in favor of adopting the resolution vote i. I. Any opposed the motion carries and the resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it. I can get in here. It's going be. Okay, folks. And for those of you who weren't quite following what we did on agenda item four, we essentially suspended the rules around around the need to do our council president pro tem schedule by seniority. So we have shifted things a little bit. Again, it's wasn't controversial and it was a agreed upon thing. So I don't want folks to think that this is an affront or an insult somehow to to you councilmembers talent. And in fact, I appreciate. So it means that that Councilmember Herbold will be council president pro tem in January, followed by Councilmember Suarez and then followed by Councilmember Mosqueda. And the only reason I'm highlighting that is because it's particularly relevant for the first three months of this year, which we will get to in a moment. So before I talk about my other business, is there any other further business to come before the council? And for the for the new members. This is if you need to be excused for a full council meeting, this is the opportunity for you to do that. All right. So I am though I don't have I'm not required under the council rules to be formally excused by the full council. I am nonetheless taking the opportunity to, in oral form, request that I be excused for all four Council meetings between January 13th and oh, what's the week before March 30th? S.O.S. We have March 30th. What's the Monday before that? March 20, March 23rd. So January 13th and. And March 23rd. I will be and I'm excited to be leaving on maternity leave. I will be the second council member in three months and in the history of the city of Seattle to request maternity leave and am very excited about about the opportunity to step away from my council obligations to bond with my first child. And I'm looking forward to be to being able to spend some time away from City Hall a little this morning I was having a little bit of FOMO, hearing all of you all talk about the wonderful things that are going to happen in the first quarter . But it is just an absolute humbling experience for me to be able to be in a position to start a family and to be able to have had some of the best prenatal care I could have ever asked for, and to have the support of my former colleagues and my new colleagues in carrying some of the work through in the first quarter. In my absence, I really appreciate all of the ongoing support from each of you up on the dais and from my own staff who have been key to making sure that the work will continue in my absence. So we have a solid work plan that we've been working on for weeks in my office to make sure that the roles and responsibilities of the council president office that are part of my office's responsibilities now are going to flow well with each of the three council president pro times that are going to be in place for January, February and March. And we are really looking forward to continuing to advance many of our policy priorities around child and and affordability and transportation issues and early learning and education issues throughout the city. And look forward to establishing all of that foundational work in my absence over the next three months. And then and then hitting the ground running on March 30th when I return to the city council. So really appreciate the again support from all of you as I step away and and focus on on family for for three months this this year undivided attention hopefully to that and really look forward to being able to do that . So if there's no objection to my being excused, I will be excused. That's it. All right. So as a reminder, once again, there is a short reception and that will commence now in the Bertha Knight Landis room, which is on the first floor of City Hall. All are welcome to attend. That is the last item on our agenda. And with that being said, we are adjourned. Thank you, colleagues. Thank you.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.81 relating to fireworks; and by repealing Section 16.08.600 of the Long Beach Municipal Code; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06082021_21-0511

Thank you. Next step. Let's do let's have a quick votes on the UN. Well, actually, that may not be quite right to have some public comment. We have we have three votes on audiences that are, I believe, second readings or first readings that were already adopted by the council. And in 13, 14, 15 will take a vote on each of those individually. Item 13. Item 13. Communication from City Attorney. Recommendation to declare ordnance. Adding Long Beach Municipal Code Chapter 8.81 relating to fireworks and declaring the urgency thereof. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting citywide. Thank you. I have a motion in a second to approve. What's your public comment? This. Philippe Herrera. Just. Philippe Herrera, please unmute for item 13. Hi. Hi. I live. In District. Four, and I'm just here to make a request of city officials to give a little bit more attention to our district due to the constant, um, fireworks that have been going off nearly every night. I realize there has been many city attempts to correct this in the past, but I feel it's important to. To dedicate an earnest effort to. To make this a little better for everybody. So this is just an honest plea. And I don't have any any suggestions as I'm. I don't have much knowledge of how to fix this issue. I'm just kind of hoping my my request is is heard. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Okay. Members, please go ahead and do recovery. Mr. Mayor, can we have the mover and seconder, please? Well, I'm sorry. I got some of your ranga and councilmen. Mongo and I queued, sir. I'm sorry. Just in motion. So I just thought you were just making the motion. So countering negative. Any comments? No comment. I'll refer to the CD by Councilman Mongo. And this item 13 was their staff presentation. Dear Members of the council, the city's city attorney park. And this is an ordinance. This is not a second this is not one of the second readings. The other three ordinances were second reading. Right. And yes, we do. Art Sanchez from my office can give a summary of the ordinance. Linda Tatum can certainly discuss the Fire Works Committee. And we have the city prosecutor, Doug Howard, available and the deputy police chief. Art, could I have a few questions? But they might be answered by the presentation up to Mr. Mayor, how you'd like me to proceed? No, I was under the impression we were that there were questions here so that there was just an ordinance going back. So we can go ahead. If city attorney, did you want to kind of give a summary of the ordinance? Art Sanchez? Yes, council. Mayor this item came to our well, this item was brought to our attention by the fireworks committee. Our office was directed to prepare an ordinance to increase enforcement measures for the use of illegal fireworks. The focus of this the language of this ordinance was to address those issues. One, been increasing the scope of individuals that could be held responsible for violations, as well as to increase the penalties. One aspect of the increase in the scope of responsibility or the scope of people that could be held accountable for illegal fireworks was to create a host liability ordinance, which would include property owners, tenants, landlords, property managers , as well as any individual that organizes, supervises, officiates or conducts any type of firework event at a particular private location. The second main point in the language of the ordinance is the response costs. So anyone that is found to be held in violation of the language of the ordinance would be responsible for the cost. The actual costs of fire PD and any kind of emergency personnel responding to a call relating to illegal firework activity. And so those are the two main points of this ordinance. I am available to answer any questions that Council may have. I also want to remind Council that this is an emergency ordinance so that it would require two separate votes. Once the Council's concluded discussion. And that's the that concludes my presentation. Thank you. Them among us. Thank you. So I just want to thank the fireworks committee, the city attorney staff. And I know Linda Tatum's been a big part of this. Two questions. I want to make sure you both questions, because I know we have a limited amount of time. And when we talk about all the parties that could be held liable, I think it's important for there to be a process or a way where we ensure that the individual putting off the fireworks is actually the one that is held accountable. And so I know that there are situations where there are minors involved. I know there are situations where there are tenant landlord issues, property manager issues. So I guess I would want to know what. Our methods of ensuring that the process, if a landlord or a property manager appropriately notices the tenants of the legal requirements not to use fireworks inappropriately, then it sounds like as a component of that the ordinance the landlord could still be held liable. Or is it that in that case, if proper noticing went through, it would be the tenant? And then what kind of costs are we talking about? What is our estimate of what we're talking about? Where a current fine is $1,000? I don't know a Captain Bill that. How much an hour or how many hours are we talking about to input it, or are we talking about an increase? I would hope so, because we came to the city and said we need these to be more. Larger penalties, but in cost recovery, it doesn't always turn out that way. We want to make sure that we have an understanding of the magnitude of what we're passing tonight and how that could be held by a landlord who could be a 85 year old person in a senior community who uses their rent for their fees to take care of themselves in a single community. So I just want to make sure we know what we're passing here. A Councilwoman, this is Linda Tatum. I can speak to several of the issues you raised there. You you talked about who is responsible. And that is one of the things that the fireworks, the working group spent a lot of time on looking at this ordinance in terms of the actual implementation of it. And at the heart of this ordinance, the new concept that is introduced here is the notion of what we call host responsibility or social responsibility. And like many other property related ordinances, the ultimate responsibility is to the property owner. So the wave of the ordinance is written when a a property owner is assumed to know or be aware or be responsible for any activities that a tenant, a visitor, or even someone who is just as long as they're on their property, they're responsible for those costs, those costs that are associated with the violation. That's the fundamental premise of this ordinance. And we talked among our group about how it would be implemented. It's very much the same way you investigate any other crime is if there is evidence either from a complaint, the police department would go out, they would take a report. They provide that the evidence of that information to the city attorney, the city attorney would thereby issue the citation. And we talked about the costs. The citation state law limits the citation to $1,000, which is why it was necessary to increase that penalty to include the cost recovery. And at this time, we are not addressing the actual cost recovery fee. That is what will come back to you next week. And we hope to in the staff report when we present that item to have some approximate costs that we can share with the council. So tonight, you're just approving the ordinance language. Next week you will consider what those fees are or what those potential fees could be, because we're not. The only reason. You're only adopting the concept of the cost recovery. And that would include not only fire and police as as Art noted, but it would also include the cost of the city attorney to prosecute the fees. And I would like to just take a little bit of time to talk about some of the other activities of that working group. They have been very active in terms of designing an outreach program. The direction that we got from council last July when fireworks kind of went through the roof is just to to attack this from more than just one perspective. One of those was increase in the penalty, but the other one was to do a much broader outreach and education campaign, and that has started in earnest. The other thing that we've been really active in is collaborating with neighbors. We've been very active in trying to collaborate across the state with other approaches and strategies for how other cities are addressing this. So all of that went into our consideration of proposing this ordinance. Again, we're looking at best practices. Two other things that will be a factor, at least for this 4th of July is the fact that the city council last week approved the free block parties. We're still hoping that that will be a deterrent in addition to those block parties. The other thing that we will continue to do is to start data collection so that we know the number of calls for service and we can track those over time based upon different activities that we put in place there. So we're trying to look at this from a number of different perspectives to to really get a better handle on this and to prioritize the issue in the community based upon the council direction that we received. So thank you. Thank you. Is there a toolkit for landlords and property managers or information that they can provide as a notice to their tenants? And when we did the suspension of rent, I did hear from a number of senior citizens who said, you're literally taking away my rent and grocery money because I live on that income. And so I'm very cautious when we pass ordinances like this that we both want to hold the individual who's terrorizing the community with illegal fireworks accountable. And what we don't want to do is then rack up. A fee that we're we're passing an ordinance today with no fee attached to it. So, I mean, it could be anywhere from $1,000 to. I imagine it wouldn't be as high as $10,000, but I just don't know. And the reason that that council came together and said, you know, we really want the fees to be higher is because we wanted those fees to fall on the people who are willing to spend thousands of dollars on illegal fireworks. We didn't want those to land on our elderly residents who are providing housing for the community. And so I just want to make sure that through that social responsibility and host responsibility, you discussed that there's a process where if a landlord and or property management company could demonstrate that they did their due diligence and that there's still a way to hold the right person accountable for these fireworks and those fees. So that that would be my concern. Otherwise, I'm very supportive of the item as long as those are met. Councilmember this is city attorney. The fee is in the ordinance. It's a $1,000 fee. The fees that were referenced by the assistant city manager, Linda Tatum, will be the cost recovery fees. So they will be in addition to the $1,000 fee that is established this evening in this ordinance. If that helps in my question. Yes, I definitely understand that to be the case, but I don't see any cost estimates and they said they're going to bring those next week. But today we're being asked to approve the the structure by which we come up with those cost estimates. So that's all. And Mr. Parkin, are you of the mind that are our residents that are not setting off the fireworks, have done proper noticing and would be protected from burdening these fees and fines as the landlord who appropriately goes out and or hires resources to manage their property to ensure that those tenants aren't terrorizing the neighborhood . And what what what does that process look like? So so the process of the ordinance would would be to hold the host or the property owner responsible for this conduct. However, there is an exception that it does not apply to a host who initiates contact with law enforcement or fire officials to assist in removing the person or terminating the activity in order to comply with the chapter. So. So there is for those landlords that are working with the city and trying to eliminate this, there is an exception. And this is Art Sanchez. Just to follow up on Mr. Parkin's comment in regard to how these fees or the enforcement against a property owner would go, they would have an opportunity to respond and provide information similar to what Councilwoman Mongeau was referring to in terms of if they provided notice to a tenant or if they provided specific information to whoever was occupying the property that they were not to use illegal fireworks. That certainly can be taken into consideration when we're evaluating whether or not to proceed with the prosecution of the citation. Oh, wonderful. Thank you. I hope that and his team can bring back some samples that we can circulate in our newsletters and on social media in multiple languages. Some landlords may have tenants that don't speak the same language as them, and it's really important that language is integrated into all components of our city. And so for those reasons, I would hope that a flier and or acknowledgment tool could be provided for property owners and property management companies. I think that will go a long way in getting those entities to help with our campaign to notify people that illegal fireworks are not going to be tolerated in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. A councilman in the house. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, for all of those listening to our city council meeting, one of the things that I want to make very clear is that fireworks are illegal in the city of Long Beach, any kind of fireworks. And we have been having this problem for four years now as as was mentioned a lot last week, city council last week, city council meeting fireworks are not only disturbing, but because they set up current norms and don't let people sleep. But they are also very dangerous and triggering for events that that, you know, occur or when through violent and gun battles and stuff like that. So it brings back a lot of PTSD. Yet despite the $1,000 fine that we already have imposed for fireworks citations in the last couple of years, we have seen an increase in the number of illegal fireworks. One of the things that I would like to see and like Councilman Mongo said, is I would not want any unintended consequences to our property owners and landlords when when they are not aware of. Of the illegal fireworks that are being lit by maybe some of their tenants. I do worry about that. I was wondering, is there a way? I mean, I am sure that there could be a way where if a landlord does not know and does not obviously approve of their tenants doing or lighting up fireworks on their property , that they have the freedom to be able to pass that fee onto them. Is that something that is possible? So this is city attorney Art Sanchez. So in answer to that question, one of the main issues relating to enforcement measures of illegal firework activity is finding the violators. So if a property owner is in a better position to identify who these individuals are that are setting off the fireworks, then yes, we would take that into consideration . Depending on what the information is and what and how much how we could identify the individual who set off the fireworks. So that would be something we could take into consideration. But as a whole, regarding the way host liability works in this situation, I think the focus is on being able to enforce against individuals and what hosts liability does in the language of this ordinance increases the scope of people we can hold accountable so that we can get to the actual individuals that are setting off these fireworks or have possession of these fireworks or selling these fireworks. And, you know, and so that's that's one of the reasons for having this type of language. And, you know, again, those are things that we can address as we seek to enforce this ordinance. Thank you. Three. Thank you. Another thing for those that that are caught dead lighting of fireworks. I know that other cities such as Pasadena, which has been thrown a lot around when it comes to fireworks and I was wondering, they have an ordinance that impels the cars that that the person lighting the fireworks has. Is that something that we can consider in this ordinance? So this is our attention that again, I have reviewed what the city of Pasadena has in its ordinance, and I didn't see anything in their actual fireworks ordinance relating to the empowerment of a vehicle. I don't know if that's related to someone that is discharging or selling or possessing the fireworks in their vehicle. But it may be that the vehicle is part of, I guess, the committing the violation or the crime. And that may be a basis why I just don't have enough information to know what Pasadena is doing in terms of the empowerment of vehicles. And when doing some of my research, I did come across that. And I do believe that it was, you know, for having these illegal fireworks in in the car that they were being impounded. But I will look further into it and maybe we can talk through it. And I think some. My second question would be, is it possible to issue like or come up with an incentive program to help residents identify who is lighting up fireworks and possibly, maybe even when we have the if we we identify someone that's lighting up fireworks and that's doing this, and then we give them the fee, which is the thousand dollars plus. Right. Is there a way that we can use maybe some of that money from the peak fee to create an incentive program? The city attorney that that could be considered during your budget application process as whatever money that's coming in for the program. The cost and the fees that you'll discuss next week are to recover the cost of the services to implement the program. So if we start giving the money or you return the money or it sounds like you're creating some sort of an incentive or reward program for reporting, that would have to be additional monies that the city would have to make that decision on how much how you would distribute that, how you would award that, and that could be considered during your budget cycle. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. It gives me a little bit of hope. Third question, and I may be afterwards and another time. Okay. Thank you. I'll call you back up. Thank you. Council member, Austin. Thank you. I just need a little bit more clarity on that. The host you'll remember I brought forth the social host in order is related to alcohol consumption. I want to say maybe eight years ago and and I think our city prosecutor and I think a lot of this is based on on that the host is not necessarily the owner. I just want to be clear on that. Is that correct? City Attorney Yes. Councilman Austin That is correct. Okay. So it could be the tenant. It could be a landlord. It could be a property manager. But it's trying to assign responsibility to someone at a specific address. That's how I understand this. And so with that in mind, that may address some of the scenarios related to fireworks in our city, but it may not all. And so I'm just going to ask how we or how does this ordinance address potential situations where individuals may be setting off fireworks in an alley or in the middle of the street? So to answer your question, Councilman, the ordinance does have language that allows for a adjacent property or adjacent public right of way to a property where individuals are setting off fireworks and then return to a specific private property that can be identified. It allows for a violation to be attached that way. And so what that would require, unless the fire or the police officer is able to identify the individual setting or identify that the individual setting up the fireworks where he was located and where he went into or what location he went into would require residents or witnesses to identify one, the activity that's adjacent to the property. And then second, the property where that person that was setting up the fireworks ended up. And so that's it does have a provision for that. To answer your question, if the alleyway is adjacent to a specific property where the individual goes, then that could be assessed as a violation. Well, thank you. And I think this is a tool that we haven't had in prior years. And I'm you. Well, I don't necessarily like to see enforcement measures, but this is one that has the attention of so many residents throughout our city. And this is more than an annoyance or a nuisance, fireworks or impacting on sleep. I mean, people are deprived of sleep. They're animals that are having, you know, hard times dealing with these these fireworks. They're are veterans that are impacted. And so I think it's important for us to send a strong message. I think the takeaway from this is, you know, moving forward, if you choose to do legal fireworks in our city, you are putting your own housing at risk. And I think that is a strong message to take away from this. Thank you. I'll be supporting this. Thank you, Councilman and House. You are mute, Councilwoman. Thank you, Mayor. My third question would be, is there a way to penalize, certainly or legally discourage people from even participating in close proximity to illegal fireworks being lit as a way to discourage people from not only lighting up these fireworks, but also from being complicit in in a way, you know, like if they're involved in. You know, the the whole show thing. Like, is there a way that we can also cite them, even if it's like a $50 citation or something like that for those that are encouraging the your lighters. And to answer your question, Councilwoman Sanders, the ordinance does have language that allows for what includes the definition of a host, as any person who organizes, supervises, officiates, conducts, controls or otherwise is in charge of an activity at a property. I mean, the best example I can give for that is someone that maybe has organized some kind of, you know, firework party at a particular location. And based on the information that either PD receives or information received from witnesses at the scene that they can identify this person who organized the event, that that person could be held accountable as a host. And so I think that answers part of your question. It doesn't necessarily apply to all the individuals that are participating at that location, but it does provide for that type of liability as a host for the person that can be determined to have a coordinated or supervised event. A great and is if we wanted to do something like that. How would we go about it? Is there a way to to do something like that? Councilmember invite and this is city attorney if I understand your question correctly, this ordinance does not and I don't think legally you could craft an ordinance that would cite someone who's watching a fireworks. It may be somebody who's just walking by it, maybe a resident or a neighbor. I think what Art was explaining that we're trying to capture in the ordinance is if someone is is participating, organizing it, or at the host location and in setting off fireworks, we can certainly go after them. But I'm not sure where you would we would have to do a lot more research on where you could draw that line. Okay. Okay. Understandable. And yes, more research would be welcome to try to see, you know, because usually from what I hear from my residents, it's usually a little group that, you know, gets together, likes the fireworks and tries to disappear after they light it. So that that was my my reasoning for asking that question. Also, one more question. The city has in place a system to track down the sales of fireworks as as another approach to stopping the practice of of a fireworks being set off in the first place. Correct. I mean. Do we trip? Do we track it by the the cars? I just want to make sure that my my residents and actually other residents are informed on how we track the fireworks and the calls that are being placed. I can speak to that really generally. We have through the emergency services, the emergency line. Whenever a call for service comes in regarding fireworks, it is tracked by that by that office. And they track what they track, whether or not you see a fireworks activity in a specific address. They also track whether or not you hear what you think is a firework, and they will note that it sounds like a firework. So we track all of the data related to what we think are fireworks calls. Now, I wasn't clear that I hear you ask a question about confiscation of fireworks or fireworks sales, because that is something that PD also that was one of the other priorities that we were asked to look at to see if a police could step up the efforts to confiscate fireworks. And I know since the beginning of this year, there have been a couple of confiscations, and I think the chief is on the line and he could probably speak to that a little bit more specifically. I'm thinking. Yes, I thank you very much, Linda, for that explanation. I think that it would be great to share what what the conflict station successes have been. So, Chief, I might have to cue in again, but I'd like to give you time to answer that and to share that with our residents. And this is Linda Tatum again. Our staff is also finalizing a report, I think we mentioned during last week's meeting that we are preparing a report so that council can see since the the the that the working group came together last July, there have been a number of successes and a number of new, new initiatives that were done by this group. And we'd like to just lay those all out for for the the city council. And that report will be coming out to you within the next within the next ten days. And that will include the confiscations data as well. Okay. Wonderful. Did, Chief, that you want to share, Chief Luna? Did you want to share about your lust confiscations or. Or should we wait for that report? And I think. Not available. Stafford I think Stafford mentioned that they wanted to they're still putting a major report together that they. Mr. Modica, I know you had mentioned that you guys were putting together a report that will include the PD involved. Yes, we we are planning. A written report that will have a lot of information that you can share with the community. So we can do a quick oral report and our wait for the written report later. Councilwoman. Yes. Did you want do you want a quick oral report now? Yes. If possible, please. Just a small one. That would be great. Can you give a quick report? Yes, sir. Robert Luna here. Mayor and members of the City Council. So we were allotted funding that all of you made sure that we had. And part of our strategy was to give this money to some of our narcotic teams and directed enforcement teams. And and this is a warning to everyone who's listening out there. We're doing by bus. That means if you're out there selling fireworks. Our intent is to arrest you or cite you and confiscate the fireworks. And our teams have been doing that. We've confiscated close to £1,000 of fireworks thus far, and we plan on doing many more. So, again, just a warning to anybody who's out there. You're going to get a very heavy fine for trying to sell fireworks in the city of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you very much, Chief. And I know that you had a commander also in New Hampshire that with me, as well as city manager. And, you know, I that's one of the reasons I wanted our residents to hear that we have been confiscating fireworks. With that said, one last question, and I may have to queue up right back up, but hopefully I have enough time to ask this question. I know that using your time is up. I will come back. Thank you. By Summer Richardson. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Just a couple comments. You know, this is a difficult issue every year. You know, it's a cultural issue within our city. Fireworks. And every year the city council demonstrates that they're working on it. And city staff also brings their best foot forward as it relates to policy and enforcement, culture, education. And so I want to just acknowledge the city attorney's office, the police department and city staff for really taking the feedback from the council over the course of the past few years on this issue and coming forward with a new tool in our quiver. I think it's important every year that we do let the residents know that it is a process, but we are continuing to work on this issue. It is frustrating. We know that, you know, veterans, folks with animals or people who just want, you know, calm and quiet in the neighborhood, it's that it's a difficult issue and we need to continue to figure it out. The one thing the one question, one request that I would make to staff is I know and I am supportive of the strategy around block parties this year that Councilman Mongo Councilmember Mongo talked about supportive of that. We do those things in the ninth District and the culture here, too. But I would like to know, as we approach particularly the 4th of July, if we need to do more outreach in key areas or, you know, if folks don't know about the program, about the the way fee waiver or if they're not particularly engaging at some of the high fireworks neighborhoods, if we can just, you know, give some periodic updates, a city manager memo or two from for just on how we're going by district, that would be helpful, particularly for me to understand what's happening in the community that I represent. But I just wanted to just chime in. I know it's an important issue. I want to thank staff and I want to just offer encouragement to the residents that will continue working on this. Thanks a lot. One mango. Thank you. My comments actually fall in line with this. Mary Richardson So when I look at the high firework areas, we know what streets typically have calls and these are the streets that have calls all year round. So I guess my call to action and we only have 30 days is we know the addresses of the property owners of those properties on those streets and I would love to see a notice seen to those communities and to those groups. The Situs address is the address that the property owner requests that property tax paperwork is mailed to. A lot of mailing list by those from the assessor's office regularly to solicit them with advertisements about refinancing and such. But we as a city can work with the County of Los Angeles to get that download of the this addresses for the whole city. We could easily gioco those pretty quickly or have they have a GIS guy in the assessor's office. If you ask them to geo code the specific areas you want and download those addresses, you then have the exact addresses of the property owners, you know, the addresses of the renters because they live in the addresses that you were searching and you'd be able to mail out those notices and alternatives, including if your neighbor is someone who you believe to be someone who interacts with illegal fireworks, perhaps we offer a reward and or we say, here's a tool in the free block party to ensure that you and your neighbors are out in the community, all watching to be good witnesses and prevent, through peer pressure, the use of fireworks. And as Councilman Sun has said, all fireworks are illegal in Long Beach. So I say illegal fireworks. All fireworks are illegal in Long Beach and they do terrorize our community. So I just want to make sure that we work with the resources available for notice that I know that today or last night, I should say in my newsletter, it was sent out to thousands of people about these resources. But again, 50% of the block parties are already on the east side. And I think that it's been an effective tool for keeping illegal fireworks down as I've driven around the city on the 4th of July. And I hope to partner with any councilmember who wants to help their neighborhoods get those tools and resources to make sure that every single block in this city has a chance at a peaceful 4th of July. Thank you. Thank you. Go back to customers in their house and then we'll go for a vote. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor and City Council Member Members for bearing with me. You all know how passionate I am about this item. My last question is let me get to it real quick. My last question is, are we expecting to have on the go Long Beach are activated? I know that I heard that we were working on being able to have that available for our our residents to be able to report the fireworks that are being lit. Do we know if this is a function that will be available to us before the 4th of July? Councilwoman. This is Linda Tatum's responding. The the go Long Beach app is still in development. But given that we still have some work to do to marry or to make sure that the Go Long Beach app is compatible with the prosecutors website, we are not going to attempt to do that prior to the fourth. Rather, we are driving all of the the complaints right now directly to the prosecutors website. That website is up, is familiar. Residents know about it already, so we'd like to not confuse them and have two separate websites that they could report to. But shortly after the fourth, we will we'll continue to work on that so that we can somehow make the two compatible and speak to each other so that they both essentially do the same function or we'll somehow combine them. But but we're looking at all of the options. But for this coming forth, we want to make sure we're driving all of the traffic to the prosecutor's website because they've had some successes with prosecution as a result of the uploaded video and other data that provides evidence for them to follow up with actual court filings. So we're hopeful that we'll see a lot more of that activity this this holiday. Thank you, Miss Tatum. Thank you very much for the that information. I know that I get a little bit anxious and I want things done right away raised. But I think the best thing to do is to do it accurately and efficiently. So if we have to wait a little bit longer to make sure that we have a successful go Long Beach up where we can really, you know, report through there, I'm I'm really looking forward to seeing that in the coming months, hopefully before New Year's. But thank you very much, Miss Tatum. Thank you, everybody, for answering my questions. This is something that has been very important to me, you know, since before I was on council. I want to give a huge, huge thanks to city staff for your willingness to address this issue continuously. I want to give another huge shout out to our city prosecutor, Doug Kopacz, who has been amazing in creating a portal where we can have these instances recorded right directly to him. And I think that that is been a lifesaver and I'm very happy that we have had success with that. I want to give another big thanks to our fireworks committee. And I just could not could not pass up this opportunity to also give thanks to our amazing Facebook group, Long Beach against the illegal fireworks. Thank you for all the input that you have given us throughout this past year and a half. And thank you for working with all of the above mentioned to make sure that we have a fire firework free city as we move forward. And thank you for caring for the whole community. Ricky Ricardo, please. This vote is the first vote of two votes that will be on the urgency. A first vote, Councilwoman Zendaya's. I compliment Alan. I. I'm Samantha, but I. I can tell you in mango. I. Councilwoman Sarah. I. Councilmember Oranga. I. Councilman Austin. All right. Vice Mayor Richardson, I motion carry a second vote. Councilman Sun has. Did we? I'm sorry, did we ask for public comment on this item? Yes, we had public comment on this item. We don't have any public. We did. And as speaker, we had a speaker and they spoke prior to council. Okay. Thank you. Councilwoman Sun has. I. Councilman Allen. I councilman's subpoena. All right. Councilwoman Mango. Yes. Councilwoman Sara. I. Councilmember Muranga. I. Councilman Austin. Hi. Vice Mayor Richardson. Yes. Bush and Kerry. Thank you. Let's go ahead. And we have two more audiences to approve. Let's get these approved. First, item 14, please.

Order for a hearing regarding transparency and publication of the Organization of City Government, the City Charter, and City Ordinances. On motion of Councilor Breadon, Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilor Bok as co-sponsor.

BostonCC_02162022_2022-0293

Aye, I opposed nay. The ayes have it. Docket 0297 has passed. We will now come back to docket 0293. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 0293. Lucky number 0293. Councilors Braden and Lou offered the following order for a hearing regarding transparency and publication of the Organization of City Government, the City Charter and City Ordinances. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. The chair recognizes Councilor Braid and Councilor Braden. You have the full. The original co-sponsor to this docket, please. So, added Mr. Clarke, please. That Council block. Having just completed my first full term on this legislative body, there was a massive learning curve over the past two years and getting oriented to the structure of our city and its governing texts. The state statutes that make up our city charter and other special, special acts affecting our city and the ordinance that comprise our city code . Through the arc, through the City Archives, my office has found a 200 year institutional history of published and updating of publishing and updating official documents as the framework for our city, including the municipal registry from 1821 to 1991, listing government departments and officers and the Organization of City Government from 1911 to 2006, listing the enabling legislation and members of the city's boards and commissions. Our ordinances were first codified and published in 1995. In addition to a compilation of special acts affecting the city, the ordinance is passed by the council and approved by the mayor were supplemented to the 1975 ordinances are available in the clerk's office and are posted online and annually updated by the publishing company. However. Code. Publishing companies suggest a standard of record defying and consolidating codes every 10 to 15 years to resolve inconsistencies and conflicts. For example, Framingham, one of the city's newest communities to become a city, requires that their charter be that their charter requires in their charter a review of the charter charter every ten years and and renew and renewal and modification of the ordinances every five years. It has been nearly 50 years since Boston has comprehensively reviewed our code. 15 years since we have revisited compiling state statutes in our city charter as well as other special acts that affect our city. At the end of the last term, five councilors moved on from this body, and currently two thirds of their members are serving their first or second terms. We are in a period of significant shifts in our city and it is immensely important that we access the institutional knowledge we lean on to conduct legislative duties as stewards of the city. This hearing is intended to be an opportunity for partnership of the city council, the clerk's office, the administration and the law department to assess the current condition of our governing document. Documents. Consider adopting updated best practices for periodic maintenance and ensure necessary capacity, support and appropriations. Ensuring efficient, easy to read up to date and enforceable governing documents free of obsolete and convoluted language enables our constituents and laypersons to have free, open and easy access to understanding our local laws. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Great. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? The chair recognizes counsel. And Jen just want to say. Thank you for. He gave us a great reason for it. It's really just about transparency. I know. And I was, you know, just got elected. And even before that, trying to find the mean the updated charter to access the codes, having everything in one place online, we need to make sure that that's available to all of our residents so that everyone can access and feel like they know the governing structures of our city. So access to an updated charter, a clear organizational chart with the departments, all of that. We need access to it all. So thank you, Councilor Braden and I look forward to working with you and making sure that we can tell folks that we're working towards a transparent government here in our city. Thank you. Thank you. The chair recognizes counsel. Counsel. You have the floor. So much, President Flynn. And thank you to Counselor Lujan for partnering on this. I think it's a great time with the start of a new administration to really look at updating these things. Often we see a certain amount of reorganization with the new administration and and so that makes it a good time to try to codify that and make it clear also something that Councilor Edwards has frequently raised in this body is that technically and officially, like all offices and such of the city, are meant to be codified by the city council, and that is a practice that has fallen off. And so I think there's a good opportunity here to work with the administration and kind of understand the overall chart and think about how we're making that publicly accessible. Because I'll just say that we have often found with, you know, interns and research fellows in our office that even trying to explain to them where they can go to find the most basic city information is often a challenge. And and it's an ironic thing that a number of the compilations that Councilor Braden mentioned, they've sort of they've been discontinued because the idea was, oh, well, now we have the Internet, we don't need those books. But the books used to really gather it all in one place. And now you have to be a bit of a Googling wizard to find all of the things. And so I think, you know, making sure that we really have this information about city government in our operations transparently available and in one place for people is a very important thing that the council can do. So. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, counsel. Would anyone else like to like to speak on this? Would anyone else like to add their name? Please that counselor Arroyo Counselor Edwards Counselor Fernandez Andersen. Counsel Clarity. Counsel LRA counsel me here. Counselor Murphy Counsel. We're all pleased that the chair docket 0293 will be referred to the committee. On city services, in innovation technology. Mr. Carr, can we take a brief recess? Yes. We will. We'll be in brief recess for a few minutes. Thank you to the city, to the clerk for working with us on an on an issue. Um, Mr. Kirk, I want to go back to 0294, please. Yeah. At this time. The clerk. The chair recognizes city council member. Councilman. Here you have the floor. Q Mr. President, I have learned here in the last two years. But I'm I to always choose my battles and I'm going to fight when I need to. And this is one of those moments. So I'd like to put a motion to reconsider the committee, insert a docket to 94, was assigned to, I believe, city services and it should go to either the Education Committee, the workforce development and even for that matter, the Accountability and Transparency Committee. So I would ask the lead sponsor to support the reconsideration and move to one of my three committees. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel near me here. So there's a request. Is there is there a second? There was a second. Councilor Arroyo as second. And Council. Would you like the floor? I'm okay with. Thank you, counsel, and thank you counsel on the Hill for bringing this to our attention. We want to. Provide you that provide the this hearing to the education committee. So. 02029411 Albion to be reassigned to the Education Committee. Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Going into our trials. Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Clarke, we're going into personnel orders. Will you please read? Docket 0298.

Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Related to the Northwest Territories Regional Shoreline at Alameda Point, and to Approve the Finding that the Northwest Territories Regional Park Disposition is Exempt from the Surplus Lands Act, as Amended, as the Property is Proposed to be Leased to Another Local Agency (EBRPD) for the Agency’s Use and Because It is Located on Public Trust Lands. (Recreation 280 and Community Development 216)

AlamedaCC_02182020_2020-7674

Okay. Good evening, mayor and council members. I'm Debbie Potter, the development director. And I am delighted to be here tonight to talk about the MRU with the East Bay Regional Park District for the Northwest Territory Regional Shoreline. And I'm even more delighted to have my coconspirator here, Amy Wooldridge, the Rec and Park Director. So I'm going to start and then I'm going to hand it off to her so that we're going to we're going to have to team you or whatever. Okay. So open space and parks have been a really important part of the redevelopment of Alameda Point going all the way back to the Community Reuse Plan, which was adopted back in 1996. We have always had a big emphasis on open space, access to the water, more park amenities for the community. And the Northwest Territory has been one of the most important open space features that has been in the mix since the beginning and pretty much since the outset. We have been working with the East Bay Regional Park District to construct and maintain the Northwest Territory. The city has a long standing relationship with the Park District, Crab Cove, Crown Beach and East Bay Regional Park District has also a long standing relationship with the VA, its immediate neighbor. So they make an excellent partner with the city on the development of the regional shoreline. And we are thrilled to say that after a long time of negotiating with the Park District, we have come up with an emoji that talks about what the components of the park are going to be, the shoreline and what are the main essentially the deal terms in the lease that will be negotiated over the next up to 12 months. We hope it won't take quite that long. And the Northwest Territory the the shoreline just high level. It is intended to be a passive park. It's 158 acres. It really emphasizes bicycle and pedestrian trails, viewing and seating. Habitat restoration is an important feature of the regional shoreline. The amenities are pretty basic, kind of reinforcing the idea that it is a passive park and then the VA. Just one of the things to add and acknowledges that the VA is planning on doing a visitor center on its property that is intended to serve both the regional shoreline and the wildlife reserve. So they've offered up that space and they've incorporated that in their plan, which will be a nice amenity and feature. So high level, that's what we're doing. And then I'm going to turn it over to Amy, who is going to talk more specifically about the components of the menu, and then we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. So what you have before you is the exhibit A from the memorandum of understanding that my view and highlighted is on the northwest corner of the Northwest Territories regional shoreline. Some of the main points of the memo you that you have before you. It's a no cost 66 year lease. This is a long term lease agreement because this is state tidelands. And so we can't actually convey the land to any organization. So that's why it's a long term lease. The intention is for this MRU to be a high level, high concept document so that we will use this as the guiding principle to then over, as Ms. Potter said, over the next 12 months, hopefully less negotiate the actual lease agreement that would then come back before you and the Park District's Board of Directors. This is for the Park District to design, construct and then operate and maintain the Northwest Territories regional shoreline within two years of execution of the lease. So potentially up to three years from now. The Park District would be required to develop a concept plan. That concept plan. It requires that there's is input from the Alameda community. We've I've already talked to them saying I can help them with organizing the Alameda community to provide their their input. And then also it would come to the Recreation and Parks Commission and ultimately to you as City Council for your input on that concept plan. Back in 2008, the voters approved measure WW the park district's bond to build and improve more parkland. 6.4 million of that at that time was allocated toward this project. So it really has been in the thoughts and in the works for quite a while, and that money in this milieu is clearly identified as is being put toward park development. Also in the most recent, recent in past years, Measure C and more recently Measure F, this park is also identified for the Park District to be putting dollars from those measures into maintenance for this park. However, this park will cost significantly more than 6.4 million to design and build and construct. So the menu also speaks to the city and the Parks District, working cooperatively to identify through grants and any other mechanisms to both constructive but also for maintenance dollars in terms of what the area is. It is 100 and x 158 acres of the Northwest Territories. In addition, there's a section of the San Francisco Bay Trail that goes along the regional sports complex that the city is required to build. But once constructed, then it will be as part of this lease will be turned over to the Park District to maintain it as they maintain other areas of betrayal. And the island also has the option term to construct and maintain the seasonal bay trail that goes from Northwest Territories around the southwest corner of Alameda Point and to Pave Park in this M.O., it details that the Parks District Park District is responsible for design and construction plans as well as for permits and to do the construction . And it's important to us that the community residents have an opportunity to see this what's out there sooner than than when it actually opens to the public as a full park. So there is interim access. The Park District most likely will be doing guided walks. So however often once or twice a month, they'll do guided walks out to Northwest Territories, to the community, can see it and experience it because it really is quite amazing out there in terms of shoreline stabilization with climate change and rising sea levels. This is was an important discussion point. The city is responsible for for the shoreline stabilization along the sports complex in that section of the Bay Trail, because that is part of it as identified in the master infrastructure plan for Alameda point will be a levy because it needs to protect that significant infrastructure of the sports complex. However, the Northwest Territories itself will be what's called resilient design, managed retreat. There's different names for it, but as sea level, it will be designed up front to acknowledge that as sea level rise and as the sea rises, that that that the Bay Trail and other aspects may be moved inward as the level rises. It will not have a formal levy around this shoreline park in terms of naming the park district retains that responsibility to name. However, they will be taking city feedback. They will also be considering names that that have a connection to Alameda and specific. The National Naval Air Station history. And in regards to lease revenues, that's something that's important to us. We have a number of of leases, leases out there and both short and long term uses. And so the city will be retaining that lease revenue until they actually are breaking ground for construction. So with that, the next steps are for this body to consider this this MRU. And then if approved, it was already approved by the the Park District Board of Directors on February 4th. So yours would be the final vote on this issue. And then we staff would be working on the negotiating the detailed lease agreement and bringing that to you within the next year. So with that, my partner and I are both available to answer any questions. Thank you. I feel like I'm under interrogation with that light shining in my eyes. I'll tell you anything. Okay. Thank you. Great presentation. Exciting project counsel. Do we have any clarifying questions from four staff on this report before we hear from the public speakers? I'm going to hold mine till later. Okay. So let's hear from. And how many public speakers did you say we had last year? Five. Five. Okay. So everyone gets up to 3 minutes. Okay. So we have Richard Bangert, Mary Spicer and Amy. Burns are the first three. Thank you, Mayor, and staff members of the council. Thank you for moving this forward and please continue to do so. It's been a long time coming. I just have a couple of comments. I would hope that before we get to a year from now, before a year passes, that there is some sort of workshop check in on this IMO you process, let's say in the fall just so the public is apprized that we're not suddenly reaching an impasse because this is what happened with the wildlife refuge. There was there was essentially an understanding between the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Navy to have a national wildlife refuge until there wasn't. And it was really because of a few people that couldn't come to an agreement. And the public had no input on that. The city had no input on that. It was just we woke up one day and found out that it was going to be given to the VA. Now, I have no problem with the veterans facilities being there. It is what it is. But I if this deal is not going to be consummated a year from now, I think the public has a right to weigh in because it's not like one of one of the parties is a private developer with proprietary financing information that they don't want to divulge. It's to public agencies that we both pay taxes to. So I hope that we could have a check in if maybe in the fall some workshop or an agenda item where we can weigh in and find out if things are going smoothly. One other thing I'd like to comment on is in the staff report, it said something about the public being able to go out during construction. I'd just like to acknowledge what the Navy has been doing for the past five years or so. And in effect, construction has been going on for about five years. And and it will continue this this year and perhaps a little into next year. And that involves about two thirds of this regional park area. And so some tens of millions of dollars have been or will be by the time they're done, put into re landscaping and re-engineering two thirds of this area, including a shoreline stabilization plan for everything essentially from about where the sports complex ends out around the tip. So that's also going to happen probably a year from now. So I think during the course of this, we should acknowledge what the Navy has done to bring it to where it is , because they could have done much less and still pass muster for safety, but they went beyond what they needed to do. Thank you, Mr. Boehner. Our next speaker. Mary Spicer, then Amy Barnes, then. Pat Lamborn. Hi, Mary and hello City Council. I just want to say, last time I spoke, you unanimously voted against the server farmer out there on insulin. And I wanted to say thank you so much for that. I spend a lot of time on the water out in the estuary and insulin on Killarney. These the paddle the outrigger team out there. And I also stand up paddle and I'm very familiar with the land and of the Northwest Territory from the water. And I'm really coming here to to just give a little bit of future input on potential potential things that I think might be important. Some of the teams are some of the teams out there are very excited and wanting to get into wanting to get involved in some of the park development ideas out there. One thing that we're really interested in is potentially having a landing spot on the Northwest Territories, not something where boats can park, but places where sups stand up paddlers and kayakers and people that go around the island all the time, a place that we could land there and really enjoy the nature out there. And I also organized large garbage cleanups at Jack London Aquatic Center. I call it I Heart Alameda Oakland Estuary and we pull out £2,000 of garbage every six months out of the shores of the estuary. And I really would love for the support to start to think of the garbage out there along the shoreline. There's so much garbage and also the garbage from the ferry parking lot that blows into the ocean, into the estuary that we end up cleaning up. I really would love for that to start to be if it could somehow be involved or some future thought on how we could start to clean up that garbage out there. And then also space for nature. I spend so much time paddling right in that area and I get knocked down all the time on my board because the boats go so quickly. And we've seen a lot of seals out there. My friend saw a big turtle out there once. We don't know how it got there, but I really think it's important that we make space for nature. With all the park development and all the development that's going in at the base, that we really start to think about how many boats we're going to put out there, how are we going to manage wildlife and what the seals, the dolphins, the turtles, the fish need, as well as how we're going to develop a lot more potentially a lot more people using the water out there. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Then Pat Lamborn, then Irene Dieter. Is a recreation and Parks Commission member. Hello. Hello. And Miss Brian, going to pull the microphone down so we can hear you. Thanks. I. Uh. Right. Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft. Council members, staff and members of the public. My name is Amy Barnes. I grew up in. Alameda and now live on the West End with my family. I spent my career working on climate change, including serving most recently as a senior advisor to Governor Brown on the issue. And as Mayor Ashcraft mentioned, I also serve as a member of the Recreation and Parks Commission, although tonight I'm speaking in my personal capacity. So I'm here to speak to you this evening about the recommendation regarding the Memorandum of Understanding. With East Bay Regional Parks District on the Northwest. Territories M.O.. You first, I wanted to just. Acknowledge Amy Woolridge, our recreation and Parks Director for all of the incredible. Work she's put into this menu and for. Everything she does for our parks in general. We are so lucky to have her in Alameda. As you review this menu, I would like you to consider this context. Our planet's changing climate. Based on current projections and guidance from the state of California. All projects under development should assume 6.9 feet of sea level rise by 2100. That's in 80. Years. But my son, who's. Five, will still be alive. At that point. So not too far in the distant future. At these values for sea level rise, we can expect complete submersion of the. Northwest Territories. And the via lands previously proposed as the Wildlife Refuge at Alameda Point and possibly. More for the. Packets. You can see FIG. two on the handouts I provided. There's a map showing this level of inundation. These estimates don't include water. Table rise. Which will undoubtedly. Further exacerbate the. Situation. With this in mind, I've. Developed a proposal that the Northwest. Territories be turned into a first of its kind climatological adaptive. Park that would be returned. To wetlands and shallow bay as sea levels rise due to climate change. I've developed this idea in the proposal before you, which recommends that you designate the Northwest Territories Rewild Park. The idea of Rewild Park is, which is to return the land at the. Northwest Territories, which was historically either shallow bay or tidal mudflat to wetland. You can see FIG. one for a historical historical. Map of the point circa 1800. It will be rewild it and planted with salt, tolerant natives and other species that attract and support local wildlife, including threatened and endangered species. The restoration of wetlands in this area. Which is. Expected to be inundated from sea level rise due to climate change, will help with flood and. Storm surges protecting Alameda, particularly its West End residents. Like me. There are a number of additional environmental, public and equity related benefits. To the projects that are included in the proposal. But that would be too long to read. In my remaining 21 seconds. I realize at this point that it is too late to include language on this concept in the memo in front of you, but I would like to request that the Council convey this proposal alongside the signed MRU to the East Bay Regional Parks District. With your positive recommendation, I would then plan to present this proposal at the next East Bay Regional Parks District meeting and work closely with Amy to ensure the idea is integrated into plans moving forward. Thank you, Ms.. Barnes. And our next speaker. Pat. Lamborn and Irene Dieter. Good evening. Good evening. Mr. Ashcroft. Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor. John Knox. White Oak. Changing cast of characters, council members. It's late. I'm here. Well, let's see. Who am I? I'm a resident of Alameda. Long term, I am, as you well know, a proponent of parks on our bay. I was recently elected to the. This is going to be a longer, long thing. Northern Alameda County Executive Committee of the Sierra Club. Right. Doesn't make an acronym. That's OC Sierra Club. Sierra Club endorses this. I think if there's anything that Aimee gets up and says, let's sign this memo, you. I would just say just. I agree with Amy. I can't tell you how excited I am to see that Amy has put forward to move forward on this East Bay Regional Park District wants to move forward on this tonight. Please agree and I enthusiastically ask you to sign this memo. You. It says a year we can achieve everything the previous speaker just said, but it will be a step towards that. We can spend $6.4 million, but if we don't sign the memo, you we can't even consider how to spend it. Right. And so I just think it's it's it would be so inspiring to the people of Alameda if you went forward with this. I've seen in the Sierra Club, every city's passed a climate, you know, a climate emergency resolution. Well, what have we done about it? We're starting to do some things, but that's about the future. But what have we done about the kind of inundation, sea level rise, etc.? This is positive. This would be a shoreline resilience approach. We can look at the kinds of things the previous speaker talked about. We can do other things. We'll do this in cooperation with the East Bay Regional Park District. And as Richard said, and, you know, what an advocate has been will include the public will go out there, will have guided visits, you'll have a voice in that . But we can't do it. If you don't sign the MOU, you please sign it. Say yes, sign it tonight. Um, and the last thing I'd say is there was this amazing article in the New York Times about and it compared us to Manila, you know, the whole San Francisco Bay in terms of sea level rise. It was a phenomenal article. There was nothing in there as amazing as as these kinds of actions in our area. So let's be let's be the first city to do it. And let's be in The New York Times next year or the year thereafter. Thank you. Our next speaker is Irene Peter. Hello. Council and mayor. I am Irene Dieter and I am a member of the East Bay Regional Park District's Advisory Committee. The Park Advisory Committee was appointed by Director Ellen Corbett, and I am here to wholeheartedly support you signing the menu tonight. This has been a long time coming. I have personally been lobbying each of you for this moment and lobbied your predecessors. So for the last decade we have been trying to get a park out on the Northwest Territories and it is becoming real and it is exciting. And I encourage you to sign the menu this evening. Thank you. Thank you. This beaver. Okay. Um. Okay, counsel comments. So, to the left, Councilmember Violet. We'll move right. Along. Okay. I just want to keep this brief. I intend to support this tonight, and I think that this has been a long time coming. I know that this council, as well as previous councils, have spent a lot of time on this. I want to thank Amy for all of her work. I think a lot of times there's we all know how much work you do, Amy, but there's a lot of work that you don't get credit for that you spend a lot of time on. And navigating between two agencies takes a lot. And so thank you so much for for putting in the time and making sure that this is going to become a reality for Alameda. So thank you. Vice Mayor next week. Great. Thank you. I'll be brief as well. It's been a long time going. One of the first projects I got involved with when I moved here in 2001 was fighting against the golf course in the convention center, at least ensuring that we had access, public access to the to the edge of this property, enough that my father in law still thinks I hate golf. So I will be enthusiastically supporting this as well as I just want to give a shout out to Miss Barnes and her proposal. Well, we won't be hearing that or talking about it tonight. I really appreciated the thoughtfulness of it and it looks like a great plan. Thank you. Councilmember Desai. Well, thank you. This is going to be absolutely beautiful project overall and I really look forward to the Bay Trail extending southward outside of the area that we're discussing tonight, the bay trail particularly extending in the part of alameda that is San Francisco County. Um, that area is absolutely beautiful. I haven't been there since I think December 1996, but I remember when Captain Dodge was driving me around there, um, being able to see just the panoramic of the whole day with San Francisco in the distance. Um. This is going to be a beautiful project. And I all of Alameda will be proud about this. I like the idea of that was mentioned of allowing. Paddleboards or stand up boards at park places. That's a great idea. I guess I just want to end by saying when I look at the visual of the Northwest Territories, it really looks like a piece of the puzzle that is called Alameda Point. And more and more now, so much of those pieces of Alameda Point are falling into place and we're able to see it coming and achieving the vision that we had way back when. So thank you for the staff for bringing us here. And let's move forward with our M.O.. You with the East Bay Regional Park. Councilmember Odie. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'll. Before I do my comments, I will move approval of the item. Just so we get that table. I do want to thank Amy and our staff, and I think our city manager actually worked on this as well because we we've kind of had a logjam. I appreciate everything that the community has done to push this forward. It's been ten years, right? I mean, I can't vote for this today without just giving a shout out to one of my former colleagues, Mr. Matt Arrestee, who, you know, when we were walking around town five years ago, he said that $6.4 million is not worth what it was when Measure WW passed. Well, here we are five years later and it's worth even less. So I'm glad we're finally getting this done. Just a few quick notes. I would like to, you know, make sure we have a check in if if we run into snags. And these are two public agencies. So there's in my mind, no need to have, you know, discussions outside of public view because it's all taxpayer money. And I think I shared a concern with the city manager about the use of rodent sites. So hopefully those things will be fleshed out in the you. But this is this is an amazing project. And to follow up on Mr. De Socks comment, I'm glad that we're now spending some time and some effort and input filling in the pieces because these pieces of the puzzle where we have parks, whether it's up in the Northwest Territories or down in the deep park, are just as critical as, you know, site B, inside A and Main Street. So I do see actively and finally happy to say that we're getting this moving after ten years. So thank you. Thank you, council members for your comments. I too am very enthusiastic about this project and Mr. Bangert, when he spoke, mentioned the Navy and the work they're doing. I thought you were maybe going to talk about the tours that they give, because once a year the Navy, along with the RB is Restoration Advisory Board. The RAB does this amazing bus tour out all around to the areas that they've most recently cleaned up and the public can attend. It's anyone remember what tablet month is in July, so let's see if we can post that notice on the city's website closer in time to July, because I've gone for the last few years. The views are amazing and it really gives you a sense, and especially we've gone from year to year just to see how much has been accomplished. I did want to clear up one thing, though, that there was a statement made that someone woke up one day and the land had been given to the VA, the Veterans Administration . So just to keep things in perspective, we're a city, much as I would love to tell the federal government what to do. And I wouldn't I love to tell them a few things these days, but the pecking order just doesn't work that way. This is federal property. Yeah. Some of it's been conveyed to the city, but first and foremost, the feds get to do Fed the Fed transfers, and that's how the VA got the area they have. But that said, we're a Navy town, a former Navy town. We had a military presence here for many years. We're still a Coast Guard city. There will be an adjacent to the Northwest Territories, two very needed resources a vet, a VA clinic, and also a columbarium. And we are very excited that just a week or two ago in the president's budget, I know I didn't think I'd be excited about anything. But in the president's budget was a request for the majority of the funding that it will take to build the VA clinic where we have the funding in place for the Columbarium that I get asked all the time by veterans and their families, When are we going to see this VA clinic? The last time I was in D.C., I met with the VA. Everybody was waiting for this budget, the current budget, and we were really hopeful. But lo and behold, the money was there. But I like to look at it is as we can all coexist. I think for veterans who are out there accessing the clinic, this is a very tranquil, peaceful. You just don't get more beautiful views than that. So there's there's room for all of us. And the only thing I don't think we're wanting to modify anything in this memo you but I think maybe in the least negotiation is when we want to make sure the road and rodenticide is like something that kills. Well yeah. The concern was that if you use that to kill the burrowing rodents, that then the wildlife would eat those and be poisoned. And we don't want to. So, so and again, because the the regional parks district has already signed the memo, you we don't want to been in the lease negotiation. It's just a lease term, not a lease to turn. Right. But anyway, the and then the one item that I want to include in the lease. Yeah. And yeah. We've got to vet. It was a joke, a little inside joke. Okay, my and my ask this is important to people opening restrooms. There is. Because I emailed with staff today and said, okay, I get we're going to have restrooms, but who's building them? Where does it say. Well, it could be the VA or it could be the East Bay Regional Park District. By the time the lease comes around, I want to have specifics, please, about who's building the restroom facilities. But otherwise, I think this is really exciting. Bless you. And so we have before us a motion to authorize the city manager to execute an MRU with the East Bay Regional Parks District related to the Northwest Territories regional shoreline. It's been moved and seconded. So all in favor. I. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Of course not. The motion passes unanimously. Good work, everybody. Thank you. You know, we're going to save time. We've it's almost it's after nine and we just finished our first item and we've now separated B and C. So with that, thank you, everybody, for coming out and speaking. Could we have item six B, please. Recommendation to review the Planning and Building Code Enforcement Program in response to the City Council's November 19, 2019 referral and provide direction on potential future changes to the existing enforcement program.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Use District Map of the City of Long Beach as said Map has been established and amended by amending portions of Part 10 of said Map from CHW (Regional Highway Commercial) to CCN (Community R-4-N Commercial), read and adopted as read. (District 6)

LongBeachCC_08252020_20-0782

Thank you. And if we go into the there, obviously this is a special meeting. So we have we just have a few items on the agenda, but we do have to continue to hear it. So I want to go ahead do those. It's going to get to continue hearing at a number two. Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, concluded the public hearing. Find the project exempt from secure and adopt ordinance approving a zoning change for the properties addressed as 9012945 East Pacific Coast Highway District six. Okay. If I can turn this over to staff, please. Thank you. Christopher Coons, deputy director, will give the staff report. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council. And we're here to talk about a project in the vice mayor's district. Uh, this project is on Pacific Coast Highway. It involves a former redevelopment property that was then transferred to the successor agency. And through a competitive process, was awarded to Mercy Housing. Mercy Housing acquired the adjacent property, a former auto facility. And they're turning that piece of land into a 68 unit affordable project. The Affordable Housing Project has already been approved by staff and the Planning Commission. And what's in front of council tonight is the technical matter of changing the zone on the property to a zone that allows for this residential use. So it'd be from c h w to cc n. Um, and the effect of that would be consistent with the existing adopted land use element and would allow for this positive development . This is going to be a project that provides high quality housing to seniors of limited means. It's a very attractive design that was complimented by both the public and our planning commission and planning staff. And it's being done using modular construction, which is the exciting way to lower the cost of delivering housing projects throughout the city and throughout the state of California. Um, so I could go on, but it's all positive regarding, um, this project. So I'm going to pause here and answer any questions that the Council may have. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and go to public comment. Madam Clerk, first. Yes. Our first speaker is Erika Villar Blanca. Your time starts now. Hi. Good afternoon. Good evening, Mayor. And Members of the City Council. My name is Erika Blanca, and I'm the director of real estate development for Mercy Housing, California. Thank you for your time this evening. Our Long Beach. Senior Housing Project will provide 67 units of much needed affordable housing to low income seniors. Aged. 62 and over. We'd like. To extend our thanks to the Planning Department and city staff for all their efforts in working with us to. Get to this point. We're very excited about this project and have received a lot of support from the community since we first started reaching out to immediate neighbors and other organizations about a year ago last August. Together with our architecture. Team, Studio 111, I'm here to answer any questions you may have, and we're looking forward. To the day our. Vulnerable seniors will be able to call this place home. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Myron Wolin. Hello. I am the president of the Long Beach Gray Panthers, a senior advocacy group in Long Beach. I want to speak in favor of the council approving the zoning change so that the proposed housing project by Mercy Housing can be built in Long Beach. The project will provide housing for 68 units for homeless seniors and veterans in Long Beach. As we all know, there is a homeless crisis in Long Beach. There is a need for housing for the homeless, especially homeless seniors. Today we see seniors who are homeless in Long Beach, and we expect a 13% increase in senior homelessness this year. In the future, we expect the problem to get worse. And seniors living below the poverty line increase and to be almost 25% of all seniors in five years. You can be sure there will be a subsequent increase in homelessness. The project will be an asset to the neighborhood and probably improve it. The new housing will transform a site that is currently vacant into new housing that will help serve as a new anchor for the neighborhood. Within a short walk of less than a half a mile, a bus lines, parks, medical clinics and senior services at Long Beach City College. In addition, this housing will include indoor community rooms for residents and an outdoor courtyard. It will also be secured bike parking. We call on the council to approve this item with all the museum's amenities. And thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Our next speaker is Karen Reside. This is Karen Recite also with the Long Beach Gray Panthers. And we have been advising Mercy Housing on this project since they started the outreach to the community. The Gray Panthers support the approval of this project and the rezoning. This project. Is going to be built. In a much. Needed area that will eliminate blight that has been longstanding in the community and begin the process of implementing really a corridor for affordable housing with some other projects that are coming on board. Mercy Housing has been a wonderful partner to work with. They have engaged the community from the beginning and they are going to be providing community benefits with this project. They are also including local artists by including their art in the decor, which will be resident selected. The language Gray Panther supports the development of additional projects by mercy housing. For older adults like this project, as well as other developers. We now know that there is not enough housing for seniors in our community. The waitlist for on affordable housing are now from 5 to 10 years. Way too long for seniors. Who may not make it. Until that point. So we support the City Council on changing the zoning for this particular project. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jordan Wynn. Hi there this is Jordan win with the everyone in campaign speaking in support of the 67 new units being built at Long Beach senior by Mercy Housing. We're seeing housing has been a wonderful community partner with everyone in and within the Long Beach community that has over the past few years engaged the community in very constructive and incredible ways to really make one be senior, a dedicated community space that will be a shining star along the Pacific Coast Highway. This comes at the heels of other affordable and supportive housing projects being built in the same area. And it is a welcome and much needed sight for our citizens and Long Beach. Miami Beach has a ongoing homelessness crisis that has been exacerbated by COVID 19. Many individuals, including seniors, find themselves vulnerable on the street with very little protection from the virus, from other health complications and very few. Resources for housing. I'm using your help to provide a safe place for refuge for many of those people who have been previously dealing with homelessness and gives them a road to recovery by a supportive housing. What we see here is a shining star. Honestly, within our community, it will be one of the best new projects being put up in the city. And I'm really excited to see a site that has been empty for the past, you know, at least ten years or so, ever since I was going to be passing by there. Could not think of a better use than converting that into supportive and affordable housing for our previously homeless and needy needs. So I'm speaking in support of Lumbee Senior. I hope everyone on the council will do the same. Thank you very much. Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Okay with that, I'm going to turn this over to Vice Mayor Andrews and a second. Thank you, ma'am. First of all, I want to let everyone know I'm very supportive of this project and this line of thinking. Since we tore down the blight, in fact, illicit activities, it took a long time to find the right operators for this site, and I am glad that I have the process brought mostly housing as a recommendation. We have seen that our senior homeless population is increasing and I've seen on most of the operators at St Mary's Towers, they've done a great job there. I'm hopeful that we're going to have a beautiful project along PCH corridor and I would like to thank Mercy Housing Team for engaging with the community throughout the entire process , answering questions the town and looking to transform this intersection. So I'm looking forward to breaking ground, and I invite my colleagues to please support me in approving this project. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. I have count some of your anger. You have a second? Yes. Fully supporter of the project. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Price. I was just queuing up the second. I'm supportive as well, I think. Great. Thank you. And I just want to add, I really want to just congratulate the entire team, Mercy, Housing, just the community, the seniors that have been involved. What what a great project. And really, it's really exciting, I think, to see what's all what's happening along on Beach Boulevard in PCH as relates to developing affordable housing, especially for seniors and low income folks. There's a lot of progress going on. And just want to congratulate you, vice mayor, and just the whole team on a really great project. So that's very supportive. Let's go ahead and do a roll call. A councilman and Dallas. Thank you, Mayor. I just also wanted to say congratulations on this awesome project that is coming up. I can't wait for the seniors in our city to be able to enjoy, enjoy it, really take advantage of this. I think this is great for for the whole community. And I'm always in favor of for more affordable housing for our seniors. So congratulations, Vice Mayor De Andrews on this wonderful project. Before we do the roll call vote. If I can have if you're not speaking, please be on mute. That includes all the staff. We are getting some feedback, so I've gotten to do a roll call vote. Madam Clerk. District one. I. District two. I. District three. I district for. My. District five. District five. II. District six. II, District seven. I. District eight. I. District nine. Right. Motion carries.

Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7042 and award a contract to R.J. Noble Company, of Orange, CA, for street improvements on Temple Avenue between Obispo Avenue and Spring Street, in the amount of $1,274,876, with a 10 percent contingency in the amount $127,488, for a total contract amount not to exceed $1,402,364; and, authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments; Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding, including any subsequent amendments, with the City of Signal Hill, for administration and cost-sharing of the street improvements on Temple Avenue between Obispo Avenue and Spring Street, contained within City of Signal Hill jurisdiction, in the amount of $399,000; Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group in the Public Works Department by $399,000, offset by reimbursement funds from the City of Signal Hill; Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group in t

LongBeachCC_08042020_20-0723

District nine. Ocean carries. 1130 3:00 Could you please me? The Item Report from Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to RJ Noble Company for Street Improvements on Temple Avenue between Obispo Avenue and Spring Street for a total contract amount not to exceed 1,402,364 District five. Do you have any problem coming inside them? Yes. Dave Shukla. Your time starts now. Hello again, very briefly. I know it's late. This is a great example of a project that achieves multiple benefits working across more than one authority area. I really would like to see this city pursue active mobility project on not just road diets with the open free parklet, but but ones where I mean, I mean, ten years ago I spent all my research on trains. I mean, I would love to see light rail come back the Red Cross, but I mean, that may be aspirational, but something to get people safely biking, walking with the Vision Zero. So the other mobility elements that we have, I just think that, you know, getting outdoors now, especially for this year, next year, is just going to be really important for everyone in the inner city. Thank you for your time. And I need a second place and. First. The sun has set. Thank you. Could we please come for the vote? District one, District two, District three. By. District four. By District five. By District six. By seven. By District eight. Nine by. Motion carries.

A resolution approving a proposed Second Amendment and Modification Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver, Inc. to amend and modify the terms and conditions of the loan to support the construction of 32 units of affordable for-sale houses located at 43rd & Elizabeth in Globeville-Elyria Swansea. Amends a loan agreement with Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver to align requirements with Habitat’s new 90-year covenant, as well as allowing subsequent sales to households at or below 100% Area Median Income (AMI) immediately, not after 21 years, and adding an exhibit describing long term compliance requirements for funds that were used for land acquisition and hard construction costs to develop 32 homeownership units located at 43rd and Elizabeth Street in Council District 9. No change to agreement amount (OEDEV-201736287-02). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 3-9-20. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-5-20.

DenverCityCouncil_02182020_20-0094

And how do we define a family? The we define the family as a parent and a child. And where will these ones be located? At the Lambert Center on Federal. Awesome. Thank you. That's all the questions I had on that one. All right. Thank you, Councilmember. I believe the next one is yours as well. Madam Secretary, if you please put 94 on our screens and go ahead with your questions on this one. Thank you. Anybody here to answer questions about Habitat? Jennifer SIEGEL, housing development officer with host. Thank you so much. I have a question about the the switch on this one from the 20 waiting 21 years before an affordable unit is sold into changing it immediately. Why is that change happening? The change. That's happening is that subsequent sales. In the current covenant that's being changed. Subsequent sales were. To households at or below 80% AMI through 21. Years of the covenant. And then they could go. Up to 100%. Ami in the current covenant, the covenant length. Will be increased to 90. Years from 60 years. However, the change. That will be made is that subsequent sales. Meaning when a current. Home buyer wants to sell their unit, that unit could. Be sold to households at 100% AMI immediately. So the current owner who's living there would be able to sell their house to a household at, at or below 100%. AMI Why are we making that change? We've been working closely with Habitat two to craft a 90 year covenant length in it from 60 years to 90 years. And to have a covenant. That works for nearly all of their properties because they've had different covenants on different properties. And we wanted a. Consistent covenant. And there's other changes in that covenant that. Make it. Easier for Habitat to repurchase the House. In most cases. Nearly all cases. Habitat repurchases of the House and then resells that house to a household at or below. 80% of a. Mine. But that provision that allows a resale to a household up to 100% am I would be if habitat did not exercise their right to repurchase and the homeowner would would resell the house. But in. Cases nearly all cases. On habitat repurchase the house, it is resold to a household at 80% EMI. How many? What is the percentage of recaptures by habitat when an owner wants to sell? I have Maria. Sepulveda here from Habitat. She might be able to answer. Sure. Hi, Maria Sepulveda with Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver. And just to finish part of that first question, I think you're asking why 100% and what we found in the current market, you know, at 80%, AMI, we are able to make sure that families that live in habitat, whole households are not cost burden. So they're not paying more than 30% of their income on their housing costs. And part of that is made possible because we provide a below market mortgage. Now, if they were to resell and for some reason Habitat didn't buy under its 90 year repurchase rights, it enables that seller to be able to sell it 100% because most likely that person who buys that home will not be able to find a mortgage that's, you know, probably double the amount that the habitat mortgage would be. And that would make it very difficult for an 80% AMI person to be household to be able to purchase it. That 100% makes it possible for our habitat homeowners to actually sell them, you know, in a in a market where they're going to have to the buyer's going to have to have a higher mortgage rate. So that makes sense. It does. And it's concerning because these these are across the alley from my house. And so we can build these up, sell them, and then within two years, a homeowner could sell it at essentially market rate or 100% of the am. I know so. And I think just to add a point to that, so the family that would be purchasing it would be limited to 100%. Am I so today 90 to 8, right. For a family of four. But the price will be limited. We have a schedule attached to this covenant that limits price appreciation year over year by 2% so that you can't. One of the challenges before was that in our current market, we've seen market values. These homes swing up so high that then Habitat, for example, wouldn't be able to purchase it and resell it at an affordable rate . This makes sure that the price is not skyrocketing and making it unaffordable for the next family. So it's unlikely, you know, for someone who might I know probably part of what you're thinking is, you know, an investor, would you really want to buy something that you can't get the full appreciation on because it's capped year over year ? And so what percent of buybacks does happen? That, too, when a owner wants to sell their house, do you guys buy 90% of them back? And resell them. I don't have the specific number. It's a very high percentage and most certainly where we can control for the price because that would be the thing that would be the main thing that would stand in the way of us. Re purchasing the property would be that the price was so high we wouldn't be able to meet our mission of making that homeownership affordable. So with this tool in place, I'm sure it'll be a higher rate, right? Because the price will be kept affordable. Okay. Thank you. You welcome. Councilmember, can I you in at one point, did you get your question answered? Yeah, I think so. I mean, let me just. Yes, mostly, but I will just actually add one. Thank you, Mr. President. So, Maria, we're talking I would say it's actually not even 80% of most habitat buyers are. Can you just clarify the typical am I level for a family? Yeah. So for habitat, households are typical. Thank you. Our typical homeowners are around more of the 60, 40 to 60, 60% depending on the size of the home. Am I level? And just to clarify, when I had spoken with Heather Lafferty, the director, and I had asked, you know, what had Habitat failed to repurchase and resell her home to a qualified buyer recently? I thought the answer was no. Now, I don't know that that's 100% I don't know how far back that went, but it is not. Is there an occurrence you're aware of of habitat failing to purchase a home?

A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver to be administered by the Department of Safety, Division of Community Corrections in consultation with the Denver Community Corrections Board and Community Education Centers, Inc. for residential and non-residential community corrections services. Approves a contract with Community Education Centers, Inc. for $2,000,000 and through 12-31-19 for residential and non-residential community corrections services (2019-51449). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 9-16-19. Council member Kashmann approved direct filing this item on 8-22-19.

DenverCityCouncil_08262019_19-0881

As Resolution 880 has been adopted. I'm secretary, if you please, with the next item on our screens, on our screen. And Councilman Hines, if you please. Resolution 81 on the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. I move 881 for adoption. Has been moved and seconded. Comments by members of Council Councilman Hines. Hello again. So I apologize. This is what we get when we get things directly to the floor. So thank you for your clear clarity and that makes the first one way easier. So what's the difference between. This and the contract we had three weeks ago. So. Councilman Hines so resolution request eight one changes the terms of the agreement with Geo Group from 12 months to six months. It's part of the strategy after the vote before Council on August 5th, where we heard the message loud and clear to me and to distance ourselves from both core civic and jail. This was a strategic decision to try to phase that plan and move it forward. It's extremely challenging, if not impossible, to transition away from six facilities and add up to 500 beds or 517 beds. So the decision here is to move in that direction with the GEO Group and this contract takes us through the end of 19 . Okay. So there are 157 residents in GEO facilities, 73 at 1284 at William Street. And it can sometimes there's a 157 beds. The number of individuals in those beds varies day to day, depending upon movements there. And. Oh, geez. Okay. Sorry. My notes were my questions were assuming that we were going to talk about these together. So let's see. So the contract is for $2 million. So that means that the assuming the beds are full, which I would. It sounds like they would be at least close to full. Joe's getting about $100.31 per resident per day for this contract. Is that correct? Councilman Hines? No, that's incorrect. So the funding for community corrections isn't as simple as just the daily per diem rate. You have a base bed rate. So for every individual and residential placement, you will have an itemized per diem. In addition for the specialized program, a two way hall, the cognitive behavioral treatment program, there's supplemental funding that goes and is attached to that. We also have funding for a correctional treatment fund that pays for substance use treatment and mental health treatment. And there's a facility payment that each provider gets to keep caseload sizes down to a minimum of 1 to 20. It pays for prior reporting and for minimum staff salaries. So together, collectively, all those funding lines come up to the amount you see before you. Okay. That actually stands for several of the questions that I had about substance abuse, mental health. But all of that's included in the in this particular contract. Correct. Okay. And. Is there any additional funding source beyond this contract with federal dollars or. Anything else? Councilman Hines No, there's no additional funding provided by an agency of the government per the General Assembly. There is a requirement that residents pay what we call a subsistence. And that amount is authorized in the long bill each year through a footnote. And it requires the facilities to attempt to collect up to $17 per day for non specialized programs. So the William St Center qualifies for subsistence collection rates up to 17. As I mentioned at the hearing on August 5th, those rates are much lower than that. The cognitive behavioral program at Tully Hall does not charge subsistence. The footnote is not also in statute. Is that correct? That's a technical question, Councilman. I'm not sure it's part of the long bill that's passed by the General Assembly. So I, I, it's a legal document that establishes, you know, the funding for the state and then the parameters of the funding. It is my understanding, because I've put footnotes in the long bill before myself, that that isn't that's more guidance than it is statute. But I don't know that for sure either. So. But that's that was the nature of my question. Let's see, so that the cost to residents does not include room and board or classes or, you know, what's the average amount per day that a resident might be might pay for staying in one of these facilities? Councilman HINES So the the the current rate under this contract is $48.45. That's the that's the per diem established by the legislature. So that money travels to the State Office of Community Corrections and then passed through to the city of Denver in this case. In addition to that, you know, the residents of William Street, as I mentioned, would be required to pay up to that $17 a day. If someone is assessed at high risk and has a behavioral health issue. That's where the correctional treatment fund dollars kick in, and that's where the person can be referred for behavioral health treatment in the community or in house. The resident does not pay for that treatment room and board is provided as part of the funding and that subsistence. So there is no additional cost to the residents. So maybe this is answering one of the questions that I had, and that's as I was trying to do just the math on the court, civic facilities versus the geo facilities. And and you're saying it isn't quite that simple. I'm going to give you the simple math and you can help me and, you know, get get a little smarter about the math. So there are a total of 364 civic beds, right, 90, Ulster 120 and Diet 90 and Fox and 16 combined. So a total of 360 beds and then 157 beds and geo facilities. The court civic contract is from today until the end June 30th of 2020. End of the state fiscal year. Correct. Correct. Okay. And. If I did the simple math in the course of a contract is $6,680,446 in $0.70. If I do the simple math again, the core civic math gets $60.05 per resident per day. And again, as I said, the Jio contract gets $100.31 per resident per day. Can you help me understand why one is almost double the other? Councilman Hines So again, it has to do with the specialized program services. So as we've discussed, GEO has the cognitive behavioral treatment program that has a certain rate, I believe it's 5317 on top of the base bed so that those two numbers combine to pay for the CBT program. The William St Center is just the 4845 when we're talking about Core Civic. You have base bed rates across all four facilities. You have a sex offender population at our value program that receives enhanced dollars, you have facility payments. So of course Civic receives for facility payments where GEO only receives two. And then the correctional treatment fund allocation is is proportionate to the number of residents they serve. So, of course, CORECIVIC would have nearly double the correctional treatment fund allocation as well. So in trying to do the math, the way you're you're doing it, you're operating without all the information. And I believe it's similar to a question that Councilwoman CdeBaca asked at the August 5th hearing, and I'd be happy to sit down and walk through the funding lines. But it's not as simple as saying each resident gets X dollars per day. And why doesn't the math work? Yeah. And again, we had more time. It was I was under the understanding that that you were going to send that information out. But had I had more time, I would certainly have asked for that in advance of tonight's conversation, if I might add, this gentleman so I don't have the ability to change the per diem rates or to award more to one provider or another. The providers get the same rate, whether you're GEO or CORECIVIC in Denver or whether you're I6 in Jefferson County or whether you're Larimer County up in Fort Collins that's established by the legislature. So the only discretion that the city of Denver have is how much total money to allocate based upon utilization. We don't have the authority to change rates of reimbursement. Those are established by the General Assembly. Thank you, Mr. President. I have additional questions. I see someone else in the queue. Do you mind if I yield for other people's questions? It would be great. I appreciate that. And we'll come back to you. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Perfect segue. Segway Thank you, Mr. President. My question I understand you don't have the ability or authority to change per diem, but my question is about Denver's community corrections division. What is the full budget of that department? And the councilwoman said, Mike, just to clarify, are you talking about within the Community Corrections Department and underneath the Department of Safety, we administer three programs for the city. We have residential community corrections, which is part of the system or program we're talking about tonight. We have pretrial assessment and release services. And then we also administer the county's home confinement or in-home detention program. So the total budget for all three programs are just for the Residential Community Corrections Program. If you have it broken down into three parts, that would be awesome. I have approximate numbers off the top of my head. So the Community Corrections Residential program is roughly $18 million and that money is received from the state of Colorado. All but $600,000 is passed through to the providers. Again, we have four different providers that operate ten facilities in the county. The city of Denver keeps $600,000 to administer the program. So that's that supports the work of the Community Corrections Board. It funds positions in my office to provide technical assistance to providers as we move in the direction of infusing evidence based principles into the programs. It also pays for regulatory and audit work that's done by my staff as well. So with that 600 annually, how many staff do you guys have in your department? The allocation for community corrections is 5.4 FTE. And then just to just to go back to the question you asked about the total budget, the the direct services we provide, which are general fund from the county is approximately $5 million for the pretrial release and the home confinement program. Altogether. That's correct. And that's that's approximately 5050. Okay. And back to the 600, those 5.4 stuff. Can you describe to me a little bit more about what they do, considering we're primarily a pass through for the state dollars? When you say audits. When you say administration, what does that look like? Councilwoman CdeBaca So the model in Colorado for community corrections is one of local, local support or local control. So they're pastor dollars, but the responsibility kind of center statutorily with the Community Corrections Board. So community corrections boards in our state do two things they decide or authorize which individuals is referred from either the Department of Corrections or the courts or approved for placement. And they also make recommendations on which providers operate in a specific geographical, judicial district or county. Now, the way the ordinance reads for the Denver Community Corrections Board, it is advisory to the Department of Safety on policy matters related to community corrections. And there are roughly 94 standards promulgated by the Division of Criminal Justice, which is the state agency that has regulatory and funding oversight of community corrections. Not only does the state office conduct regular audits and visits to enforce those standards, but that's part of our responsibility as a local jurisdiction as well. So I have three staff that are compliance coordinators. And their job is to measure program performance to those 94 standards. They're also there to support the work of the programs. We view the network of ten facilities in Denver as a single program underneath our jurisdiction. We have a gamut of services. So there are times where they need technical assistance around statewide initiatives like contingency management or you've heard this term before called a matrix. It's a it's a case plan that takes into account offender risk and need and stabilization factors. So they go and watch individuals assessing, completing the assessments and working with clients on their case plans to make sure that there's fidelity to the model. In addition, I have one one dedicated FTE that processes all 2000 referrals each year from the Department of Corrections and from the courts. A portion of my salary is charged to the Community Corrections Fund to do work to support community corrections. And finally, we have a business manager that pays bills and manages the finances. Thank you. Let's see. Real quick before I pass it on. I will let the others ask questions. But I do want to get back to the community advisory group that was agreed to. With these renegotiated contracts and I know that's not something the public is seeing here in the Bills tonight, but we'd love to discuss it a little more. And so I want to save that till the end of the conversation. So I will let the next person speak. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. Greg, can you just outline the process that someone has to go through to get into one of the community correction beds? Yes, Councilwoman Ortega. So on the Department of Corrections side, there are statutory eligibility requirements that one has to meet for nonviolent individuals, for individuals convicted of a nonviolent offense. They can be referred to community corrections 16 months prior to their parole eligibility date for violent offenders. That's at six months when a referral from the Department of Corrections is generated. It's typically sent to the County of parole destination. It means that person has declared that location is where they want to reside on parole. And after their release from the Department of Corrections, the referral travels to to my office. That single staff person reviews the referral. They score the referral when I say they score the referral. Denver was the first jurisdiction to adopt a decision making tool, which takes the elements of risk assessment and structure decision making to make more consistent and uniform decisions so that staff member scores the tool. It's then presented to the Community Corrections Board, and they have the authority to say yes or no to the placement that they say yes. That referral then travels to a program. Statutorily, each community corrections program also has the right to accept or refuse a placement. So essentially it's a dual yes to get into community corrections from the EOC. Similarly, on the direct sentence individuals. So there's some confusion when I say direct sentence, these are not municipal level offenders. These are individuals who have failed or are failing or not eligible for felony level probation. And the district court in Denver has determined they're appropriate for a community based sentence. So the district court will sentence an individual to community corrections. That referral will then travel in a similar way that I described for Doxey. It comes to my office and then to the board, but the community board and a program has to agree to that sentence up to that placement as well. So an individual can't say this is the facility I want to go to. That's determined by what beds are available and whether or not that opening, whoever runs that facility, is willing to take that person. That's been approved by the Community Correction Board. Correct, Councilwoman? So it's based upon sort of service need. It could be gender responsive. It could be DRC assignment. We're doing a pretty neat thing in Denver with respect to the direct sentence population. Part of the responsibilities to the earlier question that my team does is they'll review assessment data for the direct sentences, or they'll meet with the client in jail and do an assessment. And we've embraced this concept of treatment matching. We know from the evidence that if we can match a client to their assessed level of care, we stand a better chance to have improved outcomes and reduce recidivism. So. When these contracts were not moved forward. There were some suggestions by people that spoke that these clients that are in the programs could be put on ankle monitors and basically be released to go back into their homes, assuming, you know, most of them have homes to go back to. Can you just speak to what authority locally we would have in being able to approve something like that? So let's start with the Department of Corrections population councilwoman. So the parole decision is controlled by the State Parole Board, which is appointed by the governor, the Community Corrections Board, nor the city of Denver has any decision making in the parole decision. So in order for someone to be paroled, whether it be because of a decision or just because they've sort of reached a point in their placement that they're ready, that's done by the parole board. They also have to be statutorily eligible. I just mentioned a minute ago that individuals can be placed in community corrections six months prior to even being parole eligible. So if you have a client that's met that timeline, then they're not even eligible per statute. The ankle bracelet program at the state level for doxy clients is called ASP inmate. That is a decision made by D.O.C. again in terms of statutory timeframes when one is eligible. The D.O.C. has to initiate a referral. Now the Community Corrections Board does have to accept or support an individual moving to ACP, but it is controlled a referral by D.O.C.. The direct sentence population remains under the jurisdiction of the court, so the court can modify the sentence, but it still requires the court to take action. So when we were discussing worst case scenario, if the contracts are not approved, individuals under direct sentences will be returned to our jail. It will create complete chaos within the courts to get them redacted, to look at the sentencing structure and make independent individual decisions on each and every direct sentence. I'm going to ask you one last question, then I have one other question of someone else in the audience. There was an article in the paper this morning, and Christina from the KRC was quoted basically giving sort of an opinion and and sort of summary of the operations of the different facilities. And I guess my question for you is, having having been with the city for so long overseeing these programs. If we did not have community correction facilities in our city, what would be the alternative to people being released from prison? Councilwoman Ortega So if residential community corrections didn't exist in Denver, individuals would have coming out of DC would either reach their mandatory release date and be ordered to parole for a period of supervision by the parole department. Or if the parole board thought they were appropriate, there could be discretion discretionary released on parole supervision. They can also be referred to ISP at a certain point, but in order to be on ISP supervision, you have to have housing, you have to have stability. You typically have to be employed and have some level of savings to support yourself in an independent living situation. So I would say absent community corrections, you would see a potentially higher rate of individuals who released without housing to Denver County. You would see a higher rate of individuals without supportive, you know, care and quite honestly don't have a place just to kind of reside and stabilize while they come back to the community. And we talk about D.O.C., but let's talk about the direct sentences, because absent community corrections is an intervention. Those individuals have failed at probation, are not eligible. So if you take away community corrections is a sentencing option. You're looking at either a county jail sentence in some cases or Department of Corrections sentence. I'm going to ask. I believe he's still in the audience. Reverend Kelly, are you still here? Would you mind coming up to the microphone? I have a question for you. Reverend Kell, you've been working in our community for many, many years. And and you work with a lot of people who have gone into our prison system and then come back out. And I just wanted to ask you your opinion about the value of us having a local community correction program. And then just ask if you have had any contact from individuals that are in the facilities. And what kind of contact that has been since these contracts had been voted down? You know, a lot of folks refer to the communication as half way out. Many of them felt that, okay, they took accountability, the ability of their actions, the crimes, whatever. And they were willing to do whatever is necessary to get to the next point of freedom. And those who are understanding what the guidelines are, who are still incarcerated, they work hard to do what needed to be done to get to be eligible to get halfway house considerations. There are those who feel like they have. Accomplished what has been asked of them. There are those who are feel a sense of redemption. I am sorry. What do I need to do to make this right? How do I go back to my community and deal with, you know, make it in the establishment of a new life? And so once they are eligible and for a halfway house scenario, you know, many of them are motivated and motivates them to continue to stay focused on what they need to do to get there. And there are many who would call me and call my office and maybe somebody could help me understand what a pre you have a prepaid collect phone call that that doesn't even sound right in the same sentence you know, because I'm still paying for it. But but they call me, they say. Rev, man, I. Finally became eligible to be considered to go to a halfway house. And they are doing what? And I accomplished this. I understood that. So it's been a motivator for them to, you know, to get to the point of being halfway free, those who finally, you know, get that call from the controllers. In our case, managers said that because of your accomplishment, you're eligible. You're getting ready to make the next move. And those are just excitement that you would think that these are criminals, these are convicts, these are but they are those people who are really trying to deal with redemption. And so as they find themselves making that transition, getting to the halfway house and being it truly hall and being at William Street, you know, has been two of the ones that I've been dealing with, knowing what core civics Dahlia Fox, you know. Those those guys. And the girls over at William Street, they said, man, I'm finally here. I'm finally able to come back to the community, you know, that I've done harm to and to try to make things right. Listen, in the wake of all of this that have just happened over the last couple of weeks, I've been inundated with calls and of concern from grandparents, from significant others, from kids saying, okay, what does that mean? Does it mean my mommy daddy going back to jail? Does it mean that those who are finally made the oh, and your mate made the did what they needed to do to become eligible for this? That means they're on hold their on state. There's a lot of people who are in jail right now. It's a real what do we do? Grandma said, what do we do? Why? Significant upset. What do we do? We're talking about the wait list. The people that are. Waiting and waiting. Yes, those. So it was just and then, you know, you know, beyond all that, my thing is, even if we are talking about taking it from the private sector to the nonprofit and all of that, the thing is, if that's going to happen, it's going to happen. But what do we do between now and that time? That has been the biggest concern that many of these grandma and people who call me. What do we do within this period of time if they are talking about consideration of putting things together until other things happen? Okay. That's one thing that we look at, you know, but when you've got a couple of people who said, what's the point? I have lost faith in the system. I've told been told what I needed to do to get to this next level. Now, I've done all of that. Now what? Now what? Now. Just like that. The carpet could be pulled from up under my feet. And you know, now, when I say that we are dealing with a big problem of immigration and whatever is a little bit up there. Okay. But I am speaking for those who feel like we are just collateral damage in this war. We are down here, you know, and nobody's talking. And maybe even right now to be in a position to talk with the ground people, the people down here, what do we do? What we do? You know, now, I would like to think that the city council, once you made this vote, you looked at the overall picture and considered that, okay, if we stop this, what do we do? What do we do? So speaking, that is our take. You know, I think those of you who know me over the years, you know, unless I feel really adamant about a cause and reason, I even say that I'm a victim. Won't say a victim. No, no. I take that back. You know, I went through William Street almost 40 years ago. I knew the value I would in to the system. What a college degree. But yet I found myself going through the system. And one of the part of the system was at William Street, the months I spent there, and I had to just understand what I had to do to get to the next point of freedom. Being able to show the city, show other folks here myself that I'm willing to do what it took to get to the next level. Thank you for that input. I appreciate it. I have no further questions. Thank you. Councilman Ortega, before I go to the next councilmember, I know we have some new people have come in since I made this announcement, but our fire code does not allow people to stand in any of the aisles, including that back aisle. So either need to squeeze in or we have overflow next door and 432 down in 391. I know there are a lot of people here for this item. And so if you're not here for this item. You know, please grab a seat and overflow so that folks who are here can grab a seat now. And I'm sure that seats will free up as we move through our agenda. I would appreciate that so that we can just make sure that the fire department stays happy with us. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Greg, thank you. So what we keep hearing the number of 517 beds. Does this mean over a year's period of time we serve 517 residents in those beds? Or is there more or less? Well. So Councilman Cashman so it's actually more so when we talk in terms of of language of bed, that bed will typically flip over almost twice in a year, roughly 6 to 8 months for a male in community corrections. If they're successful, they'll leave after 6 to 8 months in placement. And for females, it's 7 to 9. So anywhere between 1.5 and two times that bed will flip over. So you're talking closer to 900 to 1000 individuals that are affected. Over the course of a year. Thank you. The other question I have. I've been on a committee for the past year and a half or maybe two years looking at the possibility of reinstituting in-person visitation in our jails. And I know we're moving towards that slowly out at county and a little bit more slowly than that at the downtown detention center. Can you explain today if a significant other a friend, a family member, a child wants to visit someone who's in our city jails? What is the process? Councilman So are you asking about the visitation for the city jails or for community. Corrections city jails? If someone's in jail now. Then I can't speak to. I don't. I would ask someone from the Denver Sheriff's Department or Director Riggs, maybe. He just stepped out. Well, but I believe they're not in person, obviously. So I can tell you for I think the last decade or. More. Because of concerns over contraband coming in to our jails. The option, there's been video visitation. So you go down to the jail lobby and there are video screens and the inmate is on a video screen inside their pod. And that's the the current method of visitation. So it is if someone's in our halfway houses, what's the visitation option there? Yeah. Thank you for that question, Councilman. So every facility is going to have slightly different processes to approve a visitor. But generally speaking, family and even support systems friends can visit in person at the Community Corrections Program as a resident gained stability and progresses in their treatment plan. They are also allowed to go home on short window passes or 4 to 6 hour passes. So as we begin that stabilization of reentry, there is a connection to family. I know it's not a program that's affected by the decision tonight, but I'd also talk about, you know, the contract is coming up for the University of Colorado and the Arts program. Here you have a program, the haven, that works with women who have severe addiction. They can be pregnant or even have infant children that can live on site with mom where treatment is provided, a mom daycare is provided to child and then mom and baby connect. So there's tremendously tremendous advantages to kind of in-person visitation for family and children and community corrections. Right. And I would just offer, since our on this topic that the reason we're looking at returning to in-person visitation is because of the evidence that how important that is to the family members as well as the inmate that that in-person contact take place. Thank you, Mr. President. That's all I have. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Torres. Thank you, Mr. President. I miss tomorrow. Can you talk a little bit about how. Our capacity has changed over the. Years and how long we've been at 700 or so? Has it grown? Has it dropped? So Councilman, community corrections has had periods of growth. You know, the program itself was was developed in 1974, and we started with programs at William Street Center at Independence House because. I believe there were another program or two at the time. And we stayed relatively in that 3 to 400 bed range until about 2001, two and three, where we saw additional facilities come online at that point. Community corrections was again expanded in 2008. There were. Four facilities that qualified for an expansion proposal that required a change of the zoning code, increasing the number of residents at each facility in four locations. So the cap is raised from 60 to 90 a course of Fox and 60 to 120 at three other programs. But since 2008, there has been no additional bed capacity expansion in Denver. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. All right, Councilman Hines. Looks like we're back to you. Thank you, Mr. President. So I realized in my notes that I'd neglected one silly question. Well, one question about. Slavery just about the Constitution. So in 2018, Colorado amended its constitution to remove slavery entirely from the Constitution, including for those convicted of a crime. So is it possible in Colorado to require work for people who have been convicted of a crime in Colorado? You're asking, Councilman, what happens in the residential facilities as far as work assignments? I would defer to a city attorney to interpret sort of a ruling there. Fair statement. Okay. I'll just I can respond to to what happens as far as in the facility. Sure. Yes. Thank you. Yeah. So, you know, as part of living in a home. Right. We all have chores. So that's replicated in residential community corrections programs. Individuals are assigned chores. Wiping down a wall, wiping down a table, cleaning a restroom. They cannot make any facility improvements. They cannot add value to the program. They may paint internal walls and they may do other odds and ends, but they're not there to provide any service that increases the value of the facility. So like painting fences or outside or repairing fences or pest control, nothing along those lines. Yeah. Councilman So I'm actually glad you brought that up because that was reported in an article that there had been an allegation of an individual or set of individuals to erect a fence at one of the facilities. I had my team go out and visit all the sites today and talk to residents and examine what's going on according to the individual that completed that chore. He volunteered to raise a single pole on an existing fence and was happy to do so. And pest control. There's nothing that like they would leave that to a professional or something along those lines. Yeah. Councilman Hines, we've actually looked at pest control records specifically at Corecivic Fox recently and can see that monthly there are exterminator visits. So we pull that information and look as well. So that's done professionally as well. Okay. We've also received documents about the quality of the meals provided to residents there, alleging that the meals are substandard and that there isn't an adequate amount of food available to residents. So just are meals provided to residents, is there? There was specifically about cereal if if someone wanted to eat cereal, is milk available to the resident? If someone doesn't want cereal, are there other breakfast options available to the residents? Councilman Hines So the one of the one of those 94 standards speaks to nutrition and dietary values. So the facilities are required to provide three meals per day. One of them has to be a hot meal. The other two can be breakfast cereal or, you know, a sack lunch if the folks are going out to work. But they're all approved by a dietitian that's reviewed by my staff and the state. So the nutritional value is there. I can't speak to the taste. I'm sure it doesn't taste very good. But yeah, so I think taste is an opinion anyway. So I recognize that. But so because that's a requirement, is it? I mean there's, there's a requirement and then there's what actually happens. You're saying that it actually the requirements are followed through and the Denver facilities. I'm saying that we review those requirements, and if they're not followed through, it'll be a finding in an audit report. Okay. Thank you. So I, I mentioned documents that that we've received. I'd like to give you an opportunity to respond to them. And again, if we could do this in a different form, I would prefer that. But here we are. So one of the one of the documents that received there was a I'll just quote it quote, I'm here I'm currently here on nonviolent charges, and I've done everything they've asked me to do. The problem is, they want you to go through a matrix to get out of here. And the case managers drag their feet to make sure that you have to stay here longer than need be. Is that I am concerned about the quote because, you know, it says the system is set up to maximize the stay and maximize the profit. And I would I certainly think that we, you know, having rehabilitation as a place, you know, has a place. And I think that taxpayers would say, you know, that that's a wise investment of taxpayer dollars. I'm not sure that it would be a wise investment to pay for for profit prisons. So I would just want to give you an opportunity to respond to that. Sure. Councilman, so a couple of things. The concept that programs would extend a placement for profit motive. If you think about it, it's a logical there's over 230 people on the waitlist today waiting to come into the programs. There's 59 in our jail waiting to come into the programs. So there's no shortage of somebody to to fill that bed. The matrix that you refer to is an evidence informed strategy that was developed by the State Division of Criminal Justice in consultation with programs and community boards to standardize how clients move through a program. We wanted to make sure that if you were placed in program A or program C, you received the same level of care. That matrix consists of both stability and risk reduction measures within it, and so individuals are going to move at different paces. I don't know, because it was an anonymous complaint as to that person's status, but if they're moving on the dock side, it might be because they're not eligible or the parole board didn't parole them. If they're referred for ISP, it could be that DOC hasn't completed the home investigation to approve that placement. Typically on a direct sentence, they move pretty quickly to nonresidential supervision. And you mentioned 6 to 8 months for mail, 5 to 7 months for female, or do I have this backwards? You're close to a male is 6 to 8 months roughly for a general population client and 7 to 9 for a female resident. And and you're right. These are anonymous. These quotes are anonymous to me. And it sounds like to you as well. We did have a third party verify that these actually are quotes from people who are in one of these facilities. It doesn't mean that the quotes are accurate, just that someone in one of these facilities said it. So I'm going to give you another opportunity to respond to a quote. Quote Right now, I'm appalled at their behavior as they're using residents all day, every day to make the place look good and presentable. When for months I was here, they had toilets that overflowed. No sitting outside, 20 prairie dogs living in the back, no utensils to eat with many times, not if not enough food for everyone to eat, end quote. So I just want to make sure that we're maximizing treatment and reentry instead of profit for a for profit corporation . Councilman, I can appreciate that. And that's why, you know, the Community Corrections Board in my office take those complaints very seriously. You know, we we touched a little bit upon the level of regulation in addition to the State Division of Criminal Justice and their Office of Community Corrections. You have the Community Corrections Board, you have my office. You have building inspections with the city, you have neighborhood inspections with the city. You have a Department of Corrections liaison that is assigned to each facility. You have a judicial department, probation officer that's a liaison on the court side. You have the Office of Behavioral Health that completes audits of these programs. So I think everybody is committed to ensuring that clients are safe and that they have an opportunity to to make the changes that we all seek. You mentioned a lot of inspections, and I wasn't able to get them all. But but you mentioned building a neighborhood inspections. How often do those occur? I believe for a neighborhood and building, I think they're I believe their annual. And then if there's a finding, there's a follow up. And is that through corrections or is that you saying that's just a function to the city? No, that's to the city. And as a function of the role of these buildings, not as. And just because it's a building in Denver. Correct? I mean, so Councilman. So the I mean, I guess what I made the point that I was making is that the buildings are looked at by the appropriate officials for safety and security. You have correctional professionals locally and at the state looking at it from a client care perspective. You have licensing agents, the division of Behavioral Health. If it's a substance use or mental health program, licensing them, ensuring that the quality of care is too standard. Okay. Still going. Sorry, Mr. President. So another quote that I had and it says, The sad thing is that I work a ten hour day and I have to come back and have mandatory general inspection cleaning every single night in order to have this place looking good. Is is there what is mandatory general inspection cleaning and is it every night, Councilman? I think I wrote that complaint because after working a 12 hour day today, I have to go home and clean my house with my wife. I think we all have chores. And that's the point is, is these are chores. These are not, you know, completing facility renovations because, you know, someone's profiting on me being in placement. They might have to mop the floor. They have to keep their room tidy. These are just basic life skills to running a facility and quite honestly, a behavior that should be reinforced as people reintegrate from an institutional setting into independent living. And see, I think the next quote is, has already been asked and answered. So let's. I think I want to yield the floor one more time to Councilwoman CdeBaca if if she has additional questions or whoever's on the list. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Mr. President. I actually would like to bring up two people, and while they come up are Candace Bailey and Dr. Calderon. I would like to make it clear that we are not the concept of community corrections is not on trial tonight. I think that we all agree that community corrections are necessary and provide an extreme benefit to our our folks reentering society after incarceration. I think the issue tonight is really about the corporations that indeed are profiting off of community corrections. Mr. Morrow said that these chores are not because someone is profiting off of this labor, and I disagree completely. That is exactly why we are working with private prison companies because they do see a bottom line benefit in this work. I would love to ask Candace Bailey, who herself has some experience with these facilities, to speak on her experience because unlike many of the people who may be in this room currently in corrections, she is no longer in corrections. And I think that that is a protection that people who are speaking out don't currently have. A lot of people who are currently in community corrections don't have the luxury of being the whistleblowers. In fact, we have had many who have blown that whistle anonymously, and Dr. Calderon will speak to some of those complaints. But we are very concerned that even after these contracts go through, that those people will be retaliated against for speaking out on their experience. And so I do want to ask what remedies are possible to make sure that our offices are getting monthly reports on who is being sent back and why, just so we can track and make sure that nobody is being targeted for telling the truth about their experience. Ms.. Bailey, would you mind telling us a little bit about what you know of these facilities, specifically the women's ones that you've encountered? So. Excuse me. Council City. So my history goes way back. I was incarcerated. I was in the Department of Corrections in the early 2000s. I ended up going to a halfway house here locally. I ran the gambit and I regress myself. From the halfway house. Many people would say, why you met all the criteria that Mr. Morrow had talked about. You had worked so hard to get everywhere that you wanted to be. You had children to go home to. You had an objective. I had an education behind me. I was ahead of the curve. However, I had a violent crime, which put me way at the bottom of the list. So when you talk about placement into community corrections, you have to think about the fact that the Department of Corrections is an overarching adversary and they have their own set of rules, and then people are funneled through this system that Department of Correction has. And you've got to go through. Could be any of a number of things, many that we won't discuss while I'm at this podium, because it is the dehumanization while within those facilities that carries over into our communities. We're talking about community corrections. We were talking about placing a new form of penitentiary in our community. So I'm looking at some of. My sisters over here because I understand where you are. I have been where you are. I am on the other side of the fence. And I say to you, if we do not examine. Our rules, if you could just address counsel and not the audience. Thank you. I apologize. I believe that what happens next is dependent not only on what the city council believes and what they do next, but also in what we do next as a community, as a city, as a state, as a country. We have the opportunity in front of us to change everything. We have community members who are out here doing the work who have experience from inside of the walls. It is proven that peer to peer advocacy is the greatest impact. We're behind. We're far behind. We are one of eight states who has not adopted this into what we do, into what we do. I actually work in the Division of Youth Services as a family advocate, and so I am the epitome of what we should be moving to because I have the experience, the understanding, the education, the knowledge and the community presence. I know what the issues are that the woman here face, that the men who are in community corrections face. We have the opportunity to have community led co-ops to look into during this time while our contract is now being approved for the next 6 to 12 months. What are we doing? We have a timeline where we need to look at land and zoning. We have to look at this. We are not warehousing human beings. We are human beings. We want our human rights back. Okay? We are not less than you. We are equal to you. We actually pay. We pay taxes for this. And so there is something that is happening when there is a trifecta of payments. So you're getting payment from the federal government, you're getting payment from the people who live in the city and county, and you're getting payment from the people who need to come back out and be supported, loved and embraced by our communities to be healthy members of society. And we are failing with a big fat F based on profits and not people. There are human beings who are affected on all sides of the fence. And during this time that you were looking at these contracts, I implore you to look at the human beings, because those testimonies that you're hearing that are anonymous are afraid of retribution. They are afraid. You get food in these places. This is not for human consumption. Okay? Now we can either feed the system. Or we can do something completely different. Completely. It is our. Choice. We will lead the country and we have to take the steps to do so. We have to. Thank you. Because you. I'm sorry, Councilman, could you just state your name for the record so that we have it on the official record? Thank you. I apologize. Candace Bailey. Thank you. Thank you. Dr. Calderon, can you speak to some of those anonymous complaints that we've been getting via phone, via letter, via email regarding the conditions in the facilities in question? Lisa Calderon, chief of staff. For Councilwoman Candi CdeBaca, also have a doctorate in. Reentry and best practices. First, I want to just say I want to thank the folks who do this hard work of reentry, reintegration, rehabilitation. It is hard work. I know I've done it and I know it's often thankless. And I know that people often critique your your work. You're working long, hard hours. We're also standing up for those complaints, those complainants who do work in these facilities. Who have been afraid to speak out in about these facilities, about their working conditions, about their long hours, about not being fairly compensated, including for the breadth of training, experience and degrees that they have, including hearing from some of them who hadn't been paid until the negotiations for this contract started moving forward. So we're also standing up for the rights of workers. As well as. For the rights of residents. So I want to make that clear. The kinds of complaints we've also been getting from residents. I think Councilman. Hines pointed many of those out, but they run along. They run along the kind of themes of basically labor that when you have worked an eight or ten hour day and having to come home to do chores. These are adults. These are not children. And I would like to see the evidence that shows that making people do disciplinary chores makes them a better person. That's not actually what the research shows. Right. So I'm a big believer in cognitive behavioral approaches. I understand that some of the facilities actually implement that, but chores is not part of that research. We've also heard around having chores that were potentially put people at risk. Such as clearing out prairie dogs and things like. That, things that they should not be required to do and are potentially a violation of labor standards. So for those reasons, we are. When we met with director Greg Morrow and. Executive Director. Of Public Safety Troy Riggs. One of our non-negotiables. Was to. Have a hotline. For complaints. And Greg outlined kind of all of the oversight committees or. Agencies. That oversee the these these residences. But that's a bureaucracy upon bureaucracy. Upon bureaucracy. And what we're hearing is that people don't feel safe going to these bureaucracies. They also don't feel safe when they cannot report anonymously. And people know that they have to go through a process of inquiry. They're not asking us to automatically believe them. What they're asking is, please look at this, pay attention. Please investigate this because we are afraid. In fact, we even had a resident report to us that. Their cell phone. Was taken away by a civic. By civic administration. Look through their emails and texts to see if they had been corresponding with Councilwoman, see the box office. And once it was confirmed that that person was, they basically let them know in a nice way that we see what you're doing. And, yes, you have a right to complain. But the very nature of taking. Someone's phone for exercising. Their rights to be. Heard and their freedom of. Speech is quite disturbing. That is and also also not. An evidence based. Practice for reintegration. And then finally, I just want to say, you know, I want to. Make sure that this false narrative gets debunked, that it's either these halfway houses as we're currently conceiving them or nothing. We know that people do better coming out of incarceration when they have transitional services. That is not in dispute here. The question is what kind of transitional services are effective? And we have a transitional housing halfway house model that is based on an old standard. And so what we need to do is re-envision. How we have halfway houses. As opposed to warehousing. The fact that we. Zone halfway houses in warehouse districts tell you how we value people coming out of incarceration. So let's stop with the false. Narrative that no one wants transitional. Services people do. The question is what kind and should a private corporation be the one to lead that? We are you know, it should be community based. And one last quick point. Our pioneer for halfway houses was the late, great Dr. Elaine Smith, who opened a group living in five points. A black woman. We need to get back to the roots of community based reentry, rehabilitative and residential services. We've done it before. We've had county run community. Corrections as late as. 2013. In our city, we need to go back to that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. So I want to direct to Riggs I'm sorry to her tomorrow. We we had our conversation on the 5th of August, if I'm getting my dates correct. The next council meeting was the 12th, and we discussed two premises on steel in Council District nine. They were zoned i a and we asked several questions about those two particular premises and with regards to whether they could house halfway homes. Are you are you familiar with those particular properties? Councilman Hines I'm familiar with one, I believe, and we followed up to the request from the floor the night of the fifth. 4650 still was the address. And according to community planning and development, there are space and buffer issues. With that site being zoned. It would require a variance from the Board of Adjustments and we provided that information to Councilwoman CdeBaca. Sorry. And, and it was definitely within a space that where that would be granted. It's significantly far from actual residences. It's behind the old pilot off of I-70 and Vazquez and I don't see why the use would be a problem when all of these other facilities are much closer to residences. So I think the question becomes, can it be done without action of the Board of Adjustment? And the answer to that is no. So it would require a variance. Okay. And so I also think you I want to echo what Councilwoman CdeBaca said and Dr. Calderon as well, that what is. And a concern for me is not about reentry services. My concern is making sure that we were stewards of residents of Denver and the taxpayer dollars. And I want to make sure that we put people above profit. And and we've had I mean, it's well-documented that these companies at a national level are problematic. I think that's a very careful word to use. They've been a result of numerous lawsuits, settlements and nationally and even here in Colorado. And we just want to make sure that that we're doing right by the people here in Colorado and by the end and the residents in Denver and the taxpayers in Denver. So I am absolutely on board with with the the concept of community corrections and halfway houses. My concern is, is these particular vendors. So at. I hope that if we do renew these contracts this this evening, that that the message has been delivered that we're very interested in and ensuring that we have vendors that are good actors and good stewards of taxpayer dollars that work responsibly. So thank you. And I'm sorry, would you like to say anything about that? I actually have a question for President Clark. May I respond to a statement that was made by Dr. Calderon? I think it's important to just provide the an accurate fact about salaries that, you know, when it comes to geo, of course, if I just want the council have the information. Good. So if I heard correctly, the statement was that salaries were only increased in during this contract negotiation period. That's not accurate. I will tell you that Core Civic originally and then Geo followed suit with raising the starting salary for both their entry level security staff and case managers long before these contracts came before council. Such as? They're not here. They're in the audience, but they're not at this podium. And I just want to be transparent and honest with this council. What happened there? Thank you. Councilman Hinds, are you all done? I'm sorry. I have one more question. Does a burn? The Columbine facility has 60 men, correct? Correct. How many showers does it have? I don't know. Off the top of my head is the answer one. No, no, no, no. There again, there's a standard. There's a standard that governs the number of of toilets, showers, sink basins. I can ask the corps civic representative who's in the audience if you want the exact answer, or I can follow up. But the answer is not one. That's that's not accurate. I went there. I live across the street from me. And I asked them and they said that there is only one shower, that there's multiple heads. But because of the the the the Rape Protection Act or whatever, they can't shower more than one person at a time. So it's functionally only one shower for 60 residents. May I? May we call? Do we have the folks from course, the vicar in this facility who can respond to this? Thank you, Shannon. Class with Core Civic. To answer your question about showers on top of my head, I am not aware how many showers are, but they do meet the DC standards and there are one shower room with multiple heads. You're correct. And then there's another shower room that has one for 88. So what does that mean functionally? How many of those showerheads can be used at one time? Everyone that's in there. I would say it's a lot more like a gym locker room type shower. That's thank you. But that's not what the staff there reported, nor the residents there. Okay. I'm sorry. That's what's accurate. Councilman Hines Jordan. Thank you, Mr. President. Councilman Ortega. I have three questions. The first one is just by show of hands. Are there any folks in the audience who currently are in any of these programs? Okay. Can I get someone to volunteer to just come up and just share your thoughts, your experience? I'd like maybe just one or two. We're not going to call everybody up because we've got a full agenda tonight. So how about a female and a male? Okay. So we've got one and two is a these these two individuals. Okay. I think we're going to go with these two for the council. If you could state your name for the record and then answer the council women's question. Thank you. My name is April Cotton. And which program are you in? April? I'm in William Street. Okay. Can you just share your experiences there? Are you finding that being in this program is helping you reactivate back into community and get you prepared for when your release date finally comes to that, you'll you feel like you're being equipped with the right tools to be successful. I absolutely do. I just did ten years in DWC. If I came to William Street not wanting to really do anything because I had no guidance even out of prison. They don't have cell phones. So you don't know where Google is. You didn't know absolutely anything. So when I first got to William Street, I was real shut off. I was scared. I was nervous. I just did ten years. So in my. Mind, I was institutionalized. But after being there for maybe a month, still doubting things started changing for me. I ended up getting assigned a wonderful case manager. I was showed how to use a phone. I was showed about Denver, Colorado, because I'm a native from California. I was given resources to get a lot of things done for myself. I was able to get back in the well, good. Good standards of my family. They were offered to come see me. Then shortly after that, I expressed my dear love for the food industry. Well, someone from corporate heard me talk, came down in safe served serve safe, certified me with the manager, served safe so I can go out and get a job so I can be just. Please hold me like that. Please hold your applause so that we. Can be sure to hear everything. He made sure. To believe in me, to give. Me that go when I had issues in community corrections. Because we all do when things don't go our way. We will do things like pick up and email you because we're upset because either we got the class one ride up for being off location or either we was out there relapsing and now we need a scapegoat. And that's where you guys come in. So what we do is when things happen to us, we I picked up the phone and I called Mr. Moreau. I said, I'm having an issue and I don't know what to do. He gave me the best advice that anybody could give me. And that advice still makes me stand before you today. I am somebody now. I am a resident, a proud one at William Street, and G.O. has done everything for me. Community Corrections stands for reformation, preparation for our destination and goes done just that. Everybody said that, but nobody said the good. Nobody looked at the good the guy was doing. I was in prison ten years lost, and now I am one of the best people that I can be. And I thank God for Geo. And I emailed you, Miss Gilmore, expressing that she's sorry. You are rules that you have to talk to counsel as a whole not call individual council member. Councilman Ortega, have you. Thank you. I appreciate your input. I like the gentleman. Before we do that, just a couple ground rules. An important part of democracy is making sure that we have a safe space for people on both sides of an issue. And this issue is is very sensitive and sensitive for everyone. And so I will ask that you not applaud and do those things. We want this to be a safe space for everyone. I appreciate you taking time to share with us. I just want the audience to be respectful of everyone who might have different opinions. Let's hear what everyone has to say. Make sure that we can hear that and create a safe space for everyone on every side of this issue to speak. So thank you very much, Councilwoman here. This gentleman right here, is that who you'd like if you could introduce yourself and answer the councilman's questions? Jeffrey Bradley. So I'm a resident at Solihull. Jeffrey Bradley. Okay. Jeffrey, same question. You know, I've been a and all this and it doesn't make any sense. I committed a crime. I did almost five years behind it. I still got time left on a sentence. Community corrections didn't do enough to help. I'm at a jail facility. I'm at Solihull. And like the lady just said, that people did not bend over backwards for me. I'm one of the people who voluntarily helped do work around a facility. Nobody forced us to do anything. I did it myself, keep myself occupied and learn a new skill that I had no idea I could even figure out. Oh, the food, everything like that. They feed us. They houses. Granted, we pay. When we start working, we pay the $17 a day. We do that as part of being responsible is part of life, not being in a facility. I came home from DC and committed more crimes. I would've went right back to prison. They've done nothing but opportunity award opportunity to us, so I don't see how anybody could have a problem with Jill and me personally. No, I don't think it's okay to make profit off of our dumb decisions. But it's a business. I mean, that's what everybody does. They find somebody find a way to make money. Who can fault. And for that, you know. But as in us, nobody's thinking about, oh, let's consider the contract. Let's let's shut it down. Okay, cool. We're all going back to prison. So, you know, I did almost five. I've got a friend who's a I believe he's at Columbine right now and he's been in prison 23 years. He's outside. He's got a good job. He's getting ready to go to ISP. Like he wouldn't had that opportunity. You're going to take all that from after doing a quarter century in prison and send them back over something that has nothing to do with us. It doesn't make any sense. These people have done nothing but try to help us. You know. Are you are you working right now? Yes, ma'am. So you feel like you're you're being equipped with the tools to be successful so that when you reach your release state near your release, from there you're going to be successful? Absolutely. Totally. How has the CBT program cognitive cognitive behavioral therapy? I believe I mean, cognitive thinking is something we all obviously slack and we we made horrible decisions. We did things. We sent a did we paying a price behind the tools that they gave you there? I mean, it's tools we all sort of had as kids for whatever reason. We don't possess them. Now we have them. We have the opportunity to use them. I mean, it's on us. Everything's a choice on us. You know, we got to make a choice. What are we going to do with it? You know? But I do believe, you know, when the day comes that I am able to be actually back home with my family, with my kids. I'm not going to leave them again. Will I give all that credit to them? No. I mean, I spent a lot of time in prison trying to better myself. But coming home from doing that into this residential program, it is nothing but amplify that. Everybody actually, I love them dearly and I've only been there for three and a half months. From his Louis to Miss Whitney to my case manager. So, Miss, I tell you, like, all these people will go out of their way to try to help you. So why anybody would think they're treating us any kind of way or doing anything like that, nobody's perfect. Are human beings that work everywhere, obviously is human nature. Sometimes people are just bad people. Look at us. We went to prison. But that doesn't mean these people that aren't trying to help, there's not serious issues. All these things that I'm sitting here hearing, I mean, I would rather eat sack lunches they give us every day than eat the food that they give us and D.O.C. And if this contract is a renewed, I'm going back to eat food and see do I want that now? I've spent years trying to fix my life to go backwards. I mean, it is what it is. I committed a crime. I did that. But does it suck? Absolutely. Is a desirable? Absolutely not. Thank you so much for your input. Yes. I'm going to follow up with two quick questions, Greg, for you. There was a comment made about some folks who had not been paid. And I just want you to talk about, you know, when the contracts expired and how long it had been before we were able to actually make payments to the organizations that we've had these contracts with. So the contracts expired because the contracts align with the state fiscal year and the funding source. The contracts expired in June of 19. So the vendors actually have not been paid for services. They have continued to provide services at six facilities on their own accord. Nothing prevented them from closing and returning everybody to custody. They've continued to operate all six facilities. But that's been corrected from the time that City Council approved the receipt of the funds from the State, correct? Councilwoman Ortega No, it has not been corrected that the hope tonight is. Because we haven't had all of these contracts. In place. That's right. Okay. Sorry about that. I think a couple of them did move forward, though, right? The state and independent says correct. So the the acceptance of the intergovernmental agreement from the state moved forward, as did the contract with Independence House. Okay. Last question. Either you or I saw Evan here earlier. I don't know if he left. Okay. Just talk about next steps where we move forward, assuming that we have the votes here tonight for the contracts. To be moved forward as we move towards looking at other options about how we do community corrections in Denver. So, Councilman, the first thing I'd say is we have to get this right. I mean, look at this room. It's filled it was filled on the fifth. So we have to get this right. If the contracts are approved, what we will do from the Department of Safety standpoint is stand up a 13 member committee that will be responsible to sort of look at the options that we have available. We're going to have to work closely with land use and zoning. We're going to have to look at how community corrections impacts victims, how it impacts families, how it impacts individuals. That body will contain representatives from from city council. It will contain reported representatives from the community. I will co-chair, along with a community person, which we will be seeking input from council to sort of move these conversations forward. I will tell you, it's no small feat. We have six months and 12 months to turn a massive ship. I think it's been quoted in an article to move it and turn it on a dime. And that's going to be no small feat. But we've heard council will respect where you're coming from and do everything we can to restore services. But it's going to be painful and we will see a reduction in services in the short term. It's my goal to ensure down the road that Denver's better, better for this and that we have all the services in more than we have today. But in the short time, we're going to lose services. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman. Thank you very much, Mr. President. I just want to make a few brief comments. First, I just want to say that I really appreciate those who are here with lived experience. Those current and past. And I believe that it's quite possible and I believe it's true that we are hearing the true experience of people who've had very positive, affirming experiences, and that as well, it can be just as true for those folks who've either shared anonymous complaints or shared that they had a different experience to meet. And so I think that that full gamut of experience is really important to hear and to believe. And I think that what's most important for us moving forward is that we have the systems in place to ensure that where there are concerns, there are people who can hear them and handle them in ways that protects people's safety. Last time we were here on this topic, I did ask and I did get affirmation that ombudsperson is or somehow some kind of safe complaints system outside the Department of Corrections. Typical systems would be a topic of conversation for the task force. I see Mr. Morrow standing. I Unless that's changed, I don't need any comment from you, but I'm assuming yes, it's okay. So that is still a topic. I just want to make clear that I don't think we have to prove that the operators in town have somehow done malfeasance or bad things in order to decide that these are not the right partners. Right. So I don't think that we have to have a string of cases. We have a strong history in this city of saying that we want to do business with folks who are responsible contractors and their performance in other facilities in other states is relevant. We recently went through a private contractor at the airport that we had to terminate with who had a record of having issues in other communities, and we did not follow some of that evidence and we contracted with them anyway. So it does matter how they conduct business and there are times maybe things have been lumped under one provider's name that's better known. But the truth is that one of the providers does have some use in their custody, the other does not. And there are lawsuits and concerns for both of the providers we've been discussing. And so that is enough, in my opinion, for us as a council to ask questions about who we're doing business with, even if there hasn't been wrongdoing here in Denver. On the flip side, I don't think I have to prove or that you as a community or that anyone on this council has to prove that these providers are perfect in order to extend these contracts. Today, it's been very well demonstrated that there are not other pathways. And so because there are not other pathways, and it is critical that we put the individuals who are residents in a stable environment for the six month or the 12 months. Even if there are some lingering complaints that require investigation and follow up, there is not the malfeasance here that would say we can't and shouldn't extend this to provide stability to four or 500 individuals so they don't have to be, in my opinion, perfect providers for us to say that the right thing to do is to continue these contracts so it's both appropriate to continue them for the people who live there and need the stability as well as for our city to prepare. And then it's also appropriate to say that at some point in the future, when those contracts expire, that these partners don't meet our standards for how they may operate, even if it is outside our community. And I think both those things can be true and we can vote with both of those values in mind. I do just want to put on the record that I heard from several. Individuals who I had talked to prior to our hearing the last time who were, you know, voices for immigrant protection and also voices for saying we couldn't end the contracts immediately. I was surprised that that testimony did not come out in the last hearing. Instead, all of the testimony was about ending the contracts immediately. I have since heard from several of those community organizations who believe that the right step forward because of racial justice and because of the number of individuals impacted is to continue the contracts. We didn't have an open hearing tonight, so not everybody who didn't get called up here was able to testify. But I have heard from those individuals, and I do believe that we have a greater community consensus tonight about the need to continue these contracts for these short terms, for the humanity of the folks living in them while we work to responsibly wrap them down. I believed we could have gotten here last time. We didn't. I think if we'd had a few months under our belt as a council and more practices of talking to each other and negotiating with the administration, we might have gotten there, but we were not at that place. We had folks who were new and the relationships in the communication were new. But we can do the right thing tonight. I'm prepared to vote for those things with a very serious investment in the promises made both last time and tonight about the process. And I will just renew my call one more time for our community. If you care about this issue, it's important for you to open your hearts and minds as we engage in a conversation about zoning for community correctional facilities. There has been no safety related incidents in our communities. There have been virtually no complaints. It's critical for us to open up more of our neighborhoods for supervised protection of individuals. These community members are coming back to our city whether they come under supervision or not. And so it's incumbent upon us to change that zoning as quickly as we can. And that will take support from all of us, including those who may not be here tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't think it's accurate to make people in this room believe that at the last opportunity we were able to renegotiate this contract on the floor. I think that's been a misunderstanding throughout this entire process. There's one entity that has the ability to renegotiate these contracts, and that is our administration, that is our mayor's office and his director of public safety and those who work underneath him. And so at the last opportunity, it was not a possibility for us to get to this place with these with a six month contract and a 12 month contract. And in fact, even with those new relationships and those new people who were on council, we attempted to meet with the Division of Community Corrections prior to our vote to discuss what potential options existed to renegotiate this contract and make sure that we were ratcheting down in a responsible way and transitioning to local management , that we were told that that was not going to happen. That was not an option. And so that is why we're in this predicament. And so I want to be very clear that there was a lot of thought put into this process the first time. There is a lot of thought, obviously, being put into this decision this time. Ideally, we would want to have community or county control over this situation so that we could more be more selective about the providers that were choosing. I would like us to see I would like to see us move in that direction because we need to be able to hold our providers accountable in a way that serves our local government and serves the people in corrections with high quality standards. We have had people testify tonight about what is happening inside, both from the positive side and the negative side. And I think that, yes, we have these decisions in front of us now. But I think that in the last vote, what you heard from council is that we're not willing to renew these contracts after the six months and after the 12 months. And so what I expect from our Division of Community Corrections is that we put that $600,000 that goes into this budget to use to make sure that we're looking deeper into these audits, that we're figuring out how to build our own capacity again, to do this work, instead of allowing corporations to gobble up our services and gobble up our capacity and not allow us to make decisions that are in the best interest of our residents. And so I was going to call somebody up, but I will I will skip that so that we can get on to the vote and the rest of the agenda. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Torres. I was drawn. All right. Any other comments before we vote on this one? I will just end by saying thank you to staff and that I will second that I feel, you know, I think it was Councilman Hines who actually said earlier that the message has been delivered. And I sometimes change like the change that we need in this space takes a moment where it gets real and we don't have the option to negotiate these. We have an up or down vote. And I stand by my vote last time to vote no and send that message to deliver that message that the future can't look like the present or the past. And I appreciate the work, and I appreciate that it's going to be a lot of hard work between now and then. But I think that through that vote, we've said we've set our city on a different course. And so I do today I will be voting to support these contracts because I feel like now we're on that pathway and we're on that course. And I didn't feel like we were last time. So I appreciate the work that it went into to get us from where we were then to where we are now and now . I do believe it's the right decision to make sure to take care of the people who are currently in the system, in a system that is hard to move on a dime, but we need to move it very, very quickly still. And I think that's really the hard work that has set out now on the path that we're set on. And so I look forward to that work happening and starting, you know, tomorrow. So thank you for that. And I will be voting in support this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call. Hinds High. Black High CdeBaca I Flynn. High. Gilmore High Herndon. I. Cashman. High. Converge Ortega High Sandoval I. Sawyer I. Torres, I. Mr. President. I. I'm Secretary. Please close voting announced results 1339 as Resolution 81.

AN ORDINANCE relating to ranked choice voting; requesting that a special election be held concurrent with the November 8, 2022 general election for submission to the qualified electors of the City of a proposition to institute ranked choice voting for primary elections for City of Seattle elected offices; adding a new Chapter 2.18 to the Seattle Municipal Code; proposing a ballot title; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_07142022_CB 120369

But the clerk please read item number three to the record. Agenda Item three Council Bill 120369 An ordinance relating to ranked choice voting requesting that a special election be held concurrent with the November eight, 2022 general election for submission to the qualified electors of the City of Seattle. Now the city of a proposition to institute ranked choice voting for primary elections for City of Seattle. Elected officials adding a new Chapter 2.18 to the Seattle Municipal Code. Proposing a ballot title and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Customer Lewis, I believe you have a motion for us. Thank you, Madam President. I move to pass Council Bill 120369. It's their second. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Hubble. It's been moved and seconded. And Councilmember Lewis, this is indeed yours. And you are recognized in order to address the bill. Thank you. Council President. I will rest on my previous comments from the previous discussion. I think you also have emotion for me. Two men? Yes, I do have a motion to amend. The next one. Sorry. I'm just going down my notes here. To amend Council Bill 1 to 0 369 as presented on Amendment one on the agenda. Thank you. I'm sorry. I should have cut that and let you know, give you a heads up. Is there a second? But thank you, Councilmember Herbold. It's been moved and seconded to amend Council Bill 120369 as presented on Amendment one. Councilmember Lewis, you are the sponsor and you are recognized. Thank you, Madam President. This amendment adds a couple of technical changes if we are still here. He can answer if colleagues have any feedback on it, but it doesn't really change the substantive background of the process that we would be asking the voters to approve. It clarifies a couple of passages and it just generally cleans up the initial proposal. But I can see time to list or as council president deems appropriate. Thank you. Councilmember Luis. Wish to acknowledge that. This is just going to start over and then we can move on. Yes. Thank you. This just is a technical amendment to improve the language in the bill, make it clearer about how the ranked choice, voting counting, would occur. Are there any questions of wish on the technical amendment proposed by Council member Lewis? Okay. Not seen any. Thank you for being here. Are there any more comments? Not seeing any comments. Well, the clerk please call the role on the adoption of the amendment. Councilmember Herbold. Yes. Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Council Member Morales. Councilmember Mosquera i. Councilmember Nelson. I. Councilmember Peterson. Hi. Councilmember SWAT? Yes. Council member Strouse. Yes. Council president was. Yes. Nine in favor. Nine opposed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The motion carries an amendment. Number one is adopted. My understanding there. Are there any further comments on the amended bill? Bill. Okay. So will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended? Councilmember Herbold. Yes. Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Councilmember Morales. Yes. Member Mosquito I. Councilmember Nelson. Nay. Councilmember Peterson? Yes. Councilmember Salant. Yes. Council member, Strauss. Yes. Council President. Was I? Eight in favor. One opposed, right? Okay. So with that, it looks like it passes. And so I got to excuse me, I got to go back on the language here. The bill passes as amended. The chair will sign it. And will the clerk please to fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Great. Moving on to item number four. This is Madam Clerk. Please read item number four to the record.

SUMMARY: Public Hearing to consider rezoning certain property bounded by Mosely Avenue and Singleton Street at the Former Naval Air Station. Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code (“AMC”) Section 30-4.17 G, Special Government Combining District and Zoning Map to Ensure Consistency between the City of Alameda Municipal Code and Zoning Map and the NAS Alameda Reuse Plan for 37.36 Acres of Federal Property Located on Singleton Street at the Former Naval Air Station. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, No Further Environmental Review is Required. (Community Development 481005)

AlamedaCC_06162015_2015-1731

There's a table in the in the on page four of the staff report which basically lays out, you know, well, what would this do to the city's housing capacity in the northern waterfront? And it gets a little complicated because you have to make assumptions about density bonuses, which we don't know yet. And we won't know until a developer comes forward to develop that site at a future date, which will only happen when the Navy finishes cleaning it and then auctions it off. And that sites different than at any point in the land will not come through the city. It'll go straight from the Navy to a private owner. But anyway, assuming there will be some density bonus request because most of these large sites do now get them or request them, and the typical density bonus that we get, the sweet spot seems to be right around 20% for the private development interests. It essentially removes eight. It removes 824 units. If they go for the maximum Darcy bonus requests, then the savings or the reduction in capacity is as much as 927 units. If there's no density bonus requests at all. If you assume that, then it's closer to 700 units. But we think this is a good move. We think it's it's consistent with our housing element. It creates consistency during the zoning and the reuse plan. And that's always good is it was send a very clear message to any future buyer of this property. What is the city expecting? And we don't have conflicting documents. And it maintains it. We remain consistent with our housing element because we are doing as a community a great job of providing our regional fair share. As you know, from March 10th hearing and I'll say it one more time if we continue with the projects that you have approved and now with Alma, a point we not only have provided the land to meet our regional fair share, it looks like we're going to actually produce the units for our regional fair share in this ten year period. And that's a major accomplishment and it will make a difference to the housing crisis. Are we going to solve it? No, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. So we support this. Your planning board recommended it unanimously. I'm available to answer any questions. I do have one speaker. But that's fine. I'll call the speaker. The Natalie. Good morning, Mayor Spencer and members of the City Council. My name is Lynnette Lee and I'm a member of Renewed Hope Steering Committee and also of Buena Vista United Methodist Church. First of all, congratulations and thank you for moving forward city. I think that the city of Alameda will be rejoicing along with Warriors fans. I do want to say that I appreciate the safeguards to ensure the development of affordable housing with this ordinance, and I appreciate that staff did not feel that a moratorium would be feasible at this time. However, I am concerned that any down zoning of the 24 sites listed in the housing element should be carefully considered because according to an attorney who knows state housing law, if down zoning goes and I hope I understand this right, if down zoning goes below the density required by the state for that site, even though you still will have affordable housing sites at north, housing is the city does not meet the state requirement for the minimum units per acre. Then those units that are remaining may not be counted. So I think I'm trying to understand what he's saying to me, but I just wanted to raise that concern that the city count carefully all the units for all the 24 sites so that we do meet the winning numbers and meet the state law on density. Thank you. Thank you. As a staff. Would you like to respond to that? You don't. Have to. You won't even get in all the nuances of state law and all. But yes we did check we and of was you know from us from March 10th. We do not want to do anything that is going to put you out of compliance with state law. So you had a huge surplus in your current housing element. You still have a surplus even with this down zoning. Thank you. And I really appreciate Steph adding the sentence paragraph to that. That speaks to us adding the 800 new residents residential units. Allow me to point out any comments. Vice Mayor I just have a couple of comments. I in the original reuse plan of the 2009 agreement, there's a ten acre park which makes that parcel actually that tucked in 37 acres livable at the densities that are going to be there. And they're also 90 units of homeless housing, which are sorely needed. And those don't go away with this action. So I think this is a very good move, delivering 90 more very low income unit house housing and then also meeting our agreement with the Navy. And I believe there was a HUD buy in on this as well. So I think it was a good trade. Three. Yes, I remember already. Quick question. So the 800 units for a, are those. Is there a plan to put those in the housing element or. I think I heard you correctly were not out of compliance without right. You what the housing element does is it identified a whole list of sites and then it said we also have a couple other sites in addition to that. One of those was site A at the time when we were doing the housing element, we weren't quite sure we didn't have the zoning done for site, so technically we couldn't count it right. But we told it's in the right there in the housing element, it says it, hey, we also have site A which and now only a point which should be also available during this period. But we can't technically count it right now as soon as the so just it was a weird timing so essentially site is already in the housing element as part of this huge surplus. So all we're doing is. Changing some of the zoning and the staff report includes the the justification and the rationale for why we are still in conformance with our with the state. I mean a numbers. Thanks. Just. Just a quick comment. I mean, I think I talked about this twice, twice before. I think that this proposal, which I think was was generated from the vice mayor, you know, it put us in a position where we were able to ultimately approve Side A without adding any housing to our housing element, without adding any additional housing. You know, people have asked for more time. We know that's not happening. And people have asked for no housing and we know that's not possible. What we have done is, in my mind, the next best thing, as we've said, we have this number, we have this target, we have this commitment. We're not going above this commitment. And thanks to this. This proposal, this ordinance that we have today, it allowed us to. You cite a and still keep that commitment. So I really appreciate, you know, the leadership displayed by the vice mayor when we were together in the fall. You know, you said you will listen and lead. And sitting here, you know, I'm trying to take that to heart. And from you I listen and I learn and then try to lead. So thank you very much for doing this. Its idea. We have a motion. I'll move. The ordinance amended municipal code section 30 oh oh. That was what we just did. I'm sorry. I'm reading my wrong notes here. I'm a can rezoning certain property bounded by mostly affluent new and Singleton Street, the former Naval Air Station. I'll second that. All those in favor. I wish it passed unanimously. Thank you. Seven. City Manager Communications.

A bill for an Ordinance concerning the organization and creation of the RiNo Denver General Improvement District in the City and County of Denver, creating the District Advisory Board and appointing the initial members thereof, and approving the initial Operating Plan therefore. (BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT) Approves the creation of the RiNo Denver General Improvement District, appointing the initial members of the Advisory Board of the RiNo Denver General Improvement District, and approving the initial Operating Plan and preliminary 2016 budget located in Council Districts 8 and 9. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting 5-12-15.

DenverCityCouncil_06012015_15-0309

Okay. The public hearing for 309 is open. May we have the staff report? I have the opposite problem that Andy does. Mike's here. Okay. Sure. So John Carter, what Department of Finance Council Bill 150309 is for an ordinance to approve the creation of the Regional General Improvement District. The boundaries of the district are roughly I-70 on North 29th Street from the south, the railroad tracks and the on the west and on the east. So this sounds like the same boundaries, but it's actually a smaller subset of the bid boundaries on the west side of the Rhino neighborhood. The the primary focus of the idea will be to fund infrastructure improvements with the district's boundaries. First, the JDA will provide up to $3 million for enhanced streetscape improvements along Brighton Boulevard that will be installed in conjunction with the city's planned reconstruction for the street next year. Districts capital improvements will include trees, landscaping, irrigation plus pedestrian and landmark lighting along Brighton Boulevard. These capital improvements will be funded through a one time charge of roughly $200 per linear foot for properties fronting Brighton Boulevard. The guide will main will maintain to maintain these enhancements by imposing a levy of four mils on all real property within the guide. The Guide. The Guide Mill levy is estimated to raise roughly $200,000 in the first year, similar to the Ryan Obeid business. Personal property will be excluded from the guide's mill levy as the financial capacity of the guide expands. Revenue raised to the mill levy will also go towards funding additional infrastructure projects across the neighborhood. Future projects for the guide are anticipated to include a study and potential improvements to neighborhood lighting rain over riverfront access improvements, enhancements to the forthcoming Rhino Park and or enhanced and or enhancements to additional access roads within the district boundaries. The services facility, facilities and improvements to be provided by the guide are not intended to duplicate or replace the services, facilities and improvements provided by the city and county of Denver within the proposed district boundaries. The guide is being created to provide enhanced and otherwise unavailable services and improvements within those boundaries per state statute. City Council sets is the official board of Directors for the Final Guide. However, the proposed interest and proposed ordinance also creates a district advisory board which is which is delegated many of the day to day operations of the district. The Advisory Board will also recommend a district annual work plan and budget for city council approval each year. The initial advisory boards consist of seven members appointed by the mayor and confirmed by City Council through creation ordinance. Presenting and shall and show consist of at least two artists, creative enterprise, property owners and two residential representatives. The initial members of the board are proposed as follows and. HAYES Tom Gordon, Chris of all time, Jonathan Kaplan, Jason Winkler, Larry Burgess and Tracey Real as part of as part of the creation process, the petitioners, led by the steering committee of property owners, held several outreach events to ensure ample opportunity for property owners within the district to learn about the business plan, creation and operations. This includes informational mailings, newsletters distributed to property owners and numerous public events and small group meetings with property owners and businesses. Additionally, the petitioners held three public information events targeted specifically to residential property owners. Local media outlets also published articles on the guide's organizing efforts and planned infrastructure projects. Approval. Approval of the operating plan does not a not approve any specific development plan or change in zoning. City Council approval of the guide creation allows a proposed district election, including the oppose imposition of a an assessment. Proponents of the district are planning to hold the required election in November as well. Based on the present information, the Department of Finance recommends approval of the creation of the General Improvement District and its initial members of the Advisory Board of Directors. Thank you and happy to answer any questions as well for the jetty. Thank you, Madam Secretary. How many speakers do we have this evening? Eight. We have a. Okay, we have eight speakers, so I will announce our first six and if you can come forward our first five and Elizabeth, Jason Winkler, Jonathan Kaplan, Andy Mountain and Brian six. Yeah. If you can sit in the front row. That would be helpful. Okay. If you can make room for the rest of the speakers. All right, everybody in there. Okay. And Elizabeth. I'm an Elizabeth. Globeville was an extended family and lived in Swansea, all of which are taking care of me as I go into a healthier life that will activate me as an artist, I'm happy to say. And this perfect confusion about me speaking before is that I had signed up for the Geordie thinking I had signed up for the bid because I am in very strong support of it and the guide is very much the completion to me of the picture of how what the folks in Rhino are doing is inspiring and actually strengthening similar efforts of the cluster of neighborhoods surrounding the Rhino District. And one of the most wonderful things we're able to say out in the planning process is we work on the the continuation of the legacy that this council has started by putting neighborhood plan planners in the neighborhoods like Little Village in Swansea is Rhino has done it right and they have established a sequence of events that give city council and our city government the ability to provide the funding mechanisms and the prioritization so that we can support the entrepreneurial spirit of the folks that are really going to create the sustainable economy for us in these neighborhoods, which is ourselves and those that inspire us by invest, investing locally into the neighborhoods and working together with each other. And I can say that we're seeing partnerships between people that are creative people and that are business minded people in Elyria, Swansea and Globeville in particular are starting to know more people in Reno that can partner up in technical areas and in mentoring and business and that kind of a thing. So the relationship between the investors and the communities that is showing up in the in the GEDI and the bid is extremely exciting and very reassuring. One of the in particular I want to thank in Hayes for showing up at our neighborhood planning processes from Westfield. And there's a very important juncture there in Brighton Boulevard. So just as a person out in the mix doing what I can to make my way and meeting the context of creative neighborhoods, folks that transcend economic cycles through entrepreneurial courage and who sustain efforts over long political calendars, many people are very grateful, and I think we're all going to be learning a lot how to move together as diverse neighborhoods, too. And the solution to gentrification is really increase and diversify the income house to house to house to house, generation to generation to generation so people can stay in their neighborhoods and stay in the weave of their their family legacy. And with the advent of the artisan economy, local economy, there is nothing better than what we're seeing happening between the combination of the good, the bad, working with the city planning department and helping us strengthen the economy so we can work very dynamically with the larger projects like the the overview projects in the quarter, like the stock show and the I-70 dilemmas and how do we create the connectivity among. And it's a very wonderful process. So thanks to this council, thanks for staying in there and thanks for the folks that started with just your creativity. And here you are and there's a lot of people they're going to benefit from this. So full support. Thank you, Jason Winkler. Good evening, members of Council. Thanks so much for having us here tonight and thanks for everything you guys do. It's truly an honor and a pleasure to do what we get to do here. I'm Jason Winkler, and I'm a resident of Denver and also a landowner on a handful of parcels in Rhino Hammon Eastside around a West Sider. So none of that none of that really bothers me, whether we're talking about the disparity. But I do on that point think that it's going to be handled very well. The idea, of course, as a west side or west side piece of of Reno and kind of echoing what Councilman Burke spoke about and all the people flooding into Reno and doing great and. Fun and exciting things that it really is there. To provide the infrastructure, maybe the less exciting and the less sexy, you know, piece compared to the bad. But we need some place to walk. We need some place to bike. And from a safety perspective and from an economic driver perspective, the guide is there to sit beside the commitments made by the city and county of Denver , specifically to make the Brighton Boulevard corridor great. And then we as landowners want to come in behind, behind what the city and county are here to do and make kind of the edges of what the city's going to do. Great. And that's being done kind of as a one time thing. And it's really to prevent what we call Brighton Boulevard Frogger, which is you have to go one side and then cross over and then go the other side and not get hit by traffic and cross over. So if we didn't do things by way of a guide like this and all the landowners come together, which we do really uniquely in Reno. You would have a patchwork. Of of of infrastructure improvements in this guide. Most specifically lets us do it all at once in a concerted effort. And it's more. Efficient. It's more effective, has a better end result, and it eliminates Brighton Boulevard Frogger. So and that's that's at least one of my big drivers. So and thank you. And we really appreciate your support. Thank you. Jonathan Kaplan. I want to thank counsel for this opportunity to speak. My name is Jonathan Kaplan and I own some passes on Brighton Boulevard and directly behind with my wife Dorothy are some parcels on wine coop. Also on the Reno board, the UIC board, boards of boards, the bridge over the Platte Working Committee, the gift board. Now. This is a great opportunity for us. And I want to thank all the rhinos for being here. And I want to thank Mayor Hancock, especially for the line item in the budget for Brighton Boulevard. What the gift is, is an extension of a form of a public private partnership. Residents can maintain a degree of control and we can guide how the neighborhood looks, sees and feels. The grid also equalizes a perceived inequity with all the money that's being driven towards Brighton Boulevard. The GID. Now, those of us that live on Brighton Boulevard will tax ourselves additional amount of money so that we can maintain Brighton Boulevard . And the big picture here and it's not about individuals, what what it's really about is building community and, you know, communities. Micky once said Communities grow organically. Well, the GED is a way to help that growth continue. Reno has grown considerably over time, and it's the hard work, the tireless work of all the individuals that have made it happen. It's you know, it's the residents directing. As the community grows, it allows us to implement improvements such as wayfinding signage, bike racks, bike lanes, everything that the city has started. This city's given us a great opportunity here with the money for Brighton Boulevard. So those of us who live on Brighton Boulevard now are going to pay a little more so we can get a lot more because it's a real big picture and the GID will enable connectivity and it equalizes any inequities that may be perceived by the East Siders versus the West Siders. It's all about community and it's really about art. And without the arts district, we wouldn't have the GID, we wouldn't have the bid. And I want to thank Tracey and all the class of rhinos that have come out tonight to support this. And Judy, thank you for your support and counsel. Thank you for your support. Thank you. Our next speaker is Andy Mountain. Good evening, counsel. My name is Andy Mountain. I'm a resident of Denver, and I'm a principal with GBC, a consulting firm based here downtown. I've led communications and engagement efforts for a few handfuls of projects within Reno in the last decade or so. And it's given me a unique perspective on kind of the intersection of private sector interests and public sector plans, and really how that plays a role in shaping this dynamic neighborhood specifically. I wanted to come in tonight just to speak with you about the proposed Rhino Guide and encourage your approval of it. It exemplifies the kind of collaborative spirit and public private partnership that can serve as a model for other infrastructure projects throughout the city. Brighton Boulevard has long been a lightning rod of conflict in Rhino. There have been as many visions for the quarter as there are uses served by it. And when I first began work on Brighton in 2013, the city and local community were at a stalemate conflict primarily focused on detailed cross-sections. And typically we had individuals fighting over feet. How many feet should be dedicated to what nobody was pulling up and seeing the bigger vision that really stood in the way of progress. So what we did was we initiated a visioning effort for Brighton, figuring out a way for it to serve as the main street for Rhino while continuing to serve the diverse array of uses. We've touched on already everything from 18 wheelers and busses down to pedestrians and bicyclists, you name it. The result of that visioning effort was not one silver bullet design. It was a design that was adaptive and dynamic, just like this quarter is. Over the last year, you've heard from the rhino stakeholders that have banded together to define what they want, the future of their neighborhood to be specific to Brighton Boulevard. What this guide does is they've worked hand in glove with city staff sitting across the table from one another, working together to figure out how they can use the city's investment as a springboard from which they can invest their own funds to advance their own neighborhood. With the Rhino Guide, the neighborhood wins. They get an enhanced corridor. They get kind of help in designing it and investing in it. And they also get the structure and ongoing financing that they need to continue making similar improvements. With the Rhino Guide, the city wins. They get an enhanced and more vibrant and artistic, almost industrial artistic gateway into downtown, and they also gain a true neighborhood partner. One of the things that we've seen as the conflict has begun to be replaced by real collaboration and real spirit together. So really, over the last decade, I mean, this transition, you know, the neighborhood's gone from three kind of geographically disparate communities, almost tri sector, if you will, by railroad tracks. We got East Side, West Side. But there's also the river that serves as a barrier in this community. This guide effort has begun to bring folks together. So I encourage your support. This has been a tremendous effort and I'm honored to have been a part of it. Thank you. Thank you. Brian speaks. Members of. Council. Thank you for having us. I have a pretty short script. My name is Brian Sleeps. I'm with Great Divide Brewing Company. I have a pretty short script, so I just want to go off of that script for. Just a second and speak to a comment I heard earlier regarding the possibility of commercially assessed property today being developed into residentially assessed property which would then leave commercial property owners holding the bag. That bag would be the same size as it is today. And and I assume that's correct in that the election question is written such that the mill levy that's assessed on commercial property owners is set at a ceiling. So now I'll go back to my script again. Brian sleeps with great divide. We owned just over five acres of a of commercially assessed property along Brighton Boulevard. And with that said, we fully support the creation of a general improvement district and we would ask council to do the same. I have witnessed firsthand a very organized and collaborative. Public private partnership thus far, and I'm excited to. See the reconstruction of Brighton Boulevard get underway. The the General Improvement District would give us a unique opportunity to work with the city to retain the character of Rhino by funding enhancements to that project. It would also allow for future projects that would continue to make our neighborhood a great place to work, live and play. So again, thank you for your time and hope that you support this general improvement district. Like most of the residents and and business owners and commercial property owners in our in our district. Thank you. Thank you. Justin Cross. Members of council. I'll keep the short since I was up here already. But I just want to talk about the Guild and specifically the fact that we didn't set out to form a guide. We set out to form a bid, and then the investment, which we are very thankful for. And Bright and Boulevard came about and there was this idea of how do we contribute to that and basically turn it into a truly living street because of the concerns about potentially there being funds in an in transparent way, going towards infrastructure on the West Side and more towards soft costs on the east side. There was actually a decision by the bid board to explore creating a separate district specifically to function on to function as the entity to fund infrastructure improvements on the West Side. So I just want to talk a little bit about how that process or say that's how that process went. The idea for the guide. I think that we're so excited about is the funding for Brighton Boulevard is going to go primarily towards concrete, which in a lot of ways is great. We're really excited about having a separated bike lane other than this one right out here. It'll be the first vertically separated bike lane in the city and making Brighton a truly multimodal street and making it a real place. And I think that's what's so exciting to all of us is it's it is it will always be a gateway. It'll always be a thruway. But what makes a great gateway as a true place and really allowing cyclists, pedestrians and people of all modes to be able to walk down Brighton Boulevard and visit. The different things that are happening on that street are so important long term. The the goal of the guide really is to continue to fund other projects in the neighborhood. The big one is the river and we think that the river is probably our greatest asset on the west side of the tracks and it's been abandoned and overused and really treated like a sewer for most of Denver's history, especially in that neighborhood. And how do we as a neighborhood really stand up, really on behalf of the river and say, this is important to us, we want to reclaim this for this community? The GID, after funding the Brighton Boulevard improvements gives us the ability to do that over time and have a separate funding mechanism that really focuses on the area around the river and improvements associated with the river. So I just want to say thank you for your consideration. We are excited about this district, really looking forward to talk about specific projects and actually potentially looking and encouraging the East Side to actually sign up for it as well in the future because of the significant infrastructure needs related to drainage and one way streets on that site. Thank you. Thank you, Jason. Rick Krohn. Evening, Rick. Crown Attorney Spencer Fein here representing the proponents. And here just to answer questions, I. Think they've covered it very well. Don't really need. To add anything. Thank you. Thank you. And Jamie Lythgoe. And Jamie go Centro again, consultant on the guide creation process. So just here to answer questions, anything related to the process or the operating plan? Thank you. Members of council. That includes our speakers. Are there questions from my colleagues? Councilman Ortega, I would like to ask Jamie if you would come to the microphone. So this stretches all the way to I-70, correct? Yes. So how have large businesses like Pepsi been involved in the conversation and are they on board? Straight answers, yes. Pretty much every all those major landowners all up and down Brighton Boulevard did sign the petition of support. Our engagement for the process was nothing short of a labor intensive process, and this group has talked about the collaboration of how that came about. A lot of it driven by design and a lot of it driven by the big question of how are we going to make this work structurally from an organizational funding point of view, how does how do we make it all work? So beginning, I think sometime in mid-November and leading really through February, March time frame, when we actually went to petition, there was a group of property owners, including, as you said, Pepsi and others who were meeting literally every other week on a monday morning for 2 hours, sitting down, working through design, working through assessment methods, working through how we make this financially work for everybody without it being too much of a burden. So the guide was extremely labor intensive and collaborative process in that regard, and the demonstration of support we received and the petitions of support demonstrate that from all the major property owners, not only on Brighton but within the broader GEDI area as well. So my next question is about the fact that historically the city has looked at non-profits a little bit differently. I know that along this corridor we have the 40 museum. I think they're a nonprofit, are they not? They so. They are actually they have. A. Majority of them, a majority exemption, but they are do have a partial commercial exemption for part of their business. And they also did sign a petition of support for both the Biden. Okay. It all the questions. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Sheppard. Thank you. Forgive me if I missed this, but how many mills is this? Levy? I thought I heard eight for the first four. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Are there other questions? No. The public hearing is closed. I made my comments earlier. The thing that I would just like to hammer home is that allowing for this general improvement district to pass complements the Business Improvement District. And after hearing what Justin Crawford talked about how the board had decided that this really was the way to go, I 100% support it. And I'm so excited again to see I mean, Rhino is just changed so quickly and even a year from now, I'm so excited to see what happens. So I will be supporting this and I encourage my colleagues to do the same. Our next speaker, our next councilperson is Councilman Brooks, followed by Councilwoman Kennish. Thank you, Madam President. And I'll make this short, because I feel like I'm back in church a little bit with the heat, and I've said all of my comments, but I wanted to show my support and I did a fashion faux pas today and I wore my shorts. Some of us can see that. Councilman Brooks, can you stand up to the rest of us can see that. General, you get in this. Like Superman. I thought it was going to be chest hair. No, not chest hair or. Any other comments. Okay, Councilman Kennish. Thank you, Madam President. I know regret chiming out so that Councilman Brooks could go first, because I've got nothing to follow that. But so, you know, in regards to probably both issues, but for this one in particular, I just wanted to say, you know, I often get asked what it's like to govern. And particularly when I talk to folks from other areas, I talk a lot about Colorado and Denver and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights and how limited it seems like we are and how one of the things we end up doing is having these special districts that carry a lot of the infrastructure needs for our communities. And in in in many cases, you know, that's borne of a difficulty or it's borne of a challenge. But the one thing that I think that is a positive that comes out of it is it is actually creating a citizen led government in a way. What you are creating in this in this these actions is really taking ownership of your community, investing your dollars in having a direct say in how they're spent. And so I do think there's a beauty a little bit to that democratic way of of building your community. And so I want to just, you know, congratulate you. You've taken on a big responsibility, as we seem to be headed in the direction of passing this one as well from the comments so far. And, you know, to say that, you know, the values that you've shared in addition, I mean, we're talking about infrastructure here. But what I believe in is that the way that you build a community is is the way that you are treating and serving the people who will live, visit, spend time there. And so that I think if you think about the form following the function, you know, that's the responsibility you're taking on. And I think that the interest in, you know, touring truly keeping that to be an inclusive space. And so, you know, bikes is a really important piece. But how how do poor people interact with the community and continue to feel comfortable there? And and how do all of those pieces continue to come together? So I think that that flavor of rhino that you have is is, is, is about the people and how you make sure that that infrastructure matches the people is clearly a value that this group has. So with that, I want to lend my support once again to this measure and to say that I look forward to seeing the fruits of your labor as they come online. So thank. You. Thank you, Councilwoman Kennish. See no other comments. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 309 40. I. Can each. I layman I. Never. I. Ortega I Rob I Sheppard I Susman i brooks. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. Ten Eyes. Ten Eyes. Counsel Bill 309 has passed. Kelso MacInnis, will you please put Council Bill two of seven on the floor? Thank you, Madam President. I move that council bill 212 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. I'm went ahead. Take that back. Council President. I move that council bill two seven be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It's been moved and seconded. Council bills 207 and 212 approve zoning map amendments. The Council is required by law to conduct hearings on zoning map amendments, and council's actions are subject to court review in order to provide a record for court review. Testimony is recorded and any items presented to the Council are marked as exhibits and become a part of the record. 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 is. The public hearing for Council Bill 207 is open. May we have the staff report?

AN ORDINANCE relating to gig workers in Seattle; establishing labor standards requirements for premium pay for gig workers working in Seattle; amending Sections 3.02.125 and 6.208.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code; declaring an emergency; and establishing an immediate effective date; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_06152020_CB 119799

Agenda Item one Capital 119 789 related to gig workers in Seattle, establishing labor standards requirements for premium pay for gig workers working in Seattle and then U.S. 3.02. 125 and 6.208.020 of the settlements proposed declaring an emergency and establishing an immediate effective date all forced out of the city council. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I will move to pass Council Bill 119799. Is there a second? Thank you so much. It's been moved in second hand to pass the bill. Councilmember Lewis, as co-sponsor of this bill, you are recognized to address this item and I believe you have as a substitute version of the bill to move for our consideration before we take and comment on the underlying bill. So let's go through the procedural motion first and before we get to the substantive bill, which will be the substitute. So so I'll hand it over to you to put the substitute before us. Thank you so much, Madam President, for cueing that up. So I would ask then if item one from Council Bill 119799 can be read into the record. So item one has been read into the record and it starts earlier. I was like, I think we didn't just do that. Oh, yeah. Okay. Sorry. I moved past Council Bill 11 nine and you already did that. Sorry. You need to let me. Let me start a little further along for me. I'm sorry for. That's okay. You need to move to amend council 1119799 by substituting version for for version two. Yeah. Sorry. I'm down there now. I'm so. Yes. I moved to amend council bill 11 9799 by substituting Virgin for for version 2.8. In their second. Okay. It's been moved and seconded to substitute the bill. Councilmember Lewis, again, you are recognized in order to address the substitute version of the or the procedural fact of the substitute bill. Yes. So thank you so much for the opportunity here to address this. I know we've talked about this bill a couple of times over the last few weeks. The substitute version lowers the initial price that Councilmember Herbold and I had considered in terms of the premium pay number, which originally was $5 per delivery. Having consulted with our labor partners as well as the platforms in the space. We determined that a $2.50 per delivery still accomplished the goals of the premium pay in terms of compensating for time spent cleaning vehicles and acquiring PPE and sanitizer, as well as also making sure there was some consideration for the unique hazards that folks are facing during COVID. So for that reason, we made some of these changes. So there are substantive changes in the bill. There are also some technical changes that do not otherwise make considerable changes. A There's going to be other amendments addressing the fact that the substitute does not have a provision like some other versions of the bill have had, where the cost could potentially be partially passed through to consumers. So this substitute bill would allow folks to partially pass through some or all of the additional cost to consumers. And that's a discussion that we can have. I believe Casper Morales will be bringing forward an amendment to queue up that conversation, but otherwise those are the substantive changes. I don't know if Councilmember Herbold also has anything to add to that before we move forward on a vote to adopt the substitute. Councilmember Herbold, anything to add on the motion to consider the substitutes? No. I think Councilmember Lewis handled it well. I have nothing further that. Great. Thank you so much. Colleagues, any questions on the substitute version being proposed for consideration? Councilmember Salaam. Thank you. Needless to say that I support the legislation itself to require additional hazard pay to gig workers who sacrifice self-sacrifice. And labor is really one of the only things that has allowed many people to continue to have access to food and mobility during this COVID crisis. And these workers are doing so at great personal risk of infection, and often with very little common compensation from the multinational corporations that hire them, which have even been extremely stingy in giving them very basic protective equipment as well. However, what we are discussing now in this motion to place an amended version of the original bill is whether to substitute a new draft of the bill for the original and a strong. And I want you to say that I strongly prefer the original bill to this substitution, because the original bill is significantly stronger in many respects . First, the original bill protects both food delivery gig workers and TNT drivers, like those who drive for Uber and Lyft. The substitute, however, only protects food delivery workers. And I will, of course, be opposing any amendment that excludes any workers from these protections. I understand that some council members are arguing that this change is reasonable because they believe that the mayor will draft legislation in the future to cover dirty drivers. But that reason is totally insufficient. This is emergency legislation that already only requires hazard pay during the legally declared emergency. That ends when the emergency ends. If the so again, you know, we're talking about the bare minimum. If the mayor does generate this legislation in time to go into effect on October 1st, which the Teamsters have told my office is the current schedule, it's very possible that these hazard pay restrictions would have expired by then anyway. So that would leave TNT drivers with having had no hazard pay protection. So the entire public health emergency, the official emergency, even if the official go with emergency, has not legally expired. This amendment would still leave TNT drivers without hazard pay for at least three and a half months. Additionally, I mean, that's based on the timeline we've heard. There's no guarantee that that even that timeline will be adhered to. Additionally, the substitute bill majorly reduces the hazard pay benefit available to gig workers. The original bill provided gig workers with $5 hazard pay per delivery plus $5 for each additional stop. This subsidy cuts that more than more than in half to $2.50 per delivery and only a dollar and $0.25 for additional stops. We should also remember that this legislation is in response to nationwide. The base legislation is in response to nationwide organizing of gig workers, including a courageous strike called by Instacart workers demanding $5 per delivery premium pay. Who opposes that? Who is demanding it to be reduced? I can only guess that the big delivery businesses have been putting pressure in the backrooms because we have not seen that in public comment. Gig workers are many of the essential workers that have made it possible for Seattleites to have food and be mobile during this public health crisis. And they have done so at great personal risk with extremely low wages while they are multinational bosses have raked in profits, indeed profiteer through the pandemic. I support the strongest possible hazard pay and do not support this amendment that would exclude taxi drivers and lower the pay. So I will be voting no on making the substitution, but I will of course be voting yes on the overall bill when we do that later. Okay. Thank you so much, Councilmember Swan. I see Councilmember Herbold has raise your hand, so I'm going to go ahead and recognize Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I just want to note that as it relates to removing taxi drivers from from the bill in the in the substitute that Councilmember Lewis just spoke to, that was actually a request that we do that from the Teamsters. They they requested that we remove the the authorization of the hazard pay for their drivers. And then as it relates specifically to the different price point that was negotiated with working Washington, they recognize that there is a balance that is is necessary to strike and they do not want to see a reduction in use of the food delivery services in response to a price point that is too high. And so that is really the foundational thinking around, again, trying to trying to hit that hit that sweet spot between what the what the price point should be to compensate drivers for the time it takes to maintain the vehicles in a way that's consistent with public health standards, the and the the products necessary to do so. And, and also recognizing that this is working during this period of time is is indeed a hazard. So, again, I really appreciate having the opportunity to work with working Washington throughout this this process and leading up to the substitution. Thank you for that additional information. Councilmember Herbold, any other comments or questions on the substitute bill? Hearing and seeing none. I think we are ready to consider the substitute version unless. Councilmember Lewis, you have anything else to add? I do not, Madam President. Okay, great. Let's go ahead and I will have the clerk call the roll on the adoption of the substitute. Peterson I. Don't. Know. Strauss. I. Her bold eye, Juarez. I. Lewis. I. Morales. I. Macheda my never Gonzalez. I did it in favor. One opposed. I thank you so much. The substitute is adopted in version four of the bill is now before the council. So I will go ahead and now open up the floor for additional debate and comments on the bill as amended. And our colleagues, are there any other amendments? I know that Councilmember Morales you have a particular amendment. So perhaps what we should do is consider your amendment first and then we can have a conversation on the bill as amended. How does that sound? Sure. Okay, great. So I will hand it over to you, because my role is to make your motion to put Amendment One before the council. So I move that we amend Council Bill 119799 as presented on Amendment one on the agenda. It's great. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved to amend the bill and I will hand it over to Councilmember Morales to describe Amendment One. Thank you. Council President Gonzalez. So this amendment would prohibit the hiring entity from passing on charges, increasing grocery charges to consumers. We all know that the economic impacts of COVID are having really drastic effects on our families. And food security in particular was a problem in the city already. And we know that food insecurity is increasing, especially during this crisis. So this is really an attempt to. Decrease the risk of having customers who are relying on grocery delivery from from having that charge passed on to them. We want to make sure that we are protecting our vulnerable neighbors, our seniors, especially families with children, and anybody who is really at risk of food insecurity, so that they are so that this assessment or this charge does not get passed on to them. And that's what we're doing here. Great. Thank you so much for that description, Councilmember Morales. Any questions or comments on Amendment One? Okay. Hearing none. We will go ahead and take a vote on Amendment One. So will the chief call the roll on the adoption of Amendment One? Peterson I. Do want. So I want. I thank you. Strauss. I traveled. I. Suarez. I. Lewis. I. Morales. I must get. I. President Gonzalez I nine in favor. Nine opposed. Thank you. The motion carries, the amendment is adopted and the bill, as amended, is now before the council. Are there any further comments on the bill as amended? Councilmember mosquito, followed by Councilmember Lewis. Thank you so much, Madam President. And thanks to the sponsors of this legislation comes from Herbold and Councilmember Lewis. Really exciting day for gig workers and actually just for our entire economy. As we know, gig workers have been left out of the basic protections that we have been. So. Proud of here in Washington State and in the city of Seattle to offer to W-2 employees, but make it basic labor standards for those who are classified as independent contractors are hard to legislate, especially for gig workers as the sponsors and this entire council knows. So I'm really excited about the piece of legislation in front of us. I think that there's much more work to be done for sure. Conversations of issues of misclassification and long term solutions for gig workers continue. But I know that we have to act with urgency. Right now. This crisis of. COVID has been telling us that we need to step up in an immediate way to provide these protections for gig workers and looking forward to working with all of you on those next steps. I know also that we are well aware that gig workers need additional protections, especially because of COVID. We get our groceries delivered, we get food delivered. We are, I think, in a crisis where many of us are depending on this portion of the economy even more heavily now. So I really think it's important that we're stepping up in an essential way for these essential workers to make sure that they're treated with the basic protections like premium pay and making sure that they have safety equipment. Being told that the unemployment rate is as high. Oh, I'm sorry. Workers are being told that that given how high the unemployment rate is, that, you know, some people are being told if you don't like it, then you don't have a job and you know, you don't have any other recourse. That's absolutely unacceptable. We want to make sure that all workers have these basic and basic protections that we provided to other sectors of our communities. So as workers are putting their their selves, their life at risk, their family's lives at risk by coming to work, they serve our communities. We need to lift them up and to make sure that these workers with. The basic protections they need. Thank you again to all of the. Folks. Who worked on this legislation. And thanks to the gig workers who every day take a risk to go to work. Appreciate the time. And I'm grateful that through this legislation, we're again making labor history and passing this. Legislation into law. Great. Thank you so much, Councilmember Mosqueda, for those remarks. Councilmember Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. And I'll be I'll be really brief. And I think Councilmember Swan actually cued this up rather nicely. So I think I'm following on a theme that's already been introduced, but this truly does have to be a first step. And as Councilmember Maceda also alluded to as well, it is a temporary measure. You know, COVID someday will pass and this measure will pass. But we are still going to have massive inequities in this app based economy that has been mischaracterized as a gig economy, but really increasingly is the economy. This is increasingly a way that commerce and businesses transacted in our society. It's increasingly a space where workers are misclassified as independent contractors to justify justify paying them less and giving them fewer benefits. And it's going to be an area where we are going to definitely need to do more work. And I look forward to doing that under Councilmember Mosquito's leadership in the committee that covers workforce standards. And I know that a lot of our stakeholders in the community who I really had the pleasure of working with through this racial ladder at work in Washington and everyone over at work in Washington, Sage and the whole team there were great. I want to thank Camille Brown on my staff, who did an excellent job working with Councilmember Herbert's office to really shepherd this through over the course of a month with lots of back to back meetings and making sure we were reaching out to all the stakeholders. So just wanted to extend those. Thanks and we'll look forward to voting to get it over the finish line today. And thank you all for everything you did to make this a success. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Council members want. Thank you. As I mentioned before, I'm happy to vote yes on this bill requiring big business, big businesses to pay hazard pay to gig workers during the COVID crisis. And I agree with Councilmember Lewis that this is increasingly become the norm. It's not like we're talking about one small section of the economy. So many workers, and especially younger workers, are getting pushed into what's called the gig economy, those kinds of jobs where they are not recognized as employees. Gig workers deliver groceries, drive for Uber and Lyft, and do many other essential jobs to our society. These are jobs like any other, except they are marked with the legal fiction that they are a one person small business rather than a worker and a corporation. The result of this legal fiction is that workers are suddenly no longer protected by workers as gig workers, as workers, and by being classified as gig workers, in fact. Big business even avoid Seattle's minimum wage by classifying its workers at big workers, which is particularly important for the hazard pay bill we're voting on now. It is totally unjust, and it is a clear example of how, under capitalism, the working class must continually organize and struggle to avoid falling even further behind. As I mentioned two weeks ago, when council was voting on extending the paid sick and safe leave to gig workers 100 years ago, when workers could legally form no workers could legally form unions in this country, but courageously they did it anyway, often having to defend their picket lines against physical attack, in fact, by the police and by private forces. In the 1920s, the U.S. military was even deployed to bomb the picket lines of striking miners. It was through these courageous struggles that workers won the decent contracts that formed the so-called middle class for at least a section of American society. For two generations, they won labor law protections and they won the right to organize a union. Since then, however, for decades, big business has been attempting to claw back every gain workers had fought for and won. Wealth inequality has ballooned. An estimated one out of five workers in the U.S. is now classified as an independent contractor, e.g. gig worker. Ultimately gig workers will need to unionize with or without the legal permission to do so. Just like workers in the past, because we only have the power in the workplace when we get organized to fight for it, we will need to rebuild the fighting labor movement that overcame legal, physical and political obstacles in the last century to establish the union workers, the unions and workers can rely on today. Today's premium pay legislation is extremely temporary, but in approving it, the city council is making an important statement, and I'm happy to support the legislation to extend basic and save time to gig workers also. And finally, I want to raise the caution around enforcement that I had spoken to when this legislation was first discussed in a briefing council briefing, I think, a week ago. Seattle's Office of Labor Standards is empowered to enforce these workers rights. But because so many big businesses engage in wage theft, the Office of Labor Standards has a serious backlog. If your boss steals from you, it takes many months to even get the money you're owed. And we've seen how ruthless giant corporations like Uber can be in disregarding workers rights. The Office of Labor Standards is currently. Understand the mayor is instituted a hiring freeze, claiming that there is not the budget to adequately staff the department because of COVID related budget shortfalls. This is an example of austerity, but like any other austerity, these budget shortfalls are not automatic. If Mayor Durkan And if the political establishment were willing to tax big business, the city could raise the revenue to stop this austerity and create a public jobs program, not only to build social housing and on Green New Deal programs, but also to enhance the stuff that we would need to actually fully enforce labor law. Gig workers deserve to be protected with their rights, and that means this legislation is an important part of it. And we also need to end the austerity and the inadequate staffing at the Office of Labor Standards. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Swan, are there any other council members who wish to make comments on the bill? Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you. I just want to flag that we have a process and a product keyed up for the taxi drivers for minimum compensation. I think it's really important that the conversation that we've had around hazard pay also lead to a conversation around minimum compensation for the the drivers who deliver groceries and meals from restaurants. I think there was a lot of a lot of interest in seeing whether or not the the worker advocates and workers could get to a place with the the apps where they had some agreement on what not only what those conversations might look like, but what the what the product might be. But unfortunately, we didn't get there. But I am confident that those conversations will continue and we'll do everything I can in my role as a as a council member to support those conversations, because it is critically important that that folks who are doing this work that we can see right now in this in the state of emergency , how how critical it is. It's critically important that these folks receive some form of minimum compensation as well. Councilmember Herbold, are there any other questions or comments on the bill? Okay. Hearing, then I will ask that the curtain call on the passage of the bill as amended. Peterson I. Want. I Strauss i verbal. I. Juarez. I do is i. Morales i. I. President Gonzalez i. Nine in favor and unopposed. Thank you. The bill passes as amended and the chair will sign it. And I'd ask that the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Okay, colleagues, let's move into agenda item two. Will the clerk please read agenda item to into the record?

A RESOLUTION designating the Grand Street Commons Redevelopment Opportunity Zone pursuant to RCW 70.105D.150(1) and making findings in support of such designation.

SeattleCityCouncil_09242018_Res 31836

Bill passed and chair of the Senate. Please read the next agenda item. Agenda item ten Resolution 318 36 designee the grants she comments redevelopment opportunities and pursuant to ICW 70.10 5.1 50.1 and making findings in support of such designation, the Academy Committee recommends the resolution be adopted. In your district. Good. So I am very pleased to be able to present this resolution. What we are doing here is identifying a parcel of property that is going to have a what is called a redevelopment opportunity zone. It is at or close to the future site of the Judkins Park Light Rail Station. I believe this is in your District Council President Harold the Grand Street Commons. It's an a very impressive project that will be going on a Browns field, very polluted area, but that area is going to be demonstrably cleaned up. And part of the reason that we're doing this resolution is the Department of Ecology requires us to make this designation. There will be approximately 700 units of housing total on the site. About half will be affordable. 150 will be for households earning less than 60% of the area. Median income and 150 will be for households earning more than that, and then the other will be market rate. So because we have to make the determination that this brownfield property is something that can get cleaned up, that we are supportive of the project, that we will provide the designation, then they can go forward for additional funding and approval. And we definitely recommend that the revitalization of this property is very much the the juice is worth the squeeze and we're prepared to move forward with it. Any further comments? Councilman Gonzalez, thank you. Council President setting aside that, saying that, I'm not sure what it actually means. A lot of work and you actually get something for it. Okay, good. Thank you for the translation. I I'm really excited to support this particular resolution there. There's been a lot of effort at the city and in the city council in particular to really take a look at a lot of publicly available land that the city regularly surpluses for purposes of identifying those parcels of land to build additional affordable housing or to develop in some other way to advance our priority around affordable housing. And one of the things that I think we need a greater strategy around is identifying more of these contaminated sites that are either publicly or privately owned that cannot currently be utilized to build affordable housing upon because of the degree of contamination. And this provides us, I think, a really good example and model in the city of Seattle moving forward in terms of how we can be a little bit more creative about identifying buildable lands within the city and work with our representatives in our state delegation to secure funding through the state budget to allow for this type of environmental cleanup to occur within neighborhoods who are really just in desperate need of land and property to build on. And I'm really excited about the opportunity to work with these developers in particular to see if we can move forward a body of work over the next year to take, take, take a riff off of the work that we did on that Hope for Home program and see if we can come up with an inventory list, for example, to begin identifying other brown sites throughout the city of property that would be able to be utilized for affordable housing, but for the fact that it's contaminated. So I'm excited about this being the first step and excited about more to come in this in this space. And if I can just build a little bit more of the comment you just made, I want to say and recognize that Lake Union Partners Joe Ferguson and the Mount Baker housing group, Connor Hanson have done a tremendous amount of work. And one of my colleagues and it may have been you, Councilmember Gonzalez, said, what's it polluted with? And the litany is unbelievable that there was former commercial equipment manufacturing. There was actually a former commercial dry cleaner offsite, but the water was leaching from one property to the other. We've got petroleum hydrocarbons, words that I can hardly even begin to pronounce, let alone explain what they are. And because of their willingness to go in and remove the soils completely and then bring in fresh, we're going to have a site where people can live in a very healthy way. Very good. There are no further comments. Those in favor of adopting the resolution. Please vote i. I. Those oppose vote no motion carries the resolution is adopted in the chair will sign it. Please read items 11 and 12 into the record agenda.

AN ORDINANCE relating to parking enforcement; amending Ordinance 126237, which adopted the 2021 Budget; transferring positions out of the Seattle Police Department; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_08162021_CB 120148

Agenda Item seven Council Bill 120148 relating to parking enforcement and then the ordinance 126237, which adopted the 2021 budget, transferred positions of the Seattle Police Department in ratifying the ban for certain firearms. The committee recommends the bill as amended. Great. Thank you so much. Customer Burble. This one also comes from your committee. I'm going to hand it back over to you. Thank you so much. So just as a bit of background, last year during the budget process, the Council took budget actions and passed legislation expressing our intent of transferring both the parking enforcement officers in 911 dispatch out of the Seattle Police Department and into the new Community Safety and Communication Center. In May, we took the legislation up that would actually implement the the planned action from the the budget process the previous fall. At that time there was a divided workforce. The supervisors of the parking enforcement officers were interested in in moving to two star and they were are represented by protect and the parking enforcement officer rank and file was represented by IOG and they wanted to go to the Community Safety and Communication Center because there was this division among among workers and also among management. The the executive was also very interested in the pillows going to to store it, as were several council members. We amended that legislation and just transferred the nine or one dispatch to the Community Safety Communication Center. And we included a proviso extension to allow us to continue to have the conversation and make sure that the pillows were continuing to get paid while still at the Seattle Police Department. That proviso extension expires on September 1st. Unfortunately, this extra time did not really have an outcome of a different, different result. There is still a divided workforce. I know that the front line parking enforcement officers and protect who represents the officers are still in conversations with how to come to an agreement and improve relations. But I have heard that that the the positions haven't changed. But nevertheless, I'm being responsive to the the fact that a majority of councilmembers are interested in transferring the pillows to the Seattle Department of Transportation. And for that reason, the bill, as passed out of committee unanimously with an amendment that I introduced, does transfer a P.O. unit to start. The bill, includes a ratified and confirmed clause to ensure the unit is paid come September. Thank you. Thank you so much. Are there any additional comments on the bill? CHEERING then will the court please call the role in the passage of the bill? Let's get the. I. PETERSON All right. Strauss Yes. Herbert Juarez, I. Lewis Yes. And Council President Gonzalez I. Seven in favor. Nine opposed the bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will There is a fixed signature to the legislation on my behalf. Will the Court please read item eight into the record? The Court of the Land Use the Neighborhoods Committee Agenda Item eight Council Bill one 2121 relating to land use and zoning, adopting interim provisions by amended sections 23.70 6.004. 23.70 6.006 and 23.7 6.0 32 of and adding a new section 2340 2.0 41 to the municipal code to facilitate occupancy of street level spaces downtown during the COVID

Recommendation to receive and file the Guiding Principles recommended by the Queen Mary Land Development Task Force. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_09202016_16-0878

Let's give them all a round of applause for serving and thank them. Thank you. We're going to go now to our item on the Queen Mary. And it's a it's listed as both a presentation and agenda item. So we're going to move that agenda item and just do the whole thing here in one item. So if I can have the clerk, please begin by reading item 25 and then I'll kick us off. I'm sorry. Now that I'm 25, it's item number 17 and they'll kick us off. Report from Development Services recommendation to receive and file the guiding principles recommended by the Queen Mary Land Development Task Force District to. Thank you. We're going to before we turn this over to two staff, I just want to make a couple opening comments. I want to just begin by thanking first the council and then the task force that the council formed, this Queen Mary Tibet Land Development Task Force probably about a year ago or so. And Vice Mayor Lowenthal at the time had brought this forward along with myself, just to ensure that we would have a extensive community input process throughout. As far as developing these principles and guidelines for the development of the Queen Mary land around the Queen Mary. As a reminder, this is probably some of the most important undeveloped land, not just in the city, but really in the region. This is significant property. It is adjacent to our iconic Queen Mary. And there's a lot of potential to really connect this parcel to the rest of the city and build something really special for not just Long Beach, but really for for the region and for the state. So it's been an exciting process. And I want to start by thanking all the members of the task force. This was a a phenomenal group of people that served on this task force. There's four of them that are here, but I want to thank each of them first. The chair was Michael Bowen, who is going to be saying a few remarks today, who, as we all know, is a senior principal and design director at Studio 111. Geoff Hoffman, who wanted to be here so bad but is actually traveling for work. Who's who's vice chair of Hoffman and Associates was the Vice-Chair Ryan Elton Toon, who we know is a developer and the executive VP of Energy and Pacific Stewart Ashman, who was the CEO of Mohler, Becky Blair from Blair Real Estate. Julia Wang, who I know is here, who is the founder of Imprint Venture Lab and the CEO of Inner Trend. Kathleen Irvine from the from the community in the Willmar City area. Ken McDonald, who is the CEO of Long Beach Transit. I see Cheryl Perry, who's here, who is with Long Beach Heritage and president of the Long Beach Navy Memorial Heritage Group and one of our premier historic preservationists in the city. Kelly Ruggiero, who is the executive director of the Long Beach Symphony. And Kelly is also here. Steve Sheldon, who is the director of entertainment events at the Queen Mary. I saw Steve here. If he's not here now, he was maybe spoken in and out, but I did see him. Come in. Come in down here. And John Bendis, who's the principal and founder of German DS, Inc., I know if you want is here or not, but it's it was a a phenomenal group. They've worked very hard. They've been putting together a lot of their work. And you're going to see the culmination of their work tonight. And so with that, I'm gonna turn this over to city staff. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, we certainly agree that the task force has done a tremendous amount of work, a tremendous amount of visioning and bringing community input into what is really Premiere site in Long Beach. So Linda Tatum will go through from development services, will go through a bit of a staff report to give you an overview and highlights of what their work product was in your packet, you have kind of the full report which gets into a even greater detail and we'll give a summary of the great work that the care that the task force did. Linda Thank you, Mayor, and members of the Council. I'd like to start by just acknowledging the staff that worked on this incredible project, and that would be to my left here, Fernandinho, who's the planning staff? She was the project manager. I'd also like to recognize one of the our department's interns, Olivia Jonge, as well as our department director, Amy Bodak. And I would also like to acknowledge the assistance that we had, the very capable assistance we had from a project designer, an architect, a local architect who assisted the task force in their deliberations. So with that, I'd just like to introduce the overview of this project by acknowledging that the selection of a new leaseholder for the Queen Mary site was a very opportune time for the city to step back from the site and take the opportunity to really significantly reimagine what could occur on the site. It's an underutilized site. And this time and the appointment of the task force really played a critical role for the city to re vision that site. So with the mayor's creation of the task force there, their charge was multifold. It was, to, number one, recognize the Queen Mary ship, but also to re-envision the site as a world class destination, something that that could be and also to for the task force there key role was really to provide leadership in that deliberation and in that conversation with the community, their charge was to get a broad base of community input in terms of what that vision could be and to take that input and feedback from the stakeholders and the community and synthesize it into a. He's the vision for the site. And that resulted in the Queen Mary document that the draft document that you have in front of you in the course of their appointment over about eight months, they had a total of ten meetings. And during those meetings they routinely had very active community input and participation. Those meetings included presentations on topics related to the President, related to the topic of the vision, but also some very specialized presentations such as a potential aerial tram for the site, as well as the restoration of a historic carousel. So those were some of the topics. In addition, they had several design featurettes that were hosted by the architect Gwyn Pugh and his firm to facilitate that discussion. So I'd like to briefly just summarize the guiding principles that were that drove the the ultimate vision for the site. They started out with, first and foremost, the acknowledgment that the the Queen Mary ship really is the focal point. It serves a significant iconic cultural landmark for the city. And the idea is that whatever development occurs on the site should recognize the Queen Mary and its contribution to the city's history and culture, and that any development of the site just needs to compliment the Queen Mary. But the task force didn't forget that the other key role or the key objective of the development of the selection of a leaseholder is to really begin the process of developing that site so that it can allow funding to restore the Queen Mary to its historic grandeur. Another one of the key principles was esthetics for the site. And the important component here was that whatever is developed on the site, that it's attractive and that it's it is authentic architecture that really reflects the setting of the site itself. The other key point that the task force recognized was that whatever happens on the site, it has to have broad public access, not just getting into the site easily, but also just getting out of the site and providing very ample and adequate parking for the site. Another one of the guiding principles was connectivity. I think that there was a lot of focus that talked about how the site itself needs to be connected not only to the downtown, but also the activities and the the various events on the site must be connected to each other and that the public and those visiting the site must must have a different options or modes for actually access in the site. And also connectivity included visual access. It's not just getting around the site, but having the site be visual or be actually visible from the downtown and other parts of the city, as well as promoting the great views of the site itself across into the downtown area. Also the notion of complete community. The task force wanted to make sure that we weren't just creating a single purpose type of setting. The idea was that there would be multiple purposes for there, and that would include everything from social, cultural, educational opportunities as well as hospitality for the site. So it was really important that when you go to the site, it could serve a multiplicity of functions for for visitors as well as for local residents. Also iconic. That was the term that is intended to make sure that whatever gets developed on the site, not only does it respect the Queen Mary ship, but that be iconic in and of itself. So that, again, those views of the site of the Queen Mary site from the downtown and other parts of the city reflect something that's very substantial and and worthy of the the location on that piece of property. And lastly, the the task force deliberated on this one a lot and we added it. They added it at the last minute that because it kept coming up in the conversation, the need for this outdoor venue, this very unique outdoor venue to provide a very iconic and a high quality outdoor venue that would rival other local regional venues such as the Hollywood Bowl. The thought was that this would be unique because of its waterfront location and that it was certainly a a and a great unique opportunity for the the city to take advantage of. So with that, the other major component that went into the the guiding principles that are reflected in the document are a number of about seven or so key themes. And these are the key themes and elements that were were tossed out. There are tons of ideas that came out of the various members of the of the task force. And but they were all coalesced around these key themes that are represented here. They were things like not just the sense of arrival or creating a sensible arrival, but having the arrival to the site be an experience in and of itself. Making arrival there easier with wayfinding. Making, as I mentioned earlier, circulation to the site, getting to the site and and traversing the site itself through different modes, be it walking, biking, coming to the site, using other modes of transportation, including your cars, the water, taxi, but just be highly accessible however you choose to get there. Also making the parking accessible. And the other consideration was the esthetics and the design of the site. The idea, again, was to make sure that the the site and the the architectural features and everything was cohesive and really made the site that that world class destination that will be attractive not only to local residents who may want to spend an afternoon there, but for an international visitor, for example, who may stay at a local stay at the hotel on the site and spend the weekend there. So the idea, again, making sure that the site is attractive, that it is welcoming, that the building is all the buildings on the site are cohesive and they orient and enhance the Queen Mary itself, enhance the site and make it a world class destination. The other component was the open space. The task force felt that it was really critical to take advantage not only of the park site, but the open space of the site itself and with the orientation of buildings, the placement of the buildings to make sure that those open space corridors are actually maintained, so that at no time is the site overdeveloped. So you don't get to continue to take advantage of multiple open space opportunities on the site as well as open space views. And then lastly, the key uses of the site. The task force spent a lot of time and they had a lot of great ideas. And again, these are summarized in the they're presented in a little bit more detail in the document itself. But the idea is that there would be a variety of uses, cultural uses, entertainment uses, recreational uses, hospitality. Again, the ultimate goal being to have the site be a world class destination that that brands the city of of Long Beach, as well as the Queen Mary itself. So with that, I'd like to close out the presentation by talking about the next steps after the council takes an action on the these guiding principles. Tonight, we will be formally presenting them on the Mayor's behalf to the urban commons, the leaseholder and the I just to make sure that the you're aware that urban commons has been they attended many of the task force meetings and so they were they were there we know that they were listening to the incredible feedback that came directly from the community and from the task force. And the idea is that these guiding principles will inform their ultimate design of something truly iconic, something truly esthetic, and that really enhances the site. And we will look forward ultimately to their submittal of a set of plans for the long term development of the site. And that concludes staff's presentation. Be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. And I know that before we get the questions, I'm going to have Mr. Bowen come up, who's going to say a few words on behalf of the task force. And he led our group along with Mr. Hoffman. Well, thank you. As the chair of the Queen Mary Task Force. We are very proud and excited about the document. We've put a lot of energy into it and we think that this could be a really great document for the developer and the community to use as a guide. We hope that you support the document that we produced today. I also want to say that I want to thank the mayor for putting this group of task force members together. They were the best. They're very passionate. They're very talented and knowledgeable. And everything that's in this document has a reflection from all of the members. Didn't always agree, but we always were able to work things out and we think we have a really phenomenal document. I also wanted to thank Gwen Pew and Linda with Urban Studio. They were the consultants that helped facilitate some of the community meetings as well as our meetings, and they are one of the best in Southern California. I've worked with a lot of different firms and they're really wonderful. It was a really great choice. I also want to thank the city, particularly Linda Tatum and for I know for being very patient with us, listening to us and being such great communicators. And so and then finally, I want to thank the community. We had many people that showed up to all the meetings. We had some that went to a few. We had about 60 to 70 people come to one of the workshops. And again, as an architect, I've been to hundreds of workshops, and I was the most proud of our citizens of Long Beach. They were professional. They were respectful of each other. And they had a lot of great ideas. So there's a lot of their ideas that have permeated into this document as well. So we hope that the developer will find this document useful. We hope the city will find it useful. And we hope that they will embrace the developer, will embrace many of the ideas that are in there, if not all of them. And we ask for you to support this document tonight. Thank you. Thank you. The developer. Well, I think. Let's go ahead and Councilmember Pearce. Thank you for that. I want to first just thank everybody that has been a part of this process I attended as a resident before I got into council a few of the task force meetings and just thought that you guys asked a lot of phenomenal questions. You gave a great opportunity for the community members to be involved. And everybody that attended, I think, came wholeheartedly with Let's Dream Big. And that dreaming big is how cities become great. But I also want to thank the mayor and previous vice mayor, Sara Lowenthal, for process. I think that our city has come a long way in the way that we envision things, the way that we say we're going to invest, whether it's homelessness, whether it's. Recognizing. The gravity of what this piece of parcel is, and it's about process to put everybody in a room together and say, let's vision together. And that's how we get away from investing in projects that might not pan out. And so I am very hopeful that while we've spent. Many years. In the past talking about this site, talking about what it could mean, that this is the first opportunity that we've really had to invest in it with a vision that includes not part of the community, not some, but everybody. And so just thank you to the mayor and previous vice mayor for that process. I've always been supportive of it, and I think that what we have here with these guiding principles is really historic. Not to say that, you know, people have come together and say we want to have a process that's that includes everybody. But it's historic because the Queen Mary is 80 years old. It is a place that is often sometimes people's first experience when they come to Long Beach. And it's a place to experience history. And I love and the guiding principles that it says, let's have a sense of arrival, because I think a lot of times you go to the Queen Mary and that that parking lot just kind of stops you. And it takes away. Some of the magic that could be experienced on the Queen Mary. And so having a place of arrival, but also having a place, a sense of an experience that you leave wanting to come back in. And so it's a historic day to be able to say that we as a city have spent time and energy and a process and didn't just throw money at something or make a decision in a silo. And so today for me is is about the vision of what we can have happen at the Queen Mary. But it's also about a process that's including everybody from workers to community members to the environment, to talking about transportation, to dreaming big, about having something that that brings people across the water to the mainland. Those are big, exciting ideas. And it takes a community that's wholeheartedly behind that to make that happen. And so I'm really excited to support the Guiding Principles today and excited about what's going to come in the future. And thank you, everybody, for your hard work. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. I, too, want to congratulate the task force. I think it's. Very. Mindful this work was just all encompassing. As Councilmember Pierson mentioned, she said it so well that, you know, this was a great process. It was a wonderful to be able to see all of this kind of come together and that all of you in your expertize. I know, Cheryl, I go to her for my historic preservation, anything related to historic preservation. I go to Cheryl and I'm glad she was a part of this. And so many of you will now have a lasting impression on the Queen Mary. Because of your work. And so I also want. To acknowledge. Scott, who is in the audience as well. I know when I first got elected, we talked about a carousel. And adding. A carousel. To the Queen Mary. And so I don't know if there has been any discussion on that and where that's at, but I know that there's been a lot. But Linda, would you like to answer that question? Yes. We actually had a presentation on the historic carousel and the potential for it to be located on the site. Okay, wonderful. Because I heard all these magic things about this carousel. So that would be a great addition. But thank you all for your tremendous work. Again, appreciate it. Thank you, Councilmember Ringa. Thank you. One of the things that I'm more accommodating now, when you talk about an iconic district, we know that the Queen Mary is iconic, is probably the most iconic feature that we have along our coast is Queen Mary. But the city of Long Beach itself has a long history. Used to be a naval town. Back in the day when I was a kid growing up in East Los Angeles, we would make a trek to the pike down at the town on the shore here. And there were a lot of iconic structures there as well. I remember the the cyclone racer, the roller coaster, and you guys are too young. Probably the only one who remembers it. He probably built it. But you remember it well, you know. And right now, when we drive under under the under the bridge right there on the shoreline drive, we you see the light going up and down as if there was a rollercoaster there. So, I mean, I think that I'm not I'm not suggesting that we build a roller coaster along with a carousel, and that's a totally different project. But I think that we should look at some of those iconic structures or iconic features that Long Beach had back in back in its heyday. We're trying to bring back some waves. Look, we're studying the breakwater. So, I mean, we could look at inclusion of some of those features as well. The carousel we just mentioned right now, which is somewhat of a throwback to the days when when the pike was activated and very and very well attended, millions of people kept along beaches to visit the park. So you want to include some of those that features that well as well, I think would be very beneficial. And and add to the the the development of an iconic district right around the Queen Mary. If food for thought. Thank you. Very. Summer Richardson. Thank you. I have a really important question. Where's the NFL stadium? I thought that was a part of this. I guess. I guess not. I would say. That somewhere. Else. So I think this is a I want to talk about the process. I think this is a great model for the city to select the task force and put together these guiding principles. I would imagine this would be very helpful to a developer. You guys did half the work, so hats off to the task force for doing that. And, you know, we need to think about replicating that model with with other developers. We, you know, partner with doing some of this outreach. And I'm sure we'll get a tremendous product. There are some really great things here. One thing that I think is stood out to me the most is the potential for a performance facility like, you know, Hollywood Bowl type performance facility. I think that would be a tremendous, you know, asset to our city that folks wouldn't have to go all the way to, you know, the Anaheim, you know, to Anaheim, to the Verizon or whatever they call that Anaheim Meadows. I don't know Irvine Meadows, whatever they call it, to change some names or go all the way out to Hollywood. But have something here, I think that could be really a hit. Also, it's it's you know, it's always been hard to describe when I when I have meetings or something at the Queen Mary or at Hotel My , it's always hard to get people to to describe how to get to the south waterfront. So I love the creativity here in that we in the guiding principles make it easy in thinking about a gondola and things like that. So I just want to say to all involved, so Staff Task Force Council is all involved. This is fantastic work and you should be proud of it. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you. I want to echo the comments of my colleagues and thank the task force for their great work on this. I've had a chance to speak with a few of them who have reached out to me to explain kind of the process and their vision. And I appreciate you taking the time to do that. I think it's going to be fantastic, and I really do believe that we need to have more venues to support the arts in the city. And using the the landscape that we have in this city is very important for us to think about in terms of our future planning. So thank you for the work that you do and the efforts that you put into this committee. Thank you. Any other public comment on this? Any public comment? Please come forward. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council Members. One of the advantages of being real old is that this is kind of a repetition of what I've heard over the last 30 years of coming here. We actually had a presentation by the designer maker, manufacturer of a wooden roller coaster who wanted to put it over on that side, stood right here and suggested a wooden really coaster. Also was a large demonstration of the overhead gondolas. The manufacturers of that ride came by and we would leave from where Point Avenue was, was going to go crossed over there. But I think there may have been a missed opportunity because I know I didn't go any of the meetings, but had we had a different alignment in the in the cosmos, we may not have had to have this study because some of you who are old, I remember when Disneyland was going to develop the whole thing. And my thought was, is there any archival information of what Disney's design was? Is there any way of getting hold of that? I mean, they're the best in the business doing what they do. I don't know what happened to shoot that down. But that's just a thought. Maybe someone in that task force could see if there is any archival designs, concepts, that kind of material around. So I just wanted to share that with you. And so it was the roller coaster, the carousel and, and the gondolas have all been discussed at this council in previous years. Thank you for listening. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, City Council members. My name is Alexandra Wayman. I'm a representative of Unite Here Local 11, a hotel and restaurant employees union representing over 20,000 workers in L.A. and Orange County. We have members that live, work and play in the city of Long Beach. First, I would like to say thank you to the Queen Mary Redevelopment Task Force for their work on the guiding principles for this redevelopment project. The Queen Mary Redevelopment Project will include many new uses for the Long Beach community to enjoy, including public space, recreational activities, venues for entertainment and a hotel on the lounge on the land surrounding the Queen Mary. Our purpose in being here is to make sure that these offerings are not negatively impacted by a labor dispute. Our union has entered into labor peace agreements on projects that have a public interest. This includes a strong track record throughout Los Angeles County, including LAX, the city of Los Angeles, in the city of Santa monica. This project will have public uses, and you, as the city, have a right to require a labor peace agreement to protect that interest. We strongly recommend that the City Council require a Labor peace agreement for the landside hotel development operations to ensure the city is protected against lost revenue. Thank you so much for your consideration in this matter. Next week, please. Good evening. Mayor Garcia and city council members. My name is Carol Roberts. I've been a Long Beach resident for 36 years. And I do remember the Cyclone Razor, by the way, but not when I was living here. I'm looking forward to the redevelopment of the land surrounding the Queen Mary, because I always enjoy visiting the Queen Mary and going to the restaurants there and taking out-of-town visitors to the Queen Mary. And I'm excited that you're going to make it even more of a destination. That will be great. I hope that the proposed redevelopment project will uphold the working standards in Long Beach and that this project will serve as a model for future development projects in Long Beach. The Queen Mary Redevelopment Project should ensure that workers are treated with dignity and respect and that and that all future projects are future jobs at the site surrounding the Queen Mary are good jobs that provide workers with good wages. I encourage the city to implement a local hiring program that will provide jobs to residents in the Long Beach community. Additionally, in compliance with the California Coastal Act, the project should include affordable accommodations and recreational activities so that all residents and visitors to the city of Long Beach can enjoy spending time in the coastal zone. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Very good you cook as the address one another advantage of the Queen Mary's circumstances were to have it. I have suggested to Anita, to to France and to Casey Wasserman, as well as to Don Carnaby, that if the Long Beach Marine Stadium is selected as the rowing venue, which will solidify, I believe, the event. We can look forward to having a site that would be seen in no other place on the face of the planet, i.e. a rendezvous of the Queen Mary, the Queen Mary two and the QE two, which would make a tremendous backdrop for festivals and particularly fireworks displays following the events here. And I think they are looking at that. And so everything that can be done with the Queen Mary to keep it and keep it puffed up, I think is certainly not withstanding the the Olympics is the key attraction that brings people here to this city. Thank you. Thank you. See no other public comment to go back to the council. Great Councilman Austin. Thank you very much. I just wanted to be brief. I mean, this presentation has kind of brought back the very first issue regarding the study session. And and I can't just emphasize the importance of as we are building up our downtown and and this this this land development task force and the planet, the guiding principles that we are probably will be adopting this evening. It's important to to emphasize the access to Long Beach along the 17 freeway. I can't emphasize that enough. You know, it's very important that we we work with with our regional partners to make sure that we identify the resources, to make sure that that freeway is improved. And access to our downtown and to the Queen Mary is actually improved as well. I did have a question because one of the comments commenters mentioned a hotel, but I don't know if I heard that in the the actual presentation for staff. Is that a plan part of the plan? Yes, it is included in the guiding principle in terms of the complete community as well as the one about a destination. So the task force spent a lot of time speaking about having a hospitality use on the site and you'll see it in the backup material, in the actual document. In just one of my personal favorites over the years. I just have to ask, was the casino considered? I don't believe it came up specifically, but they talked really broadly about other entertainment and recreational activities. Okay. Just just just wanted to throw it out there. Thank you. See no other comment from the council or the public. Again, members, please cast your votes. And as we do that, thank you to the committee members that are here, the task force members. Fantastic work and a great group. And we look forward to the developer and the next step of the process. So thank you. Motion carries. Great. Thank you again. Moving on then, we're going to go ahead and do item 15. We're going go to public comment right after a couple of quick items. So 15 is the one that's being postponed. I'm going to turn over to Councilman Price.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the sale of City real property for multifamily development; declaring the property located at 12705 30th Avenue Northeast surplus to the City’s needs and authorizing its sale to the Low Income Housing Institute or its designee; and authorizing the Director of Finance and Administrative Services to execute and deliver the contract for transfer of land, deed, and related documents.

SeattleCityCouncil_01092017_CB 118888

Agenda item five. Constable 118888. Relating to the sale of city real property for multifamily development, declaring the property. Located at 12705 30th Avenue, Northeast surplus to the city's. Needs and authorizing its sale to the Low Income Housing Institute or his designee, and authorizing the Director of Finance and Administrative Services to execute and deliver the contract for transfer of land, deed and related documents. Committee recommends the bill passes amended. House Member Burgess Thank you. This is Fire Station 39, the old location out in Lake City. And we have a little procedural matter that we're going to take care of first. Substitute version of this bill, which Councilmember Herbold is going to speak to. Concerning her vote. I move to amend Council Bill 11 8888 by substituting version eight for version seven. Second spot, moved in second to substitute version eight for version seven. All those in favor say I. I oppose. The ayes have it. So we have a substitute bill. May I speak to the changes? Yes. Should I wait? I assume people knew of it. We've already had it voted. But why don't you tell us what we just voted on? Okay. The changes reflected in the substitute recognize the council's role in moving this project forward dating back to 2011. The original bill, as proposed, did not have a recognition of the resolution passed in 2011 Resolution 30862, which directed the Office of Housing and the Finance and Administrative Services Department to look at the suitability of the the property. The 2011 resolution that actually required that was resolution 31292, which required that the Office of Housing consider this particular site as a a site for meeting shelter needs in the city. And then later in 2012, there's reference now in the ordinance recognizing that statement of legislative intent, requesting that the executive develop a proposal for the future development of Fire Station 29. Now, instead of long term shelter, the focus was on long term housing for low income or for formerly homeless individuals or families. And then in 2013, the Council earmarked $950,000 in funding to support specifically the capital costs associated with the the activation of the ground floor space that would be would provide services desired by the community, which then turned out to be child care services. And then finally, the recognition that the city has year after year moved these for these funds forward without reallocating them for for another purpose, with the idea that it might take some time to get the disposition of this property in line with what the the Council and the Executive had hoped this property's use would be would be ultimately determined to be. A considerable concern. BURGESS Thank you. This legislation specifically declares this property surplus to the city's needs and authorize authorizes its transfer to the Low Income Housing Institute for Affordable Housing and Child Care and Preschool Services. It authorizes the Director of Finance and administrative services to execute and deliver a contract for transfer of the land deed and related documents. Lehigh has agreed to construct a six storey mixed use building with 70 units of affordable housing. These units will serve people with area median income of 60% or less. It will also include 15 one bedroom units 25 two bedroom units, five three bedroom units, five open one bedroom units and 20 studio units. So definitely for many of these units are suitable for family housing, these units must remain affordable, affordable for 50 years. There will be four preschool classrooms in the building on the first floor that will serve up to 80 children. These classrooms will be run by the Refugee Women's Alliance as part of the Seattle Preschool Program. And the idea is that this building will be ready for occupancy in September of 2018. We heard public comment today that the city did not follow its normal process for disposition of property. And so I just want to address that very briefly. In March of 2012, OFAC sent out 1550 neighborhood notices soliciting comments on Fire Station 39 and potential uses for the property as either homeless shelter, housing or low income housing. There were 219 separate comments received as a result of this early feedback from the community. The Director of Planning and Development embarked on a several year process, working with the community to develop an acceptable proposal for a redevelopment of the old fire station 39 site. In March of 2016, FAA sent out additional notices on disposition of the property, explaining the work that had been done and explaining that the property would be used for low income housing for families and a preschool. This notice was sent to all residents and property owners within 1000 feet of the property as well as anyone, any individual organization or agencies who had commented on the earlier notice. The second notice garnered garnered zero responses consistent with the city's surplus property disposition policies. FAA has issued a notice in the Daily Journal of Commerce on December 14 and 15, announcing a public hearing on the final disposition. That hearing was held on January four, 2017, at 930 in the morning. The committee held the public hearing and then voted on this action that we are acting on today. All of the city's normal policies and process for the disposal of surplus property were followed in this case. Thank you very much. Any further comments from any of my colleagues? Councilmember suarez. Thank you. I just want to add some comments and thank the council member for Council Member Licata and of course Council member. I just forgot Lisa's last name. Herbold And the people that worked to this, of course, Councilmember Burgess. I'm incredibly excited to vote to approve the transfer of Fire Station 39 to the Low Income Housing Institute for Development of Affordable Housing and a new preschool. The homes created on this site will house 70 families making at or below 60% of the area. Median income people making 60% of AMI are often people in our service sector, grocery workers and other food service employees, nonprofit professionals like the preschool teachers who will be running the programs on the ground floor of this building. These are the people that make the comforts we value most in our communities possible. The preschool on the ground floor of the building will be funded using the Seattle Preschool Levy dollars and will provide for classrooms serving up to 80 children. I'm very happy to see that the Refugee Women's Alliance Rewa as a provider for this new school as North Seattle becomes a hotspot for growth, having affordable housing like this new building will ensure that people can work, play and live in the communities of their choice. As in North Seattle, particularly District five has become more diverse in recent years. Having organizations and having organizations that are culturally responsible. Responsive, I'm sorry. Like where you are physically located in the community is more important than ever. At the recent North Scale Human Service Summit, the first of its kind in the North End on December 6th. The providers talked about the need for place based services and services that reflect the community. I'm sorry, services that reflect the community. This is a great example of the city making investments to support the establishment of the very resources we know people want and need. The most high quality preschool has been proven to be the deepest impact on children and children's leaders success and stability in life. This is an asset that will continue to pay back pay back to the public in ways we may not even realize today. This is a great use of public land, and I'm happy to vote yes on this bill today. And as a resident of the North and particularly Lake City way for 30 years, I can say that the neighbors, the communities were aware of the growth and the planning that went into and are happy and are welcoming of this facility in Lake City, way in District five. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Whereas Councilman Burgess, more comments. Yeah. Just finally, this is, as I said in committee last week, this is a win win. We have a great new fire station right next door and that's serving of the Lake City area in northeast Seattle. We have affordable housing going in an area where it's clearly needed. But it's really gratifying to me that the city pressed hard to make sure we had preschool classrooms here. We have a shortage of preschool classrooms in North Seattle. This is going to address that. But this is a model that I hope the city will take to other parts of the city where we are able to serve a variety of public purposes, from affordable housing to taking care of our kids and making sure that they have the strong and fair start that they deserve. So to others in the city government who deal with disposition of city property, please look at this as a model for what we might do with the other parcels in the city that we don't need for our basic core city services, but could be used for something like we're seeing here at the old fire station 39 site. Thank you. Any further comments? Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I just want to thank Councilmember Burgess Town Council central staff for working with me to revise a few of the recitals. I just think it's really important that the city tell the full story of projects like this. This was a project that took six years from from inception to bring to fruition. And I also want to thank my former boss, former Councilmember Lakota, for his vigilance on this project. He went to countless community meetings and heard many, many concerns. I had a lot of fun reading from a 2012 Urban Politics, his his newsletter, where he very wisely stated that facts alone were not going to change the minds of people who had concerns. And he was right. It was involvement of the community in in the process of of making this final decision that really, really made a difference. So with that, I also want to thank the seven or eight different city departments that were that were involved in bringing this forward. And again, thank both the previous councils, as well as the executive in making sure that we continue to earmark the funds that were later that will be now used for the implementation of the child care facility downstairs. Funds that the Council had. Many years before, and I'm sure there were many uses that would have been great uses for that. But we stayed true to what our original goals were, and that's fantastic when the city can do that. Very good. Please call the role on the passage of the amended bill. 118888. Swan I. Burgess. I. Gonzalez. I. Purple High Johnson. Suarez O'Brian. High President Harrell. High seven in favor and unopposed. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. And before we go to the next agenda, item number six from Councilman Burgess. Councilmember Johnson had a personal family situation that he forewarned me is going to have to do with 315 not knowing when it was going to occur. He knew he had to leave. So he will be missing the remainder of this. And we wish him well on his personal obligation. Please read. Agenda item number six into the record.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt resolution amending the Master Fee and Charges Schedule. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04042017_17-0228

Thank you. Now moving on to our hearing, which is the first item up, we can have the agenda for the hearing. Madam Clerk. Hearing item one is a report from financial management recommendations received supporting documentation into the record concluded the public hearing and Adobe resolution amending the master fee and charges schedule city. And. Q We're going to go ahead and turn this over to staff. Mr.. MODICA Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff report will be given by Leah Erickson, our Assistant Finance Director. Good afternoon or evening met and members of City Council. City Council's approval is being requested for mid-year changes to the master fee and charges schedule. These changes are identified an attachment to the Council letter for the mid-year adjustment process for departments. I've proposed a total of 30 fee changes to the schedule, along with eight fee deletions. The master fee and charges schedule is updated at least twice a year to allow departments to meet City Council's stated policy on user fees, which calls for full cost recovery whenever appropriate. City Council last approved an amended master fee and charges schedule on September six, 2016 as part of the FY17 budget process. Some examples of fee changes in the report include changes in library room rental fees in order to encourage public use of under-utilised spaces. Fees charged to transportation network companies such as Uber and Lyft operating on temporary permit at the airport. And an adjustment parking permit fees that aligns the city's fees with prevailing market rates. The full list of fee changes and deletions is available in the Council letter. That concludes my staff report, and Department of Representatives are here to answer any specific questions you may have on any of the proposed fee changes. Thank you. We'll start with Councilman Austin. You know, just have one quick question. Obviously, this is a staff report is pretty voluminous. What are the what exactly are the feed deletions that you mentioned and where are they at? So count Councilman Austin, the attachment A has a two page list and on attachment A page three of three is the list of proposed fee deletions for fiscal year 17, and it includes some changes in library services related to eliminating fees for compact discs, video DVDs and other media type of charges. And this is being aligned in order. These fees were collected by the library on behalf of Friends of the Long Beach Library, who pays for the media. And so the Library Department had requested two ladies with books which are being provided free of charge, and so these fees are being deleted. In addition, there was a couple of coffee urn charges that are no longer being offered. So those fees are being deleted as well. I see. Thank you. Council member are actually based on. Richardson. Do you have anything? No plan. Customer Pearce Yes, I want to support obviously a lot of this. I did have a few questions that I wanted to just ask quickly about the TNC. It says here that our fee structure is based on the cost of providing the services. And so I wanted to understand a little bit more what the cost of providing the services are and whether the $3 fee both for dropping off and picking up came from. Yes. Councilmember Jess Romero, Director, I want to just first frame this up, that this is a pilot program, as we had earlier explained to the council when it was approved. The fee itself is based on a number of factors. There's a range of fees that we looked at at competitive airports, all in California, most of them here in the L.A. region. And there's a range of fees. They go anywhere from about $2 to $5. And a lot of that is reflective of the fact that each airport is different in terms of its cost structure, what it needs to support, or what they call the landside element or the roadways, parking areas that are out, you know, outside of the fence, if you will. So with this research, you know, we believe that the $3 fee for a pick up or dropoff is appropriate. And really what this is doing is this is helping us continue to diversify the revenue that is required at the airport. We heard from the council very loudly and clearly when there was a discussion on the FISA vote that financial stability was extremely important. And the more money that we make through these programs like this, the less we have to rely on other funding sources, specifically passenger facility charges, which are entirely driven by activity at the airport. So will there be these fees be used to invest back in the airport infrastructure parking? Can you elaborate on that a little bit? Absolutely. And to your point, this year alone, this fiscal year, the airport has spent about $550,000 on roadway improvements for any recent visitors to the airport within the last few months. They'll notice that the island area that separates the inner and outer curb was lengthened and shrunk to allow for more traffic lanes in front of the terminal to ease congestion. We do resurfacing projects all the time, so this actually is just going to go part of the way toward helping us fund or landside element more appropriately so again, that we don't have to rely on funds that otherwise could go to securing debt on the bonds that are outstanding at the airport and other projects . Last question. I see that the yellow cabs, they have a one time fee and this one is pick up and drop off. Can you just elaborate? And I promise that's my last question. Well, again, this pilot here was specifically intended to focus on the T and C's. We just completed a ground transportation study through a consultant. And our goal is over the next several months, but also dovetailing with this pilot period, to gather more information and examine fees for all commercial ground transportation providers. The legacy fee, I'm calling it from Yellow Cab is a fee that's been in existence, I think, since the 1980s. There's no doubt that it needs to be updated, but we'll be looking at the appropriate fee structure in the coming months. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I want to thank city staff for this report. I know that they have to do it twice a year. It is a lot of work. We appreciate that. I do want to, for the record, just put on note that and ask a rhetorical question. Leah, can you confirm that any fee made to the fee schedule, which is very lengthy, is outlined in the letter? There are no changes that were not specifically called out in the letter that a constituent who was trying to read this would be confused by. Is that accurate? Councilwoman Mango Between the the letter and attachment a to the letter, every single fee change or deletion is detailed. Just not exhibit A because that seemed a little bit overwhelming to some, but I wanted to make sure that I was accurate in what I had stated. That is correct. Exhibit A contains the full list of all existing fees and charges, including any. Amendments that were already that are singled out and identified in attachment A to the memo. Perfect. And then secondly, I just want to thank the city staff for their creative approach to parking. Splitting the day, parking, parking in the evening parking really will open up. And then the hire. Option in terms of our ability to properly sell parking at those locations currently without actually knowing how many days versus night users you have, you have a limit to how much you can sell. So we've a shortage of those permits. And I know that the community and I personally who use some of these downtown lots will really appreciate that they have that differentiator. I think it's a great solution. We've heard the community asking for more parking. This is a way to get there and I think it was. Creative and I appreciate the hard work. Done on that. And then finally, and to echo the comments of Councilman Pearce related to taxes versus cab and legacy fees, I'd be interested in aligning the legacy fee. I think what's good for one is what's good for all I know in meeting with the cab providers, they said they wanted a level playing field. I think the more appropriate way to level the playing field is that everyone move to a per pickup, per drop off fee. And then I would also like to see us explore. The neighborhoods who are around the airport have recently been significantly impacted by people parking on Friday in their neighborhoods and then now there's not any parking for their kids birthday parties and utilization of those areas. They're there and parking there for more than the 72 hour limit, which is allowable. And so then they're taking either an Uber or a cab from a nearby location to the airport. So they're trying to skirt the fees. They're also parking at our local hotels that are in the area, even though they are not guests in the hotel. So I've seen this and they will park at a local hotel. They will get in a cab and go to the airport even though they are not a guest. So I'd like to see a little bit of that money in the first year set aside to alleviate the pains that are being caused by this, as long as it's allowable under the federal rules related to airport revenue. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you. I, too, want to thank staff for the report. And I have a couple of questions. I first wanted to point out that I like the proposed changes, although they don't impact my district with the parking fees and the lots having consistent daytime and nighttime parking fees I think is appropriate. And I've talked with Mr. Beck about that, that we shouldn't be charging more for nighttime permits or daytime permits. We should try to have some consistency there. So I like that that's at least being proposed in regards to some some lots that are mentioned in there. And the master fee staff letter I did. I have a few questions about the TNC fees as well, and I want to thank the airport staff for taking some time to talk with me earlier this week about it. And my concern is really this, and that is if this is a pilot program and we're using it to collect data, why are we not waiting to determine what the fee should be based on the data that we're collecting? And if we believe that there is going to be a need to increase revenues in order to offset some of the detrimental impacts of having this additional flow of traffic through the airport, then where did we come up with the $6 amount? So if there's any answer to that, I'd appreciate that. Thank you. Staff Councilman do to clarify it's some the fee is is a an either or fee. So the way it would work operationally is the customer would be brought to the airport passing into the Geofence system. $3 is added to that fare. They have to go out, either leave the it will leave the airport and go on their way to another pick up. Or we have a under the pilot program, we have a holding lot and they can stay there. So it's it's it's $3 for either a pick up or a drop off. You know, they won't necessarily do two transactions during one visit to the airport. Again, as I said earlier, as it relates to the fee, we know that it is costing the airport money to maintain the roadways, to do repairs, to do enforcement. All of that is is ongoing. That's just as it relates to the expense that up to this point, the airport, other than through what I'm going to call it, fairly nominal fees that are assessed for the permits for these commercial providers. We have not kept up anywhere near to what it cost to run the programs. At the very least, you know, it's the goal of the airport at the very least to achieve cost recovery, which I'm not even convinced that we'll get there when this program is complete. And again, part of that is collecting the metrics, the data and determining whether or not these fees need to be adjusted at some point in time. So I think it is very appropriate to go into this with a fee. It's bracketed by the other fees that are being assessed at the other airports. And again, each airport is different. But based on what I know, we're expanding what staff what I've seen staff information, the data and what we're expecting based on these these trip fees, it's not going to cover these costs. It'll get us in the right direction. And as I said earlier, what we're trying to do is diversify the revenues from many sources so that we don't have to rely on fewer revenue centers like parking, airport concessions, things like that. So this is really going to help our overall program. And I appreciate that because your answer clarifies to me that it's not an arbitrary fee. It's a fee that is designed primarily for cost recovery. So do you envision that after the pilot program, there will be an adjustment to both the TNC fees and any fees assessed on our cab services based on data obtained? Or is this is this fee estimated to be able to be sufficient and cover what we think it's going to need to cover? Quite honestly, I think it's a little too early to tell. I can I can tell you this with reasonable certainty that the $3 fee, I think, is is a good cost point, if you will, a price point for the operators. Again, I think that it's going to help move us toward cost recovery as it relates to the cab drivers and the cab companies. You know, obviously, it and it was mentioned earlier that, you know, the goal is a level playing field and we would we'd obviously support that as well. What we'll have to look at is their cost of operating that particular enterprise versus the TNC, which are you know, they're measurably different. So we don't want to discriminate by, you know, necessarily setting one uniform fee it. May turn out that that's what happens. I want the data to show, though, you know, what what really is defensible, what is appropriate. And again, our eye is toward really making sure that we're protecting revenue streams and growing revenue streams at the airport. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you, Councilwoman. Next up, we have Councilmember Supernova. Thank you. I think Mr. Romo just answered all of my questions, but I'll just frame it a little differently. And that is your your wording was the fees are bracketed by the region, almost like a market driven fee. But to clarify that there is no correlation between Long Beach and a lake size airport in the region. Cost could be drastically different. Would that be correct? Well, I would say we're looking at, I think, within the fee range or the cost or the fee assessed at the airports that we're looking at, especially the airports there between two and $5. So percentage wise, yes, you can say it's drastic, but from an absolute dollar amount, it's you know, I think it's not as big of a spread. That said, you know, each airport is a little bit different. And I believe that based on the characteristics and the the cost burden and the requirements at bay at Long Beach, that $3 is a very appropriate fee to start this program. Okay. And then that's just on the function of the service. And beyond that, we have the cost of the airport. Not all airports in the region have a new terminal, a new parking structures, etc., to pay for. Yes, that's correct. I would say this, though, is that it's not necessarily even in the newness of safe facilities or assets at an airport. In our case, we've got aging assets and things that need more attention. And again, if we don't have to take money from other sources of revenue, that's not much more. We can invest in other airport projects. So I believe I'm a firm believer in making sure that elements at the airport, whether it's on the airfield or the landside, that they are being able they're able to generate and extract revenue from various sources in this case, because Long Beach Airport, really, for all intents and purposes, has not had a ground transportation program up to this point. We need to do that anyway. And part of that is making sure that it looks at appropriate funding, you know, to meet the burdens, to repave the roadways, to improve, you know, ingress and egress to the airport. And really even what we'd like to do, if possible, is use some of this revenue to help fund what I'm going to call wayfinding or beautification projects at the airport. That's a that's a longer term goal of ours. But I think that anything we can do to help fund that and offset that from other funding sources that like, for example, PFC, I'd like to make sure that we could keep PFC in place, firm and center on our bond obligations and use these other revenue sources for what I'm going to call operating expenses. Okay. Thank you. One last question or just a comment. I concur with Councilmember Mungo's statement about the issue with folks having an Uber or Lyft pickup within a neighborhood or a hotel parking lot. If there's any way to get that into the contract, we'd appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. I just wanted to highlight one additional line that is also changing the reservation based around transportation and non reservation based ground transportation. Just to be clear, is that, say your limousines, your bus services that are for hire when you drop off six or eight people at the airport, all of those. And it seems as though the permit is only being increased for the one time, but not necessarily on the per pick up or the per drop off. It's on one of three of attachment. Yes. In the case of the other, ground transportation is really this pilot program because of the technology that's available and because of industry standards, where it is a per trip fee, that's we're going into this focusing on the tax ideally. And if you've had a chance or do get a chance to read the ground transportation study, one of the recommendations is for the installation and investment of what's called an ABI or automated vehicle identification system, because ideally every commercial vehicle that goes into the airport should be paying some fee based on activity. I said earlier, I it may be that it it results in a single fee, but I know this from my time at L.A. World Airports, they actually have different fees, trip fees for different types of vehicle. I'm not saying we would do that. I'm not saying we wouldn't do that. Part of this exercise is to collect that data. So these fees here relative to the permit fees. Again, in my experience, they were greatly under charging those service providers. We weren't. We are we have not, to this point being, been recovering the administrative time that it takes to process these documents , get them signed and sent out. So this is this right here is is really just to cover the paperwork. I appreciate that. I, of course, would prefer to be fee free. I do understand, though, that this program and other programs has an impact to our neighborhoods, which is why I brought that up specifically. I read the memo. I appreciate the research done, and I recognize that it is the industry standard and we're not the first into this market. And so for us to take a major diversion from that might be difficult for both the consumer and the the industry. So I appreciate your work on this and I'll be supporting this item. Thank you. Thank you. And just to just as a clarification, also, Mr. Remo, I mean, I think almost every airport that has implemented the rideshare program has has a fee, correct? That's correct. Okay. Thank you. There's a motion and a second public comment on the fee schedule issue. Please come forward. Just a quick question and a good point Councilwoman Mongeau made, and I'm not sure I followed all of the details, but if a neighborhood is being impacted by that, can there not be what some neighbors have, some neighborhoods have as a parking permit that the neighbors would have and that anybody that has a car parked there that does not have that permit would be towed, period. Thank you. Q Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Max Gellar. This is Diana, my colleague. We're from left. We look forward to picking up passengers at the airport, but we have some serious concerns, namely the trip fee. Just a point of clarification, these trip fees. All airports do have a trip fee where we're permitted. Some of them don't have both a pick up and a drop off fee. Especially airports besides Burbank, San Jose, San Diego, a bigger one. It's just a pick up fee. There's no drop off fee. So what we're asking for is for the pilot to begin to gather this data to then determine a more permanent fee structure. And it's not Lyft and Uber that pays these fees. It's the customers themselves. We're sort of a conduit. We get these fees and then it goes straight to the airport for the cost recovery that they're seeking. Also, generally, airports that we've dealt with have provided a really sort of annotated detailed description of the TNT operations costs and where these fees will go down to the point of the salary of the people who point to where a taxi pickup has to happen. We want this pilot to start tomorrow, but we have concerns that if we sign an agreement with a double sided, $3, $3, it will set a bad precedent. And we haven't sent back the agreement for that reason. So what we're asking is that the six months start with all the data being collected and then a more appropriate fee is sort of determined based on the data we haven't been picking up at the airport, so we're still confused as to where they're getting these numbers from their client, you know, all the sort of numbers that they're citing. But we're here for any any questions you have. As a resource, too. And a follow up for any past experience. We have California airports and experience with airports, the size and that's all. Thank you. Thank you very much. Let me go back to Mr. Mr. Romo, because I know I just want to ask a question. The regional airports of the five regional airports, I believe we are the one that currently doesn't have the TNC program in place. Of those five, do they all have which only have one or the other or both? Can you? I would say Ontario Airport currently does not allow TNC. I think they're working toward that here in the coming months. L.A.X. charges $4, pick up and drop off for dollars. Pick up and drop off. Orange County, I believe, is $2 for pickup and $2 for drop off. And I defer to staff. I don't know. Burbank, I think is three and change. I'm not sure if it's just a single fee. So but L.A.X. and Orange County, both do both pick up and drop off. Yes. Okay. And can I get a response? Do we know about Burbank? It's a we can. It's $3 only for pick up fees. And one of the reasons actually. I'm sorry, I'm in the discussion. Thank you. So. Okay, and and I know that Ontario right now is doing the same thing we're doing, which is moving towards a policy, correct? Yeah, they're looking toward it's supposed to be from what I hear, it's supposed to be go into effect next 60 to 90 days. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Councilman Mango and work here. Thank you. If you have a question. Well, thanks, guys. Appreciate it. So I know one of the things that's a challenge is we want to continue to maintain the quality of the options available. And we would, of course, love for people to get to the airport in any means they like. But one of the things that comes in, at least my discussions with staff related to the drop off fee, is that every drop off sub vents a parking at the airport. And so to Mr. Romo's point related to the budget, I saw in our fee analysis that we actually believe that parking revenue is going to go down because of a lot of factors. Actually, people are using other transportation. People are parking at the airport as long people, the destinations have changed. So they're not going away for as long. We don't have the flight to D.C. anymore, etc., etc.. So these shorter hauls have less days at the parking structure. And so we never want to put ourselves in the red and we don't want to create new fees if we don't have to. But I think that with the pilot program in mind, if we could just encourage the staff to keep in mind that the bottom line , they think that that's really important to our community so that we have a safe and stable airport. And some reassurance. I just want to respond to Mr. Good Hugh's point about creating preferential parking districts, at least in my district. That's not free. It starts with a 1400 dollars traffic study. The residents would have to pay for signs and also an annual permit. And I don't think I'd ever ask my residents to subsidize a private company doing business in their neighborhood like that. But thank you for bringing that up. Thank you. There's a motion in the second. Members, please go and cast your votes. Motion carries.

Hold a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of a Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Add and Revise Fees. (Finance 2410)

AlamedaCC_07072015_2015-1579

Public hearing to consider adoption of resolution amending master fee resolution number 121912 Add and revise fees. Do. Do you have any comments on that? He. Good evening. I'm Julian Boyer. I am substituting for Elena Adair, your finance director, for the three weeks that she's on vacation. This item comes before you each year to adopt new fees or to improve the fees that have been on the list. And each year, they are increased by either the CPI or the building building index. So I've checked the fees. They comply with that. There are a few new fees, not very many, but there are the fees that are new are in the Community Development Planning section and they are actually for a smaller entity. So a bigger entity had a higher deposit, smaller entity, lower deposit and there are three of them and they appear on pages 33 and 34. May I just ask for clarification, Ms. BOYER So CPI would be Consumer Price Index? That's correct. I'm sorry. Yes. It's one of those terms that you just get so used to saying that you forget. And then there was one fee that was removed from the list that's on page four and is in the police department and Alcoholic Beverage Control License approval. And, and it was originally a $50 fee, and it applied only in our case to nonprofit organizations that got a one day license. And the chief of police recommended that we move that fee to zero, since it's a signature only. And what we were charging was removing fundraising efforts from the nonprofit. So that fee has been proposed to be reduced from 50 to 0. Those are the only real major changes. There are some minor wording changes, but not in the fees themselves. The language changes were to be clarify and be more descriptive. And that makes it easier for staff to apply and for the public to understand what the fee is. Staff members who participated in creating this fee resolution are in the audience and would be available to answer questions. Should you have any? Very good. Are there any questions, comments from council members? ASHCROFT Thank you. I think there was some clarification that the means for assessing penalties on overdue business license fee. Do you want to explain that? Well, we didn't include that in this document. The that is actually included in the municipal code. And so Ms.. Adair will be coming back to you at a later date with a recommendation because. Yeah. For the council's request. Yes. Thank you. Any other questions? Comments from council. I'd like to move the master fee schedule as presented asecond. All those in favor. I motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. You. I will now adjourn the joint meeting of the City Council, the successor agency to the Community Improvement Commission. And now we will continue with our regular city council meeting. Roll Call. Council members. They said, here, here, here, here, Mayor Spencer here I present.

Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract, and any necessary documents including any subsequent amendments, with Howmedica Osteonics Corp, of Chicago, IL, for the purchase of power medical gurneys, in an amount of $658,619, with a 10 percent contingency in the amount of $65,862, for a total contract amount not to exceed $724,481. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06142022_22-0655

Come on, Mango. Motion is carried. Security zero. Thank you. 31, please. Report from Health and Human Services recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing city manager to execute a contract with how mediocre? I'm not even going to attempt the Second Corp for the purchase of power, medical journeys and a total contract amount not to exceed 724,481 citywide. I think is how medical it's been moved in second is any public comment. There's no public comment. Members Ecclesiastes wrote. Motion carries it through. Thank you. I think that we just have public comment number two. Is that correct? Correct. We have three public speakers. All right, let's have public comment. Cameron, Javier and Zaki. You'll be happy to know that even though my comment relates to outdoor dining, I won't be mentioning Parklets. Three months ago, this council voted in support of street vendor law reforms both at the state and city level that would finally allow street vendors to achieve a pathway to permitting, giving them the ability to participate in the formal economy at the state level. Our own state senator, Lena Gonzalez, is fighting for this reform effort to make a few minor modifications to the California retail food code recently passed the Senate Health Committee. Yet health departments up and down the state are resisting. Why? Not because of any serious threat to public health, but because it's more work for their staffs to approach this issue with the nuance it requires rather than enforcing a blanket ban. Unfortunately, our own health department seems to be no exception to this disappointing pushback.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute an agreement, and any necessary subsequent amendments, with the Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation to accept and expend grant funding in an amount not to exceed $53,790 for the 2022 Dodgers Dreamteam Program, formerly the Dodgers Reviving Baseball in Inner Cities (RBI) Program, including the acceptance of funding for park field maintenance and umpire fees, along with in-kind contributions, for youth baseball and softball for the 2022 summer season; and Increase appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department by $53,790, offset by grant revenue. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04122022_22-0402

Nine zero. Thank you. 11. Report from Parks Recreation Marine Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute an agreement with the Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation to accept grant funding in an amount not to exceed 53,790 for the Dodgers Dream Team Program. Thank you. Thank you. Just. Mr. Modica, I'm not sure what what that was. I just heard something in speaker. Mr. Modica, just a brief staff report on the update on RBI. We don't need a lot of time on this. Yes. Brant. Dennis. Yeah. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We're really excited as a department to continue our partnership with the Los Angeles Dodgers to their foundation. So tonight, we're asking for approval to accept their support in the amount of $53,790. Beyond that, they do also provide a lot of other in-kind support for our program. We're excited because it really does introduce or give opportunities for nearly 930 kids to be introduced to baseball, primarily in the T-ball and coach coach pitch levels. But the funding helps offset the costs to support 77 teams at 24 different park locations with 12 to 15 players per team. And again, it's just a real great opportunity not only to continue our partnership with the Dodgers, but to spark an interest from young kids in our community for the great American support of baseball. Thank you. You have a list, the parks with the program? Yeah, I can I can. Just read them off. Quickly. 24. Sure. So I think they're not phonetic order. So the parks include Bixby College Estate, Shabazz, Cherry, Coolidge, Drake, Eldorado, Hartwell, Holton, MLK or King Park, MacArthur McBride or Zorba Pan-American Ramona Scheer Park Seaside Park Signal Hill Park Silverado, Somerset Stearns Veterans Wardlow and Whaley and in particular some of the larger park programs. And do include Hampton Park, where we have about 110 kids involved in nine different teams, just as one example. Fantastic. Thank you. Any public comment on leaving? No public comment on the side. Of seeing nonmembers. Please cast your vote. Motion is carried. Thank you. Thank you. We'll go to number 19, please. And we still have item 12 of the content calendar as well.

AN ORDINANCE proposing to amend the Preamble to the King County Charter to include among the charter goals, equitable government, a strong urban and rural economy and superior quality of life and to make a grammatical correction; and submitting the same to the voters of the county for their ratification or rejection at a special election to be held in conjunction with the November 2, 2021, general election.

KingCountyCC_06022021_2021-0184

All right, with nobody signed in and nobody present to offer testimony. We will advance, he said, scrolling through his notes to item five on the agenda. And that is proposed ordinance 2021 184 I'm in our last meeting. Sam Porter provided a staff report on proposed on the proposed ordinance which would send to the November ballot a proposed proposal to make changes to the Turner's preamble. I miss Porter, can you please rewind and reorient us to the legislation and amendment? Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can you hear me okay? We can. Okay, great. Sam Porter, Council Policy Staff. The documents for this item begin on page seven of your packet today. This charter amendment recommended by the Charter Review Commission would propose, including the context of equitable government, a strong urban and rural economy, and a superior quality of life among the counties. Goals in the Preamble to the Charter. Along with making one grammatical correction. The preamble serves as the introduction to the King County Charter and provides a brief statement on the activities, goals and objectives of King County Government. The four changes to the preamble included in proposed ordinance 2020 10184 can be seen in context beginning on page eight of your packet. The first change would insert the words equitable and for all in reference to the operation of King County government. The second change would correct the grammatical error and the spelling of the word ensure. The third change would add, protect and enhance in reference to a healthy, rural and urban environment and economy. And the fourth change would be to insert the goal to promote a superior quality of life. To place this on the November 2nd ballot. The last regular council meeting for adoption is July 28, and the deadline for elections to receive the effective ordinance is August 3rd. There is an amendment to the proposed ordinance to correct grammatical mistake. This amendment is on page 13 of your packet. That concludes my remarks. I'm available to answer any questions and Louise Miller may be on the line. She was the co-chair of the Charter Review Commission. Thank you. I'm checking participants. I don't see Councilmember Miller with us today, though. She was here at our last meeting. And are there any questions, particularly about the proposed amendment? From his porter. See none. DOMBROWSKI Councilmember Dombrowski, thanks again. Thanks, Mr. Chair. And Sam, thanks very much for the report. Do you happen to know I assume we pay a cost like any other government to go on the ballot with a question? Maybe that assumption is wrong, but I'm wondering what the cost to put this forward is. I don't have that information off the top of my head. It would be going on the general election ballot. I think that there's increased costs if it's going on a special election ballot. But I can find out and get back to you. Okay. And we do so we've updated the charter a number of times. And I guess my related question is, I wonder if if there were other charter language updates that would, you know, that we would be doing, whether those could be integrated in that kind of a consolidated proposal to the voters? This one is very specific in the in the preamble, or does it have to be kind of a single subject type rule? I would need to get back to you on that. There may be a single subject issue. Okay. Thank you. Further questions. Council member Belushi. Not a question so much as a comment. Just as a reminder, although it's been briefed before the we have a legal obligation to at least take up all of the recommendations that came from the Charter Review Commission, and they put in a lot of work over a long period of time. There's a short list of recommendations of theirs that we did not put on the ballot. I just want to say that I recommended this one and the next one, because it seemed this one in particular seemed like a is the first words that you read of our Constitution for our government. And I thought that the thought that was put into it was meaningful. And although it's more of a change in tone and direction, it does make the charter a more modern and relevant document to have these words. I think it's a really good question as to whether it's going to actually cost us cash out of pocket to put this on the ballot. I don't believe it does on a November ballot, but it's well worth considering and we have the time to consider it. I don't know if this was considered to be on for action today, but I'd be happy to move it if it is on for action. And then we could, you know, sort of decide what to do at full council based on what we hear about the the cost. But just looking for your guidance here about whether you want to move it or keep it in committee today. Mr. Chair. I have this and the next charter amendment both on the agenda for possible action today, and I would entertain a motion. In that case, I would move. Approval of proposed ordinance 2020 10184 or the due pass recommendation. Councilmember Baldacci has moved to give a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2021 when 84 Councilmember Balducci. MOVE Amendment one. Councilmember Belushi's moved adoption of Amendment One. Councilmember Bell Dutchie. Amendment One has been briefed. It is that it is a fairly technical. Issue for questions on Amendment one two and we didn't get any. Now all those in favor of Amendment one please signify by saying I. I am opposed. Nay. The ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Ordinance 2021 184 as amended. Councilmember Bell. She. Yeah. I think I stated my, my rationale before making the motion, you know, with my usual deep respect for parliamentary procedure. But the I think this is a stronger preamble. I think it is accurate and states what this county is really all about in a better and more direct way. And it brings the preamble to our governing document, our baseline governing document into into modern times, if you will. And I would urge your support. Further discussion. I'm. Councilmember Caldwell's. No, no. Then, madam, quickly, please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council Member WG. Council Member Dombrowski. I am. Council member Dunn. I. Council Member. Congress council member member. I am council member of the group. I. Council member by night there. Councilmember Bond right there. I. I. Council members are high. I. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The vote is 99 zero. Thank you. By your vote, we have given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2020 124. And this is where I'm going to do some talking and learning out loud in the middle of committee. I mean, if we with next Tuesday, the eighth meeting canceled, if we expedite, does that mean it happens on the 15th and we put it on a regular course of business? Does it happen on the 15th? Does anybody know? I believe it would be on the 15th either way. Okay. So let's not. Confuse anybody and just put it on regular course. Perhaps, Mr. Chair. In one's regular course means it skips one regular meeting and ends up on the 22nd. Wendy can correct me if I am wrong or Jeff, but I believe my suggestion to the one that's one week. It has to be at least one week on regular action. So with the meeting getting skipped, it will still go to that for that next council meeting that's occurring. My suggestion would be to expedite just in case if that is the intent to have it on the 15th. Just so we're really clear then. Then, unless there's objection, we will expedite, which means that it will be on the June 15th Council agenda. Hearing no objection. That's what we will do. And that takes us to item six in today's agenda, proposed ordinance 2021 185 would also send a proposed charter amendment to the November ballot.

On the message and order, referred on September 29, 2021, Docket #1014, Message and order authorizing the City of Boston to accept and expend the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) in the form of a grant for the FY21 Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program, awarded by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture-USDA to be administered by the Office of Food Access. The grant will fund projects to increase the purchase of fresh fruits and vegetables by low-income SNAP consumers, , the committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_10202021_2021-1014

Madam Clerk, we are now moving back to reports of committees. Would you please read Docket 1014? Thank you, Mr. President. Docket 1014 The Committee on Strong Women, Families and Communities, to which was referred at September 29th, 2021. Docket number 1014. Message In order authorizing City of Boston to accept and expend an amount of $500,000 in the form of a grant for the FBI. 21 Gus Shoemaker Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program awarded by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture and USDA to be administered by the Office of Food Access. The grant will fund projects to increase the purchase of fresh, fresh fruits and vegetables by low income SNAP consumers. Thank you. The Chair now recognized Councilor Liz Braid and Chair of the Committee on Strong Women, Families and Communities. Chair Braden, the floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm also on Friday, October 1st, we had a committee on the Strong Women, Families and Communities held a hearing on the docket 1014. We were joined by Catalina Lopez Ospina, director of Food Access. The previous common sense talk Feeney has read is pretty self-explanatory. This new funding will also allow for additional store locations to participate in the Boston Double Up Box program. Currently, there are 12 stores participating in neighborhoods across the city with an anticipation of adding another 4 to 6 more stores. With this funding, it is my recommendation that the council to the council that we would accept and pass this docket. Thank you. Thank very much. Councilor Liz Braden, chair of the Committee on Strong Women, Families and Communities, seeks acceptance of the committee report and passage of Docket 1014. All those in favor please indicate by saying I oppose. The ayes have it. The docket has passed. Madam Clerk, we are moving along to docket 1013. Docket 1013 message, an order authorizing the city of Boston to accept an amount of $750,000 in the form of the Land Water Conservation Fund. Grant awarded by the National Park Service, passed to the Massachusetts Division of Conservation Services to be administered by the Boston Parks and Recreation Department.

Adoption of Resolution to Increase Expenditure Appropriations in the American Rescue Plan 2021 Project (96034/C9930) in the Capital Projects Fund (310) by $23,625 for the Feed Alameda Program to Provide Alameda’s Most Vulnerable Residents with Hot Meals and to Provide Support to Alameda Restaurants (Community Development 24161823)

AlamedaCC_09072021_2021-1234

Okay, great. Let's. Does anyone want to make a motion? 11 Council member Desert Moves Council Member Knox White. Second. Thank you. I just read your mind. We have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember Dayton. I. Earl spencer. No. That's why. I. Rella mayor as. Ashcraft. I. That carries by 4 to 1. Thank you, madam. Okay. Last pulled item is 250, which is the option of resolution to increase expenditure. Appropriations in American Rescue Plan 2021 having to do with additional moneys for the Feed Army program. This is under community development and the city manager's office has also been involved. Specific questions council for her Spencer. So my question goes to and I had shared this with the city manager in advance one and one restaurant or food provider in town was excluded from the program because they don't serve hot meals. They only serve a cold meal, whatever that is. And I think many of us I certainly have meals that are so I didn't know if that's actually part of the program or if the city has discretion. I think many of us I certainly do eat meals that are not hot all the time, salads, for instance, sandwiches. And so I want to know if that's actually part of the program or if we have flexibility to include that other local company that applied. Hmm. Who would like to answer that? I see our community development director, Lisa maxwell, out there at the ferry terminal. However, is Maxwell, do you want to. Are you prepared or. Lewis Butler two. Hi, who's been nice to you? Also from community development, economic development, who has been very intimately involved with the Feed our meter program, including, I think, delivering some of those meals. Do you want to speak to the requirements and such? Ms. Butler. Sure. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Mayor. And City Council. The program did call for hot meals, and that's why one of the restaurants was excluded. But to answer Councilmember PEREIRA Spencer's question, if you would like us to include them, we could also include them. But they they they indicate they cannot provide. And I will just throw in, because I had a little something to do with this program that, as I recall, the guidelines were those that they are set forth by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, I believe, or the state maybe Department of Agriculture, great plates. And it was similar to that criteria, though, that you had to have some fresh fruits and vegetables and couldn't include sugary drinks and there's nutritional requirements. So and it was the middle of winter when we started the program as well. That that's a good point. Yeah. So some of them may continue. So the fresh fruit, vegetables that you just mentioned, obviously those can be done on a salad and heated. And so I would like to make a motion to accept this. But I also think that one restaurant that provides cold, cold meals, as long as they satisfy all the nutritional requirements are met . And so you would also be approving whatever additional expenditure it takes to provide. Ms.. Butler, remind us how many meals at a time were our restaurants providing you? Five. Again, we upped the amount because of the need. We were we were very successful. It was very popular. And it is a wonderful program. I'll just give a little shout out that not only did it help give our local restaurants a lifeline, especially while they were really struggling with, there were times when they could only do takeout and delivery, but it provided some wonderful, tasty, nourishing meals to some of our most vulnerable who are enumerated in the staff report. Councilmember Knox. But I saw your hand up. All right. And I guess since it's a theme for tonight's meeting, we're now discussing program design and selecting specific entities for and giving direction on an expenditure approval. I just wonder if we're yet again getting out. I know it says hot meals in here, but we're talking about adding giving direction to staff about specific program design and when we're actually just being asked to approve an appropriations request. So I'm just not sure we're not getting a little bit off the content account again. Yeah, I think we're pretty close. I but my point is there's a specific dollar amount of appropriation we're being asked to provide and it would be increased a little bit to add that meal. So if there's the way we could fashion a motion to include that flexibility, I think it would be for a worthy purpose. Be happy to include the additional cost for the one meal. Okay. Madam Clerk, with that motion amended, motion clear enough for you. As long as staff can amend the resolution accordingly. I believe for clear. Vice Mayor. I'm reading from your facial expression that you have questions. Yeah. I just you know, we started this this meeting earlier. We were talking about, you know, the Open Government Commission and making sure that we have transparency. And I'm just concerned, you know, if it's possible to approve this and then if we could just give direction to staff to come back, perhaps. You know, concerns that you have. Yeah, that I would I would feel more comfortable doing that. I think that's a good observation, I think. Councilmember Knox. Right. I you're right. You're very, very correct. We've we've heard from the Open Government Commission. We don't want to be inviting another Open Government Commission complaint. So I think the safest thing well. Attorney, I'm just going to read everyone's facial expression. City Attorney Mr. Chan, why don't you weigh in on this? For if the council wishes to make changes, it has to be an expenditure change. So for example, you could tonight change the resolution dollar amount. Right now it says what it says. If you want to add $2,000 or whatever it is, that's fine. That's perfectly within the council's purview. Staff doesn't need to bring it back. If you want to make programmatic changes, you probably want to just give a side direction to staff and Bill respond accordingly, possibly bring it back, possibly work within your existing budget. But what you're asked to approve tonight is funding for the program. And if you want to increase funding, you can do it tonight. We could modify that funding amount and you feel that the noticing is sufficient, such as it would not invite a complaint from the see? Well, anything could invite a complaint from the city. So if even a perfectly correctly agenda item could invite a complaint, but I believe that we could adjust. You could change funding because that is what your agenda is to do tonight and which is to fund. And if you want to give more money or less money, this is your time to do it. And I will add that this program is coming to its conclusion. But Vice Mayor Vella, I see your hand up. I was just going to ask if we added additional funds. That doesn't necessarily guarantee that there is a change to the program requirements. And so there would still need to be direction or side direction to have that come back to us. My concern is my concern is twofold. One, what happens if we allocate the funds here? Is there a way to word it such that if we can't make the change in time? The the funds go, you know, at what point do they come back? And then the second question I would have is, what is the timeline that we're we're looking at relative to the, you know, how long it would take to make these sorts of. Five. So I don't know if the time has passed essentially for for staff to make changes. Ms.. Butler, can you tell us about this to the vice mayor's point about. Does this require this change from hot meal to non hot meal? Does that require some sort of change or seeking permission on our part or. So it could be very. With that. It's it's really under the city manager's limit. He's asking for funding. And then the city manager. Can give me direction to to follow up based on the concerns. And and I think he's within his authority to do that. And so if you increase the budget to 26,000. Happened here a minute ago. But if you increase the budget to include an additional $2,625, and I can give you the additions fairly quickly, I think that that would just I think it would settle everything. How does that sound advice, maravilla? I'm fine. Adding that specific sum. If we can get that specific number, I'm fine adding it and I'll make that motion. $26,250. Okay. So I would total. The total amount. Yes. Yes. Not for. One. No. So I would I would move approval of that amount. All right. And I'll second that. But I'd like to know what sense we're giving direction, almost to add a specific restaurant into a city program. I'd like to know what that restaurant is. It's JS coffee and tea. On. SNL. And it's an avenue. And in fact, I mean, do you want to read the list of all the. There's 43 of. Them. No, no, no. The last six. I know there are. Trust me. But just the those last six that didn't get there. You know what? Let's keep moving that you can people can look that up. Okay. Yes. And then I would just say, relative to the program requirements, just that that staff come back to us if they need council direction and get that agenda. Absolutely. All right. It's been moved by Vice Mayor Vella, seconded by Councilmember Knox White. May we have a roll call vote, please? Interpretations. I forever, Spencer. I knocked like. I. Fell a. You did it again. And we didn't need it so fast. We couldn't. Move. Moving too quickly. I like carries by five eyes. Okay, that is great. And then the last one we need to take care of. Madam Clerk, do you want to introduce item five? Yes. As in Sam for us, please? Yes. Adoption of resolution authorizing issuance of City of I was made to Community Facility District 13 dash one Alameda Landing Public Improvements 2021 Special Tax Subordinate Bonds in the amount not to exceed 24,585,000 and approved related documents and actions. Thank you. And so you, I believe, have sent folks on here. Or. Are you okay? We have. I feel fine. Council, our finance director. Okay. So, hey, counsel, I'm sure you have read the staff report. Does anyone have any specific questions or should we go straight to the motion? Maybe we go straight to the motion to have a motion to approve.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare a resolution by the first week of March in support of the certification and publication by the National Archivist of the State of Virginia’s ratification of the of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), in addition to support for the joint resolution introduced in Congress on January 21, 2021 to eliminate the arbitrary deadline towards full constitutional ratification.

LongBeachCC_02162021_21-0145

Thank you very much. Our next item, please, which is item number 15. Item 15. Communication from Councilwoman Mango. Councilwoman Sunday has Councilwoman Allen and Councilwoman Price recommendation to require city attorney to prepare a resolution in support of congressional ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. However, most of my councilman. Mongo councilman. Thank you. Many know the story of the era, and it has gotten additional attention recently with the television series that recently came out. I think it is time that we as a city work towards the bipartisan support of the era. I'm glad to be supported by, I'm sure, all the women on the council. We had four of us on the item, but that's only because of Brown after restrictions. Otherwise, I know all of us would have been on it and I am so thankful to the partnership with the community. We've communicated some opportunities and we hope to celebrate this and many other big victories for women during Women's History Month in March. Councilwoman Price. Mayor. And I want to thank Councilman Mundo for bringing this item forward and for asking me and some of our colleagues to sign on to this item. I'm very, very pleased to support this item. And I think that over the years we've taken. We've taken the opportunity so many times as a council to talk about disparities with both gender and racial, ethnic and financial disparities. I guess it's more than just both, but many disparities that we have recognized as as a council in our city. And I think that we continue to talk our talk about gender equity and celebrate the progress that we have made for women both in the city but also around the country. And efforts like this continue to celebrate the progress, but remind us that we still have tremendous ways to go. And I'm grateful that the city has raised this issue as as one of focus. I know that I have brought an item forth a few years ago, and we worked with Cal State Long Beach to identify some of the the gaps and our in our services and our programing and the things that we need to do as a city to recognize and celebrate gender equity and make it at the forefront of our efforts, as we do with with all issues of equity. So I'm grateful to have signed on to this item and to be joining so many others in supporting this this particular policy action. So thank you very much. And thank you to Councilwoman Rondo for bringing it forth and for connecting us all on this very important topic. Thank you, Councilman Allen. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I'm just. What a great item. And I also want to thank all the council women, Mango Price and Zane de Hoff. And I know that all the women on this council or at this. Neither women or woman or sex are words that appear and constitution. And this definitely reveals the limits. Our Founding Fathers had an understanding of women as equal citizens. This meant that one of the things that this does that went that. Sorry, I just muted myself. And that meant that people of color were regarded as less than full citizens. So ratifying this era would confirm that sex discrimination is inconsistent with the nation's core value of equal protection under the law. And one of the things that this does, it sends a clear message about our national commitment to the equal right of all people. I want to say just a quick thank you and appreciation to Zoe Nicholson, who was a second District resident and sits on the Human Relations Commission. She's just been steadfast and committed to women's rights, and I know she immediately reached out when I got elected. And and I just want to thank her for her dedication to equal rights for women and commend her for her lifetime work. And thank you, Councilwoman Mungo, for bringing this forward. I appreciate it. Thank you, customary, Ringo. Thank you, Mary. And I want to thank all our female cast members for supporting this, to bring it forward. But I would say that if I were invited, I'd be right there working for right in front of it as well with you guys that I think that this makes the city proud again. But we at the forefront of these kinds of issues and certainly have my support. We've always had my support at any time that I could be there. I'm ready. So thank you very much to all councilmembers. Support this forward and looking forward to it. Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Wanted to chime in offer my my strong, solid support for this resolution. Look forward to adopting. And I think it sends a good, strong message that, you know, Long Beach is on the right side. We have a council full of, you know, proud, dynamic, educated female leaders, women who are ensuring that we are on the right side of history here and acknowledging this important resolution and the era. And so I'm happy to sign on and I'm happy to vote and support and look forward to when this comes back to council. But Councilman Van De has. Thank you, Major. Thank you very much to Councilwoman Mongo for bringing this item forward and for inviting me to. Beyond this item, I am more than honored to support this item. This legislation in Congress is so, so important, and it really is the last thing standing in the way of that. You are a being enshrined in our nation's constitution. This is long, long overdue. And I'm so glad that Long Beach will have taken our place standing on the right side of history with all of the amazing activists that have made this possible. We still have so much ahead of us to bring an end to gender discrimination, but adding that great to our Constitution is such a powerful step forward, and making making that possible is going to be amazing, not just for ourselves, but for all of the amazing woman who worked so hard to achieve this and the many who didn't live to see this bill come to fruition. So thank you again. Council member Mongo. Councilwoman Sara. Yeah. I also want to thank all of the council women for bringing this item forward and want to thank Zoe Nicholson for being such a staunch advocate for making sure that this is just a priority for us as a majority council women. And it's also just really symbolic as well that we also have our first female vice president. So this is just so meaningful and such as, you know, one of the very many step forward in ensuring that we have gender equity. And so for that, for many of those reasons, then I staunchly support this item. Thank you. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Support this item. It is far past time. So thank you to everyone involved. And I'm glad that Zoe Nicholson was also mentioned because she has been leading this effort across the city and really doing great work. So thank you to to her. Is there I believe we do have public comments. I want to go do the public comment on this item and then we'll go. To here, if you wouldn't mind. What am I to do? I can modify my emotions slightly. Oh, sure. Councilman Mongo. Absolutely. Go ahead. Thank you. And we asked for community feedback and received some after the agenda item had been filed. And so we wanted to also modify the motion to include sending a letter to the national archivist that the City of Long Beach supports the publication of the 38th state. So if that could be noted, for the record, we'd like that letter of support sent should this pass, as I hope it will. Sure thing. It's added to the motion public comment, please. Our first speaker is Zoe Nicholls. Thank you very much. This is Zoe Nicholson, and I'm barely able to speak. Uh, how fabulous to hear my name spoken by several of you. Um, I'm really proud of that. Um, I am bursting with pride that after bringing the array to council several times, uh, actually, council came to me. Um, the fact is, since Michelle was Paul wrote it in 1923. Today, right now, in 2021, we are the closest to passing it we have ever been. And I want to tell you why. It's because in 2016, something really significant changed. And that was women started running for office at every level, at every turn, and women were elected. Nevada elected a majority of women into their state legislature. And then African-American veteran and state senator Pat Spearman organized Nevada and broke through that mountain. And Nevada ratified in 2017, thus becoming number 36. Their attorney general certified it, and the archivist in Washington published it in June of 2018. Illinois ratified and again their A-G certified and the archivist published it. In January 2020. Because. Of a majority of women elected to the legislature in the state of Virginia. They completed their. Requirement of a full majority of 38 states. I'm proud to say I was in the balcony when it happened. The Virginia. A.G. certified. And the national archivist got a call. From Bill Barr at the behest of President Trump to stop the publication of the Equal Rights Amendment. And David Ferraro, the national archivist. Is waiting for the green light. And you may know that both President Biden and Vice President Harris have committed to the Equal Rights Amendment. Your letter of support joins with city state citizens, urging this new administration to direct the National Archives, David Farrow to publish that last 38 state and thus adapting the Equal Rights Amendment as the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution. I want to say this is great news for all your daughters, your mothers, your sisters, your aunts, and actually all Americans, regardless of sex. Together, we will finally have equal rights. Thank you. Our next speaker is Marcella de Rivera. Am I still. On? We will have equal rights under the. Marcelo Rivera. They came back thanking me. But thank you. I just want to get in. Thank you. There before my time is up. Thank you. Marcella de Rivera. Marcella de Rivera. Please begin. Mercier. They were very they're. I think that that included a comment or more. Yes, that'll conclude public comment. Okay, then let's go and go to a roll call vote, please. Councilwoman Sunday has high councilwoman Ellen I. Councilwoman Price. II. Councilman Sabina. High. Councilwoman Mango. I. Trans Woman Sara. I. Councilmember Oranga. I. Councilman Austin. Hi. Vice Mayor Richardson. Right. Bush and Kerry.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to accept funds in the amount of $8,300 from Sk8 Dojo, a group under fiscal sponsorship with Habitat for Humanity, to place additional cement pathways at Michael K. Green Skate Park in 14th Street Park; and Increase appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department by $8,300, offset by donation revenue from Sk8 Dojo. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_05042021_21-0382

list. And so I want to make sure that we we do that. That could be an office mix up there. So I want to make sure that we do it the right way for her. For her, because you want to pull that and can we go ahead and reconsider item 18, no. Objection. Will we consider that? Can I get a motion? Your second to reconsider. 18. It is a motion of a customary ranger and a second by Councilman Zendejas. And why don't we go ahead and talk about. District one. I district to my. District three. I. District four. I. District five. And by district. Six I District seven. I. District eight. My district nine. I. Motion carries. And then can you go ahead and read item 18, please? Communication from Parks, Recreation and Marine recommendation to accept funds in the amount of 8300 from skate dojo taking place. Additional cement pathways at Michael K Green Skate Park in 14th Street Park, District one. Great councilman. Thank you very much, Mayor. Thank you, Councilmember Ang and Mike, every all my colleagues here for allowing me to first reconsider this item. We have requested it to be pulled. But then, you know, all of these technical difficulties that we were expecting to be. That's okay. That's, you know, we roll with the punches. But so thank you for for letting me speak on this item. One of the things that we have that we have that so very, very unique and special to us here in our district, our youth programs, our youth programs are really, you know, fired up and really doing the the work of what what's going to be the future of Long Beach and Skate Jojo is no exception. They are a phenomenal a phenomenal new nonprofit organization that is doing incredible work in my district. So I, I just couldn't go let this go without, you know, highlighting them a little bit and highlighting the work that they've been continuously doing here in the First District. They have they are a skate organization where they bring together youth from all over the city, especially the first district youth. And they bring them and they, you know, get them involved and get them passionate about, you know, being involved and being engaged in their community. They have a great following for being such a new, new organization. And I'm very proud to have them in my in my district. And they focus on right now, they're focusing on 14th Street Park, which is an amazing, amazing place in our Washington neighborhood. And I know that, you know, their love for our skate parks, their love for the community is where, you know, feels them. And they've just been great. They've had a couple cleanups where they invite the youth and the youth get to be active in in cleaning up their their 14th street park and clean up their skate park and being able to to feel like they're doing something for the community. And I just wanted this opportunity to give them a big, big shout out in addition to these pipe improvements and clean up. So I think it's it's a it's an organization that the city should recognize and should uplift, along with other incredible organizations that our youth, you know, put together and develop and really make our community great. We've had a lot of conversations in the past few months about, you know, rising crime in our community. And, you know, they have really, really serious concerns. And and so they want to do their part in being able to help, you know, reduce that not only reduce the crime, but also prevent crime and give others an opportunity, other youth, the opportunity to succeed and and to have fun while they're doing it. And so I just love the partnerships that Skate Georgia has had. They have partnered up with my office. They have partnered up with Habitat for Humanity, who is also very invested in the Washington neighborhood. They have partnered up with books and buckets and many more organizations around that that service the youth. So thank you again for letting me take a moment to really highlight this wonderful organization that's serving the First District. Then keep keep doing the great things that you're doing, Skate Georgia. And you know, you have my support all the way. Well, thank you for that, Councilwoman. Yes. And we apologize for for missing the the pulled item. So thank you for that. And let's go ahead and we have a motion filed by councilman in the House. And secondly, Vice Mayor Richardson, vice mayor, to give a comment. Also, just keep up the great work. I love hearing all the transformation that continues to happen in the Washington neighborhood is a legacy transformation that's happening. And so it's great to hear that, you know, there's a partner there that's that's a part of these these efforts of graduations, Councilwoman, and skate, don't you? Great. And then with that, there is no public comment. So we're going to do the roll call. District one. I. District two. I. District three i. District four. I. District five. I. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. District nine. I. Motion carries. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Are we. Do we have a public comment for 25 here? Not yet. We're not yet. Okay, well, we do have we do have a study session that we have a time certain for. I just what? I didn't want to go into the long study session. Then I have these folks waiting around. So why why don't we. Do a couple of items quickly and then we'll maybe give you a few more minutes for that. So again, and then we'll go to the study session and maybe after a few more. So let's see some of the other items out of the way.

Consider Directing the City Manager to Have the Social Service Human Relations Board (SSHRB) Review City Policies and Procedures for Aiding Alameda’s Homeless in Order to Make Recommendations to the City Council for Policy Revisions and Additions. (Vice Mayor Matarrese) [Not heard on July 19, September 6 and 20, or October 4 or 18, 2016]

AlamedaCC_11012016_2016-3338

Considered directing the city manager to have the Social Service, Human Relations Board, review city policies and procedures for any homeless in order to make recommendations to the City Council for Policy revisions. In addition, if you want to make a motion. Yes, I'd like to move that as written. And I understand that the SSA, H.R. B is working on a specific plan for Gene Swinney park, but I want to make sure that this goes beyond it. And we actually have all of our policies that are related, including police procedures and their recommendations coming to us. And that won't be in December, but that will be the start, the kick off. That'll be. I understand that because we'll get a specific project, specific update in December. But this is this is broader. And I think this situation is not going to go away any time soon. And I would like this ongoing review of city policies and procedures and actual recommendations from the S.S. H r b to come to council . So the second that one. Your motion, that's my motion. And secondly, as a discussion member, Ashcraft. So I actually think we're getting ahead of ourselves here. I know you weren't able to attend the workshop that was presented, but we did hear a lot about police policy. I would be willing to wait to hear what Shrub tells us with the outreach work of of Operation Dignity, because they've I think they've started going around in the mobile outreach unit and collecting this data. And as I recall that night, we didn't just talk about the Jean Sweeney Park. I know there's some folks who would like to declare it a park already, so certain ordinance would apply, but that's maybe glossing over some of the underlying problems. But we also talked about the properties Union Pacific property and the railroad right away over by the Fruitvale Bridge and that area. And and there are more areas of Alameda. I mean, it was a pretty comprehensive. And this is they are collecting data on citywide. On so what I would actually recommend is that we wait and hear what comes out of that and then make the recommendations. I mean, I think when they come to us, we'll be making recommendations. Isn't that part of the. So this is vice mayor's referral. We've got a motion and a second to. I'm also just I just I just want to be clear on what I'm asking because I'm asking for an organized this was this was a staff driven and rightfully so because it's an immediate problem. But I'm asking for, for the ss h.r b to help us in systematically looking at all of our policies and procedures and coming back with recommendations. And it could be from the body of knowledge that they're gathering now. But if if we just wait and see, this could get preempted and it just keeps going and going and going. And the problem is with us, and, you know, we talked about the Alameda Point Collaborative and and their function and. How do we mesh that with what we have in north housing and how do we mesh that with the people who are actually on the street? I'd like that to be dealt with in an official way. So we're not just passively waiting, but we're we're giving them direction and they're going to come back to us with a report. Well, that's all I'm asking. Mayor, I. I'm not disagreeing with the principle of what you're trying to do. I'm saying that first step is already taking place. Could we just folded into when they come to us, then we'll make our recommendations. You want to we're. Not making we're going to receive recommendations. We're going to then look at policy. The way I look at it. City manager, would you like to respond to clarify? What are you thinking at this point? I actually think we can meet both of your interests of when we come back in December with Operation Dignity. We will talk about the immediate plan and then council will provide an agenda. Is it as part of that discussion, council input for policy level stuff that we learn from Operation Dignity and Shrub. And Shrub already knows about this referral. It's been talked about and so they're already starting to think about it. But they do want. Direction from the council to say, go ahead and look at these policies. So I think we can do that as a same agenda item in December. Okay. So you actually accelerate it by doing that. I think you feel comfortable that vice maybe you feel comfortable going forward with your motion at this. Point. As long as it follows what I've written. So, okay, so we have the motion. Second, all those in favor. I oppose an abstain. I, I would if two abstentions. Three in favor. Motion carries. Thank you. Now we're going to nine. It'll still come to us in December. Right. And it's vice mayor. Mattress is referral. 90. Oh, I should consider directing the city manager to. Initiate revisions to the ordinances and code sections for mixed use zoning in.

A Resolution condemning the unprovoked invasion and egregious act of aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation. On motion of Councilors Breadon and Bok, Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilor Flynn as co-sponsor.

BostonCC_03022022_2022-0326

Doug in number 0326 Councilor Braden and Councilor by calling for the following a resolution condemning the unprovoked invasion and egregious act of aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. The Chair recognizes Councilor Braden. Councilor Braden, the floor is yours. President Flynn as an original co-sponsor. Seeing and hearing no objections. Councilor Flynn It is added as the third original co-sponsor. Councilor Braden You have the floor. Just as how the Council has adopted resolutions in the past condemning war and imperialism across the globe. I offer this resolution today to condemn Russia's egregious invasion of Ukraine. Let's call it what it is. It's a war when you're firing cruise missiles into populations, civilian populations. It's a war, as we have seen in the news early Thursday morning, February 24th. The president of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, launched a full scale invasion of sovereign Ukraine. The number of dead and injured, both military and civilian, is undetermined and growing. But the cost of this act of aggression will be lives, livelihoods, homes and cities. And the impact will reverberate beyond Ukraine and Eastern Europe, and it will reverberate in this country as well. To date, it looks like 800,000 Ukrainians have already been forced to seek refuge in neighboring countries and up to 4 million Ukrainians are expected to be displaced in this act of war. We must also condemn the threat of nuclear aggregation that was that has precariously mounted since the 2014 annexation of Crimea just less than three months ago. I introduced a resolution that was adopted by the council renouncing nuclear weapons proliferation and urging the United States to pull back from the brink and prevent nuclear war. In this situation in Ukraine, we are not one step closer to an on and on anticipated and unexpected escalation into a nuclear conflict. We must affirm our unwavering support for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, self-governance and territorial integrity by calling for the immediate cessation of violence and illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine, which is lacked regard for citizens lives. And commend the courage, resolve and resilience shown by the Ukrainian people, both in Ukraine and overseas here in Boston and in here in Boston, in their pursuit of sovereignty and democracy. On the humanitarian front, we must ensure all citizens have safe passage to escape into and that including black Ukrainians, have been held back from fleeing and seeking asylum. We must also increase aid efforts to for refugee resettlement both nationally and locally for those who are displaced, both as a result of the war in Ukraine as as as well as those who have been and will continue to seek asylum. Before and after Ukraine. What we're seeing in the turn on the television in this moment in the 21st century. It's such a sad and tragic situation that we do not have better mechanisms to solve and promote international cooperation and peace. And I do urge you to my colleagues to support this resolution. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Braden, Councilor Bach, you have the floor. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Today for Catholics and civilians like myself, it's Ash Wednesday. And Ash Wednesday is a day of reflecting on our mortality and fragility and the extent to which we all ultimately depend on God and one another. And I think that when we see a situation like the situation in Ukraine and that there are a million conversations about what are the foreign policy options about the looming terror as counselor and great instead of nuclear war. But I think that the first thing that we can do and that we must do, and that to its credit, I think the world has largely done in this moment, is is to lift up our prayers. And that was why it was so good to be joined by Father Roman at the beginning of this meeting and to stand in solidarity with one another. And I think that this resolution is a way for this council, the city council of the city of Boston and the United States far away from Ukraine and yet home to a Ukrainian American community here, as we heard this morning and as we are home, as we've been discussing to so many communities of immigrants that still feel that that tether and tie to moratorium homes. And I think that what we can do here in the council today is to is to say that we stand with the Ukrainian people and to express, as the resolution expresses, not not only condemnation and then standing with, but also recognizing that Boston should be a home and a welcoming place for refugees and migrants from all countries. Just as we joined in supporting the resolution on against Title 42 a few weeks ago. And I think that that, you know, no one city anywhere in the world right now can be all of what the Ukrainian people need. The Ukrainian people are reaching within themselves of their own resources. And yet the. World we have. Has to figure out all the things that we can do. And and and. And just recognize together that when we many decades ago made the fateful decision as a as a humanity to move towards nuclear weapons and towards a destructive foreign force that quite literally ties all of our fates up together, that that also obligates us to think in universal terms about solidarity and moments like this. So I do hope that the council will join us in passing this resolution today. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Councilor, back at the path, I would like now to recognize. Council President Flynn. Council President Flynn, the floor is yours. Okay. Thank you, counsel Counsel Arroyo. And just wanted to highlight the some of the Ukrainian flag raising ceremony, as we've had with counsel, clarity and counsel of counsel Baker and Councilor O'Malley. That was that was here before with attorney Nick Zazula, who was one of the leaders there in the community, and Professor Peter Walsh and Chuck. But it was a great, great to see the Ukrainian Ukrainian community join these flag raising ceremony. But what we also learned from the community is their love of country and their love, love of democracy. And as as counselor great and Counselor Bach discussed on this, the Ash Wednesday, we prayed for for peace and an end to the senseless war and suffering across across Europe and across Ukraine. And we continue to stand with the Ukrainian people during this very difficult time. The U.S. has always stood with people in need, and that's something we're proud of and we're going to continue to do. Thank you. COUNSEL Well, thank you. President Flynn. The chair now recognizes Counselor Clarity. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Raised to support Ukraine. Please add my name to this resolution and through the chair to the makers if they would consider a sixth resolve in that calling upon the Biden administration to stop buying oil from Russia, it's been reported that we may be buying somewhere, let's say, of 600,000 barrels a day. The fact that we're participating in their economy is unconscionable. Not to mention we're getting price gouged through the chair to the makers if they would consider a six resolve calling upon the Biden administration to stop buying oil from Russia. Thank you, counsel. Clarity. I'm going to turn it over to counselor back. Counsel, but the floor is yours. Or Councilor? Sorry. Not concerned about Councilor Brady. I thank my colleague for his an amendment to a resolution. I'd be happy to hear that. Thank you. So I also had another two comments. In Alston Brighton we have a large immigrant population of elderly, retired, Russian and Ukrainian folks. Many of them fought in World War Two to defeat fascism and Nazis. And I really want to stress this moment that Russian folks living in the city of Boston are not our enemy. Many of them fled oppression and persecution in the former Soviet Union, and they sought shelter and they were refugees here, along with their Ukrainian neighbors. So I want to stress that while we condemn the actions of President Putin and the Russian Federation in this moment, that we embrace and support our Russian and Ukrainian neighbors in our in our neighborhood, in our district and in our cities. Thank you, Counselor Brady. And before I just go to the opens. It sounds like that's a yes for adding the six resolves that counselor clarity suggested that is there that so I'm saying that it heads from all of the original co-sponsors. I'm not going to go to Counselor Baker. The floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for my colleagues for bringing this bringing this to be a very, very important issue that we stand with the Ukrainian people in my quest to educate myself on things other than Boston. I started listening to political podcasts, and I came across a woman, Anne Applebaum, who broke down the Ukrainian new Ukrainian Russian issue that's happening, and in what she had described it as, is very similar to what the English had done to to the Irish. They they wanted them to be English subjects and the Irish wouldn't have it. They they went so far as to to even stab the Irish people going back to the 1830s, which is why the despair happened in Ireland and why you have Irish people all over the entire world as early as night, as late as 1930. Now, this this. This policy goes back to Czar Nicholas and was also enacted by Joseph Stalin. So in the thirties and they called it the Harlem. They went door to door in the Ukraine, taking their food to starve them out the exact same way that they did to the Irish people. So this is the type of longstanding political battle that's going on. And let's not forget that, that when Hitler came in, Hitler came into Poland first. Ukraine's right next to that. So this is scary, scary time. And I'm thrilled that you guys put this on the floor here today, and I'm glad to add my name. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Baker, Councilor Louis. Jan, the floor is yours. Thank you, Counselor Arroyo. And thank you for to the sponsors for introducing this. So many of us right now are, you know, standing in solidarity with what's happening with Ukrainians who did not ask for this war and with many Russians through also did not ask for this war. Just want to make sure that we are also highlighting the plight of migrants of all of all of all colors who find themselves in Ukraine, even in times of war, xenophobia and anti-blackness reared its ugly head. And it is, you know, someone who is, you know, wants to be or is upset by the fact of war, by the act of war. It is it hurts w more when you see migrants, when you see folks of Arab descent, when you see black folks being denied entry into other countries as they to seek refuge. So as we address the issues here of war, of imperialism, of let's also not forget that migrants in countries, whether in the United States or in the Ukraine, also deserve safety and to be free from harm and persecution and war as well. So thank you. Thank you. Councilor Lui. Jen, Councilor Edwards, the floor is yours. Thank you very much. I echo the comments of my colleagues as well, especially the comments from Councilor Braden, noting that the Russian people are not our enemy. I had the honor of getting to know and befriend a Katya who lives in Russia right now. And it was just somewhat surreal that I watched what's actor and said, How are you and what's going on? And for her to respond and say, None of us want this. We don't want this. This is not us. And I really want a lot of us to. My my neighbors, my friends to understand that the the Russian people are equally not are not behind this. This is the result of a madman, a dictator, and someone who honestly probably wasn't even legally elected to lead his country. So even his his authorities, I believe in question. I also want to shift not so much to shift the focus, but also added to this conversation. There's something Special Counsel Flynn and I both share, and that is our military connection. And I want you to know that when talks of war happen, there's a special kind of feeling you get in your gut. My mother served in the band the Air Force, and I grew up on military bases. And during Iraq one, everyone feels that part of that unique community, especially when you're the child of someone who could be deployed. And so we had therapy. We had people dealing with those of us who are going to school every day and knowing our parents going to work was going to Iraq and going to deal with and possibly not come home. So this is this is a message also to those who are serving in the military, those who are serving, of course, already in the military and Ukraine, but also to those who are coming and volunteering in different countries around the world, and especially ours, and to those who have been retired. I know you feel it as well. You feel the sense of it's it might be time, it might be coming up. It might be one of us. And I just want you to know, you, of course, have all my solidarity, my sense and and my patriotism. And I wanted to express that and thank those who've already answered that call and ultimately had the ultimate sacrifice for this country. But, you know, being a kid of the 19, 1980s, a good chunk of my childhood was during the Cold War on a military base. This is eerily familiar feeling. It's eerily familiar about Russia. It's eerily familiar from feeling. And so I want to acknowledge that feeling. And there are a lot of us who are feeling it. So thank you. Thank you, Counselor Edwards. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Seeing. No. No hands. Would anyone else like to add their up? If I can. Yeah. Com's President Flynn for. Thank you, Counselor Arroyo. I'll be very brief. Just want to. Wanted to respond to my good friend and colleague, Councilor Edwards. Um, we spent a lot of time over the last four years talking about military families, and you added so much to the discussion. I also want to recognize our other colleague, Tanya Fernandez. Anderson is also a military family. And we also know the the sacrifices of Tanya and and her family as well during this difficult time in our in our country. So I just wanted to acknowledge my acknowledge our colleague as well. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Council President Flynn. Would anyone else like to add their name? Please add Councilor Edwards. Mr. Clarke, please add Councilor Fernandez Anderson Please add Councilor Lara, please add Councilor Lui. Jan, please add Councilor Murphy, please add Councilor Allen, please add the chair at this time to turn it back to Council. President Flynn But I do believe that there's a motion on the floor from Councilor Clarity, that is, to adopt new language that that is being brought out. And then I think it will be a vote on that amendment and then a vote to suspend and pass it today. So. Council President Flynn. Should I stay here? Yeah, I'll take care. I don't know if that I know that the. Mr. Clarke, do we already have the copy of. I see. Counsel Clarity has his counterpart. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The language is being just drafted to for the friendly amendment, and it just requires a second and a quick vote of the council. Maybe just a quick, brief recess. Another in your lady's office taking that's. We'll take a brief recess until we have the. Until we have that in front of you. We are back in session. Thank you. Okay. Yes. Yes. I now recognize Councilor Fire to. Take a message through the charity to the Makers. A friendly amendment to add a sixth resolve. Calls on the Biden administration to stop buying oil from Russia. Requires a second and a vote and we can move forward. Thank you. So seconded. Now, Mr. Clarke, if you can do a roll call vote on the motion to amend the roll call. Vote on a motion to amend. Councilor Royal. Yes. Councilor Roy. Yes. Counsel Baker was voting on the motion to implement. Yes. Councilor Baker. Yes. Councilor Bark. Councilor Kiss. Councilor Braden. Councilor Braden. Yes. Councilor Edwards. Councilor Edwards. Yes. Councilor Fernandes. Sanderson. That's different than the standards. And yes, council clarity has clarity as. Councilor Flynn. Yes. Councilor Flynn. Yes. Council The Council. Our Council. Our Yes. Council. The Regional Council. Regional Council. The Here Council. Murphy. Yes, that's. Murphy. Yes, and Council World. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. The resolution will be so amended. Now we are seeking a vote, a suspension of the rules and passage of this docket as amended. Number 3 to 6. All those in favor say I all oppose. I say nay at the ayes have the ayes have it. Docket 3 to 6 is passed. Thank you, counsel rail. We're going into personnel orders. Mr. Clark, please read docket.

AN ORDINANCE relating to international affairs and the Seattle Sister Cities program, amending Sections 3.14.440, 3.14.450, 3.14.460, and 3.14.470 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_08152016_CB 118754

Exigent item, please. Agenda item to cancel 0118 754 Relating to International Affairs and the Seattle Sister Cities Program amending section three point 14.4. 40.4 50.4 69.4 74. Code held August 8th, 2016. So this point on this agenda item I move to amend counts bill 118754 by substitute version four for version three A and just so you know, you may recall that I held this just because there were some typos in the first version so that the new versions are second to remove and second to amend. Council Bill 118754 Any further comments? All those are in favor of the amendment for I. I oppose. No. Okay. So what this legislation does very quickly is it broadens the scope of our Sister Cities program. You may recall the we have 21 sister cities across this world. In 1957, it started in Kobe, Japan, and they formed one of the first such AC relationships. But there's been a moratorium on the sister cities for quite some time. And we have a waiting list, if you will, to add sister cities with emerging cities around the world. So what we're trying to do here is expand its size and its scope to address issues, to strengthen our Sister Cities program. And I sort of had gone over this at the briefing with you, so I won't waste time in diving too deep in. And so basically we're changing its name and changing its scope from its is going from 20 members to 30 members. And we're looking at the scope to make sure we strengthen our cultural ties, particularly with those cities that have been sort of boxed out because of the moratorium and any further questions in this legislation. So this is a bill, so please call the role on the passage of the amended bill. Burgess. Hi. Gonzalez. Herbold. Johnson. Suarez. O'Brien. Shire President Harrow. High. Seven in favor. Hey, O'Brien, give me his proxy. Can you count that in record? No, I can't do that. Okay. Please read the next report. And by the way, we're getting there. We just have an agenda. We'll get there. We'll get there. We'll get there for you to read the next report. We've already admitted our agenda. So we got the report.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2019-2020 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment process.

SeattleCityCouncil_09292020_CB 119838

Agenda Item 18 Council Capital. 119838 relating to land use and burning amendments to have a comprehensive plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2019 to 2020 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendments Process. The committee recommends the bill passes amended. Thank you so much. Casmir Strauss. As chair of the committee, you are recognized in order to provide the committee report. Making Council President. State law allows the city to make amendments to our comprehensive plan once a year, with limited exceptions. This legislation is the annual round of amendments to our comprehensive plan based on proposals that were docketed for consideration last year. This year we are making two amendments to the comprehensive plan First Amendments to expand the boundaries of West Shalhoub Urban Village to the portion of campus of Providence. Mount Saint Vincent for the Mount Providence is seeking to renovate and expand the current uses on the property, including building additional senior housing service space. City staff conducting public engagement before proposing these changes. And we heard support from the local community members at the public hearing. The Second Amendment amends the Delbridge neighborhood plan based on the recommendations in the Work Village Action Plan. The Action Plan is the result of many years of engagement with the college community and was promoted by several factors, including planning for the Village Multimodal Corridor Project and planning for Sound Transit three and the community support for changes to the neighborhood plan. This legislation Warman the comprehensive plan and should not be confused with our next resolution, which sets the docket of potential amendments that we should consider for next year's comprehensive plan. Thank you. Councilmember Strauss, are there any additional comments on the bill as members want, please? Thank you. I will be voting yes on this year's comprehensive plan amendments because I don't oppose what what is included. But I did want to mention specifically what's being left out of the bill, which I do find objectionable. In particular, there is no mention of developer impact fees. Developer impact fees can only be passed into law after they are put into the city's comprehensive plan, and the comprehensive plan is amended only once each year. So the fact that developer impact fees are not included in this bill means that there will be another year wait at least to make big developers pay for the impacts they have on our city infrastructure. Of course, we have to be clear, just amending the comprehensive plan to that effect is hardly the end of the fight that we've seen for six sites over six years. I've observed that developer impact. These are have been opposed by the to the nail by big developers and so making it happen actually will require a housing justice movement to fight for it. But I did want to mention that that is missing through the in these updates. And we know that there is a long and bureaucratic process for establishing developer impact fees before they can be passed. They need to be in the plan, a comprehensive plan, and before they can be put in the comprehensive plan, they need to be studied under the State Environmental Protection Act. And I do find it unacceptable that even though developer impact fees were included in the resolution the Council passed last year listing the issues that should be discussed for this study studied for this year's comprehensive plan. Mayor Durkan has refused to do that study. If we had developer impact fees available this year, we could have raised the funds to reimburse all the guards to metro busses. So as I said, I will vote yes. But also note that this leaves missing something extremely crucial. Thank you. He to remember. So what? Are there any additional comments on the bill? Councilmember Herbold. I want to speak to the things that I believe are in the bill and my support for the bill because of their inclusion. I want to thank Councilmember Strauss for making sure that we added additional language to Section B, requesting that I start work with Stsci and and object to review changes that could be made to the comp plan due to the closure of the West Seattle Bridge. Of course, also including the Del Del Ridge Neighborhood Plan Inclusion. Appreciate that. And then finally, appreciate inclusion of the request to the executive to study the designation of the South Park Urban Village . I know all that's in there, and I'm pretty sure Councilmember Strause, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm pretty sure that we actually did include the impact fee amendments so that we can actually make progress in implementing them in 2021. Checking with staff right now because as my comments just before I wrap up my comments was this bill should not be confused with the next bill, which sets the comprehensive plan document for next year. Just double checking. I do know that the study was conducted and that currently we are waiting on the hearing exam. It will take just 1/2 and I'll be right back with. Yeah. I'm sorry. I might be confusing the bills to. Madam President, if it's okay, may I confirm? Are we on the agenda? Item number 18. Yes, we are on agenda item 18, which is the bill related to the amendments to the comprehensive plan. Excellent. Thank you very much. Governor Swann, please. Yeah. Just wanted to clarify that the next bill does have it. And yeah, I think we're confusing the bills. This one doesn't as far. Right. Okay. Yes, go ahead, Counselor Strauss. Thank you. Just to clarify, yes, it is included in the following bill for further analysis, as requested by the committee Senator. Excellent. Any other comments or questions on the bill? Councilmember verbal yes. That I think all of the comments I just made for number 18, I won't repeat them. Transfer them to number 19. Awesome. All right. Any additional comments on this bill? Councilman, let's get a plea. I just want to say thank you to the chair of Land Use and Neighborhoods, and thank you, Councilmember Strauss, for shepherding us through this process. It's been really incredible for our office to be able to work with your office and with you directly on trying to get in as many components as we possibly could into this piece of legislation. Obviously, I'll talk about in the next bill a piece that we're looking forward to continuing to push on. But I really appreciate the way in which you have been inclusive of community comments. I know you've spent a lot of time not only in public comment, but also individually meeting with various constituents across the city on these issues that are of utmost importance to those who are calling in and testifying. And you're spending a lot of time outside of these public meetings meeting with folks on a one on one basis , too. So thank you for that work. I know it takes a lot of time and this is something that people are very invested in. So it is imperative that we have your leadership on this and you have done a tremendous job on this effort and look forward to working with you in the future years as we continue to advance these priorities that you got into this legislation. It's been a pleasure for our office to work with you, so thank you. Councilmember Mosqueda, are there any additional comments on the bill? Okay. Looks like we are ready. I will go ahead and ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill. Morales must get a yes. Peterson. Yes. Sergeant. Yes. Strauss Herbold. Yes. Suarez. Yes. Lewis. Yes. President Gonzalez. Yes. Nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation? Item 19 Will the clerk please read the title of the now? Very well introduced item 19 into the record.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Seattle Center Department; authorizing the Seattle Center Director to execute an amendment to the facility use agreement with Force 10 Hoops, LLC, authorized by Ordinance 125323 for use and occupancy of KeyArena for playing of professional women’s basketball games; making findings of fact about the value provided by professional women’s basketball in Seattle; amending the relocation payment structure in the agreement; and exempting the amendment from the requirements of Chapter 20.47 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_07222019_CB 119549

Bill Pass ensures chair will sign it. Please read the next agenda in the short short time to. Please agenda item five cancel 119 549 relating to the sales center department authorizing sales center director to execute an amendment to the facility use agreement with Force Ten Hoops LLC. The committee recommends a bill pass go again. So this Council bill is relative to our. Beloved champions, the Seattle storm. And this basically modifies the facility use agreement amendment. It allows the basically it it doesn't increase our potential liability. The city was continues to remain capped at 2.6 million. But what it does is recall it modifies the formula used to calculate relocation payments. It it no longer makes a differentiation between additional costs and lost revenue. And by doing that change, it certainly encourages and incentivized the storm to play the storm to play their home games here in Seattle rather than electric the location like Everett. And I think many of you know that they're now playing it the pavilion at the University of Washington. And we want to keep our champions local. So that's what this does. And it was a agreed upon negotiation. Any other questions on this great nat please call the role on the passage of the bill. Must get to I O'Brien by Pacheco so I thank John Gonzalez purple by President Harrell. I eat in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair of Senate. Please read the next agenda item.

AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance 124927, which adopted the 2016 Budget, including the 2016-2021 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels, and from various funds in the Budget; creating both exempt and nonexempt positions; modifying positions; adding new projects; making cash transfers between various City funds; revising project allocations for certain projects in the 2016-2021 CIP; revising project descriptions; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_09062016_CB 118752

Thank you. The bill passed and the chair will sign it. Please read the next report. Agenda item for Council Bill 118752 An ordinance amending ordinance 124 927, which adopted the 2016 budget, including the 2016 to 2021 Capital Improvement Program. Changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels and from various funds in the budget. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Councilman Burgess, thank you. This is the second quarter supplemental budget ordinance. It provides expenditure authority requested by various city department as a result of developments that have happened since we approved the budget last fall. For example, it authorizes use of the funding received in the grants ordinance that we just adopted a moment ago. The total appropriations increase in the second quarter supplemental, including grant backed and other appropriations, is approximately $40 million of the $40 million. $5.8 million are appropriations from the city's general fund. A few highlights of the various expenditures that are authorized here. A total of $19.3 million is allocated to cover cost increases for the new Customer Information System Project at SPU and City Lights. $4.8 million goes to the police department for the hiring of for the funding of 42 new police officer positions. This is part of the proposed expansion of the police force by a total of 200 officers. Thank you very much. Are there any further comments? I have just one. Brief, I'm sure. Thank you. While we were on break, we received a request from our municipal court head, Karen Donahue, and it came in while we were on break. Nobody had an opportunity to really look at it. What she was asking for was resources to help with their community program that they have, which is, I think, excellent in terms of providing connection and services for people who are going through their court. I just want you to know that it I'm sorry that it didn't come in in a timely way, but I would like to look at this as part of our budget in October. And that could happen. I know that they had requested that funding from the city budget office and that funding was denied. But we could raise that at any time in the future. Okay. Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Gonzalez. I herbold. I Johnson. O'Brien. Hi, Sergeant Bagshaw. Burgess. Hi. President Harrell. All right. Eight in favor and unopposed. Bill passed in Cheryl Senate. Please read the next agenda items into the report. But if you could do those together, are they different? They're going to do them separately or. Item six. Excuse me. Item five. Item five is next. The Neighborhood Matching Fund. Okay. Please read the next section item.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2600 High Street and 1919 East 26th Avenue in Whittier. Approves an official map amendment to rezone land at 2600 High Street and 1919 East 26th Avenue from U-SU-B1 to U-MX-2x (urban, single-unit to urban, mixed-use) in Council District 9. If ordered published, a public hearing will be held on Monday, 2-12-18. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 1-2-18.

DenverCityCouncil_02122018_17-1461

Calcium, our protein here. I'm going to ask you because Councilman Espinosa is not here. Will you please put Council Bill 1461 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the council 17 dash 1461 to be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. Thank you, Councilman Herndon. The public hearing for Council Bill 1461 is open. May we have the staff report? Jeff Hurt. Is here again. Are we talking about parking or. If you to be my pleasure to go looking around if you want. So Jeff, here with community planning and development. So this is a request for a rezoning from a single unit to a neighborhood mixed use zone district in the Whittier neighborhood. So it's in Council District nine. Again, Whittier neighborhood, northeast corner of High Street and 26th. So the subject properties are two parcels that in total are about 6300 square feet. And there's two. Commercial structures that were. Kind of built in different periods and that share a parcel boundary. And the request is to you Max to X, which is a neighborhood mixed use zone district, and the request is to accommodate or to support redevelopment of the Western parcel. And so the existing zoning is UCB be one, as are the surrounding sites or the surrounding properties. Excuse me, existing land use is of commercial and retail and industrial actually. So under some images of. The subject property. So you can see there's two buildings that share a parcel boundary. So the Western building actually is a filling station originally that was built in 1953 and it's been in a number of different commercial uses over time, including restaurants. The Eastern Parcel is that buildings about 800 square feet and the Eastern Parcel is about a 2000 square foot warehouse building built in 1901. So both structures have been used for commercial historically and under some images of the subject property. So just looking. East and west. And then images of the surrounding properties. So this is looking at top images, looking north on the. Subject block and then looking south on the. Bottom image across 26th. And so this is looking east west along 26th Avenue. And so the proposal in district is you Emacs to X. And so it's a neighborhood, urban neighborhood context mixed use district intended for small lots that have embedded commercial with the neighborhoods. And so the zone district has a lot of restrictions on more neighborhood intensity or higher intensity uses. So for example, drive thrus are prohibited and a number of other things to kind of ensure that neighborhood context. And so in terms of the rezonings that have. Happened in the area and. This is just kind of background information for the decision several properties and I think most properties in the area that were historically. Commercial and on commercial corners. Were re zoned as part of the 2010 citywide rezoning to your max two or you max to ex. These particular parcels were not although we do have some information that some requests from the community actually to go to your max two. But we don't have good information as to why this one was not rezoning to your max to ex. But again, it has been used historically as commercial. So the public process has been our standard process. Public outreach was done directly with a number of different registered neighborhood organizations in the area. We did receive a letter of support from the Whittier Registered Neighborhood Organization. Their support was with a sort of a comment that the support was. For commercial. Uses here rather than necessarily residential. But the letter was in support of the zoning district in the request, and there was one nearby resident letter of opposition who stated preference for residential zoning to stay the way it is. These are the review criteria staff uses to evaluate rezonings. So in terms of citywide plans. A number of different conference and. Plan policies support the request and most related to encouraging. Infill development. And reusing existing structures, things like that. In terms of a neighborhood or excuse. Me, blueprint in Denver. The subject properties are classified as an area of stability. And as single. Family residential. So that is a mismatch that is actually common throughout this neighborhood. Do we have an existing commercial embedded use that has the similar mismatch? So those properties with a max two X nearby we just looked at have a similar issue. And so in terms of a neighborhood specific plan, the only one is the Whittier Neighborhood Plan. And so there are a number of policies this request supports, mostly related to reusing and. Redeveloping. Underutilized commercial properties and commercial sites. And so the only other criteria. That I'll touch. On relate to justifying circumstances. So that's one finding staff has to make to support a rezoning. And there has been some redevelopment nearby, the subject properties. And then of course, there have been a number of closures for restaurants and other uses in the filling station over time. That was that represents a change condition. And then lastly, in terms of the consistency with the neighborhood context, the new annex to ex district is really designed for neighborhood scale sort of context sensitive, embedded commercial, unlike these sites on this scale. So staff thinks it's consistent with that. So staff does recommend approval, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you, sir. Okay. We just have two speakers for the public hearing this evening. Journalist DiCaprio and Chairman Sekou. Mr. DiCaprio, you're up first. And you have 3 minutes. Councilman. I'm Joyce Caprio. With the same platform where the agent for the owners of this property. So really just here to. Answer questions. If you need. Them. Thank you. Thank. All right, Chairman Sekou. Yes. Good evening. My name is Chairman Sekou. Founder organizer for the Black Star Action Movement. For self-defense, representing poor, working poor. And senior citizens. We see. That. This has the possibility. Of enhancing the. Neighborhood. One, which I attended high school, Emmanuel Manual High School, right around the corner. And there's a caveat in it because it needs to be this whole zoning thing needs to be consistent so that, you know, we know exactly what we're doing with this and people aren't caught up in the process. That's economically. Not fair. Many of these projects, you have to spend thousands, tens and thousands of dollars before you even dig a hole in the ground, because you got to go to this zoning process and changes and whatnot. And we're moving forward with this thing as it comes out. We're changing it. So that's a good thing. That's a good thing. Now the question becomes. What's coming with this? What's coming with this? Because when you change it into another deal here, you open up the door and Pandora's box. To housing that folks in the neighborhood can't afford does number one. It don't look like none of the stuff that's there. Well, they throw up a building and then, whew, in the midst of brick houses, we got this ultra super kind of looking kind of thing, and we got this witness. It was a Mendez. You wouldn't want to have in your own neighborhood. I mean, come on. Can you imagine putting this in Cherry Creek, man? Come on. For real? It wouldn't happen. So we see the vulnerability of our neighborhood and us organized. And that's why we need City Council to ask some real specific questions like, what are you going to do with this? What's going to do it safe? And some people feel this zoning and a place for it to go. But I know all of you know, most of you have talked to these folks before, even came to the floor about what is to do, what's to do, what is what's the planning. And we don't know what that is because that's not on the agenda. See, and most people in neighborhood don't even know these folks. All right. So gentrification comes in on the down low because you start building stuff that people can't afford in a neighborhood, and then they had to move out because you increased them corner lots. And then what we have is increase in property taxes for folks who are in the middle of that, who are fixed income, who lose their houses because they can't pay the property tax. But the house is already paid for and here comes the developers are gone. The banks will go mosaku. Your time is up. It's time to go. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Say who? Thanks for our speakers. Questions for members of comment. Members of the council. All right. So another public hearing for 464621 is now 14, 61 is now close. Any comments from members of council? All right, Madam Secretary, roll call. Black. Clark. Espinosa. Flynn. Herndon. Cashin. Carnage. Lopez. All right. New Ortega. Sussman. Hi, Mr. President. I. Political goals. Voting in US results promising to. SUSMAN And my husband was not. A screen. Is frozen. Okay. ESPINOSA Great. 12 eyes. All right. 12 Eyes Council vote. 1461 has passed. Congratulations. Okay, Madam Secretary, we have a couple of bills we need to put on the floor here. How would you like to do this?

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment process.

SeattleCityCouncil_10042021_CB 120154

President Gonzalez High nine in favor. Nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign. It will affect my signature to the legislation on my behalf. All righty. Well, please read item 13 into the record and I am 13. Cancel Bill 120 154 Blaine 26 Downing of Ending Sale Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes proposed as part of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendment Process. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. All right. I'm to hand back over to Councilmember Strauss to walk us through. Thank you. Council President. Colleagues, two more bills than I promised will be done. Council Bill 120154 amends the comprehensive plan as part of the 2021 annual amendment process. As we just discussed, this leads us to a major update and these amendments we considered a year ago. If I have that right now, I'll text me if I have said that incorrectly. This legislation makes other changes to the comprehensive plan as part of the 2021 annual amendment process. As a reminder, state law allows us to amend comprehensive plan one time per year. The Council engages in a two year process for amending the comprehensive plan first by passing a resolution that sets the docket of amendments to be considered and then considering seven amendments the following year. The amendments in Council Bill 120154 were docketed last year. There are two amendments being made as part of this legislation. The first is a proposal from the community, from community members to add a half block in the new district to the University District Urban Center. The second is a set of changes from the Office of Planning and Development for early implementation of the key aspects of the 1/30 Street Station area plan to encourage denser housing near the future lot transit station that is on schedule. Thank you to Councilmember Juarez. This legislation as transmitted also includes amendments related to manufacturing district areas as part of the mayor's maritime and Industrial Strategy's recommendations. Those amendments had to be removed in committee because CPA has not been concluded on those proposed changes. The mayor's office has shared its intention to conduct an environmental impact statement on most of the proposed changes, which could allow the amendments to be considered next year. The Seattle Office of Planning, the Seattle Planning Commission and Pcdi recommended all the amendments included in this legislation, he added, and the committee mittee urges a vote. Thank you, Council President colleagues. Eight. Are there any additional comments on the bill? I'm not seeing any other hands raised. Oh, I see. One hand raised comes over silent, please. Sorry. Give me a while. To get my I.D.. I. I just want to make sure this is item number 13, Murray. The amendments to the comprehensive plan. Yes, this is item 13. Thank you. I will be voting yes on the comprehensive plan amendments this year because I do not object to any of the amendments this bill contains. But the fact that yet again council members have left out developer impact fees is just stunning and it's completely unacceptable. Developer impact fees are the fees that the city could charge corporate for profit developers to raise tens of millions of dollars in progressive revenue to fund roads, parks and public transit. And in fact, other cities in Washington State charge developer impact fees. As an illustration, developer impact fees in Seattle could have funded $40 million worth of public transit expansion. I want to quote what I said on September 29th of last year, one year and five days ago. Quote, I want to be clear that I object to what has been left out of the bill. In particular, there is no mention of developer impact fees. Developer impact fees can only be passed into law after they are put into the city's comprehensive plan, and the comprehensive plan is amended only once each year. So the fact that the developer and back fees are not included in this bill means that we have to wait another year or two to vote for them for the opportunity to make developers. Big developers pay, corporate developers pay for the impact they have on our city's infrastructure. Unfortunately, there is a long and bureaucratic process for establishing developer impact fees before they can be passed. They need to be in the comprehensive plan and before they can be put in the comprehensive plan, they need to be studied under the state's Environmental Protection Act, CBA outrageously, even though developer impact fees were included in the Resolution Council passed last year, listing the issues that should be studied for this year's comprehensive plan, the mayor refused to do that study. If we had developer impact fees available this year, we could raise the funds to reimburse all the cars to metro busses and ports. And keep in mind, these are, quote, my thoughts on my comments last year. So when I say this year, that meant last year and last year meant two years back. Here we are once again, one year later. And again, this data, my collection agency study. This study has not been done to allow it to be included in the comprehensive plan, despite the fact that it was placed on the list of things that would be done to prepare for this year's comprehensive plan. And despite many, many false amendments from council members, in fact, and from successive councils, you know, it's based on the numbers and from the current ones. In fact, in July of last year, the Council voted yes to include an amendment from my office to our transportation funding bill that added the following various clauses and I quote Whereas developer impact fees would be established as early as 2021 to increase funding to buy bus service hours from Metro. And. WHEREAS, Developer impact fees are a progressive funding source paid for by large corporate developers. And. Whereas, the Seattle City Council intends to complete in 2020 any required CIP analysis to enable developer impact fees to be enacted in 2021. And. WHEREAS, the Seattle City Council is committed to enacting developer impact fees in 2021 raised not less than $44 million, which would allow Seattle to increase funding for Metrobus. Our end quote. This is from the amendment from my office that was accepted by the council to a transportation funding bill. Unfortunately, that type of analysis requires the chair of the Council committees that consider land use to prioritize impact fees for the central staff. Time for the committees. And it's clear that neither Councilmember Peterson nor Strauss, who chaired the committees, have agreed to do that this year. But as a matter of fact, the council as a whole, the Democrats on the council as a whole have not prioritized developer impact fee in any way. This is a clear demonstration of the inordinate power big developers have in Seattle's politics and how much Democratic Party politicians bank do that. Despite the endless rhetoric that we hear, the mayor's office refused to be busy for analysis on developer impact fees in 2020. Then in 2021 it was deprioritized by council members and all of this happens behind closed doors to the public, does not even know who to blame and why things are not moving forward. Why is it that a completely sensible idea like developer impact fees is not going forward? I mean, the reality is it's all political impact fees are hated by corporate developers, not surprisingly. And that is why you see the inaction on the city council in the absence of a real. Campaign, a real grassroots campaign, a real momentum on the ground to push for forward. Like the Amazon backs like $15 an hour, like the many renters rights victories that renters have won this year because we've built independent campaigns to win them. So the overall result is that years have gone by and corporate developers continue to make double digit profit rates, just humongous profits, without paying anything resembling their fair share in taxes . And we can see that developers, contractors, big banks, big corporations, all of whom are making big bucks from construction and development. They are also the entities responsible for denying basic and fair contracts to construction workers. And we are seeing courageous carpenters, union carpenters on strike for or for a fair contract for themselves. And so all of this is in the mix here. I voted yes on the previous agenda item, changing the name of single family zones to neighborhood residential. But let's be crystal clear that Bill was nothing more than a name change, having absolutely no material impact. This is where the political is. That is where the political establishment chose to put their time and energy instead of fighting to introduce developer impact fees. They want us to focus. They want to focus everyone on symbolic issues, ignoring the struggles present to pay their fair share. As I said before, I will be voting yes on the comprehensive plan amendments because I do not object to those amendments in particular. But I urge members of the public who want if we want to rent developer impact music, we want big developers to pay anything resembling their fair share, particularly to urgently expand transit hours in Seattle . Then we will need to build a campaign independent of. The council president. Point Order. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss. I appreciate it again. Colleagues, our city council rules do require us to keep our comments focused on the legislative matter that is being debated, as opposed to generalized comments about unrelated legislative matters or only tangentially related legislative matters. So I appreciate your help in in staying true to the requirements of the City Council rule, just to make sure that we are staying efficient and equitable. And in Gonzalez, all my comments were 100% related to the comprehensive plan. So I do not share your point, your your claim that it was anything show or peripheral in any way. Council Members. Council Member So what I and I am I am for the record, disagreeing with your characterization that all of your comments were 100% related to the Council bill before us, which are in, in my understanding, routine amendments to the comprehensive plan that have been in the works for a year. I agree that you would like to see them move for be be more robust and you have an interest in advancing the legislation that you just described. But that is not the matter that is before us. The matter that is before us is contained within this Council bill. Your objections are duly noted. And again, I just want to make sure that we are being efficient and effective with the time that we have together. And I'm just asking for you all to work with me in being able to achieve that. Any additional comments on this bill? I'm not seeing any other hands raised. Council member stress. Would you like to close out debate? Thank you. Council President colleagues, just to respond to some of the things that have been said on the record just a moment ago. Understanding the impact fees have been previously docketed and have been docketed for a number of years. Being docketed is a request to have the executive and executive departments study the issue at hand. And not only that, but counsel put forward the resources. And when I say study, that means to have CPA conducted on the policy proposal. Furthermore, the City Council has put forward the resources to have impact fees studied. So there is no we have made the request of the executive to have acted. We have put forward the resources needed to do so. At this time, we are waiting for CPA to be concluded and before we can amend the comprehensive plan to move to include impact fees. That is the schedule of of land use items. It is out of our control at this point because that is the schedule in which it needs to be completed. And so as we are waiting for a CPA to be conducted or concluded at that, once it is concluded, we would be able to take it up for consideration. Thank you, colleagues. That is the committee report. Thank you so much. Will the court please call the rule on the passage of the bill coupled? Yes. Suarez I. Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Macheda. I. Peterson. I. So. Yes. Strauss. Yes. President Gonzalez, i. Nine in favor and unopposed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The bill passes, and then I will sign it with the clerk. He's affixed my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Well, the clerk please read item 14 into the record.

A RESOLUTION relating to the City Light Department; endorsing the City Light Department’s Wholesale Energy Risk Management policy governing wholesale energy, transmission, ancillary services, renewable energy credit, and greenhouse gas offset trading, and their risk management; establishing it as the policy governing the conduct of wholesale energy, renewable energy credit, and greenhouse gas offset risk management at the City Light Department; and superseding Resolutions 31467 and 31216.

SeattleCityCouncil_09282015_Res 31616

Agenda item 12 Resolution 31616 relating to the City Light Department endorsing the City Light Department's wholesale energy risk management policy governing wholesale energy transmission, ancillary services, renewable energy credit and greenhouse gas offset trading and their risk management. Establishing it as the policy governing the conduct of the wholesale energy, renewable energy credit and greenhouse gas offset risk management at the City Light Department and superseding resolutions three one, four, six, seven and 312, one six. The committee recommends the resolution be adopted. Thank you, council members one. Thank you, President Bridges. This resolution makes minor updates and adjustments to city lights, wholesale energy risk management policy. Like other utilities, Seattle City Light trades, electricity on the open market. And as a matter of fact, we sell more than we buy. But because energy markets fluctuate in general, there is there always financial risk. So the city has to have some policies in place to limit, monitor and manage those risks. And this resolution makes minor adjustments recommended by city like to keep our policies aligned to the current conditions of the industry and energy committee recommends that we pass. Thank you. Questions or comments? All in favor of adopting resolution 31616 vote. I oppose vote no. The resolution is adopted in the chair will sign it. I want to go back to agenda item number one, which is Resolution 31609. Council members who want had to step out very briefly and missed our vote on that resolution. So consistent with Council Rules six g. I move to reconsider the motion to adopt resolution 316090a second. Thank you. All in favor of reconsideration. Vote I. I oppose vote no. We now have item one in before us for reconsideration. Are there any comments or questions? All in favor of adopting Resolution 316609 vote. I oppose vote no. The resolution is unanimously adopted. Thank you. Is there any other business to come before the council? We will reconvene council members at 355. 5 minutes to four when we will sit as the Transportation Benefit District Board of directors. We are adjourned. For a break.

Recommendation to increase appropriations in the Special Advertising and Promotion Fund Group in the City Manager Department by $2,500, offset by Second Council District One-time District Priority Funds transferred from the Citywide Activities Department to provide a contribution to the Long Beach Blues Society for the 2021 Long Beach New Blues Festival; Increase appropriations in the General Fund Group in the City Manager Department by $5,730, offset by Second Council District One-time District Priority Funds transferred from the Citywide Activities Department to provide contributions of: $2,500 to Kahlo Creative LLC to support Long Beach International Tamales Festival 2021; $2,200 to the International City Theatre to support their 36th Anniversary Celebration; $500 to Long Beach Food and Beverage to support Long Beach Black Restaurant Week 2022; $250 to Partners of Parks for the Harvest Festival and Resource Fair on October 30, 2021; $280 to Pedal Movement to provide Bicycle Valet Services for Fourth Friday on Fourth Street on November 26th, 2021; Decrease appropriations

LongBeachCC_11092021_21-1166

Thank you. Now we're going to do all of the fund transfer items, please. And 44 is communication from Councilwoman Allen. Recommendation to increase appropriation in the special advertising and promotion fund group in the City Manager Department by 2500 to provide a contribution to the Long Beach Blues Society for the 2021 Long Beach New Blues Festival and increase appropriation in the general fund group in the city manager's department by $5,730 to provide contribution to five community events. Item 62. Communications from Vice Mayor Richardson. Councilwoman Cindy has Councilmember Aramco recommendation to increase appropriation in the general fund group in the city manager's department by $1,000 to provide a donation to the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. Is there a second on that? Your public comment. There's no public comment numbers. Please cast your vote. Vice Mayor Richardson. The motion is key. Okay. We do have to I believe we have three. We have four hearing items on the Supreme Court. So we have four hearing ideas. We're going to what we're going to do is we're going to take hearing item 41 and 47, which both relate to the CVB together. And because they are presentations that staff are involved with, we're going to combine them for a total of 20 minutes so that we don't have to do two separate items and do two separate presentations on time. That way it fits within the time bucket that that is allowed. So if there is no objection to that, I'll turn it over. Madam Clerk, please read item 41 and 47.

Consider Clarifying the Maximum Allowable Number of Units per Site and Potentially Removing the Multi-Family (MF) Housing Overlay Designation for Various Sites. [Not heard on March 20, 2018] (Mayor Spencer)

AlamedaCC_04032018_2018-5324

Yes. Okay. So that passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Next item nine C. Okay. This is a referral that I had brought before. I think it was addressed this evening. However, I would like us to have at some point a bigger discussion and then vice mayor brought this up to really clarify. More clearly. But what our options are. And I appreciate the 20 or 30 page legal memo. I just think that that might be a little hard for many people to digest the possible, if it could be, if you all can figure out a way to make it clearer. I think that'd be very helpful. Everyone go to that? Yeah, you hear that? Okay, nine. This one's not moving forward as she. Is not moving forward. Great. I just asked them, though, to I followed up with comments we made earlier because this was done before the item. I see. And that would go to the housing element report. I heard. Earlier. Thank you. 1990. Yes. So I'll just be brief on this one. And this may be something that we put off, but I recall that when we had the meeting where we discussed the bond, there was some confusion at the end on what it would mean if we went over 11 three times in a row and whether that meant that we had

Recommendation to approve naming the park site located at Del Amo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue as "C. David Molina Park".

LongBeachCC_11152016_16-1019

Thank you. So that concludes public comment. So we're going to go a little out of order. We have a I know there's a lot of people waiting here, but we have one more brief item to get to before that item. So we'll take item number 11, please. Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Andrews and Council member would UNGA recommendation to refer to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee. The request to consider naming the park at Del Amo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue after C David Molina. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank council members Gonzalez Andrews in Urunga for signing on in support of this item. As many of you may know, we will start very soon work on a new 3.3 acre park at the southwest corner of Delano and Oregon Avenue in a district. The neighborhood has been anxiously awaiting this park ever since it was originally acquired by the redevelopment agency almost a decade ago. Now, thanks to the actions of this City Council last year in the partnership with Integral Communities, this park is about to be built. This park will provide athletic fields a lot and a playground walking paths and access to the Dominguez Gap wetlands to an underserved community. After discussing this issue with many people, I would like to recommend for consideration that we named this park after someone who was a pioneer in the health care field and left a lasting legacy not only for Long Beach but throughout the nation. Dr. C David Molina was born in Yuma, Arizona in 1926, and he studied education at San Diego State University. He began his career as an elementary school teacher at Yuma Indian School and later taught in Long Beach. After earning his medical degree, he set up a private practice in Long Beach in 1962. He started Long Beach's first intensive care unit at Pacific Hospital, where he also served as the director of emergency department of the emergency department for 21 years. He earned a grant to develop a paramedic system for the Long Beach and trained the city's first firefighters to become paramedics. Dr. Molina noticed that low income, uninsured and non-English speaking patients were coming to the emergency room in need of general health care services. So in 1980, David Molina opened the clinic to Long Beach to provide low income families with a place to get personalized health care. He soon found it Molina Medical Center's and served as its president and chief executive officer. By 1994, Molina Health Care was a licensed health care plan in California. Dr. Molina, unfortunately, passed away in 1996, but his legacy continues. His children Mario, John, Martha, Josephine and Janet and the extended Molina family continue to serve this city in a number of fields and endeavors. Two of them are joining us today. John and Janet, thank you. Today. MOLINA Health care's a Fortune 500 multi-state health care organization. It serves more than 5 million individuals and families. Melina Health care is still headquartered in Long Beach. And David Melina's grandchildren I'm sorry, his children now run the company. His grandchildren are still involved in the city as well. Given the lasting contributions of Dr. David Melina to the city of Long Beach and his legacy of providing critical medical services to underserved communities throughout the nation, it is fitting to consider the new park at the Alamo, an organ in his honor. I move to refer this recommendation to the Parks Recreation Commission and Housing and Neighborhoods Committee for consideration and recommendation back to the City Council. And I would ask for my council colleagues for support in this endeavor. Thank you. Thank you. Council member. Would you like to make the motion this item? Is there a second? Great. Next up, Councilmember Ringa. Without question, the Molino family has been a staple and a steady source of hope here in the city of Long Beach. Their philanthropic endeavors in Long Beach and elsewhere is unquestioned and welcomed. And I see no cause to name this part anything other than the Sea Molina Park. Thank you, supporter. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I too am very supportive of this. I think that they are a staple of our community. And when you go to anywhere. Else, Washington, D.C. or otherwise, and people. Say, wow, Long Beach is not only. Diverse, but one of the largest Hispanic owned businesses in the country is right here in Long Beach. And it's not just about being the biggest for them. It's also about providing quality. And I think that they provide not only quality to their customers. But knowing people that work there. They really provide a quality work environment and a lot of jobs to our neighbors. So we appreciate. All of that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Thank you, Vice Mayor. You know, I want to thank Councilman Osman bringing this item forward. You know, I have a lot of respect for the Parks and Recreation Commission. I hope they take into consideration this suggestion. John Molina was a wonderful person who looked out for the underserved. His legacy carries on, but we should honor him in a special way. And this park will be it. And I want to thank you guys again and thank you again. The stars of the great news for. Thank you, Councilmember Pearce. I also wanted to say this is a great item. I think honoring people that have done great work in Long Beach is always a great opportunity. A park where we talk about health as as we try to engage our youth to be active is also really important. And I also want to thank the Molina Foundation for their support of things like the aquarium, places of education. I think that you guys are doing a great job and we're really lucky to have you in Long Beach. So thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Price. I want to echo everything that my colleagues have said, and I want to thank Councilman Austin for bringing this item forward. It's fitting and appropriate. And this is exactly the type of situation that we should keep in mind when we're talking about naming our public spaces. So thank you very much. And thank you to the Molina family for all they've done and all that you continue to do for our community. It's very much appreciated. Thank you, Councilman Andrea. So I mentioned John, but I know it's David was just trying to name a park after you already, so just stick around, buddy. Thank you. And I'll just add congratulations and thank you to Councilman Austin, everyone who signed on this, I think. MOLINA It's no secret these folks are very present in the community and this just sort of reaffirms that commitment. So you'll have my my clear support on this. So is there any public comment on this item? Hi. I'm Janet Molina. What? I just wanted to say thank you for considering. Honoring this our father by considering naming this park after him as one of five children. Parks are very important. Growing up, we were at Eldorado. Whaley taking different parks and. Rec classes from when we were growing up and then to our families. Now we still use the parks our kids ride, their bikes, their walk, their Greenspaces are so important. To the livelihood of communities and the health and well-being of. Everybody. So we really consider this an honor. Thank you. Thank you. Any further public comment? Is this the last public comment? If so, we'll close it after this. Good thinking, honorable mayor and members of the city council. My name is Rita Cox and I live in the eighth District and in Long Beach all my life. I love Long Beach and everything that it has to offer. I treasure the city's past, and I'm confident the future holds many positive changes. One of the positive changes that I'm happy to speak to you about tonight is the importance of the new 3.3 acre park at Alamo Boulevard and Oregon Avenue and the naming it in honor of Dr. Molina. This is an exceptional, wonderful opportunity for the community of the eighth District. There is more to a livable community than the development of property for residential and commercial uses. There is a need for parks, libraries and open space. Parks and open spaces are necessary components of a healthy, well-balanced community in the eighth District. There is just this need. As you're probably aware, the district is a high density residential community with mixed commercial uses. This new 3.3 acre park will improve and add to the quality of life for many. A place where people can go and get away from the everyday hustle and bustle. The location is ideal next to the Los Angeles River, with its additional benefits of walking, hiking trails, horses, ducks, a bike path to the beach. Just as importantly, I sincerely hope the park will remain open space now and in the future for the people. We need to protect our parks and open spaces for the precious resources they are. This is truly a win win situation. More open space for the community and also importantly, no fiscal impact for the city. I hope input from the surrounding community will serve to be a valuable part of the planning process and I hope plans will be available online along with the new library and the improvements of the first wetlands. This new park is a much needed and welcome addition to the district. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. CARROLL Sean and I live two. Blocks down the street from this park. And what better. Way to remember somebody. Continually by naming a park after them, especially since they've done so much for this city. Thank you. Thank you. And we have someone queued up up top to speak next. Wave your hand if you queued up to speak of top. Okay. Seeing none will move forward. The next speaker here. And Control. And no, I don't live in this district, but I am very happy to see that there is going to be another park in Long Beach. When this was being proposed. The developer who is providing the money for the park said that. The city wanted to put in artificial turf for the sports complex or the soccer field there. And he. Would be willing to put in natural grass with all of these people talking about open space. I hope you will consider putting in natural grass instead of artificial turf. As you are aware, artificial turf has to be fenced so that there is no damage to the field with food, with chewing gum, with bicycles, all the things that can tear up artificial turf. And so the general public is not going to have access to this section of the park that is going to be a soccer field . That's I'm glad that you are naming it after Dr. Molino, but I think you should also be considering having open space for the whole public. And this would be accessible to everyone, not just soccer. Thank you. Thank you. I don't see any other public comment. I'm going to turn this back over to council member Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank my and my colleagues for all of the supportive comments. I've heard a lot of supportive comments from the public as well. I want to make just a couple of points on this. This park has been been the long awaited resource for for the city. Again, it's been almost ten years getting to this point. And we have a lot of great assets that are connected to this park, including the DeForest Wetlands area, which is beautiful, natural open space just across the Alamo. We are developing the the Forest Wetlands Restoration Project, which is going to be beautiful, natural open space. It's right along the L.A. River, where people have the access to ride their bikes through recreation. And in the future, we hope to have uses of the L.A. River as recreational opportunities for for the public. And so when we talk about creating open space, that's exactly what we're doing in the eighth District in North Long Beach. There's going to be acres and acres of open space created. This is going to be an active, mostly active recreational space, which I think is going to be a tremendous addition to this community. And so, again, members, I would ask for your support. Thank you and great recommendation here. So we're very happy about this. Please go ahead. Cast your votes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. And that moves on to the Parks and Recreation Commission. And now we're moving back over to item number ten.

A bill for an ordinance amending the Denver Zoning Code. Approves text amendment #9 to the Denver Zoning Code to establish a new Active Centers and Corridors Design Overlay zone district (DO-8), create consistency with the Shopfront form across contexts, and make other associated amendments in Articles 5, 9, and 13. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-16-21.

DenverCityCouncil_03302021_21-0156

So a portion of a larger project would need to provide something other than residential at that ground floor facing the street. There's also a number of of more qualitative standards that get to this notion of maintaining a strong street wall and sort of main street character, but also allowing for greater flexibility and pedestrian movement through a variety of setbacks and more flexible range of where the building can actually be located, creating better transitions between the public sidewalk and private residential units when there are residential uses at that ground floor, and then supporting very highly active street levels with tall ground floors and many windows across those frontages. So this is a this is a brief summary, and I won't get into each one of these individually, but I do have some slides if anyone has questions about these going forward. But this is a summary of what's what's in the design overlay itself. You know, most fundamentally, as I mentioned, it would does have a standard to provide nonresidential active uses for just a portion of that primary street frontage on larger sized lots. Limits the building forms to the shop front and townhouse. Make some changes to the build to range. Again, sort of allowing greater flexibility for that building to be set away from that primary street zone online a little bit, provide some more space for outdoor dining in pedestrian areas. Some setbacks that I mentioned, and then limiting the transparency alternatives in areas within the overlay to only be allowed to be to meet that alternative through the permanent art. So really, we're looking for windows and we want to make sure that we get the highest level of transparency possible. And then finally, a minimum floor to floor height for that street level. And that's really sort of leaning towards making sure that these projects and future future buildings are designed in such a manner that they can accommodate those nonresidential uses at some point in the future. And I should clarify to a nonresidential use in this case and in this particular zoning district doesn't mean that it specifically has to be retail or it has to be a coffee shop or a food and beverage of some kind. It really runs the entire range of things like neighborhood services, health care services, the dentist, the dog groomer, you know, any number of things that could be considered and would be permitted as a nonresidential use. I also mentioned this design overlay and in the text amendment that will establish this and the Denver zoning code picks up an inconsistency in the shopfront form and in all of the other contexts within the zoning code, the shopfront form does not allow parking between either the primary or the side street. And for whatever reason, in the urban context, which is Article five, that was a little was inconsistent. And so we've made that change as well in all of our our X, M, X and s districts. And that parking would not be allowed between surface parking, I should say, would not be allowed between the building in the primary or the side street. So moving into the rezoning itself, we'll, of course, look at at the overview of the existing context through the zoning land use and then existing building performance scale. As I mentioned this, these areas are a range of different mixed use and main street zoned districts, they range in scale from two storey to three storey and up to five storey in a couple of locations. A few of these areas also included the UO one and two, which is the use overlay one and two that were sort of carryovers of of older zoning and older entitlements that are applied to these areas. The other one is the adult use overlay, and two is the billboard use overlay. And you can see there in the surrounding areas, generally these areas are bordered either by a two unit zone district or a single unit zone district in the urban context as far as land use. As you might expect, there's actually quite a large range of things that are happening in these various areas. They primarily there are commercial and retail. There is a mix of multi-unit residential office and mixed use type of properties. You can see in particularly the northern part of Tennyson, which is the which is the long section here in the in the middle of the of the graphic, particularly on the western side of Tennyson in that area that has really transitioned almost exclusively over to multi-unit residential. And we'll look at a photograph or two that shows that. So zooming in here, this is this is the portion of Tennyson from 38 to 46 that is being considered for the rezoning. It sort of runs the range in terms of scale from one story, traditional commercial type of non type of buildings up to three and even five story multi-unit residential structures, some new, some old. As you move further north, this is where that rapid transition has really has really happened and really raised a lot of the concerns from the neighborhood and has over the last several years about changes to add to this portion of Tennyson that did used to provide some local commercial and neighborhood goods and services, but has really rapidly transformed over to almost almost exclusively residential projects. This is the area around 44th and Sheridan. Again know it's generally going to be mixed use and commercial and retail and it's existing patterns. It also has one story more sort of traditional type of commercial buildings, but then also some more suburban type of examples where you where you see the surface parking is located generally between the building and the street. Here. This is up near Regis University. So this is at 49th and 50th Avenue. And Lowell, again, kind of a range and a mix of some convenience store or drive thru type of uses, some one story traditional commercial buildings and then portions of this section have also transitioned over to multi-unit residential. 44th in Lowell. Again, sort of a mix of things, the one and two storey commercial buildings and then some other more suburban type of development where the buildings are set away from the street. And then finally, this last section along the north side of 38, which is just east of east of Sheridan here, again, sort of a mix of lower scale, lower scale commercial and some residential components here as well. So the overall outreach has has been ongoing for a number of years now. CPD has been involved directly with with Berkeley, Regis United Neighbors, which is the local registered neighborhood organization since at least the fall of 2017. So this goes back to even to former Councilman Espinosa for this area. And those initial conversations about what what kinds of things an overlay might include. Really, it took it took on a lot more momentum once once Councilmember Sandoval got got into you know, got into her position. And her office has really taken on the bulk of the of the public outreach through a number of different mailers and fliers, media advisories and town halls that were that were held in the spring of last year. Unfortunately, right around the time that the pandemic started to started to take shape. And so they they did a lot of additional direct conversations and outreach, really, through the spring and summer of last last year. And then finally we presented to the IMC Zoning and Planning Committee back in November of last year. Process has similarly moved through the standard protocols and procedures. The informational notice of both the text amendment and Map amendment were in November of last year and the planning board meeting was noticed in January and the hearing was in February. Moved on to council committee. And then here we are this evening on a Tuesday instead of a monday. As far as public comments, we have received a letter of support from from the R.A. from Berkeley, Regis for United Neighbors. They submitted a letter of support to the planning board. And I believe we're also going to submit a direct letter to the council members as well. We've also received 24 letters of support from from various various neighbors and really speak to and cite this desire to maintain and enhance the walkability of these these areas and ensure the continuation of commercial activity is provided by local small businesses. One of those letters in support was actually conditional, recommending that we didn't go far enough and that there were some additional strategies they would like to see to strengthen that overlay. And then we have also received four comments in opposition, generally citing concerns relative to the timing and the applicability of the new overlay potential increase in construction costs. And that residential uses really should be the focus for these locations. Moving into the review criteria, there are three. For this rezoning, we'll be looking at consistency with adaptive plans and then uniformity of district regulations and furthering public health, safety and welfare. So we'll start with adopted plans and move directly into a comprehensive plan. 2040. I do think it's important to call out there's there's a number of different things that speak to this notion of complete neighborhoods and a mix of uses. But I really do want to highlight a couple that come from the strong and authentic neighborhoods strategy. You go one strategy and to build a network of well connected, vibrant, mixed use centers and corridors, and then to encourage quality infill development that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and offers opportunities for increased amenities. Moving on to Blueprint Denver then and looking at the urban context, mapping this entire area falls into the urban context. Generally, development should be compatible with the existing neighborhood character and offer residents a mix of uses with good street activation and connectivity. Future place type. All of these rezoning areas, except for one very small site, fall into the local corridor and center categories, characteristics of these of these types of areas in the future that they primarily provide options for dining, entertainment and shopping. They could include some residential and employment uses. The scale is intimate with that focus on the pedestrian. The one area that does fall into the residential low category actually has an existing commercial use on it currently. And that's something that the neighborhood and the councilmember was interested in reinforcing and perpetuating into the future. The, let's say, future street types, both 44th and lower fall in the mixed use collector category. And then Tennison is a main street collector and then 38 falls in the category of Main Street Arterial. Generally, these have similar descriptions of a varied mix of uses, including some residential. They are typically multi-story with high building coverage and a shallow setback. It is within the all areas of all other areas of the city as far as growth strategies. So that means that roughly 10% of the jobs and 20% of housing by 2040 should be absorbed into these types of areas. And then getting into some specific strategies that Blueprint and Denver directs and really establishes some policies that are supportive of this of this rezoning is that in in the general the land use and built for general policies policy number 11 is to implement our plan recommendations through citywide legislative rezonings and text amendments. So that's exactly what we're doing here this evening. And then more importantly, on the qualitative side, in the design, quality and preservation policy, number four speaks to ensuring an active and pedestrian friendly environment that provides true mixed use character in our centers and corridors, and specifically strategy A speaks directly to what we're what we're doing here this evening of requiring strong street level, active use standards for local centers and corridors. And this may include a prohibition on residential units for a portion of the street level building. As far as the equity analysis overall, these areas in Berkeley and Regis relative to access to opportunity are rated as having moderate access. This is a result of having relatively lower access to transit and grocery stores, but higher access to existing local centers and corridors. So I want to make sure that we're supporting supporting that and helping to, you know, ultimately provide additional access. The proposed overlay in the rezoning, we think, will further increase that access to opportunity by encouraging walkability within these areas and ensuring that new development is including those nonresidential uses that could contribute to jobs and services and other amenities. So we find that the rezoning application would have a net positive impact on the area's access to opportunity. As far as vulnerability to displacement, the Berkeley areas are indicated as low vulnerability to displacement, while the Regis has a slightly higher moderate vulnerability. The region's score is is partly due to a slightly higher percentage of the population that has less than a college degree. The proposed overlay is not anticipated to significantly impact vulnerability to displacement. However, it may actually help with some employment displacement because, again, by ensuring that nonresidential space continues to be offered in the future and new development , it will open up and provide space to be available and hopefully more affordable to local businesses. So we find that the rezoning would not have a negative impact on this measurement and that housing and businesses would not be displaced as a result of the rezoning. Housing. Housing diversity. Both Berkeley and Regis areas are indicated as low to moderate housing diversity. They're generally diverse in terms of their home size, but not necessarily diverse in terms of middle density housing or homeownership opportunities compared to rental. We found that looking at the rezoning because there is a limitation on the residential uses at the ground floor, there may be a very slight impact on overall housing diversity. Just just because there may be slightly fewer units that are generated because of that requirement to provide some nonresidential use of the ground floor. And then finally, jobs, diversity. The subject areas within Berkeley and Regis generally have low to moderate density in terms of in terms of the number of jobs overall, they sort of fall in the category of retail innovation, jobs near the university and lower and manufacturing diversity. And we think that the proposed rezoning may have a positive impact on job diversity in the neighborhood. Again, sort of going back to the notion of having more commercial or nonresidential space available and the opportunities that that may present to new businesses and local, local employment. So we think that overall, we find that the rezoning application would have a positive effect on the area's job diversity. We also find that the requested rezoning would meet the next two criteria. It would result in uniformity of district regulations and would further the public health, safety and welfare primarily through the implementation of our adopted plans. So staff recommends that City Council approves the Denver Zoning Code Text Amendment Number nine and establishing the active centers and corridors design overlay. Finding that all of the applicable review criteria have been met and we also recommend approval of Map Amendment Number 2020. i-200080 rezoning these areas of Berkeley and Regis neighborhoods to apply the new DOJ finding again that all applicable review criteria have been met. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you. Christopher, when I saw the 40 the the 40 slides in the deck, I wondered how quick you're going to be able to go. And so great job doing that. You're welcome. There's a lot to cover is a lot of information. So I'm happy to answer questions. All right. Right on. Well, tonight, counsel has received one written comment on counsel Bill 157 There are no submitted comments in favor of the application and one submitted comment in opposition of the application. No written comments have been received for counsel Bill 156. All members of counsel that are present have certified certified that they have read each of the submitted written comments. Do any members need more time in order to read all of the written testimony that was submitted? All right. Seen none. Council secretary let the record reflect that all written testimony, both in favor and in opposition of Council Bill 157 have been read by each member of Council and all written testimony will be submitted to the official record of the hearing and this evening on the combined public hearing for Council Bill 156 and 157. We have two individuals signed up to speak this evening, and our first speaker is Bill Killam. And Phil, you're unmuted. And so we'll go ahead and let you introduce yourself and tell us your city of residence and go ahead. Great. Thank you very much. My name. My name is Bill Killam, and I've been a resident. Of the Berkeley neighborhood in. Denver since 1986. I am a member of Berkeley, Regis, United Neighbors. Zoning and Planning. Committee since 2006, and I'm also currently serving on the Brown Board of Directors as a long time resident. I've seen the destruction of much of the retail aspect of Tennyson Street as developers took advantage of mixed use loopholes, specifically by building LA homes and apartment buildings. The brand's zoning and planning committee has been working to rectify this situation as long as I've been a member, and the effort actually began much earlier. The Zoning and Planning Committee has been working with Councilwoman Sandoval, her staff and city planners since her election in 2019. Run has kept the neighborhood informed through social media and in-person meetings. We shut down and affected. Landowners have been contacted directly by the councilwoman to office. Tonight, I urge council members to approve these text and map amendments to help preserve street activation and the commercial character of the neighborhood. Directly read This neighborhood has been severely impacted by changes in our commercial districts over the last few years, and we believe that instituting this amendment and overlay will help preserve the neighborhood's character to the extent possible. So Graham, thanks the council members for their consideration of this matter. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Killam. And we have another speaker. Rafael Espinosa. And we're going to go ahead and ask former Councilman Espinosa to unmute himself, please. Good evening. Thank you. Council president and city council former colleagues. This has been a long time coming. The. I remember. Jefferson. Park, my neighborhood was first meeting in 28, 2008 for the 2010 adoption. Here we are. We spent the better part of nine months or more in actually more during my time in office. And now we're nearly just a couple of months from midterms on. You're on this next term. So it's actually taking longer to make the tweaks that the. That the zoning code always anticipated. I do urge. CPD director LG Reddy and others to figure out a way to expedite this process because it really the community effort and the amount of data points and meetings and time and effort that went into producing. What seems to be a very rational approach has taken an inordinate amount of of of effort, both by the city and the community. That said, I do want to thank Tom Mobley in the members of the community, specifically CBD staff Andy Dalton, Mr. Dalton, Abe Christopher and Brad for their continuing efforts to shepherd the community to get to this point. So thank you for taking the time to consider the matter, and I'm looking forward to hopefully celebrating the adoption once all this COVID stuff is over. So thank you very much. All right. Well, thank you for joining us, former council member Espinosa, and good to hear from you. All right. That concludes our speakers this evening. On this combined hearing questions from members of Council on Council Bill 156 and or Counsel Bill 157. Council member, Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I Christopher. Or maybe Councilwoman Sandoval, either one of you, please help me out a little bit with let me go over to the staff report and the presentation on Slide 12, where I talk about the proposed standards for design overlay aid and then where there were more specifics on it. On page 22 of the staff report, I'm trying to visualize how these setbacks and minimum heights, etc., will contribute to the outcome that you're that you're desiring for more shop front, townhouse oriented environment. So maybe talk a little bit about increasing the build to range from from 0 to 5 feet to 0 to 10 feet. What does that do for you as far as encouraging outdoor dining? Talk a little bit about the and the minimum two foot primary setback. Primary street setback in the shopfront form. How does that conflict with the build to it? There's so many measurements in there. I'm just trying to I'm trying to get a picture of what a street that is that has this overlay will eventually look like when these regulations are all adhered to. Christopher or Caroline, if you care. That's what I'm do. Do you want to start? And then I'm happy to. German. I'll defer to you, Christopher. Okay. Yeah. Perfect. So yeah, that's a that's a great question. So I'll start with let's see why not. I'll start with the with the two foot setback. Part of the reason that we we made that determination is that the current Department of Transportation and Infrastructure, the standard for the amenities are sidewalk along Tennyson. And most of these areas is actually an eight foot amenity zone and only a five foot sidewalk. That's that that's the minimum standard. So we wanted to make sure that there was, at the very least, potentially an extension of that sidewalk that could be accommodated to allow for a greater intensity of pedestrian movement and activity in this particular location. The other thing that actually that helps with is that typically in situations where there is a zero foot setback in the building, as is built right up to the property line, and then what is essentially the back of the sidewalk, if there's ever a table chair and railings permit, which is the permit that you need in order to encroach into that public right of way that all goes through. Dottie and CBD doesn't have an opportunity to directly be able to sort of oversee and weigh in and provide comments on those kinds of those kinds of factors. So having that small setback means that now that encroachment covers both a portion of the private property and then extends into the public right of way. So now we've got at least two people, two agencies that have some have some oversight of how that gets how that gets applied, increasing the bill to range from 0 to 5 feet and going now it would actually be from two feet to ten feet. So we accommodate for that initial setback and then going up to ten feet, basically that allows for a building to be set a little bit further away from the public sidewalk, still meet our standard for having buildings close to, you know, close to the street, close to the sidewalk to create that that main street feel from it from a design perspective. But it allows for a lot more flexibility for those outdoor dining or outdoor retail type of experiences that is not encroaching into the public sidewalk. Not in. But we just interrupt. Christopher, I apologize. But say what you're saying is that an outdoor seating area at a cafe could be set back from where the people are traversing the sidewalk, going to walk around, etc.. That's exactly right. I guess that's right. And one other delight that I think I brought up, the 14 foot minimum height for the ground floor, even for residential. Is that in my reading. That correctly. So. So the way that that works is that that that standard would apply to projects that that are large enough to have that have that nonresidential requirement. And so the way that that's measured to clarify is that it's a floor to floor height. So it's not necessarily the interior volume, the floor to ceiling room. So, you know, there's there's a lot of architectural improvements on the interior of the building where you can have drop ceilings and other things. So in a residential context, that interior volume is probably going to still be more in the 0 to 10 or 11 foot range, which is a very comfortable, comfortable height for it for a residential type of of of use. The good thing about having that full 14 feet Florida floor is that then in the future and over time, if those uses are modified and changed, we haven't precluded the fact of for them the opportunity to have a non residential or a commercial component in in that ground floor. So if the project was designed with a very limited and short first ground floor height, you potentially create challenges with those uses ever transitioning back into a into a nonresidential type of use. So we're trying to account for that. You know, and there's also a lot of research and data out there just in terms of the viability of commercial spaces that generally those taller floor to floor heights and those those, you know, those larger spaces, interior tend to actually lead to people spending more money. Mm hmm. One last thing, Madam President, if I could. The transparency requirement says eliminate the alternatives. Transparency requirements, except for, I think, art. Let me take a look at it. Except for permanent art to encourage more windows at street level. Does that apply to the townhouse, the townhome form as well? And in other words, a person's residence on the street would have to have. What are we talking about as far as windows? Yeah, the residential the residential requirement for transparency in the townhouse form and I can double check this, but I believe it's only 40% in the shop front. Form, it's 60%. So it's a much higher standard for building forms that are intended to have a mix of uses. There are there are several other alternatives, transparency alternatives that exist in the code today. And some of them have been used, I'd say, to less success than others. And so that was that was the determination that we wanted to make sure that if there was going to be an alternative to transparency, to a window, we wanted to make sure that that was actually something that's contributing back to back to the street. And permanent art is is something that is actually reviewed also by Denver arts and venues to determine if it is actually a work of public art. And so that's, again, sort of gives that an extra layer of quality. Mm hmm. Thank you. Thank you very much, Christopher and Madam President, all have. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. Councilmember Torrance. Thank you so much. I'm looking at some of the early slides that you have, obviously. Christopher Councilwoman, we've talked about this being considered for Santa Fe by some of the community there for for that corridor. Now it's being applied to Mex and S and there's language in the in the slides about its use generally four stories, 2 to 5 stories. But as a as a as an overlay, can it be applied to any district more beyond X 2 to 5 or more? 2 to 5. Yes, it could be. It's written to apply to really all of our ah mixed use districts within the Denver zoning code. So that could be a, we have our districts the residential mixed use then we have and we have mixed use. It is not specific to height, so it could be applied to an eight storey district. I would say the only component about the overlay that does have a reference back to height is that through this process we're also looking at potentially or we've had other neighborhood stakeholders approach us in two story districts and there are some two storey districts actually that are being proposed for the rezoning and District one. And there's been a lot of concerns or questions raised about the viability of providing nonresidential uses in a two story project. Once you get up to three stories, five stories, it's a lot easier to financially make that work. But in a two story district, it is difficult. So in the overlay, the nonresidential use standard. So that standard that would require nonresidential uses of the ground floor does not apply to two storey districts. It would have to be a three storey or above. Okay. And then the other the only other question that I have is if adopted this evening, projects in queue, who becomes affected by these versus projects that maybe have not applied yet for the permits to construct? Kind of what's the what's the bright line? Sure. Yeah. That goes back to what we call the effective date and then the applicability of the of the zoning code change. So in this case, and really what the what the default is for really any zoning code amendment is that it becomes effective as of the date of that of the hearing and of the adoption, in that it is applicable to essentially all projects that have yet to be approved. That is that was determined to be the case here. We had a lot of conversations with Councilmember Sandoval and some of the neighborhood advocates as well, and actually reviewed a lot of the projects that were in that are in the process of the permit review. And there were there were some examples that raised a lot of concerns that they were not going to be consistent with the intent of the overlay. And and really then, you know, the intention of the neighborhood for these corridors. And so Councilmember Sandoval made the determination that this zoning code change should be effective immediately and should apply to all projects that are still that are still under review. And so essentially, anything that has not received approval, these were these would retroactively apply. Okay. Thank you, Christopher. Thank you, Councilwoman. Thank you, Councilwoman Torres. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam President. Christopher and Councilwoman. Sandoval, thank you so much for working on this. I'm really, really impressed. I'm just going to ask a question publicly that I've asked both of you in private. We had a couple of people reach out to us who were unhappy that they were sort of caught in the middle of this, that they were already engaged in some sort of financial transaction, and they didn't know about this. And I've talked to both. Of you about it a lot. And so thank you very much. But I just thought I'd give you an opportunity to talk a little bit more about all of your outreach. I know you had a fight about it in the presentation. And then Councilman Sandoval, specifically, I know you said that all of the property owners were aware of it and. That if there were parties. That weren't aware of it, it was perhaps because the property owner had not revealed that. So if you could just publicly comment on some of those things, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Yes, sure. Thank you for the question. Outreach is essential in these type of projects of the utmost importance. So when we created the town hall notification, I went to the assessor's office in January of 2020 and I asked our assessor to in all of the areas that are mapped, so not the text of the amendment, but the mapped areas of the amendment, which is the second bill on reading to send me every property owner on the Denver Assessor's list. So I got that. We got those property records and we mailed them a flier in by U.S. mail notifying them about this survey that my Naomi and my office put together, and about two upcoming town halls that we held at Skinner Middle School. So we sent that out the US mail that my office paid for, and then we went back through and we fired. Because a lot of times what I've learned in roads, especially in retail areas and residential, not everybody who not all property owners live on site, but it's important that tenants know about it as well. So we went back through and fired all of the properties before the town halls happened. And unfortunately, our last town hall took place, I want to say March 12th or March 11th. And the city did get shut down with COVID on March 13th. So during that transition time, when the city was shut down and we were all virtual and trying to figure things out, we Naomi and I compiled a list of property owners that we didn't think we heard from. And I individually researched our houses to court people to make sure that they were aware of it. And any time that we saw something come through a transaction through business then or any other, because properties do have transactions during this time. I personally reached out to all new property owners, but within this amount of time to make sure that they knew about the overlay and we gave them the summation of it. And to date, I hadn't heard anything except for right before a planning board. And this past year did I hear from two property owners that they were aware. And for the record, they're not property owners. One of them is under contract, and the woman who lives in the home said she was not aware of it, which there's been signs and several notifications that have come through. So I hope that answers your question. And then the other slide, once it was an active application, community planning and development sent one mailer out and by accident they forgot to include something, which is why these two tax amendments are here on the same evening. And they got a second mailer. So not only did they get one mailer, they got two mailers notifying them about planning board. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Black, for the question and Councilmember Sandoval for the answer. And seen no other hands raise. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 156 and or Council Bill 157. Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. Well, working for Councilman Espinosa, the community came together with a lot of different concerns regarding Tennyson and the transformation and something the quarter was changing into, something different than they had envisioned while working on Blueprint Denver 2020 or 2002 and the 2010 zoning code update, many residents of the Berkeley Regis community were task force members who volunteered their expertize and time to the zoning code. Update the zoning 2010 update and as we see development occurred along along the corridor, new forms. We're out of context and we're taking cues from the surrounding neighborhood. We would not be here today if it weren't for numerous advocates in the neighborhood who spent years and hours and dedicated to this overlay. So in 2010, the zoning code established Main Street and mixed use zoning along Tennyson, which historically had been one of our streetcar nodes. So we have some areas of Denver where commercial is embedded within a residential neighborhood. So many corridors like Tennyson, like Law got their life from having mixed use, residential mixed use among the residential neighborhoods. These historic areas show a pattern of small acts and pedestrian friendly design suitable for strolling to and from street car shops. The 2010 zoning code reflected the Berkeley community's desire to maintain and enhance these commercial corridors while also making room for new residential density that would support businesses. Unfortunately, long standing main streets like Tennyson have experienced a loss of commercial space new due to new developments. At a time when we are facing such a crisis and housing needs in our city, it is easy to forget about the lack of spaces for small businesses when we desperately need new housing. We also need places to work, shop and everything else to create a vibrant, walkable, compact city. Our businesses are suffering immensely right now, and not just from COVID, but from an entire system of land use and other forces. These businesses are what make our neighborhood such a great place to live and deserve to be protected. The loss of tenants in character is incredibly painful. Yet with so many wonderful, creaky spaces are gone, there is much to preserve on Tennyson and throughout Berkeley Regis and as I keep in mind, planning for the next seven generations. I am also heartened to know that this design overlay can help preserve the commercial nature of historic Main Streets throughout Denver. I would like to end by thanking everybody who spent years seeking my predecessor, Councilman Espinosa, for his steadfast leadership who I call often and ask for advice. For Naomi in my office, for who goes above and beyond to do community outreach, attend late night meetings. I'd like to thank Christopher for attending numerous meetings in the evening and his ability to go back and forth with design efforts with Naomi and I. It was rewarding and it was a great experience the whole time and everyone else at KPD. And I'd also like to thank my staff, Gina and Naomi. A lot of times we go, We can't do this work without our staff. I'll just say that to Gina. Naomi, many thank you all for supporting me and this crazy idea of moving forward, all these overlays during the time of COVID. And with that, it would be an honor if I were able to get all of your vote tonight in support of something that my community has desperately been wanting for the last ten years. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. Up next, we have Council Cashman. Thank you. Council president. I want to just offer my thanks to Council Councilmember Sandoval and all the folks that work on this. What I consider. Extremely. Important pair of measures are embedded. Commercial districts are such a have such a rich history and such such an important part of our community fabric to lose them to to add a few more housing units just I don't think would be the trade off we're looking for. I'm really excited to support this and I hope to see it implemented further around the town. So thank you. Thanks a lot, Christopher. Thanks for the presentation and for your hard work. Thank you. Councilmember Cashman. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to piggyback on what Councilman Cashman said and congratulate Councilwoman Sandoval for addressing something that even before I got on council six years ago, I think had been a source of a lot of anxiety among residents of Denver, fearful of losing what is Denver? This allows growth, but it allows it to occur in a way that is complementary and absorbs that growth in a way that maintains the look and feel of neighborhoods. And particularly up on in northwest Denver, where I don't spend a whole lot of time. But I have been up there. I was up there with Councilman Espinosa when he was in office, taking a look at what he was describing, exactly what was needed here. And so I just wanted to congratulate Councilman Sandoval for following through on that and seeing it come to fruition. I'll be happy to support it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. And it looks like Councilman Cashman, we have you back up in the queue. But if it's okay, we'd like to go to Councilmember Ortega since you've been up. All right. Thank you, sir. Councilmember Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to add my accolades to everyone who worked on this. I have seen so much of the transformation that has occurred in northwest Denver. Having lived here most of my adult life, and I think these changes are not only welcomed by the neighborhood, but really can be utilized across neighborhoods throughout our city and will benefit from the incredible hard work that everybody put into these changes that are moving forward tonight. So to Councilman Espinosa, Councilwoman Sandoval, to the Brennan neighborhood, for all of their commitment and dedication and many meetings, and to Christopher and Naomi. For your. Work and all of the other folks at CPD in helping to make this happen, because it's not always easy to get support from CPD staff with the kinds of changes that we often, you know, try to bring forward. And the fact that it really came across as being a genuine partnership in making these changes happen is is really exciting to see. And so I just want to congratulate you all, and I'm happy to support this tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Ortega. Councilmember Torres. So much, just looking forward to being able to have kind of the next conversation with my district in Lima, Lincoln Park. Something like this was a work that had been generated by neighborhood residents and advocates along the Santa Fe Corridor, which is currently zoned for Main Street five stories and Main Street eight stories in some cases, and just starting to witness some of that growth begin. Folks were, I think, justifiably worried about the kind of active street use that would or would not come with that. And so I'm excited to support this and and bring the conversation to Santa Fe to see if this this brings the desired effects to that corridor that that they would like. So thank you so much for all the hard work. Thank you, Councilmember Torres. Councilmember Cashman. Thank you. Council President, quickly. I did not want to forget, especially, you know, put a smile on my face, too, to hear our colleague, former colleague, councilman, the Honorable Rafael Espinosa. I want to thank him for his work on this. But I also wanted to just mention quickly another subject that Councilman Espinosa was very interested in, that I hope we can move further down the road is the appropriate use of design review in our commercial projects. I'd seen in my own district some examples that they're just doggone shame to just, you know, you don't need to keep everything exactly the same. But I think it's important. That we show. Respect for the context and the history. In. All of our areas. So, again, I want to do I tip my hat to Councilman Espinoza and mentioned that part of his work that I hope we can carry forward. Thank you, council president. Thank you, Councilman Cashman, and appreciate that, Councilmember Flynn. I'm impressed. Just a quick note. I should have made mention of this that I found it ironic. Councilwoman Sandoval, you might want to look into this. Why? The Regis neighborhood had a high rate of residents without a college degree. I think you need to ask the Jesuits what's going on up there. Thank you. Well, I think we just heard a plug for some scholarships for the neighborhood out there. Well, I'll go ahead and chime in here. Last seen no more hands raised. A very happy to support this this evening. Councilmember Sandoval, and thank you for all of your intentional and authentic work that you always do within the community and always been so responsive to the voice of your community. And know that when you say years, you really mean years on this. And it was great to hear a little bit from former Councilman Espinosa as well. And so thank you for all of the work by yourself and your council office and Christopher as well. And so appreciate that and I will be happy to support both Council Bill 156 and 157 this evening and seeing no other hands raised. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 156 and 157. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres, I. Black I. CdeBaca, I. Clark. All right. Flynn. I. Herndon. I. Heinz. Cashman. I. Ortega, I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. 12 days.

Recommendation to request City Manager to schedule an Airport Noise Ordinance Study Session to educate the entire council as to the history, importance, and background on this vulnerable protection for our community. Said Study Session shall include but not be limited to City Management, City Prosecutor, and City Attorney staff. Community stakeholder input should be accommodated as well. This meeting shall be scheduled/conducted within the next 45 days.

LongBeachCC_11112014_14-0929

Item 15 Communication from Council Member Austin Councilmember O'Donnell. Councilmember Durango Recommendation to request city manager to include to schedule within 45 days an airport airport noise ordinance study session to educate the entire council as to the history, importance and background. Okay. Can I get a motion? So moved. Okay. There's been a there's been a motion. A second council member, I think. Austin O'Donnell. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. As we all know, we are pretty much at a critical juncture for the at the city right now as far as our airport is concerned. We currently don't have an airport director. And there has been rumblings in the press and throughout the community about a major customs facility potentially being developed at Long Beach Airport. This is this is a major concern to many of the residents who live in the impacted areas, particularly in and around the airport areas. And I think it merits our attention to to to to really focus on our noise ordinance and the importance of our northern ordinance, the history associated with the noise ordinance, the the strengths of our working noise ordinance, the the opportunities and the the challenges that that may face our noise ordinance with with potential change at Long Beach Airport. You know, as I look on as you look at this this this diocese, I don't think other other than one city council member, most of us weren't here during the major fights that crafted that noise ordinance that that actually dealt with airport the airport expansion issue. The the the the development of our new terminal and the noise ordinance is key to all of that. And so I'm asking the city manager to come back within 45 days with a study session for this council, this body. We've studied pension reform. We've studied our budget. We've done study sessions on our civic center and other issues that are very important to the city of Long Beach. And I can't think of any issue more important than our noise ordinance to the quality of life of our residents. And so I'd like to see a report back in 45 days, I mean, at least a study session within 45 days. And I ask for council support. That's been in motion in a second for the study. I know. Councilor O'Donnell. Yeah, I just want to thank Councilmember Austin for recognizing the need to protect our most vulnerable ordinance. It is sensitive. He stated pretty clearly that nobody was here when the airport wars were going on. I see retired council member Gavlak out there who was a full participant and engage with some of the folks out there in the airport wars. And you haven't seen anything until you've seen an airport war at this council because what what happened in the last round of the airport war and there has been more than one is people's homes are threatened. Individuals in this community came with came forward with a plan that was going to cost $250 million and probably invite more flights into the airport. And democracy won. In this case, the neighborhoods stood up. The council changed probably because of it or in part because of it. So don't underestimate the value of protecting this ordinance. And, you know, I urge you, don't put it in danger or you will be in danger. And what we ask is that the study session take place. I don't believe we want it in 45 days. I think we want it in mid-January. We want to get through the holidays and then bring the study session forward. So we're thinking about mid-January, January 15th ish. The city manager could could schedule this in the ask again is not just that staff give a presentation we'd like some of the community stakeholders to be able to do do so as well. With that, I'll turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor. Is that a thank you? I just want to make sure not to veer off since I think mid-January. Okay. With you as concerned. O'Donnell stated. No, I don't want to disrupt anybody's holidays. And so I think January would be fine. I'm amenable to that. Okay. So that's that's the motion on the floor. Councilmember Ringa, any other comments from the council public comment? If you have a public comment on the item, please come forward. I got to do to make it one. Push a button. There we go. I think I can hear you. Like I say, my name is Larry Tree. I live in the flight path of the airport. So this is an important issue to me. I've lived in Long Beach since 1953, so the airport's important to me from just the citizens perspective. I'm really glad that you're having the study session. I want to thank Councilman Austin for putting it on the agenda, and I also want to thank him. Thank you, Mr. Austin, for the article and newspaper this morning to bring all of this to our attention. I think personally, I don't know what everybody else thinks by the customs facility could be really disastrous and start putting a real lot of pressure on the airport and Internet in the community. So this is a really vital interest. This, as Patrick was saying. I'm glad you're having a study session. I want to make sure that you put some thought into who's conducting this study session. You know, everybody's got a different perspective. So the person who's doing the presentation is going to have a perspective. You've got to make sure that you have everybody's perspective when you're doing your study session. You probably really ought to have members of the old wars. There was the organization called Hush. I think it was Patrick that you really ought to have somebody from Hush that that can stand there with the person, maybe from the city staff and tell you how the neighborhoods perceive this. So good luck with this. I'll be watching. And I can guarantee you all my neighbors will be watching. Thanks. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Ray Gavlak president president of hush to just calm I am they reappointed me. Okay. First of all, Al thank you so very much. And Roberto and certainly Patrick. But Patrick, I have to say to you, I'm going to miss you being here. You know, we had a great partnership and leadership to get this city to a side where we could build a terminal that serve the traveling public. And that did a fine job of it. We didn't build it too big. We could afford it. And it protected the. I believe it was modernized don't super sized. Well, that was that was on some of those. Yeah. But you know, I think it's important for the new council members really to understand that it's more than the noise ordinance. Everyone will say, but we want to support the noise ordinance. A JetBlue says we want to support the noise ordinance. It isn't about that. It's about look at the history, the litigation history and where it started. It started in 1981 when 13 airlines were suing the city of Long Beach. They wanted in here they go where it's going to be the most economically beneficial to them. And so what we have to do and what you have to do for us is to protect the communities that live underneath those flight paths. And ultimately, again, sort of like the whole the property tax revenue is the number one source to the general fund. Well, you want to keep those property values high. And if you allow a challenge to this ordinance and we lose that protection, we could be looking at really a devastating result for the city of Long Beach. So I look forward to the mid-January study session. And thank you again. And Patrick, good luck. And you might have to join me on this side when you're in town. Thanks. Thank you. Hi. My name is Jane Naito and I'm a resident in the eighth District and I was part of the war that Patrick talked about regarding the airport back a few years ago, before Patrick and Ray became council people. And I look forward to helping you guys learn about the noise ordinance and how the fight to the original hush group and their hush to helped educate the city. Because, as Councilmember Austin said, most of y'all don't know anything about how that all went down and the importance of the litigation on the noise ordinance and understanding the ramifications if it gets changed. And like Ray said, JetBlue says that they want to protect the noise ordinance. And I think that's probably true because it helps them out with their mission to raise their dollars. So it's important for us to pay attention to the noise ordinance so that we can protect our properties and the well-being of our children and grandchildren and keep the neighborhoods beautiful. So I'm glad you guys are going to do this and I look forward to working with you on it. Thanks. Thank you very much. I think that's all the public comment. I'm going to go back to Councilman Ross and then we're going to go to a vote. Got summarized a. Couple of things. I want to commend our airport staff because we have a great airport staff and they operate in the interest of this city right now. And so in no way do I want to say or anybody to imply or in for a walk away from here thinking that this council does not support its airport department because they do a great job and they are our our biggest monitors and defenders of our noise ordinance today. Secondly, I heard one of the speakers say, you know, he's concerned about who's going to be doing the noise the noise ordinance study session. Well, it will be our city manager, our city attorney, our city prosecutor. And in this language, it does say it leaves room for a lot of community input. And so I do expect to have a very robust conversation, a study session regarding our airport noise ordinance, and hopefully we can all walk away better educated and informed about this very important issue. Thank you. Great. Thank you. We have a motion on the floor to have this study session. So all those in favor, please raise your hand. Motion carries unanimously. I think any of our positions are abstentions. None of it was unanimous. So obviously, moving on to the next item, which is item number 16.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the organization of City government; creating an Office of Economic and Revenue Forecasts; adding a new Chapter 3.44 to, amending Section 3.39.010 and 3.39.035 of, and repealing Section 3.40.060 and Chapter 3.82 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_07192021_CB 120124

Agenda Item five Council. Bill 120124 Relating to the Organization of City Government Creating an Office of Economic and Revenue Forecasts, the committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. As Chair of the committee again, I'll provide the committee report and then happy to open it up to any additional comments on the bill. Colleagues, I'm excited to be voting on this legislation today after nearly nine months of collaborative negotiations with the executive to develop this legislation. I believe that establishing the Office of Economic and Revenue Forecasts will create a more open, transparent and robust forecasting process that will enhance both the Council's and the public's access to and understanding of the city's budgetary forecasts. The implementation of this office should also improve the dynamic between future councils and future mayors by building a stronger foundation of trust and balance between the branches as it relates to the development of the city's budget priorities. There are two prominent events during 2020 forecasting process that highlighted for me and many others how important it is to level the playing field between the council and the mayor's office with regard to our access to information related to the city's forecasting process. Those events prompted me, my staff and central staff, to look at alternative models for how governmental bodies develop their budget forecasts. And indeed, both Washington State and King County utilize independent forecasting offices that are outside of the legislative and executive branches. King County went so far as to pursue a voter approved charter amendment in 2008 in order to create their Office of Economic and Financial Analysis. Fortunately, based on my and central staff's review of the analysis conducted by our City Attorney's Office, we at the City Council are able to establish our own independent office in a manner consistent with our city charter. And the legislation we're voting on today is reflective of all of the feedback that we received from the city attorney's review and their legal advice upon its creation. The Economic Revenue Forecast Office would provide independent forecasts and economic analysis, fulfilling the policy intent of the Council budget action that this Council previously took. And that was included in the 2021 budget that was adopted. It would also consist of three and a half full time equivalents through a combination of newly created positions and transferred positions from our city budget Office and Finance and Administrative Services. This new office would be headed by a director who would be hired by and report to a new forecast council comprised of the mayor, the city finance director, the council president and the Council Budget Chair, or their respective designees. The Forecast Council would be responsible for providing oversight of the new office and for approving the forecasts. The Governance and Education Committee did have a conversation and presentation on this particular proposed piece of legislation and unanimously recommended that the Council bill be passed and adopted by the full Council. And I'd like to encourage my colleagues to join us in voting to adopt this legislation. Are there any comments on the bill? Councilman Strauss, please. I think your council president will be supporting this legislation today. I think this is a smart choice to remove a city, but to create a an office forecast office that is not tied to either the executive or the council. I'm just going to take this moment to really share kudos of the city budget office. Last year during the recession and reopening of our of our economy. Because as compared to the state level the city budget office really did an amazing job of making accurate predictions that we could work off of as compared to the state that did a little bit had a bigger drop and a bigger rebound. So I know that we have the tools and I know that our city budget office is doing great work. And I think that this year legislation today is the next great step. Thank you, council president. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss. Really appreciate that. Any other customer, Herbold, please. Thank you. Just really quickly, I also want to thank you, Council President Gonzales, for moving forward. The intent that the council expressed again under your leadership during the budget discussions last year to create this independent office. This is, I think, considered a best practice and really appreciate knowing that moving forward, whether or not it's at times when there are increased revenue forecasts or or potential reductions in revenue, that the Council will have access to that information as opposed to sort of the current practice where an often we find it out at the same time when there are budget proposals to. To cut or add. So it will allow us as the body that is most responsive, engaged with the public to to give input to those budget discussions and decisions. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Herbold, Councilmember Peterson, please. Thank you. Council President. I wanted to also explain my support for this new office. There were some articles written about this proposal recently that delved into legal issues and looking at the city charter. And I think that it was healthy to to to raise these issues. I did some additional research, got additional comfort with with that aspect of it from a from a practical standpoint, having worked for a budget chair many years ago and the timing of these revenue forecasts has also been a source of frustration. And so I think it's important to to have both branches collaborating on on this. This data about what the revenues are going to be, how we're predicting them, and having that information at the same time so that we're so that legislative branch isn't sitting around waiting. When is this information going to come so that we can then figure out how to make decisions since we ultimately have to adopt the budget and decide whether to amend it. So I was really pleased when you brought this proposal up and then the more to geologists I've done, it seems like it's going to be good for the city that we have this information at the same time, both the executive and legislative branches. So thank you for bringing that forward. Thank you, Councilor Pearson. Appreciate that. Any additional comments on the bill? I've not seen any other hands raised, so I'll go ahead and closes out. I think Councilmember Peterson stole the words right out of my mouth. And that's the note that I wanted to end on, is that I think that as the budget appropriation authority, it has seemed odd to me in the six years that I have served on the council to oftentimes feel like we are caught on the back of our heels when we're receiving revenue forecast changes in the middle of and sometimes towards the end of our budgeting processes. So I think that this bill will allow for more equitable access to information and to more timely access to relevant information in a way that will really allow and facilitate for the co-equal branches of government at government, at the city of Seattle, to really function like co-equal branches of government, and to make sure that both of us have an opportunity to really fulfill our duty and obligation as both the budget proposer and the budget doctors for the City Government. So I'm excited about an opportunity to advance this bill and appreciate the ongoing support of my colleagues in the effort to advance this this important, important piece of legislation. Did want to thank did want to thank Cody writer in my office for all of his hard work over the last nine months, as well as Ali Pankey and Tom McPhail. And also, of course, appreciate the the collaborative opportunity that we had with the city budget office and with other members of the executive to come up with a shared plan and vision on how this can be achieved in a way that fulfills both the executive's desire and ours as well. So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and close that debate and ask that to please call the roll and the passage of the bill. GROSS Yes. HERBOLD Yes. Suarez. Guy. Lewis Yes. Morales Yes. Rosetta, I. Peterson I. So want. Yes. And Council President Gonzalez High. Line in favor. And unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the court please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Is there any further business to come before the Council? Right. Hearing that, colleagues, this does conclude the items of business on today's agenda. Our next regularly scheduled city council meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 26, 2021, at 2:00 PM. I hope everyone has a wonderful afternoon. We are here to thank you.

AN ORDINANCE increasing the fee or tax on persons engaged in or carrying on the business of the collection of garbage, rubbish, trash, CDL waste, and other solid waste; amending Seattle Municipal Code Section 5.48.055; and providing a special referendum opportunity as required by state law.

SeattleCityCouncil_08152016_CB 118739

To outstanding candidates. Any comments from any of my colleagues? All those in favor of confirming those two appointments? Vote i. I, those opposed vote no. The motion carries and the appointments are confirmed. Please read the next report into the agenda, please. Three Part of the Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Committee Agenda Item six Council 118 739 Increasing the fee or tax on persons engaged in or carrying on the business of the collecting of garbage, rubbish, trash, cdel waste and other solid waste. The many setting Mr. Code Section 5.40 8.0 55 and providing a special referendum opportunity as required by state law the committee recommends. The Bill Pass. Comes from Herbold. Thank you. Seven Relate to solid waste, solid waste rates and solid waste rate taxes. Seattle Public Utilities proposes to increase the 2017 2019 Solid Waste Waste rates to collect $26 million more in revenue in 2019 than was expected for 2016. This new revenue would fund increased costs for services, capital investments, higher enrollment in the utility discount program, and compliance with financial policies, as well as a proposed 2.7 percentage point increase in this city's solid waste business and occupation tax from a 11.5% to a total of 14.2%, revenue from the solid waste tax is deposited into the general fund and can be used for any municipal purpose. The executive estimates 3.2 million in 2017 and 4.4 million in 2018 in new revenue. Although this is an increase, it is still in line with the Seattle Public Utility Department's six year strategic plan and the targets for rate increases over a period. Of six years. Thank you very much, Councilor Herbold. Any further comments? Please call the roll on the passage of the Bill Burgess. Hi, Gonzalez. Purple. Hi Johnson. Suarez O'Brien. Shire President Harrell. Hi. Eight in favor and unopposed. Bill Pass and Chair of the Senate. Next agenda item please. Agenda item seven Council Bill 118 740 Relating to the solid waste system of the Seattle Public Utilities revising rates and charges for solid waste services, revising credits to low income customers for solid waste services, and amending chapters 21.40 and 21.76 of the of Mr. Code Committee recommends the bill passed. I'm sorry, Herbert. I don't have anything further to add. My description to item six blended both the the impact of both items and seven together. Any further comments? Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Burgess II Gonzalez. I Purple II Johnson Suarez O'Brien Bagshaw President Harrell I Aden favor and unopposed. Bill passed and chair of the Senate next gen item please.

Application of BarrientosRyan LLC, to rezone an approximately 20,000 square foot parcel located at 4544, 4550, and 4600 Union Bay Pl NE from Commercial 2 with a 55 foot height limit and M Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) suffix (C2 55 (M)) to Commercial 2 with a 65 foot height limit and M1 MHA suffix (C2 65 (M1)) (Project No. 3030253, Type IV).

SeattleCityCouncil_03022020_CF 314434

In the opposing thing none. The motion carries and the appointments are confirmed. Thank you very much, Councilmember Strauss. Madam Clerk, please read the agenda item number six into the record. Agenda item six. Clerk 5314 434. Application of those Ryan LLC to rezone an approximately 20,000 square foot parcel located 4544, 45, 1540 600 Union Bay Place Northeast from commercial to with a 55 foot height limit and mandatory housing affordability suffix to commercial two with a 65 foot height limit and one MH suffix, the committee recommends that the application be granted. Excellent. Councilmember Strauss. Yes. Item six and seven. Are the two items related to the contract reason of 4600 Union Bay Place. This is a quasi judicial matter which I brought up at Council Briefing this morning. So if anyone has received communications from proponents or opponents of this process, please make sure to confer with Keel Freeman. Or if you have questions about quasi judicial process, please confer with Colonel Freeman and our central staff. This is a contract rezoning application for three parcels at 45, 44, 45, 50 and 4600. Union Bay Place Northeast. The applicant is, as we heard, seeking a reason from commercial two with a 50 foot height limit to commercial two with a 65 foot height limit. One of the things in committee that struck me about the presentation in which we received at committee was that with the gradation in the setback from the Berkman Trail, there is this brings it to the building height limits to a similar height, even though it is a higher height being allowed. The reason increases the affordability level required under MHR from the lowest and level two and one, and the applicant is planning to develop 98 unit building with 2000 square feet of retail space. In addition to the MTA requirements, this project will be participating in the mandatory and multifamily tax exemption and 20% of the units on site will be rent restricted and and affordable to households between 65 to 85% of area median income. SDC I am the hearing examiner have both issued recommendations to approve and there were no appeals. Thank you very much, Councilmember Strauss. We will take item 6/1 and then item seven. Before we do that, any additional comments on item number six, Councilmember Peterson. Yes, this project is in District four. And because it's a contract free zone, we're not able to actually delve into it until we receive the clerk file at the committee. But what was presented to us was very thorough and thoughtful. And so, as Councilmember Strauss noted, there were no appeals to it. So I support this project. Excellent. Thank you very much, Councilmember Peterson, any additional comments? Okay. CNN, all of those in favor of granting the application, please vote I and raise your hand. I. Any opposed seeing none. The motion carries, the application is granted and the president will sign the findings at conclusion and decision of the City Council. Item number seven has been alluded to. Council Clerk Would you please read item number seven into the record.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP FM15-167 and award contract to Parsons Constructors, Inc., of Pasadena, CA, for as-needed professional Project Labor Agreement (PLA) administration services, in an annual amount not to exceed $280,000, for a period of one year, with the option to renew for four additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_10062015_15-1010

Thank you. Next item, please. Report from financial management. Recommendation to award a contract to Parsons constructors for as needed professional play administration services in an annual amount not to exceed $280,000 citywide. Mr. West as the in a second face merely talking to get a second please. Can I get a second? Okay. There's a there's a motion and a second. Mr. West, do you have a quick update on this? I have a. Quick update by our purchasing manager, Jason McDonald. Mayor Council members. The item in front of you is for a ward of a contract to support the staff administration of the project labor agreement to Parsons constructors of Pasadena. Following a request for proposals, Parsons response was reviewed by an evaluation panel and determined to have met the required criteria . Additionally, Parsons has prior experience working with the city as well as the building trades and has served as the play administrator for the Port of Long Beach. The team, proposed by Parsons, has extensive experience in working with plays in Los Angeles County. That concludes my comments. I'm available to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on the item? CNN members is going to cast your votes. You're not kidding. Do you want a Cuban? Okay. Go ahead, Councilman Ringa. Thank you, Mayor, for regulating me. What? My own. In reviewing the report, I see that there were a number of businesses, women, business owned entities, disadvantaged entities and minority enterprises as well. What is Parsons? Where does it fit? In those categories. Councilmember. I don't I don't know. Off the top of my head, I can look it up here. We probably have it in the report. But I don't know. Because one of the things I want to I've said it before and I want to encourage it again is that we need to be sensitive to minority owned businesses when we do our contracting out. We don't have enough. I don't think we're even close to even 5% or 10% of contractors that do business with the city. And it's a it's going to be an ongoing issue for me as I review these that we make sure that we are addressing our need to hire and contract with women owned businesses, minority owned businesses and enterprises as well as disadvantaged enterprises. So I'm hoping that with this number of applicants that we're there and this one one out. We need to create a better way of being able to identify that we get enough minority women on and disadvantaged businesses into our contract cycle. I'm more like on a pedestal. I'm not one of those. Think accounts. Remember, we had the motion to approve the motion in the second. If I can just please cast your vote on that. Oh. Motion carries.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to enter into a Grant Agreement with Community Hospital Long Beach Foundation, a Long Beach-based nonprofit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, for reimbursement of predevelopment costs incurred by the City of Long Beach to rebuild and replace buildings located at 1720 Termino Avenue, 1760 Termino Avenue, and 4111 East Willow Street (Subject Property), to continue to operate an acute care hospital at the site; and Adopt resolution authorizing City Manager, or designee, to execute an agreement with Perkins + Will, a private for-profit corporation in Los Angeles, CA, for hospital facility architectural design and consulting services, in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000. (District 4)

LongBeachCC_04022019_19-0297

We are now doing the Long Beach Community Hospital Foundation, which is item 21. So, Mr. West, we can get the staff report. Item 21 is the report from Economic Development Recommendation to enter into a grant agreement with Community Hospital Palm Beach Foundation in an amount not to exceed 1 million for reimbursement of pre-development costs to rebuild and replace buildings, to continue to operate an acute care hospital at the site, and a resolution to execute an agreement with Perkins will for hospital facility architecture, design and consulting services for. Mayor Council matters. One of the things, you know, we've been working on night and day for the past year has been trying to reopen community hospital with an acute care facility. One of our. Partners working just as hard as us is the Long. Beach Foundation Community Foundation for the Hospital. And John Kiser, our director of economic development, is going to give a report on our work with them. Honorable Mayor and members. Of the city council. I'm very happy to bring this item before you tonight. This is a major first step in the process of developing the construction plants that will ultimately aid us in the process of achieving seismic compliance for community hospital Long Beach. We are grateful that our partners at the Community Hospital, Long Beach Foundation, members of our community who have been supporting the hospital for decades, in some cases individuals who have been serving on the board, donating their own time and money to fundraise in support of the hospital, and now in support of these construction plans that will help us to reopen the hospital in the coming year. So this action before you tonight is to receive $1 million that will be used for the construction planning. It also will allow for us to establish the contract authority that we have with our architect, Perkins and Will. And the reason that we are using Perkins and Will as the architect for this project is because they were the firm that actually did our compliance plan when we were evaluating the feasibility of retrofitting and rebuilding the hospital. The third thing that I need to read into the record is that unfortunately in the address that is listed, 4111 East Willis Street does not actually exist. It is 411 East Wilton Street. And so the city attorney has made sure that I read into the record that it is the funds for this project will be dedicated to construction plans and pre-development costs associated with 1720 Termino, 1760 Termino and 411 East Wilton Street, which include all of the properties that the city owns of Community Hospital. So with that, I'm happy to take any questions, but I just want to finish by thanking Matthew Faulkner, the executive director, Ray Burton, the chair of the Long Beach Hospital Community Foundation. And for all the community members and board members who have donated to make this a reality for the city. Thank you so. Much. Thank you very much, Mr. Chrysler. In terms of the controversy or not. Thank you for that report. And to any resident that might live it for one on one Willow Street, you almost hit the jackpot, but not quite. I just want to echo what Mr. Chrysler said, that we want to thank all the community hospital, Long Beach Foundation board members in particular, Ray Burton, the president of the board, whom I've talked to almost daily for the past 18 months, and also special recognition for executive director Matthew Faulkner. Although this has been pretty intense for the last 18 months. We looked up the first time he spoke at one of my community meetings and that was September 2015. So Mayor Matthew has been hard at work on this project for a long time, so thank you very much and thanks to staff for putting this all together. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you. And I, too, want to acknowledge this the step forward and give a special recognition to our city staff, the community foundation and, of course, councilman superstar for his leadership on this item. Thank you. Thank you. I also just want to add, again, I think staff has done a phenomenal job. Saving a hospital is incredibly hard work and almost always hospitals end up closing. And I think that the the staff has done a great job. The foundation, who is making a substantial gesture of support and strength in this case, I think is also very welcomed. And so I know we've all thanked the foundation individually and publicly. And I just want to again thank the Long Beach Community Foundation I'm sorry, the Community Hospital Foundation for for this and for their ongoing commitment to support community hospital, which we are all committed to reopening. And I know it's been said again, but the Councilmember, Superman and the other council members that have been engaged on this, particularly Councilman Price and Councilwoman Mongo and the rest of the council that of all are all supporting moving forward. I just want to I want to thank them again. Is there public comment on the community hospital item? Seeing none where. Mr. Goodhue, please come forward. All right. Good. Hugh Clark, as the address. As I said last week, this is the last time this is up. This is certainly a commendable project and the city owes a great deal to the council. And sure enough, one of the great aspects of this is that we will get considerable money. I think the figure don't quote me, I think it was like 90 million. I forget what it was. But they deal with the various. Troubling issue. That some people have mental. Disturbing conduct. Such as. As manifested by our governor and other people that are drooling over the slot Kamala Harris and people like that. And there is money that is missing. You know, Mr. Goodhue, I told you this last time you're here, but you don't use it to demean women every time you come up to speak and say that word. I sit up to a sitting elected official. So I don't know how many times we have to. I know you have a First Amendment right to say things you would like, but I would hope you have a little decency not to say that again. And you misrepresent. I do not say that. Represent all women. Women. Period. You were the one that's doing that. 90% of the women are fine. I think they're all right. Go ahead. Go ahead and get back on topic. Get him. Percent. All right. It's the percentage. The. It's the percentage of people. The percentage of people such as she that the US Ninth Circuit Court bipartisan panel founded. Edit engendered an epidemic of corruption. Period. And the only people that would saddle up to that person would be disease minds such as our new governor or our mayor. Period. And there's 90 million. I believe the figure is 90 million. Set aside to deal with those disease mines, period. And you're misrepresenting the facts. I've never said that all women are like that, period. The issue is focuses on the men that saddle up. To the people such as the slut Camilla Harris. All right. You're off topic. Unbelievable. That concludes public comment on this item. There's a motion and a second. Is there more public comment on community hospital? On community hospital, please come forward. Take your. You can take your time. You're okay. We're okay. Good evening. For the rest of the panel. Please come forward. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and the rest of the panel. I do want to speak on community hospital. I have had two generations of families that has come through community hospital. And I. Feel that it's an excellent resource into the community. Not one is nonprofit, and secondly, it has the heartbeat of the community. I as a medicare recipient, I have to go through the senior Obama's plan, which is that Kaiser and this is what is coming against community hospital. So my question is what is in place to keep it from failure again when you have the rising of Kaiser not only on terminal but also now on Pacific Coast Highway. Thank you. Let me I'm going to answer, but do you want to conclude with your comment? Yes, sir. I just want to make sure that as we rally and advocate for community hospital, because I have been involved with that of two generations coming through there. And now my third, which is my great great grandson, that will reopen and go there again because of our loyalty to community hospital, what is in place to keep it from staying in place again. But the community, the heartbeat that it has and is right diagonal, which is almost ten steps from Kaiser. Thank you. I'm going to answer that question and the other as you would any of the public comment on this item so that I can answer the question. Okay. I'm closing public comment there. Let me just there's a community meeting coming up that I would invite you to consider support or do you want to? Yeah, if you're available tomorrow night, 6 p.m. at the big rec clubhouse, we'll be there and answer all your questions. Will have John Molina will be there. Ray Burton, the the president of the board and Councilwoman Price and myself will be on hand. So that's the best place to ask your questions. And we're going to and we're also going to someone's going to commit you over here on the site separately, and we're going to get you all the information you just asked about, because we have a whole packet of what we're doing around community hospital. So Mr. Ramirez can get the information and we'll we'll connect with you right now. Then I'll be back in again for the lifeguard and in Jordan. And it's not coming. Okay. West Side. Okay. Thank you. The lifeguard item already passed, but think we will connect with you right over here. Thank you very much. Members, please go out and cast your votes on this item. Because remember, price motion carries.

Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter 30 (Development Regulations) to Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit Regulations to Implement and Comply with State Law and Make Other Administrative, Technical, and Clarifying Amendments pertaining to Appeals and Youth Centers Definition, as Recommended by the Planning Board. (Planning, Building and Transportation 481005)

AlamedaCC_04222020_2020-7866

and clarifying amendments pertaining to appeals and youth center definition as recommended by the Planning Board. Thank you. And who is that? You, Mr. De? This is L.A.. Hi. Hi. Yes, I can hear you and see you. Good evening. Great. Nice to see you all. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. This is Valentine City Planner with. The Planning. Building and Transportation Department. So this is an ordinance to amend Chapter 30 of the municipal code, otherwise known as the zoning ordinance, specifically the amendments pertaining to accessory dwelling units or more commonly known by its acronym. And the purpose of the amendments is to bring Alameda and new regulations into compliance with the new state laws. Eddie is referring to backyard cottages for those who aren't familiar and granted units or second units that California law allows by rights when associated with a primary show unit. These units are accessory to the main house, and state law prohibits cities from applying any sort of density rules to use or otherwise try to limit the number of abuse in their city. In 2019, the state. Passed a number of new laws that standardize many requirements for any use in California. These laws are in effect as of January 1st of 2020. The new requirements mainly pertain to zoning standards such as height limit, minimum unit size, building setbacks. The laws also allow 80 use now on multifamily lots, as well as making way for greener, more efficient use. Overall staff. Definitely the changes in the law make it easier and more economical for Alameda residents to build, and new staff has already begun implementing the new requirements as mandated under state law. The Planning Board held a public hearing on February 10th and recalled City Council approved the ordinance. The ordinance also includes two very minor cleanup. Amendments related to appeals in. The definition of use centers. These cleanup amendments are administrative in nature, as described in the staff report, so I won't go into detail unless the council has specific questions tonight. Staff is recommending that you approve this ordinance, but with a slight modification, which is to omit. A. New provision identified as subsection J on page ten of the ordinance published on the agenda tonight. And just for me to explain, this provision allows you to be sold separately from the main dwelling by a nonprofit to a low income buyer. This is not a mandate by the state. And on the surface, sounds like a good idea. But after consulting with the city attorney, we believe this matter raises some larger policy questions that warrant further study. So we ask the council to omit subsection K on page ten if there's a motion to approve this ordinance tonight. That was my staff report, and I am here for question. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Tiny. And then, quick. Do we have any speakers on this one? We do not have any public comment on this one. Public comment. And so any clarifying questions of Mr. Ty, Mr. Otis. Councilmember Odie. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just briefly. I mean, do we I remember when we first tweeted a couple of years back, there was a fear that there'd be a mad rush of ideas. If you know, can you tell us how many we've had in the last couple of years? If not, it's fine. Right. We actually do have we have been tracking very closely. We since 2017, which is the last update to the ordinance, we have seen 30 to 80 use construct in Alameda. So meaning the definition of pass inspections, about half of those are really in basements that are basement conversion, very hidden and the remaining half are backyard cottages, conversion of existing garages. And the average size has really been under 600 square feet. I think comedians are taking advantage of opportunities to create units for extended family or rental opportunities with the least cost. Thanks. 32 total, not 32 per year, right? 32 total since 2017. And the city has approved 120 applications to date. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That was all your question. Yeah, thank you. Yeah. Let me know when you're done. Okay. Any other clarifying questions? Council. Okay. Well, then council comments. I I'm going to actually lead with comments because this is a topic near and dear to my heart. This year I am the co-chair of the League of California Cities Statewide Policy Committee on Housing, Community and Economic Development. My colleague, Councilmember Vella, sits on the committee and we have worked very hard over these last couple of years to promote more building, especially of housing that is affordable, whether designated affordable or affordable by design because of its smaller size, and also to work to remove some of the roadblocks that were in place in some cities that made it difficult to do something that shouldn't be so terribly complicated. And so what I can say is that the housing crisis in our state is not going away, not because of the COVID 19 pandemic or any other reason. And in fact, it has really highlighted for those of us elected officials who are being given mandates by our governor and by our county public health officers to go into encampments and get people out of them, because it's just a place where the virus can grow and flourish. And we're scrambling to find hotel rooms. The governor's working with Motel six in the South Bay to do that. And at the end of the day, we need more housing. People should not live unsheltered. They should not be sleeping under our overpasses or in the bushes. And I mean, it's a complicated a complicated topic, but we need to to pick the low hanging fruit. And ideas are certainly one of them. And I also want to just note that until last year, I was a member of the Casa Compact CASA Combat Practice, a suite of very aggressive housing protection bills. And so I was one of the committee that oversaw the recommendations to the legislature. And I want to say it was maybe a planner from San Mateo County had brought to us a really nice booklet like a how to that San Mateo County does either San Mateo County or the city of San Mateo. I think it's the county. But anyway, so if you came to the counter and said, hey, I think and I want to do an ad for you in my back yard, you would get this or that. You can probably download it from the website and it's it's a how to and it makes it simple and easy. Do we have anything similar to that or anything in the works? Mr. Tanner. Mr. Thomas, whoever wants to answer. By the way, I'll just note for the record, when I'm writing my notes and I'm identifying who spoke. I just put your initials. But when I've got Alan Tie and Andrew Thomas, I'm going to have to write someone's name out. But it's okay. Which of my eighties would like to go this year? Yes, thank you. That helps. I will go to that one. Mm, yes. I think one of our next steps is really to focus on developing collateral material and doing some outreach. So, you know, some of the ideas that we've had might even include working with the building department and building inspectors to do maybe a community workshop or something that would be very informative, that would let residents understand the entire process from the initial application to some to think about the construction. So we've seen other cities successfully do that, and that's something that we would certainly love to model. Oh, that sounds great to me. Did you want to add anything, Mr. Thomas? Yeah, this is good. Okay. Yeah. Great idea. I'm all for that. Okay. That's all for me. Who else wants to speak or make a motion or what have you? As I said earlier. That's right. And then you. Councilmember de. Sure. I'd love to move approval of this. I will say really quickly that I did listen to the planning board discussion on this, as is very frequently the case. They had a fantastic discussion about it as some really good, tough, clarifying questions, and I think it was very well vetted. I really appreciate. And it's always a testament to the work of Mr. Ty on this issue, how well this comes forward. I really am very grateful at that. So I'm very happy to. Tim, if approval. All right. Well, thank you for the comments. And we've got a motion and we have a second councilmember. Dave, thank you. Had your hand out. Yes, thank you. Just quickly, I appreciate the modification that had been raised with regard to I think it was item J of the item. But for me, the larger concern is still there. And I think you you all your staff especially know where I'll be coming from. This is a larger concern about Measure a Chapter 26 of our city charter Part three. I'm I'm not sure how the ACTU really is aligned with with our city charter chapters 26 item three. It might be and might not be, I don't know. I mean, maybe it is state law, as some might say, you know, trumps everything. But so for tonight, I, you know, I'll need just to look at this a little bit further. So tonight I'll just I'll just abstain on this and then I'll come to a decision next time we have the ordinance. Thank you, Mr. David. So I don't want to leave the audience with any mis interpretations or misimpressions. So if someone want to step in and talk about it can be one of the lawyers or Mr. Thomas, you'd be in a good position to sit here. Yeah, let me just just for the audience and giving this and we certainly respect member Dave Dog's position and need to think through our interpretation or interpretation of you know, state law. You know we are our ability as a city to pass local rules and regulations and laws is confined by the limits imposed upon us by the state of California. As a member of the state of California, as a city within the state, we we have our laws must comply with state laws. And the state has been, at least from the stats perspective and our interpretation of state law, and this is supported by our communications with the State Department of Housing Human Development, which we, we communicate with them on a regular basis. In fact, they they pointed to our ordinance selling this to too modest. He didn't tell you about that our how the state has requested to use our new ordinance and amendment as a model for other cities. But there are there are conflicts between the city charter and and and new state law around housing and and abuse. Absolutely. I think the voters, you know, state law and the laws around second units that we have today in California are not the same that we had in 1972 when the measure was passed in 1991. It was then further added to in our charter. So it's not the first time we've run into these conflicts with the charter around these these kinds of housing issues. In this case, it's pretty clear to us, with the exception of that section J, which which Alan mentioned, the state law is very clear for all cities that you , the accessory dwelling unit, cannot be considered when considering whether you're violating the the density limit imposed on a particular piece of property. So essentially, under state law, a second unit doesn't count towards the density. And I think that's the provision that Councilmember de Song was referring to the one unit per 2000 square feet of land with density standard in our charter. Under state law, you cannot treat accessory dwelling unit as a as an additional unit. It's accessory to the main unit. I'll just leave it at that. But that's just for the public, just sort of how that plays out. Thank you. And I will also note that the governor, certainly before he became consumed with leading our effort to fight COVID 19 and doing a spectacular job in our in our state, he had had said that housing is his priority. He is very well aware of the crisis, the housing crisis we have in this in this state and has even taken a city or two to court over some of their housing laws. So I want to make that clear, too. And then if I could just go back to the makers of our motion, both Mayor and Council Member Odie, you were making the motion with the request about S.J. Inc, correct? Yes. I'm sorry. I should have been more explicit in my. ED just to make sure. Okay, perfect. And then, Councilmember, do you had your hand up? Well of because I agree with everything you said except for the part where you serve on the committee, because I don't. But everything else I agreed with committee as a you can take a video of that minute because it seems every couple of months you have to repeat yourself on that. And also, I just want to extend my congratulations to Mr. Ty for. I had heard that about the the ordinance being used as a as a model. And that's and we're very proud of you. So congratulations on that. And so right back to you. So anybody else want to comment or should we vote? But. Okay. Let's take a vote then. Councilor Vella, that's not. I think we should vote. Do you think we should vote? I agree. All right. Now I'm quick with your roll call. Vote, please. Councilmember de SAG. Exiting. Next site. Hi. Odie. Hi. Bella. I may as the enthusiastic I that carries by four eyes one abstention. Thank you. So, item six. Thanks, everybody. Staff who was on this one? Item six has been withdrawn and we move to item six e introduction of ordinance authorizing the city manager or designee to execute a 12 month amendment to the lease with Pacific Pinball Museum. 501 C3 Nonprofit organization with the option of for one year extensions for Building 169 Suite 121 located at 1680 Viking Street at Alameda Point. And the thing is that. Mr. Levitt, you're presenting it. Who's presenting. And then that's here and go.

Selecting a Development Team for the West Midway Project and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute an Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement (ENA) with the Selected Development Team. (Base Reuse 819099)

AlamedaCC_07162019_2019-7025

Hi. Selecting a development team for the West Midway Project and authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute an exclusive negotiation. Right. To negotiate agreement. Sorry. With Selected Development team. Okay. Good evening. Good evening. We're looking for the CliffsNotes. Version of the statue is, um, let's see. We're here tonight to recommend that you select the development team for the West Midway Project and that you authorize the city manager to execute an exclusive negotiation agreement with selected development team. Um, you familiar with the area of the map and exhibit one? And the process has basically been, uh, we came here about a year ago, July 10th, you authorized the RFQ, we've received seven qualified proposals. And in February you narrow the field down to two finalists, alameda point and Jamestown. Cypress Equity Investments. Uh, have some members Odion de sag. They're appointed to a subcommittee to develop supplemental questions for staff intended to gain more information about the finalists. Um, between March 6th and March, uh, May 6th, the two finalists, Alameda Point Partners and Jamestown. I requested additional time to explore potential partnership to develop West Midway and submitted responses in supplemental questions. On May 21st, Jamestown withdrew the developer selection process due to uncertainty about the viability of a commercial development. Given the phasing and increased costs of infrastructure with the withdrawal of Jamestown CEI, there are few alternatives that council can take tonight in selecting a development team. One Council could select AP as the remaining finalists shortlisted by council, and they have completed the supplemental questions. Another alternative is to reconsider. Brookfield, Brookfield Residential and or Telis Council could confirm that there is they are still interested based on their original submittal and then require them to respond to the supplemental questions . Another alternative is to reinstate the RFQ process, which would take about 6 to 9 months before coming back to council for a final selection. Um, so staff's recommendation of council is to select a development team for West Midway and authorize, um, execution of it. I will say that each of the development teams has a representative here to speak to any questions you might have. And that concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer your questions. Thank you. Nice work. Any clarifying questions on the separate? I want to just hasten to thank my colleagues, Councilmember Odie and Councilmember De. So you did a nice job on the questions that were posed to the finalists, so thank you for for your work on that subcommittee. So we go ahead and here are public speakers and then have our deliberations. Okay, let's do that. And so I think we've said 2 minutes per public. Speaker So go ahead, Madam Clerk. Okay. Karen Bay, Joe Ernst, Doug Biggs and Bruce Starkman. Good evening, Buttermere City Council Staff. So it's been more than two years since the Main Street neighborhood specific plan was approved. It's been a year since CRF two was issued. We had four developers that were shortlisted and then we narrowed it down to two. One of those developers, James Town, backed out and said, We're left with a two point partners. I think it's time to move forward and make a decision. And I'm here to support our point partners and let them choose a partner if they so desire to choose a partner. We've been through this before where we selected a partner for someone and it didn't work. And so I think AP Partners has earned the project at this point. They've been vetted. Are their financially committed? They have a great vision for the project. They've done their due diligence. They know the project site. They have a great construction team that's ready to go. And I think that there's benefit by having sort of a this master developer that has a vision so that we don't have a sort of a hodgepodge type of project with people, developers with different visions. I think there's a great benefit to having them move forward with the Main Street Development Project. So I urge you to select Alameda Point Park. Nice for the Main Street Project. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.. Bay. I just. Mayor Ashcraft, members of the council. I'm Joe Ernst with Alameda Point Partners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'll try to make this quick. I'm happy to be here and talk about this because I do as I've mentioned to many before, I do believe we bring a lot to the table here. Certainty. I think we can deliver with shorter time frames. We've already gone through the process of negotiating DDA documents, etc. with the city. We have a lot of knowledge and a lot of experience in working with the various systems that agencies issues, economies. We know cost here is critical and we have with our phase one work site A, we can bring economies with that work. Vision, I believe our vision for the project is most consistent with with delivering reshape, which is so critical. But also the other objectives that we've talked about for years jobs, social impact, trip generation, transit development and reduction of trips. But I want to address, most importantly, you know, one of your big concerns. One we respect. And that's the issue of diversity. I appreciate the questions about how do we mitigate risk, be comfortable. You know, we know what gets funded. I think all of the developers in this room know that a well-designed, thoughtful project that has community support, that will pencil and then is delivered by an experienced operator, you know, we all go through whether we have our own capital or we work with third parties. It's a very efficient market we go through. We have fiduciary responsibilities to investors, independent boards. So at the end of the day, you know, projects that get funded are those that pencil and have experienced operators who've demonstrated track record. You know, we went through that with City. We ran into issues in 2016. All right. Thank you. 2 minutes. Okay. Next, I see Doug Biggs. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Members of the City Council. My name's Doug Biggs, executive director of the Alameda Point Collaborative. And speaking here on behalf of the Reshape Collaborative Partners. You want to get out of here before midnight? We want to get out of this process before the end of the year. First and foremost, take the idea of an RFP off the table. That is just untenable. There is a lot of funding coming down the pike now for housing and we need to take advantage of it and we need to be ready to do this. And lengthy delays in selecting the metro developer for the Main Street project will severely impact that it's time to move forward. We early on met with all four partners. We determined that all four are capable of fully capable of of doing the work. We have full faith in them. We've enjoyed working with and meeting with each of them throughout the process. You have a process you embarked on last year that has resulted in having one, one, one developer standing tonight. And you either need to move forward on that or, you know, if you can do it without delays, you could do the questionnaire process as long as it's a very quick turnaround. But we you know, you set a process in motion that's resulted in where you're at tonight. There's rationale for finishing that out. There is if you feel like you need to do other vetting. I think there's some rationale for doing the questionnaire. We're not going to tell you which route to go. That's why you're sitting up there. But please don't do a process that's going to delay moving forward on this. Thank you. Thank you. And Bruce Dorfman, listen next. Speaker. Yes, Mr. Dorfman. Good evening. I was hoping to keep it short and basically second, everything my partner Joe earned said, but he didn't get through all his points. So I'd just like to restate what we've said before, that we think that we can offer greater certainty, shorter timeframes and lower costs by moving forward. We have a DDA that we relatively recently negotiated with the city. We know the pricing for doing the work out there. We've completed the physical due diligence and understand the constraints. We have good working relationships that have been developed over the years with the city and related agencies, and we're prepared to execute. Phase one, as we discussed at the groundbreaking of BLOCK Eight last week, is going quite well now that we're out of the rainy season. And we even though we've incurred, I think it was close to 70 days of rain and weather delay, we've gotten to a very important point been the 50% completion. And frankly, the second 50% of this work we think is going to go much quicker. So we are very interested in moving forward and just getting to one of Joe's points about the diversity aspect. On phase one of site, we had six different development parcels. We have sold three of those to different developers, and diversity has occurred that way. We're looking at moving forward with phase two. We're currently processing the vesting, tentative map and the infrastructure improvements that will be in front of you later on this year for review. And consequently, I think that being able to roll right into West Midway is appropriate and frankly, given the neighbor neighboring. Thank you, Mr. Dorfman. Approvals. Thank you. Okay. So I'm going to close public comment. Okay. Counsel comment. Who wants to start Councilmember Odie? Sure. I'll go first and I appreciate the thanks on the questionnaire. And you were. Very helpful. To work with my colleague and I also appreciate the answers. And I think they were frank. They were honest. And, you know, one of the things I learned in this job is that, you know, developments don't always take as fast as you wish. We wish we could have that housing open today. But the mayor and I were there. Was it last week? Last week at the at the building aid. And just to know that we were standing there where half of the infrastructure that we didn't have that was basically half of the cost of the project was basically from the city's perspective it was in. So I don't see any reason why we had this discussion a while back where we narrowed it to two. I mean, in an ideal world, the partnership had a lot of appeal, but one dropped out. So I mean, the point of narrowing it is, you know, you narrow it and then you go, you know, with who you have. So I trust AP to get this done. They've had shovels in the ground. They know what's under there and they know what to do. And I don't see any reason why we would change horses, you know, right now and start the process over or even ask others to do the questionnaire, because this is the direction of the council from a while ago. And, you know, I'm perfectly comfortable. And I do want to thank Staff Michel and Debi for all your hard work on this. Thank you, Councilmember Dandelion Councilmember Desai. Oh, thank you. Thank you also for your kind comments. Much appreciated, in my opinion. The process worked. You know, we started out with a multitude of developers through the request for a qualification process, and then it came down to two. It was actually three because because one of them was like on the bubble. And then so and then we came down to the two of Jamestown and, and AP, but Jamestown, you know, fell by the wayside. And so Alameda Point Partners is and we're not backing into app. This is a developer who has proven themselves and also I have always appreciated the substantial commitments that they've made through the DDA Shell shuttles running on a on a particular time frame. The amount of investments in in bus rapid transit and investments in the ferry terminal set are not to talk about not to mention the infrastructure dollars that that had would go down. So I'm satisfied with moving forward with staff's recommendation, with selecting a winner for the for the West Midway Project and that being AP, I appreciate the other developers who are here especially could tell us I appreciate the work that you guys have done in Bayport and also in Alameda Landing. But several months ago I think it was Jamestown. And Jamestown is in here. So. So there you have it. Thank you, Councilmember. You, Vice Mayor, next week. Hmm. So I think when we heard this in January, anyway, whenever we heard this, we chose to we had a we had we kind of went with a a known quantity and a new in a in a new entity this year. And I think at that meeting, I was definitely in the eye nervous about putting all our eggs in one basket. I did. I will disclose that. And I did meet Mr. EARNEST last week briefly, and I don't think I said anything different than I'm going to say right now. If there was a you know, I think if there was somebody that I would trust to put our eggs in one basket, I said this back in February as well. They do have a history of delivering, you know, in a tough market where we've watched a number of other development entities walk away, come back and ask us to reduce their things so they can sell to somebody else, etc.. You know, I'll be interested to see where everybody else is. But I do agree with with Councilmember Hardy that we started a process. We chose two people at the end of the day, not because we chose we ended up with one of those people, but that there is something that to suggest that maybe we shouldn't walk away from that process. Thank you, Councilman Rivera. I think my concerns are around question three regarding the do you foresee anything that could cause delays in completing the infrastructure for Reshape and the West Midway development? As I expressed at our previous meeting on this, you know, my concern is about making sure that these affordable units are able to come online and that, um, that there aren't delays to this. And in particular, one of the concerns that I have is about the overall number of units and the density and what that could mean to the rest of Alameda point. And, you know, I think one of the things and I'm reading the response here and I and I appreciate the acknowledgment that there's a number of different things that could cause delays to the build out of infrastructure. But I am I am concerned about the timing of different units coming on to the market and what the the total number of units are going to be. So I don't know. You know, if there's if we could get kind of a. Do you have a question you wanted to ask? We help bring them back up. Yeah. Okay. Could I have Mr. Dorfman and Mr. Ernst to approach the podium, if you would, please? This is my day for just putting people on the spot. But, hey, here they are, the applicants. Okay, because I think I. And in my notes, I actually like that same question. Okay. So if. You could ask away, would you if. You could answer that question. The question being number of units being delivered at any one time. Mm hmm. So if it is a concern, if there are too many of the same type of units being delivered at any. One, I was just. If you were speaking to the microphone, we could all hear you. You know, that there would be a concern if there's too many of the same kind of units being delivered to Mark at any one time. So that will be something knowing what we're doing with phase one today, phase two safety as we think about the product type for West Midway, that we have the ability to manage that and not create something that's going to compete with one another and jeopardize the project. And how, you know, in terms of your plan for the number of units that you see coming on for this, could you talk about that for this phase or for this. For first phase of West Midway? But in the end, when? So. Microphone, gentlemen. Excuse me. So we had three different product types in content. One was a rental community. Another was townhomes. The third was single family. So consequently, the the highest density project would be the largest of the three being the multifamily component. The townhomes would be next, and then we would have the fewest number of single family homes. So the townhomes and the single family, we will be selling off to third party developers. And frankly, one thing that we're doing with phase one and phase two is we are by working with true MA Homes right now, introducing those phases for the townhomes specifically where there's probably saw absorption and certainly the multifamily component in, you know, every 6 to 9 months, the 60 units. So that speaks to that absorption. But I'm not overly concerned about cannibalizing, if that's what the concern is, because again, in the big scheme of things, this is relatively small. It would true Mark. Or will true Mark be working with you? Will true Mark be working with you potentially on this project? Well. Uh, or Brookfield or. Oh. You're into partnerships. Say. That's interesting. Okay. But again, I think to your question, Councilmember Vela, you know, with both projects, the. Microphones, with. Both projects, we can manage the product types that we don't create a competition that jeopardizes the project. Did you have your questions answered? That's it. Okay. Thank you. You may sit down, I. So when. And I also met with Mr. Ernst one day last week, and I was I think I was the eggs in the basket person when we voted on this, worrying about putting all our eggs in one basket. And I do appreciate that. That was a question that was asked of the applicants, and I appreciated the responses. And my feeling is that, um, and it's been said before by the applicants that they have experience with this infrastructure. They have seen the surprises of which there were many. And yet last week in my weeks just fly by. So it was maybe Wednesday or Thursday. Last week, Councilmember o.T and I represented the city at a fabulous groundbreaking for the first residential construction to rise at Alameda Point and its affordable senior apartments at 60 affordable units. 20 and 30 of those are for formerly homeless seniors, 62 and older. 28 of those 30 are for formerly homeless veterans. And there we were at a former Naval Air station. Housing about two houses a year from now will be doing a ribbon cutting to house formerly homeless veterans, which is one of the really sad things in this housing crisis. We face that a significant percentage of our homeless are veterans, and that just is wrong on so many levels. And they serve their country. And now for a variety of reasons, they're living unhoused. But there there were those who said that, oh, you know, this the affordable housing, it'll get pushed to the wayside. We were the first project to go up is going to be market rate. Well, it's not and following shortly behind the senior will be the multifamily affordable housing. And so it was really a proud moment for us to speak because we had a lot of there were a lot of folks from the region who were there and even from Sacramento. And to be able to talk about no, we the city council, we have a commitment. We put our money where our values are and and, you know, do the right thing. But we need good partners to do it with us. So that's kind of a long way of saying that. I, too, would support the selection of Alameda Point Partners to be the the development team for the West Midway Project. So we have I think there's two things that are we a man clear cut me how are we doing to votes? We need to take a vote on selecting the development team for the West Midway Project and also other a city manager to negotiate an exclusive and execute and any. You can do it all. We can do it on one vote okay to have a motion or. I'll make that motion I. Have a motion from okay and have a second spin move by councilman cody seconded by Councilmember de sag all in favor. I. I that would be unanimous. This motion passes. All right. Congratulations again. And our apologies for the lateness of the hour. We had a lot of business to transact, and we are going to zoom into the next one. So, um, good morning.

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with the Public Works Department and Parks, Recreation and Marine Department, and in conjunction with Community Partners, to identify funding and begin pre-planning efforts to develop a park vision plan for Martin Luther King Jr. Park and report back within 90 days.

LongBeachCC_04052022_22-0386

All right. We're now going to go to item 31, Martin Luther King part. Communication from Councilwoman Sarah Vice Mayor Richardson Recommendation to request City Manager to work with the Public Works Department and Parks, Recreation and Marine Department and in conjunction with the community partners to begin pre-planning efforts to develop a park vision plan for Martin Luther King Jr Park and report back within 90 days. Thank you, Councilman Ciro. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And so I want to thank you for signing on to this item. I'm just so excited to be able to present this item, to identify funding and to begin the pre-planning. This has been identified as a need in a district dialog I've had in the past year, and I see that this is possible because it happened in Highland Park where we had the Doris Topsy Alva Community Center. We have the just recently named Ron Areas Health Equity Center. We also have a central health facility and I believe that's a model and what we could do and I think creating this vision plan is much needed because we haven't seen improvement in this park at this historical and cultural park in a long time. So in the past year, unfortunately, due to the vandalism, the statue, MLK statue was restored and little upgrades have been made. But more needs to be done. And it needs to be done with the community. It has to be a community driven vision, and that is part of the planning that is going to happen after we get a report back from the departments and how much it'll cost and what it will take. But I also want to thank the multi-racial coalition that have submitted a letter of support for this vision plan. Latinos in Action. My Girls in Action. Elite. Skills Development. City Fabric. Forgotten Images. I'm going to name all of them because I don't want to, you know, leave anyone out in their support. You see United Cambodian community as well as I think we have a few individual pastor. Well, Willie, Larry McIntyre from Grace Memorial Baptist Church. So I want to just thank all of you, all the residents, for voicing this need and this long overdue investment in central Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. I'll speak up as a seconder. I think you have to start with a vision and that in the money follows. When we started at Highland Park, the idea was our community center was failing. You know, we had every winter when it rained, we had to close down the social hall and but we brought the community together and we started with the vision for the center. And then that developed into a vision for the park. And then that developed into a vision for the whole uptown area, the uptown open space plan and those visions. They won awards and they led to money. Today, if you go there, you know, a 95 year old community center has been redone and facilities been added and it's beautiful. The doors topsy over community center. That was an $11 million investment and the vision plan that happened just a few years prior. And then just yesterday, we open the Rainforest Health Equity Center. It was a facility center that we invested $5 million into. But what's really important is what we put inside the programs and services inside. So things like the fatherhood initiative, things like, you know, My Brother's Keeper, My Sister's Keeper and our office youth development clinic. The things that, you know, particularly it was important to have in part because there's, you know, five city halls closed north lobbies that are all in city hall. So it made it more accessible for people to go to the area they know to get the city services. So I personally think I support where you want to go, but I think it's important. You know, King Park is like, you know, it's an important, iconic part to the city and it needs to be invested in and treated as such. And so I'm happy to support this vision and I look forward to what comes next in terms of the actual millions of dollars it's going to take to make the park into what it what it can be. Next, we have a councilwoman. So you want to go to the comment. Okay. We'll go to public comment. Madam Clerk. Well, the first five speakers please lineup. Tim Gilmore. Russell Waters. Ginger Moore. Franklin Sims. Marc Anthony Hall. So there's talk. Hello. My name is Tim Gilmore. I am a member of the Midtown Neighborhood Association, president of the Long Beach Poly Alumni Association, Inc.. 5013329. I'm talking to you about the support for Mr. Leonard Adams program, which is the basketball court construction, which will benefit our kids and help it. In my case, Park is a part of Sully Soros Item 31 Work Vision Plan. I've known Mr. Adams basically for about six years. We've gone out and he's done his his backpack school program, and I've had a lot of respect for that. And in those three years we discussed possibly doing something for basketball courts. But since we had COVID and my health condition, we kind of had to put that on on hold for that. But I'm starting to get back to things. And in March of second, we met at a Denny's restaurant, and we really rekindle the idea of doing it. I've been doing some research here and finding out basically what the cost and basically comes out to about 250. Okay, to about 400. I did Masco, I called the basketball vendors and such. So I've been doing some research on it as well as talking to the city planner, which is Nancy Conlin Arrows and Joy Contreras, the public works group hopefully going to have a meeting this week. It's such an I really would really love to see if we can get this doable. I do think is this. Mr. Gallo, your time has expired. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Russell Waters. Hi. Nice to be here. To all the council members, we appreciate you, Dr. Sorrell. We love you so much. Thank you so much for this right here. My family has been in the city of Long Beach since before Long Beach was Long Beach. We did not come to Long Beach. Long Beach came to us and we have never my family has been serving that community on that street for over 115 years. Chris and Baptiste started in my great, great, great grandfather's living room in 1907. We fought to get over. There was a court battle just to get there. We have never in the 115 year period that we've been there serving had the kind of support that we have received from you in the last year of your since you were elected. I'm going to calm down, but I get emotional every time I talk about this. What you've done is incredible. I'll be back to say more about what I have to say about. But we're just proud of you. You're the crown jewel of our community, and we are proud of you. I'm to you next. I'm going to come back. My time is up. Oh, have I got a mouthful for you? Mary's in De Vos. Thank you very much. We're in full support. And that's next. You're more. Hello, council members. I will not be as. Passionate as the last gentleman, but. My name is Ginger Moore and I work with Elite Skills, a nonprofit, and we currently occupy an office space at Kings Park. Parks and Rec are near and dear to me because my father for over 20 years worked for Parks and Rec. And so now, as an adult, to be back at one of the parks that I frequented as a child, it's it's a big deal to me. And Kings Park has so much potential. And I'm here in favor of item number 31 and the beautification process. Or the planning. Stages of this. I drive up every day and I'm so proud to be there. And I. Know what it could be, he said. You were the crown jewel growing up. Kings Park was our crown jewel. So we're excited to be here today and look forward to what's to come. And we are fully support we fully support you in this. And we would look we look forward to being part of the planning process. So thank you. And again, you have our support. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Oh, my name is Mark Hall. I was born and raised in Long Beach, California is right across the street from the park. Our crown jewel was Herb. He built the park when it was Real Street Shack. African-American men underserved over there. All we see is soccer year alone, so we must connect with the true Negroes. My family been all industry for 85 years. You helped build up stained a church about a dare. We we've been underserved. So I represent reset we grassroots movement. We like to be a part of rebuilding or not rebuilding fixing. We must dialog to make it right. Dang. They write right now. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Franklin Sims. The next five speakers after Mr. Simms is Leonard Adams, Nina Younger, Bridget Jones, Sharon Diggs Jackson. And since I can say. This agenda item is about a vision plan for King Park. You can't have a vision. Without telling the. Truth. Councilwoman Sauro said that the Dr. King statue had been restored after being vandalized. That is not true. And I'm concerned that when you go throughout the vision, if you didn't start with the truth, then what are we going to end up with? This is a bust of Muhammad Ali. It was sculpted by the same man that sculpted that statue of Dr. King that sits at MLK Park. That sculptor came to Long Beach after it was restored. And that artist stood right in that park. He looked at it and I said, Mr. Stokes, has the statute been restored? He said. I want to weep, Franklin. It has not been. He was called by the city after it was vandalized with Nazi symbols. He told the city what to do. They did not. If you have a vision, you have to tell the truth. The Martin Luther King Park must be restored and that statute must be restored. And there are people behind me who won't take no for an answer. Thank you, Alex. Police. Good afternoon. City Council. Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. I am a long time resident of the sixth District. I am also a former city and city employee with 40 years of services. And as I retired, I never quit working for my neighborhood or my city. You got a gentleman was talking about mean giving backpacks, giveaways out for the school kids in my neighborhood. But also during my time when I spent with the city, I spent ten years at Martin Luther King's Park and I thought that park would have absolutely nothing for years and years with no development. There was also a problem with having outdoor outdoor equipment. There was no outdoor equipment other than a swing and a playground. So if we look at all the rest of the parks around the neighborhood, Martin Luther King Park is not equal to them. You can go almost to any park and it's a major civil rights park is named after Dr. Martin Luther King's Park. We are trying to figure out why does this park doesn't have a basketball court. It's the only major park. I guarantee you. I guarantee you get in your car and drive around anywhere and you're going to see a basketball court on any major park except for Martin Luther King tomorrow. As a problem with that. As city council members, I believe that all of you guys. Should be. Proactive in your job, because when you stood up there, you said. Mr. Adams, your time has expired. Basketball. Thank you. Basketball court. Hear you loud and clear. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Nina Younger. Bridget Jones, Sharon Diggs, Jackson Anderson, I can say. Good evening, counsel. My name is Nina Younger. I live at 924 East Damian Street, right in the center about three blocks from Kings Park. I've been in the area for over 50 years. Definitely we need. To. Bring up our park. Just like the gentleman before me said. There's no basketball court, there's no sports in our park. We used to have sports. We used to have baseball games. There's nothing more than that. I would like to see in our vision a black history museum right there at that park. You are a black artist, pop up so that we have lots of talented people in our district. It'd be nice to show our artwork, what we do, our community. There's going to be a new 68 unit housing being built right. Behind my house. Well, in front of my house behind it. Now my ocean breeze is gone and I feel bad for the aging on that corner. They have nothing to go to or anything to do. I'm just pleading with the Council to end this vision, make sure that you get the community input. We know what we need in our area and we would like for you to help us. If we're going to support you, we'd like for you to support us. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, City Council. My name is Bridget Jones. I am advocate for community organizations across Long Beach. I really feel that in the essence of a vision plan, it is imperative that you incorporate stakeholders. In this particular case, the immediate stakeholders are the residents that surround the park. There really does need to be a Phil proof system that allows their vision to be heard. I understand that emails go out and there are different things in place, but you do have to consider that not everyone is privy to email. Not everyone has the capability to utilize or access whatever tools that you are using. So please, in your planning and your vision planning, please make sure that you are using tools that the community can access and that they really are a part of the vision because the vision is not clear if they are not included. Thank you for your time. Thank you so much. Next speaker. Please. Good evening. Vice Mayor and City Council. My name is Sharon Diggs Jackson. I am currently the program director for the. Black Resource Center, which is located at 1133 Rear Street. And I just want to offer some words of support for the motion. Thank you, Councilmember Ciro, for moving it forward. But I want to make sure we also include the Central Facility Center. We just moved into the Center. For the Black Resource Center. And my staffer and I spent the last month cleaning up the space, painting, organizing it because the facility had sat vacant for more than almost three years. So we want. To make sure that it's part of the visioning plan, that it also includes the Central Facility Center. There are nonprofits. There are resources that want to operate out there, who want to be able to serve the community. And we want a world class facility. In which to do it. When that center was originally opened. Having grown up here in. Long Beach, I remember the. Day that it opened and when Clarence Smith was so excited about it. So we want to bring it back to where it was again. Martin Luther King Park is near and. Dear to our community. We want to be part of the visioning process there. If you can't find. Somebody, give us a call. We'll make sure that we can put. As many people on whatever commission our committee that. You are trying to plan to move forward with this. Project. I also want to just give a minute and say thank you to the council. It's only befitting that item number two tonight actually addressed an issue dealing with Constance Oden in the Oden family. Those of us who grew up here and know Connie. We know that she. Gave her heart. And soul to. King. Park. Thank you so much. Next, people, please. Is the snake less than I can say? Sixth District resident. Thank you to our sixth district office of Dr. Sara for bringing this item up to council. It's imperative that this park is rekindled as it currently stands. It's essentially a green mausoleum. It's a dead space. There's no programing with respect to this park that truly benefits our community. And as you can see from the rest of my neighbors, I live just a few blocks away from the park, as well as going to church just a block away. We want to have community input towards what this what this has to be for us and the community. There's a lot of stipulations and areas that we feel like is currently the case with the park. I think a lot of people have named the the outside of basketball court. For me, it's imperative that city races control a perpetual lane from Boys and Girls Club. They are not speaking to the community. We live in a zip code 90813 where the per capita income is $17,000 and for lane charges over $20 for people in the neighborhood to engage with publicly owned, city owned property. I'm a property owner in the area. It makes no sense that the children in our community have to pay to use a city owned property. That's number one. So we needed to wrest control of the Boys and Girls Clubs and mandate of that because they're not doing right by us. And finally. Well, there goes the time. Thank you. The last thing is that with community partners, the trickle down Reagan economics days are over. There's a plenty of community based organizations who are here. We need to be compensated for it. Thank you. Next Speaker Freddy Johnson. Sean Earle. Shannon McLucas. Sean Olds. Daniel Pickens. Michela Palmer, Freddy Johnson. Hello. Good day. Good evening, counsel. Great to hear you speak me know most of you. Let's get to the point. We're suffering in that area. There is no structure. There's no financial backing for that structure. Okay. All of you were children. All of you had a part to play. These are the people that I am speaking to. If you ever were a child, it becomes at this moment, it's your responsibility to make sure that environment is better and they have better choices to make regardless of the situation. We've all come from things, but better is a choice, and the environment for that better to breed is these areas. They're not being considered or understood. They're being overlooked because we're overlooking it. You understand what I'm asking? The better is the choices we make in here. All of us were children. The children should not have to fight for the right, for choice to be a success and whatever role they choose. The basketball courts. There's one pool table. There's no physical anything inside these places. But if I went to Signal Hill Park, I can be a doctor in that park. Kings Park need to be that because kings still for every race in here. So how could that park not have more value than anything? He gave his life for the betterment of the culture of every class of people. Let's look up and stop looking down. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Yes, sir. Hello. My name is China. I also grew up in Long Beach, right around the corner from King Park. And when we were growing up in King Park, we used to swim and there used to be a little white pool. And we loved to get in that pool, even though the kids might urinate or suddenly that. Pool we got in anyway. And it was. Double the initiation. You wasn't from that neighborhood if you hadn't swim there, that little pool. You know what I mean? And I think the programs at the park had it days is what when we because we all grew up in the community turned us down different roles but it was those programs that was started at a young age that helped us when we got older, to be able to come back to our senses and to become mature men and grow up. And our kids today are missing that. They have no programs. They don't even have free lunch. They have a big, beautiful pool now in King Park that the children in our community can't even get in because the parents don't make the the amount of money it makes to be part of the Boys and Girls Club. And we need grassroots people to be up there. Volunteering and. Interacting with them kids. Because a lot of the times when I was in the streets, it was people that worked at that park and in the programs that see me like, Boy, you better get home. And I would respect that and I appreciate that and our kids need that back. Thank you. That speaker, please. Hello. My name's Shantel and I'm here to let you know that I respect all the names that you named FAS. The people that volunteered and sent in letters. And they are nonprofit to support Kingsport. But it's a shame that there was no black organization that wrote in to support Kingsport. And it's a shame, you know, my father took me to this fort and he told us what Dr. King meant to him and how Dr. King meant to us as a whole. Dr. King stood up for us all. He stood up to support each other. And when we stopped supporting each other. That part is a reflection of what the community is right now. The community is poor now and they don't have nothing to lose because they don't know nothing else. But I know better because my father took me there and he raised me there to show that I know better so that I can do better. The kids, they don't know better. Sorry. Not going to do better. Council. Everybody. You're letting us down. And I'm responsible for that, too. We got to we got to stand up. We got to stand up for our community. We got to stand up for our family member. But you continue to turn the back. No soul. The same souls that you're turning your back on, they're going to be forced out and they're going to be in your neighborhood and they go have a day. They're not going to care. They knock on Kerry and will be right at your door. Thank you. Speaker, please. Madam Clerk, can we just read off the next few to the line up coming for. Miss McLaren, MC Lucas, Daniel Pickens and Mikayla Palmer. Thank you. Vice Mayor, council people I encourage. You to support. With the sixth district council is trying to do. I'm probably. One of the few that was there when they broke the ground. Breaking park. When they open the doors. It's a very much needed thing. I grew up in Long Beach all my life. I run a nonprofit called Forgotten Images. It's really, really needed. My daughter. Her first job. Was working at King Park as a camp counselor. Please include the community in this planning. Thank you. Thank you. Let's speak to police. Hello. I am Akeelah Palmer and I'm going to talk about why softball should be in parks and in afterschool programs. Some parents cannot afford the actual sports park so kids can get some exercise while having fun. They should also be in after school programs. So while parents are working, kids can have fun and do an activity. Instead of kids being at home getting zero exercise, they can always go to a park to get exercise and have fun. Thank you. Good job. Thanks, Speaker, please. Good evening, counsel. My name is Daniel Pickens. I've been a resident of Long Beach for approximately seven years. I came here shortly after my term with the ninth US Marine Corps and I want to say that Long Beach has been very beautiful. The bay has been very kind. It's open me with warm arms. The residents, the community take very they took very much pride inside of their city. And I see that they are in a constant pursuit of doing more and more for the city. Me being the resident right there on 1904. Lemon I was literally living right next to Martin Luther King Park. So I saw everything that I went through through the course of the last seven years from the good, the bad and the ugly. You know, they removed a lot of the drug usage over there, and I see that it is on its way to improvement, but I know that there's a lot more that that could be done. You know, I had a child that I was mentoring over the last couple of years who was a resident over there. You know, he kind of fell prey to the structures of, you know, gangbanging. But, you know, nonetheless, I see him constantly trying to do more for himself. But I feel like if we implement more programs over there in Martin Luther King Park, if we give more opportunities for kids to be able to actually do affordable things, we utilize our resources to the best of our abilities. And we just overall as a community try to show that we really do care about our city. Then I felt that would be what Martin Luther King's dream to use. It's been 54 years in a day since his assassination. I'm going back in. Please. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. City Council. Some of you guys know me. Some of you guys don't. I'm Jeremiah. I just wanted to put my $0.02 in. Even with me being a college student. Long Beach City College. Some of the some of the elders at Kings Park were kind of tell me, boy, go ahead and put that out and go back to class. It goes perfume, but go back to class. And even as I as I got older, I started having more children. And that would be the place I can take them that I would know will be affordable and feasible within my. District, you know, so just kind of take it into consideration. It's not really for us. It's for the next generation. And we're laying down the groundwork. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That concludes that concludes public comment. Thanks to everyone who spoke up. We're going to now take it back behind the rail. Councilwoman Zendaya's. Thank you and vice mayor and thank you, Councilwoman Sarah, for bringing this item forward. And thank you, all of you who came out to speak. I think that it's very important to hear your voices. And, you know, one of the things I admire a lot about you, Councilwoman Sarah, is that, you know, you really want to invite the community and then welcome them to participate. So I know that I know that that's something that I totally admire about you. So I'm glad that you guys are here and we can, you know, connect and steps. Really great. I know that MLK Park is such a valuable space to all of us in the city, not only because it's home to our beloved statue of Dr. King, but also because of all the that it offers to the surrounding community. And it can be a place where it offers a lot more. And I know that Councilwoman Sarah is going to bring that. Martin Luther King Park is has been one of the closest parks to my district with a swimming pool. And a lot of my district residents like to go over there. So because of that, it also is super special to me as well. I'm super supportive of this vision that empowers the community and and, you know, the neighbors for to be able to have a more positive light shone on this park and be able to create more opportunities for the community surrounding it. I'm really looking forward to receiving this report back and to hearing about all the possible outreach efforts to get the community informed and involved. And I think that this is a first step in the right direction. So I'm fully supportive of this item. And Councilwoman. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Allen. Yeah, thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to say thank you to everyone that came up here and commented. I was really, really moved. I love King Park. You know, I grew up I went to poly and and back in the day, I represented my friends, the student body president back in the eighties. And me and a lot of my friends. I was an athlete, but a lot of us spent some time at King's Park, a lot of time at King's Park. And I became keenly aware that it was not like other parks. I know in 1996, they added a pool they dumped. They've done some things there, but not enough. Not enough. And I stand with you. I just want you to know you're right, Dr. Ciro. Councilwoman Sara is amazing, and I stand with you and beside you on everything that we can do to make sure that we get you basketball courts, that we that we get just all the programing that our kids, my kids now your kids deserve. And so thank you, Councilwoman, for bringing this item forward. And you just let me know how I can help. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I also want to thank you for bringing this item forward. I really want to appreciate the community for coming out and speaking out. It's not every day that we get a community here behind an asset like King Part King Park is a is a jewel, is a treasure, is a core kind of cultural community space in the central area, sixth district. And what we heard tonight was love and pride of community. And obviously, as a city, we need to be supporting those efforts. I heard a lot about the visioning and what that means, and I do want to just give Steph the opportunity to to address what a visioning process actually looks like. Is there anybody here who can address that? Just briefly. Yes. Our director of public works, Brant Dennis, and our director of public I'm sorry, Parks and Rec and Public Works, Eric Lopez can help talk about that. Thank you, Councilman Alston. So in general terms, when a request for a vision plan originates on, the dais such as this one will immediately work with the community to develop a scope for exactly what that vision plan will entail. Some of our parks do have established master plans or vision plans, so that's actually the foundation for a good starting point. But some of those plans are decades old. And as we know, the neighborhoods and the demographics and the recreational needs around each park certainly changes with the times . So I think engaging with a consultant group, whether they typically are urban planners or landscape architects, that's kind of in their professional wheelhouse to help lead the community engagement and outreach. But I think the points that the community voiced tonight were excellent in terms of making sure we understand the right vehicles, the right techniques to make sure every voice is heard. And I know with COVID waning, our ability to get together in person is a really a positive thing. And I think most of our community meetings, when we can meet the neighbors in the park, walk and talk and envision together, that's a really positive approach. But we certainly work very closely with our colleagues at Public Works so that whatever visions are established, we know that things like historic properties and infrastructure, utility needs and other things that have changed with the times in terms of accessibility and in terms of accessibility, also want to mention how committed we are to language access. So any of our parks that we begin to communicate outwardly through surveying website invitations to contribute ideas and even an in-person meetings will be following all of our language access protocols. Thank you. And so Parks and Rec, you all kind of facilitate the visioning process and public works will actually implement the visioning process. Yeah. Councilman. And Public Works gets involved in the very beginning. We want to make sure that as we create the plan, as we listen to the community, as we learn what works, what doesn't work, of how our communities have evolved, have changed. You know, there are there are there's there's a lot of important information that comes out of the planning and visioning process that directly informs the actual technical work that comes with actual constructing the projects. So we're we're we're happy to be a partner here. We're happy to connect with the community, to work with all the organizations and individuals that that want to be engaged and participate and to to look at what opportunities exist to make this existing park better. So public works where the excellence in construction. But we also like to be involved in a beginning. Well thank you. I just wanted to just re-emphasize that this is going to be an inclusive, engaged process with the community and that that visioning process for basketball courts or whatever the vision that you may have as a community, you will have the opportunity to participate and engage in with the planners when we get to that point also. I know I have one at a time here, but Cob City Manager, I know during our budget process we set aside some funds to to restore the statue, and I believe those funds were already spent. So can you is there money already identified that we could actually put toward this visioning process to pay for it in our fy22 budget? Excuse me. Yeah. So that's part of the request that we've been tasked with today is to figure out the funding, figuring out the. The feasibility. Okay, folks, just. We hear you. Let's hear from the city manager. Thank you. Yeah. So there certainly is money that was set aside through which I believe was measure eight for the park. So that was set aside in the last year's budget. I did hear the question about the parade money. That money is actually restricted for special events. It can't be used for other things that some voters have put that restriction on it. But that's the task that you've been giving us tonight is figure out of the funding strategy. Come back, talk about what the plan would be and identify those resources. Okay. And then lastly, I just want to just say, again, King Park is a special place. Children grow up in that part. My kids spent many, many summers with Miss Connie at the summer summer daycare programs. It's a special place for me and my family. And so I'm happy to support this item. And I think we should put the resources behind, you know, a great visiting plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next is councilman, your anger. Thank you. And I want to thank everyone who came out today. Spend a few hours with us here out of your personal time to come and share your your vision for what the park should be. I think you've already made some suggestions. And I think that the city council has heard them, staff has heard them, and I'm pretty sure that they're going to be incorporated. MLK Park is special to everybody. It's special to me many years that they're going to go MLK Park for. Celebrations. For. MLK Parade. Day and the events at the Park for Juneteenth celebrations out there as well. And I'm looking. Forward to. Reactivating MLK Park to getting it back where it needs to be. And and I definitely support this item. Thank you, Dr. Sorrell, for bringing it forward. Because obviously it. Is a. Gem, a jewel of the sixth District, and we need to make it so. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you and thank you for bringing this item. I, too, am very supportive of it and I appreciate all the comments from the members of the audience tonight. I do have a question for our staff. Why isn't the pool accessible to the community? I. Yeah, that is a misnomer. The Boys and Girls Club has no role with the pool, so it's a city pool, just like Silverado and Belmont pool. So we can help explain that will work with the council office to make sure there's no misunderstanding regarding access to King Pool. Okay. And I know a few years ago we brought an item forth to make sure that swimming for seniors and children was offered at a reduced rate throughout the city. Is that in effect at Kings Park? Yes, that's still in fact, yes. Okay. And what is the rate? I don't know what that is offhand. I'm sorry. All right. Because I want to make sure that it's affordable and it's something that everyone can afford because that is a beautiful pool. And I know that we want to make sure the youth is using it. And it's a it's a much needed asset. But I'm very supportive of this item, and I'm really happy to have heard from everyone in the audience tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I am so supportive of park programs and visioning such as this. A few years ago, there's a couple of agenda items I think should be talked about. One is that there was an agenda item brought forward where we talked about what does community engagement mean and what does involving the community mean and what does it mean to notify the community? Is it via every door direct mail where you get a postcard in your mailbox that lets you know about a community meeting? Is it only using Twitter and Facebook? That's probably not the best sources. But we as a council said we want to hear from the city what they believe community engagement means. Then on a case by case basis for programs such as this, we want to see why you chose what you chose, to make sure that it aligns with the council person's expertize in knowing and understanding his or her community to make sure that that is the best way to get a hold of and engage the constituencies. So first and foremost, thank you all for being here. This is the first step of being engaged. Second, let's make sure that we use the systems that we created to ensure that the community has clear expectations of how they can and can't be reached and how they can and can't be involved, and that they know that they're not showing up to meetings that are useless, that they give input that is not implemented. We want that to be implemented. And then finally, there was another agenda item that I brought forward regarding park advocacy groups, and we have a great partner in a nonprofit organization called Partners of Parks. Earlier tonight, Councilmember Supernova gave funding to that organization to help a community group and parks on my side of town, probably because I brought the item and I really pushed for it. Each park has a group of six or seven people that consider themselves the park advocate for Wardlow Park or whatever they are, and they're people who live near the park, the people who are impacted the most by the park, or a person who might live adjacent or be a part of a program that has insights into the programing at the park that the community believes is the right person to be there. And Brett Dennis from Parks and Rec has worked to have some staff members available to engage with and provide those resources immediately. We shouldn't have to wait a year for a visioning process for you to get some of the resources that you need today, including but not limited to visibility and transparency about who's renting your park and how often and what does that mean and who is limited to access, including but not limited to the pool. When we brought forward an item to reduce access costs for the pool to either two or $4, I can't remember one. It's $1. For admission. The other three to 2 to $3 is covered by partners of parks through grants that they write. And so having them at the table and having them to help raise funds, they just helped raise funding for Admiral Kidd Park. And they're here to be an advocate for you and support you as well. And and we're here to help. And I am so proud of all of you for being here tonight. And I am 100% behind supporting Councilman Sorrow and all of you in getting not only a basketball court, but if you want. I was really supportive of midnight basketball. We needed it more of our parks. And while I appreciate that, I hear that the city is going to bring midnight basketball and house. I think that there's something to be said for asking the community what they want, if they want to continue to use some of the nonprofits that are providing those services and why before we just bring it in-house on our own and make those decisions. So I only have a little bit of information about that, but I'd like to dig in more at my next Parks and Rec briefing to better understand where we are on that and what I can do to support both Councilman Zendejas and Councilman Sorrell. Thank you. And the community. All right. Thank you. Before we hand it to Councilwoman Sorrell to close out, I want to thank everyone for stepping forward. What I heard today was a beautiful vision for the park. And if you want to see that vision implemented, you have to stay engaged. You heard, you know, the entire city council, black plurality of the city council expressed their support for King Park. But at the end of the day, the priorities need to come up in the budget when it comes time for funding. That's when we have to pay attention. The vision is key, but you all want to see the vision be implemented, so we have to make sure the dollars reflect those values. That's what's incredibly important. And so I'm happy to support this. I know it's possible. It's a great park. I've seen transformations at the Forest Park, Highland Park. It does not take that long. You can do some immediate work. You can get long term things like community centers and all sorts of things. But it really is really important to center on community activism. So you're going to have to. Going back to city council around budget time. That's my recommendation to you. And that said, I'm going to hand it back to Councilman Sauro to close it out. Yeah, I just want to express my deep appreciation for you to come out and share your thoughts that those feedback is what? The visioning processes. Hearing what hasn't been done. Hearing the historical disinvestment that's been made. Right. And that's what this process is. It's hearing. What does it take to make you feel like this is a community park that is fit for your children, our elders. Right. I hear you about making sure we're knocking on doors and reaching out to people like Miss Alice Robinson. She doesn't check emails. She doesn't even she she is old fashioned phone. And that's what my staff does. We call people and we also doorknock, I think now that things are getting better, that's what I also plan to do to reach out to people. And that's the work I love. I come from community organizing. I've been a labor organizer and I'm here to bill, you know, 100%, here to Bell. And, you know, I know what it's like to come from a place where, you know, I, I, I come to this with love because I know what hate does, right? I've been a child of genocide survivor. I've seen what hate has done in my community and what's even brought my family and my community here to the US. So I have no room for that. I have room for love and have a room for building and that's what I want to do in our community together with everybody . So that's the spirit that I want us to take with this visioning. I'm going to be I'll give you my full commitment to be part of that process, detailed in and out. So I look forward in us doing report back and engaging with you and how you were able to come out. I hope to continue this process because this is what it takes. So thank you and thank you to my council colleague for your support and staff as well. Thank you. Council member Sara was go ahead to our vote. Motion is carried. Thank you. Let's go ahead to item 30, please.

Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Submission of an Application for Senate Bill 2 Funding from the State Department of Housing and Community Development Under the Permanent Local Housing Program (PLHA) and Affirming the City Council’s Adoption of a Five-Year Permanent Local Housing Allocation Plan; and Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Related Documents, Agreements, and Modifications. (Community Development)

AlamedaCC_07072020_2020-8107

Thank you. And then we move to item five G, which is a very important and also timely item. I think it has a lot of potential good news and so for our city. And so that's why I ask that it be pulled. And so that council and the public can just hear some of the things we're doing to address a very real crisis in our city, in our county or state homelessness, housing issues. So, um, we have our community development director Debbie Potter with us who's going to give us a brief overview and of the item and answer any questions. Miss Potter, welcome. Thank you. Are you unmuted, Miss Potter? It's funny. I don't see the microphone icon, but I'm not hearing her. Still not. Hearing. Okay. I think as city attorney, did you hand it? Yes. Yes, I do. If I may ask the city clerk to announce the item, is the public. Take you before the. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Thank you. I need all the help I can get sometime. Thank you. Madam Clerk. Adoption? A resolution ordering the submission of an application for Senate bill. I'm sorry. I'm trying to do two things at once here. We're trying to figure out if Debbie needs to be let in in a different way. You know, I'm happy. Well, you figure that out. I can all introduce the idea. Okay. Sure. So what this is, is we are voting on a resolution to authorize the submission of an application for Senate bill to funding from the State Department of Housing, Community and Economic Development under the Permanent Local Housing Program, and affirming the City Council's adoption of a five year permanent local housing allocation plan. And also to to recommend that we authorize city manager to negotiate and execute related documents. So did I give you enough time to let this putter in? Yes. I can. Yeah. Sorry about that. Now, thank you. But evening, Mayor and members of the Council, I started to say that I actually have the easy part of this presentation, which is to introduce Lisa Fitts from the Housing Authority and. I hope at least it can also be let in by the clerk. She should be here. So. If not, I have her. I have her presentation so. We can find her. She can read. But you can't find her. Okay, we've missed that. So, dear. No, that the whole technology thing can be challenging. But with three devices in front of each one of us, we can do this, right? Sure. And many of you weren't exactly at your equal to the task. Okay. So she's. We found her. She's called in. Okay, sit. Down. There's audio is. Hey, is that you? Ms.. Fitz? Mrs.. Lisa. Is she okay? She just went. It got muted. I'm assuming that's her number. Okay. Would you like me to start while we have time? Yes, I would love that. She just dropped out. Whoever it was. Okay. Please do. Okay. In September of 2017, the California legislature approved the Building Homes and Jobs Act, which is also known as Senate Bill two or SB to and SB two, which is sometimes also referred to as the permanent source of affordable housing funding. Establish a $75 recording fee for real estate documents to set up, as I said, a dedicated fund for affordable housing. The law has been in effect, funds have been coming in at the state level, and we're now on the first round of local jurisdictions receiving their funding. We are slated to receive $3.3 million over the next five years, and that is an estimate because you get an allocation that's based on the number of real estate transactions in your community. But we know for certain that we will be receiving $558,765 this year. Even though we are getting these funds by right, we have to submit an application to the State HCV. It has to be a five year plan for how we propose to spend these funds. And the funds are to be spent on housing for people and households making less than 60% of the area median income, which is a very low income households. So we have put together the plan. We are required to hold the public hearing that's happening this evening and the opportunity for the council and the community to comment on what's being proposed for the expenditure of these funds over the next five years. During that, for the first year, we are proposing that the funds be used to to provide rent relief and housing navigation services. Really, given the pandemic this year, we feel like the focus should really be on some of the more immediate assistance that can be provided. And we feel like it's a nice complement to the day center that will be opening to provide intense housing navigation services to people who who frequent the day center. And then for years two through five, we are recommending that we allocate these funds to actually building affordable housing. And we have referenced three projects, a wellness center on Mackay Avenue, North Housing and the Reshape Project. And the funds can be spent across those three projects as there is project readiness. We're recommending over the next that four year period that 75% of the funds go for housing development, and that 25% of the funds go to a pool fund that the county is setting up across multiple jurisdictions to provide direct rental subsidies. And we feel like this is going to be a great that rental subsidy program could be a great opportunity to subsidize rent for people living in the wellness center because it will serve a large need of formerly homeless and frail seniors. So that is our plan in a nutshell. We are seeking approval this evening at the close of the public hearing of a resolution authorizing us to submit our application to state HCV. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Potter. And you know what? I have read this. It's just appeared on this screen. So, misfits, if you wanted to our man quick. Do you need to amuse her or she can unmute herself? He has to unmute herself. There you go. Hi, Ms.. Fitz. Welcome. Would you like to add. This is we know you've worked a lot on this important item. Did you want to add anything to to what Ms.. Potter said? I think she summed it up well. Okay. Um, I, um, I, I'm very excited about it. I'll just add that you want to talk about the two goals that are consistent with the alimony to our housing element. To provide housing services and opportunities. To. Support. And I'm looking on the staff report. Anyway, I that's what we've we've probably heard plenty from Ms.. Potter and I just I want the council I think you'll notice that housing providing housing is one of our top priorities and especially for our most vulnerable populations. But I also want the community to know what we're doing. And this these funds are a very important part of it. And we worked really hard to get the legislature to to to even get this all the way up to be signed by the governor. This this bill took a number of tries. But council any clarifying question before we open for public hearing. Okay. I'm not seeing any hands waving at me. So, Madam Clerk, can you take care of that public hearing piece, please? Yes. We have one. Speaker on Zoom. Okay. Welcome. Darla Brown. Hello, Miss Brown. Hello. I don't know if you. Can hear you. We can hear you. I can hear you. Sorry, I was muted. Miss. Miss Brown, welcome. And please, we're. We're delighted to have you. Thank you. Important part of my proposal really hard. Um, we're working on a plan. A proposal to. Build. Like, a Universal Studio. Which is a movie studio. Amusement park at the Adams Point. The B phase. Hello. I'm Miss Brown. Yes. Yes, that's what I wanted to throw it out there. But we're in the. Process. Of getting everything. Ready for the. Proposal and the plan. But I want to throw out that we're. Looking to want to build like Universal Studios, a movie studio and. Amusement park at. This point, which can create over 4000, 4000 jobs. Hello? Hello? Yes, I can hear you. I can hear you. Thank you. Um, just for clarification, Miss Brown, when you say Adam's point, is that Alameda point? Yes. Yes. All right. Thank you. Okay. However, if anything, further. To be lost. Right. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All right. And, madam, quick, were you getting that feedback or was that from the phone call? Yes, we were getting that feedback and we think the live stream might have been playing in the background. Oh. Okay. So any further, um. Public speakers for this hearing. Madam Clerk. No further speakers. All right. Um, so Councilman Brody's hand is up. And to be real quick, I think, as the mayor mentioned, but it took three times for that bill to actually get out of the legislature in the assembly and or into the governor's desk. And, you know, I was proud to work in the assembly when that happened. But I want to just give a shout out to the mayor's efforts, because this was a bill that she champions from the beginning. All three times. And it took that long. So thank you for that. So it's nice to see something that we all believed in. We worked in, we fought for, you know, finally come to fruition. Thank you. It it seemed like such low hanging fruit. I mean, a $75 transaction fee. And it doesn't apply to the sale or purchase of a single family residence. That is your principal residence. So when you think of real estate prices in California, in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars, $75 of that fee to go toward affordable housing. But the third time was the term. Okay. Are there any further any further comments or does someone want to make a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the resolution. Thank you. And also the recommendation to authorize the city manager. Yes. Okay. All right. And I think I see a second from Councilmember Bella or did you want to speak? Okay. Thank you. All right. And it's been moved by Councilmember Ody, seconded by Councilmember Vela. Any further discussion? Council seeing none. May we have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember de SAG. Councilmember Desai, you're muted. We're going to get good at the. A computer as well doing it. Your double. Privilege. Yes. And. Yes. All right. Is that okay for. Call it. Okay. We can go back to him. Knox White. Yes. I Vela. I may or as the Ashcroft. I and Kels. Meredith, do you want to verbally. Yes. Yes. Got it. Thank you. So that item passes unanimously. Thank you, counsel. This is this is really good news for our city. All right. So we I thank you, Mr. Potter and Misfit's. Great work. Okay, so we now move into the regular agenda. And Madam Kirk, will you introduce the first item. Six days adoption of resolution calling for the holding of a consolidated municipal election in the city of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020, for the submission of a proposed charter amendment to repeal the prohibition against building multi-family housing in Alameda and authorizing city council members to file written arguments for and against the measure. All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk. And we have 24 hour planning, transportation and building. I might not have gotten this in the correct order. Director As a man of many talents, uh, Andrew Thomas, who is going to present this item this evening. Welcome, Mr. Thomas. The floor is yours. Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft, can you hear me? Okay? Excellent. Okay. Yes, fine. Yes. Good evening, Mayor. Vice Mayor Knox, White Councilmembers Oti Vela and Councilmember de Suck. I am Andrew Thomas. I'm the director of Planning Building in the Transportation Department for the city of Alameda tonight. You're having your third public hearing in a series of four public meetings that have occurred this year to discuss a simple land use question. That question is, should the voters of Alameda be given the opportunity to remove or reconsider Article 26 or some part of it from the city charter? This is not a new question. We've been debating the merits of Article 26, often commonly referred to as Measure A for four years here in Alameda. But the events of the last year caused us, I think, all to see these issues in a new, clearer light. The compounding impacts of a pandemic and deep economic disruption have starkly displayed the disproportionate burdens that exist in our society as planners and leaders of local government. We have roles to play in transitioning to a more just inclusive place where everyone can participate and prosper regardless of income, race, color, age, disability, religion or sexual orientation. No issue is more important to be an inclusive just community than the right to housing. No community can claim to be an inclusive community if it prohibits access to housing for certain segments of our community. If we strive to be an inclusive community, then we must identify and eliminate exclusionary policies and regulations that work to bar access to housing for those segments of our community and undermine opportunities for shared prosperity. In January of this year, staff presented its analysis recommendations that Article 26 in its entirety should be removed from the city charter. We found that Article 26 is in direct conflict with state housing laws that require that all cities provide for the housing needs of all income groups. We found it in direct conflict with our own general plan policies supporting a diverse, inclusive community that provides for the needs of all residents, not just those with higher income. And we found that Article 26 continues a legacy of exclusionary zoning that discriminates against families based upon income. In May, the City Council held a public hearing to discuss these issues, and a variety of options were included and discussed, including full repeal, partial repeal, and a variety of modifications to eliminate these conflicts between Article 26 and state law. In June, the Council continued the public debate and focused on one half of Article 26 the multifamily prohibition, with the idea that the second half could be addressed in in two years or at some later date. But tonight, you must decide what you would like to put before the voters. Staff is recommending that the Council give the voters the option to consider both parts of of of both parts of Article 26 and give the voters the chance to amend their charter to avoid conflicts with state law and remove provisions that be exclusionary and discriminatory and contrary to this King's desires to be inclusive and diverse community. Madam Clerk, can we get the power point up? I forgot about that. Yes, sir. Can we go to the second slide? We'll just skip right over that first one. Leaving us in suspense. There we go. Second slide. So let me just explain very quickly why staff is so concerned about Article 26. Article 26 has two parts. Part one says that constructing multi-family housing is prohibited in Alameda. The charter is saying we will only build single family housing. We will not build multifamily apartments on Park Street and Webster Street, nor Alameda Point or anywhere in Alameda. What do we know about multifamily housing? We know it is more affordable than single family housing. We know that seniors living alone, the disabled and those that cannot afford a single family home depend on multi-family housing. If you need this type of housing, housing Article 26 is discriminating against you and excluding you from our community. Part two. 2063 was added in 1990 to reinforce and support Part one. It says We will prohibit all construction of housing with a residential density over 21 units. P.A. The charter is saying we will only build low density housing. What do we know about low density housing? We know it is more expensive than high density housing. We know that buildings in Alameda that are more affordable are the higher density buildings that were built before. Measure A if you need this type of housing, Article 26 is discriminating against you and excluding you from our community. The photo at the top of this slide is a single family home in the Grand Marina development of 21 units per acre. This is the type and density allowed by measuring the ground. The grand marina homes go for over $1,000,000 per home. The building below is a multi-family building with seven units on Clinton. And each residential density is 40 units. P.A. It is not allowed by measure. Why not? They both fit in Alameda. They both look great. So these provisions are not about design or neighborhood quality. Why would we prohibit the more affordable building measure allows us to build seven of the expensive units, but it does not allow us to build seven of the inexpensive units. So it cannot be about traffic either. It can only be about income. What else do we know? We know that Alameda has not met its regional housing need to provide for lower income households since Measure eight was adopted. We know that Alameda has not constructed a single mixed use building with retail on the ground floor and apartments upstairs since the measure was adopted. Despite general planning policies encouraging this kind of development since Measure eight was adopted. Next slide, please. Well. Thank you. At your last meeting, the council discussed the idea of giving the voters the opportunity to remove half of Article 26 the multifamily prohibition, but leave the other half. The higher the higher density prohibition for at least another two years in the city charter. That proposed ballot language has been prepared for you and is provided in your packet. We recommend that you reconsider that decision and instead give the voters the opportunity to repeal all of 26 from their city charter. We recommend this reconsideration because we do not believe that you have two years to wait before Article 26 begins to cause new problems for this community. Since your last meeting, the Bay Area received its next regional housing needs allocation. This news is confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt. That you will need to adopt a new housing element within the next two years and before you can get back to the voters. Committing the city of Alameda to zoning sites to meet its regional housing need for a lower income, and that zoning will need to provide for 30 units per acre and will need to provide for multi-family housing by right in direct conflict with both sections of Article 26. You will not be able to comply with state law and respect your city charter if you do not deal with both pieces of measure. You'll need to make a decision as a council. So I uphold state law or uphold the city charter. Article 26 Your city charter should not force you to choose between the charter and state law. Your charter should give should guide decision making in conformance with state law. To do otherwise invites trouble. Conflicting regulations lead to unclear policy direction, poor and inconsistent governance, community uncertainty, and ultimately disputes. These disputes lead to costly lawsuits, threats to state grants and tax revenues, and ultimately the possible loss of local land use control to the to the courts and the state legislature. Lastly, I'd like to reassure some members of the community that seem to believe that removal of Measure eight from the charter will result in an absence of regulation that will result in an uncontrolled boom of high density residential development throughout Alameda. They argue that it is necessary to come up with a whole new set of regulations to replace Measure eight before you get rid of Measure. This is a logical thought, but it is a misunderstanding of the current law. All of Nigeria's restrictions have been embedded in our zoning code over the last 40 years. Removing measure from the charter does not remove these provisions from the municipal code. What it does do, however, is it allows the people of Alameda to work with their planning board and city council in the future to selectively and carefully consider how and where and in which zoning districts these provisions should be changed. These future zoning changes cannot happen without fully notice public hearings before the Planning Board and City Council. Removing Article 26 from your charter does not automatically change Alameda. It merely allows the residents of Alameda to plan thoroughly and thoughtfully for a fair, just and inclusive community. So with that, I'm going to conclude my statements and recommendations. Staff is here to answer any questions or help with your deliberations. If you wish to continue and adopt the provision to place just part one of Measure eight before the voters, that language is before you tonight and you can adopt that language tonight if you want to adjust that approach and go with a ballot measure that allows for full repeal or full of Article 26, then we would have to direct us to do so. And I think we can be back at your next meeting with that legislation. So with that, I'll make myself available through answering questions. I think City Attorney's Office is also here to help out if you have legal questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. That was a good, succinct report. So do we have any clarifying questions from Councilor City Councilmember Velez? Hand up. So let's take our clarifying questions before we hear from. And should we might have a public speaker too on this item? Councilmember Vela Yeah, a few questions. My first question is, Andrea, you're saying that our arena numbers are putting us up against measuring what parcels are going to be impacted by the repeal of measure? To help with our meeting arena numbers? Well, I think we are looking at to meet our next Reno numbers, we are going to need to identify enough land for about 2000 units of lower income house lower income, well enough land zoned properly to accommodate the lower income portion of our arena. Which is it going to be? We estimate around 2000 units. That means that land is going to need to be zoned at 30 units acre at this point, what we're looking at is areas in the northern waterfront and Alameda point, potentially some of the shopping center sites. I think. The shopping center site. Excuse me. With shopping center sites. Well, we haven't done the housing element yet. I mean, we don't even have our final numbers yet. I think South Shore is definitely a possibility. They've already submitted and proposed housing on that site. I think the other folks, the other sites that have asked us about housing possibilities are Marina Village and Harper Bay. But it's okay. I mean, I don't you know, so we have a process that we haven't we haven't decided yet. I, I guess my question is, and I'm thinking about the sites that you just listed. Most of them are west of Park Street. I think you listed one that is not west of Park Street. And we've got, you know, some of the concern that I've heard is, you know, there's only one point of egress west of Park Street, and that's the Webster Tube. Um, I know that. And I'm glad to hear that you said that Harbor Bay is included in one of the sites that you're you're looking at is what is the process going to be for that? So if we repeal measure A, how do we it's one thing to repeal language. It's another thing to put something into practice that allows for this policy, this policy to be implemented in an equitable way throughout Alameda. So how what is that process look like if it's measure is repealed? Well, we've already started that process because we're in the thick of a general plan update and we are preparing for the housing element update, which we're going to have to get started on first thing next year and you will have to adopt that housing element in 2022. So in the land use element of the general plan, which is posted on the city website, we have already identified the areas that we think should be considered to accommodate housing over the next 20 years, not just the next arena, the next 20 years. Arena is an eight year cycle because we're updating the general plan from 2020 to 2040. The sites that we have called out are Alameda Point Northern Waterfront and the shopping centers along both shopping center sites, as well as some opportunities along Park Street and Webster Street. Our main transit corridors, our our our planning process basically anticipates a robust community discussion about that, those ideas, those general locations for the next 20 years for housing growth in Alameda that will then set us up in the spring of 2021. We will get our final numbers. We believe that our arena numbers for the next eight years will be somewhere between 30 504,000 housing units. If there is consensus over the general locations of where a new housing should go through the general plan land use element, we will then with the community and the Planning Board, start getting much more specific about how we're going to accommodate 4000 units in those areas over the next eight years. That will then determine exactly which sites are identified as housing opportunity sites and what residential zoning we are going to place on those sites to meet our regional housing need for the period 2023 to 2030. Does that include that question? Yeah. I mean, I'm I guess I'm a little confused because in the in the to the earlier question, you said Harper Bay would be included. Did you just leave that off the list and. You just. Say. Look, we're. Going to be all over Alameda. Correct? Yeah, you're absolutely. Look, we are. We are. We are. We have been talking about the shopping centers, that sort of a group of sites we really have for that. We're thinking about South Shore, Harbor Bay, Marina Village and Alameda Landing. Frankly, the future of retail, the future of these sites. And this is not just an Alameda. This is nationally with sort of the projects, the the trajectory of retail shopping centers and the need for housing. So those are obvious sites for the city to be looking at. As you and the council know, we have very little to no vacant land in Alameda and we're not going to create any more land and we're not going to annex land from from the county. So we have to work with the land we have. And that land is that is that that is, you know, other than, you know, sort of random small sites around town. The the those two areas, Alameda Point northern waterfront and the shopping centers are the major areas. And unfortunately, because we would like to distribute the new housing throughout the city and not just focus it in one area, unfortunately, the vast majority of the vacant land, of course, is out of Alameda Point. Then secondly, the northern waterfront between Park Street and AMI to point. And then lastly, really Park Street and Webster Street. I mean, there's very little real opportunities on Park City, Webster Street, because the sites are so small, the shopping centers are the only exception. Another question, Andrew, is have there been projects that have gone through before that were impacted or that we would have been able to get more units had an injury not been there? Yeah, absolutely. We have a couple of that. You know, we've been using state density bonus to basically get multifamily housing built in Alameda. So it's a way around major, but it doesn't get it essentially as a bonus on top of the maximum allowed by measure. The best example that I sort of used is the a couple of years ago we approved a project on Webster Street, a very nice little project, three stories. Webster and Taylor. A beautiful little design on that parking lot. Ground floor retail, two stories of residential above. With measuring the maximum density 21 units, S.A. with the density bonus, they got a bonus density on top of that. But at the end of the day, the project's only nine units. The volume of that building is such that in the size of the building is perfect for Webster Street. It's just right. It fits right in. It's three stories, two stories of residential. We measure the volume of the building is such that the units some of the units are two stories, two storey apartments, because, I mean, really, that volume should should accommodate much more than nine units. It's it would be if that building were 15 or 16 units, I am sure it would be built today. But not. And when you mean volume, you mean the same, the same height. Would it included more units? Yeah, exactly. The building would look exactly the same with 15 as it does with nine. You can imagine if you're an investor, a housing investor who does apartments, invest in apartment buildings, mixed use buildings in Oakland and Alameda. And I want to build a building with two storey apartments. Now, your first thought is like that's how many people want to rent a two storey apartment upstairs on Webster Street. It's just a strange. Housing type that is just not very common, but they got to fill a space somehow. Mhm. You know that's a good example. The other one is CBS right across from City Hall. We've had people come in over the years. Oh, I'm interested in buying the tbf site, redeveloping it ground for retail, maybe move CVS on to the ground floor and do housing above, you know, three or four storeys, certainly no higher than the parking garage, you know, can you help me out with this? Tell me what I can do. And we go through the math. That site is one acre. So that means you get 20 units and then you use that to do anything with density bonus. You get another, you know, five or six units, like 25 units. You can't build that project with 25 units. They tell me like they tell me, how do I get around that? How do I get more units? There's there's no way you have to go to the voters if you want more units than that. And they they are very nice about it. They say, well, thank you so much for giving me this information. We will be leaving now. You will not hear from us again because that is not viable. They sort of look at me and there's are parting words are usually like, that's crazy. Like 25 units. You can't build that site with 25 units and they walk out. And so to two. Really quick last question. The other is when we're. Will there be sitting on parcels that are impacted or would allow for. One of the things we're always fighting about is or not fighting about fighting for is the low income housing are there and included in this and included in this repeal is also city owned parcels. Correct. That we could then look for additional uses for that sort of thing? That's true. And I just want to emphasize something that I said at the end there. I just I can't particularly for some of the people in town who are concerned by this repealing measure A sets us up as a community to decide where we want to do higher density. It doesn't mean that all of a sudden the entire city is higher density. What it means is we get to work with the planning board and the community to decide which sites do we want to go higher density. Where is it appropriate? Might be on Park Street, it might be on Webster Street, it might be at Alameda Point, it might be city owned sites. It may not be near some of our historic neighborhoods. It may not be in certain areas. So it's going to be a public process that has to unfold to decide which sites do we want to up sown, how much do we want to upsell them? Where is it appropriate? Where does it meet our needs? It does not mean that the entire city has to be high density housing. State law does not prohibit single family housing. What it prohibits is single family housing covering every inch of your of your city. So it's it's really a public planning process, which every other city in California does. We are just trying to do it under this sort of this this mantle of of of measure A. That, you know, I'm going to I want to jump in here just because I think I have some other council questions. Sorry. Did you finish your line? I just wanted to ask one question, which he was quite touching on, which is just, you know, I think our current housing element and the multifamily overlay, I think, Andrew, you would talk about this. It sets the density at 30 units per acre for the low income in order to comply with state law. And there's a little bit of a rub there about what we're not necessarily in line with that we have to kind of get to that jump. Is that correct? That's right. And then and then so will the repeal of Article 26 allow council? And I think you just mentioned this to set much higher density levels, perhaps accommodating multi-story structures, or are these these other alternatives? And it's through this process. That's absolutely right. And I think what it does is it allows you there are planning board in your council decide where you want to increase density and in what areas. And it's been, you know, it's you're going to have to accommodate your your regional housing needs. So you might decide we would rather accommodate it by raising the density on a few sites a lot or on many sites a little. They both work. But that's the kind of conversation that you can start having with your community. You've muted yourself. Is that over and out? Yeah. Okay. And then Vice Mayor and actually you had your handout. I did brief Andrew. I guess two quick questions. Just because you guys started talking about specific sites and whatever else, but I just wanted to really clarify the removal of a measure. All of it doesn't change anything, correct? Absolutely correct. That our ability to consider changing it beforehand. Okay. That is the question is if we remove measure eight, is our reader number go up because now we can accommodate more housing? No. Okay. So whether we have measure or not, the reading number stays the same. All it does is affect how we can decide to accommodate that, whether we have to spread it out and build a lot more housing throughout the entire city or whether we can build it where we have to. Absolutely correct. Thank you. Other Council. Thanks. Thank you for that. I need all the visual cues I can get other council members clarifying questions before we go to the public. Seeing no hands waving at me. Madam Clerk, how many public speakers do we have? And so far we have. Eight that are speaking on Zoom and then we have 26 to read into the record. Hello. And two more just came in. So I think we're up to 28. 28. Okay. So that means 2 minutes per comment. And then could you all say to the best of your ability, make sure that we're not double, um, messaging because at the last meeting a couple people pointed out that some people both spoke and had sent in messages. So to the extent you can see, you know, the same names, um, just one bite of the apple here. And after hearing from some members of the public who weren't loving that automated voice, we have the wellbeing thing voice of our city clerk and assistant city clerk. I said, if you you know, there's a lot of messages to read so you can go back and forth. But let's take our live speakers first, if you would. Thank you. Yes, the first one is Zack Bowling. Oh. Good evening. Yes. It's the first surprise. All right. Yeah. Mere council. I'm watching a website called Repeal 26 seconds. Educate voters why? We need a full repeal for 26. Just as an aside. But today I'm asking if you can change the proposal on the ballot item to strike all of 26 from the charter. And please don't kneecap us by leaving 26. That's three and 26. That's one and two may look progressive on paper, but it has very little substance. That's why some of the housing folks may be willing to concede to its removal without removing the ridiculous density restrictions. Nothing of significance will change, and we'll continue to. This is systemic racism enabled by the section of our charter. We shouldn't have to depend on state overrides anymore to build housing. We need to take steps to legalize housing for more than just high income earners, and a full repeal is required to do that measure. It was entirely designed to keep lower income people out of Ballymena. Saving Victorians is only a partial side effect of the time. Our call 26 came five years after redlining was ended and 20 years after discriminatory deed restrictions are ruled unconstitutional, adding just yet another way to keep lower income people and people of color out of Alameda . So I'm asking, please do the right thing. Please put a full repeal on the ballot. I believe it can win. I believe young voters will be out in November. I think we can make this work and I think we can count on the voters to make sure that happens. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. BOLLING. Next speaker. Gail Parsons. Possibly Galen Parsons. Just a guess. And that maybe your. Zoom needs to be updated. So if you could update your zoom and then we can promote you back to a panelist to speak again. So you don't miss this. Why? I figured you maybe want to make that little announcement for people. About. Everybody has to be on the most current version of Zoom in order to be able to speak. And if you are not on the most current version of Zoom will get an error message. When we try to promote, you will let you know you need to update and then we can put you back in. Thank you. Okay. All right. Miss Gamble. Hello, City Council people. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. I would like to respectfully implore you to instruct city staff to drop draft a ballot language to repeal Article 22nd floor from our city charter. The Bay Area is facing a catastrophic housing shortage for years. This is a fact. Because of this, any attempt to limit housing supply is irresponsible. The cost of living in the Bay Area makes it impossible for those lower income brackets to achieve secure housing. Many of these folks and able to gain footing are essential workers making minimum wage. If you are grateful to essential workers risking their health so that you can feed yourself, it seems absolutely requisite to accrue as much housing as possible, making it more possible for essential workers to live in the communities that they serve. Article 26 limits the amount of housing that can be built. This is immoral. Earlier this evening, Mayor Ashcroft said that providing housing is our top priority. Here you go. I believe that every one of those council has expressed publicly that they believe that Black Lives Matter here is their opportunity to actually act on this as homelessness disproportionately impacts people of color. Doing everything within our power to remedy. Remedy. The housing shortage. The moral imperative. How we can show that black lives actually matter in policy as opposed to signage and social media platitudes. As the community and country has seemingly determined that it is due time to face the systemic racism and white supremacy embedded in our day to day lives. Alamy We're going to hear this call about our elected officials. This decision is in your hands right now. Intent is not relevant. It is time to address the impact of Article 26 on our black and brown neighbors. It has systematically pushed them out of this community for decades. Please stop this trend. It is due time. Article 26 The Racist Stain on History. If you showed up at the rallies organized by a credible youth organizers and are willing to use your power to make these changes, your attendance at those events was merely performance allyship. It's how many white article 26 alt right along with Jackson Park and our shameful racist cannabis ordinance. And do the work required to move towards our city motto that everyone belongs here. Let's make that a actual reality. Time. Thank you. Perfect timing. Thank you. Next speaker. Zamora Cisneros. Welcome. Hello. My name is Sam Neto. Can you hear me? Yes. Just fine. Welcome. Hello. I am resident and I'm excited to hear that the city council is considering a repeal of Article 26. And I just I think it's become clear that, as Andrew said so well, our history shows that prohibition and segregation of multi-family zoning is rooted in discriminatory policies and practices, dating back to redlining with intent to keep people of color from white neighborhoods. And for anyone in the audience that hasn't had a chance to do so, I highly recommend The Color of Law by Professor Richard Rothstein. And I'm not saying that single family homes are racist or bad, but single family zoning comes with a painful history. You can look around at the lack of diversity here and how need to show how this policy has affected our community. I don't mean as a wonderful community and we had an opportunity to open our city. There was room on this island who welcome you neighbors and not just on the west side. We need to be a fully inclusive community throughout Alameda. I just want to underscore what Andrew was saying, that this is zoning, not like a mandate for developers to have a high density building next to single family neighborhood is just getting permission to allow multifamily development. And I also want to underscore there's market forces and we have the discretion review process and we're going to bring that to the planning board. So there's going to be a lot of checks and balances. And I'm going back to the example about the three storey building in Webster. It's it's really too bad that this policy has made project infeasible, not only affordable housing projects, but also naturally affordable housing projects. These are small and multi-family and product types are really important form of our housing solution. So again, we need more flexibility and I just couldn't agree more with staff, the city council members. I have heard some of your comments and Pastor Michael Yoshi that we need to challenge inclusionary. Hey, thank you, Ms.. Cisneros, our next speaker. Suzy Hofstetter. Good evening, Miss Hofstetter. Good evening, City Council. My name is Izzy Hofstetter. I'm not going to repeat the wonderful arguments from the other speakers, but I'd like to speak in strong support of a full repeal of Article 26. And I'd add that I live in a nice 1920 something four plex and we are good neighbors, and everyone in our neighborhood gets along well with the Single-Family residents and the multifamily residents. And there's no reason why housing, like the older stuff that I live in, shouldn't exist throughout Alameda in greater quantities. So I would encourage you to support a full repeal of Article 26, and I'll be out there canvasing and phone banking with other supporters. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Josh Guyer. Good evening, Mr. Gardner. Send me yourself. Perfect, Mr. Ken. Great. Well, I am so appreciative of the previous speakers who have laid out in really persuasive detail why Article 26, as enacted by voters of 30 years, at least 30 years ago, is racist, is exclusionary, is is if not by design, then then by by effect is and keeps our keeps people who want to live here. Want to work here. Who do work here. People who want to raise kids here. People who want to age in place here from having the units that they need to be able to do so. We I walk around alameda and it feels really it feels really integrated to me. Like when I walk around Park Street, I see people of all kinds and it feels really good. And yet there's despite only 5% of the population in Alameda is is black. And it doesn't have to be that way. It doesn't have to be that if if if African-Americans want to hang out in Alameda, which I think they should, and as should all kinds of people, they shouldn't have to kind of come in here for like a lark and then, like go back to another place if here is where they want to be. I think we need to make affordable for all different kinds of people because that's the kind of community I want to live in. And so, again, repeal of Article 26 is embarrassing. We can do better. We are better than this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Guy. Our next speaker. Galen has called in. So we'll go back to Galen Parsons. All right. Welcome his presence. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, council members. And I'm encouraging you. To fully. Repeal Article 26. First, the. Substance of Article 26 rightly belongs with zoning. Ordinances. The error putting it in the charter. Has been attempted to repeat it again in recent years, unsuccessfully. The misplacement. Of Article. 26 is reason enough to fully repeal it. Second, Article 26 puts our city out of compliance with state law and poorly. Positioned thus. To meet our state. Allocation of housing. This noncompliance. Is reason enough to fully. Repeal Article 26. Article 26 protected the Victorians good jobs and we now have a strong preservation and. Design review ordinances that did not. Exist in 1973 or 1990. Article 26 has done its job. Let's send it to a well-deserved retirement. That is reason enough to fully. Repeal the article. And finally, Article. 26 is demonstrably. Racist in its impacts. That is also enough to fully repeal. Article. 26. It is out of place. It puts us out of. Compliance. And it is. Out of step with who we are today. So let's let's. Be the Alameda that we want to be. And fully repeal article 26. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.. Ms.. Parsons. Our next speaker. Terry Johanson. Hello, Mr. Hansen. Justin Mute. Diego. Thank you. Good evening. They are council staff. Um, this is Harry Johansson, and I'm speaking for the Alameda Progressive and would like to begin by thanking Gavin Yoshi for all of his service to our community for all these years and wish him very well. The Alameda Christmas requested the council adopt a full repeal of 26 in its entirety to be included on the November ballot before COVID. The Alameda Press is sponsoring a Saturday vigil at the end of the Vigil Park and Santa Clara. We started the pledge. I will act to work toward the goal of creating a society where we struggle together with love, justice, human dignity and a sustainable world. I challenge myself and those in my community to take with us as we confront the many ways the black lives are diminished and are taken from us. I pledge resistance to state violence against black lives. I will defend the human rights of others. I will serve as an ally to people of all indications, regardless of their immigration status or face. I pledge to cultivate my own strength and resilience to make space for direct action and civil disobedience. I will remain accountable to myself, to my peers to ensure that I always remain true to this pledge. The ultimate applications feel to remain true to our courage. We must not suppose discrimination, which is inherited at age 26. This is the statue of Robert me. And it must be destroyed. And with that inspiration from the Desmond Tutu. If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. All are welcome. Black, white, red, yellow. Rich, poor. Educated and not educated. Male. Female. Gay. Straight. Oh. Oh. Oh. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Henson. Next speaker. Grover. Women Brown. Good evening. That evening. Mayor and council members, thank you for taking my call today. Hi. My name is Grover and I'm a resident of Alameda and also the communications manager at East Bay Housing Organization. And I'm calling in today on behalf of the membership base of MPO, as we're colloquially known, which includes residents of affordable housing, providers of affordable housing, and everyday residents committed to housing justice. We ask that you reconsider your June decision to divide the repeal Article 26 into two parts and put all the sections of Article 26 on the November ballot. Our more than 500 members are committed to ensuring affordable housing opportunities for low income people in the East Bay. Low income East Bay residents are overwhelmingly elders, children, people with disabilities and because of widespread racial inequity, are too often black, brown and new immigrant resident. Leading the repeal of Article 26 and the two separate ballot measures is confusing for voters. It increases the education and campaign costs of both the city of Alameda and supporting organizations to run two separate campaigns. And it is unnecessary. As a member based advocacy organization, we do not provide direct assistance or affordable housing. And yes, every single month the pages on our website that are titled Looking for Housing and Steps to Find Affordable Housing are visited twice as much as all the other pages. People in the East Bay currently wait years for stable, affordable housing that gets community investment. And some of our members were unhoused, living on the streets for years before they were able to move into an affordable unit. Despite our members that provide affordable housing, working hard to prioritize opportunities for currently on house people to come home. Each affordable unit come in a home for someone who needs it. Our region simply does not have the number of affordable homes are needed and Article 26 stands in the way of meeting that. That's time. Thank you for your comments and our next speaker. Tony Grimm. So that Mr. Graham. It's just on mute. Okay. There you go. Good evening, everyone. I'm here to read a statement from the Alameda Justice Alliance, which is the Alameda Justice Alliance is asking you to place a repeal of the full Article 26 of the Alameda City Charter, all sections on the ballot this November. This provision, which has barred the building of a legitimate and much needed form of the housing in Alameda for the last 47 years should have been removed years ago. Instead, it blocked the building of housing that could have allowed hundreds of working class families to remain as they were pushed out by rising rents from the tech boom . Or when 400 mostly poor minority families from the Harbor Island apartments were evicted in 2000 for Article 26. Some people call it has been used as a battering ram against those brave enough to call out these injustices over the decades. It's the notion of homeowners being a superior and privileged class in Alameda, a division that makes a mockery of the city's aspirations to being a decent and welcoming community. As our nation begins to wake up and acknowledge institutional racism in all its forms. We all cannot ignore the discriminatory, discriminatory legacy of Article 26. There's no more room for excuses and selfishness. The young people in our town are asking us for justice, the opportunity to fashion a new future not built on these false divisions. It begins with reconciling our past. It begins as dumping Article 26 in its entirety. The statement is endorsed and signed by the following alliance members. Alameda Progressive Alameda Renters Coalition Renewed Hope Housing Advocates. Alameda Legal Council. Alameda Firefighters Local 689. Teamsters Local 863 and the wing of the United Methodist Church. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we hear Liz Varella. Hello, Miss Varella. Hello, Mayor and Council. Hi, I'm my name is Liz Berlin. I'm Executive Director of Building Futures and we are a homeless domestic violence and housing agency proud to be serving Alameda in the last 20 years . I am in support of a full repeal of Article 26 and on the November ballot. As you know, in our work, we see every day the ravages of those kept out of housing, the effect on their health, their safety, their mental health, education. It's devastating. I must say I agree with Andrew Thomas. This is an historic opportunity to make Alameda a truly a place that all can prosper. And I hope for Alameda and then the folks that we serve that this path that's put on the ballot and it passes. Thank you so much. Thank you, Ms.. Ferrara. Next speaker. Sophia DeWitt. Hello. Reverend, do it right. Hi there, Tony. And council members. As a resident of the city of Alameda, I encourage you I urge you to follow the staff recommendation of Planning Director Thomas and direct city staff to prepare a full repeal of Measure eight, Article 26 and the City Charter, and help us move past the discriminatory legacy of this part of the city charter. You know yourselves how I measure A prevents the city from reaching its arena obligations, how it is at cross-purposes. With the general plan. And with state law, and how it has racially discriminatory impacts and effects. And it's time to repeal this article in its entirety. We urge you to do that to provide more housing opportunities for everyone in Alameda. And if that's put on the ballot, I will be helping to canvass and make phone calls myself, the Alameda City residents . I'm proud of the community and I want Alameda to live up to the values that we prefer. So thank you very much. Thank you. Our next speaker, Cynthia Bonta. And evening respond to. And you just need to unmute. Welcome. Thank you for this opportunity. Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. I support the total repeal of Measure E on the ballot on election day. So we as a city can vote out this exclusionary provision in our city charter. By so doing, we will be dismantling a law resulting in inequity, splitting our community along colored lines. By so doing, we are resolving the critical need for affordable housing throughout Alameda. Probably only in part, but because there is still much work left to do towards that end. But I want to be clear. What we are doing today is cleaning out our city charter of exclusionary provisions that were passed in the guise of something else. The result of Measure A has certainly shown it has failed its various claims, whether it is bulk traffic congestion, well protected Victorian development. So repeal all of measure a mental loss and discriminate on the basis of race and economic class. Need to do this to be consistent. With. Everyone. Belong here. A place of sanctuary. A welcoming. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker. Jonas Coughlin. Mr. Coughlin. Welcome. Good evening, Mayor and council members. I'm a 20 year Alameda resident. I'm a homeowner and I'm just one more voter who would like to see a full repeal of the same measure. But Article 26 put on the ballot in November is the right thing to do. And it's also good governance. It's a just thing because of the disparate impact the current charter has on people of color. We need more affordable housing. It's also good governance because Article 26 is a blunt instrument that doesn't belong in the charter. We need the refined, refined tools of zoning ordinances, historic preservation boards and commissions that work, and the full breadth of Sony ordinances to come up with the housing policies that the city wants and needs. We don't need this in the charter. So for those reasons, I urge you to put the full repeal of Article 26 on the ballot in November. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker. Paul Forman. Mr. Forman. Thank you. Good evening. Mayor Ashcraft and council members. Some of the proponents of fact, all of that I've heard today argue that Article six has a disparate impact on people with lower income. Most even say it's racist. Other commenters today, oh, we do have an affordable housing crisis. But Article 26 is not the culprit. The responsibility for the shortfall lies with past decisions of our city government. Since 1969, state law has required Alameda to identify sufficient parcels for low income development. I learned very early in law school that state law supersedes city law. Therefore, notwithstanding Article 26, Council has had a legal obligation to produce a housing element since 1969, four years prior to the adoption of Article 26, however, council was resisted and there was no strong state enforcement of the law. Thus, Alameda avoided complying with the law until 2012. This was not voluntary or triggered by a legal demand letter directed to them by a renewed hope attorney preceded by a very damaging lawsuit against Pleasanton for violating the same law. Surely city compliance with state law over 40 years earlier would have given us much more of the affordable housing that we now lack. A second factor depressed, depressing, or affordable housing inventory is our inclusionary ordinance, which requires a market rate developer to provide only 8% of his project for low income housing. Article 26 may or may not be a good idea, but it is the aforementioned city policy, not Article 26, that excluded lower income people from living in Alameda from 1969 to point. Thank you, Mr. Foreman. And our next speaker. Rasheed Shabazz. Good evening, Mr. Shabazz. Getty Images. You City Council Mayor George Floyd was born in Houston, a city which has no zoning, and he moved and was killed in Minneapolis City that recently eliminated all of its single family zoning due to the recognized history of racial segregation. The police power of zoning, as has been applied in Alameda, has been a tool for segregation and exclusion since World War One. So a little bit before the city refused to adopt the housing element for those who responded to my presentation of our measure. You know, I've read the source material from a correspondent for CNN today as a number of citations, and it builds on the research of scholars like Dr. Ross Pindell, who calls things like Article 26 Things of exclusion zoning reduces the housing stock for your family and erases reports of the single family detached dwelling and reduces affordability since it excludes low income families and people of color typically. Regardless of the intent article was generic at the time, some of the opponents expressed concerns about measure a damaging effect, and fair housing advocates oppose three legal challenges to the basis of the on the basis of racial exclusion, predating that last one by a renewed hope for in 1980 and in 1989 with the Henderson. And so my opinion and I read these comments about the will of the voters in some of the court findings, or I saw that some people don't want the voters to be able to vote on this one. Just a couple of years ago, they were talking about the will of the voters, as so urge you to support a full repeal and give the citizens of Alameda an opportunity to repeal Article 23. Thank you. Our next speaker. Alexia Rocher. Good evening, Miss Erica. Good evening. Marriage cross and all. My name is Alexia Rocher and I am in support of full repeal of Article 26. As an attorney, I work with folks who are homeless or at risk of homelessness in Oakland. So I'm quite familiar with the housing crisis in the Bay Area. I also read the book, The Color of Blood, that a former commentator mentioned, which I recommend people on this island are surprised when racist acts continue to occur here, such as All Lives Matter, painted on the cars of black families on the East End, or an elderly white couple almost running over people last Friday at a people dying outside the police station while screaming and yelling. And yet, it shouldn't be a surprise, since this island is quite segregated. And this is partially due to a history of redlining and zoning laws such as this. And as the previous speaker just eloquently explained, I'm Brazilian and Venezuelan. And when I first moved to Alameda on the West End, I also thought this was a diverse island. However, when we moved to the east and I realize it is anything but, so I agree with what many have already said and encouraged that you fully repeal Article 26. Thank you. Thank you. And next speaker. That is the end of these Zoom comments. Okay. Reading the public comments into the record and I think there are 24, about 24. Okay. Do you have your cup of tea next to you? Ready? Okay. Okay. First is Pat severe? I am very disturbed that you are even considering a complete repeal of Article 26. Just a month ago you voted 4 to 1 with your individual convictions to just put 2061 on the ballot. Now, it appears you've been influenced to put the whole article on the ballot. This will greatly influence the public's trust in our leadership. Next is Barbara Johnson. Please do not include repeal of Charter City Charter Article 26, Dash three on the November 2020 ballot. Next is Daniel. Miller. I am writing to encourage you to direct staff to draft ballot language, to repeal Article 26 in full from our cities. Charter 26, Dash 126, Dash two and 26, Dash three. Article 26 was designed to prevent black and brown people from living in Alameda, and it's time for this policy to go. Multifamily housing is sorely needed to address housing affordability and meet our arena targets by putting a full repeal of Article 26 on the ballot. You will enable the city to vote our values all at once in a clean, straightforward, cost effective way. If you seek to eliminate racism from our community, then you must start with eliminating racism from our policies and system. This is one small step you can take to show our community that you are wholly committed to making Alameda a truly inclusive, anti-racist city. Next is Bob and Beth Coates. Mayor Ask Questions, Mayor Ashcraft and city council members. It comes to our attention that the council plans to vote on whether or not to place the repeal of Article 26 from the city charter on the November ballot. We consider this an underhanded move during the pandemic when we are confined to our homes and cannot attend the council meeting to voice our opinions in person. We cannot understand the rush and lack of communication to all our meetings on this issue. This is totally irresponsible and underhanded on the council's part. We've been in Alameda since 1979, raised our children here and watched the growth that we have considered too much too fast. With a lack of forethought. Before our housing. Let's concentrate on traffic, infrastructure and our new homeless. If the city has a mandate for affordable housing, address it. Now, with building affordable cookie cutter housing first, we urge you to vote no on placing the repeal of Article 26 on the November ballot. Next is. Dan Dinneen. Countless mayor and council members. You have all received my earlier email tonight. I want you to realize that Article 20 6-3 in our city charter should not be put on the November ballot. Do not reverse your June 2nd, 2020 decision. Our city deserves better consideration and decision than that which was presented by Andrew Thomas. Do what's right and vote no. Next is Markey. Article Subject Article 26. I believe it is highly premature to schedule a repeal of Measure eight, Article 26, on the ballot for the following reasons. One There is plenty of housing for the well-to-do. As can be seen by all the for rent signs around town. What? Two. What is needed is housing for the thousands of people displaced by gentrification, not more gentrified housing. Three. The US is now in a state of flux due to the current economic crash and COVID 19. At the same time, there is a move away from California. Population growth has slowed dramatically and for the last few years, more people are moving out than in a major increase in online shopping, making shopping centers redundant and a move to work from home making office buildings redundant for the least cost effective way to house the relatively poor is new construction. In an article in February 2020, the New York Times found that each unit of low cost housing in the Bay Area averages a cost of 600,000 to build. Further, Allen modest infrastructure is already under strain. There are only four ways on and off the island, and adding more people will push the infrastructure to the breaking point and create massive gridlock during commute hours. Five. If office buildings and big box stores become redundant, it will be simpler and cheaper. Cheaper to make these edifices over in to apartment buildings in Alameda, much of Webster Street is empty and has been for some time. There is a large building at the entrance to the High Street Bridge that has been vacant for years. Redoing these buildings into low cost housing will put much less strain on the infrastructure and not destroy. Alameda Historic Neighborhood. Seven. Theresa How dare Mayor as Ashcroft, Councilmember Knox, White Villa, O.D. and SOG. I strongly oppose Planning Director Andrew Thomas recommendation that you are of diverse. Your decision of June 2nd, 2020, your decision to constrain the repeal of Article 26 to charter Section 2061 on the November ballot should be maintained. Any further modification may be placed on the 2022 ballot and still afford the planning department the time to identify parcels to meet the RINO requirements. Per those requirements, the subsequent rezoning is allowed to take up to three years. The pandemic has permanently changed our lives from how we live and work to how we do business. More and more people are working from home, and those that do commute do not use public transportation for fear of COVID 19 exposure. As a result. Future housing and transportation needs are not yet well understood. As I am sure the Planning Department is well aware, the Planning Department needs to consider this changing landscape and future urban designs to ensure that public safety requirements, housing, businesses and educational needs are met. While the architectural esthetic and small town feel for which Alameda is most beloved is maintained. Today's world is not business as usual. To now reverse and reconsider your decision to place a portion of Article 26 on the ballot will erode public trust in your ability to govern. Those who wish to repeal Article 26 in its entirety claim this to be a racial issue. The passage of Measure in 1973 had no such intention. Painting the measure as a racial issue is in fact a marketing ploy that fanned the flames of hatred and diverse Ziff Davis divisiveness in a town that prides itself on welcoming everyone . Indeed, everyone is welcome here. Strong leadership is needed to get us through this difficult time. Karen Lithgow, Dear Madame Mayor and City Council Members, I urge you to defend. Defer or. The removal or alteration of Article 2063 on the November ballot until after the completion of the upcoming general plan discussions. The density restrictions in this measure are necessary in certain parts of the city to protect the esthetic and livable features of our historic neighborhoods. It was these density restrictions that shielded our irreplaceable vintage homes from the ongoing destructions by greedy developers wanting to get rich with ugly box multi-unit buildings, taking advantage of those seeking affordable homes. I do not trust this current city council with the responsibility of maintaining zoning and tear down restrictions to protect our treasured vintage properties. We need the firewall of Article 26. I understand that the Council equates large developments with the potential for providing affordable housing for a lucky few. But if you were to go out now and survey the offerings among the newly built housing projects, all you'd find is sky high prices for densely packed townhomes. The long awaited site project, for example. Offers up. A half dozen townhomes models to purchase, starting at 1 million. Don't bother asking where the affordable units are. The salespeople don't know. The newly refurbished. And Admiral. Cove Townhomes for rent on the old base start at 4000 a month. No affordable housing over here. So where is the affordable housing now? It's located in the mom and pop owned rentals in our vintage homes. Check out Craigslist and you will see that the 1600 dollars a month rental I have available in my Victorian is one of the most affordable units in town. And yet landlords in Alameda have been vilified as greedy and subjected to the type of restrictions, leading many landlords to permanently remove rental units from their building or sell outright to owner occupants. These more affordable units are shrinking in number as a result of misguided council actions. What disgusts me the most beyond the city's council's inability to provide actual, affordable units in a timely manner. And the time is up on that comment. Thank you for next comment. James Snyder. Uh oh. This is for three people. Sorry. James Snyder, Sharon Snyder and Cynthia Lacroix. To the members of our city council. We, the undersigned, citizens of the Alameda City of Alameda, concur with the below statement and believe allowing this to proceed is an infringement of our rights and have. Our duly. Elected officials to act in good faith. It is clear that Mr. Thomas recommendation is not motivated, motivated by any material change in circumstances since June 2nd. The reversal of your four one June 2nd decision by taking the draconian step of placing full repeal of Article 26 on the ballot at the last minute and in the midst of an attention diverting pandemic, will reverse your earnest attempts to regain public trust. We strongly oppose placing the repeal of the remaining Article 20 6-3 on the ballot. Its repeal would place the entire city included our established, built up neighborhoods and retail commercial districts at risk of high density development. Next is Dan McDonald. Initially, I would like to register my disbelief at the way council have conducted themselves in bringing repeal of Article 26 of the City Charter to the ballot by stealth before the public has a real chance to weigh in. It's dishonest. More the narrative certain repeal proponents use to sell this is spurious and offensive. I'm seeking, of course, of the I'm speaking, of course of the thinly veiled suggestion that the article and by association its proponents disagreements and against visible minorities. In 1970 the percentage of white residents in Alameda was 90.3. In 2019, it was 48.6. If, as some allege, an object of supposedly nefarious Article 26 is to prevent visible minorities from living here, it's failing spectacularly at it. In reality, the purpose of Article 26 is to protect the current character and quality of life. The city in terms of limiting building for density, whatever you malign, which it achieves in this connection, the city staff evaluation of Article 26 and its glowing conclusions punch up zoning, which this repeal invites, have significant flaws. See the Alameda Citizens Task Force. Christian Citizens Task Force critiqued for details. These flaws are serious enough to put the report subjectivity into real doubt. Last, the proposed ballot language describes Section 20 26-1 as the prohibition against multi-family housing precisely nowhere. In 20 6-1 do the words multifamily housing appear. If the purpose is to prepare to pose an impartial question, why not use the actual language of the section you are proposing to repeal? Please review this ill considered rush to gesture that you are doing something. Next is Ed Singh. Thank you for opening the floor to comments on a proposal to place the repeal. Of all of. Article 26 on the November 2020 ballot. In lieu of only Article 20 6-1, which you affirmatively approved at your June 2nd Council meeting. There is no new information that has arisen since your previous vote to warrant placing a full repeal of Article 26 on the ballot. Article 26 has not been an impediment to the development of multifamily housing in Alameda, as state housing requirements partially supersede those in Article 26. History has shown that we have readily met state housing goals, even with Article 26 in place. Article 26 should be viewed as an important check on ensuring smart development in Alameda. Rather than focusing on repeal of Article 26. The City Council should be focusing on how to bring more affordable housing to Alameda. Repeal of Article 26 will only bring more market rate units and only a limited number of affordable housing units. Your focus, rather, should be on a comprehensive development and financial plan to spur developers to build affordable housing communities in Alameda. Thank you for your time. Next is M.D. Hall. Dear Mayor Ashcraft and Council Members Knox White Villa Odeon. Anderson. I am disturbed to be informed that Andrew Thomas is yet again attempting to influence the Council to fully repeal Article 26. I was in attendance for his initial presentation to council as to why Article 26 should be repealed. The presentation was condescending and less than honest. He never once informed audience members about the ability and ease for Alameda to build or create an accessory dwelling units on their property, particularly when they stood up and expressed a wish to be able to build an in-law unit for income or aging parents. Instead, he let people believe you have to repeal Measure A to do that. Now Andrew Thomas is back, citing the release of regional housing needs assessment for 2023 to 2031. Sadly, I have to question his motivation at this point. I would love to see his enthusiasm for accommodating developers put into some transit solutions. We lose the ability to qualify for affordable housing funds because of our low transportation scores. The public transportation at Alameda Point is a disgrace to the 500 formerly homeless living there that don't have reliable, safe transportation to access Alameda County social and medical services, let alone day to day shopping. We have an affordability issue, income disparity and sheer poverty. In Alameda. We have approved and are in the process of building more and more high density, high end luxury housing and only requiring 15% to be affordable. That is the problem here. To do this during these uncertain times of jobs and housing needs and without full community awareness and access to public discourse is irresponsible. Thank you. Next is. Morale. Grant. Dear Mayor and City Council members, it has come to my attention that there is a plan to put forward by the City Council to put the repeal of Measure A up for a vote. I would ask you not to include repeal of City Charter Article 26, Dash three on the November 2020 ballot. There has been a tremendous amount of planned growth within our city, and we have yet to see the full impact that these new units will bring. Many of these new housing units are still in the process of being built, and it will take several years to discover whether or not we have done a good job planning for the transportation and education and infrastructure needs of all of these new residents. I believe very strongly that this is the wrong time to initiate such a vote when our community is still reeling from the impact of the COVID 19 virus. This issue, Article 26, has been a very powerfully divisive topic that will take a great deal of energy to grapple with when and if it is brought up for a vote. I am certain that the issue will not be given its due attention. It if is put if it is put out to a vote. While citizens are struggling with day to day stressors of this pandemic and the race, civil rights issues that are extremely important and should demand our full attention. In addition. Uh oh. It jumped on me. Sorry. Can't possibly say I lost my place. The flood of media attention and messaging that will come out as an inevitable inevitability of the presidential election process will soon take center stage and will drown out real depth of dialog and assessment of the issues that should occur around Article 26. For all of these reasons that I have stated here, I would request that you not include the potential repeal of City Charter Article 26, Dash three on the November ballot. Next is Rob Halford. Dear Mayor Ashcraft Council Members Knox White Vela Odion de SOG. I strongly oppose Planning Director Andrew Thomas's recommendation that you reverse your decision of June 2nd, 2020 to place only the repeal of Charter Section 2061 on the November ballot, and instead place the repeal of all of Article 26 on the ballot. For the reasons outlined a separate cover by the Army to Citizens Task Force. This hints strongly at a disingenuous act that dishonors the public trust. That should be an objective of every public servant. These types of apparent bad faith and end arounds to accomplish one's objective should not be welcome in our city. Please adhere to the good faith agreement that was set forth with the people of Alameda prior to Mr. Thomas's change of heart. Next is David Buck, to whom it may concern. I strongly oppose the efforts of Mayor Ashcroft, Andrew Thomas and Vice Mayor Knox White to force the repeal of Article 26. While some changes may be required to make Article 26 continue to work for our city, a total repeal will destroy the quality of life that we currently enjoying this city. Any politician that supports the repeal is not acting in the best interests of our city and does not deserve to continue to represent the citizens of Alameda. Please work to keep our city unique and do not sell us out. Next is Gretchen Lipp, our dear mayor and council members. While we are all sheltering in place, this is absolutely the wrong time to take up such an important issue as changes to the historic 1976 measure. You must have good reasons for this move, and I think they should be aired in a public meeting. Members of the public would like to engage in this historic discussion as. Well. As keepers of the city. Plain. Flame. It would do you well to uphold the highest standards of political discourse. You need to safeguard the procedure in the most democratic means possible. Please refrain from manipulations and off the grid mechanization. Let Alameda shine an open discourse, encouraging participation of all of its citizens and refrain from stepping into the obscure dark side. Next is Andrea Magellan. Please do not include repeal of City Charter Article 26 on the November 2020 ballot. Next is Maria. Ballito. What is the limit to Almeida's population, according to four members on the City Council? There is no limit. Furthermore, there are many proposals for additional housing, but not one proposal to improve our infrastructure. Who cares if there is even more gridlock? Construction congestion? Not you, obviously. In fact, Andrew Thomas and John Knox White made the claim that more housing we build, the less. Cars. Less energy and less transportation infrastructure Alameda will need. Did they pass basic math in school? It's real simple. More people equals more congestion and a burden on all city services and schools. More new housing units equal more people, more cars equal more traffic and gridlock. It's simple math. Let me remind you all that Article 26 was voted on. Voted in by a majority in 1973. And it was reinforced with 20 6-3, again by a majority in 1991. There's been no outcry by the people of Alameda to repeal it. And we don't need the four of you to change what the thousands of us voted into the city charter. What you're doing is an abuse of power. It's selfish and it's self-serving, especially during a pandemic. You're doing it because it is convenient for you, because you're beholden to the developers and because you're willing to sell Alameda off for tax revenues and state funding. Shame on you. Next is Mike Van Dyne. Mayor Ashcroft's new reason for repeal of Article 26 is to undo systematic racism and achieve racial equality in Alameda. However, it has been uncovered that she intentionally injected race as the reason for Article 26 repeal as a strategic political calculation. Her strategy became a hypocrite when Laura Thomas, the vice president of renewed Hope Housing Advocates in Alameda, publicly stated that she met with Mayor Ashcraft and recommended the use of race to attract voters in the campaign to repeal Article 26. After that meeting, the mayor began to exercise that tactic. See Laura Thomas's June 18th comment in blogging. Bayport, Alameda. So Mayor Ashcroft, do you believe you can hitch your repeal of Article 26 wagon to a real American social problem and gain African-American votes in November? Are you offering any guarantee that any person of color will live in one of these expensive residential units you plan to build? Have you introduced any mechanism to measure and assure parity for people of color? The fact is that these housing developments, which you propose, have absolutely no guarantee of benefiting any particular race. They only benefit those who can afford to pay to increase almeida's African-American homeownership and population percentage. You should focus on reparations in the form of mortgage rate reductions or rent vouchers aimed specifically to the African-American community until balance has been achieved. Now, that would be a real solution in racial inequality in Alameda. The repeal of Article 26 only promotes your hidden agenda of more development. Next is Conchita Perales and she's sent a flier that says Alameda is for sale. That's the point. For more information, contact the Alameda City Council. Available now, thousands of affordable units starting at a million. These exclusive units are not for everyone. Guaranteed gridlock and longer commutes. New high density overlay plans for every neighborhood. Uninspired living box in a box. Architectural design. Unlimited building opportunities across the island. Alameda City Council promises to add thousands of new residents, exacerbate traffic and ignore the need for new access and egress. It's not about social justice. It's about tax revenue and state funding. Stop the city council from selling off Alameda. Vote to keep Article 26 this November. Next is Michael Bock. To whom it may concern what Mayor Ashcroft, Andrew Thomas and Vice Mayor Knox White have in common is having served in the Alameda Planning Department. So you simply see development as essential and you are addicted to the revenue it generates. You want to force the repeal of Article 26 in order to remove it as an obstacle to your development agenda. Please do not pretend you are fighting against social injustice. How can you not be satisfied with the 5000 housing units you have developed in the past five years? That's not enough. You claim you were forced by the state mandates to keep building. However, Alameda is not obligated to follow the state's recommendation. We need to fight against those housing mandates in order to preserve Almeida's quality of life and unique character. The citizens of Alameda regard our island as an asset just the way it is. You apparently do not. Next is Joan Moore. Mayor and council members. I strongly oppose the staff recommendation to place the full repeal of Article 26 on the ballot. When you walk around the beautiful neighborhoods of Alameda, it's always startling when you pass it. The big, ugly box apartment buildings that were built before Article 26 was voted into the city charter. I want to stop for a minute and formally thank the mayor and city council. Of course, I'm not referring to this mayor or this council, but to Mayor Chuck Krieger and the Council of 1973 who helped implement Article 26. It has helped to deter the crushing development of more apartment buildings in Alameda neighborhoods for 50 years, and it also saved our historic buildings from demolition. Those civil servants are remembered for their incredible legacy that they created for their vision. Our current mayor and council members will be forgotten as soon as they leave office and take jobs with the developers they supported. Next is Elizabeth Tuckwell. Thanks to all council members for allowing my comment about item six to be read aloud at this virtual meeting. Please do not fulfill the sneak attack of which you've been accused. The sneak attack is, of course, including all of measure A in a ballot measure seeking its repeal on the November ballot. There has been almost no opportunity for community input into consideration of even a part of measure, a much less all of it. If the City Council does carry through with this sneak attack, at least part of the community will remember, particularly at election time, while working and voting to retain Measure eight and as an inseparable part of that community. Next is John Spangler, Mayor as he Ashcraft and council members city staff Section 26, 1973, Measure. A. Has been a heavy, burdensome and outdated yoke around our collective necks since before Linda and I moved here in 1997. It is unconstitutional, wasteful and terribly imprecise. Planning tool. I might have worked for its passage in 1973 had I been living here at the time, but it had already outlived its usefulness at least 20 years ago. Since Section 26 is unconstitutional, it cannot be enforced and is moot. It is in the interest of good government since it is moot and outdated as a planning tool. It should be removed in its entirety in order to clear the city of Alameda from the threatening cloud of the state, withholding funds for our park, streets and rows . Please place the repeal of the entirety of Section 26 on the ballot so Alameda can move forward in a rational manner. Next is. Robert Farrar. Here is the future of Alameda. Welcome to northern city of Los Angeles. Be prepared to wait in long lines of traffic as you traverse this once great city. Our city council has decided to try and get 20 6-1 220 6-3 repealed on the November ballot. I have said it all along. Please leave the city of Alameda and Bay Farm alone. You can go ahead and build apartments, condos and single family homes all over Alameda Point. The state of California says the city of Alameda has to come up with additional housing or face reduction of state transportation funds. Has the city of Alameda asked the state why it is mandatory for a small island to build so many units when the infrastructure is not up to par? What does the state of California want the city of Alameda to do? Tear down old Victorians and historical buildings to make room for multifamily multi-unit apartments? How do other cities like Piedmont, Woodside, Hillsborough and Atherton comply with mandates to build housing? I'm talking about cities. Do these cities receive exemptions? And if they did, why doesn't our city apply for the same exceptions? I can understand and accept removing 2061 from the charter, but please leave 26 three in the charter. Next is Jay Garfinkel. Good evening, Madame Mayor. Members of the City Council. Various suspicious arguments have been and continue to be put forth forward as justification for repealing Article 26 from the Charter. One such argument presented this evening is the assertion that the number of additional housing units will increase by 200% is neither mathematically no factually correct. On the first point, note that even if and I stress if the number doubles from our current number, it will be an increase of 100%, not 200%. It's just one of those statistical misstatements that people through. Throw out. When attempting to manipulate those around them who are less than well informed. On the second point, note that the Arena Housing Mandatory Committee has neither settled on which factors to use nor how to weigh them. It should also be noted that once this process has been completed, possibly sometime this fall, the air bag executive and other communities committees will have to review it and take comments. As a result of this process, the final numbers will not be published until the end of 2021. Staff is fully aware of these facts, yet he persists in telling anyone who will listen and is naive enough to believe him that the sky is about to fall in Alameda. We should also be aware that even if we are eventually assigned twice, our current allotment staff has already identified land that can be used to satisfy even the most egregious mandate from the state. There is no way Article 26 can interfere with the use of land that staff has already identified as being sustainable and available to meet the state's demand when they eventually are published in 18 months or later. It appears to me that the reason the staff has been pushing to eliminate Article 26 is that he wants to be able to put infill and replacement housing anywhere he chooses in the city. Article 26 denies him this unbridled authority. Repealing Article 26 in its entirety will allow staff to do whatever he pleases without regard to preserving the current family friendly ambiance of our city. Next is Rosalind mcCorvey. We are an island city. We need to be responsible and address the egress egress issue. The tunnel is only egress on the West End unless you add another bridge to leave Alameda. We will have major traffic jams every day, especially in the mornings. Prior to COVID 19, the traffic is horrific in the mornings. I invite city council members and alameda is in favor of repealing article 26 to go out at 7 a.m. in front of the tunnel and see the traffic mess for yourselves. You'll be harming the working people of Alameda that need to go to work on time. Most speakers who want Article 26 repealed are probably not among the workers that have to leave the island to go to work. Andrew Thomas comment that increasingly a density will not increase traffic does not make sense. I recommend that we hire professionals to study the real traffic data and not make this a political issue. There is nothing wrong with building larger units versus numerous smaller units because larger units actually invite more families instead of tiny apartments for single tenants. I cannot imagine a senior wanting to climb a three storey building. Some of the high rise buildings being proposed in the shopping center areas will impact the city. The city has worked with Article 26 for many years and we have created many buildings with reasonable number of stories that conform with the character of our city. We do. Not repeat. And we do not repeal Article 26. The Council needs to protect existing citizens of Alameda and not try to make room for everyone who wants to come to Alameda to live here because it is impossible. Oh, and we have another Zoom speaker who would. Like to comment. Chris Buckley. It was said. Did you come to the end of the written speakers? Sorry, that is not written, master. Masterful job. And much, much lovelier than the mechanical voice. But. Oh, my goodness. I bet your voice is true. Okay, so we have Mr. Buckley. Hello, Mr. Buckley. Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Good. Thank you. I apologize for coming in this late. I have not yet fully mastered the technology of Zoom, so thank you for hearing me now. You are not alone, Mr. Buckley. I'm with the Allemagne Architectural Preservation Society and actually was going to present the official position, which you've pretty much already heard from others. So I'll try to be brief. We urge you to not proceed with the staff recommendation to place full repeal of Article 26 on the November 2020 ballot, and to stay with your June 2nd decision to proceed with repeal only of sections 26 one and 26 two as set forth on the resolution before you. We had previously recommended deferring placement of any Article 26 changes on the November ballot until after completion of the general plan revisions which have been discussed but council's action proceeding with repeal of just 20 6-1 4th November 2020 . We think is a reasonable strategy to address some of the more immediate concerns regarding Article 26 while deferring consideration of changes of 26 three until completion of the general plan process. And we would like to thank the Mayor and the council members who supported this approach on June 2nd. Regarding the general plan process. We think that some of the strategies the planning director outlined are quite reasonable and we would be inclined to support those kinds of strategies, but we really need to see them on paper and there needs to be an analysis showing the impacts of favorable impacts on housing supply and particularly affordable housing for those strategies and also other strategies. And we think there really needs to be this kind of analysis before we use a different kind of blunt instrument to repeal all of 26 Article 26 before we've done that kind of analysis. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Beckley. And that was that. Yes, we're all right. Okay. With that, I'm going to close public comment. But, Counsel, before I come back to our discussions and deliberation. It's almost 930 and I am going to call a break. It's 922. Can we be back at 935? Sums up at least a couple thumbs up. Okay. Members of the public, thank you for being here. We've we've been here actually since 5:00 when we started our closed session. So I'm going to give this council a break. We'll see you at 935. Thanks, everybody. Needed break. And before we well, as we start our deliberation on this item, I would like to suggest to the Council that we do something we've done a few times lately and suspend our 9 minutes per speaker speaking limit. Just because I think this is a very significant topic and we might need a little more than nine times, but that would take a motion approved by four of the council members. So anybody want to make that motion? I'm happy to move it for you. While I don't expect to use 9 minutes, I'm happy to make a motion. Say thank you. But I don't think I am either, and I think we usually haven't. But it's just kind of nice not to have to run up against that. But that's we have a motion by the vice mayor to have a second. Well, it's nobody wants to second. Okay. We'll keep it at 9 minutes, then I'll seconds, will you? Thank you, Councilmember Desai. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we allow ourselves more than 9 minutes if necessary. So, Madam Clerk. And any discussion from council. Madame Claire, could we please have a roll call vote? Councilmember Jason. I like. Hi. Odie. Abstain. Bella? No. A mayor as the outcast. Hi. Since that requires four votes, it does not pass. It was 300. Yes, I got that. All right. Well, I am going to start out and take part of my 9 minutes to just say something that I think is important to note. I appreciate everyone's comments on this matter. What I am taken aback by is some of the ad hominem attacks, personal attacks on staff council, where elected officials I'm not saying I endorse it, but we do get harsh things said about us. Mr. Thomas is an absolute professional with long history and experience in this field. If you have the opportunity to read the staff report, he laid out very clearly what was the recommendation coming from the planning board that studied Measure A back in January and January was even before the pandemic. And the other thing that I just feel the need to to address, because I very much support the democratic process and this is what we're going to talk about and decide whether to put an item or two to the voters in November and let the voters decide. Yes. To be accused of being irresponsible, underhanded, doing a stealth attack, disingenuous acts. One of the things I will note and that we should wait until the pandemic is over, until we can meet again in person. One of the things that I've noted is that we actually are getting very impressive public participation right now on the Zoom call. There's 52 participants that's just on Zoom. It was as high as 69 earlier. People are watching on Facebook Live. People are watching online the way they always have. I would say we have well over a hundred observers and participants. You've spoken in person, you've had your statements read, and we've had many more emails and letters come in to the cities. So you may not agree with the proposal, but I would take exception to being called irresponsible, underhanded, etc.. But enough of the niceties now. I just I just felt the need to to say that we did try to run a civil meeting. So who would like to start out with with their discussion or comments? Councilmember Odie. Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I appreciate the comments you just made. I mean, we have we have thick skin. So what I like to do is make a motion and then reserve my comments to the time when we discuss that motion. And my motion would be to direct staff that this council direct our staff to bring back the ballot language for the November 3rd, 2020 ballot for a ballot measure to repeal Article 26 in its entirety. We have had a motion by Councilmember Odie. Is there a second to that motion? I see the vice mayor as handed vice mayor. In the motion. All right. Um, discussion council. Well here. Yes. Councilmember, time to, um. To give our nine minute talk. Yes. Yeah. Since I spoke for all of you, on behalf of the staff, you get to take it away. Yes, Councilmember Desai. Oh, great. Well, thank you. First of all, let me say thank you very much to all the residents who took part tonight. Um, and let me begin from the outset, uh, tonight by addressing what I believe to be one of the major arguments, um, of those wanting to do away with Measure A in its, in its entirety . I wanted to do away with Chapter 26, dash 126, dash to 26, dash three of our city charter. Um, according to them, Measure A is racist. It is a racist tool meant to stifle diversity in Alameda. Meant to keep African-Americans out, especially out of Alameda. But here's the truth. Here's the truth. U.S. Census data shows that. Contrary to the measure, a is racist argument. The African-American population in Alameda had grown immediately prior to the adoption of Measure eight in 1973. The 1970 U.S. Census showed that the African-American population was 2.6% of a total of Alameda, 2.6% of the total in 1970. Jan Measure eight was adopted in 1973. Now if you believe the measure A is racist argument. You'd think that the 1980s U.S. Census would show a decline. Yet in actuality, almeida's African-American population doubled. Two 4.2% of the total, according to the 1980 U.S. Census. The 1990 U.S. Census showed another growth, 6.7% of Alameda. Alan Alito's black population did drop to 6.2% in the year 2000 U.S. Census. Largely because of a military base closure that occurred in the mid 1990s. The most. And then in 2010, almeida's African-American population went up slightly to 6.4%, the most up to date. Census estimate now puts African-Americans at 9.2% of Alameda. So as a percentage of Alameda as population, we have seen a steady progression in the increase in African-Americans in Alameda since 1970. Throughout all the different censuses, all this with Measure eight intact. The U.S. Census data clearly puts to rest the argument that Measure A is a racist tool meant to stifle diversity. Meant to keep African-Americans out of Alameda. But what is interesting is that even as Alameda is back, black population has grown in sheer numbers. And as a percentage of the total, African-Americans have experienced alarming declines, declines in nearby Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco. Between 1970 and 2018, Oakland lost 10,500 African-Americans. They went from 35% of the population to 27% today. Berkeley lost 15,200 between 1970 and 2018, going from 24% of Berkeley's total in 1970 to 10% today. San Francisco lost 38,400 African-Americans between 1970 and today, going from 13% black to 7% black today. So when it comes to attracting and retaining and let me repeat that, attracting and retaining African-Americans, Alameda has performed better than Oakland, San Francisco and Berkeley. Let that sink in. U.S. data shows that during the measure eight era, Alameda has had a better record in retaining and attracting African-Americans as residents better than Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco. We are a stronger, better, more diverse Alameda than ever before, even with Measure A. I know this because I grew up here since 1974 and our town has changed dramatically in terms of its race and culture. Can we do more to attract Latino Americans, Asian-Americans, African-Americans, of course. But let's put to rest the tired and false argument that measure is racist tool meant to keep out African-Americans from a millimeter. But let's not kid ourselves either. Measure A is urban planning by sledgehammer. Measure eight is not a fine tool of precision, like a scalpel in the hands of a surgeon. But when you look at its history, you see why this urban planning sledgehammer was needed and is still needed. Measure A came about in 1973 because of the planned explosion in housing on what ultimately became Harbor Bay. It also came about because, as others had said, the loss of of Victorian homes, Measure A was and continued to be that sledgehammer that kept runaway growth in check because an island we were an island, an island like Alameda with limited ingress and ingress and egress needs to be especially thoughtful as to how we plan our future. I mean, come on. If you remove measure, eh? You're going to tell me developers are going to self-police themselves and not. Pursue runaway growth at your expense. Right now. Developers are salivating at the prospects of even more housing at Alameda Point because of the forthcoming state mandate numbers that you heard about earlier this morning, this after the evening. Developers are also eyeing the East End, looking at South Shore Shopping Center, as well as Harbor Bay's shopping center. My fellow residents. It is measure A that provides you. The Alameda resident, our planning board and the city council. It is Measure A that provides that extra special protection that forces wise, thoughtful, well moderated growth. Do away with Measure Ray and it's down the path of runaway growth. So let me end by saying this. Even with Measure A, we have met and we will continue to meet state mandates. The state even recently certified our housing element. Of course, we're up for another one. Even with Measure A, we are actually building apartments. I mean, please drive down to a. Point and you. Will see apartments. Or drive. To. Sherman and Vista. And you will see apartments there. You will see in parts of Alameda new apartments that measure a supposedly stopped. But they were built and they were built out of a strategic necessity. The strategic necessity. Our City Hall legal experts figured out a way to keep measure rate intact while meeting state law. Finally, let me say, even with Measure A, our city has become more diverse than ever before as we are attracting and retaining African-Americans at rates far better than Oakland, San Francisco and Berkeley. So if nothing else tonight, please do not believe the line. That measure is a racist tool because U.S. Census data spanning 50 years says otherwise. With Measure Missouri, we can. Continue. To racially diversify and support thoughtful, well-planned, well modulated growth that an island like Alameda. Can support. Thank you, Mary. As we have, Chris, I think this was a great, valuable discussion that we had tonight and we look forward to November 2020. Thank you. Councilmember Jason Account Sirota, your hand is up next. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I'll say at the outset, I will try to speak quickly. So if I have well, whatever I have left, I will give you everything except one minute if you need it. So I want to thank everyone for for coming and speaking on this today. I'm not going to take a lot of time. I do want to just reiterate that the key thing is we're giving this decision to the voters to decide and I'm sure one of my other colleagues may talk about this more. So I'm not going to touch too much on it. But if all the bad things that were said about us are true, then this initiative will fail and we will go back to where we are. And if the voters do decide that they think that a change is necessary, then then they will make that decision. They were the ones that put this there and they are the ones that have that should have the opportunity to decide whether it stays there. So I don't want to get too much into my colleague's comments, except to say there's a difference between de facto racism and de jure racism. And I kind of interpret his comments as trying to say, well, because we've had an increase of African-Americans in Alameda, then we have no de facto racism. And I mean, maybe that's true. I don't know. But, you know, I've been reading a lot. I mean, I you saw my color of law that was referenced. And then I have this American Babylon. I actually had this one. So I pulled it off the shelf. And we're going to have these discussions on all of these issues in more details over the next four months. But this kind of talks about the impetus behind all of these laws that we have in the East Bay and the affects. So 1950. Alameda, 5312 African-American population. San Leandro, our neighbor. 20. Not 20,000. 20. So it's. Now I look at the 2010 census data. San Leandro is almost 12% African-American, 10,000 residents. Alameda said 6.1. 4500. So we actually had less than we had in 1950. We had Missouri. San Leandro didn't. Their black population as a percentage of their population is double ours. And it was practically zero at a time when we had a significant amount of African-Americans living in Alameda. So if we want to talk about de facto, you can have that argument. But the thing that to me is more important is is de jure. And what that is, is discrimination under the force of law. And this book and I picked it up again today. Look at some more sections. And I read from part of it last time we were here. And I realized, well, if I can say that all of these things are racist for half of that measure. And it seems kind of silly, and I couldn't say that for the other half. And there are things in this country that are coming down like statues of Brodie Lee that are vestiges of white supremacy. And I know it's uncomfortable for people to hear this, but these laws read this book, read this book. This is all about the de jure racist laws that have been placed in effect in this country, a lot of them here in California, to basically keep African-Americans out of white neighborhoods. So to me. This has been an interesting couple of weeks and it's been an awakening that there are pillars of white supremacy that need to come down. I mean, it's easy to fall down a statue, right? It's a little bit more difficult to, you know, take down a flag that people in Mississippi have been using for many years. And it's even more difficult to change laws that have been put in place to perpetuate a segregated society and a segregated system. And, you know, like one of the people said on the Zoom call, you know, if we're going to have any meaning to this Black Lives Matter and value black lives, then we need to do our step, take our our do our responsibility and take steps to remove these laws. And what we can do as a council today on this issue is put this before the ballot. So they're put this on the ballot before the voters. I just, you know, want to just sum up the whole idea of of to show your racism by just rereading a paragraph from The Color of law. And I know people are going to talk about this this measure and talk about it in isolation, but I don't see how we can look at it in isolation. We have to look at it in the picture, in the broader picture of what was going on in our country for the past ten years, not only here in the East Bay, but across across the country. Take it in isolation. We can easily dismiss such devices as aberrations, but when we consider them as a whole, we can see that they were part of a national system by which state and local government supplemented federal efforts to maintain the status of African-Americans as a lower caste with housing segregation, preserving the badges and incidents of slavery. My fellow alum. Even today, I want to get rid of the badges and incidents of slavery in our charter. And I'm not only voting to put this on the ballot, I will be supporting it and telling everyone I can that we need to repeal it. Thank you. And there you go. Madam Chair, you have you can have all my 3 minutes. And I try to live within my means. Thank you. Councilmember Odie, who's got a councilmember? Well, I see your hand up. You're next. Just unmute yourself. Yeah. So I want to start with before measure a you know, when my family came first came to Alameda in the 1960s. My grandfather was in the Navy. He could not find a place, a house for his family to live in because of the discrimination against Filipinos in our city. And it was very difficult for them and their extended family members to find housing here. And what I want to be careful of is and I'm hearing a lot of measure a. Is the cause of, you know, these disparate impacts, but it's more than just an injury. And that was a lot of what my questions were about, because there have been a lot of projects that have been proposed throughout Alameda in places , you know, on the East End and Harbor Bay, where we have seen these projects summarily rejected because of density, because of multifamily and really trying to to keep out certain types of housing that are affiliated or connected to, you know, lower income. Or affiliated with this concept. Of lower income. And I think we have to be very thoughtful about it's more than just measure because it's going to be about all of the steps that come after it. If we want to see a different outcome, we can repeal Measure A and continue to get the same disparate impacts. If we are not careful and thoughtful in how we go about this process and everybody really coming out and thinking about how we make room for everybody in our community. So I don't see this as the end all, be all, and I want people to think beyond this. I think we have to think beyond this. We have to think about what does the broader Alameda look like? What do we want it to look like? Where do we have these different opportunities to be creative? Because I do think there's a lot put on a lot of stress put on the West. And we are seeing a number of different things happen because of the pandemic. People are worried about whether their bus lines are going to still be operational, how these transit connectors are all going to work. We do not have a safe and clean way for people. On. The West End to cross over into Oakland by bike or by foot. That's something I know this council has been working on. We need to continue to be committed to that effort. It's an environmental equity issue and to be able to move around freely in a safe, safe manner on bike or by foot to have those different transit options, it's going to be a big lift. I also think that there's you know, we're going to have to have bigger conversations as a whole of our community in terms of reimagining things. We've got lots of parking lots in Harbor Bay, lots and lots of them. And whether you look at the business park or you look at around the golf course, Grandview Pavilion, all of these areas, I mean, I think we need to reimagine what type of community we want to have. And I think what makes Alameda Alameda is our smaller neighborhoods. It's the feeling that you get walking around and interacting with people in in space. And, you know, we can recreate that feeling, that pattern, that quilt of Alameda in different ways. We just have to be open to it. And so I want people to come to the table to think about that and to participate in the process. This is not the end all be all. This is the beginning. And I think that we need to really focus on the Alameda we want. To have. We also need to focus on homeowner ownership options for people, first time homebuyers, because, again, it can't just be rental housing that we're adding to. We we keep pushing for for more rental housing. That's great. We need the low income. We need the moderate. We also need first time homeowner opportunities if we want long standing diversity in our community. And not just racial diversity, economic diversity, I think both are important. So I will be joining the majority tonight in placing this on the ballot. I think that there's a larger community discussion that needs to take place in terms of reimagining the future of our city. Thank you. Thank you. Community City Councilmember Vela, I think, Vice Mayor, you haven't spoken yet. Sir. Thank you. Thank you. I, too, want to echo your initial comments about the fact that we can disagree, but we can disagree simply. And if that's your best argument, you really are making a point that you don't have much to add to the conversation. But I also appreciate councilmember many conversations on this issue. I appreciate all of them that were open and friendly. I read the data you presented differently. I don't think we should consider when comparing ourselves to cities that are kind of the national paragons for black flight and gentrification and the entire regional housing market pushing people out of out of the area. I think we can do better. And that housing is one of those places where regional impacts have significant issues. So every city is going to have to step up to address the the issues that we have to kids. It's probably too late for my kids at this point in time. I would like to come back and live nearby. But for the next generation, we need to do better. We need to create a place where people can get where families can actually start and grow and and maintain the roots that I think a lot of us talk about. As important to me, too. I'm going to be supporting this tonight. I really appreciate all the work that was done. I appreciate our our staff's considered. I thought Will, after listening to many of the red letters, you know, I think it's just important, again, to remember that Measure eight does not protect us from the number of households. I think Councilmember Desai did a fine job of explaining how council imagery doesn't actually protect us from the type of housing people are concerned about. It just makes everything very convoluted. And he says strategic and thoughtful. I would say we end up having to put things places that don't make any sense. Rather than looking at the places where we have the infrastructure that can handle this. So I will be fully supporting this and putting this on the ballot and look forward to talking with voters about it in the coming months. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Knox. Right. So has elected officials. We have certain powers and abilities, not as many as people think we do. I apologize to all my residents that I could not stop the fireworks over the 4th of July weekend. And they were ridiculously loud and long. Nor could I close the beach, but I just urged all Alameda residents not to go. And you were pretty compliant. But we have an opportunity before us to correct a 47 year old mistake. It might have served its purpose at the time until this architectural preservation and design review laws were enacted. But that was know that that's been on those have been on the books for a while. So now we have an opportunity not with the stroke of a pen, to say, okay, measure A is repealed, but simply to say youth voters, today's residents, registered voters. And I want every eligible registered voter in this city to be registered to vote by Election Day in November. You have the opportunity to weigh in on this decision, your voice, your vote, exercise it. So for all the things that were said today, none of that matters unless you get out there and vote one way or the other. But what this council is doing is simply providing the opportunity for democracy to take place. And I'm not sure why anyone should feel threatened by that. But what I have seen over the years that I have been serving both on the planning board and the city council, now as mayor, now serving on a statewide I'm co-chair of a statewide policy body for the League of California Cities on Housing, Community and Economic Development . Councilmember Vela sits on the same committee with me. We have looked at the issue of homelessness and the housing crisis in Alameda, in Alameda, in our state. And just because we've all been consumed by the COVID pandemic, which is a very serious crisis, and also the racial injustice crisis, which is all very serious. We can't forget the housing crisis because all three of those crises are interrelated. And so we have been under housed. And yes, it is true that we are losing some residents to other places, but we're still under housed. And so we can't lose sight of this important fact that we need to do a better job of housing people. And in the city of Alameda, we've done quite a bit, notwithstanding the presence of misery, but we could do so much more. And by the way, for someone who said he couldn't find the housing, the affordable housing added Alameda Point, there is a beautiful residence apartment out there. That is housing as we speak, formerly homeless veterans, among other low income seniors. And there is a multifamily apartment building that is going up. And if it weren't for the fact that we're all sheltering in place, we'd be out celebrating with in-person ribbon cuttings. We will we will do that. It'll be just a little bit retroactive. So we've been doing a lot. We can do more. And I, I want to emphasize one of the principles and I've spoken about this before, when we talk about homelessness, that at this policy committee that Councilmember Vela and I serve on, we have learned over the years that the best, most economical way to address homelessness is not to let it happen to. To begin with. And yet when you have a housing crisis, when demand exceeds supply, it pushes the price of housing up. People's incomes are not going up. In this COVID crisis, people are out of work. Their hours are reduced. They are you know, we've done what we can to protect renters here, but people are being pushed out into their cars, couch surfing and eventually on the street. We need to address the housing crisis. That's what I believe. So I will be supporting putting this measure on the ballot to let the voters vote. And I will say two quick things. One is that times change. We are the same city that we were in 1973. And we need to listen to the current residents and, of course, the ones who have been here for years. But some of those very residents who are long term, who've been here for years, would love to stay here, but downsize out of that family home that they've outgrown. But there isn't a lot of opportunity because since 1973, without jumping through a lot of hoops, we haven't been able to build those smaller units that people could age and place in the very community where they they raised their families and would like to stay. So I am very excited about this opportunity. I think it meshes perfectly with the moment that we are in, in the midst of all these crises. I am always wanting to see the glass is half full and the silver lining in the cloud. And I believe that truly people have become more civically engaged because where else are you going to go? But they're watching the news. They're following what we do. All of us on the council, I think, are most of us have held Zoom town halls, Facebook live town halls. And people have been able to ask us in real time questions about these various issues. But now is the time. It's been a long time coming. Mr. Thomas and I have worked together since I started on the planning board 12 years ago or more, and we were talking today about sometimes the planets just all align and this is our time to give measure a another another look. I think it's outlived its usefulness. I am very excited about the public process that will follow to look at how we want our city to grow and develop. Where and what way. Just like Councilmember Vela was saying, this is just the beginning of a process, not the end. So with that, I am happy to also support this motion and it has been moved and seconded any further discussion. Seeing that a council member decided you have no time left. Councilmember Odie, you have your hand up. I just wanted to say that the motion was was drafted, that this is the council direction. It's not adopting a staff recommendation. No offense, Andrew, but I want the community to be clear that this is the council making this decision to give that direction. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. So so, yes. So we're clear on what the measure is, what the emotion is that we're voting on to to place both Article 26, dash one in Article 26, dash three. Three outlets in all three. Oh three. Right. Because the others were were all discussed. Yes. Okay. All right. So it's been moved by the council members, seconded by the vice mayor, who's got his hand up. Go ahead and clarify the directions to ask staff to draft the language to bring back for us to vote, to put it on the. So it will not be on the ballot tonight. As of tonight, we will be coming back again into it. Correct. And I do believe I heard Mr. Thomas say that he is confident that he can bring this report back to the council for the next council meeting. Correct. Okay. Nodding of the head is good enough. Okay. Hands up. I got that. Um, okay, so we've had a motion. We've had a second. Any further discussion from anyone who has time left on their clock saying, then we have a roll call vote, please, Madam Clerk. Councilmember Daza. No. Not quite. Hi. Odie. Yes. Bella. Yes. Mayor, as the Ashcroft. That carries 4 to 1. Thank you. And then there's another part of of this item that I want to address, and that is that we can recommend going to the staff report. So. Um. Let's see. Can I? Madam Clerk? Yeah, if I want to. If you want to talk about the arguments. Is that the question we were getting to? Basically, yes. Since you're not adopting the resolution tonight, the timeline will change because. It'll it'll. Kick in after the 21st. If you adopt the resolution on the 21st, we'll set new deadline. So all of the related actions will all be taken on the 21st. No further action is needed tonight. So I appreciate that about the extended timeline because I was a little confused when we talked this morning. I would still like to make my recommendation of how for the council to consider about who would draft the arguments and the rebuttals and and then if the council approves, obviously we'd have to vote on it again on the 21st when the motions, when the directive direction that we've made to staff comes to us. But um, knowing that we have direct the staff to do so, we could have council members at least start thinking unless the city attorney wants to chime in and tell us that that's giving him a problem. Madam Chair, that's not a problem at all. The Council could at least start designating members if the council chooses to start thinking we will have to formally designate those folks again when we bring the report back to on the 21st and the official timeline, as the city clerk indicated, will run from the 21st. But nothing prevents you from having council members be sort of ready to go and have two more weeks to think about what they may want to say. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just so everyone knows, I checked with them ahead of time, because not only not only do I not like to blindside staff, but also I do remember what we learned as litigators. When you're cross-examining someone, you just don't want to ask the question you don't know the answer to. I'm not that this is really a cross-examination, but anyway, my my suggestion would be that and this is on the top of page for this staff report council that there's different, different ways there could be we could go about it. The whole body could draft an argument in open session. I do not recommend that. What I do recommend is that, uh, no more than it's, it's the number three option authorized no more than two council members to draft an argument and decide to have a combination of council members and or other signers. I think that just gives us the, um, the maximum leeway and I would suggest that that subcommittee would be, um, or the two council members would be Vice Mayor Knox White and myself. That's my suggestion and I'm happy to hear input from others. Council Member Desa Madam Mayor, a. Question to our city attorney Is. There anything. That stops the council from also designating a council member such as myself to lead the. No. Uh, I, I, I couldn't do it alone, but, but I would certainly love to get the imprimatur of the council. Good question. I missed your the introduction. Yes. Council member. The Council absolutely had the right to appoint one of its members or one or two of its members to the opposing arguments. And if the Council does so, that one or two council member group will get the priority under the elections code, just like the arguments for. So it is absolutely the Council's direction to pleasure to do that and the Council certainly could. The law certainly authorizes it. Thank you. I would appreciate that. Okay. So, um, so we've heard a suggestion from me, a suggestion from council member desired, um, direction from the rest of the council. Account for everybody. Thank you so much. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in addition to that, it said 2008 as a subcommittee. Those words were left out of option three that they should have been in there. Right. I'm sorry. Say it again. I was crying to the French. Authorities no more than to customers, to me, to the subcommittee. And option three just left out the words to me, to the. Subcommittee is a subcommittee. But I think that was just a typo. Right. I would I would imagine that to be. But what do you think? Everybody counts in the city situation. I know. And so that was not part of my part of the reports. I'm going to defer. Okay. Madam Clerk, do you see where we are at the I? It would it makes sense to. Okay. I think that's right. I think I mean, in both situations it appears it would be a subcommittee. But I believe. The distinction that we're trying to make between two and three is the decision about if you guys want to let the subcommittee decide who would want to sign or if you want the council to. Talk about who it would like to to. Sign, it'd be the same subcommittee working on the drafting the argument. It would just be. It's just for to. The distinction is. Just to talk. About signers and let you have the discussion. About who signs. My preference is to have the subcommittee decide. So I guess it's not an option for you then. Well the but yeah it is option three because if it were option to then it means you have to the entire council. Fine. And I don't think that's happening. But so you're you're saying a. Subcommittee could decide that's what. Well, not the entire council. The subcommittee can decide that's what they want, but. I doesn't have the term to say. But you said you were it was option three that you were supporting, correct? Well, it says decide and have a combination of councilmembers and or other signers. So it sounds like. Yeah, that's three to decide. So that's what I'm talking about. And I don't need to be on the subcommittee, but you know, I will be if someone doesn't want to, but I don't need to be. But I think it's fine as proposed. Thank you. Was that either subcommittee? I'm not going to be on the opposing one. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. Kidding. Okay. Um, other, um. Comments. Councilmember Vela, I'm fine with the proposal. I'm also fine with Councilmember de Saag being on the alternative subcommittee. Okay. All right. Okay. So we do do subcommittee. Second subcommittee. Right. Right. Well, exactly. Because it would be for the two different. Mm hmm. Yeah. So position would be trading places. Yeah. Okay. No more than two. So one should be allowed. Mm hmm. Exactly. Okay. All right. Question on that. Yes. Um, am I. What are the rules in terms of working with others? How do I go about doing that? Or is that something that that that is we could deal with off line work? Well, you can work with whoever you want. It's not a majority of the council. Okay. I think we're pretty safe. In that way. And I if you. Don't like it, but by the council establishing you as your own subcommittee to author, the argument against it gives you priority ranking. If more than one argument is. Submitted is all it does so that it's authorized by the Council, therefore you're the highest priority. And your argument would be. TRUMP Any other arguments submitted? That's what it does. Great. Well, thank you for fighting. You know, sometimes we try to avoid. Okay. Yes, I may add to. My mission, please. Yes. I also believe that the council comes every day FOX requests, which is also that he wants to be able to choose others like citizens at his pleasure to join him. But just like can be one committee, two would have the same powers. I believe that's what the request. Oh, okay. All right. Because committee one will have powers under option three, which is to choose additional citizens that are non council members to join in the signing. And I believe the same is being requested for committee two. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. Um, four. Oh, Committee two. But again, also under said paragraph three that the committee one and two is simply in the yes and the yes on the repeal and no on the repeal. I think we've got that. Okay. Any further discussions? Can we get a motion? Can we can we wrap it all up in one or vice mayor? I move that we create two subcommittees, a committee for yes on the appeal. That is the mayor and myself and a committee that is on the appeal that is Council Member Dayton. And it's the repeal. Right. As opposed to appeal. So yes. Yes. Okay. Um, okay. We have a motion by the vice mayor. Do we have a second? Second. Councilmember Ody has seconded to have any discussion. Councilmember Bell's your hand up. No. Okay. No discussion. All right, maybe we have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember De Sang. I thank. You, Knox White. You're welcome. Hi. Odie. I also thank you. I may or as the Ashcroft. Hi. That carries by five eyes. Unanimous. All right. Good work, everyone. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Thank you to all our speakers. Okay. We will see you in two weeks. And everybody start rolling up your sleeves. And with that, we're going to move on to item six. Be correct. Yes. The adoption of. Madam Quick. Adoption Resolution. Calling for the holding of a consolidated municipal election in the city of Alameda on Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020, for the submission of a proposed charter amendment to clarify the prohibition against members of the Council interfering with duties of the City Manager and other executive city officials. Authorize the city attorney to prosecute stay LA State law misdemeanors and amend outdated provisions, including utilizing gender neutral language in authorizing city council members to file written arguments for and against the measure.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending Sections 22.206.200, 22.208.020, 23.40.006, and 23.91.002 of the Seattle Municipal Code; to modify maintenance and demolition standards related to vacant buildings.

SeattleCityCouncil_09052017_CB 118971

Bill passes and serves on the amended bill. Please read the next agenda item. Constable one one 8971 Relating to land use and zoning, many sections 22.20 6.220 2.28.0 2020 3.40 .306 and 23.90 1.002. At the center. Mr. Curtin Modified maintenance and demolition standards related to vacant buildings committee recommends bill passes amended consumer. Johnson Thanks. I promise to be a little bit less rusty on this one. We we've been approached by the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspection on behalf of several different constituencies that have been concerned about the number of vacant buildings in the city. In this legislation in front of us would improve security standards to keep vacant buildings more secure, allow for buildings that have been subject to an emergency order or had two or more unauthorized entries within the preceding 12 months, and received notice from Seattle Fire Department or the Police Department that the building presents a danger to the general public. Those buildings would be allowed to be demolished slightly faster than they have in the past. And it would also allow a building that hasn't been occupied as rental housing for the prior six months to be demolished, pending the master use permit from the city of Seattle. In committee, we added some important baseline information that I think made the bill much stronger. Councilmember Herbold proposed additional recitals to establish competing, not competing to establish additional policy and regulatory objectives to balance the the approach that we're trying to take with vacant buildings, as well as better describe the intent of the legislation to respond to an increase in complaints and to balance out the safety and security against the preservation of the city's housing stock. We also added a section in the bill requesting that the seven Department of Construction and inspections prepare policy options and a cost estimate for a vacant building monitoring program that would allow us to expand the program authorized by the existing code and really give us a better sense of exactly what the violation of building standards would look like in a quarterly monitoring program. So those are some the elements that I think are going to be really important. Fundamentally, this is responding, I think, to public safety concerns that we've heard from a lot of community members, while also balancing the need for us to work with nonprofit community organizations like Weld and others that are very interested in the preservation of housing stock to make sure that we're walking that fine line between having a roof over people's heads who need it and responding to safety concerns of vacant buildings that are no longer habitable and have become a real nuisance in the community. So without I'm happy to answer questions that folks have, I'm sure there are a couple of my colleagues, Councilmember Wise, and I imagine Councilmember Herbold may want to share some thoughts on the topic as well. Thank you, Catherine. Just any comments? COUNCILMEMBER Worse. Thank you. First of all, I'm proud to say that we I helped co-sponsor this legislation, this vacant building legislation. I want to thank Councilmember Johnson and also central staff Kyle Friedman, the CDC director, Tom Wilson, Faith Lipson and Shawna Larson, who were very helpful in our office and answering questions. And, of course, Chief Scoggins of the fire department. The intent of this legislation is to expedite the permitting process of vacant buildings in response to a significant uptick of hazardous vacant building complaints. The previous 12 months policy has led to substantial squatter events and public safety issues which pose risk to neighbors, transient occupants, and the first responders who must enter into the building in the event of an emergency. In the last five years have been a 58% increase in citywide vacant building. Complaints in District five alone near Linton Springs and Lake City neighborhoods have been particularly hit hard by vacant building occurrences. In committee, I introduced an amendment to shorten the vacancy period to six months of waiting time prior to demolition. Every month the building lays vacant. There is an exponential impact on the public safety and health of the transient occupants and neighbors. This legislation is a huge win to address our city's imminent public nuisance and health and safety needs. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman. Words from Herbold. Thank you. I want to thank my colleagues on the Council on the plus committee and the folks who aren't on the committee but attended. And working with me on some of the amendments that passed, i, I, I am concerned that there is a, a balance that was struck with the old approach between valuing housing that still has a useful life. And public safety interests were we were replacing what was an objective valuation approach of on on actually looking at what the with the replacement value of the property is with an approach that may be a little bit more subjective. Time will tell when the development of the directors rules that talk about how it is that speed and the fire department identify properties as as being imminent safety hazards. You know Stsci identified this the current approach, the current valuation approach is a barrier to demolishing abandoned properties. And, you know, there are over 250 abandoned properties that DCI is aware of. Of all of the districts in Seattle, District One has the greatest number of them. And so I was really concerned when I contacted DCI and asked them how many abandoned buildings did they have on file that they were trying to do an evaluation process with and they were unable to do so and thus removed them. And they reported to me that. The vast majority of those 250 properties actually had not received any evaluation, so the SDR hadn't even attempted to use the process. Of the six that were ordered for demolition in 2016, all were successful. So in each of the six times in 2016 of over over 250 buildings, they were able to successfully demolish and meet that existing standard in all six times. I'm concerned that the current proposal might reward disinvestment and an abandonment. The reality is, is that a property that still has useful life can go from being potentially safe housing to really housing that is dangerous and unfit within a course of a year of being abandoned. And I feel the reason for that is that we aren't doing enough to monitor our existing vacant properties and hold property owners responsible for maintaining those properties. For that reason, I'm really looking forward to receiving information from SDC early next year to work on how how we can make more robust and more frankly effective our existing vacant building monitoring program. In addition, I'm looking forward to receiving from SDC information from them of of the approximately 250 buildings that they know that are vacant now, how many of them are likely to meet the new basic standard of having one emergency order in two unauthorized entries? And then also what their process is going to be to develop standards for the fire and police departments to recommend buildings that need removed. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Herbold, any further questions or comments? Okay. Please call the rule on the passage of the bill. So what I think Sharna Burgess Herbold Johnson Suarez O'Brian President Harrell High Ayton favor an unopposed. Bill passes and show so please read the next agenda item.

Consider Directing the City Manager to Prepare Analysis and Recommendations Regarding Reviving the Airport Operations Committee. (Councilmembers Daysog and Oddie)

AlamedaCC_02022016_2016-2515

Considered directing the city manager to prepare analysis and recommendations regarding reviving the airport operations committee. This item was placed on the agenda at the request of councilmembers. Dave. All right. Remember days ago, A.D.? Did you want to speak to this? Right. Well, thank you. You know, as indicated last time, when the members of the audience came out, the FAA is doing an incredible major overhaul of how. Jets, the flight path of jets moving into a satellite based system. And as a result, that's causing a lot of disruptions throughout communities in the United States, especially along the West Coast . Now, the reason why the members of the public had argued for an Alameda specific committee to deal with this issue, which is on a time limited basis, is because there are other players representing their own areas who are at the table. And right now, the congresspersons representing the peninsula have represented and organized citizens from San Mateo and that area to bring them to the table to discuss matters with the FAA on the proper routes of of the of the. Path of the planes coming in and out. And it's the FAA who controls the air tower. And for Alameda, we need to think about this, especially because there are other cities, especially including Oakland, for example, where their own residents are organizing. And while we as a city are on regional committees that deal with airport issues like the Noise Forum or something called Calk, which monitors the city of Alameda, Oakland Class Airport Agreement. While we are on regional committees like Cork or the Noise Forum, it's completely possible that members in those regional committees might not necessarily understand where Alameda viewpoints are. Specific let me say this at the last noise for a meeting, there were a lot of Oakland residents who came out to talk about the impacts of the altered flight paths. Residents from Montclair, especially, there had to be like maybe 15 to 20 speakers who came out. No one ever comes out the noise for meetings and they're gone. And they are talking about getting their own council members involved. So the question then becomes in working with the our congressperson, hopefully, and also getting this to the table with the FAA. If we go in with Hawk or the Port of Oakland, we have to wonder whose interests are being best served in that way. We have to remember that, for example, that while the Port of Oakland is a quasi independent entity, its its leading members are appointed by the council members from Oakland. So this is an important issue. And the window for this, for this matter, is a very tight frame because this is something that the FAA wants to deal with. And, you know, I and I think the arguments raised by members from class and members from the first know homeowners association made a pretty good sense as to why we need an Alameda specific entity, especially involving those persons who previously served on the airport operations committee, whose incredible knowledge of airport issues is just. Are reaching. Yeah. Just briefly. I joined Councilmember De Saag in this referral. You know what? I think it's a it's a short term committee, so it's something we can get done and get out of there. You know? One of the reasons I did it is because this is not theoretical to me. I lived for 15 years directly in the flight path, and for those that actually do that, you know, you can argue, you know, you got disclosures, blah, blah, blah, you know about it. But, you know, it is an impact on your your quality of life. And, you know, I want to make sure that, you know, we in Alameda have have a say in this. I'm. Rascoff I don't disagree with any of the comments about the impact and and needing to do something about this. I'm just wondering. That, you know, we we pay a federal lobbyist in Washington, D.C. and we do have. As Councilmember re noted, we have a congressional representative in D.C.. He maybe we have some local representatives there right now. But the I I'm just wondering, you know, time wise, how long it would take to get a committee set up and started. And maybe it's a we take a kind of a shotgun approach and operate on more than one friend at a time. But I, I would at least like to know what is possible to be done from a lobbying level, the federal the federal government, because it's I think what we want is to get some make an impact and get some decisions made sooner rather than later. So I just would like to know the most expedited way to do that and effective way. I swear. For that reason. For the reason that councilmember disorganized. Councilmember Ashcraft said as well, I would like to support this because this direction is to have this city manager prepare an analysis. And. And a recommendation with regard to stating this. Committee a. Once upon a time with action. So I'm curious to hear what the outcome is. So I make the motion that we. Have it looked into as requested in this Council. Referral. For a second. I'll second it. And I might also add that yeah, I think you know, it could all to get it could be parallel tracks of working with the uh, with a lobbyist. But I also think, and I suspect the city manager's staff know it worked closely with people like Walt Jacobs or Dave Needle, I mean, or Barbara to layer. They've got some ideas out as to how we might proceed most effectively. And and they see a table that will soon open up and is and they just want to make sure that in the same way that the FAA has been accommodating people on the peninsula, that people on the East Bay area, that perhaps we join up on that table, that that's been opened up for the people in peninsula. So I'd like to speak on this. And so when you're done. Okay, you go ahead. You want to go ahead? That's right. So I haven't spoken before. You made your motion, but I'd like to weigh in that I support this, but I'm not familiar with what the dormant airport operations committee was. So I would like it when it comes back that it brings whatever, however. But that was how it was composed, whatever documentation we have as to that. So I did have a conversation with Councilmember De Saag on this matter. But I think from our perspective, and I don't know a ton about this, just what I've been learning in the last couple of weeks, there are about six committees that we monitor, and that's very time intensive for our staff. Doesn't mean that this is not important, and I think it is important. And I think as Councilmember De Saag said, I think we would need to rely heavily on these citizen citizens who have this expertize. And I think absolutely, as Councilmember Ashcroft said, we would probably want to connect our citizens with our lobbyists and our representatives. But I just also want you all to realize there are about six committees that we monitor just on airport noise. And it is, you know, we have limited capability to continue to, um, um, add to that. And in fact, I want to add when I was in D.C. for that U.S. Mayors conference, we had a speaker come and say that the mayor of San Leandro was connecting with the FAA and she reached out to include me to do that. However, we got snowed out. So what she's tried to do is set up a phone conference to hook up with the FAA and stuff will be part of that. That might be an act for this. Share that. It just seems to me that it would be logical to probably join it. But and notwithstanding what you said, Councilmember de SAC, about the port having its own interests, but, you know, the airspace that these jets fly over doesn't just go along city limits. And so there is strength in numbers. So maybe we want to look at what San Leandro and Oakland and whoever the you know, our neighbors who are also affected are are doing and, you know, get a little stronger in in. Concert with our our colleagues. So I agree with that. All right. So we have a motion you want to make. Okay. All those in favor. I. All right. So thank you on that one. The next line be. Can we move to the special meeting? Is that okay? Let's just move this agenda item. Yes. It's 230 in the morning. I'll move to do that. You went under. February 24th. Yeah. Or. It'll be 230 in the morning again. I got it. We got a media.

Recommendation to authorize the implementation of a Lit Services Pilot Program for the provision of internet services for a period of one year; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute a Lease Agreement with Famous Dave’s of America, Inc., of Minnetonka, MN, for the lease of Lit Services, in an annual amount of $11,988, billed monthly at the rate of $999 per month. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_05032016_15-1327

Thank you. Item 25 Report from Technology and Innovation Recommendation to authorize the implementation of a lift services pilot program for the provision of Internet services for a period of one year, and to execute a lease agreement with famous Daves of America for the lease of lights lit lit services in an annual amount of $11,988. District two may have a staff report. Brian Stokes, our technology and innovation director. Vice mayor, members of the City Council in order for the city to provide possible Internet service function to local businesses. The Technology and Innovation Department is proposing a limited one year pilot program to provide broadband services are commonly known as lift services. This proposed lease agreement under the pilot program would provide these services to famous Dave's Long Beach. As the initial participant lists, services are including the provision and equipment installation, the management and support of all services that are required to provide high speed Internet access. These lift services will allow FEMA's Steve to receive the high speed Internet connectivity while sharing the same conduit as the city's municipal fiber. We are completely segregated. Segregated, and the city networks do not pose any risk for any type of security breach. Famous Dave's was primarily chosen for this because of their inability to obtain high speed Internet services from other providers. Also, the proximity of unused city fiber and a minimal cost for the city to configure it. Install the proper equipment on Fima Stephen's premises. With that, I'm open to any questions. Thank you for that. I wanted to ask just a basic question, but why don't major internet service providers provide service to that location? That is the Pike Circle. And there's a tremendous amount of enterprise going on there. So I'm a little surprised. Do we have an answer to that? That's that's a very good question you think would be very profitable. But we do not know why they do not, you know. Interesting. Okay. And then. Are there other pockets similar to this in the city? Yes, we are looking at other areas that could potentially benefit from a municipal run, fiber and connectivity. That's part of an assessment that we are taking. And as the infrastructure the city grows, it could be potential openings for other people to join in on this pilot. Okay. And sorry. I don't mean to appear startled. I'm just a little surprised that that that exists. But are there any assessments during the pilot phase of reassessing anything during this phase? Primarily for us. It's making sure that we have the capability to provide that type of service. We are bringing an additional capacity to our current broadband access and then we're bringing that over to them. So if it's something that we're able to maintain and that they can use efficiently, then that shows that it's been a successful initiation and something we would want to grow from there. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. And I wanted to mention and he's not here in the audience, but Mr. Schneider, Kurt Schneider, who's the owner of Famous Dave's. I'd like to thank him and his team for being as diligent as they had been in their efforts to get Internet service to their restaurant and hopefully eventually to the rest of Pike's Circle. It was quite a surprise for me and my staff to find out that. That was a black hole of sorts for connectivity. So Curt came to our office sometime ago and presented the lack of service and the great need to get it somehow soon. While I realize he was speaking specifically for his establishment, I do think opening up this issue to the light of day gives us an opportunity to make sure that the circle is served somehow, one way or another. They have done a tremendous amount to make that a much more attractive location for all of us in Long Beach and our visitors. And so I think working on getting connectivity is something that we should do. And I know you're working on it, and I want to thank our team that has continued to try to make this happen. And I'd like to applaud you for getting us to our current position. And I'm hopeful that the outcome of this pilot will be positive and that we're able to continue moving forward. I know that a couple of councilmembers have mentioned that there are similar pockets that they're aware of. And so it's a good direction for us to move and. Councilman Gonzales. I just want to say thank you as well to Brian and his team for staying on this. I know a lot of us have been prodding and asking you about what the next steps are, so I appreciate it. Do we have a map of the fiber that we have currently? I know there's been one kind of floating around, but I don't know that we have to have a formalized map at this point. We we do have a map of where Cityfibre is currently running. What we don't know or aren't able to yet to provide is what's really available, because we're not yet to the state where we could provide this services to other parts of the city. The primary map is mainly covering areas that we do service for our own public inter or our private internet such as police substations, the ECAC, other city facilities that we would want to grow on as part of that master fiber plan to expand and then decide, is this something that the city is capable of performing and moving into that arena in the future? Okay, great. Thank you for the clarification. All right. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of the public that wish to address council on 25? SINGH None. Members Cast your vote. Bass, man. Motion carries. Item 26 report from Water Commission and the Water Department recommendation to receive and file a report from the Long Beach Water Department regarding the excellent quality and safety of the drinking water in Long Beach Citywide.

On the message and order, referred on January 26, 2022, Docket #0158, for your approval an order authorizing the issuance of refunding bonds in a principal amount not to exceed Two Hundred Million Dollars ($200,000,000.00). The current conditions in the municipal bond market appears to be favorable for the City to potentially realize significant saving in debt service costs by refunding certain of its outstanding general obligation bonds, the Committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to passed.

BostonCC_02092022_2022-0158

Lucky number 0158. Message in order for your approval. In order authorizing the issuance of refunding bonds in the principal amount amount not to exceed $200 million. The current conditions in the municipal bond market appears to be favorable for the city to potentially realize significant savings in debt service costs by refunding certain of its outstanding general obligation bonds . Thank you, Mr. Clarke. At this time, the chair recognizes Counsel Fernandez Anderson, the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means. Counselor Fernandez Anderson. You have the flow. Thank you, counsel plan in case needs to be said. This is not my maiden speech. You should all have the committee report in your inbox. The Committee on Ways and Means held a public hearing on Monday, February 7th and heard testimony from the city CEO Justin Sterrett and Maureen Castle and Richard Piano from Treasury. This order requests for funding authorization of $200 million, which will cover an upcoming anticipated refunding transaction and future potential transactions. Refunding transactions are transactions in which new bonds are issued at more favorable rates than previously issued bonds similar to the refinancing of an individual's home mortgage. As of an assessment one month ago. The city has approximately $60 million in bonds that could be refunded, which would save the city 3.5 million in debt service over the next ten years. The refunding transactions will be credit neutral, credit neutral and will not push the current debt out. The council last granted refunding authorization in 2019, which has since run out. Granting additional authorization to total, allows the city the flexibility to move quickly to take advantage of refunding transaction opportunities when market conditions are most favorable. I recommend that this matter all to pass. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel Fernandez Anderson, the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means six, acceptance of the Committee Report and passage of Docket 0158. Mr. Potter, can you please call the wrong. Lucky number 0158. Councilor Royal. Yes. Councilor Roy. Yes. Councilor Baker. I know Baker. Yes. Councilor Borg. Yes. Councilor Borg. Yes. Councilor Braden. Yes. Councilor Braden. Yes. Counsel Edwards. Yes. Councilor Edwards. Yes. Councilor Fernandez Anderson. Yes. Counsel Fernandez Anderson. Yes. Counsel of Clarity. Yes. Not so clarity. Yes. Counsel of Flynn. Yes. Not so of Flynn. Yes. Counsel. Error. Yes. Not sort of. Our In-house counsel. Louisiana. Yes. Counsel Louisiana. Yes. Counsel. Let me hear. Yes. That's what I mean here. Yes. Counsel Murphy. Yes. Not sort the. Murphy. Yes. Counsel World. Yes. Counsel Oral. Yes, Mr. President. Docket number 0158, as we see the unanimous vote. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Docket 0158 has passed in in. Counselor Fernandez Anderson is exactly right. That was not her maiden speech. We are looking forward to it in in a couple of weeks. So just want to say thank you for that reminder. Counselor Fernandez innocent. Thank you. We're on two motions, orders and resolutions. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 0259, please. Lucky Number 0259 Council on Me here in Arroyo offered the following an ordinance amending City of Boston Code Ordinances, Chapter 15, Section ten, and establishing the Boston Fair Chance.

Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to submit a grant application to California State Parks, through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, in the amount of $450,000, for the construction of the Pacific Electric Right-of-Way Greenbelt from Park Avenue to Ximeno Avenue, at a total estimated construction cost of $900,000. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_02032015_15-0092

Thank you. Next item. Item number 14. Report from Parks Rec and Marine Recommendation to adopt resolution to submit a grant application to California State Parks for the construction of the Pacific Electric right away at a total estimated construction cost of $900,000. District number three. Can I get a motion? A button pusher. Okay. Council member Austin, seconded by Ranga. Any public comment on the item? See none. Oh. Just kidding. We changed it. Councilwoman Pryce and Councilor Richardson. Okay. And he let me turn this over first to Councilwoman Price. Think confusing. Sorry about that. That's okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank our Parks Rec and Marine staff for assisting us with this project. This is a project that the Belmont Heights community has been working on for some time now, and the staff has been very creative and trying to find ways for us to obtain grant funding in order to be able to complete at least one phase of this project. And I want to thank their team and also the new team that's joined us from Public Works in trying to get this this additional money to help make this project a reality. There's very little opportunities for green space that currently exist in the third. And this is an opportunity for us to bring some green space to the third in an area that desperately needs it, and to turn what is considered by many to be a bit of an eyesore as it is currently not maintained and does not serve any useful purpose. So I'm excited about this project. It has been a priority project for me and it will continue to be a priority project for me. And I'm looking forward to early spring when we find out whether or not we were able to obtain any grant funds. And I want to thank George and his team for pursuing this on our behalf. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on the item? CNN council member Austin. Yes. I also wanted to comment again, this is this is great. And I think this is a great move forward for the the third district in the green belt there. An examiner I used to actually live a short distance away from there. And I remember when that that issue was debated significantly over whether or not they were going to put a housing development there or keep it as a green space. And so to have this move forward, to finally have some hopefully have some funds there to to develop that that space, I think, is really, really great. And I also want to commend Parks and Recreation for coming to the council with this to get the authority to to go out and get the grant. Because I think there's there's some consistency there that we need to continue to follow. Thank you. Thank you. Any public comment? There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Motion carries seven zero. Next item, please. 15. I'm sorry. Actually, I request to hear. Item number 22. Item number 22 communications from vice mayor. Susan Lowenthal, Councilwoman Susie Price, Councilwoman Stacey Mango, Councilman de Andrew's recommendation to request a resolution making the month of February 2015 be officially deemed spay neuter awareness month.

Recommendation to receive Charter Commission appointments and reappointments approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee pursuant to Section 509 of the City Charter and Section 2.03.065 of the Long Beach Municipal Code.

LongBeachCC_05152018_18-0404

Great. And I want to hang out. We're going to do a photo once we get through all these. So congratulations to that first group. Let's give them a round of applause. Next we have a are other appointments and we are going to be appointing these other appoint appointments to some of our charter commissions. And Madam Court, if we can have the read the item. Communication from Councilman Austin Personnel and Civil Service Committee recommendation received Charter Commission Appointments and reappointment approved by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee. Great. And this will also include reappointment that we have. I'm going to read about the appointees and I'm going to turn this over to Councilman Austin, who will give a report from the committee who also had a chance to go over all the folks today. So I'm going to go ahead again and thank all of you that are up for appointment. We first have a lot of folks that are going to join our Citizens Police Complaint Commission and we are happy to appoint some new commissioners tonight. First, we have Diane McNish, Diane McKinney inches a council district, one resident and longtime community leader with a variety of organizations. She's been nominated as Woman of the Year by the California State Assembly and was awarded Woman of Distinction by Fullerton College. Diane was also, as we're aware, a member of the Long Beach Community College Board of Trustees and a former member of the Community Development Commission and is excited again to serve the city as a commissioner, very involved in the community. Diane, we're very happy and excited to have you. We also have Veronica Garcia, a Veronica Garcia is a fifth District resident who serves as the executive director of the American Red Cross, are from the San Gabriel Valley chapter and has more than 20 years of experience in nonprofit administration. She's also the former president and of leadership Long Beach, past board member of the Long Beach nonprofit Partnership and the Rotary Club and was a founding member of the National Latina Alliance and United Latino Fund. As we know, Veronica is has been incredibly involved in the community. She is a resident of the fifth District. And we're very we want to welcome you to our commissions. Thank you, Veronica. We're excited to have you. Four council districts are in Council District seven. From that district, we have Maria Norvell. Maria is here. Thank you, Maria, for being here. Maria has long been engaged with public safety in our community. She served for ten years on the Public Safety Commission and participated in the Police Chiefs Advisory Group for Neighborhood Watch leaders from 1989 to 2010. Maria is very interested in neighborhood policing, community policing and very excited to join this commission as well and serving in this new role to add to the many roles that she served on in the city, particularly when it comes to issues around community policing. So Maria, thank you for joining the commission. We're excited to have you. And also from the ninth District, we have Dr.. Thank you. Yes, from the ninth district, we have Dr. Joanie. Dr. Joanie Ricks out O.D.. Sorry, I forgot the last name there incorrectly. I'm sorry. Okay. I just know you with Joanie, so. But Joanie is a District nine resident. She has a doctor doctorate of epidemiology from UCLA and is a current is currently the director of the Center for Statistical Consulting at the University of California, Irvine, and is actively engaged in the language community as vice president of the DeForest Park Neighborhood Association, executive board member of the L.A. Long Beach Area Sierra Club and Community Lead for the North Long Beach Veterans Day Committee. And Joanie is just really involved in North Miami Beach issues as a community leader. And we're excited to have you. So welcome. And absolutely. And also on the commission, we have Dana Buchanan. Dana is a council district 33 resident and a business owner who has been recognized for active involvement in the Long Beach community. Dana has been a board member for the California Conference of Equality and Justice CCJ, where she works on issues around restorative justice and is involved in a number of local organizations, including Long Beach, Rotary Leadership, Long Beach, Friends of Pathways, among many others. And of course, it's really active but very involved in her business as well and provides incredibly delicious food with your with your other partner over there in your wonderful business. And so, Dana, we welcome you and to the commission as well. Next, we have three appointments to the Civil Service Commission. First, we have Heather Morrison. I know Heather is here. Heather is a resident of District eight. I mean, she actually is a former staff member of Councilmember Al Austin, which you may know her from. But she also is incredibly has an incredible rich history herself. Prior to joining the city, she is currently completing her teaching credential in special education at Long Beach State University and is a volunteer at both Jordan and Cambria High Schools. Heather recently completed six years on the Bond Oversight Committee for the Measure K and Measure E bonds for Long Beach Unified School District. So we're very appreciative of that community work that Heather has been involved with and is also really involved in community and our local schools. A very fair person. And thank you, Heather, for joining us on the Civil Service Commission where we know she's not able to attend. But we're also going to be appointing Suzanna Gonzales, Edmund, who is a District five resident. Two to the Civil Service Commission. She has over 15 years of experience in the public and private sectors, including her time here at Long Beach City Government. She's currently a government relations consultant with ex Duncan Klink and by and Suzanna has served on several boards and has a master's in public policy from Long Beach State University. So congratulations to Suzanna and Lasse. On this commission, we have Megan Kerr. Megan is known to us, of course, as in her other role as president of the Long Beach Unified School District. She's a District eight resident who's actively involved in Long Beach and the community. She also has served on the Commission on Youth and Children in the past, and as they've transition and kind of reformed as an organization. She's interested in helping our community grow and thrive as a graduate of Long Beach City as well as Cal Poly Pomona, and is very interested, of course, in issues to ensure there there is equity also in the hiring process. And so, Megan, we want to thank you for for joining this commission and R and R and her final appointment of the evening is to Mariella Salgado, who is going to be appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission. And Mariella Mariella is a first district resident, and she actually owns a district, a business in the fifth District and holds a master's degree in business administration from Pepperdine, is an advocate for Long Beach youth and our entire community through her volunteering with the Willmar City Heritage Association, the Alpert Jewish Community Center, and so many other organizations that she is involved with. Mariella is very interested in ensuring that there's access and for all youth across the city to our parks. And so with that and before I turn this over to Councilman Austin, let's give them all a round of applause for their great work. We also have a series of reappointment to the board which are all on this agenda of any of of re appointments are here. Congratulations to all of them. And let me just say before I turn this over, that if if we read a lot of names of incredibly qualified women, it's because almost all the appointees that were in this group are incredibly qualified, amazing women. And it's been it's been important for me, as I've joined in this seat, to ensure that there is gender parity and that we are representative of the full amazing talents of all our amazing women across the city. And for for far too long, we have not appointed enough women to the seats and. Once this group goes in and one more group that will be in a couple of months, there will be for the first time in the history of the city, there will be more women serving on commissions than men. And I think that'll be that'll be a good change. I think for a Long Beach for the first time. And so the quality of these appointments to all the women that are here, you're all amazing. And of course, to the one gentleman that's being appointed to, he's also amazing. But I wanted to thank all of them for their service. And with that, I want to turn to Councilman Austin, who has some remarks. Thank you. And as chair of the personnel, the Civil Service Committee, we met last week and went through and vetted and voted unanimously to approve the mayor's recommendations for committee, charter committee appointments, commission appointments. I want to thank the mayor for his very thoughtful appointed appointments. And I want to thank the the the appointees for their willingness to serve our city. The work that you have before you is very important. And we as a council value the work that and the recommendations and the work that you'll do on your individual commissions in those capacities. I've had the opportunity to work with many of the the nominees and appointees here and know them on a personal level. And I have full confidence that they'll do a great job. And so with that, I would like to just because the mayor spent so much time explaining and going over the bios. I'd like to just move the full approval of the personnel, the Civil Service Committee's recommendations. Thank you, Councilmember. And thank you for leading that committee to to get through all of these as well. There's a lot of vetting that has to go on through this process. And so we appreciate that. It comes from Birmingham. Thank you, Mayor. I'm also a member of the Civil Service and Human Resources Commission, and we did review all candidates. And I want to thank thank them for stepping up and volunteering because it's going to be is is not always a pleasant thing. And it takes some of your time away from family and friends. But I'm sure that the rewards that you'll get from working with the city to making the city a lot better is going to be invaluable. So I want to congratulate you for stepping up. And I also I thank the mayor as well for making these appointments, bringing them forward for us to consider and for you and for us to for your names as members of the new commission. So congratulations to all of you. Looking forward to working with you when we're in one capacity or another. Thank you. Councilmember Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think this is probably one of the most qualified cohorts of appointees that I've ever seen come in front of our council. So let me just say congratulations to all of you. This is a very impressive group. And I have to say, yes, I see a lot of women, but I really see the years of commitment and volunteerism that I see here from all the people I see around me. Susan Right in front of me, I see new leaders like like Joni and and I see Ebony and Dana. So many people here. This is a really impressive group, and I think that should be noted. So on behalf of myself, the Ninth Council District, congratulations to all of you. And we look forward to seeing many great things come from this cohort. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Councilman Price. Thank you. I want to make comments to both groups that were voted on or that will be voted on this evening, even though I know we already did the other item, I knew that we would have some residents from the third district, at least in the second group. So I reserved my comments, but I feel like it's a little bit of a ladies night in here because there are so many women here. And I want to echo what the vice mayor said. It's not so much that there are women here. It's that the room is filled with competent, independent, efficient leaders. And that's really what we need. They happen to be women as competent, efficient leaders often are. But I think that having you here and having you willing to serve and continue your commitment to the city in a different scope is really something that is a source of optimism for all of us who are here. So for the third district residents who are going to be serving on charter and non charter commissions, congratulations. Welcome to the policy process, the policymaking process. And please know that we rely on you to serve as the experts for the commissions that you serve on. So when issues of policy come to our attention originating from your commission or a subject matter that's normally discussed in your commission, we will look for your guidance on how we should proceed and the pros and cons of a particular issue, because you will have studied it a lot more and with a lot more depth than we will at the time that it first comes to us. So please know that we rely on you as as a source of information and guidance as we move through our policy decisions. I know that's always how I've worked with the third district commissioners, and I hope to do so with all of you. So congratulations and welcome. Thank you, Councilwoman and Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes. Also the same thing, a very incredible group of women. I'm extremely impressed. So many of you have said yes to be being commissioners, but on top of your either a 9 to 5 job, on top of your volunteer work, I see so many of you at so many community meetings that I think to myself, why are you at this community meeting? I know I have to be here, but you're here because you really want to be here and make improvements for our city. So I really appreciate all of your hard work. So many of you do such a great job at that. And on top of that, some of you are mothers. So I appreciate your perspective in that lens as well, because we know that we have a lot of work to do for our families here in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Mongo. I'm so excited that the message is out there. We've been talking about more residents. Of the fifth District volunteering. For commissions. This is the most applicants we've had in this category in a long time. And so I think that for you guys to rise to the top is a real accomplishment. And I look forward to many more opportunities for you to have more fifth District neighbors joining you on some of these commissions. So great work and thank you. And it was a really big candidate pool this time because we've really been pushing commissioners. So thank you. Councilman Andrews. Yes. I want to thank also every one of you who stuck in there and decide to accept these appointees, because the fact that when you speak about the young women, that what is so exciting to me is that I hear and listen to your your due diligence for sticking to it. And it's you because most of you individuals have your masters, your doctors. I mean, that's kind of saying something and you want to get on a commission. I mean, that takes time also. So I just want to commend every one of you to keep up the good work. I hope the young kids are looking at this because you guys, this is work. And I hope you know what you're getting into. Congratulations to most of you. Thank you. And the last thing I'll say, because I think it was mentioned is the amazing part about this last group of of amazing appointees is once we put out that that we really want more amazing women to apply, we've never received so many applications from just qualified, experienced, amazing people. The amount of applications that received we received from women was more than we've ever received because of the strong interest. And sometimes you just seen a need to put it out there and make the ask. And we were just so impressed. And so just thank you. Thank you for serving and we look forward to your leadership. There's a I see no public comment on this issue. We also have the reappointment as part of this. And so, members, please go ahead and cast your vote on this. Motion carries. Great. Well, congratulations. And we're going to do like we traditionally do is going to do a photo. And so I'm going to we're going to ask all the kind of all the commissioners that are whether you got appointed or reappointed to kind of come on the staircase and we're going to councils and come on the staircase, we're going to take it. So we all get in. So just somewhere on the stairs right there. Thank you. That you didn't exercise because. Does he mean, like, right here? Yeah. Just get him on this one. More people on the. Registry and. People I don't know. Great, sir. Thank you to everybody. Good working on it. Good to see you again. Come on in. I'm just going to look at the way you look in here. Everybody, everybody, everybody. Lean out a little. A little bit. Every little guy here. All right? Everybody can see me. Got to get to. She passed away. Thank you, guys. Thank you very much. Internet. Send me your pictures. I trying to have my mental disorder. You know, my life. His name is David. Congratulations. I didn't work out. I. Well. Know, we've talked about this idea and I help to. Guess. I know that. Okay. We're going to continue the meeting, so I'm going to ask everyone to please exit quietly. And so we can do our conversations outside so we can continue on with the meeting. Okay. We had a request to move up item 20, which is from Councilman Al Austin. Madam Clerk.

AN ORDINANCE authorizing, in 2016, acceptance of funding from non-City sources; authorizing the heads of the Executive Department, Seattle Department of Transportation, Seattle Fire Department, and Seattle Police Department to accept specified grants and private funding and to execute, deliver, and perform corresponding agreements; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_11212016_CB 118842

The report at the Select Budget Committee Gender M's went into Council 118 842 authorizing and is under 16 accepting of funding from non city sources. The committee recommends the bill pass agenda item to council 118 843 amending ordinance 124 927, which adopted the 2016 budget. The committee recommends the bill passes amended. Okay. Chair Burgess. This is a matter of process. I'll still turn to you and no comment is always appropriate. Okay. Any comments from my colleagues? Please call the role on the passage of the of agenda item number one Herbold. Yes. Johnson. I was. I. O'BRIEN So aren't I. Bagshaw Burgess, I. Gonzalez, President Herrell I nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passed and chair of Senate Please call the roll call on item number two. Herbold Johnson Suarez. O'Brien. So, Sergeant. Bagshaw Burgess Gonzalez President Harrell nine in favor nine opposed. The bill passed and chose sign it next to our four file so please read click files and items three and four.

Recommendation to adopt resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2019 Salary Resolution to revise the salary range for Gas Field Technician II and III and Gas Construction Worker III. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_01222019_19-0061

Now. Can we move on to item 20 4:00, please, with that item? Item 24 is a report from Human Resources. Recommendation to adopt a resolution amending the fiscal year 2019. Salary resolution to revise the salary range for gas field technician two and three and gas construction worker three city wide. And you have a report on that? Sure. We have one. Our H.R. director, Alex Bass. Was and Dana Anderson. Good evening, vice mayor and council. Members Dana Anderson is. Going to give a brief report and we'll be here if you have any questions. Speaker three. Good afternoon. Honorable Vice Mayor and City Council. The salary resolution creates certain offices and positions of employment in the city and faces the amount of compensation by incorporating the city's personnel ordinance, civil service rules and regulations and the applicable labor. Use. As a result of a meeting of a process with the Association of Long Beach Employees over the Energy Resources Department's creation of new classifications. Staff request that Council adopt the attached salary resolution amendment with which reflect the following changes increasing the salary range of the gas field technician two by 2.29%. And gray level three by 2.19%. To align the salary commensurate with the duties. Increasing the salary range of the gas construction worker three by 1.54%. To reestablish internal equity within the Energy Resources. Department, among. The field crews. It is the staff request the Council adopt the salary resolution amendment, and I am available to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Any public comment on this council during the election? Okay, Councilman Pearce. Okay, fine. Will you please take a vote?

Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Add New and to Revise Existing Planning, Building and Public Works Fees. (Building 481001 and Public Works 4210310)

AlamedaCC_04162019_2019-6738

Okay. Thank you. And thanks for all the good work, all of you out there and staff and also the public for all your great input. Okay. We are moving on to six C. Public hearing to consider adoption of resolution amending Master P resolution number 12191 to add new and revise existing planning, building and public works fees. You're back. I'm back. I'm just doing that. I'm just going to do the Vanna White portion here. This is. I'm going to Madam Chair Council. And for Thomas, what we have before you tonight is a public hearing to consider adoption of a resolution amending our master fee resolution to add new and revised planning, building and public works fees. This is a required exercise. We charge fees for services under state law. We have to check in on those fees every five years. We have to make sure in that study that we are not overcharging. This is a fee for service. It's not a fee to make money. It's a fee to cover the costs of providing a service to people who need permits under either local or state law to make improvements to their property. We also want to check to make sure we're not under charging under council. Council policy is to make sure that we are getting cost recovery. So if somebody needs a service, they need to come to city hall to get a permit or a service. We need to make sure that we are accurately charging them for the cost of that service so that the general fund or that other residents of the city through their general fund are not sort of subsidizing those costs for them. So that's what we're doing. We're checking to make sure that our fees are accurate. And once again, these are fees are not designed to make the city money. These are just to cover the cost of a service. We did this this we do this every five years this year. We did it in partnership with public works. So what you have is planning building, which is the planning building and Transportation Department. But we also did it joined forces with public works because they needed to update their fees as well. This was an important exercise because there's really probably no two departments in Alameda that work more closely together. I mean, most projects and any projects of any size require permits from both planning, building and public works. So we want to make that process as seamless as possible for the for the customer. And so we also tried to sort of make sure that our fee structure works well together. Something else that I know this is important to the council and something we were working on constantly and also causes the need for adjustments in fees . We're constantly working on efficiencies. How do we make our processes more streamlined? How do we make it more efficient? This reduces the cost of the fees. It also just makes us all much more productive and makes the experience for the customer just much better. And you know, it's good for both the city. We meant spend less staff time processing permits and it's good for the customer. They they get their permits faster and they spend less, less to get them. I'm going to now turn this over to Greg McFadden, our building official, who has been here even longer than I have and has been through this process, I think four times. He's going to talk a little bit about the planning and building changes. And then Scott Wickstrom, your capable city engineer, is going to come up and take us. There is take a couple of minutes to talk about the public works fees and what's changed there. We're all available to answer questions if you have any. Thank you, Mr. Thomas again. Gaming getting fancy building official quickly. The building fees were currently when we did the fee study and when we did the fee study, we look at all of our fees and we talk to staff and we look at how long it takes to do the process, processing the permanent, the counter inspections, the whole gamut. And so that's what we've been doing for the last few months, is looking at those, figuring out what it takes to do a permit and then figuring out based on that, what, what we need to charge based on, say, we've determined that the building department is currently recovering about 80% of their fees, their costs. We were charging an hourly rate of about $156. We're looking at charge of $200. There's not a lot of changes to the building fees that pretty say we made a few we added a couple, but not a lot of changes. The increases really for building are were to code cycles since the last fee study. One of the big changes that's come into play is the green building code, which has added quite a bit of new requirements on both residential commercial buildings. So there's more time involved in inspections and planning check and and staff cost increase over five years. So that's where you get the increase in the building code planning has gone from a 60% cost covering up 200%. Their hourly fee would change from $184 to $216. And our planning has done some more or more significant changes. One of the main ones is going from more deposits to more flat fees so that there's a surety of what you're being charged when you come in for a permit. So you get a deposit and it's sort of out there and you don't really know. There's a lot of staff time in tracking the time and then billing sort of flat fees. And we're able to do this by looking at what we've done over the past five years has been particularly busy the last five years. We have some good numbers, so we were able to determine what those flatfish could be. So planning just got a lot more flat fees. We've done some streamlining, looked at items that we don't need to do as significant a review on. We're instituting some online permitting from a building standpoint and from planning standpoint. We take a lot of plans in electronically any of the big projects we've done, all the side projects have been submitted electronically. We're not taking in the big rolls of plans until the end when we need a copy for inspectors in the staff. So we've cut down a lot on the planning. We wish we had done that with Domani because we have some enormous rolls in the vault waiting to go. But they've been there for, as you say, quite a while. That's the big changes in planning building. I'm going to turn it over to Scott. Good evening, madam, and members of the Council. My name's Scott Wickstrom, City Engineer. I'll talk briefly about the changes to the Public Works Office. We do work closely with planning and building. However, we're quite a bit different in terms of the scope of projects that we look at. We very much are narrow to public right away and while building will issue well over 3000 permits per year, planning looks at over 500 some odd applications and various permit reviews. We have about 40 ongoing projects impact the public right away. So what we're trying to do with this fee studying the changes in here is actually go the opposite direction of planning department and from a fixed fee and doing more towards hourly based. These 40 projects are really the big projects are the site there are the new warehouses out on Harbor Bay for one of the challenge projects and aluminum arena. It's hard to really judge what the scope of that work is going to be. The best way to accurately collect our costs is to basically come up with a fee study and then bill hourly for our efforts. Our rate does increase from 182 to $192 per hour and following a similar methodology that the other departments were done. One thing that we are making a bit of a departure and we are looking to explicitly subsidize some permits are for encroachment permits for residential properties. If you have a broken flag, a concrete or a couple of broken flags concrete up front, most homeowners are find it to be very expensive to one hire the contractor. One of the things that we realize from our standpoint when we go through and also inspect that work and plan, check and go through all the reviews in the process because of the liability that we incur from the city, it takes a fair amount of time and effort for us to the point where that cost of our permit would be almost equal to the cost of the improvement, which means that the work gets done on Saturday or Sunday without benefit of a permit, without benefit of inspection, and not necessarily to city standards. So we are making a move to explicitly subsidize that. It's a relatively small proportion of the amount of work that we do in a relatively small amount of year, the total cost recovery that we do. Thank you very much. Does anyone have any questions of staff? And we have no public comments. So council discussion. Did you have a staff question? I can ask it under discussion. You can ask it now. You're on. Site. And I spoke with the city manager about this. I well, since we're in discussion, I'll say first up, this is a great report, makes the case for how the fees that you're suggesting make sense from a cost recovery point of view. What I found missing in the report was who is being impacted by this and what is that impact? I appreciate our city engineers pointing out that the public works fees are really mostly very large projects for the most part, etc. So on the planning and building fees, can we do we have some idea of that? These are everybody, right? That was what you told me earlier. But what the impact of this increase is to a a norm, you know, a homeowner who is renovating your bathroom. Absolutely. You can sort of decipher it from the tables. But what thank you for the heads up. Greg was able to come up with sort of some simple projects, and there's a handout here that. You're better deciphering than I think. So we we did we put together three fairly typical projects that we see come to the counter and looked at what the current planning fee planning building fees would be and what the proposed would be. So the first one is a residential addition, 450 square feet that a $75,000 valuation design reviews required. So the current design review fee is $3,000 going forward as a flat fee, it's a 2860 filing fee goes up from 208 to 264. You can see planned check goes up, inspection goes up a bit. So the total cost goes from about 5100 to almost 50 $600. So that's the impact on that type of project. Commercial tenant improvement. Nonstructural says no new structural walls 2500 square feet with a window change. So in this case we have design review exemption. It still gets looked at to make sure it's consistent with the guidelines. But there's there's no design review process, $150,000 valuation. You can see the design review fee went up a bit. Filing stays the same as the previous example. Planned check is pretty flat and building inspection goes up about $400. So we've got about a 600, 550, $600 increase in that permit. The last one is a bigger project, new multi-family residential construction, four story 5200 square feet, $1.4 million on two acres with design review. This would be consistent with one of the buildings at BLOCK nine. Inside a design review was a $500 fee with time and materials $184 an hour. We'd be looking to have a flat fee or a initial fee of 2868 within the time materials at $216 an hour. So the real change there is slightly larger flat fee, with an increase in the hourly cost building permit inspections go up again based on that and the total cost is up about $3,000. That's just an example of three that we came up with. Thank you. I so first off, I mean, I asked just everybody in the business. I asked this question about 330 this year. Appreciate how quickly and how detailed you got the design review is that the from the from the looks of it it doesn't matter whether you are a residential or commercial or huge building a new thing . The design review is 2868 flat. Yeah. It's let me just clarify on the big project when when when there's a there's a flat and plus time in materials that's essentially a deposit. Okay. So got it. Your big project comes in, we start tracking our hours that the first minute if we if your project actually only turn takes 6 hours, well we'll take it out of the initial deposit. Okay. All right. If you're just redoing some windows, but they need some sort of approval, but they don't need design review because they look just the same as the ones that are there. Do we think that this kind of 8% increase in 8 to 9% increase in. For the exemption? I'm just wondering, this is a $75,000 project, but I'm sure you get a lot of just rewiring a couple of like light fixtures, kind of really small projects. Do we think that the the scale, which seems to be about 8%, is about the same for tiny project? Yeah the the the hourly when we looked at the these projects are small project with changes of lights. The hourly time was the same the the hourly charge went up. So that's the difference you'd see is the difference between 156 and $200 an hour would be the difference you'd see in that type of project. It was like a 25% increase for those tiny. For those small. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes. Councilmember Day, sir. Well, thank you. I certainly had the same concerns about possible impacts to what I will call the smaller scale projects, particularly projects done by homeowners or property owners. In looking at the report, particularly the appendix. It seems to me a way to systematically get at that is to one. Ex for me accept the modifications with regard to the planning division. Because when you look at the tables in the appendix A1, when you look at, for example, the first table and A1, the third table and A1 and the fourth table in A1, the nature of the fees that are being referred to there are largely kind of larger projects, the type of fees that are being discussed. The second part, the second table identifies the type of fees that. Could potentially be smaller. Projects. But by and large, I look at the type of fees that are being discussed and they're Appendix A1 Planning Division. It seems to be the larger projects. When you go into the building division though, you look at the appendices and you look at a range that I think there's fees with regard to flagpoles, for example, fees with regard to fences. So a lot of the fees that are associated there do seem to be kind of a smaller scale projects, but not all, because there are some fees within the building division that refer to new construction. So new construction is by and large going to be a pretty big project. But but what's also distinguished there, though, is remodeling. So. And the second thing about the fees within the building division as indicated in the front end of the staff report, but also as indicated on the on a detailed basis in the appendices, is that , you know, the cost recovery is 80%. I mean, it's not 100%, but 80% ain't bad compared to, I say, the cost recovery of what's what's happening in public works or or in the planning division. So one thing that I would suggest is that within the building division that we might my druthers is to not just any fees that have a cost recovery of 78% or higher, but if there is a fee within the building division that has cost recovery of less than than 78%, you know, adjust that either to 100% or 78%, whatever. So that would be my druthers and also to to adjust anything having to do with new construction, whether new construction for single family homes or new construction for industrial or commercial, but for remodels of residential. I would keep at it. I would keep it a 78. I mean, because from my vantage point, an 80% cost recovery is pretty good. I just I understand, you know, sort of where you're going. A couple of things. One, just the numbers that Scott talked about. Alamy we do a few big projects a year. The lion's share of the expense that you as a city spend to process permits and the money that we bring in to cover those costs is the small projects. It's those small I mean, if you think about our projects, it's it's like a pyramid. There's a few big ones that we all talk about and we argue about it in public hearings. And then there's the rest of the pyramid, which is all the little ones, and that's really the bread and butter. So when you say or when you think about the option of saying, well, let's not try to get full cost recovery on the small ones, you're talking about a huge portion of the pyramid. And so what does that mean? It means that one of the other things that the council has adopted in the past is their need, because the planning building department is completely fee based. So we're our plan and our our whole mission in life is to operate this service without having to use general fund money. It's but we also are preparing for cycles. And what happened in the recession was the cycle went down and immediately we just had to start essentially laying people off and stop doing the kinds of work that the council and the planning board still wanted us to do, like updating the general plan and doing the zoning changes and or doing things that would help us get out of the recession. And it got tricky. So one of the things that you've done, which is smart, is said we got to build in a rainy day fund because there are going to be cycles. So you need to build up a reserve. So the way when we go at 80%, what you're basically saying is just eat away the reserve. I mean, that's what's going to happen if we don't get 100% cost recovery as close as possible. It means that our ability to build a reserve is going to be severely hampered because we're essentially going to be digging into the reserve to cover that extra 21% for the lion's share of the projects. And once we eat away the entire reserve, then we're going to be coming back to you basically with our out saying, hey . We have no more reserve member reserve right now is 800, about 800,000. I mean, we'll burn through that and then it'll be like, okay, time to either raise the fees back up to get her percent or open up the general fund and start subsidizing through your general fund the services that we're providing at the counter. So that's the downside of not pushing to the to the, you know, up to the levels we're talking about now. Just come in that I would not be able to support my colleague's proposal because I very much appreciate the work that all three of these departments did. And I do want to know that the policies we have in place, the fees were charging, have been streamlined, have been updated and modernized. And I, I think that it is entirely reasonable to have these charges. And, again, we look at all the things we want to do. In our last report, we told Andrew more than once, if you need new staff, you know, more staff, let us know. And at the same time, we would say 78% recovery is good enough. I, I think there's a lot of ways that homeowners can finance home improvements. Sometimes you take out a home equity loan, and we do know that property in this area has appreciated greatly in the last decade or so. But I think we do need to keep an eye on our city's budget. But we have a bit of housekeeping to do because it's 5 minutes to 11 and we need a motion and we need four votes to pass to to pass it to be able to consider new items. We have the item nine, which is Councilmember de Suggs Referral Council referral, and then we have ten, which is an update on the Emma Hood streams that are items. So do I have a motion to go past 11 from the tired is looking person up here or. I'd make a motion I'd like the update on on my hood. I'm wondering if Councilmember Desai wouldn't mind if we could continue his item to another meeting. Uh, the only thing is this. We continued from two meetings ago. Okay, I'm just. I'm. My feet are swelling up. I've been sitting for a long time. I'm not feeling great, so I may leave. Well, if we could do it the first part of the meeting, that would. I'd love that. I wouldn't mind. Well, counselor, referrals have a place to go. But will. I mean, I don't know what our next agenda looks like yet, so I would certainly I want to hear your item, too, but I could. Can I make a suggestion. Please? Vice Mayor. Could we continue to go to Monday night's meeting? Allow me to point. After we only have one conversation, which is kind of to say, because we then just quickly talk about it there. Well, that's a public meeting. The problem is, I don't think you necessarily have the kind of public access that this has tonight. It's not going to be televised, for instance, for people who aren't there. But I mean, that's certainly a suggestion. Okay. Do I have a motion to go past 11 with two items with one item, someone make a motion or no motion? Well. I would move two items. Is there a second? Sure. Can we be quick, though? Okay. Okay. Do we can we can even set a stop stop time, can't we? That we can say we're not going past 1130. 1120. I just I just I just want to flag that this one actually has some discussion that is key and timely. Do you think it's reasonable that we could go to 1130? Depends how long the hotel takes longer. So it's a. Relatively. It's just a council referral or not? Yeah. Okay. So do I have a motion that we continue the meeting to 1130 to consider these two items? Okay. You're making the motion council member dated July 2nd and seconded. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second on favor, I. Okay. How many eyes was that when I did? For medical reasons. Okay. So I got four. Okay, so let's. Let's. Let's let's talk fast. About the. Approval of this item. All right. This there's a motion to approve item 60. Do I have a second? Second? It's been moved and seconded. All in favor. Hi. Oh, did Melissa just shoot? Okay. Oh. Do you want to ask what it would be? As for. Yeah. No. Can I. Can I. What? While we were waiting for. Councilmember, could we please hear the swim center so that if she wants to leave before the hotel. Okay, so we had a motion in a second and we were voting on approving item six. See. I'd like to have a discussion. Discussion. So, you know, I think my concern is that the we just talked about the cost of use. We just talked about the cost of trying to streamline and who this who these fees get passed to. I understand that, you know, we're trying to bring some of the fees in line, but there are some fees. My concern is if our fees are too high. We've already heard from renters who've said they're afraid to report certain things. And now we're adding to the cost of that. And I think that we do have to think about where that comes from. I'm all for trying to get to cost recovery, but I do have a concern where inflation is, you know, half of basically what are some of our fees are and frankly, a quarter or, you know, a fifth of what some of our other fee increases are. So I do have some concerns relative to that. And I think that we're missing the mark when it comes to I think, you know, I'm for trying to streamline it and get those increases, but I think we're trying to do a lot in one cycle. And I would like to know a little bit more about, you know, how we think we're going to actually go about enforcing or or getting people to comply and how we think it's going to impact things like our ADOS and stuff like that. I would like to note that on the historic preservation side, you know, if you need a certificate of approval by the Historic Advisory Board, I mean, those fees are going up substantially and we already have a lot of issues. You know, with with timeliness and getting that board together and things like that. So can I just quickly. I think our recommendation is set your fees to cover your cost, however we do. And the last item with the hearing, people talk about the process to build things, the amount of time we need to discuss things. I guess what I'm asking the council to do is you should adopt full cost recovery, but then you should also make it very clear to staff. Keep working on streamlining these processes. Move more of these projects from the design review plus time and materials to the design review exemption category. Find ways so that you're getting full cost recovery. But the permit doesn't require a certificate of approval. With a public hearing at the Historic Advisory Board, it can be approved by staff, and that's just that. What's the adjustment? What's the timeline for that? And where are we going to see those comparisons in terms of the timeline or those projects getting cut down or streamlined? Well, we can I mean, we can be processing changes to these every single one of these changes is a change to the municipal code. So it's changing a process. It's cutting out a public hearing requirement. It's setting it's setting design review exemptions. And we've been doing this consistently over the last few years. We've been getting better. But if you need us to speed that up, we we. Certainly I think I could agree that we do. And I would also add that even if we don't do it, Sacramento may in the near future. And I would I mean, I would just like to say that in my opinion that that needs to come with and with this ask for an increase in fees. I think that saying that we're going to come back, I would like to know when that's going to come back and when we're going to at least review it , perhaps with staff coding some of the more major or more impactful ones. I guess that we have a lot of them. And my ask would be that we get a handful of them, you know, maybe what are the top two or three that we think could make the biggest impact? And there's some things that we can we've already been talking about in terms of prioritizing, in terms of the climate action thing, like, you know, how do you streamline, you know, energy efficiency changes, Windows, things like that. Would homeowners want to do? So I think with the climate action, we'll start. With both an eye to the timing, not wanting to keep my colleague out much later and also making sure we're staying within the parameters of the item that was was noticed before us. We do have a motion. We do have a second. All in favor. Yes, it was made and seconded. Yes, right. Yes. Okay. Okay. All in favor. I opposed. No. Okay. The motion passes 3 to 2. Thank you. Okay, now we will move on to the City Manager Communications. In the interests of time, I could move mine to the end so that you can get to the other two items. Okay. You get done by 1130. Thank you, Mr. Levitt. And do we have any oral communications? Not agenda? No. So then we move on to council referrals. Item nine, a couple more days.

Order for a hearing regarding reparations and their impact on the civil rights of Black Bostonians.

BostonCC_10272021_2021-0734

Docket number 0734 councilor councilors Mejia and Balk offer the following order for a hearing regarding reparations and their impact on the civil rights of black Bostonians. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The chair now recognizes Chair Julian me here, who is the chair of the Committee on Civil Rights. Consider my hand. The floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. President. Yesterday, the Committee on Civil Rights held a hearing on docket 0734 order for a hearing regarding reparations and their impact on civil rights on black Bostonians. It was a marathon hearing spanning over three and a half hours. We were joined by we were joined by several council colleagues, including Councilor Bach, the co-sponsor of this hearing. In addition to counsel readings, Slim Flaherty Campbell and Representative Brandy Fluker, Oakley also joined us. We structured the hearing into several different panels, starting with an African Libation by Dr. Ben Mer and Atlantic knowledge from Jean-Luc Pigott. Our first panel, consisting of Dr. Ben Damir and Dr. Jamari, come on to discuss the history of slavery and reparations, both not nationwide and in Boston in particular. Our second panel featured a number of amazing advocates, including Imani White. Good night Robinson, Tammy Atai, Tanisha Sullivan, Dr. Attia Martin and Kevin Peterson. The covered subjects range from health and wellness, land in gentrification, education, arts and culture, economic empowerment and more. I want to uplift equal in particular from Armani, who said it's important to recognize that we came here as slaves, we got free and we were able to purchase land. But then that land was taken from us by a city government and used to create a way for business. I wanted to uplift that quote in particular because it drives home that this conversation is not just about slavery. It's about the repeated injustices in policy decisions that have been made specifically to disenfranchize and target black communities. Our third panel consisted of a more this thing summarized and detailed several reparation efforts across the country and across the world, and reminded us that any effort towards reparations reparations here in Boston needs to be guided by a sense of healing and love. We were also grateful to have been joined by the administration who were not only present but listened and learned and moved their schedules around so that they can stay and take part in the conversation. We were joined by Chief Lori Nelson, Chief Salena Barros Miller and Jessica Felipe. During the hearing, several advocates, both on the panel and from those who presented public testimony, voiced their support and urged the council to take up the cause of creating a commission to explore reparations. We will continue to work with advocates to determine the best course of action, implementing a reparations program and process here in the city of Boston. I want to close out by sharing a quote, a quote offered by Dr. Camara. The question is not what needs to be done. The fundamental. Issue is whether we have the political will at this time will be keeping this order in committee. And I also would like to thank Tunisia Sullivan for inspiring us in filing this hearing order and all of the folks who have been doing the work to get us here. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Maguire. Did the co-sponsor wish to speak on this? I would just. Thank you. Thank you. The co-sponsor echoes the chair's report on that and docket 073 or anything else that we ought to speak on. Docket 0734 Seeing no takers. Docket 0734 shall remain in the Committee on Civil Rights. Madam Clerk, would you now please read docket 0600?

Recommendation to Accept the Quarterly Sales Tax Report for the Period Ending September 30, 2014 Collected During the Period April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014. (Finance 2410) (Continued from January 20, 2015)

AlamedaCC_02032015_2015-1272

Six A recommendation to accept the quarterly sales tax report for the period ending September 30th, 2014, collected during the period April 1st, 2014 through June 30th, 2014. Good evening once more. This is another report. Excuse me. All of a sudden, my ear just went. Hmm. This is another report that was carried over from a previous meeting. Well, we report to you on a quarterly basis the sales tax revenues. Now. The. It is our fourth largest revenue source and it is important that there is attention given to the various elements and various impacts upon sales tax revenues. We should also be aware of the lag sales occurring in the one quarter are not our revenues received in the next quarter. So when we talk about this, we're talking if we're talking revenues there, they come later than the actual sales and we need to be aware of that as we talk about it. Most. There we have hired HDL companies to receive confidential data from the Franchise Tax Board and to provide HDL provides various analyzes to the city. These analyzes include the year over year change by major industry group historical trends over time by major industry group historical trend for the city as a whole. Historic trends by geographic areas and the geographic areas I just want to footnote were originally chosen by the City Council and we keep adding as we see new shopping areas, new areas developing. So we may want to revisit those at some point and decide if those are really things that we want to track. The surplus gap comparison. This really shows you how much sales tax dollars alameda alameda and spend in alameda versus what gets spent in other cities. It's referred to as the leakage report. It also has county wide comparisons, statewide comparisons and a general economic analysis of the nation, the state and our local east bay. This is a one of the analysis that we receive is called the 13 quarter trend. And it shows that over the 13 quarters since the most recent 13 quarters, we are trending up and that's good news. But it also tells us that when there is an economic downturn, this is a very sensitive and very volatile piece of revenue and we need to pay attention when that starts to happen. This. The next slide tells us about the per capita sales. This is the sales tax revenue per pop, per piece of population per person in the city of Alameda. And we still have the lowest sales tax revenue per capita as other major cities in our county. And we recently changed the county, the cities that we were looking at in order to be more comparative with those that we felt had similar population sizes as well as similar shopping, not just our neighbors geographically. So we are now looking at Oakland while they have. You know, bigger population. It still is interesting to look at. Per capita what they are generating and sales tax revenue. And as you can see, Alameda is still at the very bottom. So I'm going to ask a clarifying question. In the past, have you included Piedmont? No. This is one of the first times that we've included. Did we include people I can't know? Piedmont is not included. We have. Not now. I said in the past, that was my question. We haven't in the past looked at Piedmont, but we have started getting some of that data so we can start including Piedmont as a comparison if we wish to. But it's not. Wasn't high on our list of comparatives. Thank you. Madam Chair. May I make a comment? Actually, the two cities that we're looking at revising is Albany and Richmond, and the cities that we're thinking about supplanting it with is. Um. Um. Elsa Prieto. No, not. No. Sorry. Walnut Creek. Yeah. And Pleasanton. And Pleasanton. So comparable sized cities. Comparable. More comparable median income. Because Albany is much smaller than than we are. I mean, yeah, substantially smaller. And Richmond's demographic is much different than ours. Okay, so we can have a discussion on that. Right now, I just want to leave it to our clarifying questions. Thank you. So just to reiterate that the quarterly sales tax is a lagging indicator, but it's worth tracking because it is one of our four largest revenues. And we can as you look at the written report, you see that there are geographic reports and industry reports and some other charts that are included. So we can alter those to some extent. We do have a limit on the quantity of items that we can report, but we can alter them. So I wanted to point that out to you this evening so that if you choose to look want to look at different comparisons, we can start that process. And that concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. And we have no speakers. Correct. All right. Member Ashcroft, did you want to start or. Thank you, Ms.. Boyer, for all the presentations you're going to do for us this evening. So I you and I'm looking at the staff report now on page two. The and again, there is a lag in the actual collection of these. The reporting follows the the actual collections. So the South Shore Center, I was surprised to see a drop of 2% over the past year because it seems like so many businesses have been added. But is this just a matter of not having the most up to date information? So remember that these are the sales that took place in the period ending September. No other way from April to June. April to June. Okay. So is that really a high sales season? It's not the holiday shopping season. Exactly. Or back to school are back. Those are the two real high points at a retail establishment that's mostly what you have at South Shore is retail rather than anything else. Okay. Generally, I see this as very positive. I realize that it is not only cyclical, it's dependent on the economy. And when consumers are feeling more confident, they are more confident about spending. And there is also. It's in this report. I believe the the fact that brick and mortar stores now have competition from the e-commerce. And yet there is a mechanism by which, yes, we are recovering. We share in what's called the county pool. So what when a a. When there is an online sale and there is no brick and mortar presence in our in our city, the sales tax accrues to the county pool, and that's shared among all of the cities in Alameda County. So we get a share of that pool and that is increasing over time. And then thank you. Which which is important for us to capture that. And then with regard to now, I'm on exhibit one and there's the per capita sales tax surplus gap comparison that you referred to. And I did also note the footnote at the bottom of this graph, the last sentence that says this The information is provided only as a starting point in identifying potential sources of sales tax loss and should not automatically be interpreted as an expansion or levering leveraging opportunity without more detailed analysis and assessment. And the the one example that just comes to mind, because it's been discussed in the community is somewhere on this table, I do believe, is the fact that we lagged in the gas station sales of gasoline in the city. And so we've recently added a gas station as you come in from the tube. And even though I certainly remember many discussions by this body previously, it apparently didn't get out to the whole community because mostly I'm hearing complaints from people about why are we looking at a gas station as we come out of the tube? And I think there's two answers to that. One of them is Sean Roskam in of Catullus promises me that that screaming from landscaping and possibly a fence even is going to help to obscure that view a little and make it a little more palatable as you come through the tube. But on the other hand, that's what sales tax generation looks like. We just did a couple of weeks ago the ribbon cutting at the new Safeway out at Marina Village, which is quite lovely. And already I understand we're not seeing it in this report, but that the sales tax numbers from Target that's been up and running now for more than a year and some of the other retailers, I'm sure that Safeway is going to do a great business because it's the first grocery store that far out on the island. But this this comes with, you know, it is development. We've heard some negative things said about development, but this is part of what development looks like. To comments one grocery stores don't generate a great deal of sales tax. Most of what they sell is not taxable. It it it's hard to tell you exactly what percentage because each store varies by what they have to offer sales tax on gasoline because the price is dropping where that's going down. So it's very cyclical right now and not something that is going to really boost our sales tax revenues over the next three or four quarters, I would say. Thank you. I smell. A question. Thank you for the report. And stepping us through. It is good to have the allies to help guide. But I wanted to go back to the $313,000 that was recovered a basically to the positive of Alameda. Is that going to to stay because that business is here and now reporting here so will will get their sales tax not necessarily that number will get their sales tax. Or is that sales tax spread over a number of years and are in arrears? I'm not sure of the answer because I will have to do some research and give you an answer later. Because if I look at the total quarter. Um, and I don't know how that how that figure balances, but if that figure, if that $313,000 is part of the $460,000 from Harbor Bay Parkway, is that correct? On this is page two. Yeah, I'm not I'm not certain. But to see how that. Yes. To see how that. If that's a one time or. Is it. Ongoing or is it a we expected to see some of that continue out to. If you could clarify that in the next quarterly. Yeah, I can clarify it. And then I can tell you that typically when they find an error, they give us all of they go back as far as the beginning of the year. They give us that money and then make sure that it stays corrected from that point on. And how much are we going to get? I don't know at this point. Not going to look all the time when we were on the other end of that. Yes. Where a significant amount of money went the other way. That's true. So I think if we can make sure that we flagged that in the next report. Yes. See where it lies. That's all I have. Thank you. Member de SAC. Right. Well, thank you very much. Thank you very much. Uh, interim finance director Ms.. Borja. Really appreciate the presentation. You know, I think from the big picture of things, the reason why we sales tax is important certainly is it's one of the revenue sources by which we finance the quality of life that we all hope to have here in Alameda. So it's important. And unlike a number of other revenue centers, the sales tax is one which you can more or less plan around in terms of how you design and strategize with regard to your built environment, but also plan with regards to, you know, what kind of business attraction, business retention this is expansion strategies . So there is there is a lot of wiggle room when it comes to sales tax generation. So for that reason, it's a right place of focus. When I look at the sales tax bar chart that you had where you have like is this as an industry and in general consumer goods and then restaurants and hotels. The bar chart where you had kind of the dash colors versus the solid colors. What's really interesting is when you look at business and industry, it's great to see that it went from $500,000 in sales taxes to a roughly slightly over $600,000. But, you know, to staff's credit, we all understand that when it comes to business sales taxes, that, you know, it is highly volatile. More sales taxes, as it is, is a volatile revenue source business as as business. The business sales tax is that much more volatile business can leave or they can maybe change their their place from which they conduct the sales. So so I think rightfully, city staff is recognizing that while our sales taxes in general have increased, what has been driving that is perhaps a business to business sales tax. So on the expenditure side, just because we have sales taxes go up by what, 200,000, $300,000 on the on the revenue side, on the expenditure side, I know that staff isn't going to bake into cake 200 to $300000 more in expenses. So so I think, you know, staff is certainly on the ball there. I think there's a lot of opportunities that I think we as City of Alameda further contemplate how to utilize our economic development manager, Darrell Doan. There's a lot of places that I think we should be excited about. So. So it is true. We're an island. And by virtue of being an island, our sales tax per per capita numbers are going to be lower than many other places. But there are places where where we can mobilize. I mean, just by bringing right speed, for example, if we have right speed, make sure that when they sell a truck, make sure that we that the sales tax comes to us. And it's and as we plan Alameda point, maybe we should look for the you know make sure to prioritize those kind of businesses. And I'm sure that city staff is as is Jennifer Ott. And as we make our early discussions with prospective and developer Alameda Partners, I'm sure they'll keep that in mind as well. But, you know, there are strategies that we can do also that are on a smaller scale when it comes to sales tax retention. You know, we've we have a lot of vacant spaces in Alameda and with with some of those vacant spaces, perhaps we can, you know, have Darrell Doan and city manager staff think about, you know , what kind of pop up strategies that we might employ, pop up retail and do that. In a intentional manner. And finally, one of the things that we need to also do is, you know, figure out ways to get, you know, residents to make sure that that they spend here and in town, you know, and when they can , you know, maybe, you know, the special dress or the special suit, you know, maybe they'll go to San Francisco or Walnut Creek for that. But perhaps for a lot of a lot of other items, you know, that they're purchasing elsewhere, they'll do so here. One final point on on grocery stores, because grocery stores are an important part of a shopping center for obvious reasons. And while they are not a sales tax generating generally, maybe 30% of their sales is is taxable. Grocery stores are important in that they drive foot traffic. They drive customers to come. And that's why when you look at all the different shopping centers that we have, practically everyone has an anchor. Anchor store is anchored by by the grocery store. So so it is an important part of an overall economic development strategy, even if even if they're not as high tech generating as a target . But final point, it's great to have target here. We need that kind of sales tax. But we also need to think and I think we're on we're moving in that direction. We think about, you know, things like the business to business sales taxes. We need to think about small scale pop up strategies. So I look at this as data that is a beginning point for a wide range of strategies, and that means a lot of exciting times with our Darrell Dunn. And we do include him when HDL comes to review the quarterly information, Darrell and his staff are included in those discussions and they have an opportunity to ask lots of questions and to secure more data. So it's an ongoing process. Thank you. And Brody. Just a couple quick questions. Again, thank you for the report. And, you know, doing all the reports today, it's a lot of work to generate this information and gather at all. So on the the geographic area, you know, where would somebody at home or someone like me sitting up here find the sales tax revenue for target Alameda landing. Is that is that so link or I'm sorry all other areas. It's in all other areas currently but we have added Alameda landing and you'll see that in the next report. And then even if you take out the 85,000 year over year for for Target, you know, we still had some good increases. What's going on with like north of Lincoln and Webster? Do you know that was one that actually had a deal? I don't know. I would have to do some research on that. Generally, when we get this data, it's accumulated from other data. And so you have to really dig through the. All of the information in order to pin the exact where the changes occurring and why. And then on the I guess it was exhibit one, the the graph. It's per capita. So that's the total per capita. So a place like San Leandro, which has a higher tax rate, you know, would by virtue of that, have a higher per capita. If they have a higher sales tax rate. Right. So it might be helpful in the future, you know, kind of compare what the sales with the sales rates on the yeah. If if they have a general sales tax rate, they may have a sales tax rate that is to support a specific bond issue and therefore should not be reported in this. But I can check and make sure. Yes. Just so you know, we're comparing apples to apples. Yeah. So cars. Cause they do sell cars. Customers have a higher tax rate. So and I think that's an important point because when the car dealerships left Alameda ten years ago, it was a precipitous drop. Yeah, you can see it on the the green line or whatever. There you go. Yeah. Thank you. Member de SAC. Oh, I. Just wanted to quickly say to that. My understanding is Peet's Coffee is interested in Webster Street. Did I read that correctly? Yes, you did. Well, that is exciting news. I just was, especially for it. Sales tax generation and foot traffic generation activity. Thank you. We've been working on them for about 18 to 24 months. Great. Awesome, wonderful. Thank you. Clarification question. Member Ashcroft. Thank you. I'm wondering if staff could just clarify. Councilmember O.D. asked where we would find the target sales tax numbers. And I think the answer is, even when those reporting periods come up, we won't. And I don't think we'll see. CVS and some others could bring that to. Us in order to get access to the Franchise Tax Board data, we have to treat it as confidential information. It is not even resident on our computers, so that's why we hire HTL. They we give them permission to get our data. We do not have nor can we release any information about specific taxpayers. That's what we have to agree to in order to get the detailed information. We can tell you in general, big categories like service sectors, or we can tell you by geographic areas. But and if we have something that's Alameda landing, you know, all the stores that are there, you have to make some assumptions. Know that was the question. Are we going to be able to identify Alameda landing in the future? Yes, we we have already asked for that, right? Yes, you have. Thank you. And I appreciate the report. Thank. Thank you. So in regards to sales tax, I know there are many elements that do shop on our historical districts and our historical districts and sales taxes, sales tax. So you can also continue to shop and Park Street, Webster Street. Of course, we have South Shore. And for me, in regards to whether we have another gas station, we have gas stations on Webster already. We do have other gas stations. And I will encourage people to shop all of our districts to our historical districts. And so personally, I am concerned about the building of more retail. Retail provides low paying jobs. And as we saw earlier today, many people are concerned about low paying jobs. That would be nice to have and to attract and some there were quite a few people that referred to car sales and maybe that's not going to be coming back. However, I think entertainment quite often is more of a win win in regards to our meetings are very supportive of, from what I have seen, entertainment, restaurants, things like that that are of other ways of bringing in sales tax revenue. So thank you very much. Yes, sir. We'll have a motion. Please move that we accept the quarterly sales tax report I second. Okay. All those in favor I oppose abstentions. Motion carries unanimously. All right, next item.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use regulation of home occupations; adopting interim regulations to allow home occupation businesses to operate with fewer limitations during the COVID-19 civil emergency, amending Seattle Municipal Code Section 23.42.050, and adopting a work plan.

SeattleCityCouncil_03152021_CB 120001

Hey part of the land use the Neighborhoods Committee Agenda Item 13 Council Bill 120001 relating to land use regulations of home occupations adopting interim regulations to a home occupation businesses to operate with fewer limitations during the COVID 19 Civil Emergency. Amending the Code Section 23.40 2.0 and adopting a work plan. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended with the DIVIDED report with Councilmember Strauss, MACHEDA Morrison, Lewis in favor and Councilmember Peterson opposed. Thank you, Madam. Claire. Councilmember Strauss, you are the chair of the committee, and I'm going to hand it over to you to provide the committee report. Thank you. Council president. And thank you both. You council president and Councilmember Mesquita for your co-sponsorship of this legislation in the past year. Small businesses have been hurt badly by COVID 19, the pandemic era restrictions, and our economic recession to business. Too many businesses have been forced to shut their doors for good, and this past year has also shown us how creative and nimble business owners, entrepreneurs and innovators can be when they're faced with these challenges. And we know that the land use code was not written for life in a pandemic, and when you use code has not kept up with our changing environment, especially when we're doing more than ever from our Homes Council President Gonzalez, Councilmember Mesquita and I all introduced bringing business home to provide small business owners and entrepreneur entrepreneurs with the flexibility they need for these challenging times. Bringing business home will make it easier to open or operate a home based business for the next year. Time limited year. By easing some of the onerous code restrictions on these small businesses, home based businesses are still regulated by other levels of government and public entities such as Department of Health, Liquor Control, Board, City, Seattle, Department of Finance, the State. There are many, many, many layers of government still regulating businesses, and specifically for businesses that occupy either in food or in beverage or in health care. This does not change any of those regulatory or licensure oversights as well as there would still be many requirements of home based businesses, including they must be operated by a resident of the home, that the business will be clearly accessory. So secondary to the main use of the home is residents that the commercial deliveries are limited to one per day and on weekdays early. And I can tell you some of my neighbors get more on Amazon then than that. Just again, that's an aside. Lastly, it's also very important to understand that home occupancy businesses still must abide by the noise, odor, white or smoke impacts that are currently written in the code that they cannot be noticeable beyond the property by now. Also, you've heard the story of Yonder Cider and Greenwood, which was forced to close after they were found in violation of current code again when Yonder brought their situation to my attention with colleagues as well, I'm sure what opened my eyes is that we have many different businesses, home occupancy businesses operating in the community that are not operating to the letter of the code and could be shut down if they were cited again. Once a citation is in the queue, it cannot be undone even by the person that submitted that citation. And that again is why we need to create this level playing field and why we need to provide this time limited flexibility as an exception to the norm. This bill is more than just about yonder. It's about the opportunity to start and grow a business that can soon fill a vacant storefront down the block, or by giving a struggling small business the chance to move home for the moment to weather the storm and then come back in full bloom on . In our business districts, some of the most successful businesses in the world were founded in garages. I heard about one at committee last week. That sounds very delicious. Now it is time for the city to make life easier for these entrepreneurs. Rather than shutting down the small businesses that make up the fabric of our community, we must make our neighborhoods. Our land use code should not be a barrier to making our neighborhoods more vibrant and having a strong economy. Thank you, Council President and thank you, Councilmember Mosqueda, for partnering with me on this effort and for everyone who has helped get this bill along, including V, Wynn and Noah on and Quito. Freeman of course. Thank you, people. Council President That is my report, colleagues. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss. I know that we have one amendment to consider on this bill. That amendment is from Council Member Herbold. My my suggestion. I know I have remarks. I'm I'm almost certain that Councilmember Mosqueda has some remarks also as our partner on this legislative effort. And so my suggestion is that we address the amendment first and then we can open it up to to comments on the bill as amended from those who would like to to speak on the bill is an amendment. If that sounds agreeable to folks, I propose that that is how we should move forward. Okay. I'm not hearing any objection to that. So let's go ahead and hand it over to Councilmember Herbold to allow her to move her. Yes. Oh, I can hear you now. Okay. Oh, it's council member Ward. Thank you so much. I'm at a different location, on a different phone, trying to do three different things. It's a tailored health ward. So I just wanted you to know that on the last item that we voted on regarding the Pike Place Market Preservation, that I had voted yes, but I didn't do the statistics. So I hope the clerk to note that I voted yes on that and and I am here for the Council Bill 120001. So thank you. Yeah. Unfortunately, Councilmember where is the record? Can't reflect that unless we take up a motion for reconsideration, which means we've got to go back in time on the agenda start. Nope, nope. No. I appreciate you, but you know I'm here. Thank you. Okay. I appreciate your. Thanks so much. I appreciate it. Okay. So Councilmember Herbold and I hand it over to you to make your motion on Amendment one to council Bill 120001. Thank you, Madam President. I move to amend Council Bill 12 0001 as presented on Amendment One, which was recently distributed. Second rate. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Sorry. I'm having my own technological issues over here with words disappearing off the screen. Give me just a minute. There we go. Okay. It's been moved and seconded to amend. The bill is presented on Amendment one. Councilmember Herbold, back to you in order to address the underlying amendment. Thank you so much. This is a single amendment that has two components. The amendment requires, first, that a home occupation not have a drive in business component. And secondly, it requires that home occupations that are permitted, but that are related to automotive sales and service. Not cause a substantial increase in on street parking or vehicle traffic. As discussed this morning, this amendment would not prohibit automotive sales or services it would prohibit, as is now the case, a substantial increase in vehicle traffic or parking. The amend would also prohibit a drive in or drive thru type of business. Thank you. Thank you so much. Because remember, herbals. Are there any additional comments on Amendment One? I know we also had a discussion about this in the council briefing, so there may not be any questions this afternoon, but that doesn't mean that we didn't have a conversation about it. Cause more stress, please. I think he counts prison. Thank you, Councilmember. Well, just to note that I did connect with staff in the interim. Having that conversation and briefing was very helpful. This is a very narrow amendment, much like the bill being a very narrow change. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Councilmember Verbal. Great. I also had a time I had an opportunity to take a closer look at at this amendment and had a conversation with with my staff as well. See, it is very technical and narrow to that particular type of business. So appreciate that the proposal here will be supporting it. Colleagues, any other comments on Amendment One? Hearing that will the clerk please call the role on the adoption of Amendment One? Lewis I. Morales Mike Skinner, i. Peterson. Yes. So what? Yes. Strauss Yes. Herbold Yes. Whereas. Yeah. President Gonzalez I nine in favor nine opposed. Great. Thank you so much for that. Now I'm going to make a call for any additional comments. And I see that Councilmember Peterson has his hand up and then we will hear from Councilmember Mosqueda. Plus, Mr. Peterson, please. Thank you. Council President. During the two committee meetings, I was able to articulate my strong track record of supporting small businesses, as well as my concerns about this bill. I also posted my concerns with the bill on my city council websites. My constituents can see a detailed rationale for my no vote. The benefits and concerns the bill have recently been reported in the media as well, so I don't want to go through them here, but I really do want to thank the committee chair and original sponsor, Councilmember Strauss, for providing the time to raise and discuss the concerns in this committee. That was really helpful, I think, for everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Councilmember Mosqueda and then Councilmember Morales. Thank you, council president. I really appreciate the council. The council's consideration of this and this bill today as amended. Happy to be a co-sponsor. Thank you very much, councilmember strauss and council president. I know you've been working on this for a while and very excited to be part of the team as we get this over the finish line. To me, this is really about what's good for the economic resiliency of Seattle. And as you think about how many people have lost their job, their employment prior to the pandemic and folks who are being innovative and creative. I talked to Ventures just last week to hear more about how, you know, some of our smallest businesses are faring during this time. And what I heard is that many entrepreneurs are doing everything they can to try to be innovative and change their business strategies so that they can survive. And allowing for this type of code change is really critical right now as people think about either opening a business for the first time or modifying the type of businesses that they had originally engaged in and doing it in a way that actually reaches people where they're at right now. People are staying home. They're staying in their neighborhoods, they're staying in their local communities, and they're walking more and making it more accessible for people to be able to purchase goods and services in their neighborhood, allow for those entrepreneurs to be able to open the front of their shops or their garages and be able to sell to the pedestrians and the bikers. And, you know, potentially the folks who are going through the neighborhood as they get out and start to enjoy spring and hopefully are vaccinated and actually get a chance to walk around our neighborhoods more. This is an economic stimulus bill. I think it's important to reiterate what we talked about last week as well. This is not just about helping those entrepreneurs who need additional assistance and cut helping to cut through the red tape. This is also about how we create more dollars in the pockets of residents across the city who are then able to spend that money in existing local businesses. This is not going to be a detriment to existing small businesses. In fact, this has a multiplier effect that is beneficial every time we allow for there to be more finances, for more financial stability for residents in the city, it pays forward. People spend that money in local shops and in local restaurants and vendors. So this is truly one small way, a very important way for us to help our smallest employers and future entrepreneurs in this city and whether that's the next Microsoft or the next tasty taco or what have you. And so what that bread councilmember was, I think it's really important that we're making these changes today, because I don't think anyone could argue that having to do appointment only and not more than two people working for the vendor and not having signage on the street, that is not a good way to start a business. So we're making it easier for folks to do that. And we're also addressing the traffic concerns, I think, appropriately in this bill. I want to thank again the council president, staff and customer Strauss's staff and my staff. Andrew Houston did a lot of work on research on this bill, so thank you very much for the ongoing work and part of that research. As we thought about the ways that we clear curbside to make more opportunities for folks to be able to see small businesses was to think about how this isn't just about access to parking in front of businesses. This is about how do we make it a more walkable, thriving and vibrant neighborhood. So looking forward to what we can do to learn from this experience in the long run. I think this is an important interim measure and I think that there's a lot to be gained from this as we think about creating resiliency in the out years. Look forward to working with all of you, and I'm looking forward to passing this. Thank you. Thank you so much, former Mouseketeer. And next up is council member Morales. You council president? I am really excited about this bill. So I want to thank Councilmember Strauss for the work that you've been doing to bring this forward. I think it really speaks to the fact that we need to fundamentally change the way we offer opportunity to our neighbors. We know that micro-businesses play an important role in generating income for some families. In my previous life, I provided technical assistance to food based businesses who were trying to get started, trying to expand. And very often these are shops that are owned by just family members. There aren't a lot of employees. It is, you know, mom and pop, maybe one or two of the kids. And it is very important revenue that they are bringing in for their families. Through that process, I learned how hard it is for these family. Businesses. To expand into brick and mortar. Commercial space is often too big for some of these very small startups or too expensive, or the tenant improvements that would be required are cost prohibitive. So we have a lot of work to do to make it easier for those who don't have easy access to capital to get their foot in the door, into entrepreneurship, into supporting their families, and really expanding the kinds of goods and services that we're able to offer in our community. And I think this is a really important first step to make sure that that happens. So I look forward to what we can learn through this process. And I want to thank the sponsor and cosponsor for starting this conversation for us. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Morales, are there any additional comments on the bill? Okay. I'd like to make some some comments on the bill as well. I am really enthusiastic about being able to support this legislative efforts in partnership with Councilmember Strauss and also with the support and Councilmember Mosqueda, I do want to thank Noah on and the Nguyen from my office. Noah, from your office. Councilmember Strauss For all the hard work that they've done on this legislation, both in terms of reaching out to impacted small business owners, but also the good policy work that they've done on behalf of our offices. And big thanks to Cato Freeman as well for all of his good, good work in this space as well. And I believe that this bill is going to be just one of many strategies that will help us with our economic recovery from COVID 19. We know that we need flexibility and innovation, and this is local government meeting innovation happening on the ground by our entrepreneurs who want to try out ideas and provide needed income for their households. This bill will help lower barriers like access to capital or commercial affordability that keep many women and bipoc entrepreneurs in particular from starting a business. The Bringing Business Home bill will strengthen neighborhoods and get us closer to complete neighborhoods with amenities for Seattle residents and families. At a time when it's not just important to support our local small business to ensure they'll still be with us on the other side of the pandemic. It's also important to create flexibility and options that will help entrepreneurs during this period of time. This bill will help lower barriers like access to capital that keep many, especially bipoc entrepreneurs and women, from starting a business with many out of work during a pandemic. This change can help Seattle residents start a small business to add much needed income to their household. This will only help us to get that much closer to economic recovery while adding vibrancy and amenities to our neighborhoods. In addition, this bill helps us get to better connected neighborhoods, which means we don't need to go far when when services and amenities are within a 10 to 15 minute walk or bike ride. This bill means that it will be easier for people to start their dream of being a small business owner and help us get back to a city of vibrant small businesses all across the city. It will support innovation and provide a pathway for people to build their business clientele and grow capital in hand for their business. We want every single business to grow out of their garage and into a storefront. You need a lot of money to do that. And this bill allows businesses to build at home first before they can take the next big step. And lastly, the reality is that our neighborhoods are the center of our universe as this pandemic continues. And while we recover, this bill will allow us to continue to limit our travel outside of our homes to say, stay safer under pandemic protocols, by increasing amenities right in our back yard. So I am really excited about this bill, and I know that there has been some conversation about the need to ensure that this is not too broad of a legislative fix. I don't think it's too broad of a legislative fix. As Councilmember Straus likes to correctly remind us, this is a narrow bill to address a narrow issue within the structure and the context of the land. So I did want to take an opportunity to read two testimonials into the record from impacted small business owners. The first is from Caitlin Brant. We've heard of Caitlin a lot these days. She is the founder of Yonder Cider and she is a big supporter of Council Bill 120001, which we are calling the Bringing Business Home Bill. And she wrote to us just this afternoon, quote, In August 2020, I launched Yonder Bar our retail to go only space in my garage. We launched in the time of COVID, and when launching a full tasting room with a 5 to 7 year commercial lease was not possible for us. Launching in my garage, allowed for the incubation of our business, helped us to determine its viability and eventually lead to the signing of a commercial lease just last month. I hope this bill allows this opportunity for so many other hopeful small business owners. In the past week alone. I have received calls, emails and messages from more than a dozen people who, like me, have dreamed of opening their business only to be faced with hurdle after hurdle. I believe this bill will open opportunities for small businesses across the city now and into the future. And in my opinion, this bill doesn't take away from people signing commercial leases. It makes them possible. Furthermore, since the comments at the last Land Use Committee, I have gone into my local community to talk to business owners on Greenwood Avenue, from those who I talked to. They welcome businesses like Yonder Bar because what they see is more traffic coming to their neighborhood. To the neighborhood, more potential exposure to their business and more connected by communities that benefits everyone. Many of these businesses also carry our products now and see growing sales with the existence and exposure of yonder bar. Launching on our garage made our big dreams possible and we hope this bill will allow the same for others. That's testimony from Caitlin, who is the founder and president of Yonder Cider. And I want to thank her for for her support and for really important comments on this legislation. A second constituent wrote to our office the following about this bill. I'm about a friend or a voter in District two and the owner of Emerald City Flowers. I started Emerald City Flowers during the pandemic as a part time job to bring joy to people during this difficult time with the pandemic and gain additional income. I'm writing in support of the Home Occupation Bill. During the pandemic, many businesses had to close their storefronts. People were laid off from their jobs. Had their hours reduced. Hiring freezes and freezes on salary increases. However, cost of living remains high. In Seattle, small business owners and residents need to have more avenues to gain income, and this legislation can help make that possible. Current land use laws around operating a business without your home are too restrictive, including having customer schedule appointment times, which doesn't work well for many business models selling goods and services. During this time, many people are at home thinking about how they want to spend their time and what they want to do. For some, that is starting a new business or venture. Our local economy and small business owners have been devastated by the COVID 19 pandemic. By suspending some of these restrictive conditions, it will enable more small businesses to operate and thrive. Seattle is a city of innovation. Many successful businesses were started out of someone's garage. Passing this legislation will help existing and new small businesses as as well as aid the economic recovery of the COVID 19 pandemic with a more vibrant small business ecosystem. So I will conclude my comments there. I think those are two really great testimonials from the north to the south end of our city, and look forward to being able to continue to support this legislative effort. That being said, I want to I want to give Councilmember Strauss the last word before we I call the roll on is still. Thank you. Council President Thank you. Colleagues, just want to again and thank you for reading those words that were brought in for public comment today. Council President. This is about incubating innovations and businesses to fill our vacant storefronts. As you just heard in the case of yonder, they would they used their money that they have raised from opening in the garage to fill a vacant storefront. That is the trajectory that we are talking about in their neighboring business association. If any neighborhood association also expressed their support to me for this legislation. This is about being silly. This bill is about being solution oriented and creating outcomes for everyday Seattleites. If you want to take a look at the last two committee meetings for some great questions, good conversation and more information on how narrow this bill is and what other government regulations and licensors are required be on the land use code. There are hours of discussions there. Again, the land use code, not zoning, is what we are partially amending for a time limited period to. To provide flexibility for our small business entrepreneurs. Again, want to thank everyone who worked on this, including Andrew and Councilmember Musk and his office and to Caitlin for bringing this issue to our attention that impacts so many home occupancy businesses throughout Seattle. I have a Ballard patch glass full of water and I would say let's raise our glasses to making big dreams possible for our local entrepreneurs. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, colleagues. Thanks so much, Councilmember Strauss, for those comments. We're now closed out debate and I'm going to ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the amended. This. Yes. Morales. Councilmember Morales. Yes. Mosquito I. Peterson. No. So what? Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbold. Yes. Suarez. By President Gonzalez. I Edson favor one opposed. Thank you so much. The bill passes as amended and I will sign it. Will the piece of fixed my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Well, the quick please read items 14 and 15 into the.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation; authorizing the execution of an Agreement for Activation and Programming of Westlake Park and Occidental Square Park; and ratifying and confirming prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_09212015_CB 118478

Agenda item 16. Council Bill 118478. Relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation, authorizing the execution of an agreement for activation and programing of Westlake Park and Occidental Square Park and ratifying and confirming prior acts. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Thank you, Councilmember Gordon. This is an agreement between the department, the Downtown Seattle Association and the Parks Department to activate and to make our parks downtown more friendly to all. And we certainly endorse this unanimously by the committee. Thank you. Questions or comments? Please call the rule on the passage of the Bill O'Brien. Okamoto. All right. All right. So want I back shot? I got in. I Harrill I Lakota High and President Burgess High nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Please read item 17 to the first semicolon.