Datasets:

huuuyeah

/

meetingbank

like 8

AN ORDINANCE proposing an amendment to the King County Charter to clarify when an inquest will be held and to require the county to assign an attorney to represent the family of the decedent in the inquest proceeding; amending Section 895 of the King County Charter; and submitting the same to the qualified voters of the county for their ratification or rejection at the next general election occurring more than forty-five days after the enactment of this ordinance.

KingCountyCC_06162020_2019-0236

Is there a desire to expedite? Mira. Then I will. We will not expedite. It will be a regular course of action to full council and not on consent. That takes us to item nine. Proposed Ordinance 2019 to 36, which would amend the County Charter to clarify when an inquest was being held and to provide for legal representation for the family of the decedent. I know my colleagues are aware of litigation surrounding the inquest process. I want to point out that the litigation is separate from the charter amendment we'll be discussing. And it's my hope that we'll be able we will focus on the charter amendment and not discuss the litigation issues which would it would necessitate in executive session. Jennie Jim, John Batiste will give a staff report on the proposed charter amendment. And Ms.. Jon Batiste, the line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jenny. Jon Batiste, Counsel. Staff. Agenda item nine begins on page 43 of your packet. As you noted, Mr. Chair, this is a charter amendment related inquests, and it would add language to the charter about when an inquest is to occur, and it requires the county to assign an attorney to represent the family of the decedent in the inquest proceeding. In the interest of time. I will be covering highlights in each section of my staff report. I'd like to start with a few background facts on inquests on page 404 of the packet. An inquest is an administrative fact finding inquiry into in the review of the manner, facts and circumstances of the death of an individual in King County. Inquests are held when a death involves a member of any law enforcement agency within King County, while in the performance of his or her duties. The scope of the inquest is limited to the cause and circumstances of the death, including whether the law enforcement member acted pursuant to policy and training. The purpose of the inquest is not to find fault or determine whether the use of force was justified. An inquest is not a trial in the sense that there is no judgment on liability or found fault is produced. However, an inquest has some of the attributes of a trial, including hearing, sworn testimony of witnesses and a selection of a jury in the case of an inquest known as a panel is the finders of fact. As you are well aware, there have been recent changes to the inquest process in recent years. I wanted to highlight a few of those changes on page four, oh five and four and six of the packet. In December of 2017, the executive convened a six member King County Inquest Process Review Committee. Then in January of 2018, the executive temporarily halted all King County inquests in order to allow more time to review the existing inquest policies and procedures. In October of 2018, based on some of the review panel recommendations, the executive signed a revised executive order for the policies and procedures for the inquests. Then, in May 2019, under the new inquest process, Judge Michael Spearman was appointed as an inquest administrator. There was a pause again in the inquest process in December 2020 as the parties indicated that they intended to seek review of the inquest procedures in King County Superior Court. Petitions were filed with the King County Superior Court subsequent to that, and most recently on Friday, June 11th, the Executive signed a revised executive order which includes revised policies and procedures. However, of note, there were really two things that were revised. Substantive changes to now allow for subpoenas to be issued to involved officers and to allow counsel for the involved officers to participate in the inquest hearings regardless of whether they offer testimony. The next date. That's coming up is July 17th of 2020. That is when you hear your court is scheduled to address all of the pending petitions related to the inquest process. I want to note that it's my understanding that the outcome of the litigation won't affect implementation of the charter amendment if it's approved by the voters. Page 5405 of the packet provides a very high level summary of the current inquest process that is outlined in the executive order. The process starts with the prosecuting attorney's office receiving information from a law enforcement agency within King County of a death of an individual involving more law enforcement. The PAO then reviews that information and advises the executive as to whether there should be an inquest. Upon receiving the advisory opinion, the executive determines whether to hold an inquest. If the inquest is to be held, the executive then directs the manager to proceed with the inquest and the manager then assigns one of the inquest administrators to preside over the inquest and the Superior Court provides the facilities, the jurors and the courtroom staff. Specifically now looking at the language in the charter amendment. Please turn to page four of six and four seven of the packet. The proposed changes to the Charter, if adopted by voters, include several substantive changes to Section 895 of the Charter. Specifically, it adds additional language regarding when an inquest is to be conducted. This additional language specifies that an inquest shall be held where a member of any law enforcement agencies actions, decision or possible failure to offer the appropriate care may have contributed to an individual's death. Was this language the intent of the Charter Review Commission was to expand and broaden the number and circumstances under which the inquests are to occur. The next substantive change in the charter amendment is that it defines what a member of any law enforcement agency is for purposes of this section of the charter. And that is the second substantive change. The third one is that it requires the county to assign an attorney to represent the family of the deceased decedent in the inquest proceeding. But the family has the option of accepting the attorney or not. As Council members are aware, in January of 2018, the Council did adopt Ordinance 18652, which requires the Department of Public Defense to provide legal representation to the family participating in inquests regardless of the income level of the family. The proposed charter amendment is very similar to this language. Mr. Chair, I would note that there are two amendments in your separate amendment packet starting on page seven. These amendments are not substantive to the First Amendment, which is on page seven, and it also has a corresponding title amendment reflects suggestions by legal counsel so that all the charter amendments use the same language when referring to the election dates. The Second Amendment on page nine is really a style and readability change so that the sentence reads a little bit better. Well, Mr. Chair, that concludes my comments. I'm happy to answer any questions for you. Thank you. Mr. Jon Batiste, before we go to questions, I would call on Mr. Surkov to take to present. Minister from the Review Commission. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, Council members. My name is Rob Soca and I'm a commissioner. Can you hear me? Yes. I'm sorry. Right. And I'm a commissioner on the Charter Review Commission. It is my honor to appear before you all today, and especially Council Member Sala. Tommy Lee. Hey, Suz Fernandez Marial. Joseph Pepin. My chance. Dunlap. Giddens. Malina Lyles. These are just a few of the people. That when we talk about inquests, irrespective of whether the death is is deemed to be justified or not, we must never forget to acknowledge the humanity in the names of those killed in encounters with police. Sadly, the lives of families and communities are forever changed when someone is killed by police. Nationally. We're also mindful of the recent brutal killings by law enforcement of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others across the country. And I'll tell you that in my personal capacity over the last few weeks, I've been absolutely honored to march alongside my my dear friend and old colleague council members Natalie. As well as thousands of others in the movement for Black Lives across our region and our nation. Personally, I've also been moved by Dormice devotion to serving others and humbled by his presence and inspired by his bold leadership. And I thank him. And I think every one of the council members who have supported this particular proposal today. I'm also hopeful that our region. Our region's unified voice will bring meaningful, lasting policy change to address issues of police accountability and transparency. But in this forum, in this legislative body in which I virtually stand before you today, you must move from protest the policy. And here is the opportunity at hand. And when we're talking about the proposed charter amendment, what will it specifically accomplish? Well, on the commission, we believe that this common sense charter amendment recommendation before this committee would directly advance three basic ideals and law enforcement accountability, truth and transparency. Therefore, the Commission recommends making two substantive changes, which Jenny already highlighted. As it pertains to inquests. To recap. We want to do. We want to elevate to the charter the relevant county code provision for writing a county funded attorney, the families of the deceased during the inquest process. Again, this particular proposal, with respect to this particular proposal, it's 100% consistent with existing law and interpretation. The second thing that we want to do, as Danny alluded to, is we want to ensure that the inquests process occurs in the event of an in-custody death. She talked about some of the the textual underpinnings and some of the specifics as it relates to the exact language. But broadly, what we want to do is make sure it applies to law enforcement agencies and corrections agencies and require an inquest at any time that any action or decision or failure to act may have contributed to a death. We talked about what an inquest is. There's some egregious myths out there. We've heard from the community during this process, but the overwhelming majority of community input that we've heard and gathered during this process was was strongly in favor of having the inquest, as we we've proposed today. It's just the Administrative Fact-Finding Inquiry. The purpose is not to determine liability or fault. It doesn't address wrongdoing or whether the death could have been avoided or whether it was justified. So why do we why do why are we moving this specific proposed charge, a charter amendment before you today? Well, broadly when we began our work on the commission to help enhance the inquest process potentially at the charter level, we started with the premise that agree families deserve answers, they deserve truth as well. Again, inquests are not a finger pointing exercise to assign blame. One way or the other, the findings of an inquest help all stakeholders, including policy makers, including you all help you understand the causes and circumstances of the death to enable people to learn and grow from these experiences. We we found that inquest reform at the charter level helps maintain and improve public confidence and trust in the integrity and professionalism of the community's various law enforcement agencies across King County. During officer involved killings. Again, the goal is to enable departments to be held accountable for creating better safer. And more equitable ways of protecting and policing. So we know that it adds legal representation and affirmative right to legal representation for family members of the deceased. We think that this will fully and more equitably allow participation in the in the inquest process, regardless of a family's financial means. And we also learned that providing legal counsel for all families of the deceased will better ensure each party to an inquest will have equal opportunity to participate. Again, that one is 100% consistent with the existing law, but we felt strongly that as a matter of policy and priority. Before the current crisis that we're seeing. And I'm not talking about the COVID crisis. That it was important to up level that particular provision to the charter. And then with respect to the in-custody death clarification. The Commission wanted to shine a light. The light of transparency that's inherent with a more robust inquest by expanding the requirement to all in-custody death situations. And we felt that understanding in-custody deaths, learning from each other's deaths, and using that information to make positive, positive changes to the system outweighed any potential concern or cost of having too many inquests. Again, we felt that aggrieved families deserve answers. So does the public and members in the law enforcement community. They all deserve a full and complete investigation of the facts that led to any tragic death. Which of course, is tragic. So, Mr. Chair. And Council. In sum, we believe that these common sense reforms to the Charter to create additional transparency and accountability and trust in law enforcement are necessary. And now the time for action and accountability is more. Is more clear than ever, in my view, and we must move forward together to get to the truth. And I'd finally like to make it clear that this was one of the early action items that Chair Miller identified earlier, that we moved forward last summer because it was adopted unanimously. We thought it was less controversial, and so we felt strongly about it then. And given current events, we feel well. I personally feel even even more strongly about it. So, Mr. Chair, that concludes my overview of the inquest proposals. At this time, I welcome any questions or comments that you all may have. Thank you very much. Colleagues questions. Seeing no questions. Council members all i. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to first thank Rob soccer. Thank you for first of all, for making me blush. I appreciate you. I got to know Rob when I was an associate at Perkins Curry, and he's always been an exceptional attorney and tireless champion for justice. I want to thank him all and trace Mikita, Oliver, Chair Miller and everybody on the Charter Commission, Charter Review Commission for all the hard work that you all have done. I'm very supportive of this amendment. You know, families that have gone through the inquest process, our families who we owe the most to these are families who lost loved ones at the hands of the government. And this charter amendment would make sure that if one of our constituents has had to suffer the death of a loved one , that they would be provided an attorney to go through the inquest or investigation process. So it's the absolute minimum that can be done, in my opinion, to provide the fundamental right to representation during what is the most unimaginable situation that a family could go through. So I ask for everyone's support on this, and thank you also to the co-sponsors on this legislation. Some of those. Councilmember Dunn. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm a little unclear. I got all the good arguments and the good arguments in favor of the legislation. I didn't get sort of a real breakdown with specificity of the of the language. Is this are passing an ordinance is charter amendment. I guess I'm missing exactly what the details in terms of the inquest language. This is a charter amendment as recommended by the charter commission. Okay. So let me ask this question. What I heard was was a very good explanation of the arguments in favor of the charter amendment. I didn't hear a central staff breakdown, and we're not going to do that. We're just going to rely on the charter review commissioners to provide the briefing. And that's fine. But I think there needs to be. A little more analysis in terms of what it does with the language does. And in terms of pro and con, there's a mr. Sanchez presentation is the commissioner was preceded by a staff report by Getty Jon Batiste. And if you have questions of Mr. Batiste or or want further information, we can certainly facilitate that. Yeah. I mean, Jenny, can you just break this down to quick parameters? I might have missed that. I was out of service for just a little bit longer. Can you break down the parameters of what the language changes? Yes. So on page 4:06 a.m. 407 of the packet, it's just a sentence that we're talking two sentences. The existing language is is very short and the changes are also very short, but they are substantive. So I'll go over it again. If adopted by voters, these changes to Section 895 of the charter would add the additional language regarding when an inquest is to be conducted. This additional language specifies and so this is the following is new language. An inquest shall be held where a member of any law enforcement agencies actions, decision or possible failure to offer the appropriate care may have contributed to an individual's death. Additionally, there is another sentence added for the purposes of this section. Members of any law enforcement agency includes a commissioned officer, noncommissioned staff and agent of any local or state police force, jail, detention facility or corrections agency. The next substantive and it's an is again, a one sentence but very substantive. The county shall assign an attorney to represent the family of the decedent in the inquest proceeding, but the family has the option of accepting the attorney or not. As Mr. Sokka indicated. Currently, the current code provides that the Department of Public Defense shall provide an attorney to represent the family. So this would not change. The county's the current practice now, but it would elevate that to the charter. Additionally, as I noted earlier, the added language is intended to expand and broaden the number of inquests that occur with that additional language. Got it. Very good. That's okay. That that that helps me. I try and thank you for that. And I missed part of that. Is there a beneficial note or anything in terms of the cost associated with it, with that those additional changes. There has not been a fiscal note currently the. County does fund the administration of the inquest process. But there has not been a fiscal note to specify how many what the additional costs, if any, would be. And Mr. Chair, real quick on this, we got 11 charter amendments to the plan will be a central staffer will introduce the issue, then we'll have a charter review. Commissioner, make the pitch essentially. That's the point. Just so I understand. That's how we've done it today. If there are additions, if when we take up additional charter amendments. And to date, only five of the 11 have been introduced. There are commissioners who wish to make presentations. The commission supplies somebody. Then, yes, we would follow a very similar format. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Yvonne, regular. True. That was the question. Council member Dunn's question was the one I was curious about. If there is a fiscal note, if there is a limit on how much we pay and I want that, we'd have an opportunity to evaluate that and the forecast. Thank you, Councilmember Lambert. You can understand it. Agree with Councilmember Graham there couldn't be a more horrendous experience than life for anybody but to lose a loved one's. I did support the inquest process and paying for the attorneys. But the reason for a charger for me is how the government works not to pick special laws. We like the Mexican charter so can't be changed for ten years. So the things that are important here are writing in law or providing the attorneys and we have inquests. And so I think that as a policy, taking our favorite pieces of legislation and sticking it in the charter, that's not what the charters for. And I have some concerns about some of the language, like possible failure, appropriate care, who who decides what was appropriate care. And that's the reason we have laws so that we can define what is possible failure, what is appropriate care. So we have a definition, we put it in the charter. We don't have that. These are already existing in the existing law. And I think that they are important. I can't imagine them being changed. So having them clearly defined in law is in my mind where these things should be, not in charter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Further discussing colleagues. Councilmember Bell DC. Mr. Chair, just a brief comment. I really appreciate the what appears to be some serious care that went into drafting the language around when an inquest will be required. I'm glad to see that this came out of the executives process because I think, as we all know, currently, the executive or prior to his executive orders of recent times would have a decision. Yes, this one gets an inquest. No, that one doesn't get an inquest and that can. And that in and of itself can be, I imagine, a very difficult decision to make, but also seems very odd and unfair to the people who have been infected by the person who's been, you know, their family member's death. Like, why is one one death worthy of this kind of deep public inquiry? And another one isn't? So I think the standardization of it is really good. But also, the the Department of Justice has standards for when we report what what in custody death is. That counts for purposes of data collection. And it sometimes doesn't make a whole lot of sense, I'll tell you. Like so we have had people who have never, ever set foot in our jail, who died in custody and were counted as a death inside the King County jails. We have likewise had people who have come into jail, had bad things happen to them in jail, got sent to the hospital because of the injuries they incurred, died at the hospital from their injuries and don't count as an end to custody death, which is just crazy, right. So I like when I read this, it to me it makes a lot of sense that the way it's been stated and I appreciate the work that apparently went into that and I'm happy to support both the standard that's being set here for a routine inquest be happening whenever there is a death in our custody, whether that be in police custody or in or in like sheriff's custody or in our jails. And I really I mean, I don't I'm very happy to support the proposal that the family gets a support person who understands this difficult process, which I think would be hard for a layperson to navigate at the best of times. It all makes good sense to me and I support it. Thank you. Further questions. Councilmember Carlos. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to chime in, I also support, since I was pleased to work on this issue in one justice committee when it came through earlier. And I think it's an important step forward thinking. Council members are prime sponsor. I'd like to move the amendment. Mr. Chair. Councilmember Sala has moved adoption of Ordinance 119 to 36 and moved adoption of Amendment one. There are two amendments, correct? That's correct. There are two amendments in a title amendment to conform with the First Amendment. Can you remind us the contents of Amendment one in Amendment two? Yes, they are both non substantive amendments and Amendment One is simply to make the same changes to the election date language. And then Amendment two is intended for style and readability changes that. The sentence reads a little bit better. Councilmember Zala has moved to adoption, a move that would give a two passed recommendation to Ordinance 2019 to 36 and adoption of Amendment one. The date change discussion on Amendment One seen none of those in favor of Amendment One. Please signify by saying i. I. I opposed. Nay, the ayes have it. Amendment one is adopted. Council members all by Amendment two. So move. Mr. Chair and some of his allies moved the adoption of amendment to see no discussion. All those in favor of amendment to please signify by saying i. I opposed nay. The ayes have it. Amendment two is adopted. Council members on how they would you move it? Adoption of Title Amendment one, please. So move, Mr. Chair. Adult Amendment Tier one as before. See no discussion. All those in favor of title amendment to one please signify by saying I, i all those opposed. No, the ayes have it. Total Amendment one is adopted. We have Ordinance 2019 to 36 as amended before us. Discussion Council members. Hello. Would you like to open? Sorry, but I think we have said everything that needs to be said at this point. I hope everybody supports this amendment and I'm very thankful for all those who worked on it and co-sponsored it. Thank you. Thank you for the discussion, Councilmember Caldwell's. Sorry, Mr. Chair. I just left the unmute. None. It's my little trick to see. Oh, I think it's my advance warning if I realize some of these mute is off. I see people meeting all over the place right now. See no further. No one further to speak. I'd ask the clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Belushi. Hi, Councilman. Douchey Council member Dombrowski. I. Council member Dombrowski. Both I Council member. Done. No. Council member done votes now. Council member Cole wells. I. Councilmember Caldwell's votes I. Councilmember Lambert. No. Councilmember Lambert. Votes. No. Councilmember. Autograph. I. Councilmember after grove votes. I. Councilmember Yvonne Wraith. Our. No. Councilmember von Right. Thereabouts, no. Council members only. By. Council members on high votes? Yes. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The vote is six I's Council Councilmembers Lambert on rank power and one vote no. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2019 to 36, and we will advance that to full council. We will expedite it. So it would appear on next Tuesday's council agenda. That takes us to the next to them on our agenda.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the rates, terms and conditions for the use and sale of electricity supplied by the City Light Department to customers in the city of SeaTac; and amending Sections 21.49.020, 21.49.030, 21.49.040, 21.49.052, 21.49.055, 21.49.057, 21.49.081, and 21.49.100 of the Seattle Municipal Code to implement new rates for the city of SeaTac that reflect the terms of the 2015 franchise agreement.

SeattleCityCouncil_07272015_CB 118443

Thank you. Agenda Item seven Council Bill 118443. Relating to the rates, terms and conditions for the use and sale of electricity supplied by the satellite department to customers in the city of SeaTac and amending SeaTac. Thank you Councilmember. So on trying to help you out there. Yes. This item also accompanies item number nine. I will go ahead and speak to vote. So I'm speaking to item number seven and nine. City Light has negotiated the new franchise agreement with the City of SeaTac. These are 15 year agreements and you may have noticed that they have all been expiring and have been renegotiated recently. There's a standard agreement and this is similar to those standard agreements. There's one thing that's notable. There's something called a consideration payment, which can either be 4% or 6%. This is a fee that is assessed to the customers in that area. In this case, the customer is SeaTac. And satellite ads that feed and then hand that revenue over to the city similar to a tax. It has no impact on other customers outside the city. When Sea-Tac renegotiated their franchise agreement, they elected to switch from the 4% consideration payment to a 6% consideration payment. And that's why there are two kinds of those. This one adopts the new rates with the consideration payment, and item number nine will adopt a franchise agreement as a whole. And I just wanted to note that as I have advocated here in Seattle, I think the city of sea dogs should alter how they do rate to lessen the burden on working families. However, this is what Sea Deck has negotiated, so the Energy Committee unanimously recommends passage of the bill. Thank you. Questions or comments? Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Okamoto. Rasmussen I so want I back shot Goran I Harrill I look Carter I O'Brien and President Burgess nine in favor and nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. And I have just signed the oil train resolution with the extra comma removed. Thank you. Councilmember Okamoto, please read item eight.

AN ORDINANCE relating to residential rental properties; requiring a minimum of 180 days' prior written notice to tenants whenever the housing costs to be charged a tenant are to increase; and amending Sections 7.24.030, 22.202.080, and 22.206.180 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_09272021_CB 119585

So one. Yes. President Gonzalez? Yes. Eight is in favor and unopposed. The bill passes as amended and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Well, please read item 11 into the record. The report is suspended. The bill excuse me. And Reference Rights Committee Agenda Item 11 counts 4119585 residential rental properties for clients, a minimum of 180 days prior eviction notice to tenants. Whenever the housing costs to be charge, a tenant are to increase and amending sections 7.20 4.0 or 3020 2.202.0 80 and 22.20 6.1 80. Of this code. The Committee recommends that will pass amended with councilmembers who want one Alice Suarez and Lewis in favor and council with an abstention from Councilmember Peterson. Thank you so much, Councilperson. Before we go through the steps of discussing the bill, would you also like to have Agenda Item 12 read into the record for purposes of discussion? Or are you fine handling each bill separately? I'm fine. We'll take it. We'll take a vote separately on both of them. But I just just for purposes of the conversation. Either way is fine with me if I think separately will also work. Okay. Well, we'll go ahead and do it separately. And if if it starts looking like people want to comment on item 12 as well, then we'll go ahead and take a pause and have that read into the record at that time. So. Okay. I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Samant, who is the chair of the committee in order to provide the committee's report. Thank you. And I would like to make a few comments before moving the amendments, if that's okay. The this legislation. So I'm sorry, I'm speaking about item number drop. See what I mean? We're no. No, no. Go ahead. I know this legislation is the first of two bills from my office addressing the crisis renters face from rising rents as reported in the Sustainability and Rent Committee and and also in successive Monday morning briefings of the City Council. The data from apartment list dot com. A landlord website shows that rents in Seattle have increased over 25% in 2021 alone. I mean, this is just a staggering rate of increase. If this trend were to continue, rents will have increased by 40% by the end of this year. Imagine getting a 40% increase in your wages. I mean, that's just unheard of. So undoubtedly, this is an unmanageable situation for renters and also is a clear explanation of why we need rent control. And as members of the public and the members know, my office has drafted rent control legislation which we hope to bring to a vote in December. But in the meantime, we do need legislation to mitigate the harm that is going to be experienced by recent years because of the skyrocketing rents. And that's what today's vote for the bills today are intended to do. This bill in front of us right now requires landlords to provide six months notice for rent increases. Currently in Seattle, only two months notice is required, which is not nearly enough notice for renters to rearrange their lives when they are displaced by a rent increase, particularly given how difficult it's going to be for them to find another rental home, just given how unaffordable most housing has become across the city. And this is also a national phenomenon. And also, as I've mentioned before, this bill was originally requested by the City of Seattle Renters Commission. Oh. Increasing the notice landlords are required to give renters already. Freezes cannot stop the rent increase, but it does give renters the time they will need to find new housing and rearrange their lives when the rent, if and when a rent and these forces them to move. The Sustainability and Renters Rights Committee recommends the city council pass this bill, as Amelia mentioned, with all votes in favor and unopposed and one abstention. I just wanted to read an extract from a letter that was sent to the city council by a social worker, Heather Steiner, who also spoke in public comment a little while ago, who works in the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, who says, quote, I've had to move, slash, relocate eight times in ten years because my landlord kept raising my rent every year by 5 to 10%. I work in social services for the with disabled people, and I do not get income raises anywhere near this level. I cannot absorb thousands of dollars in increases every year. So I keep being forced to move every 12 months. And it is getting so hard on me, my pets and my work patients who operate out of my home office. These people are very disabled and any change in their schedule and structure is very hard on them. And I am drowning here. My work is very important to me. But if I cannot find a way to keep my head above water financially, I will be forced to abandon all my disabled patients and find a higher paying job . So I really urge the City Council to vote yes in favor of this bill because it's clear that it will make a real, tangible difference in the lives of renters. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember San Juan. Are there any other comments on the bill? Elsewhere, Peterson pleads. To Council President colleagues on this bill. During the committee meeting, I proposed an amendment to exempt small landlords defined as owning four or fewer units in Seattle. And the amendment failed by a narrow vote. And so I abstained at committee to give myself more time to to think about what to do today. I do appreciate the intent of this bill and support helping struggling renters. A theme of our response to the COVID pandemic has been to boost rental assistance for those in need. We've also adopted several renters rights bills during the past two years, including the winter ban on evictions. I've heard from many small landlords, though, that the influx of multiple changes to the landlord rental regulations has created confusion and discourages them from continuing to provide rental housing in Seattle. Currently, we provide 60 days notice and so this bill would triple that time period. One approach would have been to perhaps double that to 220 days and then see how well that worked. These are tripling it. Regardless, I support expanding the notice period for larger corporate landlords, but my amendment again would have exempted small landlords owning four or fewer units. And since that committee meeting, nothing substantive has changed in the bill. In fact, I've heard from multiple mom and pop landlords concerned. So I will be voting no on this bill, mainly because it does not exempt small landlords. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Peterson. Next up is Councilmember Morales. Thank you. Council President. I am supporting this bill as I did in committee. In my opinion, this bill merely asks the landlord to give a few more months notice for rent increases. It does not because because state law currently bans rent stabilization. This bill does not prevent a landlord from increasing the rent, nor does it restrict the amount of an increase. And while this does mean that landlords have to wait a short amount of time before before implementing an increase, the more important piece of this bill for me is that it means tenants have adequate time to find a new job, to find new housing, to deal with childcare issues that may present as a result of this change, or to make any other number of adjustments that may be necessary so that they can pay for a rent increase or make the plans to move out and find something that's more affordable. So I think this is a relatively small ask from the landlords, but could have a really acute impact, a meaningful impact for for tenants. So I will be supporting the legislation. In due course their morals. Are there any other comments on the bill? I'm not seeing any hands raised. Customers want anything you'd like to see in closing. Just that. Of course, there are advocates that I would like to publicly thank, but I'll save them for the second bill because both the bills were advocated together, advocated for together, and only to add the small landlords are not the ones increasing rents by high rates which which is where it makes a difference how much notice you have. So as far as what the bills today that they're considering are concerned, they simply don't affect the small landlords who are not actually looking to gouge their tenants. Thank you so much, Councilmember. One paper does conclude debate on this bill. So will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill? Strauss Yes. Herbold Yes. Lewis Yes. Morales That's. Must get a high. PETERSON No. So what? Yes. President Gonzalez I seven in favor one opposed. Thank you so much. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will a quick please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read the short title of item 12 into the record?

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Urban Commons, The Wave team and other key stakeholders to determine the cost of a Feasibility Study pertaining to the development of a Gondola System connecting Downtown Long Beach with Queen Mary Island; and Request City Manager to work with Urban Commons to identify key stakeholders to create a multiparty partnership to conduct an initial Feasibility Study pertaining to the development of a potential gondola system connecting Downtown and Queen Mary, and identify potential public and private funding sources to begin the initial feasibility study.

LongBeachCC_03122019_19-0223

Next, we'll go to item 15 with the clerk. Please read the item. Communication from Councilmember Pierce, Councilwoman Gonzales. Councilwoman Price, Councilmember Richardson. Recommendations are to determine the costs of a feasibility study pertaining to the development. Of a gondola system. Connecting downtown Long Beach with Queen Mary Island, and to create a multi party partnership to conduct an initial. Feasibility study and identify potential public and private funding sources. Yes. County Councilwoman Pierce. If we could wait for everybody to clear. So we can hear. That would be awesome. Okay. I thank you. And I want to say thank you to the city. I wanted to say thank you to the mayor for putting together the Queen Mary Development Task Force. Several years ago, I was a 12 person task force that really worked to vision what we might do at the Queen Mary and what urban commons might do during their their lease there. One of the concepts that came up was doing an aerial tram and to some it seems like pie in the sky. If we're going to be punny tonight. I'll go there. We know that dreaming big is something that's really important. And we know that this is a creative idea that other cities like San Diego, L.A., are really exploring and taking seriously. I've had many conversations with urban commons, with other stakeholders, with the port that say that they are interested in seeing if this is feasible. And I know we already have a feasibility study. That was a very quick one, a phase one. And what this item would do is basically have our city staff work with all the stakeholders to identify funds to go forward with the second feasibility study. And so I want to say thank you to Tom Modica for working with us on this item and making sure that, again, this isn't a commitment that the city is going to spend city dollars on this, but this is about visioning and doing this prep work that really allows urban commons to come in and develop something that works for the city, works with our waterfront and works with our residents. And so I want to thank all the stakeholders that have participated so far and thank my council colleagues for signing on to this item. I think it's fun to dream a little bit and see what we can get to. So I'm curious to hear from public comment. I know we have some people here in the audience and then hear from our council colleagues. Fine. Thank you. Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez. We can bring the public up. Okay, fine. However, the public comment on this item, which you please come up. First off, I. Appreciate that we have an opportunity of being in front of eventually in front of the mayor, the honorable mayor and members of the city council. Um. It has been a long time coming. My name is Alex Bellemare. My address is 6242 Napoli Court, Long Beach. And I am. President of the statewide developers and the initiator of the wave, which is the aerial tram. Which, by the way, began at the. Last. Portion of 1990. So that'll give you some idea how length shows. Everything is a matter of timing. Now as a little bit of the history. The way back. When we were approved by the council, the town council, to proceed with our project and everything was going fine. Except it evolved our financial our finances. That is, on a country level. Turned into a very, very deep recession. And at that point in time, the city. Was no longer. In a position financially for them to have. Their staff. Work with us, and we had to put the project on the shelf. Subsequent to that, we began working with the the Queen Mary people. And others to the extent where we raised funds, substantial front funds, that would have taken us well into the project and just about ready to go. And the Queen Mary, as you painfully remember. Had financial problems. So once again, we had to. Put the project on the on the. Agenda or I'm sorry, on the on on hold. It is painful, but fortunately it caused this. Project to be delayed. Until now and with the financial finances nationally. And and our. Thanks to all of your work here. The city of Long. Beach and many other factors. And we are at this point ready to take advantage of the other time. You might say that the third the third time. Is. Really the charm. Now. Because of my age, which is like 84 at this point, I realized that my steam. Has pretty well evaporated. To the extent where I need. To have, uh, someone to fill in. The. Leadership role. And carry most of the, of the, the challenge here. And that individual is standing next to me. Clay Sandwich I believe that most of you know Clay. He is an incredible business person, a tremendous. Communicator, and a kind of. A guy that once he puts his teeth in something, he will not let it go. So with that and what let me first say to our council lady here, thank you so much. I'm going to turn that over to the co-developer clay. Sandwich at this point in time. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Alex. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, where you are? City Council. Thank you very much. I'd just like to take a very brief moment to identify my team. That's a world class team that we've assembled to really take this project and really look at it. Alex has been on this for over 15 years. I've been involved with it for about six. But we have assembled a world class team representing WSP is Cliff Hankey here in the audience. WSP is a global firm representing about 30,030 7000 employees. I've got our Moros. Our project advisor is a former executive director or acting executive director and retired from Port of Long Beach. I've got Robert ATA Lino, who is not here with us tonight. We also have Dapo Meyer Gary event, who is the largest gondola manufacturer in the world and probably has more ropeway tramway systems installed in in the world than anybody. So we do have a world class team that can really evaluate what the right options are for connecting the downtown to the to the waterfront. And I just want to say thank you to the mayor and the City Council for consideration of requesting staff to assist in identifying funding for the feasibility study and benefit cost analysis of the aerial tram people people mover system. Our tram folks look forward to working with all stakeholders in establishing the basis and feasibility of an aerial tram system. So thank you all very much for your time tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mrs. Gonzalez likes like this. I think this is great. And I think, Councilmember Pearce, for bringing this forward with Alex and with everyone, because I really do think that this is the prime time in downtown being the other half of downtown to really. Start exploring these great ideas and really providing different avenues for transportation. I've heard my residents talk about this quite a bit, and I know that Austin, Brooklyn, Chicago are also exploring various ideas. And so where we have to tell ourselves that we're a small city, but we're actually a really big city, and so we should absolutely think big as well. And I would only include and I know this was a very loose request to study, but I would also include any commissioners specific to our economic development, which I'm sure that they will be included, but everyone should be at the table to be able to explore how great this could be potentially for our city . And I think urban comments as well for coming to the table and being a part of this. Thank you. Thank you, Congressman Austin. Oh, thank you. Um, you know, I love when we can dream and this is when I heard about this, this idea that was one that was very intriguing to me and one that is very intriguing to me because I've been to many cities, many downtowns that actually have amenities. And I think this would definitely add to the character of our downtown. Specifically, the item is requesting that the stakeholders or the city manager work with stakeholders to determine the fees cost of a feasibility study. And to my city manager, I had a question regarding where and how such a feasibility study would be funded if you have an idea if there is a fund available to do so. Thank you, Mr. Austin, and members of the Council. So there is already some work underway and Councilmember Pearce alluded to it. So Urban Commons is in the middle of putting together their development proposal for the 54 acres across the bay and as part of their master development they are looking at all possibilities for getting people over to the site as part of their Sequoia. So they are already looking at this. They have started some technical feasibility work just to see is it technically feasible. And what they've let us know is they want you know, that next step would really be kind of feasibility of of neo of a system. Where would it go? Who could maybe be included? And they wanted to take a break and say there's some other partners that might want to participate in in making that a broader study. So it really is urban commons is the lead. It would be their study. And we will pull together people to see who might be interested in helping to fund some of this. We expect it to be maybe about 100,000 in the beginning, but will determine that. And if the city were to participate, it might be some transportation dollars in a very low amount. But we haven't made that determination yet too. We all going get together great. Well, that helps clarify one of the questions that that a constituent posed to me a little earlier, like, well, how do we pay for such a feasibility study? And I was curious, is the talent fund available to do this type of study? Potentially, it could be Prop eight transit, it could be some tidelands. Again, it's a pretty minor dollar amount at this point. If this were to become a full on city project, we a project wouldn't be a city project to be you see, obviously we would be looking for grants in metro and those larger amounts of dollars to support. Okay. So it doesn't sound like this is a general fund burden and there might be some some other opportunities, is that correct? I would not imagine that we would ask for a general fund for this. No. Great. Well, but that said, I'm happy to support this moving forward. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongeau. I appreciate my budget oversight committee vice chair or member and their questions. They answered exactly what my questions were. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Pearce, you want to go at this again? Councilman Parrish. Councilwoman Price all the time. We look so much alike. And it's the p, the Persians. Okay, um, so this is a great idea. I want to thank Clay and Alex. They did brief me on this a few months ago, and I think it's definitely an idea worth exploring. And I look forward to the opportunity to learn more about it and discuss the feasibility. I do think it's a really good effort when we're talking about mobility and the difficulty in going over to the Queen Mary and some of the congestion that we experience and we will continue to experience as hopefully the Queen Mary thrives with programing and that entire area over there is rehabilitated and thrive. So I look forward to this. I think, Councilmember Pearce, for bringing this item forward and I look forward to hearing the results. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. Thanks, Vice Mayor. So, like, I like the idea. I think it's going to be essential if, you know, Queen Mary is going to be developed. We're going to have to figure out how to get people over that over that harbor. Whatever it is, we're going to have to figure that out because it's difficult to get over there. And, you know, and it myself, you know, I've used that the water taxi, both the water taxi and the Aqua Link, I've used them both and they're really cool. But I feel like they like the experience of getting on a boat is really what what folks use that for. And I think, you know, having something like a gondola, people are going to ride it for the experience of riding a gondola. Right. And it's going to actually transport people. And I think it's really cool that, you know, they're thinking the same thing in Dodger Stadium from from Union Station. So I think timing is timing is important. I was in Seattle I was in Seattle this weekend on the Space Needle. And they have an area where they talk about the history. I think what's really interesting is it accounts for every little step along the way. So it says right here, June 2nd, 1961, they number 47 of the project. Seattle Building Superintendent asks City Council for permits permits to allow the needle's construction. So all these little when we think big we may not know how far is going to go, but all these little roles that we play, they all, you know, contribute to the identity of our city. You know, you think of Saint Louis, you think of the arch. You think of, you know, Seattle. You think of the Space Needle in Long Beach is going to be the Queen Mary in the port of Long Beach. And so the more investment we can make into gondolas and things like that, I think are great. So I'm happy to be in support of this design. And thank you, Councilwoman Pierce. Thank you. Councilman Pierce. Two things. One is I wanted to just recognize and thank the people that sent letters in IBEW, Leo's Building Trades, Urban Commons and John Thomas from our Queen Mary Task Force today. So we received those. I did have a question for Mr. Modica on timing. I know we've been talking about this for a little while. Just if you could clarify what the next step would be. So if this were to go forward. Which it seems like it is, we would be working with urban commons to pull together the stakeholders. So really, you know, this is their project. They are in the middle of their entitlement process for that site and they need, you know, to submit a plan for mobility of which they right now they believe the gondola would be part of it or a different alternative that would do a similar function. So we would pull them together and have them help identify some of the stakeholders. You've identified some of them here and then start talking about, you know, what the cost could be, whether there's an appetite for investing. And then we imagine coming back with a report and we'll let you know what we would recommend for for a city contribution and if there was one, and how we would pay for that. Thank you and thank all my council colleagues for their support. Thank you. I just want to I'm glad I made it before the item was was ending. But I want to just say that I completely support the study and the concept of the gondola connection. And, Mr. BOLLYKY, you've been at this for a very long time. I remember the first time we sat down and you told me about your your vision for connecting the downtown and in different ways. And this was, I think, even before I was on the city council. And I just want to just say that I think your persistence and your ability to look to look towards the future is really served this project well in the team. You have a great group of folks working with you, and so I'm very supportive of the feasibility study. I have been supportive of this concept as it's been, you know, kind of been back and forth in different iterations over the years. But I think it's a it's a great way of connecting the the pieces of Long Beach that need greater connection and greater transit opportunities. This was mentioned, I heard over the Speaker in the back. Mr. MODICA You had mentioned Metro and I want to just re-emphasize that once we get past the feasibility stage and hopefully get to an actual project that we can look to or agencies like Metro for significant partnership. Metro right now is looking at investing in a aerial gondola system that could connect Dodger Stadium, you know, to other parts of of the ravine. It's looked at looking at possibly a gondola system that would connect the Hollywood sign down to two visitors. So there's a lot of conversation around different types of transit. And in my view, this isn't just an innovative project. This is a transit project. And any way that we can invest in public transit and bring in partners that are doing that work I think is really important. And so I look forward to the conversation and I look forward to bringing this project forward to the Metro Board when when we're ready to do so. And so. Thank you to Councilmember Pearce and everyone that supportive of this. And I look forward to to continuing to support it. And with that I think they did public comment already members going and cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. We have public comment. Let me. We have. Two categories of folks. Let me start with with is is Latoya marshall here and Trymaine Deanna Ellis. And then Larry Goodhew will be next. Actually, Mr. Good to be there first and then you'll be the third.

Recommendation to approve the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and Assessment for the period of December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Magnolia Industrial Group, Inc., for a one-year period; and authorize payment of $1,511 in City property assessments from the General Fund (GF) in the Public Works Department (PW). (District 1)

LongBeachCC_11222016_16-1036

Motion carries. Thank you. Item number six Please. Report from Economic and Property Development and Public Works recommendation to approve the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and assessment for the period of December 1st, 2016 through November 30th, 2017, automatically extending the current agreement with the Magnolia Industrial Group and authorize payment of 1500 dollars in city property assessments from the General Fund in the Public Works Department District one. Thank you, City Manager West. With a report from Jim Fiske Garman, one of our managers in economic development and property management department, honorable vice mayor and City Council Members. This item is the annual approval of the Magnolia Industrial Group Property and Business Improvement District and report and ongoing assessment. The recommended action on this item continues the assessment for another year. There are no proposed changes to the basis of the assessment, nor any significant changes with proposed activities or programs. Therefore, staff request that City Council receive supporting documentation of record and approve the recommendation to continue the levy of the assessment and authorize the city manager to extend the agreement for one additional year. That concludes my report. Thank you. Councilmember Gonzalez. Yes, I'll just say, Jim, you know, you do such an incredible job with our business improvement districts, especially MiG. And they also are great, incredible, hard workers. So it was great seeing you last month at the meeting and continue the amazing work. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Arango. Okay. Is there any public comment on this item saying non please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Number 17, please. Before we go to 17, just an announcement that will be we continued the closed session earlier. We'll be continuing that to the end of the meeting. So just wanted to make sure that we announce that as well.

AN ORDINANCE naming the Children and Family Justice Center Building the Judge Patricia H. Clark Children Family Justice Center Building, in honor of the late Patricia H. Clark, Superior Court Judge and revered community member; and naming the new building's resource center the Justice Bobbe J. Bridge Resource Center, in honor of Washington State Supreme Court Justice (retired) Bobbe J. Bridge, courageous juvenile justice services leader.

KingCountyCC_07152019_2019-0210

Thank you. I believe that concludes public testimony for today's meeting. Is there anyone else who would like to offer public testimony? Yeah. Anyone else. Then we'll close the public hearing and we'll move to item seven on today's agenda. The county's Children and Family Justice Center will be opening later this year. This ordinance, ordinance 2019, 210 would name the building itself and the resource center within the building after two prominent local jurists, Patricia Clarke and Bobby Bridge, both of whom had a tremendous impact on the improvement of services provided to juveniles within the juvenile justice system . Here to brief the committee on the legislation is Patrick Hamacher. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council members, for the record. Patrick Hamacher, council staff. The discussion of this ordinance begins on page 28 in your packets today. And as you noted in your introduction, Mr. Chair, this ordinance would name the facility, the Children and Family Justice facility after Judge Patricia Clark. It would name the resource center within the facility after Justice Bobby Ridge. Just by way of background towards the bottom of page 28. Patricia Clark served as a King County Superior Court judge from 1998 until 2015, and she served as the chief judge of the Juvenile Division from 2000 to 227. During her time on the court, Judge Clark received many awards, some of which are the Vanguard Award from the King County Women's League, Women's Women Lawyers, the 2005 Voices for Children Award from the Washington State Children's Alliance and the Trailblazer Award from the National Black Prosecutors Association. She also served as a member of the Superior Court Judges Association, Board of Trustees and the Superior Court Judges Association, Family Juvenile Law Committee. Moving to page 29, in your staff reports, she chaired King County's disproportionality committee and the State of Washington's Committee on Racial Disproportionality. Judge Clarke also led the county's implementation of Dependency Family Treatment Court, and it was instrumental in the Reclaiming Futures Treatment Court and Family Treatment Court. The ordinance would name the facility formerly would formally name the facility. The judge, Patricia H. Clark Children and Family Justice Center Justice Bobby Bridge served as a superior court judge for ten years. Four of those were as the chief judge of the juvenile court and two years as a presiding judge of the King County Superior Court. In 1999, she was appointed to the Washington State Supreme Court, where she served until 2007. After leaving the bench, she served as the founding president and CEO of the Children for excuse me, as a Center for Children and Youth Justice. As with Judge Clarke, Justice Bridge also received many awards throughout her career, a sampling of which is the David W suck up Speak Up for a child from the Washington State Association of Court Appointed Special Advocates and Guardian Ad Litem. Jurist of the Year from the Washington State Bar Association and Judge of the Year from the King County Bar Association. Justice Bridge also served as co-chair for the Supreme Court Commission on Children in Foster Care. The chair of the Domestic Violence Child Maltreatment Statewide Protocol Project and chair of the State, a task force. Judge Britt Justice Bridge contributed to the establishment of a Unified Family Court in King County and in establishing a child care facility at the Mailing Regional Justice Center. Moving to the very bottom of page 29, the proposed ordinance would name the Resource Center after Justice Bobby Bridge and just four by way of further information. The Resource Center at the Children and Family Justice Center actually includes a large number of services, including a full list that's on page 29 and 30. Some of the more important of which are the housing coordinators, transportation support, legal resources, community based services, and behavioral health services for the families and the children involved with the criminal justice system and having interactions at the Children and Family Justice Center. As I noted, the ordinance would name the Resource Center as the Justice Bobby Jay Bridge Resource Center. That concludes my staff report, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. See? No questions of Mr. Hamacher. I would invite Judge Bill Bowman and Michelle Clarke to join the presentation table. Councilmember Lambert, you want to speak from there or during the presentation table? Well, it's okay. Of course. Put the ordinance before us first. Yes, please. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to move. Proposed Artist 3019 020210. Councilmember Lambert has moved adoption of Ordinance 2019 210. Councilmember Lambert. Thank you. I'm very excited about this day that we're getting. We've gotten here when I actually thought at this point we would already be in this courthouse. So took a little longer than. We had expected. And I'm very excited that today we're talking about naming it for these two wonderful women. Judge Patricia Clark used the power of hope, compassion and seized opportunities to improve the lives of youth in their families. She was a strong advocate for prevention programs to help young people out of the detention system. She was truly a pioneer for change. I went with her on a trip to Illinois to look at juvenile justice best practices. She was truly a leader, and then during her time, the number of incarcerated youth dropped dramatically. New children in Justice Center will soon be a place where children and families will be treated with them utmost respect and access to a wide range of services, as Pat just talked about. The facility will include child care for families on court business, additional space for youth and family services, and a resource center connecting youth and family with the services in their communities. And I just like to tell you three times that stick out in my mind with Justice Clark. I met her when I was the legislator and we were doing a project. We went across the state looking at different courtrooms and trying to decide what made the best judges the best judges. And she was one of the three judges in the state that I chose as being the best judge. And the reason for that was she had great interaction with the people before her. She had great compassion, and she expected the best out of people. And when I was giving a report in front of a clear continuing education for justice guy in front of members of the bar, she was in the audience when I was talking about this wonderful judge, and everybody started looking at her and I went, Oh, there she is. So that was fun. And it was fun to have her peers hear all the different things that she had done because some of them they hadn't heard of. One of my favorite meetings with her was where we were going out to lunch and she was wearing a a pink outfit. It was not my favorite pink outfit. And when Blackman was waiting in the waiting room and he was there by himself, and she went up to him and she said, Can I help you? And he said, No, you can't help me. And she said, Well, why not? And he said, Well, that lady of there supposed to have helped me an hour ago, and she isn't doing anything to help. And so she said, Now tell me what the problem is. And so the boy told her, and she called clear across the room to the clerk and said, Hey, when is that going to be ready? And she goes, Oh, Judge. Just a minute. And the boy looked up at her. His eyes were like saucers. And he said, You're the judge. And she looked over at him. She said, not only mad, the judge, I am the presiding judge. And yes, we will get this. And I have one more thing to tell you. Never underestimate the power of a black woman. And I just thought that was so amazing. He was very impressed that and that she was there to help him. And she truly did. And she also got the law and the Bar Association Award. And it was really nice to be there that night and hear all the wonderful things and compliments that other judges and attorney had to say about her. The other part of this is that the resource center is going to be named after Justice Bobby Bridge. And we just heard her background. She also is the woman who's the visionary. And not only did she help establish the first court based child care center in the Pacific Northwest at our center, and if you haven't been able to get in and see that it is so child friendly and appropriate and has all these great safety precautions. She also most people don't know this, but she was the guiding force between the on the legislation and the family unification law. And she and I worked on that when we were I was in the legislature. So she had a guiding force in family unification to make it even possible that you could unite those kinds of cases. So I'm very excited that this court is going to be named after these two amazing pioneer women. And as soon as we hear from two other great speakers, I'd like to that we have a yes vote on this ordinance and to thank the many co-sponsors who have made this possible. And so with that, I would like to introduce as to the listening audience, because we all know and love her, Michelle Clark, her daughter, followed by our assistant presiding judge, Judge Bowman. Michelle, if you don't mind, Councilmember, we're going to flip that order. Oh, okay. Judge by members. Okay. Thank you, Judge. Good afternoon, everybody. Judge Bill Bowman. I'm the assistant presiding judge for the King County Superior Court. In behalf of the King County Superior Court, I want to thank all of you for the opportunity to speak in favor of this ordinance. I actually had the honor of appearing in front of a judge, Patricia Hall Clark, when I was a lawyer and then working with her as a colleague for a number of years. And I think everybody here knows that she was a fierce advocate for the kids in our community. Some may not know that she had a career in social work and youth services before she ever attended law school. In fact, it was at age 40 when she obtained her J.D. and her master's in public administration from the University of Washington. And then she had another career with the King County prosecutor's office, where she was a deputy prosecutor and worked her way up to be a senior deputy prosecutor in 1996. She brought all of her passion and experience from decades of working with youth to our bench as a commissioner. At first, her focus then was on at risk youth and children in need of services cases. She became a Superior Court judge in 1998 and continued working as a champion for families in our dependency and juvenile offender cases. She served among her many roles in our court as chief juvenile court judge for many years, and I'll use the same word that Councilmember Lambert did. She was truly a pioneer in juvenile justice reform. She was committed to collaborating with the community in an effort to approach juvenile justice issues as a team. She was acutely aware of and worked hard to address the disproportionality of kids of color in our system and was in fact one of the earliest voices to advocate for incarceration of youth and to and worked to provide viable alternatives to detention. And finally, she was a proponent of examining the juvenile justice process from the child's point of view. Her vision has served as a driving force behind our current approach to restorative justice. Justice Bobby Bridge has spent an entire career in and out of the courtroom advocating for kids as well. In her ten years, a superior court judge, four of which I think, as you mentioned, she served as our chief juvenile court. She led the creation of the Juvenile Justice Operation Master Plan, which many of you know is Jay Jump, which effected significant changes in juvenile offender court practices and led to a significant reduction in the number of kids in detention. She also led the effort to create juvenile drug court and chaired the Oversight Committee for the Parents Representation Project, which improved representation for parents in abuse and neglect cases. And as a Supreme Court justice, she was co-chair of the Commission on Children in Foster Care and chaired the Beckett State Task Force and led the Committee on Adolescents in need of long term placement. When she retired from the Supreme Court. She founded the Center for Children and Youth Justice, an organization that advocates for system reform to benefit kids. On behalf of the King County Superior Court. We can't think of two more appropriate namesakes for the Children Family Justice Center, where we will continue to collaborate with our communities and partners to provide the therapeutic and culturally responsive services to all youths and families. Thank you. Thank you. So I think that it would be appropriate not to speak of my mother as a judge, but as a mother. She spent her life fighting for children that other people didn't think were worth it. So as a social worker, as a prosecutor, as a judge, she served as a mentor to young women, young lawyers of color, new judges on the bench. But she never lost her focus for her kids. And they want me and my brother. Her kids are the kids, actually. So some of her innovative sentences were to sentence kids to book reports the book or to sends them to book reports to have them come back and share with her the times that they went to the library, what their reports were, and whether or not the kids wrote the reports. It was a success for going to the library, doing the research, coming back, and then she would serve as their cheerleader. The other thing that she thought about children were when kids end up in juvie, it's not because they have failed. We have failed them. And so she would be greatly honored to see that the county is now working toward zero youth detention and recognizing that with the Unified Family Court, that when your kid is in crisis, your whole family is in crisis. And so we need to look at it from a family systems if we're going to do so. This is a great honor for my family and my mother would be proud. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle. Can I ask Michelle, will you tell us about the picture in front of you? Maybe I can. Maybe. Okay. So this is a picture that the kids at end juvenile detention is a mural that they made for her when they found out that she was retiring. So in this picture is a kid with a backpack in the rain and a woman in robes. That's my mother in the rain. And she is holding the umbrella over the little boy. She is getting wet, but she is protecting him. So that's what they did for her when she retired. A fitting tribute. Thank you. Thank you for the discussion. Councilmember Gossett. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had the pleasure of working very closely with both of these women. Even though Bobby Bridge shared, I was the chairperson of the Juvenile Justice Operation Master Plan. I was one of the lead county council members that worked to figure out a creative way based on best practices, that we could dramatically reduce the number of kids in juvie because we were very fearful that we would have to build another youth. Yeah, we had just been told that if we did not do anything at the adult novel, that we would have to build another new jail by 2008. That was the nature of growth in both our adopting the youth populations. Bobby Bridge and Patricia Clark both served and played leadership and innovative roles. So I think it was appropriate that some of my colleagues and the judge earlier mentioned, I referenced these women as pioneering because they were indeed pioneering. I also had the pleasure of going to college in the mid 1960s at the University of Washington, where Patricia and a couple quarters I had classes with her and she noted that I like to play with her maybe a little too much. So she just took it upon herself to holler. And I'm glad, Larry, it's time to go to class. And, you know, I had to get on that and go to class. But that showed me that she cared about me being successful at the university. And when Bobby Bridge left the court, she was so committed to youth services that she served on some of the broader youth justice conferences and commissions and committees that we set up here in King County. And some that the state set up. And Olympian always played a leadership role based on her judicial experience. Our commitment to you and I cannot name the number of African-American youth and Latino youth and just poor white youth who have come to my office with stories about Patricia Clarke, Judge Clark, and how she handled down in court. And half of those stories came from their parents who just observed her interaction with their kids and with them. And I think that's an example when Margaret and Patricia Clarke, one of the most difficult cases that we ever had to handle here. Martin Luther King, Jr. Connie was the killing of Mr. Robert Thomas senior, and it was extremely controversial. And the alleged shooter was a King County sheriff's deputy, and the African-American community was extremely upset. Rod Sims was the executor. He couldn't he couldn't pay a judge to handle this case. And finally, Patricia Tarrant I will handle it. And she and earning the respect of the families involved, the police involved, you know, judicial leadership and our government and our extremely hard manner, a difficult situation to earn respect from all these parties because three or 400 black people took over the freeways one day, but she stayed calm. How about the inquest? So I want to invite them. Both of these women's extraordinary leadership as judges and as human beings absolutely warrant our support for them. Judge Clarke, having a whole facility named after her and Judge Bobby Bridge having the learning center, which is going to be used a lot named after her. And I genuinely hope that we follow through and support both of these nominees for these extremely important and symbolic and inspirational positions at our new children at Valley Justice Center. Thank you. Thank you. With that, I'd ask the court to please call the role. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Baldacci. Councilmember Dombrowski. Councilmember Dunn. All right. Councilmember Garcia. Councilmember Colwell. Councilmember Lambert. Councilmember of the crowd. Councilmember one right there. Hi, Mr. Chair. Hi, Mr. Chair. The vote is a 99 zero no's. Thank you. Haven't received the required majority. We have. We've given ordinance 2019 210 a do pass recommendation. We will send that to full council and I would suggest we could put it on consented for council. We expedite and we'll expedite to Monday to Wednesday's agenda. We can't expedite to tomorrow's because there is an ordinance and needs are to Wednesday. It needs a public hearing and hasn't been recognized. So we can do it next week, though. Then we'll do it regular course and we'll put it on consent. Thank you. Thank you very much. That takes us to items five and six. The King County District Court, Northeast Division currently has two openings to the incumbents being appointed to the Superior Court by Governor Inslee. Pursuant to King County Code, I instructed staff to coordinate interviews with all of the eligible applicants, and that subcommittee consisted of myself

Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute a Fourth Amendment to Contract No. 32168 with BiTech Construction Company for the annual contract for concrete repairs and related improvements, increasing the contract amount by an additional $3,000,000, for a total amount not to exceed $15,000,000, and extend the contract term to December 30, 2015 at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_11182014_14-0955

Motion carries eight votes. Yes. Adam 2525 is a report from the Public Works Department with the recommendation next year an amendment to a contract with Vitek construction and the amount not to exceed $15 million. It's been a motion as a second. That's member Andrews. Thank you. And Mr.. Good to you. Yes, I have. The name is Larry Good. You Kirk, as he address the questions I have on number 25 or identical to the item number and the question, the issue of number 26 coming up, I will not take the total of 6 minutes, probably about 4 minutes. And let me say to the counsel and also to Mr. Comey that. I have complete confidence in our Director of Public Works and our Director of Parks Recreation and Reed and had we had had our city manager in Jerry Miller or Jim HANKLA this question these questions would not that I'm going to ask would not have to be raised. And had we had Ernie Cal or Beverly O'Neill as the mayor, it would not be raised. But to to ask the questions that are need to be focus in. And my questions are have to do with two or really a one sentence or tail end of the sense it refers to the work is repairs and related improvements, repairs and related improvements added that language is in both of those contracts. What brings rise to the issue is the criminal rules relative to tools which blindsided the good director of Parks, Recreation, Marine, blindsided the director of Public Works and blindsided the new councilperson. When Marine Stadium two s was taken down. And without any contract, the normal contract coming before this council. And some black ops groups within Mr. West's shop came up with a contract that was signed. One month before the California Coastal Commission sat in Bank. To approve the two ads issue. This all tolls to the issue of again. I'd like to get an answer. And it's easier to answer. The question can be answered here or eventually if the grand jury. Want to make sure. What the repair what the related improvements are. And again, the issue of that goes back to that other contract. There was no contracts that specifically stated Marine Stadium two was going to be taken down, period. Set aside the fact that the contract was signed. A month, six weeks before or four weeks before the California Coastal Commission met in Bank to decide the issue. What that tolls do is that simply our city manager and the mayor cannot be trusted. So I'd like to find out what assurances we have and have those assurances given under oath as to specifically what the related improvements are going to be. And. To pass that without. Without securing that information and placing it in the public record so Mr. Comey can hear it tonight or tomorrow morning whenever he views this and the public knows. I don't think it's good judgment to pass this. Thank you. Thank you. Members. There's been a motion and a second on item 25 saying no further comment, please cast your vote. I mean. I mean. Yes. Motion carry somewhat, yes. I'm 26. Councilmember Mongeau would like to cast her vote. Are you? And I'm a council member. Are you and I? Okay. Motion carries eight votes. Yes. Thank you. Item 26. M26 is a report from Public Works with the recommendation. Authorize a contract with CG construction company an amount not to exceed $18 million.

Recommendation to approve the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2016 for the Downtown Long Beach Parking and Business Improvement Area; and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement with the Downtown Long Beach Associates for the period of October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016. (Districts 1,2)

LongBeachCC_10202015_15-1081

Thank you. Let me go back to item 18 and 19, which I had meant to pair up with item 25. A report from Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to approve the proposed budget for fiscal year 2016 for the downtown Long Beach Parking and Business Improvement Area and extend the agreement with developer districts one and two. Item 19 Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to approve the downtown Long Beach Property and Business Improvement District Annual Report and authorize the payment of $530,000 in city property assets assessments from the Civic Center Fund Districts one and two. Okay. Thank you, Madam Clerk, for reading both items. I know that Councilmember Gonzalez. We'll have to recuse herself. Yes, I since my partner is employed with Dolby, I just will excuse myself at this time. So thank you. Thank you. Vice mayor that the two items can be considered together but will need separate motions and votes. But public comment can be on both items. Sure. Thank you. So there's been a motion and a second on item on item 18. And if there's a public comment on either item or both items, you can take that now. Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor. Craig Cogen with the downtown Long Beach Associates. I'm going to keep the accolades to a very minimum, but I really want to take the time to thank the council and city staff for serving as a strong partner with the Dolby and many of the accomplishments that we've been able to achieve in our downtown, downtown as everyone's neighborhood. And I think we've we feel that strongly throughout the throughout the entire city. And I thought about this today when I when I considered my comments that Vice Mayor, we have had a great relationship over the last ten years. And I realize that tonight might be the last time you vote on this contract. And I'm hopeful that anyone who does serve in that same seat that you do that we have half as much success as we've had over the last ten years. So I appreciate your support. I appreciate the dedication that you have provided us throughout the years of living in the downtown, serving the downtown, and certainly being a strong partner and understanding the importance of bids, especially for our downtown. So thank you very much for that and we look forward to your support. Thank you. Thank you, Craig. And I want to thank you for your leadership. From the downtown bid, I. I have said this many times before, but during our worst times in the city, our worst recession. Somehow the downtown managed to not limp along, but really thrive in so many ways. And and I know that the prosperity wasn't necessarily shared by all. The recession was indiscriminate in that regard. But it certainly was wonderful to be able to see progress in in such a vital part of our city. And I thank you for that. I think the many board members that have served on the bay and the many residents and small business owners and other business owners that have come together to really reintroduce the downtown. When you see the downtown today, it is not the place that I certainly moved into in 1997. So it's been a personal joy for me to see that growth. Thank you for that. Thank you. Members. There's been a motion in a second for item 18. Please cast your vote. Are you a yes, Councilman Ranga? Verbal vote. Yeah, it's there. Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you. And if we can show item 19 or make the motion. Oops. And if there's a second. Thank you. And we've already had public comments. So members, cast your vote.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4295 North Inca Street in Sunnyside. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from I-A UO-2 to C-RX-8 (industrial to urban center), located at 4295 North Inca Street in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-22-21.

DenverCityCouncil_08162021_21-0694

13 Eyes. Council Bill 20 1-689 has passed. All right. Moving on to our next required public hearing. Councilmember Cashman, would you please put Council Bill 694 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President, I move the Council Bill 21 694 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for council bill 694 is open. May we please have the staff report? Hello. My name is Edson. Iranians, and I'm here before you again with CPD. So before you we have 42 and 95 North Inca Street. Currently it is in a light industrial zone district and they're requesting S.R. eight, which is a residential mixed use. It's located in Council District one, Amanda Sandoval's district, and it is in the Sunnyside neighborhood. As you can see, it's in close proximity to the 31st and Fox Station right at the border there. So the request is just for about an acre site. And it's for urban center neighborhood context, residential mixed use, up to eight storeys in height. And so what this means is that the first level allows for street level retail uses and commercial uses, but the remainder upper stories are strictly reserved for housing and lodging accommodation uses. So the zoning is as you as you can see, it's year or two, which is a light industrial zoning district with the billboard use overlay. So there is no billboard on site and the applicant is looking to remove that you or two adjacent to it, as you can see to the northeast or to but to the west and to the south you can see the same zoned district that the applicant is applying for the CRC, which is a residential mixed use, up to eight storeys as well. Through the West. You see IMAX three, which is an industrial mixed use up to three stories and some UTC, which is a22 unit zone district. The land use is industrial and adjacent to it is an industrial single unit. But as you can see, there's a lot of industrial single unit, multi-unit, residential, vacant office as you can see. And here is a aerial photo of the site. It's about half an acre. And the middle and the bottom for photos are the site itself. As you can see, it's a one story industrial building and directly to the north, above 43rd is the electrical substation. Um, directly to the west, you can see a one storey industrial building and then on the top right photo, it's really hard to see, but you can see a one storey industrial building to the south and then about a block and a half away, you see an eight storey S.R., S.R. eight, which is a residential mixed use, up to eight story structure that connects with a pedestrian bridge. So the applicant has entered into a voluntary, affordable housing agreement, which is attached to the staff report of which the applicant is committing to 12.5% of the units as income restricted at 80% or less, ami of which 20% of two or more bedrooms will be income restricted at a 60 year period of affordability. So with the process, it went before the planning board in June and the planning board approved this unanimously. There were some concerns from the planning board. Some of the concerns from the planning board had to do with the 41st and Fox station area plan where it recommends 2 to 8 storeys to like about two blocks to the north of this site, saying that at this site it is appropriate for eight storeys, but anything above this site or to the west as when we dove into that plan, that it might not be appropriate for eight stories. That was one of the concerns they had as well as they had some issues around the neighborhood context, which I'm going to explain in a moment. And it is before you today. So far, several different channels have been notified, as you can see on the screen. And there has been one letter of support from the Sunnyside United Neighbors, Sonny's organization, of which Sonny specifies that they met with the applicant in various occasions and they approved it unanimously, and they provided a lot of input on the design and the material of the building. So there are several review criteria that we analyze based off the Denver zoning code. And the first one is consistency with adopted plans. We're looking at four specific plans, which are a comprehensive plan 2040 blueprint in Denver of 2019, the Sunnyside Neighborhood Plan of 1992, and the 41st and Fox Station Area Plan. So there's several strategies found in a comprehensive plan that this application is consistent with. And I will jump into several of these. The first one being under equity, specifically strategy, and B, which is equitable, accessible and inclusive goal one and two, increasing the development of housing units close to transit and mixed use developments, as well as create a greater mix of housing options in every neighborhood for all individuals and families. As well as for climate under the environment, resilient, resilient and gold strategy A, B and C promote infill development where infrastructure and services already in place. Encourage mixed use communities where residents can live, work and play in their own neighborhoods, as well as focus growth by transit stations. Now when we jump into Blueprint, Blueprint classifies this area as general urban. Which homes vary from multi-unit complexes to complex, compact single unit houses and development should offer a mix of uses with good street activation and connectivity, and it should be served by transit and enjoy access to abundant amenities and entertainment options. So something I do want to highlight is that blueprint Denver and tend to emphasize this area with a future neighborhood context of General Urban, the applicant is applying for urban center. So however however that area plan as well as blueprint in the next slide will show that that this location is appropriate for up to eight storeys, but there is no eight storeys in the residential mixed use for the general urban. So that's why the applicant is applying for this urban center. Residential mixed use eight stories. So as you saw earlier in the existing zoning slide and I have it here, there are other rezonings at this location that have the six eight district which is very comparable to the closest groups five in terms of like built to requirements as well as limitations of parking structures and the pedestrian realm. So Blueprint does provide specific guidance on the flexibility of a neighborhood context, which is found on page 66 of Blueprint, which says a mapping of a neighborhood context is at a citywide scale. So the boundaries of the context may be interpreted with limited flexibility if the request furthers the goals of Blueprint Denver and is consistent with the overall intent of the neighborhood context. And so at this specific application, they are providing affordable housing option, they're promoting comparable design and providing a walkable mixed use center here. And so when we look at the future place type for this site, it it's classified as high medium residential, which offers a mix of low to medium scale multi-unit residential uses with some neighborhood services servicing mixed use distributed throughout. And buildings are generally up to eight storeys in height and block patterns are consistent and pedestrian scaled buildings form clearly define and activate the street now 43rd and industry are on designated local streets and I know that it's not adjacent to a arterial or collector street but the but it is served in that area by light pan and 38th, which are arterial collector streets as well as the pedestrian connection that is about a block and a half to the south that connects to the commuter rail. So I also wanted to provide a comparison similar to what's found in the staff report. In the staff report, we do industrial to what this proposes. But I also wanted to show that in Blueprint recommends General Urban and the applicants applying for our urban center because there is no x eight. But when you look at Greece five in comparison to Syria, it's very similar when you look at setbacks. They're identical when you're looking at the stories. They're different in this sense because one is five and eight is what applicants seeking for. But when you look at surface parking between buildings in Primary Street, they're identical. And when you look at the bill two, they're very similar. So these districts are very similar. When we jump into a blueprint for future growth strategy, it's classified as all areas of their city where they're anticipated to see 10% of new job growth and 20% of new housing growth by 2040. And something to highlight is that we're going from an industrial use to a residential mixed use is that this subject site is not in a manufacturing district or a manufacturing preservation area. Now when we jump into the sunny side neighborhood plan, the sunny side identified this area as industrial and it states that the far eastern portion of this plan should be industrial. Given that it's it's it's close proximity to the rail as well as the interstate. And then it also says that there's scattered residential mixed in through the industrial and that should be redeveloped as industrial uses. And so so although the Sunnyside Neighborhood Plan was it is an adaptive plan and continues to shape the overall policy and development decisions of the area. There's a newer plan that was adopted in 2009, which is the 41st and Fox station area plan that gives more specific guidance for this area. That station plan is in response to new opportunities presented by the commuter rail. As a result, it provides a substantially different land use recommendation in the Sunnyside Neighborhood Plan, which pre-dates the conception of the fast tracks by more than a decade. And then the 41st and Fox station area plan does not recommend industrial like this plan does. So when we jump into the 41st and Fox station area plan, it provides a vision for a diverse, transit, supportive and environmentally sustainable urban center. And something that I do want to point out is that when you look at the actual plan, this specific site is classified as a electrical substation, which I showed you earlier below and previously, is that the electrical substation is above 43rd, not below 43rd. So there's a mapping error with this. And so the inferred land use for this site is urban residential, 2 to 8 storeys, as you can see. That's what's to the north, to the south, to the west. And so when we're looking at urban residential, it's new moderate density neighborhoods forming a new edge between the station and the existing neighborhood to the west, as well as it provides a lot of urban design recommendations, such as asking for it to be closer to the street, the building, and to minimize the setbacks. So the proposed S.R. eight zoning meets the land use intensity and design intent of the 41st and Fox station area plan. And when we're jumping into review criteria to uniformly disaggregate nations, the request is consistent as well as furthering the public health safety in general welfare. And it does this by implementing adaptive plans as well as it's furthering the city's goals by creating a cohesive, walkable community around the 41st and FOX Station. And then for the fourth criteria justifying circumstances, the applicant stated change and changing conditions in a particular area in the city in general by this is a mixed use redevelopment in the area and the 41st and Fox commuter station and pedestrian bridge that is in close proximity and the Inca Street multi-use path that connects downtown. And for the fifth graders here, consistent with neighborhood context, is this your purpose and intent? Sierra Zone District Promote safe, active and pedestrian scaled diverse areas through building forums that activate the public realm. Therefore CPD recommends approval based based on all findings that the review has been met. I am available for questions. Andrew Johnson from host is here to answer any questions as well and the applicant is online Billy Wang as well to answer questions. All right. Thank you, Anderson, for the great staff report. And we have one individual signed up to speak this evening, and he's joining us virtually. And we have Jesse Paris. Yes. There's a council of those watching at home. Those are in the council chambers. My name is Jesse with some personal work resume for Blackstone, maximum for self-defense powers of actually come in for social change as well as the unity party of Colorado and frontline black knows and I would be the next my member in 2023. I am against this rezoning tonight for several reasons. The first reason is this is not affordable 80% or less than mine in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood that is not affordable. Maybe if it was 40%. Maybe if it was. 50% or less. I would be in favor of it, but I'm not in favor of this. Only 12% of the units are 80% or less. That is definitely not affordable. I have three questions. Is there a traffic study done on this particular site? Has there been a parking study done on this particular sites? And last but not least, has there been a neighborhood agreement at this particular site? How many square feet are these apartments going to be? Now, you say it meets all five of the criteria, which is consistency with adopted plans, uniformity of district regulations, further public health, safety and welfare, justified circumstances and consistency with neighborhood context and zone sense. This is rapid gentrification. You're going to continue to fuel rapid gentrification if you pass this tonight. This is not affordable by any means. I don't know who you think can afford this, but 80% am I. That means you have to make 80% of $75,000 a year to be able to afford to live in these units. So this is not affordable. Please stop saying this is affordable, but it is clearly not. And don't pass it to me. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers for this hearing. Questions from members of Council on Council Bill 694. Councilmember Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to ask a couple of questions. Is the applicant around? Yes. I believe we have the applicant in the queue. Billy. Okay. Billy. Wink, I believe. So the first question I want to ask is whether or not the applicant was provided the information from the railroad working group that basically has a check off box on the application to basically alert them that they need to be looking at how they would address railroad safety issues. So to the applicant, did you receive that when you came to the Planning Department? Okay. We're double checking that we have the applicant in the queue. Can you hear me? This is Billy Wang. Very good. Go ahead, please. Good evening, council members. We did not receive a railroad plan. Council woman Ortega. And regarding the traffic study, we were informed that that would be required when we submit prior to the site development plan what we've proposed to SUNY thus far and get their unanimous support from the PC, SUNY Pcdi and the Sunni neighborhood is a conceptual plan that shows the elevation and a concept of units. We don't have those defined in terms of how many units, what's the square footage. But we would be pursuing that. As we progress with design. That said your application was within a close proximity to railroad. Is that what you're saying to me in when you submitted your application? It is. Yes. It's adjacent to the railroad tracks, correct? Did your application check that box. I would have to look. It's an I have a question for you about what the tallest building is along that corridor adjacent to the tracks close to the light rail stop. I may answer that question, but before I do, we did provide them with a railroad study at the Pre-Application phase and as well a few, maybe a few weeks before the planning board as well, because I know this question would be brought up. And this building, if you remember correctly, this is the one where we discussed what previous applicants have done in the past and with noise, TDM and different things of what the plan talked about specifically. And you mentioned about how you wanted to maybe mimic some of that stuff if you remember correctly. But I did send it to you, Billy, on two occasions and we did talk about it Zoom as well. But going by it for your question, I don't know that specific. I do know that it's eight storeys and it's about a block and a half to the south. It's that C development which is eight storeys. I don't know. The height, the maximum height that it is allowed to be is 110. I'm not sure if it's at 110, but the zone district allows for that one, which is exactly this one district to S.R. eight. It would allow for a 110. I'm not sure if it's below that or around that, but it should be around that. Okay. I've driven and I don't remember that any of them were eight stories in in height. And perhaps Councilwoman Sandoval can address that. Yes. The Zia apartment building on 40th and into from 40 from 40th to 41st. The entire block is eight stories currently built and occupied. Okay. And do you know if they addressed the railroad safety concerns in their construction, in their work with the planning department? From what I understand, they met all requirements for building. I don't know specifically if it was the railroad construction because there is the street and then the anchor pedestrian trail, the promenade and then more land and then the rail yard. Okay. Thank you. It's an. Can you tell me if there are any limitations on the first floor activation that you talked about that would happen on this site? The limitations are only if it's strictly residential, but if it's commercial, it's the setbacks can be zero. In terms of the types of uses that could be in the commercial space, that's what I'm referring to. It's mainly focused on retail and commercial uses, not necessarily industrial uses, as you see in Mumbai, but it will be mainly retail and commercial uses office as well. Okay. And then the applicant said he wasn't clear on how many units there might be, but with these stories that potentially can can be pretty significant in terms of the number of units, somewhere in the 70 to 80 ballpark, depending on size, you know, number of bedrooms, etc.. So this is trying to get an idea of that given its proximity to rail. Can you just talk about how many parking spaces this would require? Again, knowing that sort of tied to the number of the units that will be on the site. I'm going to let the applicant speak on that because he has a breakdown of parking and the number of units that he's been discussing with House as well as well. Thank you. Billy. Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Yes. So to address your question regarding first, the commercial spot right now from the concept plan, we have allocated commercial space right on the corner of the northeast corner of 43rd and anchor. Alongside that would be a plaza because one of the key components is to activate 43rd and activate anchor and drive as a community center. So we would streetscape that from both angles and create a commercial site. Right now. I believe. Let me look. The concept plans is about 74 units. Councilwoman Ortega But that may adjust and as it adjusts, the affordability scale would adjust as well. Regarding the parking, we would certainly adhere to the parking requirements for that zone district and we would take into the future traffic study plan of trying to minimize parking or try to minimize. The number of use of cars. Along that well and try to promote the the fox and 41st light rail plan, car sharing, smart cars etc.. So tied to that question. Have have you ever encountered a bank being concerned that if you didn't provide adequate parking, that if for some reason the project didn't move forward, they didn't want to be stuck with the project. They couldn't park the units. I have not personally encountered that. Q I have no further questions. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Ortega. Up next, we have council member Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Hudson, I have one quick question. I recall from I think I recall correctly from a long ago billboard overlay issue that here we're getting rid of the overlay is our is the city under any obligation to maintain a certain amount of billboard overlay areas in the city. Is there some sort of an agreement still in effect? And, Nate, I don't know if you can answer that. I do. It was a long time ago. I remember this came up in a hearing. I just wonder what the current status is. Not that I want to see billboards here. Good evening. Members of council. Neighbors their assistant city attorney. There is no obligation for the city to maintain the billboard use overlay. Okay. So conceivably, if we re zoned any place with a billboard overlay we could do away with. We're under no obligation to keep. That is correct. Okay. Thank you. Could I ask, is there someone here from host? Oh, Andrew, I forgot. You're over and hosts now. Thank you. Hello. Andrew Johnson with the Department of Housing. Could you raise the microphones here to Andrew Johnson with the Department of Housing Stability? Thank you. In the affordable housing agreement, it read. It has two alternative paragraphs if they're for rent or for sale, but they seem to require the same thing. Can you describe, first of all, do we know what the owner intends to do, what the developer intends to do here? Yeah. His intent is actually to do rental to the rental. And so the focus during our conversations when we were going through this agreement was to do rentals. We always put up for sale paragraph in there as much as possible just in case, because 60 years is a long time. It could change somewhere down the road just in case it goes condo. Correct. Okay. I would we normally have this ask for the same percentages and affordability levels between a rental project and a for sale project. Just because of a different economics. We usually have different AMI levels on a for sale sign. Right. We did talk about a different percentage on the for sale side. But because was very confident that he was doing. Rental just focused on the just the rental AMI level. Okay. Thank you, Madam President. That's all I had. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. And thank you, Andrew. Up next, we have Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Madam President. For the owner or developer. I'm wondering, you said 74 units. Was we talking the whole development or the affordable portion? A. Can you hear me? Hello? Yes, we can hear. Okay. I apologize. The 74 units is in concept right now. That's total number of units. So if we were to meet the agreed host agreement of 12 and a half percent, what would that be? Nine units, approximately eight or nine units, and then 20% of 74, which would be two units. I think 20%, 20 for me. Total units, not of the affordable units. Just 274 is the total number of units in concept right now. Yes. 12.5% of that is going to be affordable at 80%. So 20%, two bedrooms, 20% of, what, 20? And it's got to be 20% of the 12 and a half percent. Correct. It'll be about. One one or two units. Yes. Okay. So it's a lot of math, but it's about one or two. Units in back. All right, I. You're all brave doing math on the spot. So I was just going to let you go ahead and do that. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. And thank you, Andrew, for helping out with those questions. All right. Seen no other members of council in the queue. The public hearing is closed. Comments from members of Council on Council Bill 694 Council Member Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I know that the applicant, Billy Wing, has worked with the Sunnyside neighborhood to get their support as it was just brought up by my colleague. I wish the affordability was going deeper. 1 to 2 units does not make a dent into the Sunnyside neighborhood. But that's another day, another story for another day. I know that my colleague, Councilwoman Kenny and I are sitting on the expanding affordable housing task force, which hopefully we will get more units out of rezonings such as these. So with that, I ask my colleagues support. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Sandoval and seen no other speakers. I will go ahead and chime in that I do believe that this has met all of the review criteria and will be voting in favor of this tonight. And I want to also let folks know that Councilman Hines needed to leave the meeting. And so that's why we're skipping him in the roll call in case anybody caught that. And so we'll go ahead, Madam Secretary. Roll call on Council Bill 694, please. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Black I. CdeBaca No. Clerk. I. Flynn. I. Herndon. Hi. Cashman. I can each. I. Ortega. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce results. One May 11 Nice. 11 Eyes Council Bill 20 1-694 has passed. Thank you Edson and Andrew and the community members who joined us for those two hearings. Next up, we have our third required public hearing. Councilmember Cashman, would you please put council Bill 7 to 1 on the floor for final passage?

Recommendation to increase appropriations in General Fund (GF) in the Development Services Department (DV) by $150,000, offset by the Fourth Council District one-time infrastructure funds transferred from the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) to support the funding of a hospital architect to determine whether the City can meet OSHPD seismic compliance at Community Hospital.

LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0354

Motion case. Thank you. Item 36 Communication from Councilmember Supernova. Recommendation to Increase Appropriations in general fund in the Development Services Department by 150,000 to support the funding of a hospital architect to determine seismic compliance at community hospital. Councilor. Mr. Brown. Thank you. This important issue and it is very time sensitive. So that's the reason for the amount and the urgency here. And I appreciate my colleagues support and thank you to my very hard working staff who made these moneys available. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Pearce. Okay. Public comment on this cut from Franco. Yeah. I just want to thank Superman for his championing the cause for keeping community hospital open. And I think that this fund, these funds would go a long way in trying to get the hospital. Stay there. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Murchison. I concur. I mean, this is big, too. This is evidence of why we need to make sure that we continue to support one time funds by council district. You're able to show leadership on the important issues that are important to your district and put your money where your mouth is . So, you know, I would just encourage I don't think that you should be the only one to have to do that. It's important. So cities, you know, city staff, city manager, if there's another way to pony up plenty of those funds, you know, they'll be good to say. District nine. I mean, I just don't think that it has it should necessarily I think it's great that he puts it up, but we should we should have a matching system. This is going to be about 300, about 300 to 3 50,000. Okay. Well, that's good. But I mean, the council is not just ponying up, it's seed money and we'll be filling in as well. Thank you, Mr. West City. That asset, I think Tina is a great place to look. See? No public comment. There's a mention in a second. Please cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. I think that concludes the items on the agenda that are necessary. And I wasn't here for the first part of the meeting. I got them all back. Is there a second public comment or anyone that has not spoken on an item is not on the agenda seeing none. Nope. Please come forward. Come forward, please. Just for clarification, Ken, can I congratulate.

Recommendation to support the 35th Annual Long Beach Lesbian & Gay Pride Festival and Parade by examining ways to reduce city and staffing fees pertaining to the event, and report back to City Council within 30 days.

LongBeachCC_03202018_18-0271

Thank you. So next, we'll have item number 14, please. Item 14 is communication from Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman praise councilmember turanga and Vice Mayor Richardson recommendation to support the 35th annual Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride Festival and Parade by examining ways to reduce city and staff fees pertaining to the event. Councilmember Pierce I have a presentation for us, so I want to thank the. Gay and lesbian pride. Long Beach Gay and Lesbian Pride for being here tonight. I'm delirious. This is the third time we've been here this late. I want to thank you guys for your work and your supporters for being here. I do have a presentation I think they have ready in the back. And so I want to do the presentation first and then have you guys speak and we'll try to go through it. You know, not super duper fast, but fast enough to get us home before one. I know vice mayor is like, what? Okay, in the back. Could you guys play on the video? We got a little video to wake you guys up with. Hopefully it works. Let's try it again. No. We'll give you, like, one more. We go. There we go. So I believe this video was done. By I'm not sure who. It was done by, but. Enjoy. Both. David Memory is my first here living in Long Beach and going by the is the first time there has been a. Felt really comfortable just being in a city that. We loved and feeling like just having challenges, whatever I. Had nobody judges at all. My Oscar and my stage name is Mia Farrow, and I'm also the current 46th elected president of the International Import of Palm Beach launch party. Was the first time ever something like. Artist like in the first year that he represented. And I was a lot of. You guys have enough? Yeah. So if you could go back to the presentation, please. Yeah. There you go. Next slide. Okay. So this year is the 35th year that we have had Long Beach Pride, rock and roll in our streets and really bring a sense of celebration to the community. I know in the eighties and particularly in the eighties, our community was struggling and having a moment to celebrate and a weekend to really lift up . The fact that we're stronger together and to celebrate the diversity of our community has been fantastic asset to our city. In three decades. And over the last three decades, Pride has been a grant giving organization where they've used their funds to give over $1,000,000 to other nonprofits, whether it was to youth services, mental health services, transgender services . And so we are really thankful that in Long Beach we have such a robust giving organization that supports all aspects of the LGBT community. And one of the most exciting things is that we have an organization that really is not a district organization. It's not a second district, a first district. A third district is an organization that brings an event that is an a regional event. And with that regional event, we get $12.3 million annually to Long Beach's economy and 23.4 million to the regional economy. We also make sure. That we celebrate the corridors that. Embrace that community, and we have new residents that come as a response to it. Be culturally diverse. Diverse? Yeah, I'm tired, guys. See? Okay. So one of the challenges that our organization that we're very proud of is struggling with is over the last four years, the revenue has fallen. This is reason cited to this are performance cost changes to ABC regular regulations as a result of an expanded process that they've had in making sure that we. Are. ID'ing everybody at the right areas and that we're protecting our residents and following code as needed. We've had lower ticket sales and I want to be clear that these changes are not necessarily a direct result of the city increasing fees, but that the costs have become more because we've changed the way that we've operated, from what I understand. So my goal today was to ask my colleagues to support Pride as a. Regional. Asset to our city and to explore a couple of options. One thing I want to be clear is that Pride Parade. And festival is not a city sponsored event like MLK, like the Veterans Parade. And so we have not in the past reduced any cost for this organization. All those costs have been paid for by this organization's ticket sales and and garnering individual support. So what I'd like to. Ask for today is to make sure that they provide their plans for 2018, no later than April 1st to special events. And we're actually trying to get them a little bit earlier. I would like to ask that the organization work with special events and economic development, which they have not done in the past, to identify cost saving measures like parking plans, smaller footprint, maybe shorter days, advertising opportunities. And then the next 40 day. 45 days. Return to council. I know in the agenda item it says 30, but I've talked with special events and I know that it's a little bit challenging. So we'll try to get as close to the 30 days as possible, but give us a little bit of extra time on that. I also spoke with the city auditor previously today and spoke with her about wanting to. Support this organization, continuing to grow and to thrive. And I know that there's conversations out there around the audit that you guys have been trying to work with somebody. And so our city auditor would like to sit down with you and try to identify some best practices so that. We can come back and see how we as a city really support you. I know that in cities. Like West Hollywood and other great cities. Their charter allows them to support. The organization in a different way than we do in Long Beach. And so as city attorney, I. Did want to ask one question, because they're not a city sponsored event. Does the charter hold us. Back from removing costs like police and fire and issues like that? I don't believe it's the charter that holds you back. I believe it's the policies established by the city council. Okay, so I had some this. Information given to. Me. So if in the next. 30 to 45 days when we're working with special events. If we could identify. What opportunities the city has to help reduce some of those costs, at least for the next year. That would be my intent of this item. And so I want to thank my colleagues for signing on to this. I know that it's an organization that we get to see our senators, our assembly members, our Congress members in this parade. And it. Really is a great opportunity, especially when every year we have different hate. Crimes that happen in our community. And I find that this is the moment when we really get to rally around with all the events that come with pride. And so, again, I want to thank you all for doing your due diligence for coming to the city and asking for some partnership. And I know that my colleagues, I expect, would support this, and I want to hear from any public speakers. Sorry. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Oh. Are we going to public first? Okay. Public comment, please. Uh, your honorable vice mayor and city council members. My name is Denise Newman. I'm the president of Long Beach, Lesbian and Gay Pride. I've been a member there for five years and it has been a tumultuous five years, but it's been a rewarding five years. When I became a member, I stepped into an organization that was completely in flux. We sat in our first city meeting and for me it was absolutely horrible because I heard about an organization that was out of alignment with the city, ABC guidelines, etc. because our festival was primarily supported by volunteers. The volunteers didn't have a stake in whether or not they did things right or wrong. And as a result, it kind of tarnished the name of Long Beach Pride. So for whatever reason, I got dubbed that person to come and be a part of Long Beach Pride and fix it. So my nickname became Fix It. I am so proud today to stand before you and say that we have done what I said we were going to do. When I came and spoke to you about four years ago, we now have a very flourishing relationship with special events and filming. We have an excellent relationship with Long Beach Police Department. I too am tired and fire. We went from a meeting where people glared at you to a meeting where we can now hug. But the first time we held a meeting at Long Beach Pride versus the Convention Center or at special events and filming. And that's something I think that we should be proud of. Councilwoman Pierce, you actually made a number of my points in regards to how we can partner together. I think we have a unique opportunity in front of us, as this organization has had to move from pretty much a mom and pop type of thing. We've had to kind of grow up. And unfortunately and fortunately, the organization is made up of volunteers. Volunteers like me. I have a full time job 10 hours a day. I got to be up at 445 tomorrow morning. However, we are bound by the level of talent that's within the organization. So we had questions in regards to why do we use so many consultants? Well, the primary reason why we had to do that is because we didn't have the talent within the organization to do some of the duties that were required of us to do . We didn't have someone who could do festival setup. We didn't have someone who could do parade. Right now, we struggle with we're slow to get talent and even slower to do marketing in order to put that information out to the community. Thank you so much for your testimony. I'm sorry, I forgot I had. You got like an extra. Minutes, so you're good. Okay. Thank you for your time. Speaker, please. Good evening. Honorable mayor, vice mayor and City Council. My name is Judy Horne and I'm a member of the board of directors of Long Beach Gay Pride. Thank you for allowing me to make. Not really a presentation, but an opportunity to address things in several areas. And not just the LGBTQ team, whatever population, but overall senior age groups. I've been connected to Long Beach gay pride since the late 1980s, and finally, six years ago I decided, well, I'll just join this organization and see what I can do within it. I've always been impressed with the outreach to all communities, but especially with the gay community population. I received my my first mailing from AARP. You know, when you turn 50, you get that. I thought that 23 years ago. Okay, 23 years ago, I got that. But I guess I want to bring out the fact that there are so many challenges that crop up as you age. Some of you may already know that. I don't know. Okay. But but I've also found that getting old is not not for sissies in any community. It takes guts. It takes determination to weather the storms as you would begin to age. I'm a good example of that. But Long Beach has always been the pride. It's always been a forerunner in community issues and help. And you saw some things on the video up there that explained that at Christmas time, we even have a toy giveaway in there and the community and those parents bring their kids because they know every year they can get a brand new toy, at least one brand new toy, and they come to Long Beach Pride to get it. There's just a small elementary school right behind us, and we have interacted with them and their principal and one time send them somewhere like to Knott's Berry Farm. So there's a lot of interaction there within the entire community. So but now going from the childhood years, this is my segway here from the childhood years that we help, we're going to go to the senior hood years. I made that word up the senior. Hood years. In 2018 at Pride. I'm especially excited about a whole brand new annual event beginning its maiden voyage at Pride 2018. It's called the Senior Fun Zone. The Senior Fun Zone. You know, a couple of years ago, I think that they had a place where they would play some oldies but goodies, music, and the seniors would sit around and listen a little bit. Well, that's not what this is. Key word is fun, and the key word is interactive because we're going to have bingo games, we're going to have karaoke, you know, all those people that can sing or think they can. Okay, we're having bingo games and karaoke and we games that be okay. Anyway, it. Really does sound like a lot. Of fun. It is. I do have to let you know that we were up on our. What? You all can come and join us if you're at least age 50. Saying 20 years. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Paula Goldberg and I serve as the executive director for the LGBTQ center of Long Beach. The LGBTQ center of Long Beach strongly supports this agenda item for the City Council to explore ways to reduce city and staffing fees pertaining to the annual production of the Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride Festival on Parade. The center also strongly encourages the city of Long Beach to actively and consistently support this event on an annual basis by a sponsorship or significant reduction in fees associated with renting city property, street closures and staff expenses, as it has done in many major metropolitan cities in the United States. Long Beach Lesbian and Gay Pride is one of the oldest continuously operating LGBTQ organizations in the city and continues to serve as a vital institution responsible for the city's outward facing presence as it relates to demonstrating LGBTQ inclusion and integration within our city. As the city is aware, our Pride celebration also has a tremendous positive economic impact in the millions of dollars on an annual basis. Pride also serves as a vital charitable funder for hundreds of local nonprofits and individuals. Through their annual grants and scholarships program, many cities can currently provide fee reductions to their pride organizations, including the city of West Hollywood, which continues to lead the way in California as a model example for prioritizing LGBTQ equity through their many policy initiatives, work groups and public programs. The City of Long Beach has an increased. The opportunity to demonstrate leadership and make an impactful commitment to supporting our LGBTQ community by supporting Long Beach lesbian and gay pride again for these reasons and so many more. The LGBTQ center of Long Beach enthusiastically supports the current agenda item. Thank you very much. Thanks, Porter. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor. City Council members, city attorney and city staff. My name is Leslie Smith, and I've been practicing law in this state for 27 years. I'm here today to express my opposition to Resolution 14, which seeks ways to reduce fees and the 2018 Pride Festival. I've been investigating the Pride Organization and its affiliates, and I have special knowledge about the pattern and practices of this organization's current regime. The investigative knowledge I've ascertained reveals the following. Sexual harassment settlements involving several sitting board members, including its current president, Denise Neumann. Fraudulent activities involving the operations at the Pride Office and the festival event. Misappropriation of charitable funds and gross mismanagement of the organization, including failing to perform background checks and live scan of its members and volunteers. Violations of codes of ethics and other statutes. Exposing the PRIDE Organization and any affiliates to extensive liability. Engaging in a pattern of collusion in awarding special favors and lucrative final financial contracts to the field. Representatives of high ranking public officials such as Tanya martin, the field representative for State, Senator Ricardo Lara. Ms.. Martin alone has received over $100,000 from Pride in the past few years. Additional lucrative contracts have been awarded to other friends of Pride's current administration, some of whom are unlicensed or unqualified to perform the task for which they were paid. It is further evident that this practice of collusion has extended to many local political clubs whose boards are staffed with yet more employees of current elected officials who have the political power and control to influence and manipulate nonprofit contracts. The city of Long Beach has been unfairly blamed for Pride's inability to provide community grants and scholarships. It's no coincidence that Pride's net revenue has fallen the same number of years. This current regime has been leading the organization. Sadly, the regime is led by a president who has a history of fraudulent and deceitful conduct, as demonstrated in these public records. You would be rewarding illegal, fraudulent and unethical behavior by giving any concessions to pride at this time. At a minimum, before giving any concessions, you should first demand an independent financial audit the removal of those board members who were the subject of sexual harassment. Thank you for your time and you're more than welcome to submit back their comments in writing. Scans. Thank you. Next to your police. Thank you. I am not speaking for the religious community in Long Beach. I am speaking as an individual pastor. Tonight. When I first heard that the city was allowing a. Rainbow flag to represent same sex relationships. I just pondered for a moment. And. There. I felt in myself. I felt God was saying it's being flown because now it is time for the religious community to openly address the issue. That is why the flag is being flown. So since the flight, I don't know if it's still up, but since it was flown when it was last when I was last here a couple of years ago, I thought, okay, I'm here tonight. And it's that issues on the agenda, so let's address it. I just. Be clear. The meeting's not about the flag. It's about the. I understand. Okay. I just used that as a pointer. You. You took some of my minutes. Can I have them back? Thank you. To first of all, the definition of gay dating back to Merriam Webster's dictionary and all the way back to 1948 means the state of being emotionally happy. It had no sexual connotation whatsoever. It means the state of being happy. Like I'm gay to be here tonight. I'm not gay that it is going on 1:00. But I'm gay to be here tonight. To know how someone pleasures their sexual partner is none of my concern. To have a flag flown in that regard. I could say let's fly a flag for all people who are menopausal. Let's have a menopausal flag. That we're having to have a discussion of that. I like people. God likes people. And I'm not going to think one way or the other. On gay porn, same sex pride day that okay, this is what we're doing. We're celebrating people who have same sex relationships. I rather believe it's frivolous. That the only celebration we need is that these people are breathing and that they're that they're human, as I that we're able to stand here. I celebrate that. I don't take anything away from a person because they have a same sex relationship. Nor am I granting anything because they have a same sex relationship. God's intent for men and women stands. That will not change because we have decided that we want to go one way or the other. God said, Let us make man in our image, male and female. Next picture, please. And good evening, Vice Mayor Richardson and city council members. Thank you so much. It's kind of late, but I'm here to just share with you just a personal story. I was an associate member of Long Beach Pride, and Long Beach Pride gave me the opportunity to be a part of the organization, especially somebody who was just coming back in reentry into society. So very, very grateful to this this organization. But I'm here in support. I'm here in support from project. All of a recipient of the Long Beach Pride Grant for the last three years. And in our inception in 2013, we were 12, formerly incarcerated, LGBTQIA, gender nonconforming, loving individuals who needed a safe space . And we were embraced by Long Beach Pride. And we were given the opportunity to build a movement, but more importantly, a loving space that has now flourished with a documentary that has gone to San Francisco, Boston, another one releasing this Friday at Long Beach City College. But it's that funding that gave us the courage to build our voices, but more importantly, to build community and to build love within our community. And this past year, although Long Beach Pride did not give any of the community organizations a grant, I was fortunate enough to be the recipient of the scholarship for the last two years , and it's because of Long Beach pride that I'm thriving. I will be graduating June 7th from Long Beach City College and I am going to be attending Cornell University in the fall. And when I was a homeless person who was formerly incarcerated and was stigmatized by many people in our community, even those within our LGBTQ community, my marginalized voice was embraced by Long Beach Pride, and I will continue to support this organization. And I feel that when we reciprocate this law of reciprocity, where we can take a look at some some of the loopholes in opportunities for us to give back to our community, because let me tell you, I know we all enjoy pride . We all have a great time at Pride. So whatever we can do to take a look at saving and reinvesting back into our grants and scholarships, I'm hoping we can build more courageous change agents that will step forward, come forth and build. City of Long Beach. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Final speaker, please. Hello. My name's Tanya martin and I wish I had $200,000. Sorry. I came here tonight to thank the City Council and vice mayor for considering this item today. For those of you that don't know the history behind Pride. It's it's been a long battle. It's been a hard battle. And to be here with the organization today in front of you, it took a lot from us because of the fear and then in the things that we have been through since we've been a part of the organization. Me, myself, I met my first pride in 1992, straight from Alabama, and for the first time, I could hold the person I cared about. I could hold their hand. And I felt safe. I felt protected. And it gave me strength to do the same thing outside those festival walls and that protection so much that helped a lot of people. Today, all the pride's around the world to help us fight for equality and the right to marry. To marry, which I'm now married to a beautiful woman and we have four kids. So I just want to say thank you for this opportunity. Thank you. Special events and filming for working with us. And we hope that you will consider to vote. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. All right. To no further public comment. We'll take it back behind the rail. Councilmember Gonzalez Yeah, I, I really do love this item. I think it's definitely warranted that we look into options and supporting pride. You all have supported the community so much. It's not just pride that you're out. You're at Belmont Shore helping Belmont Shore as volunteers, you're helping MLK as volunteers, you're out in the community. So the reputation that I know of you has been such a stellar one. And so I just want to thank each and every one of you for your work. And it goes far beyond the weekend of pride, and we know that. But I will say to, you know, we have a I think what Councilmember Pearce brought forward was fantastic to look at a plan because we do need to look at, you know, what the city is going to look like. We treasure the pride. You know, we treasure the parade. We treasure the. A festival. This is something that makes our city so very unique, and we need to make sure that we support it as much as possible. So private funding. You know, having a large downtown parade or downtown festival, you know, how can we help you with with what we're doing and collaborating with special events and with some outside promoters to really assist everything that you're doing. So we'll continue the discussion. I thank you for bringing it forward and just know that I'm here to support you as well. Thank you, Councilman Brice. Thank you. I, too, want to thank you for being here tonight and the gentleman that spoke. Absolutely. I think every single one of us has a great time at Pride. It's a fantastic day. It's just there's no question about it. It's it's a really great event that we have in the city. And I'm I'm I'm proud to be a part of it. There are a few things that I do want to highlight, though, and I signed onto the item, so I support the item, but I think one of the speakers said this is a great opportunity because the event has changed. It's changed from where it started. The organization has gone through a lot of changes and there probably are a great deal of efficiencies that can be found if there is more direct partnership with the city. So I my my ask of the city would be if we're truly going to have a partnership that we sit down and we think about some efficiencies that can be had. Are we paying you know, are we are we paying too much? Are you paying too much for things that you could be saving money on? Are there vendors that you could be using that would ultimately result in your costs being less? So I really would hope that staff could come to the table and give us some honest feedback regarding some efficiencies so that we can move forward in that light. The city hosts and assists with so many special events and every single one of them is incredibly important and special to our city, not just for the communities that are bringing them forward, but for all the for all the diversity of our residents that we have. And I think we need to be mindful that when we do something special for one organization, we have to be willing, ethically and morally to do the same for everybody else. So what I don't want to do is enter into kind of a slippery slope where there's an expectation that year after year we're going to be subsidizing or helping or there's an expectation because I think what we could really do is maybe this is the year, what we get on track, figure out what the efficiencies are, and maybe change some things in the model that allows us to have better results in terms of our financial status after the parade. So that's what I'm really. Helpful for. And I think this is a great opportunity to do that. I also think that so there's so you know, I have two parades in my district and they don't receive any city subsidy. And I know it's always stressful for the organizers of that event. They have to run things so efficiently to make sure that they don't come out in the red. And so maybe even talking with other event program organizers to find out, you know, what is it that they do? How can we learn some of those backpack best practices? Now, you've probably already done that, but if not, that's something I would recommend because I know for them it's always to the penny what they've budgeted. So so I'm in favor of of using this year as a time to figure out what efficiencies can be made and seeing what we can do to help. I will say one thing, since I have you all here last year there were some amazing concerts that happened very late at night. In fact, they were so amazing that on the eastern most part of the city, our windows were rattling because the concert vibration was heard on the east side of Long Beach. It was. And I was communicating with special events. They were actually there trying to turn down the noise. I don't know what happened, but when I was getting bombarded, it was it was a Sunday night, so kids were trying to go to sleep. I kid you not. The windows in our house in Alamitos Heights were rattling. We were getting text messages from residents all over the city on the east side. It was on next door dot com. Everybody was saying, what is going on? We couldn't figure out. It sounded like the concert was at Rec Park, which was down the street from our house. So kudos to you for maximizing the volume of efficiencies. But please, please, if we're truly going to have a partnership, I think after such a beautiful weekend of pride activities, it was such a negative way to end that weekend. And so I asked you guys to please if we can be mindful of that partnership. But, you know, I love the event. My my staff and I participate. We have a fantastic time. Anything that we can do to help you guys keep this going, you've expanded it to a new level. Now you have a new norm. And that new norm is going to. Evolve a new model, a new business model. So I thank you for being here, for allowing me to say my piece. Thanks. Thank you, Councilmember Bianca. Thank you, Mayor. My first pride parade was back in 1990. I was the recruitment officer for the city of Long Beach at that time. And I asked the the organizers if I could have an information booth at the actual events park to try to recruit knowledge, recruiting police officers and firefighters at the time. And they were so welcoming. I did have some difficulty at that time to get some firefighters and police officers to join me, because at that time it wasn't an acceptable. Acceptable, except it's late, acceptable, acceptable, I think, to accept it or to come out at that time so that that didn't happen till later. But I see this parade and this event as one that is has been breaking barriers for for a long time. And it seems like every time that that comes forward, there's something new that's being presented or being and another barrier is coming down is being broken. So I'm I'm very supportive of this. And that's why I signed on to it, because I think it's it's an event that needs to be sustained, that we need to continue. And if the partnership with the city would make it all that much better. And and, you know, to a casual woman, prices are concerns. We probably do need to work together and and create those parameters that we can all work together within. So, I mean, I'm very supportive of this and I look forward to working further with gay pride. Thank you. Councilman Andrews. Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor. I'd really like to say more, but I didn't put this on the agenda for 12:00. So kudos to you guys. Good luck. And also in Austin, thank you. And I appreciate the item coming forward. You know, 35 years, something is working. The pride parade has grown every year and become more and more of a, I think, exciting event. I think because it is a volunteer organization, you're going to have some natural challenges with with that. And, you know, I'm glad that we're having this conversation because I think we can the city can the council offices can be of assistance to to making sure that there is a consistency. Right. When you have elected nonprofit boards. Information is lost. Often times the leadership changes and organizational changes. I know for a fact that some of the people who were very involved in planning this parade are no longer with us. And they were they were key key to key actors in the in the planning process, you know, over the years. And so I understand that hearing the the public comment understand that there are challenges within the organization. But I got to tell you, each and every year, it doesn't show, you know, and oftentimes, you know, those challenges are very, very painstaking when when you're actually planning an event. But from the outside looking in, if you're not involved in the nuts and bolts, I think most of us appreciate, you know, the experience that pride provides everybody year after year after year. And so to those involved in the Pride organization, I just would salute you for the the dedication that you have put forth, understanding that it is a volunteer organization. And, you know, nobody's or most of you aren't getting paid to do the work that you do. And I'm glad that Councilmember Pearce brought forth some some more recommendations that I can certainly support this evening. I will just to say that I think it's it's really good if our city auditor can get involved and provide some some guidance. I mean, many of our our departments are run a lot better because of her, her hard work and her eagle eye. And inside of our department, they can give you some best practices and practices and ideas on, you know, how to make the pride parade more efficient, but also ensure that I think the operations are more standardized and that hopefully, you know, we can we can celebrate, you know, 50 years in another 15 years. So with that, I'll be happy to support item Councilmember Silvano. Thank you. I'm just looking at an email I got from Danny at nine this morning, so thank. You for staying up late. But I was so impressed by it because she put seven letters into one email and I actually called her to compliment her on that. Our offices would run so much more efficiently if everyone did that instead of seven emails. This is a great system, so I have high hopes based on that efficiency. It's just how well you guys are doing in the future. And also, thank you for the video. It actually had a shot of the Pride headquarters building, which is in the fourth District. And Councilmember Andrews and I talk about this all the time. There's not too many shots of the fourth District or sixth District in citywide video. So thank you for that. And also, I know you reached out to our office recently and please continue to do that if we can help in any way. Thank you. Thank you. I'll just add my comments here. I know when it gets late, sometimes council members we turn into pumpkins or gremlins or whatever it is. But please don't count that against us. This is it's good. It's a good parade. We want to see it indoors. Got a great legacy in the city. So we want to want to do whatever we can to do that. And that also goes to the broader conversation around, you know, last year, the big issue was the Veterans Day parade and special events. We were able to figure out some ways to improve it and make it better. And so I see a good future there. And so if that's what this year is for the pride parade, then then I encourage a lot of cooperation to figure out how you can get to the next I mean, how many years? 35. So the next 35 years. We've already done public comment. We've heard from the council members, please cast your vote. And this this motion carries. Thank you. Okay, so these next few items, when we call it, I'm just going to look to the left and the right signal if you guys want to want to speak to it , because I'm just going to straight go straight to Stanford Court. So most of these these last ten. So I'm number 15 please.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Central Waterfront Project; authorizing a “Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Development of New Seattle Aquarium Facilities” between The City of Seattle and the Seattle Aquarium Society, increasing the maximum amount of funding authorized for design, and requiring a comprehensive financial plan prior to execution of a Project Development Agreement.

SeattleCityCouncil_07232018_CB 119302

Council Bill 119302 relating to the Central Waterfront Project authorizing Memorandum of Understanding concerning development of new Seattle Aquarium facilities between the City of Seattle and the Silkworm Society, increasing the maximum amount of funding authorized for design and requiring a comprehensive financial plan prior to execution. Every Project Development Agreement. The Committee recommends the bill. Pass its final words. Thank you. Council President. This is an updated aquarium emoji regarding the Ocean Pavilion this summer. I'm sorry. This emoji would replace a previous emu that was passed by council in 2013 and subsequently amended in 2015 and again in 2017. The new agreement is intended to, number one, encourage a collaborative design complementing the. Overall. Waterfront Seattle vision number to align with the. Design schedules. Number three make. A strong commitment to cost effectiveness with rigorous and cross control cost control management. The emoji will also increase the maximum funding authorized for design from. 4.2 4.7 million with the required 50% match. This also would requires a comprehensive financial and development plan that will come back to Seattle City Council for additional approval. The committee recommends that the full council pass the legislation. Very good. Any questions or comments? If not, please call the rule on the passage of the bill. Thanks. John Gonzalez Johnson. Hi. Whereas I must get to Sergeant President Harrell. Seven in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and chair of the Senate. Please read the report of the Planning, Land Use and Zoning Committee.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the financing of affordable housing; authorizing the loan of funds in the amount of $29,000,000 from the Low-Income Housing Fund to the 2018 Multipurpose LTGO Bond Fund for bridge financing of affordable housing.

SeattleCityCouncil_02212017_CB 118916

Please read. Agenda item number six three points. Affordable Housing Neighborhoods and Finance. Agenda Item six Council Bill 118 916 relating to the financing of affordable housing, authorizing the loan of funds in the amount of 20 to 29 million from the Low Income Housing Fund to the 2018 Multipurpose Alto Bond Fund for bridge financing and to of Affordable Housing Committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilmember Burgess. Thank you, colleagues. You remember that last fall we approved the sale of $29 million in limited tax general obligation bonds to be used for building affordable housing due to the uncertainty of projects and the actual spending needs. The city will likely sell those bonds in 2018. This legislation provides the Office of Housing with bridge financing from our cash pool so that they can proceed with projects before those bonds are actually sold. So what this ordinance does is it gives them appropriation authority to spend $29 million on affordable housing projects. We will then reimburse that loan, that bridge loan, when the bonds are sold in 2018. Thank you, Councilmember Burgess. Any further comments? Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I want to thank both Council Chair Burgess for welcoming this legislation into his committee, as well as the Office of Housing and the City Budget Office for working together to accomplish what is an important policy objective for me is that we will at least be able to try to utilize some of this additional capacity this year. We had a quick timeline coming up for the 2016 sorry, the 2017 bond issuance. We do that once a year. In April, in order to have met that deadline, we would have had to identify projects in early January. And though we tried, we were unable to do so so quickly, which is understandable considering the complexity of low income housing development. And so this as a as a fallback measure to allow us to spend some or all of these funds this year is very appreciated. Thank you, Councilor Member Herbold. Any further comments in that? Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Maurice O'Brien. Hi. So on, I beg. Sharna Burgess. Hi. Gonzalez Herbold Johnson. President Harrell. All right. Now in favor. Favored unopposed. Thank you. The bill passed and chair assignment please read agenda item number seven.

Recommendation to direct City Manager to work with the Long Beach Health and Human Services Department Office of Youth Development to establish the Long Beach Youth Fund, utilizing Measure US revenue and additional revenue sources.

LongBeachCC_02162021_21-0148

Thank you. Next up is item 18. Item 18 Communication from Vice Mayor Richardson. Councilwoman Sarah. Council Member Oranga. Recommendation to direct City Manager to establish the Long Beach Youth Fund. Utilizing Measure US revenue and additional revenue sources. Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was a few years back that city council received a fail to invest in youth report on youth. Youth leaders across the city advocated for Youth Fund. And we explored city council, explored a number of options to create this youth fund. The case was made that, you know, a number of major cities in America have made this commitment to have an ongoing fund, to support youth development ongoing and and certain steps have been taken. The mayor allocated $200,000 in his 2018 budget to to begin the process of developing a fund. And the youth group said we'd rather work on the youth strategic plan and in the hopes of coming to a fund later after exploring of those opportunities. Well, since then, a lot has happened. Last week we heard about the strategic plan. We know that the Framework for reconciliation invested in creating a new Office of Youth Development. And we also went to the ballot to find ways to fund investing in equity through youth and as the US was adopted. And now it's time that we make these youth whole and we move forward with directing staff to begin making taking the steps to create a youth fund, create a program website, engage with how to rules and how to work and all those things to have it ready for the next fiscal year. So if we start now, February, we have a lot of time to make sure we've designed this the right way where it makes sense, and we begin the next fiscal year with the youth fund in place with the rules and the parameters, with equity in consideration and all of the things that we need to do to make sure that we are making a real commitment to investing. Now, I mentioned measure us, but I also say don't stop there. I think once we have this established, let's see what the Port of Long Beach has to say to Mendes. L.A. County again is going through the conversation on Measure J. Again, that's not ready today, but we can get to the table and begin seeing it. Can we leverage some of these, measure U.S. dollars to draw down county resources and others to expand this youth fund? So we take incredible steps. I think we're in a really good place to make a strong commitment, a strong statement here by beginning the process of shaping this youth plan. I want to thank particularly my girls in action and all the youth that have advocated Invest in Youth Coalition have advocated for Youth Fund for many years. And I want to thank you for staying on it. And I think this is what the City Council should do in its moment. So that's my motion. The motion has written and I urge city council support. Thank you. Council member Ringo. Thank you, Aaron. I want to thank Vice Mayor Richardson for bringing forward more and more importantly, I want to thank the voters of Long Beach for a fascinating review. It's going to speak it speaks volumes for how the city feels about our view. And then also it's a statement about how we need to address not only terms of bringing our youth to get better services, but to also provide them with all the resources they need to be successful. So I very strongly support this measure, and thank you to all my colleagues for supporting this. Thank you. Our twins are a. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank Vice Mayor for bringing this item forward. And, you know, as somebody who I've shared, when we had the strategic plan presented before us, sure. That I was the former executive director, Michael was in action. And, you know, I'm proud of their leadership on this, bringing this item forward to council as well, working with everybody and coordinating the effort. And I think that, you know, our young people have worked really hard in so many different ways to bring this strategic plan forward. And I think as adults, we need to demonstrate that we support them through investments to follow through with their plan. To really support them is to see their Plan B come alive. And the way we can only do that is to ensure that there is an investment in the form of funds. I'd also like to see if we can draw that up from state and federal dollars as well. As far as supporting this plan and so and so, yes, I'm proud to support this item. Thank you. Council member, Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Certainly, I support this, the direction that this item is going in. But I think as a council, didn't we already do this last year? We supported putting measure us on the ballot and identified that that a good percentage of those dollars would be going toward supporting youth. And won't this be coming to us? And I expect this to be coming to us as a budget proposal anyway as a result of our action last year. Leicester City Manager Can you comment on that? Yes. So we see. This as giving us direction to start with the concept of creating this fund and then it would be incorporated into your f y 22 budget process. One of the primary funding sources that we would look at would be measure us and measure us starts actually generating money in October. So that would be a part of the city manager's proposed budget and to lay out the uses of the first year, measure US funding. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to get some clarification on this because it does seem like déja vu. We already, you know, committed to to supporting our youth through to a fund by putting a ballot initiative on. And in that ballot initiative, we identified that this was one of the areas that we wanted to target our resources . You know, I I'm really interested in, you know, getting engaged in the budget process. And I know this year we will have a different type of process which will engage more the community, more of the Council through our strategic priority budget process, but which is a take up a zero based budgeting which was also directed by the Council. Yes, investing in our youth is certainly the priority. I'm happy to support this. But I just wanted to get clarification because again, I think we we as a council have already committed to doing this. And I'm happy to recommit tonight to supporting our youth. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I actually have had a couple of agenda items tonight that are already things that we as a council have discussed. And I thought we're coming back to a certain committee, whether it's budget or. I mean, I think that this sounds a little bit more like not just making funds available through the budget process, but it's really a program. And I think the confusion comes with the naming of the fund. It sounds like a youth program that establishes criteria by which when the council. Authorizes funding. Whether it's restricted or non restricted or how that works, that there there would be a process. At least that's what it sounded like when hearing from Councilmember Richardson. So I'm happy to support the item tonight. It does seem like there are a lot of different components of what we're working on for youth, and I just want to be sure that it all comes together. We have the youth strategic plan, we have the violence prevention, and we have many, many other programs that we've approved over the last six years, including and you did mention this one, Mr. Austin, but some of our parks after dark programs and then our summer reimagined or after school reimagined, we hear a lot from the community that they want to know how much we're investing in our youth. And I think that a component of this that's really going to be important is being able to bring all of that together so we know where all those investments are being made so that we're able to see the return on that investment and the outcomes and what things what levers you invest in have the highest return in lifting up our youth and preparing them for prosperity, especially as we go into some of the the listening that I've done related to financial literacy that is not taught in our schools and other components. So I'm happy to support the item tonight, and I look forward to the city staff ensuring that all the components of what we're working on at the council are included. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. And just just to clarify, we pass as we move forward, measure us. We established a resolution. It didn't establish a funding that youth as a priority for investment, wealth, climate. But it didn't call out a fund. And what I don't want is for the fund itself to be lost in translation, because councilmember among those. Right. There's been a lot of things that sound like they're very similar. This is a very specific request, reflective of a community ask that honors the community's work. And so this is an important win to those youth to have fun. You know, the program, the website, you all know what I'm saying and where we can point to. And this was the communities when they fought for this, they set us on this course to get there. Now, in terms of the presentation last week, if you notice, the youth fund wasn't was it highlighted as an element? It is called out in the reconciliation plan. It is referenced in the strategic plan. I spend a lot of I read both those plans, spend a lot of time folks and those things. This is ties it together I think, and aligns it really well. And I think the things that I'll be looking for is a similar what Councilmember Mongeau said. I want to see some transparency. I want to see investments and things like, you know, I've got a lot of youth sports in North Economy, Pop Warner and, you know , Uptown Little League and a lot of a lot of folks who are a little just a small investment goes a long way. A $5,000 grant here, there, you know, goes a long way. Let's create a process to actually hear from these folks where we stand it up and we begin collecting youth. Measure us. We're ready to go on day one that that takes a motion from this council to staff to say, we want to do it. We kind of want to go about it this way, begin that process now. So that's the intent. Thank you to the City Council for your support and read about. Thank you, Councilman Zoro. Yeah. I just want to just follow up on one point around making sure we have an allocated, you know, my experience and having done, you know, fundraising went from private foundations to public and state is that the pool of resources are together. And then when it comes down to then making a decision on how much is allocate for young people, it's a very, very small percentage. And I think I want to lift up what Councilmember Mungo said is it's it's to make sure that we know how much is needed and to fully invest in young people and how much is really spent. And I think that the only way we can tell is having a specific fund. So we know really how much it really takes to develop and support young people to be successful and to implementing a plan. So that's just what I just want to make sure to add to it from my experience and that at times young people get the kind of the very kind of leftover funds. And so I just want to make sure we prioritize it by having their own fund. And that's why I think you. Thank you. Is your public comment on this or did we do public comment already? Yes, we did. Right. Well, we still have public comment. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You're right. Go ahead. Our first speakers, Jillian Moore. Hello and thank you for having me. My name is Jillian Moore. I'm a resident of North Long Beach and a youth and family commissioner representing the ninth District. My recommendation is to the city to use the funds for measure us to establish the Long Beach Youth Fund. Programs in Long Beach that uplift youth are long term investments in the future of Long Beach as a whole, and with help from Measure U as the fund would truly thrive, programs that create spaces for youth to grow individually and together with their community to target the problems plaguing our city at their core. Programs that bring youth together, such as arts programs and sports programs, allow youth a place for mentorship, friendship and deeper education. These programs preemptively lower crime and will greatly improve the well-being of Long Beach youth. Because of COVID, we have all learned firsthand the importance of having local communities to build one another at. As it currently stands. There is a lack of program in Long Beach for youth that served its purpose as a youth in Long Beach. I see a. I see a great need. As a youth in Long Beach, I see a great need for community spaces, specifically for youth, and would benefit from them greatly. These programs would also open up opportunities to connect youth to job opportunities and college funding sources. Youth young people need resources that will help them bounce back from the devastating effects of the COVID 19 pandemic. Reopening schools will not alone solve the problem. The corona virus only revealed the problems that were already present and showed us that we cannot go back to the way things were before, especially not for our youth. If we do not address the mental health crisis among youth now, it will continue to get exponentially worse. Now is a perfect time to make the change. Youth have needed access to resources. And we. And. Ray offered. I'm sorry. The major roadblock for community development is always money. And now because of us, we no longer have this roadblock. You see the problem in their communities. They know them in and out, and they're the ones with the knowledge to fix them. By utilizing the youth funds, they will be able to carry out the change they want to see. Thank you to the city manager and the city council. I hope you'll consider my words and choose to establish this fund. Thank you. Thank your next speakers, Jennifer Hing. Jennifer. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Please begin. Great. Thank you. Hi. Dear me, are Garcia in Long Beach. Councilmember is my name is Jen lead organizer with Kline Girls in Action on behalf of the Investing Youth Campaign. We thank you all for the passing of the Youth Strategic Plan last week. Tonight, we want to especially thank Vice Mayor Rex Richardson, Councilmember Dr. Sally Sara and reporter Aranda for sponsoring Agenda Item 18 and for leading by bringing young people, vision and leadership to the table. Tonight, we are hopeful for all councilmembers to continue to show your support by voting yes on establishing the first ever Lyme Disease Fund with dedicated funding revenue. Young people deserve support and resources, especially in challenging times like these. I speak tonight because youth leaders and community residents envision a more equitable world where young people are valued and included in our city's budget. And with the implementation of the U.S. treatment plan, young people are eager to continue their leadership in shaping decisions that impact their lives. Youth are facing barriers today, but continue to be civically engaged regardless of they are eligible to vote. For example, council meetings are not always accessible for young people to speak, so your decisions and your vote tonight can show you that your efforts are seen, valued and prioritized. Are Youth Fund dedicated funding from the local passage of measure US as well as the county passage of Measure J ensures an equitable infrastructure that supports positive youth development and centers racial equity. We urge the Council to leverage these funds to ensure young people are prioritized no matter the economic climate. We also have submitted a letter of support to your offices from partners and organizations from the investing campaign, which include the Advancement Project, Building Healthy Communities, Long Beach, California Conference for Equality and Justice. The Long Beach Chapter of the California Faculty Association. California for Justice Educated Men with Meaningful Messages, Genders and Sexualities. Alliance Network. Long Beach, Forward Filipino Migrant Center, I Girls in Action Voice Waves as well as the Youth Leadership Institute. So since 2017, young people have been helping to lead an equitable budget process in our city and have looked forward to the day they can say they were part of establishing the first ever youth one in the region. We have an opportunity to support long term COVID recovery and intergenerational healing. And we hope you can show you still love tonight by voting. Yes. Thank you so much. Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Thank you, Councilman. Mongo. I'm sorry. Thank you. Yes, that's right. Thank you. So I just want to thank all the speakers, particularly the first speaker you talk about, because considering your words. Youth leadership in this city has been a dominant force that has gone unanswered since the nineties. And I served on the Long Beach Press Telegram's Youth Coalition in the nineties to talk about violence in our communities and the things we needed to do. When I was elected, we proposed lots of special funds and city management pushed back and said there were all sorts of barriers to getting there. So I appreciate. Vice Mayor Richardson's comments that this is brought forward by the community. Funds, which become available in October. Councilwoman, we lost you for, like, the last maybe 20 seconds or so. Councilman, mango. Challenges and or restrictions and how we work together. We just so you know, we you cut in and out. So we haven't really been able to hear anything you said. Okay. You know, the last like minute or so. Okay. So when we talk about a special fund and we're talking about our reporting requirements on our annual CAF and all of those things, Mr. Groves has consistently pushed back that special funds are not really possible. My office has proposed multiple special funds in the last six years, all of which were brought forward by community members with a special intent or need, including youth sports, which we talked about, and depending on some different considerations. And so I don't know if we need a report back from the city manager's office on how he plans to do this now when in the past it's been rejected. I can understand the side of it where we talk about a program that every year the council allocates a fund or two funding to. That has a roll over mechanism. I guess I'm just interested in the city management and maybe it's it's just something that you provide to us in a to from for annotating why a special fund would work this time when it hasn't in the past or if it is possible now. And some laws have changed that all the other special funds that have been rejected in the last six years would come back to the Council for reconsideration because they were rejected at the staff level before you even made it to council , even though community groups are the ones bringing them forward. So I am passionate about a youth fund. I am passionate about stopping and stopping issues in our community and empowering youth to find those solutions. But I also want to do it in a way that doesn't create a false sense of hope or a false a tool that's not available. So if there's could just be some outline or information about that, because I know I even asked some of these questions at our briefing and it seemed as though we were going down a path of a program. But I hear something very different from the vice mayor. And so I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page and that previously rejected requests are not now overlooked, because. I. Would like to know the reasoning that there would be a variance. So thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councilman de. Thank you, Major. I just wanted to thank Councilwoman Richard, Vice Mayor Richardson for bringing this item forward and for those who cosigned on this. I was very, very impressed last week with our discussion on our strategic plan and all the work that that went into the plan and especially the work coming from all of the organizations that have been involved, all the youth organizations. May I add, that have been involved in in the youth strategy. So I'm so happy to be able to support this item going forward and making sure that we achieve the goals that we set and that we're able to follow up on this, this just to make sure that we bring this fun into fruition for our youth within their strategic plan, because that was something that was the big ask was a youth plan. And as we all know, and especially in my district, I think that investing in our youth is definitely a game changer from providing a good quality of life for their future. And I'm very happy to be able to support them like this. So thank you again. Thank you very much, Vice Mayor. It's a. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Just to sum up a couple of things, though. First, this is within the general fund. It's not a special fund. And we've done this a number of times, legal defense fund, other things that we've done. The city manager we talked about this at length for many, many years is not a new idea. In fact, we discussed when we talked about the resolution that these are general fund dollar measure, U.S. general fund dollars. They all have to go through the budget appropriation process. And, you know, within the whole conversation about this, you know, I don't want it to be lost that by establishing a fund, this empowers the youth to help set the rules on the fund, talk about the allocations, talk about what the needs are and and and make our strategic plan live. And because a major U.S. structural fund can be structural. So so we're really talking about semantics here. I think staff knows exactly what what it is they want to do. What I don't want to do is give the false hopes to folks that this is a one time thing. We had that discussion, that council councilmember Mongo, if you remember, you offered $1,000,000 to take the measure off the table and walk away. And we said, no, we want to go to the voters because we want the structural. And that's what the voters voted on. This was not one time. This is something we're going to we want to commit to now. Could it change? Sure. A council could could change and make other priorities. But, you know, the idea here is we want to stand up to flag down and say that we really, truly believe in this. And that's what we're we're voting on. We're voting to move forward with establishing a fund, transparent and open. And I think. Yes. The city manager should provide regular reports to the city council. I think he already does that and so we will be informed on what that process looks like. But I hope that it's really youth, youth and youth serving organizations really have a strong voice and how its how its shape. So thank you and we can move on. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I appreciate that. You said that it's part of general fund. I think that it's important to note that the legal defense fund is an annual allocation by the city council. And so, yes, like you acknowledged each year, the council would have to acknowledge. The reauthorization or authorization of funding towards that. If we wanted to do a resolution of some sort about how much or of what percentage of this council feels is appropriate. Even still, two years from now. Five of the current council members could be gone and that new majority could decide something different. And so the difference in what I thought you were trying to suggest, which I would be supportive of if the city staff would give me a methodology to make it happen, is setting money into a fund like the Legal Defense Fund? When we did that, we took that money and we contracted it out to the vendor and it was set. It's not like it was just like any other general fund. At the end of the year, what's not used can be swept, but the council can make it a priority otherwise and so. I understand the methodology and I look forward to reading the report back because making it a priority is one thing. Setting aside $1,000,000 is another thing, but measure us is a general fund and in any given year those challenges do come up. And so the city financial management staff has parameters that are in place that I was just questioning Mr. Modica earlier today at our briefing to find out if parameters that were set before are no longer in place because we do have strong fiscal policies for a reason. And it's important to be honest and transparent with the youth about what those are, so that they're clear on how to continue to advocate for themselves and the fund, because that is the part of the process and they are capable of that. And so if we can change a law that makes it possible to set it aside in a special fund like tobacco tax or any of those other things, or a refuse fund, that would be great, but. Calling the fund. The fund without those legal restrictions is something that we just want to be very transparent about. So I'm happy to support the item and happy to continue to support youth. And I'm also happy to sit down and have a real conversation with the community and or the youth and or they can have that with the Budget Chair about what we've tried to do in the past and what legal measures may be appropriate to protect funding on a long term basis. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes everything. We will go ahead and go to a roll call vote. I don't think there's any more common sense. Councilwoman Zendaya's. Right. Councilwoman Ellen. I can Silverman Price. I can swim in Sabina. I can swim in Mango. Times. Woman Mango. Councilwoman. Sorry. I. Councilwoman Zahra. I. Council member Oranga. Hi. Councilman Alston. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Enthusiastic, I. Russian case. Thank you. Next up is I am 20.

A RESOLUTION supporting Sound Transit (A Regional Transit Authority) Proposition 1 ballot measure and urging Seattle voters to vote “Yes” on Sound Transit Proposition 1 on the November 8, 2016 general election ballot.

SeattleCityCouncil_09122016_Res 31704

Item five Resolution 3170 for supporting sound transit Proposition one ballot measure and urging Seattle voters to vote yes on Sound Transit Proposition one on the November 8th, 2016, general election ballot. As I said during a council briefing this morning, this is a resolution supporting sound transit Proposition one ballot measure and urging Seattle voters vote yes on that proposition on the November 8th ballot. We could talk a lot about what this does by adding 62 miles of light rail and growing the existing system to 116 miles. But I'm going to stop there and ask if Councilmember Johnson or O'Brien would like to talk a little bit more about what this resolution. But because mine was context, I am going to move to pass it so we can have what I would assume will be some pro statements. So I'm going to move to pass council bill. I'm sorry, I'm going to move past resolution 31704. Is there a second? Second? Okay. Councilmember Johnson, would you like to begin. Thank you very much. Council President Harrell And when completed, if the voters choose to pass us to three November, our light rail system will actually be larger than Washington, D.C. metro systems. To put that into context for folks, there's a lot to like on this November ballot. This is yet another one of those measures that I think I'm hopeful that my colleagues will support. Regardless of where you sit on this day, as there's something in this ballot measure for you, whether you're building light rail to West Seattle in 14 years or to ballot in 19 years, both at grade separations, they've got travel time and speed reliability. Whether you're building infill stations at Graham Street or the 130th Street Station, whether you're looking at bus rapid transit improvements in Ballard and West Seattle and along Madison as part of our first five years Quick Wins program, whether they're talking about transit oriented development, affordable housing, where we're going to be putting more resources into both of those projects, completing the spine and regional growth, placemaking for the next 25 years is a critical path to ensuring that the region is economically competitive and can handle the growth that we're expected to see over the next 25 years. But the final, final couple of things I want to just say about this. As an environmentalist, I care a lot about this plan because transportation is our largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and we need to get people onto transit to help reduce our fossil fuel reliance. If you care about job creation, as I do, this plan will put $54 billion worth of people to work, creating the next generation of great labor opportunities and labor projects and the associated job creation that goes along with all those major capital project investments. If you care about alleviating poverty, as I do, multiple studies have shown that access to fast and reliable public transportation is one of the most strong determiner to get people out of poverty and into the middle class. And if you care about the economy, as I do, this opportunity to build out our light rail system is going to provide so much more travel time and reliability for folks in this region to get them out of congestion. Just today, I got on a train that left our station a block away and got me to ask you stadium in under 10 minutes. That is a bus trip that used to take 45 minutes. So we need this and I hope my colleagues vote yes. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Johnson. Councilmember O'Brien. I thank you, Councilmember Johnson, for your leadership on this. And colleagues, I also hope we all support this. What we have before as the voters of the region, the peers, Snohomish and King County have an amazing opportunity before us this November. And it's an opportunity that I've heard from people throughout this region asking for it long before I was a city council member. Please get us a transit system that is speedy, reliable and gets me where I need to go. And this package does that. It's an opportunity, as Councilmember Johnson said, to address issues around mobility, around congestion and around the impacts of climate change. We're already seeing it's an outstanding opportunity, and I look forward to supporting this resolution and the ballot initiative in November, and I hope the voters of the region do also. Thank you from Bryan. Any other comments from any of my colleagues? Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I'd just like to thank Councilmember Robert Johnson and Mayor Ed Murray for their work on this on transit board, Councilmember O'Brien for coordinating the very successful city council resolution to sound transit, stating what the city wanted. And also, of course, Sound Transit Board Chair and King County executive Dave Cosentino for all his fine work in developing the ballot measure. Thank you for those words. Councilmember Sawant. Thank you. President Herold. Seattle's transportation infrastructure is woefully inadequate. We asked. I was to drive their cars, less to say the environment correctly so, and to relieve congestion on our roads. But the reality is that we don't have adequate alternatives. So how can working people get to work on time and do everything that they need for their families without a car in the absence of real mass transit? Many working people understand the impending damages of climate change and would love to take alternative transportation, public transportation, but simply do not have real options that will enable them to get through their day without significant delays. Sounds at Sound Transit three will be a major and long overdue addition to our transit infrastructure, and even this will not be sufficient to our needs, but it will be a huge step forward. And I'm really happy that we as a council are urging people to vote in favor of it by passing this resolution. It should be noted, however, the proposal is not perfect. It is funded by sales taxes, which are the most regressive taxes available. Sales taxes tax poor and working class people at a far higher rate than the wealthy and they are a big part of the funding of this transit project is an important reminder that elected officials need to show leadership not only in supporting and passing progressive initiatives that enable us to deal with climate change, but we also have to make sure that it happens in an economically progressive manner. Ultimately, we need to stop using regressive taxes, and we need to start taxing the many millionaires of this region. However, that is not the fault. Just Dosanjh on the tree. It is true for all taxes in this city, county and state. And the reality is that Sound Transit three is a really important increase in transit. And so it is absolutely critical that we all as voters support this initiative. Thank you. Thank you. Concerns one. Any further comments from any of my colleagues? Okay. So at this point, I'm going to open up for public comments. For many members of the public that would like to speak in opposition of or in support of the resolution to endorse the sound transit measure. Do I see any members of the public? And yes, we do. We have two takers, and this is important that we get to our record. So is there a sign up sheet for these fine folks? Okay. Oops. Okay. Will do. Thank you. So, I'm Alice Lockhart. I came here in support of Standing Rock. But this is a really important issue. I want to echo what the other lady said. This is great. It's not enough. If you know. The science says that. We need to decrease our. Greenhouse gases in this state and elsewhere by 8% per year. If we start now and buy more, if we wait to do that, an incremental improvement in sound transit is not going to cut it. We need, in fact, in this region and we can afford in this region free transit for everyone, which will. As I. Believe it was, Mr. Johnson. Said, also lift many. People out of. Poverty and into the middle class as a mere side effect of free transit. I hope that's the next thing that you all think about. And thank you, Emily, for. Suggesting that today. Thank you. I had Mr. Locke actually signed up on this measure. Mr. Locke, if you want to speak on the sound transit measure, either pro or con on the sound transit measure. And Paul La Belle La. You've already given $6 billion. We can't afford another 2 billion. The rail system should be made and operated to operate like an elevator where you don't need the operators. That's where your cost is. Those people riding on those rigs. Get top salary because they can they can choose the job they take. You're driving a bus or ride Mercedes rail cars. The money is not there. It looks like us who live off investments. The. Bonds in that case tell today's don't have very large payments. But 2%. The last bond i owned was 9.6%. Melissa more bombs. But people are still paying the bill. They're going to get a bill. Property taxes. Inflated the properties. A $70,000 home is now you can sell the thing for $3 million or more. The people are going to be around when all these bills come due. I'm not going to make it. It doing like it did to the Roman Empire. You know, the history books that we used to have. Of 80. Plane is going up against the empire collapsed in. No, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Locke. Our next speaker on this resolution will be Paula Revere. Hi, champ. Thanks for the chance to speak. Nobody knew there were multiple sheets, by the way. Everybody outside. Hitler, abundant in opinions on all kinds of topics. Sound transit. I am totally pro transit as. As a kid growing up. I love trains and busses, and I waited as long as I could to get into a car. And it was because I had good instincts. Unfortunately, besides the tunnel ones which make absolute sense, taking up all the streets and all the parking spaces for our local businesses, I think was a terrible mistake. And I think there's a deliberate effort behind it. I won't get into that because not enough time. And it's not your deliberate effort. So what's happened is the streets are full of these things going by. And I know at some point there'll be thousands of people on them. But watching the city and all the parking and all the small businesses get hurt by all this construction and everything has been really hard to watch. 54 billion is twice the state budget. That's incredible for a very small percentage of the state's people to be driving, to be riding them. They have the double tall busses they could speed around. They're very. Flexible. We're getting transit like 15 years late. That was also deliberate. And then it got rushed in a certain kind of way and everybody was just so happy to have it. I don't think everyone thought enough about it so I wouldn't do it. I think that we need to stop and take a look at something more flexible. Because, you know, 20, 30 years out, this is outrageous for this kind of. Money. And I watch Sound Transit run. All those wonderful people that are there making votes. They ran the timetable. They ran the decisions. And I don't trust them. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Revere. I am going to there are any other people that like to speak in pro con on this resolution supporting sound transit measure. And if not, I will hold I will conclude that the a lot of time for public comment has expired. Okay. So we are ready to vote on this resolution. All those in favor of supporting the resolution vote? I think all those opposed vote no. The ayes have it. The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it. Please read the next agenda item.

Recommendation to request City Manager to investigate the feasibility of bringing the USS RANGER (CV-61) Super Carrier to the City of Long Beach and report back to City Council and direct City Attorney to prepare a resolution stating the City of Long Beach has an interest in the USS Ranger (CV-61) Super Carrier.

LongBeachCC_09162014_14-0751

Item 18 Communication from Councilman Andrews and Councilman Richardson. Recommendation to require City Manager to investigate bringing the USS Ranger to Long Beach and report back to city council and direct city attorney to prepare a resolution stating Long Beach has an interest in the USS Ranger super carrier. GONZALES Councilmember Andrews. Thank you, Mayor. You know, the USS Ranger served our country since 1957 from Vietnam War to the Desert Storm. USS Ranger has aided Americans in many war zones. It was even cast in a high cost movie called Topgun. Today, we have an opportunity to look for a possibility permanent home for the vessel on Long Beach. It is a simple task and there will be no general funds used for this project. I recognize that there are reports that the vessel will be sold for scrap. However, the small chance may be to house it here. I think the USS Ranger is worth our time. You know, to chance it, anything is possible, especially when we are working with our veterans that serve our country. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. Thank you. So thank you, Councilmember Andrews, for bringing this forward and out of respect for our veterans. I think we ought to, you know, take a good look at what we can do to reuse or or activate this ship. I got to say, it's a big boat. It's a super carrier. I just want to see what it looks like in person at some point. But. But, hey, I think it's too early. It's early in the conversation. If Councilmember Andrews has an opportunity out there for us to look and see how this can be brought to Long Beach, I think it's well worth us looking into. So thank you. Thank you. Any public comment on the item? Any public comment on the item, Casey? None. I'm sorry. Is that someone coming forward? Please come forward quickly. And please identify yourself for the record. Good evening, counsel. My name? Name's Robert Harmon. I live in Cambodia, town 1305 East 14th Street, right across MacArthur Park. Proud Lumbee Citizen. I congratulate you on winning an election in the best cities on God's green earth. And there's an opportunity here to bring a modern marvel to Long Beach. Thank you. Take a look. Alert five. Helicopter. What's most. My first one. He. Home. Sweet home. It's a real beautiful ship. Okay. Time is. Time's up. Contain the video, please. Thank you, counsel, for your time. Actually, your time your time is up. So thank you very much. All right. Thank you. I'm available for questions. Thank you very much. Okay. Seeing no other public comment, I'm going to bring this back to the council, Councilmember Austin. Well, actually, I had a quite a couple of questions. I think this is a very interesting idea brought forth by a council member, Andrews and Richardson. You know, I received a few calls and emails from constituents who are interested in this this this item as well. You know, I do understand that this is moving forward. A vote here today would just instruct the city manager to do a feasibility study in terms of whether or not it's feasible to place it here in the city where that could be placed. But I'm interested in knowing the what kind of capacity the organization had that requested this come forth. What kind of capacity do you have right now to to fund the the movement or the transport of this super carrier to Long Beach? And and and how would you sustain that? All right. We have the full fundraising machine of some very prominent people in the city supporting us. And we do have a community of over 50,000 Ranger men spanning three generations. We have friends in high places where I would be here tonight. We can do this. It's not too much for Long Beach. We can bring it. Well, I really I don't know if you really answered my question, but the. Fundraising machine is is ready and activated. We just need a green light from the city council. We have our articles of incorporation. We're ready to go. We just need some pledges and we'll get underway. We can do this. Okay. So is your organization starting from the ground up right now? We have concept with the dream and it's okay if you are just. I just started a new a new nonprofit organization. The one who is putting the bid together for Portland dissolved after they couldn't move a bridge to get the Ranger underneath for Portland. There's a lot of heartbroken people in Portland. That whole apparatus is going to be behind me to help make this happen. The project manager and all of that teamwork will be directed in this city, focused around getting you here. And just if you could give us some logistics here regarding the super carrier, how big is this in comparison, say, to the Queen Mary? How big is this? What's the capacity in terms of population? How many people can actually be on on a on a super carrier? It's just about the same size, a 1100 feet long. It's about the same length. We have some spots picked out, chosen. We will consult with the authorities in Long Beach. There's actually some place that will revitalize a portion of downtown. It's it's perfect. We have a good spot to just have to consult with everybody. As far as people. When we broke 5500 people is a good solid answer. Okay. Well, thank you very much. And you know what? It doesn't hurt to to to to have a vision. And so I appreciate you bringing this forth. And again, I appreciate Councilmember Andrews and Richardson for bringing this forth. And thank you for your consideration. I just want to assure you we can do this. Thank you. Councilmember Ringa. Before you leave. Yes, sir? One quick question. You mentioned that it's scheduled for disbanding. What is that schedule? Are we working on a timeline here? We are on a timeline. The the thing is, is that there's Nimitz class carriers coming out of service soon. They need to make room. They're actually getting rid of all the old aircraft carriers and making way for the Nimitz class carriers who are ending their lifespan so they can be in put in ready reserve. So basically, Uncle Sam's cleaning out the attic. This is the last opportunity to have a super carrier anywhere on earth for public display because all the super carriers are gone. This is the last one. So what are we looking at? We're looking at by the. End of the year. Actually, they can close a deal any time. But we have friends in high places. They're trying to stall the contract for us. They're buying us time because it's it's a national treasure and they're rooting for us. But they've had it under and it's been like going on and on. And on and. On. In the Pacific Northwest, when I realized that we were like on a code blue status, being a ship's corpsman, I ran in here to try and save the ship because without an intervention should be scrapped. When I realized that my shipmates up in the Pacific Northwest were unable to work out a way to get here under a bridge to Portland. I jumped in, said, there's no bridges we got to worry about here in Long Beach. So I hope I answered your question. Yeah, thank you. I'm going to move on to Councilmember Gonzales, but just also is a note that the agenda item calls the city manager to come back to council with all the appropriate information after. And the city manager will do a thorough discussion, obviously not just with the parties here, but with with everyone involved, to give the council all the information. Make his job very easy. Sir, please don't. Don't interrupt me. Thank you very much, Councilwoman Gonzales. Thank you. So I just have a question. I'm trying to realize this myself. And what are where are the thoughts of where this would be put? I know that we are going to have a feasibility study, but I'm just trying to imagine this in my head. Up. Behind the Aquarium of the Pacific, between the Queensway Bridge and the Pierpoint Landing. It's out of the way. Will not disrupt the skyline, but it's still downtown where there's a lot of foot traffic at the end of the bike paths if it's there. And it'd be a perfect location because we've actually looked around the skyline, we can be taken. It won't take away the limelight from the Queen Mary. It's out of the way. Yeah, it's still accessible to revitalize the pike. A lot of foot traffic. There'll be throngs of people down there around the aquarium. There's two big parking garages that will sustain the tourism. It's perfect. All we need to do is dredge it out, make it a little deeper. We need 31 feet of clearance. And then we got it. A spy. It'll fit. Perfect. Because I just. I just get concerned because there's so much development going on near the port. And as a council member, you know, there's a lot of question about. That tiny aquarium tucked away where you can still see it and still walk. To it. Okay. Thank you and look beautiful. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. So Mr. West, should this. So this would be a study just to see if this is feasible will be your approach and what would be the things that you would consider and how you would process this request tonight? I'm concerned. Mayor will just do exactly what you're asking us to do. We'll meet with the gentlemen. We'll meet with folks at the port. We'll meet with the folks at Kaplan Landing. To talk about dredging, things like that, the amount of money it takes to put this here. We'll also talk about San Pedro and their experience. With the USS Iowa. But more importantly, we'll. Talk to the Navy. This was brought to the city council. Before under Mayor O'Neill's term. And here it is again. And let's not forget the jurisdiction that actually has authority to to to actually place this anywhere along the coast, which would not be this body but the coast commission. Yes. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other questions from the council? Seeing none. There's a motion on the floor. All those in favor. Please raise your hand. Okay. Motion is unanimous. Thank you very much. Mr. Clarke, item 17. Item actually. Item 19.

Recommendation to receive and file report from Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) on the status of the Blue Line improvement project.

LongBeachCC_01222019_19-0057

Thank you. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you. Thank you so much. Okay. Next, we're going to move on to item 19 with the clock, please. Regarding. Item 19 is communication from Mir Garcia. Recommendation to receive and file report from Metro on the status of the Blue Line Improvement Project. Thank you. The only public coming on as well. Okay. I'm going to turn it up. Please turn over to Metro, please. Excuse me. It's good. I'm going to turn to Metro and then we'll have the comments after that. Thank you very much, sir. Okay. Uh, well, my name is Tim Lindholm. I'm the executive officer for Capital Projects at Metro. And wow, that's a tough act to follow, but thank you for having us here, Vice Mayor Andrews and members of the Council, we're really happy to be here to tell you about the new Blue Project. We've got a lot of my team members here that are going to help walk through this presentation. I'll handle the first slide and then pass it on. So our beloved blue line is 29 years old and in the end are loving care. And we really need to get it into a state of good repair again so that it can be reliable and resilient and provide good passenger service. So what we're doing is we're investing $350 million on improvements to the blue line to enhance safety, increase reliability, and improve the customer experience for our passengers. So we're going to start the new blue improvements this Saturday morning at about 4 a.m.. We're going to start the southern closure of the the blue line so that we can start the work we're planning to do, which improvements in general are. We're improving all of the overhead power systems, all new track work in the city of Long Beach, new signaling systems. We're modernizing the train control system. Very importantly, we're putting in four new crossover tracks which will allow us to switch tracks in case there's issues along the tracks or an accident or an incursion into the track. That way we can pass it very quickly and keep our schedule. And it's also going to help with maintenance going forward that we have a way to get around areas where we're maintaining. We're also painting all the stations, putting in new signage and branding, and we're putting in digital map cases at every station which kind of look like big enlarged iPhones that are interactive. And you can do trip planner and you can find out when your train is coming. So the nature of the work that we're doing requires that the blue line be out of service for two extended four month closures. And we're going to close the south half from the downtown Long Beach Transit Mall to Willowbrook, Rosa Parks. We're going to work there for four months while the north portion is open and then we're going to switch. Once we're open on the south side, we'll close the north side and take care of that. Now, we're very cognizant that this is a major inconvenience to our passengers. And the success of this program is not whether we finish it on time or finish it within our budget. The success here is not to lose any riders, and to that we want to provide excellent passenger service as we do these closures. So we've designed three levels of bus shuttle service, which Metro will talk about in the next couple of slides. The shuttle services are really based on on what we see, what we know our passengers do. Ridership patterns that we observe, origins and destinations. And we're trying our best to provide a shuttle service that will work for our passengers. So with that, I am going to do the project manager, James Way. Thank you, Tim. Hello. My name is James William, the Pies manager for the Blue Line. Work we have shown here is a high level schedule, a time line we have for the works. Coming up, we talked about the Rosa Parks station and the North and South segment. The Rosa Parks station will be closed throughout starting this Friday and Saturday coming up. And that goes on for eight months. And we do the work from south portion for everything south of Rosa Parks Station that goes all the way down to downtown Long Beach. This works. Expect to go on and goes into May and then while the train is running in the north segment, this will ends in May once we make a flip. As far as doing the work and North, we open its revenue service in the south and sometime late May another four month closure to that and within the north segments there's really broken up excuse me into two segments. So there's a most northern portion downtown L.A. where the tunnel is, seven metro station out to PICO, this portion of track, that expo and Blue Post shared three tracks together. That portion. We're going to do this work as fast as we can to replace track, work and Oasis, which is all we have power lines in that segment, and 45 days closure. And then after that, we open up the Expo Line, running the Blue Line, everything South Pico Station, starting from Grand Station, still close all the way down to Willowbrook and that's expected to be finished by September. Everything be done. And let me just go into a little bit more detail on the work that's going to occur in Long Beach. Starts again, starts this weekend. It's broken up into two major work as truck work and overhead power system work essentially will have two two group of contractors and workers working together, chasing each other out to start with. Well, you'll see what I mean by chasing each other. The truck work starts first. This work starts in a long beach loop area. Everything south of a street for three or four weeks. This work continue. It's going to happen every day, Monday through Saturday. Sundays right now is plan to be off for the workers and also maybe a contingency. The work occurs day on weekends. The everything within between the crossings. Those are going to be on Monday to Friday work. And at the crossing where the street crosses our track, that's a Friday night, Saturday into Sunday work contractors planning doing that 24 hour straight starting Friday night and get this work done so on Sunday although it's not a planned work that that's the time where we're going to put new concrete at the track bed with where the street crosses the track will allow that time for concrete a cure. So this work truck work mainly it's going to happen essentially every day, seven days a week. We do it every everything. We get work done with an hour with the time we have now once this work gets done. But first, as I mentioned, 3 to 4 weeks, the contract to start moving north, north of a street, going up to Willow Station and right behind it is overhead power system work. So overhead power system workers start about six week into the job contract to start working in the Long Beach Loop area. They're replacing all their contact wires entirely. Just just like the track track is getting replaced 100%. So these contact wires, essentially, they're 30 years old and they went out over the years. It's time to replace them. So this work starts south again, going north, going toward north, chasing that group of track guys. So the track will be done after 12 weeks. And then also the cost, the overhead power work continued north. It will be finish within that. They started a six, seven weeks. They also finished total about six, seven weeks. So that take us to about three months or so. The work is scheduled to be done within 12 weeks, plus or minus a little bit. And the rest of the time they're shut down. Metros are performing basically system integration test. This is to make sure that all the work is done correctly and adjustment needs to be make is done at this time. So this and the work obviously continue all the way to Willowbrook, not just City of Long Beach goes further and beyond. So the last three or four weeks of time, Metro will be performing tests and that's where you will see you may see non-revenue train running for testing the system that we put in. That covers most of the work as you go on Long Beach. Next thing I think we'll have Jeffrey here to talk about the bus replacement service. Thank you. Blue line service will be maintained from. Seventh Street Metro Station to 103rd. Street Station. Rail service will be suspended from 100 south of 103rd. Street Station to downtown Long. Beach, where it will be replaced by three levels of bus shuttle service. The Willowbrook Rosa Parks Station will be out for the entirety of the project, but we have four minute service to to for the folks who are transferred from the green line and. Want to transfer over to the blue line. Next, I'll speak to the local. Shuttle, which is based off of demonstrated to me is to provide service to all of the closed stations. It's free of charge. And it will operate almost 24 hours a day. Service begins at 330 and extended through all the way through to 30, and that was. Due to response to. Public outcry. It'll provide six minute service in the peaks in 12 minutes, service in the base. So in the middle of the day, that's. What the base period is. Next we have the Express shuttle. These are for the folks who actually have demonstrated to me that they want to go from downtown Long Beach to downtown Los Angeles. So they'll bypass the middle of the segment and be expedited straight to the end of the line. This is provided during the peaks. We've actually expanded the peak period again due to public comments. So we. Expanded it from 6. To 530, and the back end from 9:00 to 955 is just displayed above. And the peak was also expanded from 3 to 7:30 p.m.. In a provide 12 minute service as well. The last shuttle is that is the select shuttle. And this is for the folks who demonstrated demand to go from downtown, from Long Beach, excuse me, to the green line and eventually connect over. To the blue line. Again, this would be a service that's offered during our peak periods. It is on a 12 minute headway. The composite headway for launch is about 4 minutes. So from Wardlow to downtown, Long Beach will be providing 4 minutes. Over the entirety. And next, I have Anthony Crump speak to our community outreach. Good evening. Anthony Crump, director of Community Contractual Relations for Metro. I think last time that I was here, we gave you a brief overview of the outreach that we intended to do, but we didn't have a lot of details as we were still working with our service planning to to come up with the replacement bus service and some of the other details associated with the closure. Since then, I can say that we've done an extensive outreach program to let both our customers know, as well as residents in the general area know about the closure itself. This began in earnest in July of last year and then gradually ramped up to culminate in in January of this year with an outreach program, a media program, and actually ambassadors at each of our stations talking about the closure itself. Specific to the city of Long Beach, we actually sent a mailer out that looks like this is to take one that went to all residents within a half mile of the blue line itself. And that actually actually included also the cities of Los Angeles and Compton. But everyone should have received this just after the New Years. And we also worked with the local council offices, committee organizations, business organizations like the DOJ to get the word out as well. Obviously, recognizing that we are not experts on the city of Long Beach and the neighborhoods associated with Long Beach. We really did leverage our relationships with community organizations and with the council members to get the word out and to use their newsletters and other means to reach out to them. The last bit of it was actually hitting high frequency areas where our writers potentially go to, and those are places like community centers, grocery stores dropping off these take ones actually going to hospitals, social service agencies, making sure that people that don't necessarily pay attention to the media may not even pay attention to what they get in their mail. But are potential writers or actual writers that will have the opportunity to hear about the closure itself? Back in July, we actually launched the new Blue Project web page would actually included information about the service interruption as well as the the replacement bus service that was in the works. We actually still have a number of town halls and community meetings that are still scheduled. In fact, tomorrow night we will be here in council chambers in conjunction with Council Councilmember Pierson. Gonzalez holding another community meeting just to make sure that people have the opportunity to ask us questions and to find out more details about what's going on. This morning, we actually had a press conference with Mayor Garcia where we are and Supervisor Janice Hahn and some other members of the Metro. Announced the closure itself more of a reminder as opposed to a general announcement. But we're hoping that through all of these different means and mechanisms, we're able to to reach both our customers and our potential customers to let them know not only about the service interruption, but to know about the replacement bus service that we're offering. One of the replacement bus services, the express service, is something that's completely new. Metros never offered that to residents of Long Beach or Los Angeles, and that's a service that goes from Long Beach to downtown Los Angeles directly. Hopefully that is something that will be popular. We're anticipating that it will be highly used and maybe, maybe extend it even beyond the service itself. I think with that, that concludes most of our presentation. We do want to make sure that actually one more part. Construction relations. So there's actually twofold. Two parts to our outreach program. The first part is letting people know about the service reps, the second part of the actual construction relations program. And those are the construction impacts that are related to the work that James talked about specifically. So we talk about pulling up all the rail in the city of Long Beach Resort. Talk about replacing those overhead wires. Obviously, those don't come without a little bit of pain. In some cases, it means that parking is going to be removed. In some cases means that we'll be doing lane closures and things along those lines in order to support the outreach associated with that, we have a construction relations program. That program provides noticing to impacted residents, to stakeholders, whether it be residents or businesses. We actually go out there, we meet with them face to face, one on one with them, and hopefully address many of their concerns. Our team also works directly with our contractors, the multiple contractors that we have on this project to mitigate any potential issues. That can be something as simple as, you know, figuring out what the best time is to block a drive, where the best time is to open a driveway, figuring out what's the best time to do some of the noisy work as opposed to the the quiet work. It also means coordinating with local schools to make sure that we ensure access if there's going to be a blocked sidewalk or a drop off area. All of those things are done by our construction relations team and we're actually up and running with that team right now. In fact, I think I have Brett Roberts, who's our senior construction relations officer for the city of Long Beach here, who's been out in the field for the last two months or so, talking to stakeholders directly and working with local organizations. One of the most important parts of this is our construction hotline. It's up there on the screen. 2134183039. That is designed to be answered by a live person. That is for construction related issues, not necessarily service related issues. And we provide that to businesses and residents that are impacted by construction so that if there's something that needs immediate attention, they can call that number or get somebody on the phone and we can have somebody out there to address the issue immediately. We want to be accessible. We want to be communicative. We want to make sure that this is as painless as possible. However, we do recognize that there will be some pain involved, but we do want to make it as painless as possible. And with that, that concludes our presentation. If you have any questions, we can take those in and filter this the appropriate staffers. Thank you very much. And first, I'm going to go with a public comment and then we'll go by the diocese. So anybody from the public and have a comment on these. And. Name's Larry Goodhue. I doubt that there's any person in this city. That knows more about the MTA offerings, not just the blue line that throughout the system than does this individual who opened the blue line and almost every other line, with the exception of about five or six others. There's no question it needs to be upgraded. It's the methodology they're using. With intelligent planning. There is absolutely no need to shut it down. Any rail system except an extreme emergency. All the work that needs to be done and the improvement than there has to be, there will be decades of improvements, not just here, but across the board. You do it at night. Period. And if you don't have the intelligence within the MTA, you go out and find it. Do it. Now unfortunately, this will cost. And I think I'm thinking beyond the the the blue line. This will cost Mayor Garcetti the his chance to be in the Oval Office. And I'm an arch Republican, but I think he'd be an absolute asset to this city, to this region, period. But he will not given the tackle here. Of. Approaching and neither the employers. Or the employees. Of all the industries that are in fact that have to come to work are going to put up with this nonsense period. It doesn't need to be shut down. No ifs. No and no buts. And the biggest disaster, if you're here on the board and you understand this and this doesn't translate it tangibly invents us is the disaster. That you're bringing to the. The incineration of the high school children in Beverly Hills High School, where they're building the rail lines underneath a cavern that is loaded with gas. Period. And if you look at the five different explosions we've had in just in similar incidences, not involving rail. Over the last three months. Over the last three weeks, you should, because this is an absolute disaster, as I say. It'll cost us the 2028 Olympics. The only way we'll get the 3032 Olympics is 2032 is if we demonstrate that we know how to operate a transit system. Thank you. Next week, a police. Good afternoon. My name is and I can say resident sixth district. A broken clock is right twice. Is it twice in a day? You know, we rarely see eye to eye, but I agree with this man. I think that you know how this has been handled. Yes. The red line is the busiest. Line four in terms of daily ridership, but that's internal. Most external workers coming in. Mainly service industry workers like myself coming into the city do so on the blue line. You know, according to the study you guys put out, I believe was on the 28th December, you average it about 63,000 riders daily. So it would be interesting to see the financial impact of this, you know, 30 year debacle. I've been writing this train since there's needed turtles, you know, being used to sell the idea of it. And now, you know, this is something that goes through not just through the inner city, but also through the central heartland of this of this region. And, you know, most workers go through it. I also I appreciate you guys taking the concern of the public in regards to the express bus line. I think that's a welcomed response. But I'm curious, I saw on one a year you're doing your presentation there. You said that you had a community meetings on the 23rd in District one into that, correct? I can't. I saw that on your presentation. It would be interesting if maybe you can reach out to my councilman, Mr. Andrews, here. His district services. Willow PCH, as well as Anaheim. And correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Durango, I think Waldo is at the cut off line between the six. These are the hubs that are have the most riders in this a concern. And most people in this area, in my neighborhood at least, don't know about this eight month shutdown. So if you're going to do some community outreach, it would be probably best to do it in the districts that actually have the most riders. No, no disrespect to Mr. Gonzales. I know you have about three or four, and you're between the two of you, Mr. Pierce, as well. But most riders in the city of Long Beach are on the sixth. So if you want to help the city, you know, get it out outreach wise, it would be best to reach out to Mr. Andrews, you know, possibly about let the people in the community know about it. Outside of. That, let's see how it works. Thank you. Next speaker. Fernando Guerrero, District one. Listen, I am a writer for The Blue Line, and I feel really unsafe there. And I speak for the people that ride the train on a daily basis. Look, we only have to write it now every day. But, you know, on occasions I do. And when I do, I see people being harassed. They're from the LGBT community. I see women being harassed, calling the B-word, the F-word. Oh, no one should be getting harassed. And the train I had to carry a weapon, not just one weapon, but two weapons on me to write that blue line. It is awful. It's really awful. I know people are to get drunk, smoked pot, to hop on that train, to sedate themselves. It is horrible. There's no safety there. There's cameras there. What for? There's a guy I just watched the train the other day. A guy went in there. He was already in there. I don't know if he was homeless, but whatever. But he. He started smoking a cigar. A cigar? Really? I had to be I had to go to work. I'm going to smell like cigar. And the guy one time was smoking pot on the train. I had to smoke pot showing up at 9:00 at work. Well, there's no security. I think we need more police officers on the train and on the shuttles. It's not safer. It's not safe for people. And I don't care. That person has a mental problem. There's no excuse to be rude or to harass somebody because they want to harass and be bullied. And people do that day. We need security in the trains on blue line desperately before someone gets hurt. Because I'm not going to be bullied on the train. I'm not. I'm doing the right thing. I don't drink. I don't do drugs. We need safety for the blue line, please. Will the security officers on the train and shuttles. It's not safe. I to somebody else pulls out a gun. I don't. It's just. I'm getting. I'm just getting. I'm upset. I suddenly had to fear and carry two weapons on me because someone's going to try it at me. I don't want to explode on the blue line. We need safety. Safety for the public. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The general public comment on the statement. Now we'll take it by the diocese. Mr. Spears. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I want to thank Metro for your efforts for coming out. I know that you met with my office, and it was one of the ideas that we had in that meeting to host something in downtown. So I appreciate you guys making yourself available tomorrow, and I appreciate Councilwoman Gonzalez sponsoring that event with us. I'm going to ask just a couple of quick questions on the Metro piece, because we do have our community meeting tomorrow night. And then I am going to ask a couple of questions of our PD just to make sure we address the safety issues. And I preface this with I for three years rode the blue line from Long Beach to downtown L.A. three times a week. And I, I know how uncomfortable sometimes it can be on the blue line. I also know that we've made a lot of security changes. I don't believe you guys did go over, you know, the main changes. And I think there's no worse feeling than the blue line being down at 9:00 at night and you waiting for a bus in the middle of somewhere where you've never been. So I appreciate having the busses and I don't know what to say. I hope that the use of them is appreciated and that we can continue them after the blue line has opened back up so that it's not a a waiting, even though we will have the bypass lane, which I'm very, very thankful for, I know that adding those bypass lanes is going to be great and I understand that we have to close down the entire process to make sure that it can get done. Are you guys making any improvements on security that you can elaborate on that you did not elaborate on in your presentation? I remember that this was mainly about the rail, but I wanted an addition just to make sure we ask and see what the plan is of. It's phase two of this process. I would start by saying I'm not necessarily the best guy to talk to about the security piece. I'm the construction guy. But I will say this, you know, we do have a new law enforcement contract. Right. And we're very excited. You know, we're the city of Long Beach. Yes. For all patrols in Long Beach. We have the sheriffs and we have the city of L.A. So during the closure, all those patrols will still be there and they will be patrolling the bus stops. So so in terms of the actual work we're doing, the construction work, there's not so much that directly relates to security. We have a lot of cameras. The lighting has been recently redone. So so for the most part, it's operational improvements on the on the train line. But but the same policing that's currently out there will be out there during the closures. Thank you for that. And I'll ask PD about a process in a minute as well. I think the other thing that I would add is that at the Willowbrook, Rosa Parks station, which is being completely, completely redone. Yeah, very exciting. We actually do have a transit security center that we're putting in there. It's a new one that's adjacent to the public areas and the public plaza. So that will increase the coverage and the visibility of security. And that's actually one of our highest transfer stations, people going from the green line to the blue line. So that's one physical improvement that. Great. Thank you for that. I know I was going to ask PD and I know this is not necessarily about safety, but it was brought up. So I want to make sure we address it. I know that there is now an anonymous way we can go online and make a file. A police report is there because it's very awkward to be on the blue line and calling PD. I don't want to be that person that's sitting there calling PD. Is there a process that we recommend people, whenever they don't feel safe on the blue line to reach out to our officers? We're going to turn this over to Commander Rico Misa. Yeah, I'm not sure the commander is. Part of the team that assigns the blue line officers. But we'll turn over to commander. Thank you. Vice mayor of. Microphone. Good evening. Vice Mayor. Respective Council Members. Council Member. In response to your inquiry. Any issues of concern from local community members can be directed to the police department. They can be directed to the police department. But following a police report, they could contact 911. They could contact our general dispatch number. So there's all sorts of methods in place to identify any issues and concerns, relay them to the police department, whether it's an emergency or a non-emergency matter. I really thought that last year we had a new online way and a text way that we could communicate. So maybe that's something we can get a report back on at a later date. But I felt like I was very excited that there was a new way that didn't require me calling 911. Yes, there are systems in place whereby that information can be communicated to the police department. Okay. Perhaps as we go through this process of Metro and PD can work together, at least on areas of the blue line to communicate that. I know that there's ways, you know, billboards on there that we can make sure that people know there's a way that they can feel a little bit safer. So I appreciate everybody's presentation and I appreciate your community outreach. I look forward to seeing you guys tomorrow, district two. Tomorrow night, we will announce it at the end of the meeting as well. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. I am in no position to comment on this. I'm sorry. I apologize. Please go ahead. My name is Santiago. I live in the second district. I'm a retired nurse. I've lived in Long Beach for eight months now. Speaking to the topic. I ride a bicycle and on the regular busses there's only two. I believe it's two spaces. And when you close down the blue line, there's usually two or three or four bikes on every single car that I've gone onto. So could you please be cognizant of the cyclists? Because I'm an old guy, and it takes me a little extra time to put that bike up there. And so we might need some help also. Oh, thank you. Thank you, sir. Now we go back behind the guises, Mr. President. I second most. Fine. Baby. Oh, Mrs. Gonzalez, please. Yes. Thank you again for the report. We look forward to tomorrow's meeting. And I agree as well. I think we'd as much outreach as we can do above and beyond tomorrow's events. We'd be happy to to help with that as well. Just a question. I know we had talked about I mean, the two things that I hear often in downtown are number one. Absolutely. Security. I think I absolutely agree with you. I've taken the blue line from my house off Pacific, you know, to downtown L.A. and it's can be a really awful experience sometimes. And that's someone who gets it being in the city for ten years. But a lot of residents who visit our city, I don't want them to have that same experience. So the you know, we'd like to just have more information on what I think in addition to the ways that we can reach out to and this is maybe more geared towards PD, who we can really reach out to when incidents occur. I would also like to know how we're phasing in police officers on the the blue line, because I know that I've been hearing of a certain amount allotted over a certain period of time, and I would just like more clarification on that. Whether you have that now, city manager or we can get that in a two from four. That would be great. Okay. And then secondly, are your cameras tied into a specific like. You know, we have a city program here called Cops that it's tied into the city department, the police department. Do you have that on the on the county side? Yes, we do. All of our cameras can be viewed at our rail operations control center, which is near Willowbrook, Rosa Parks, and also at a at a security center that we're building at Willowbrook, Rosa Parks, they can view the camera feeds of the blue line from there. Okay. I assume so. Just wanted to ask. And then lastly, turnstiles. I know that was another discussion. I know I'm getting a few smirks about that because it's a big one that we've talked about here in Long Beach. And that's I think a lot of, you know, what some people have discussed me attribute to some of the issues, but are we are adding additional turnstiles or what is the process? No, there's no there's no fair gating plans as part of the new blue. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much for the report. And we look forward to additional feedback as we move along. Thanks. Thank you. Councilman. Interesting. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Just a couple of things. First of all, thanks for the presentation. I know that there's been outreach through your traditional channels, your ridership. I heard about the outreach within a half mile of a line of the community. I represent north long beaches outside of that border. It sort of. WARDLOW It cuts on Long Beach, picks up like Rancho Dominguez, Compton. So a lot of times we head south or we head west, the Compton station. And so any outreach within a half mile misses. So I would I would ask a couple of things. So, Mr. West, is it possible before this goes live to tell you some other channels, just the broadly, you know, whatever our channels are, the link will be the city website, maybe even. And we have relationships and billboards and just direct people to where they can get the information. Certainly. Okay, great. And then and then I would think I would ask Metro if there's maybe some you know, we can talk with you about some hotspots, the libraries, you know, maybe some places that people go in North Long Beach to make sure that they get the information and something we can work together on. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. You know. That. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One of the topics that stood out to me in terms of what the Metro Blue Line is going to be doing during this interim construction is the establishment of an express line from downtown Long Beach to seventh and Metro, which I think will require the express taking, what, seven, ten to the four or five to the Harbor Freeway and then down. I drive that and it takes it all day. So just to get a general idea, what is the the current time that it takes from downtown Long Beach along the blue line with all its current reconstruction to seventh in metro. Just for clarification, we're talking about the rail service, correct? We're talking about the Express here. We talk about the bus. Yes. Is that what the Express is about? Yeah, it's the bus. Right. So the bus service takes approximately about 60 minutes on average during the peak periods. But my question was right now, if I get a blue line without the construction, correct, how long does it take? 59 minutes. 59 minutes. So it's not every that much different. Your estimation is. The estimation is that that would provide comparable service. So we'd be within five and 10 minutes of you. That's true. That's incredible. From what I could tell, it's going to be more in an hour with with the traffic, especially on the 405 and the 110. Even if you take the express lanes, it's a long it's a long trip. And I just mentioned it out there because I think that given the additional time that it's going to take people to go from downtown Long Beach to downtown Los Angeles, I think there might be a loss of ridership there because of the length of time people are going have to get there earlier. They're going to have to make accommodations for the time difference. And so how many how many of these express busses are you going to be having that are going to be going from downtown Long Beach, downtown L.A., 1 to 1, every hour and every 2 hours? What what what's the what's the the amount of express busses? You're going to have to. At least ten busses an. Hour. Ten. About ten bucks an hour. Mm hmm. Okay. Well, that sounds good to me, but so you might want to consider that the time factor in there in terms of how long it's going to take from downtown Los Angeles to downtown Long Beach, or vice versa. And I think that you might want to look at some alternative routes or alternative ways of getting people from point A to point B, because I think that we're going to be losing some ridership in that. And there's going to be a lot of frustration and and some people who are going to be very disappointed with the plan. So is pointing that out to you. So be aware of it. Thank you. Yes. I mean, we've done our best to to guess what our riders are actually going to do when we close the line. But we don't know actually what they're going to do. And so we're going to remain flexible with the service out there is that we're going to watch it every day and we're going to see how it's working and we're going to make adjustments on the fly to make sure that we're we're providing the right level of service. So we're right there with you. Thank you, sir. Councilman. Congressman Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank Metro for coming in and giving us a very detailed explanation. This is obviously going to require some some some adjustments from from riders, and it's going to be some growing pains to get here. But understanding that the the Metro Blue Line was the very first light rail system in the metro light rail system. Right. This was the very first two tickets. I went to a 25 year celebration that a couple of years ago. So understanding where that is, that technology and best practices have actually been been employed in some of the newer lines. I think it's important that that this the blue line be be equipped with the best as well. I'd like to just just kind of focus a little bit and we understand is going to be a lot of inconvenience. It's going to be some some some inconvenience, particularly on the riders. It's going to be inconvenience on those like myself who are trying to commute on the freeway and, you know, seeing more busses on. There is not something that I'm looking forward to either, particularly in that fast track lane. But I'd like to focus a little bit on what the outcomes will be. I was watching I was sitting next to on the blue line just just just yesterday and was I noticed how noisy it was with the repairs and upgrades and reduce the audibility for a lot along the line. How will the the line be more efficient to riders and how much safer will the line be once this project is done? Can somebody answer the question? But I think the main words we've been using have been reliability and resiliency. Reliability and resiliency. Those are those are really what we're looking at on the reliability front. And James talked a little bit about this. The overhead wire has been up there for 29 years. It needs to be replaced. So the blue line is prone, can be prone to breaking down and we don't want that to happen. So we want it to be reliable that the when it's supposed to be at a station, it's going to be at the station. On the resiliency side, one of the things that has plagued us is that we don't have enough crossover tracks to move from one track to another and that, you know, if there's a track incursion, let's say an automobile, get stuck on the track or a train is down, then sometimes it could take us 20 minutes to single track around it and then the schedule is blown for the day. So with these new crossover tracks, we can be resilient and we can get around something as if it's a normal schedule. It's very important to us that's also going to help us with maintenance in the future. Because of this lack of crossover tracks, we weren't able to get very much time at night to maintain the system. This gives us an opportunity to maintain the system in a state of good repair while while maintaining a regular schedule. So those are the two very important pieces. And then finally, thank you for for want to stay up there, if you will. I know that there was some, some discussion, particularly when we were looking at the measure m expenditures and looking at opportunities to improve the blue line efficiency and just the flow of traffic in and Long Beach period. The Wardlow station was one that that stood out as a as a as an opportunity, opportunities to improve safety, opportunities to improve the flow of traffic with but also connecting our active transportation bike boulevard as well as pedestrian safety. And part of what was discussed and I know I had an opportunity to look at some some sketches of some possibilities was to look at taking that from an ad grade model to above grade or below grade. Where is that? And are we continuing to look at that possibility for the Wardlow station? We are system wide. So so we have been busy over the last six or eight months working on reporting back to our board on what the feasibility is, because they've asked us the same thing. They've asked us to look at, you know, undergrounding the Washington Junction. They've asked us to look at grades separating the entire blue line. And we're going to be reporting back to them soon in the next couple of months. On what the results of those efforts are. I will say this I don't want to prejudge what they might tell us, but it's very expensive, you know, billions and billions of dollars, expensive to to to grade separate the blue line. So I wouldn't hazard a guess on whether that may or may not be in the cards, but we need to have a discussion with our board about that. Well, I think it it's a worthy discussion. And we need to look at greater separation as strategic junctures. And I think the Wardlow in Pacific area is one of those those areas where we've I mean, it's actually been identified in the L.A. Times as one or the worst station in the in the system. And so, again, I'll continue to look forward to continuing that conversation in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. You know, I just want to thank the individual coming down, because when I heard the words, I mean, look, you know, you're going to be flexible. That means you listen and I know what you're going to do. It's going to be a good job, because when you talk about progress, you're going to have a lot of, you know, complaints and things of this type. But we need it. And I know you're going to get it done because you have some of the most professional people, you know, in doing this. So I give a lot of, you know, all my faith in it because I'm going to ride it no matter what. And, you know, I know you guys are working hard coming down and doing this because the presentation, I think was fantastic. And I know that Julie from the Metro and a couple of the other folks have been very helpful in my district because we host a metro, you know, staff each of our neighborhood meetings. And I wanted to let one of my colleagues who didn't know about that. But you guys, I want to thank you for coming to the district and giving us this presentation. So I'm hoping we got the word out and and very happy that the people will know that we are here. And if you need any more information, you know, just call out to these individuals because you're here. And I want to thank you for doing a great job of presentation here, because a lot of people don't know and a lot of people may be a little upset and angry, but once it's done, I think you can come on down. Keep. Good work. Thank you, guys. Thank you, guys. We really appreciate it. Oh, yeah. Well. Excuse me. You know, you. You can't come in. We like to, but we can't. We have to take a vote now. And now. That was from us. From behind the gun. You know, we can talk all the time, but you guys don't get that privilege. Okay. Now, would you please cast your vote? Councilmember Richardson. Bush and Kerry's.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to purchase property insurance for City buildings, contents, and vehicles through the Alliant Insurance Services’ Property Insurance Program (APIP), for a total premium amount not to exceed $1,922,935, and to approve the purchase of Earthquake insurance (Difference in Conditions Coverage) at a premium amount not to exceed $160,000 with the Insurance Company of The West, for the period of July 1, 2020 to July 1, 2021. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06232020_20-0595

I. At a 19. Report from Human Resources Recommendation to purchase property insurance and earthquake insurance citywide. Washington. A second police. The motion by council embarrassments are going to compromise in the House. Is there any public comment? There's no public comment on this item. A roll call vote. District one. I'm District two. I. District three. I. District four. II. District five II. District six. First District seven. District seven. District eight. All right. Thank you. Yep. Yep. All right. Thank you. District eight. District nine. All right. Motion carries.

AN ORDINANCE relating to grant funds from the United States Department of Transportation and other non-City sources; authorizing the Director of the Seattle Department of Transportation to accept specified grants and execute related agreements for and on behalf of the City; amending Ordinance 126490, which adopted the 2022 Budget, including the 2022-2027 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations for the Seattle Department of Transportation; and revising allocations and spending plans for certain projects in the 2022-2027 CIP; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_07122022_CB 120358

The Report of the Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee Agenda Item three Council Bill 1203. Five eight. I have a wrong number here. Sorry. An ordinance relating to. Grant funds from the United States Department of Transportation and other non city sources. Thank you, gentlemen. Petersen is chaired committee. You are recognized in order to address the bill. Thank you, President Pro Tem colleagues. Counselor 120358 will authorize the director of the Seattle Department of Transportation to accept specified grants totaling $3.7 million and to execute related agreements on behalf of the city. While it technically amends the adopted budget, it remains consistent with it. It simply adds these grants to existing appropriations. For the Seattle Department. Of Transportation's capital projects. This was adopted or recommended unanimously by our committee. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson. Colleagues, any questions? Comments. Seeing none. Well, the court was called the roll on the passage of the bill. Councilmember Herbold. Councilmember Mosqueda So I see now. You know, I actually thought there was going to be a long line up of people speaking, so I was going to wait. I did want to say thank you to the chair for his work on this legislation. And I also want to thank Councilmember Herbold for her amendments as well. I'm excited that we are, as a city, continuing to stand in solidarity with advocates like Seattle Subway and so many more who are calling for a connected and coordinated. That's the next one. That's why no one was speaking. Okay, hold off. We got, you know, some great grant funds from the United States Department of Transportation, other non city sources, but not as exciting for the main show for. I see it now. I needed to scroll up in my script. Apologies, everyone. No problem. Councilmember Peterson, any closing remarks? No, I just anytime I get calls from a skater to give an eloquent speech in favor of anything, it's always better for me that way. So thank you, councilmember and skater. Thank you, colleagues. Great team. Here we got Clark. If you wouldn't mind reading the. Now I got. Could you please call the role on the passage of item number three? Passage of the bill. Councilmember Herbold. Yes. Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Councilmember Morales. Yes. It's member Mosqueda. Hi, Councilmember Nelson. Hi. Councilmember Peterson. Hi. Councilmember Salant. Yes. Council President Pro-Tem Strouse. Yes. Eight in favor, nine opposed. Thank you. The bill passes. The chair signed with the clerk. Please fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Item number four or the clerk, please read item number four into the record. Agenda item four Resolution 32055. A resolution relating to sound transit providing recommendations.

Recommendation to Approve a Consent to Assignment of Lease and Leasehold Deed of Trust with SHM Ballena Isle, LLC for the Current CLP Ballena Marina, LLC, Formerly Known As CNL Income Ballena Marina, LLC at Ballena Marina. (Community Development 216)

AlamedaCC_11172015_2015-2171

Motion passes unanimously. And now we'll do five c. Okay. Is Debbie Porter still here? Yeah, as part of this party. So just one Mr. Potters coming up to the podium. This is. Has to do with a lease that the. The Council's being asked to to approve its actually assignment of a lease from one entity to another. And and Ms.. Potter and I had a productive conversation via email today. And I think the the information you provided, I thought was was important. And I just wondered if you would share it with the public. And so specifically, my question was that so this has to do with Bolena, the Bolena Bay Area, Bolena IO and it's Tidelands Trust property . And so a new entity is taking over a significant portion of this lease. And can you just tell us, Ms.. Potter, about this S-H m Bolena, LLC that's taking over. Yes, thank you very much. I'm Debbie Porter. I'm the city's community development director. And the request was for a little more background information about the financial wherewithal and depth to the organization that will be assuming that the existing lease. And so what I the information I have provided is that they are a Texas based organization company that has operated 55 marinas over the last 30 years, that they have already committed to investing between 500,000 and $1,000,000 in immediate health and safety upgrades that are needed out at the marina that in 2004, they entered into an agreement with the city of Emeryville, and they did the all of the renovations and upgrades of the Emeryville marina and invested about $2.3 million in those upgrades at the Emeryville marina. And that this particular transaction that's being contemplated by this company were part of a $127 million transaction that involves 27 marinas. So all of that information taken in combination LED staff to recommend to the council that it consent to the assignment, that we feel confident in the wherewithal of this company. Thank you, Miss Potter. Thank you. And so with that, I would move approval of consent to assignment of lease and leasehold deed of trust with SAHM Bolena. I'll LLC for the current CLP Ballina Marina LLC, formerly known as Seasonal Income Ballina Marina LLC at Ballina Marina. Do we have a second? Second. Although some favor I motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Madam Mayor. If I can raise your point of order or perhaps a point of inquiry, whichever, is that effectively it might help out the members of the audience who have attended tonight's meeting as to where we are with regard to the matter that they had, issues that they had, that their youth had raised, so that the youth and their parents know how we're moving forward. I mean, without giving any details. That might prove to be helpful for purposes of the residents who are here right now. That the city attorney for you. So because of the public comments. Okay. Council council approved a moratorium for 65 days, which expires January 9th. The city has posted on its website and the housing authority, I think it might have it on its website as well. The moratorium, it limits rent increases during the moratorium period to to less than 8% for a certain category of rental units that are defined in the cost of Hopkins Act, which basically means it does not apply to single family homes and condominiums. Homes that were built or apartments that were built after 1995 than anything that was built before 1995 is an apartment complex. It's not individually personalized. It would apply to and in addition, it it restricts the the ability for a landlord to to give notices and to evict tenants unless there is cause, just cause. And that is defined in the ordinance. The city has been working very hard to get frequently asked questions available on its website. City staff has been fielding a lot of questions from landlords and tenants. City staff has met with landlord and tenant groups and is hard at work on drafting what we've calling permanent legislation, new legislation to bring forward to the City Council. Our goal is to bring it to the City Council on their first meeting in January, January 5th, which means that two weeks ahead of that, it would be available publicly on the website. So we are working as hard as we can, getting input from everyone to be able to craft different options that the Council discussed and gave direction to the city staff. And the intent is to have that legislation in front of the council and hopefully adopted before the end of the moratorium period. So the moratorium is in effect. It is a limited moratorium. And I should say that just cause eviction portion applies to all rentals, it does not apply to just a segment of rentals. So more information is available on the city's website. The ordinance is there. The City Housing Authority is fielding questions and again, city staff is working very hard to bring forward. What we are hopeful is what the council is looking for in response to the community's expressed concerns, and that should be before the council the 1st of January. So at this point, I will thank all the speakers that came on during public comment. All the students. We heard your comments and we are it. We took action at the last council meeting and we are continuing the council to figure out next steps. Okay. So we will not be giving any more information tonight. You do not have to stay longer. You could leave whenever you'd like. All right. But thank you very, very much for coming this evening. Thank you. We'll actually wait a few minutes if you want to leave. That's quieter. Oh, I haven't. Drink this way. Oh, sorry, Jim. Yeah, that's right. Hey, nice to have a drink around. I think. You have to be thirsty. When to get the can I. I'll check if you need a refill. But. Oh. Okay. Oh, my God. I guess they're you. To get it back to me when you get. It. But don't you worry. A adoption of resolutions, appointing John Nolan as a member of the Civil Service Board and Brandon Sullivan not as a member of the B Advisory Committee.

Introduction of Ordinance Approving and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Documents Necessary to Implement the Terms of the Lease with Complete Coach Works, a California Corporation, for a Lease for Two Years and Nine Months in a Portion of Building 24 Located at 2301 Monarch Street at Alameda Point. (Base Reuse 819099)

AlamedaCC_02172015_2015-1197

Introduction of ordinance, approving and authorizing the city manager to execute documents necessary to implement the terms of the lease with complete coach works. The California Corporation for a lease for two years and nine months and a portion of building 24 located at 2301 Monarch Street at Alameda Point. I'm sorry when you start the report, would you just briefly before beginning the report, can you just talk quickly about what we discussed today about presenting to council? Sure. At the at the budget. Sure. Thank you. Okay. Good evening, mayor spencer and city council members. I'm than that mchunu in the community development department slash base for use. And so I discussed. With the city manager. This afternoon based on some conversations. That he's had with several with the mayor and some council members. About figuring out how we how we approach. Our leasing and making sure that our leases are on market and how we establish rates and things like that. And so. We decided that as part of our Open House during the budget session, that we. Would. Address the that concern and give you a broader picture of our leasing activities, specifically at Alameda Point. But as many of you know, we do leasing on tidelands and cell towers and. Throughout the city so that we'll talk about that at that meeting. So what you have in front of you tonight is. A lease renewal for a. Complete coach. Works. And there have been a couple of questions that came in. During the course of the. After the the publishing of. The agenda. So I'm going to try to hit some of them. So that everybody has the same information. So American bus repair has been a tenant in Building 24 since 1997, originally under the name City Car Star, Garage Car Star and May. Of 2000. The city approved the assignment of the lease. To. American Best Repair. In June of 2012. American best repair in the city entered into. A lease that was assigned to. Complete coach works. In January of 2014. At that time. At that time. When. Complete Coach Works took over, they took. Over in December of 2013, we gave them a one. Year. Extension that the lease was set to expire. In six months and they were. Really. Nervous about that and they hadn't realized that they only had. Six months. So we said. The long term plan for this building is that. We're going to have one tenant here and we. Think it's. Going to be Rockwall Winery. So you have one year. And so we worked with. Rockwall and complete work Coats Works. Cushman Wakefield, our broker. Took complete coach works all over the East Bay looking at different properties. To try to get them geared up and. Ready to move out. And toward the end of that one year, Rockwall Winery wasn't ready to to expand until we gave. So we're here. Again with that with an extension. For three years. We talked to Rockwall Winery and said, you know, we can't have these. Starts and stops. We need to have a. Longer term approach to our leasing. And even. Three years is a short period. Of time. So Rockwall said, You know, this is well within our planning. We get it. So three. Years is. Within the horizon of our operations and it should. Be within complete. Coach works. I want to say that it is not the desire to have the painting facility as a long term tenant. There and our spirits, our spirits. Alley. But we had a bird in the hand using the building for what it was designed to do. And so. We thought it was really just in not not. Uprooting a company for the sake of uprooting. But to. Be more proactive and keeping them there and then to keep our eyes open and trying to attract a long. Term tenant. That is in keeping with our vision. Of developing the spirits and, and. Distilleries and breweries and all of those. People over there and. Food. Eventually, knock on wood, I have with. Me. Ted Anderson from Cushman. Wakefield, and he's going to try to just. Briefly talk a little. Bit about this lease in specific about. The rent rate and what we think about when we set the. Rates. But we're. Going to do a broader discussion. In our Open House session. That evening, Madam Mayor. Council members. Staff. So I was kind of the architect behind this opus. So hopefully I'm in a position to be able to answer the questions that you may have as it relates to how we came upon the deal terms. So if you want me to just kind of start answering my own question, I'll kind of give you the thought process. So as Ninette said, we gave these folks. A one year extension renewal. At that time, we also, you know, recalibrated their rental rate and, you know, moved it substantially up to, you know, a standard that we felt was more commiserate with market on this most recent increase. Or rather on this most recent renewal. We've also built in some additional increases, but they're 3% from where we. Established that new basis a year ago. When you look at it in terms of a rental rate on the 15,000 square feet, I think it comes in a little bit over $0.70, which, you know, skews maybe a little bit high compared to what we've seen elsewhere. But you have to take into consideration they've got about a 23,000 exclusive yard area that in this Bay Area of ours is is very, very valuable because land is scarce. So we've tried. To monetize, you know, that asset to the property in conjunction with what. We felt was a reasonable lease rate for. The 15,000 square feet that they occupy. And then also put a little bit of a spiff in place because of the unique nature of the building, its improvements and its utility to their end use, because this operation isn't going to move anywhere cheaply. So I think it's a tenant that we will be able to have as. The city's advocate. For as long as we see fit, because I don't think they're likely to move. Thank you. Council members questions. Nebraska. Thank you and thank you, Mr. Henderson. And also Ms.. Marcano. And I was at least one of the councilmembers who raised the question in some correspondence with Ms.. McConaughey that I thought this was an unusual and I would say, undesirable juxtaposition of uses that we wouldn't normally see a winery next door to a company that paints busses . And I was also concerned with the painting aspect of the proximity of this building to the bay, and in the event of any spillage or leakage of what the environmental implications would be. I do understand that this was a hangar where this sort of operation took place during the Navy years. But as I also pointed out, we're still doing cleanup from operations that took place during the the Navy years. On the other hand, I, I miss McConaughey gave me an excellent detailed explanation, actually, several of them. She kept coming back. And I do understand the bird in the hand argument that we are making lease revenue off of this. There are environmental safeguards in place. And if you read the lease, there is you know, it's very specifically spelled out. So this is, as I understand it, a short term lease. You've upped the the the rental rate. And so the the city is benefiting from this. And I and I know that you're also going to be out there looking around and shopping for more desirable tenants for this location. And I have to think that an upcoming agenda item is this update on our site, a development at Alameda Point. And I think as those kinds of businesses that are being proposed get up and running, it'll just make our area even more attractive to potential renters and buyers for the properties. So that's. Certainly our hope and. Charge. I know it is. So anyway, I think the team and for all the good information you provided me. Thank you so much. Thank you, guys. We have a motion. Both. Second counsel comments. I would like to thank complete coach works for continuing to do business in Alameda. I'm confident that they are being environmentally safe and practicing good work work habits, following the appropriate protocols to protect the environment. And I do commend them for continuing to do business here. And with that said, all those in favor. I oppose motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Next agenda item six see. Status report on site development at Alameda Point.

AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Director of the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to execute and accept from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, on behalf of The City of Seattle, a waterway permit and three sequential waterway permits, for the Seattle Police Department’s Harbor Patrol use of Waterway 20.

SeattleCityCouncil_09292020_CB 119882

Thank you. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation? Item three. Will the clerk please read item three into the record? Agenda Item. Three accountable 119882 authorizing the director of the Department of Finance Administrative Services to execute and accept from the Washington State Department of National Kidney National Resources. On behalf of the City of Seattle. A waterway permit and three. Sequential waterway permits. For the Seattle Police Department's Harbor Patrol. Use of. Waterway 20. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I move to pass Council Bill 119882. Is there a second? Second? It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilmember Herbold, you are the prime sponsor of the bill and are recognized in order to address this item. Thank you so much. As the title suggests, the legislation executes and accepts a waterway permit and three sequential waterway permits for the Seattle Police Department's Harbor Patrol. Use of what is called Waterway 20. This is the area to the west of the city owned Speedy Harbor Patrol facility adjacent to Gasworks Park. The area contains a dock, a holding pen enclosed by a log boom and a concrete boat ramp. This is on land that is under the jurisdiction of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Harbor Patrol has been using it for some time for temporary storage of navigational hazards, impounded or stolen vehicles, evidence and other uses. And as it relates to navigational hazards. This is detritus that they collect in the water as a condition of the permit. Frsc will have to meet with the Wallingford Council and the Center for Wooden Boats on a monthly basis in order to create a future conceptual plan for the use of Waterway 20, which meets the interests of both the city and the Community Council. It was a really interesting article that appeared in Crosscut a few weeks ago about the history of the waterways. Notes that the Harbor Patrol has been using it since 1962 and this would approve a permit to do so. There's been strong community interest in public access to the water at this particular location, and I'm really pleased that the permit itself addresses this by including as a condition of the permit. The Air Force will meet with the Wallingford Community Council and the Center for Wooden Boats on a monthly basis in order to create this future conceptual plan. The permit is through June 30th, 2022. It does not include an automatic right to renewal. The permit states that the city and the one for Community Council have not reached consensus by the end of the permit. The state shall deny the application for a new permit unless the state, in its sole discretion, waives the requirement of a consensus conceptual use plan. I also want to just real quickly give a shout out to some of the advocates, the Shoreline Access advocates who've been maintaining the site over a very long period of time. Ted Hunter and Lee Ryan are two of the many names that come to mind. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Herbals, are there any additional comments on the bill? Councilmember Peterson, please. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Harvell. I couldn't have said it better. And, you know, when I was a legislative aide, I would go to these community council meetings and this issue was brought up when I was a legislative aide about the desire to have more public access to the waterfront. And this is something, as you said, that they've been working on very hard for a long time. And this one, I think the Finance Administrative Services Department for for putting this forward, working with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to get this done. It's an important step toward getting public access in the future. So thank you for your work, Councilmember both as well. Thank you, Councilman Peterson, are there any additional comments on the bill? During lunch. Will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the Bill Morales. Yes. Macheda. Yes. Petersen Yes. The what? Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbold. Yes. Juarez. Yes. Lewis? Yes. President Gonzalez. Yes. 9 a.m. favor. Unopposed. Opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation? Item number four. Will the clerk please read item four into the record? Agenda item for Capital 119896.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; adopting a moratorium on the filing, acceptance, or processing of applications for the establishment, expansion, or change of use for certain uses on parcels with a Commercial 1, Commercial 2, or Neighborhood Commercial 3 zoning designation within the Aurora-Licton Urban Village; declaring an emergency and establishing an immediate effective date; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_10022017_CB 119093

And I opposed the resolution as adopted and the General Senate resolutions. Madam Clerk, item number three The short title, please. Agenda item three Council Bill 119093 relating to land use and zoning adopting excuse me, moratorium on the filing, acceptance and or processing of applications for establishing expansion or change of use for certain uses of parcels within commercial one. Excuse me. Introduce. I'm going to turn this one over to Councilmember Juarez. Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm very happy and proud to introduce Council Bill 119093. As you know, we shared this is regarding the urban village, the urban village strategy, in particular the Aurora Linton Springs, Aurora Village. As you heard some from public comment, this is 20 years in the works. And I want to thank those community members who have lived in those neighborhoods for well over two decades with their heart, with their commitment, the passion for their community. It's inspirational. It's been an honor working with you because I know we started this conversation well over a year ago. The purpose of this legislation is to encourage more housing and pedestrian friendly development in the C1, C2 and nc3 designations within the boundaries of Allof the goals of this legislation are consistent with the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, the Rural Act and Urban Village Neighborhood Plan, and the mandatory housing affordability citywide re zones, all of which have had community and council review over the last several years with more review to come in 2018. This legislation will disallow certain types of heavy commercial use being developed in the ALA boundaries. No businesses will be asked to leave or relocate as a result of this legislation. Any new businesses development, any new business development I'm sorry that has recently been permitted or is in the permitting process will still move forward when the new up zones go into effect. I believe that will be in 2018. These same heavy commercial uses, which I believe there are 17 of them, will no longer be in allowed in a live. So this is this is our effort to build a bridge into that next phase about how and what we do for the ALA of community development will still be allowed on those lots and we're hoping that this will encourage those owners if they plan to develop to do so by creating housing in pedestrian friendly commercial spaces. The ALA community has been welcoming to potential debt, to potential dense zoning changes and more pedestrian friendly development. The ALA of community has applied for and has been awarded a neighborhood street fund grant for art installations on Aurora and an only in Seattle grant from the Office of Economic Development to support the growth and stability of a stronger local business culture along Aurora. I know it may not seem like a lot to many people, but that one mile stretch on Aurora means a lot to the neighbors and the people that have lived in those communities for decades. I really want to thank the community members who brought this to my attention, who have continued to work with my office and to achieve the goals for their community, including Lee Anderson, Lee Burch, David Ozaki, Ryan de Raphael. I think I said that wrong. Just to name a few. Some of those people spoke up today. I did say wrong, didn't I? You're looking right at me. And that showed up today. You know, it's not often we get folks from the North End to come down. So I really appreciate that you came down to so we could hear you at public comment talk about these neighborhoods when we were doing all these plantings and the neighborhood plans and the urban village strategies. We also heard from folks in the last year and a half from Broadview, Bitter Lake, Holler, Lake, Lake City, way in North Cape. As you know, we have light rail coming in at Northgate. We're looking at a second stop at 130th and Bitter Lake. And so these neighborhoods are very dense now and they're growing very quickly. And we're working with the state legislator and my colleagues for more housing density in these neighborhoods. But I want to say that working with you guys has been a real pleasure. Sometimes this job is a bit difficult, but it's nice to work with a community that looks forward, that's realistic about what we can get done and truly cares about not only their community, but the city of Seattle. So I want to also say and thank my colleagues, particularly Councilmember Johnson, who's been great on all this wonky urban planning stuff. And I'm going to ask all my colleagues today for your support in voting yes to these changes. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmembers. So I would move to pass Councilmember 119093 and it's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion or comments colleagues seeing and I would ask the clerk to please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Flores O'Brien. So what? Bagshaw Gonzalez. I Herbold Johnson. Hi. Seven in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it, please. Oh, yes. Well deserved. Please read the agenda. Item number four.

A resolution authorizing and approving the expenditure and payment from the appropriation account designated “liability claims,” the sum of Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00), payable to Molly Miranda Craig and Heideman Poor, LLC, in full payment and satisfaction of all claims in Case No. 2015CV31713, in the District Court for the City and County of Denver, Colorado. Settles a claim involving the Denver Police Department. This resolution was approved for filing at the Mayor-Council meeting on 4-25-17.

DenverCityCouncil_05012017_17-0515

Great. I'll do a quick recap. Under resolutions, we have Councilman Flynn, who's called out Resolution 15 for a vote. Under bills for introduction. Nothing has been called out. Under bills for final consideration. Nothing has been called out and under pending. Nothing has been called out. Madam Secretary, can you please put the first item on the screen? 515. Councilmember Gilmore, go ahead and put the resolution 515 on the floor for a vote. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that resolution 515 be adopted. All right. It's been moved. Can I get a second? Right. It's been moved in second. Councilman Flynn, go ahead and make a comment. Thank you, Mr. President. I really have no comment. Just wanted to pull it out for a vote. Okay. All right. Thank you. See you. No questions. Comments. Madam Secretary, roll call. Flynn No. Gilmore, I. Cashman. All right. Lopez. New. No. Ortega I black eye. Clark. I. Espinosa. Hi. Mr. President. Please close the voting, announce the results. Are you still counting someone? Yeah. You missed Councilman New. Who's a no? There you go. I know. Yep. Lopez. And Lopez is not here. Looks like seven eyes, two nays and four absent. Seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, seven eyes. Two knees. Yeah. Seven eyes, two nays. Resolution 515 has been adopted. All right. This concludes the items that have been called out. We're now moving to the bills. All bills for introductions are now ordered published. We're now ready for the block. Votes on resolutions and bills. On final consideration, council members remember, this is a consent or block vote. You will need to vote. Otherwise you're your last chance to call on an item for a separate vote. Councilman Gilmore, will you please put the resolution for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in the bar in a block for the following items. Council Bill Series of 2017 0399040004010309041904320433031 12 zero 428 zero 420 6042603690444044505160391039203940402 and 0406. All right, Madam Secretary. And all of them. Yes. All right. It's been moved in. Second it. Secretary, roll call. Black I. Clark. I. Espinosa, I. Flynn, I. Gilmore, I. Cashman. Lopez, I. Knew. Ortega Hi, Mr. President. I please close wondering about the results. Ten eyes. Ten eyes. Sorry. I just. I just want to make sure. Madam Secretary, do we get the very. Last. Bill? I just want to make sure those in there. I thought we did. Okay. I did not hear it. And maybe that was my mistake. So it should have been. 406. Yeah. For six. Did you say four or six? Okay. Great. Sorry. My mistake. All right. All of the resolutions have been adopted, and bills are been placed upon final consideration and do pass tonight. There will be a required public hearing for Council Bill 161, as amended through the Denver Zoning Denver's zoning code to revise parking exemptions on preexisting small lots.

Recommendation to request City Manager to establish a Rebuild Long Beach Relief Fund to assist Long Beach small businesses with repair and loss recovery from damages sustained during the evening of May 31, 2020; public funding shall be allocated in a way that maximizes benefits paid to businesses, and to partner with private programs.

LongBeachCC_06162020_20-0564

Thank you, Madam Court. That concludes I'm 21. To item 14, please. Next. Communication for Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman Zendejas. Councilmember Pierce. Vice Mayor Andrews. Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to request city manager to establish a rebuild Long Beach Relief Fund to assist Long Beach small businesses with repair and loss recovery from damages sustained during the evening of May 31st, 2020. Thank you, Madam Court. I want to just first mention, this is not this is often something that a lot of us have been discussing council members, business associations, different philanthropic groups out there. There's a lot of interest in how we really support the businesses that were affected on May the 31st. We know that businesses were affected in different ways. Some may have been vandalized, whether it was graffiti or etching on a glass or even a broken window, which were, you know, smaller acts, obviously, of vandalism to much more extreme types of damage. I mean, you saw obviously in some cases, storefronts having major damage. You saw in some cases major looting that happened in some of these businesses where much of the inventory was gone. And in one case in particular, you saw a major fire that really destroyed one business, both the structure and the what was inside. And so what this motion is asking for us today is just to look comprehensively at creating a new fund to really assist all of these businesses. I think as a city, we have to be committed to every single business that was affected on May the 31st. They all deserve our support. They all are having been invested here in Long Beach, and I want to make sure that they all have support from the city in some way. Now, we know, obviously, that these are these recovery programs can be complex, where we know that a lot of these businesses, for example, will have different types of insurance programs that cover much of their cost. Others may not have the same access or may have a high deductible. Others may just have storefront damage. Their needs need some support with storefront. I also heard from some businesses, for example, in Cambodia, Town and North Long Beach, that they just wanted that want support with costs that they had to put to protect their business, to put up a plywood, which wouldn't be more than a few hundred dollars. So there's a variety of types of support. And while I know there are some really great efforts happening in some of our business corridors, some of our business improvement district, in fact, have set up their own funds. And there have been some philanthropic efforts as well. Those we support, those need to continue. But this is a city effort and this effort is, I think, us putting our commitment on the table that we're going to help all of these businesses. I know that there is a list that's being put together by economic development and working with all the bids and the businesses to see what is out there and who and who we can support. But this is can really also be a combination of resources. I think first and foremost, we're talking about grants. And so we're looking at staff to identify resources that we have for direct grants from the city. We're looking at loan programs, obviously donations. It's all laid out in the recommendation, but we want to make sure that the community gets support that they need to restart quickly and open up. And so just thank you for that. I know that obviously we have a lot of support for this item. I'm from from the council and we appreciate that. And I want to turn this over for to make the motion. And Vice Mayor Andrews just cued up first. So Vice Mayor Andrews. Vice Mayor Andrews. Yes. Yes. Thank you, man. Thank you very much. You know, first of all, I want to thank you for leading this discussion. You know, you know, having lived through three major, you know, protests in the city of Long Beach, this is unfortunately not for the first time I see the sixth District broken and looting. I have faith that we are resilient. Resilient and together we are strong beach. You know, I'm proud to have already begun working with diplomacy ship Dallas Small Business Repair. And anything we can do to levy assistance is greatly appreciated. And I want to thank you, gentlemen, for leading this. Vice mayor with that emotion also. Yes. Okay. Can I get a second, please? On on that motion. Okay. Okay. I just needed to go into the queue system, please. Second by Castro. Richardson. Castro? Richardson. Any comments? Sure. Yeah. Use my kids in the background. So. So. A couple of things. So first, I believe that this is this is really a chance to acknowledge that a lot of our programs really haven't worked for some of the businesses that were impacted on these corridors. Know some of the shopping centers that were hit. We've gone out and done outreach to see if they would like to improve some of their signs or some of their windows with the, uh, some of the CDBG funding that's out there. And it's hard to get their attention. Folks are busy. I think this is an opportunity to say, you know, why we have everyone's attention last and the last can be fixed. A lot of these things can be replaced. But how can we get get the captive audience of these businesses and help them improve some of their signs and some of their windows? Paint the buildings. It'll go a long way for the corridor, but what I'm really hoping for is out of this program, we can address some of the some of these buildings that their windows are broken. But they haven't been able to tap into the resources that we have for them already. So while we have their attention, we should really take advantage of this opportunity to improve some of these corridors. And with that, I'll second the motion. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Pearce. Yeah, I totally support this effort. I just want to say how much I appreciate having your leadership on it. We had a agenda, something similar last week and pulled it because we know that if the whole city is really working on it and if you're focusing on it, that these businesses are going to be able to benefit so much more. There's a lot, like you mentioned, businesses that have small graffiti and things like that. And so we'll make sure that our District two team is reaching out to the businesses in our district and connecting them with economic development. And many of the bids are listening. You know, I hope that they outreach, too, and that we can have a wider effort than just having another fund in the city that might not be tapped. Because I know sometimes that tends to be one of the challenges. So appreciate this item. Thank you. It's a member, Councilman Austin. I fully support the item. I think all of my sentiments have already been expressed. Thank you all council members for bringing this forward. I think this is a welcome gesture from the city of Long Beach. My my only concern is how we prioritize the resources or maybe possibly limited resources we have to to support businesses and what we can do to develop, you know, I guess a a a system of that that is fair for for everyone to participate. So those are my comments. I look forward to support it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. And that's. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, thank you very much for letting me join you on this item. I know that the First District was hit very, very hard. But thank you to your team for putting this item together and working really hard on this to support our small businesses here. You know, these small businesses were already struggling before COVID. And, you know, this this destruction that happened just made things even worse after COVID hit. So I think it's really important that we show our small businesses that we care about them and we really want them to thrive in our in our city. And by providing not only opportunities to to to micro loans is a good thing, but I think that even better than that is providing them with opportunities for grants. And I'm very happy to be able to be maneuvering some resources to be able to cover grants for those in in in need right now for the small businesses . And I will be together with my office working on putting together a little workshop so that all the businesses that were affected citywide, you don't have to be in the first district. But we're working on putting that together so that everybody knows the step by step thing, you know, that they will be needing to take in order to take advantage of these opportunities. And I look forward to supporting this item. Thank you. Next up is I think that it's everyone on the list here to speak. So, Madam Kirk, any public comment? There's one public comment for this item. Victor. Lucy, you have 3 minutes. You all just spent all that time about looting, about throwing up businesses. But the major issue is. That the city of Long Beach does not respect Black Lives Matter. Spent all this time deliberating about small businesses, small businesses looting. Why were the people out in the streets? Because OB and the police are brutalizing us. And y'all don't hear the message. Countless citizens spoke to God about the terrorism of the Arab, how we want to defund the police. But you also spent all this time whining about small business, this small business that. I understand why all this happened. Get to the root of the problem. The root of the problem is too much money goes to our big PD. We are going to be fun to elbow deep. Are you of my time? Thank you. I want to. Go ahead and call the roll call. Vote, please. District one. District two, my district three. I. District four. All right. District five. District five. I. I. District six. Hi. District seven. I. District eight. All right. District nine. My motion carries.

AN ORDINANCE relating to historic preservation; imposing controls upon The Theodora, a landmark designated by the Landmarks Preservation Board under Chapter 25.12 of the Seattle Municipal Code, and adding it to the Table of Historical Landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_08082016_CB 118731

The Affordable Housing Neighborhoods and Finance Committee Agenda Item seven Accountable 118 731 Relating to Historic Preservation, imposing controls upon the Theodora Landmark designated by the Landmarks Preservation Board under Chapter 25.12 zero Code, and adding it to the table of historic landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of the Seattle Ms.. Mr. Codes Committee recommends the bill pass. Councilmember Burgess. Thank you. This is. Imposing controls on the Theodora, which is an apartment building in northeast Seattle. It was designated as a historic landmark in October of 2014. The ordinance, if adopted, imposes controls upon this building as specified by the Landmarks Preservation Board. This means that any changes to the site, the building exterior and portions of the interior require review and approval of the Landmarks Board. The ordinance details the approval process moving forward for both the Landmarks Board and the owner of the building. And the committee recommends this ordinance be adopted. Any further comments? Councilmember Johnson. Just want to say this building is in my neck of the woods, just up the street, just beyond 65th and 35th northeast. And one of the things that I'm I got a chance to understand better in committee is that when we take these kinds of actions, it becomes part of the inspection process. So when inspectors come out to the property to take a look at the development, these protections are outlined in their form. So when they go through their checklist, these are things that they're looking for as well. So we're doing a good job today of making sure that as we convert historic buildings to new uses, that we're doing a good job of preserving them and that the inspection process holds up that standard as well. Thank you, Councilman Johnson. Any further comments? Please call the rule on the passage of the Bill Bagshaw. Burgess, Gonzalez, I Herbold II Johnson, Maurice O'Brien, President Harrell. I. Eight favorite unopposed. The bill passes and the chair was signing agenda item number eight. And please read the short title, will you please?

AN ORDINANCE relating to regular property taxes; providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City at an election to be held on August 6, 2019, a proposition to lift the limit on regular property taxes under chapter 84.55 RCW and authorize the City to levy additional taxes for up to seven years for the purpose of sustaining investments in Library operating hours, collections, technology, and maintenance while expanding access to opportunity through additional hours, Library materials, and technology and undertaking seismic retrofits of three Library facilities; authorizing creation of a new fund; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_04222019_CB 119491

The report of a Select Committee on the Library Levy Agenda Item five Council Bill 119491 An ordinance relating to regular property taxes providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the city and an election to be held on August six, 2019. A proposition to lift the limit on regular property taxes under Chapter 84.55 RTW and authorize the city to levy additional taxes for up to seven years for the purpose of sustaining investments in library. The committee recommends a bill passed as amended. Councilmember Suarez. Thank you. Council President So you know, this has been a quite a process. I'm glad we're finally here. In 2012, Salem voters approved access to critical educational literacy resources for every resident by passing a seven year $120 million library levy levy funds concluded by the end of this year. Hence the creation of the Select Committee of the Library Levy to possess a proposed renewal to continue services. I was I am proud and honored to have chaired this committee regarding one of the city's most valuable institutions and assets, our public libraries. As a committee, we closely examine the mayor's proposal, which slated to continue baseline services while keeping up with the demands of a growing city sale. Public libraries invested in priorities and values set by our constituents, all of our constituents, residents across the city of Seattle and users of the library who have said which include I'm sorry, the for are the open hours and access collections, technology, online services, safety and maintenance maintenance meaning that we are protected from earthquakes. Because you all know I can't say that word. Seismic. Seismic libraries are the People's University. They are the most public of institutions since our country's founding. The library, the 21st century, provides more, more services than ever. And these past decades, they are neighborhood centers that give greater access to learning books like. Tronox Media Equipment Conference Space Lecture Series and much, much more, including library time for little ones, for reading and for English as a second language. At its at its core, libraries have been serving millions of people and transforming lives. To that end, build a stronger, more democratic society. I hope that we continue to look at libraries as we do with other institutions as evolve. Last week, the committee approved three amendments that strengthen the proposal in addition to the mayor's proposal. Number one, I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez for her amendment to the expansion of play and learn from 0 to 5 years old, 0 to 5 years for education. Second, I want to thank Councilmember O'Brien for his amendment for the proposal, the additional open hours at 26 libraries. And finally, I want to thank Councilmember Mosquito, who worked very closely with our office and adding the expanded community resource specialist program for use. Thank all of you for working with our office and the mayor's office to move this important levy forward. The total committee has presented from the mayor's proposal is an estimated $219 million. The Select Committee and Library Levy recommended that the City Council Pass Council Bill 119491 as amended and hopefully or I hope that this will be on the August six, 2019 ballot. I again want to thank central staff. That would be Asher for doing a phenomenal job in briefing us and drafting the amendments and again in my office, who worked closely not only with the executive but with Asher and put together much of the framework and the analysis. And of course, I want to thank my colleagues for supporting this very important levy. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Walls. Any other comments or questions on this legislation? Customer Beck Show. Thank you. President Herald. Councilmember Suarez. Thank you for your leadership on this. Just as in some of the previous items, I appreciate very much your organization. Getting that information to us early and keeping the notebooks updated. Marcellus Turner, thank you for being here. We really appreciate your leadership in this as well. I don't know whether our library foundation or friends of the library are here, but having that kind of a robust community engagement on the front end is really helpful. So I'm fully supportive of this. I think it's a good package, one that is tempered but still addresses the needs of the People's University. Council President. Yes, Councilman. Whereas I just. Want to add one thing. I want to thank Marcellus versus I'm sorry, I did not see you sitting out there, but thank you so much and your staff for getting all the material back to us. And I know we pushed a lot of deadlines on you and asked you for tons of information, statistics and trends and more information. So thank you so much. Okay for the comments. Councilmember Mosquito. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you, Madam Chair, for who helped shepherd this lamprey levy through the process. It was a great to be able to work with Chair Juarez and the Select Committee and all of my colleagues to help strengthen the levy package that we're bringing to voters this August. I want to specifically thank the folks on the front line, our librarians and the folks who are working in the libraries who came up with some of the strategies that we floated during this last few weeks. I'm very, very honored to have been able to work with you to get into this levy, the ability to make sure that we have community service officers who are serving our youth across the city in more locations, especially for those who are self-identifying as homeless. Making sure that we're connecting them to housing services, health services and educational and job opportunities. We heard from folks who came to testify that sometimes our libraries are unintentionally being used as data centers. And while the reality is we need to continue to scale up our housing and shelter services, the librarians, the folks who are working on the front line, you all are providing tremendous service to the community at large. And we want to make sure that there's community service officers there to help make sure that we're connecting those who are self-identifying as being without shelter into appropriate shelter and services. So I see this as a huge compliment to the work that you all are already doing and an additional need that was identified by folks on the front line. I look forward to working with the council and the Budget Chair as we think about some of the other opportunities going forward around child care and greater security for our folks who are both patrons and workers at the library. So thank you and thanks to your team and to the board for all that you do and to our frontline staff. Thank you to our suarez for your work with us on this issue. Thank you, councilman shader. And I'll just say a few parting words. Thank you again for your leadership council and worse thing for shepherding this through and you and your board, your various boards and volunteers and employees. You know, the library has always been very personal to me. My my mother's, I think you well know, spent most of her career at the library and retired from the library. And so I just think it's so critical for this to pass. And so the sometimes difficult conversations we had looking at the finances of this, of what we're trying to do, were good conversations because at the end of the day, our library system is so much more than just brick and mortar. I mean, particularly given all of the issues that are facing our underserved communities, are youth people on fixed income. The libraries are just one of our most treasured gems. And so I think the hard work will begin after this to make sure that everyone understands that. And so it's going to be my pleasure and actually supporting this legislation, I think all of the hard work that went into it. So. So having said that, please call the role on the passage of the Bill. O'Brien by Sergeant Bagshaw i. Gonzalez Herbold. I was I macheda I President Harrell I favor favorite unopposed. Bill passed and show sign it gladly. Okay. Please read the next agenda item into the record. The Report of the Civic Development, Public Assets and Native Communities Committee Agenda Item six Council Bill 119494 An Ordinance relating to King County Conservation Features Levy proceeds. The committee recommends the bill pass.

Recommendation to declare ordinance approving a First Amendment to the Riverwalk Development Agreement in substantially the same form as attached; and authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute the first amendment with Riverwalk 131 Group, LLC, read and adopted as read. (District 8)

LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0320

Motion carries. Thank you. Hearing number two, please. Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and find that the First Amendment to the development agreement is within the scope of the project. Analyzed under the River Walk Residential Development Project Air. Declare Ordinance approving a First Amendment to the development agreement between the City of Long Beach and River Walk 131 group LLC authorizing city manager to execute it in the same form as attached. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting for Final Reading District eight. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this hearing? Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. We have to go to we have to go to staff comment first. Staff. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We have a short presentation by Linda Tatum, our planning bureau manager. Good afternoon, Vice Mayor Richardson, members of the council. I'd like to present to you a brief overview of this request for an amendment to an existing development agreement for the River Dale Development Project. I like to just summarize this. The site location here at the very north of your screen, the the vertical I'm sorry, the horizontal street there is the Alamo Boulevard. To the west is the Los Angeles River. That's the westerly boundary of the project. To the easterly boundary, it's Long Beach Boulevard. Into the south is the Union Pacific Drive. The site there that you see outlined is the Riverdale, the location of the Riverdale Project. And the Oregon Park Project is the site of the formerly named Oregon Park, but it's now been renamed to Molina Park. And those are the two projects that are the subject of this development agreement, which I'll be going into briefly. So just a really brief overview of the Riverdale Development Project. It's a new 131 unit, subdivision project, detached single family homes, and they sit on a 10.5 acre site. It is, as many of you know, it is the former will J. Read Boy Scout camp in the The Riverdale Project. The subdivision was approved by Planning Commission and by the City Council back in 2015, and it was approved in conjunction with the development agreement. And as you may recall, the development agreement is an agreement between a city and a property owner that establishes certain rights and privileges and benefits to the city. The Riverdale Project is now currently under construction. And just as a background information, it's an exciting project for the city because it's the first detached single family subdivision with a fee, simple ownership lots in more than 20 years. So it's a really great achievement for the city to have this kind of development. The next slide is just an overview of the project site. For orientation purposes at the north or the top of the screen, there is the the northerly part of the project that abuts the adjacent neighborhood and to the west there, if you look to the left of your screen, that's the location of of the Los Angeles River. And you can see there the the vertical area going down into the project is the main entry the project has. It's a gated community with private streets and they have on site park area within the project of these 131 units. Okay. So here's a just a an image of the three different product types within the project. So I'll go directly into the development agreement and the request. Essentially, the development agreement that was approved by the city provides an obligation for the developer to construct the Molina Park, formerly Oregon Park, and the construction in addition of of onsite improvements throughout the and on the site itself, but also several of the streets surrounding the park. We know that the approximate cost of the improvements to the Molina Park are approximately $3.4 million, and that is in addition to the costs for the upgraded streets that are in the surrounding area. And there are other infrastructure improvements and I won't go into those in detail. But essentially the terms of the development agreement called for a partnership between the city and the developer for those infrastructure improvements, the construction of the park in exchange for the development approvals on the project and one of the other requirements for annual review of the developers compliance with the terms of the development agreement. And I would just note that they have received a 2016 and 2017 approval of their annual compliance through the Planning Commission. So the subject of the request for tonight's consideration is that essentially the most significant term of this development agreement is the construction of the Molina Park and the associated improvements, the offsite improvements. I would just note that in discussions with the Parks Department staff, they have noted that the the process for the improvement of the park have been moving along generally according to schedule, and they're on track for completion for mid-May. So sometime next month the developer anticipates being completed with the project. Following completion of the project, there would be a 90 day period during which the city makes a determination as to whether or not all of the improvements on the site are acceptable to the city, in which case the the park would then be turned over to the city for long term maintenance programing and operation. So one of the preliminary or one of the provisions of the development agreement, which is intended to provide flexibility for the developer to move forward with the project, yet for the city to get some certainty that the improvements that are called out for improvement in the park are actually conducted. So the way that that was addressed in the development agreement initially was for to require that the developer, prior to issuance of the 33rd certificate of occupancy for the homes that the city have accepted the Molina Park improvements by the city and to accept those improvements prior to the issuance of the 67th certificate of occupancy for the homes that they constructed. The other provision was that, or I should note that to date 48 building permits have been issued for 48 of the homes. 36 permits are pending for the homes, and a total of 20 certificates of occupancy for the homes have been issued. So essentially 84 of the of the total 131 units or somewhere in the building permit process. So specifically, the request of the developer in the way of amending the current development agreement is to change the requirement so that rather than completing the part prior to the issuance of the the 33rd certificate of occupancy, they be allowed to complete the park prior to the issuance of the 49th certificate of occupancy the second. So the cities in negotiating those provisions or that request with the the developer, the city has proposes that they would actually halt building inspections at the rough framing stage. That is prior to the completion of the framing of the project after the 48th certificate of occupancy until the park is complete. Essentially, it assures that the city has complete control of the project and that we can assure that the improvements that are outlined in the development agreement are completed prior to the developer being able to get any building permit. So that's really essentially the city's it's essentially a carrot and a stick. That's the city stick to make sure that those improvements are completed. The other provision is that park acceptance will be required after the issuance of the 117th building permit instead of prior to the 67 permit, as was initially proposed in the development agreement. The other component of this project, aside from those two components which change when the park has to be improved and when they could be issued, their final certificates of occupancy is a strip of land that's immediately to the west of the project site that's currently owned by the County of Los Angeles Flood Control District. And I'd like to show you a brief sketch that shows you this property. This piece of property is immediately adjacent to the river. It is actually owned by the L.A. County Flood Control District. And initially when the development agreement was being crafted, because that that strip of land was immediately adjacent to the park property and it was already landscaped and fairly well maintained, there was some perception that maybe we could just incorporate that as a part of the park. However, the developer just advised the city that since it is owned by the Los Angeles County, it's not really practical for the city to own it and incorporate it as a part of the project or as a part of the park. So the request as a part of the other request for the amendment is to to detach and to remove the requirement for the the park to include this strip of land that the city doesn't own, nor does the city maintain it. Currently, this property, because it is owned by the county, is actually maintained by the Los Angeles County Parks and Recreation Department. And further, the city's Park Department weighed in and indicated that there is no reason or it would just be additional cost for the city's Parks Department to maintain this strip. So they are in full agreement with eliminating or removing this strip from the from the description of the park or the requirement in the development agreement to maintain this as a part of the city's park. So that's essentially the background of this request for the those two amendments to the part inclusive of the strip being removed. Staff supports the requested amendment because these amendments allow continued accountability of the developer and compliance with all of the terms of the development agreements obligations. The developer has to date operated in good faith in terms of over the first two years of the project. They've maintained the improvements that they're currently underway in the park. Generally on schedule, the requested changes, we think at the staff level they provide the developer some flexibility, but they also give the city absolute accountability in terms of assuring that the park improvements will be completed before the developer can take occupancy of a higher number of the units than what was originally proposed in the development agreement. So we feel comfortable that the staff supports this request by the developer. And we would just note that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item back in March, March 20th of 2018, and they recommended that the City Council support and adopt an ordinance amending the development agreement. This is a public hearing. So public notice was required and the notice has been mailed out to property owners within a 1000 foot radius of the park site. And we've also published notifications in the local newspaper. That concludes the staff presentation. I'd like to just acknowledge that the developer here is here tonight to respond to any questions you might have. In addition to staff responding to any questions. And I'd also like to acknowledge Scott Kinsey, who is the project planner on this project, and he is also available. Should you have any questions on this request? That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you, Ms.. Tatum, for that presentation. At this point, we're going to go to public comment. So with anyone who would like to speak on this item, please line up now. And. Okay. I see. One, two, three, four, five people in line. Ma'am, you have the floor. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Felice Bachrach, and I live on Oregon Avenue directly across from the proposed Malina Park. I do want to say, since the developers are here so far, they've done. It's really astounding. It's beautiful. However, I would urge you to vote against the proposed amendment that to the development agreement delaying the completion of the park until they sell more units. And the reason I. Feel this is, you know, this is this has been a really kind of difficult time for this neighborhood. The parking situation. Has been. Impacted. It's a it's a dust bowl, aside from the recent winds that the lot is, you know, just unpaved. It's it's a dirt park. They they removed five mature trees. So we're getting. A lot of dust. We're getting a lot of traffic from the construction. And also since the the park is they finished the the playground and they finished the the restrooms, but there's no fencing to speak of around the park. Other than temporary fencing. If they were to stop. Working on it now. I shudder to think what would become of that park. And so I just feel that, you know, the the the neighborhood's kind of gone through a a difficult process with all of this construction. And the sooner that. We can complete at least the park, I think the neighborhood would feel a lot better about putting up with the rest of the inconvenience. Thank you very. Much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Okay. My question is, is that I think. Let's start with your name for the record. Thank you. This way, Marsha. I'm sorry. My question is, is there building a gated community? But they're saying you're going to have access to the park or whatever and it's along the riverbed. What they're not saying is that is homeless people that live in these different areas closer to the riverbed that are being pushed out, being threatened , being harassed, stabbed, being thrown away, you know, and it's like, yeah, regardless of the person is human, is that living inside of the house or outside of the home? You still post the respect the person, treat them with humane, you know, humanity and respect. And it's not being done. A lot of these developers come in and they start building or whatever the case would be. You have officers dispatched like, okay, well these people are a nuisance, are just in our way, so we need to move them by any means necessary. But you guys are telling the developers, okay, we'll give us $3 million, give us the park, and we allow you to do certain things or whatever the case would be. Every time I come here, every meeting I have, I hear about how you guys turn around and say how you want to help the community, the city, the residents or whatever. But you guys continue to have the residents and the community and the developers and the retailers at each other's throats. All the money that these guys put in, you have them attacking each other is never one group that is agreeing with the other. A got to be some kind of mutual agreement for something to get along. But as you guys know that, hey, this is going to mess with these people, oh, we're going to accept it. But they are we're going to turn it over to these people, whatever. I mean, that's just biting at each other. And you guys supposed to be here to, like, eliminate that, but it seems like got more and more fuel to the fire as you go along. Then other people that are, you know, resonates. They're like, well, when did this come into play or when was this at the hearing or why you guys didn't answer this or why you guys didn't answer that? And you are so quick to pass a bill or say, Yeah, let's agree to this, they got to retract it or bring it back or whatever. When you guys already don't take these people money, $3 million or whatever. So if people weren't agreeing, it is you're building gated communities. Why is homeless people where you are getting millions for. I don't see no homeless building is going out. There's 21 stories in the air or seven stories or whatever the case would be which opposed the got all this money to help with homelessness. Okay. And nothing is being done. Guys, have a good night. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name's Abby. I'm a resident of the Dominguez Gap neighborhood, where the Riverdale Riverdale Riverwalk are going to be interchangeable, is being developed. And I'm here to ask you to reject the amendment to the development agreement submitted by Riverdale and Brandywine. When this development was first proposed, there was quite a bit of neighborhood resistance. One of the selling points made by Brandywine at several town hall meetings was their plan to build a park and soccer pitch on the corner of Oregon and Alamo, which would benefit the entire community. Riverdale is now requesting that the city increase the number of certificates of occupancy to 49 homes prior to the park's completion rather than the contractually agreed upon 33, which is an additional 16 homes. And then also to quote, they want to halt the building permit issuance after the 117th home until Molina Park is accepted by the city instead of the original requirement of park acceptance prior to the issuance of the 67th Certificate of Occupancy. If I'm interpreting this quote correctly, this seems to be semantics. Basically requesting permission to delay completion of the park until 67 homes have received certificates of occupancy, which equals a total of 34 more homes than they originally agreed to initially agreed to, which is double the amount, almost with the caveat that they would be punished severely. No more building permits if they fail. I suspect they have locked down plans to finish the park before the 67th certificate of occupancy. I think the important question here is why are they so far ahead with the villa construction and so far behind with a park? I think I know the answer. There's no investment return on the park, but I believe a contract is a contract. And I see no reason for the city to allow delays on the agreed upon completion of the Molina Park. The completed park will benefit countless residents consenting to this amendment will only maximize profits for a private developer. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker, please. Hi, my name is Gabrielle Weekes. I live in the second district but represent all of South L.A. County for the Sierra Club. This gated development, I feel, is a real lost opportunity for the city. And I know I said this back when all the permits and the project were being allowed. I think this gated development could have had a local hire requirement, maybe some union workers. I know it's a little late, but as we move forward with new development, union electricians and carpenters, union plumbers, this would be a good opportunity for some for to make stronger buildings and with, you know, good jobs locally and there's no affordable units. And this is I understand I'm hoping that going forward, we could do a little better. And maybe even for a city that wants to be green, have some green components required. Next, big development, you all green light, maybe some increased insulation. So we're not using so much HVAC and energy, maybe solar panels on the roof. A friend of mine bought a townhouse in Signal Hill and they made the whole development with a lot of environmental attributes. He's got low flow showerheads, beautiful solar panels. They put down tile in a lot of places because it's easier to upkeep than carpet, and the whole thing is really green and well-insulated. And I asked him if he paid extra for his his unit to be like that. He said, no, they're all like that because it's upscale, because people pay more for it, because it's the way of the future. If Signal Hill can do that, I'd like to think we can do. And his wasn't gated as if the neighbors can't be trusted. So I think that's kind of more of a that's how I sort of feel we might want to go for in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Let's pick be complete. Good evening Vice Mayor Council members. I'm here on behalf of Indigo, who was the original firm that got the entitlements for the River Walk project, now named River Dale. Joan behind me is from Brandywine. He'll be speaking in a minute. I want to point out the positive news. A lot of times we come down here and there's the negatives. Let me point out some positive news for the city to take into account here. Every single phase that was proposed so far is sold out. You think about that for a minute. How many single family homes have been built in Long Beach in the last, say, five, six years? Single family homes, not apartments? Every single phase has been sold out. We're talking up there by Delamar. What, the 710 do you want the value of those homes are the sold out? The minimum is over 600,000. Some of them are 700,000. Now, the fact that there's interest in getting these homes, that's what's amazing. That's what Lambie should be talking about, is you're taking brand new homes in a community, you're improving the surrounding community. I live up in the eighth, you're surrounding the community around there with property tax increment. Their benefit of their homes, their value of their homes is going to go up. Where do you see 600, $700,000 homes being built in Long Beach these days? You don't. I think the developer should be commended for building a project like that. The part will be done shortly. You'll have that finished and you're going to have a terrific community up there. That's a testament to what you guys approved. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next week, a police vice-chair, member of the city council, Alex Hernandez, representing the ownership of the Riverdale development. I want to thank you for taking this opportunity to listen to us on the positive news. A guest update, more on those facts. We have actually moved in 20 new families into Riverdale and we have sold 80 homes to this point. So basically, people are waiting for these homes to be finished at this point for construction. It's been very well received in the community and we've done everything we can to be a good neighbor. With regards to the delays on the park. There was no, you know, strategy or anything of that nature. It's just a matter of thinking about the different agencies and coordinating the different efforts between the city parks departments, building departments , public works departments, Edison, and then even the county. As we were reaching out to them to try to get agreement, agreements on easements and things of that nature took a lot longer than we expected. We're underway. We're moving this thing that this park will be completed probably in the next month or so. Hopefully you've seen some of the progress we've made out there in the community. We will turn that park over when it's accepted to 100% to the city satisfaction. We have already contracted the $3 million worth of work out there and we will can then continue to finish up all of our improvements per the original agreement. So we're satisfying all the original requirements all. Unfortunately, we got hit with an unfortunate delays. And that's all this amendment is addressing is giving us more time to finish those improvements. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Anna Kristensen. Well, I have to disagree with the prior speaker in saying that's all the amendment is asking for is more time. Because what the amendment is also asking for is for the city parks department to be released from the strip of public land. That's the county land. Now, this was not a surprise when the city entered into this agreement or the developer entered into it. It wasn't like they didn't know it was county land. And I think that when you're looking at the tradeoff here, which, of course, is a tremendous sacrifice of public space that we could have had, I mean, as a swimming pool person, you know, that could have been the actual forest public pool in Long Beach. But those that's chance slipped away. So what I would say is, you know, let's look at this strip of county land. If the developer and the city aren't interested in that open space, then let's have some more open space, maybe a couple less houses, a little more park space or some more amenities for the park, but or maybe even contributing. Here's an idea to the upkeep and maintenance of the Dominguez Gap wetlands, which on one minute are beautiful. And the next minute when you take your friend there from San Francisco, are filled with dead fish. So there's there's an issue, even there, of maintenance. So let's get something other than a, you know, more upscale housing in a gated community. Let's let's get something natural. Thank you and thank you for listening and not, you know, being more preoccupied with candy than with public speaking. It's really disheartening. I got to say, I know I'm over it line, but at least I didn't yell it. Please, people, if you don't want to listen, have public comment, don't have it. Let's cut it for one minute. But if you if you agree to for public comment, then at least try to stay off your cell phones. It's like being back a teacher in high school, man. Come on. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Andrew Carroll. I live in the second district. Thank you for listening. I just want to say, I think you all do a good job of listening. I know you're dealing like 12 different things out there at the same time and you're here every Tuesday and we really appreciate it . I appreciate it again. So I'd like to start with that. I don't know why I'm speaking because this has already passed the point of me doing be able to do anything as a citizen. But I feel it would be, I guess, remiss not to express that this city in this state is facing a housing crisis, and we're building a gated community of single family homes in Long Beach. I think that's disappointing. I'm not sure why people who live in a gated community need a park. It doesn't seem like they like the public, seems like they want to live in a gated community, hence the gates. Also, I'm not sure why we need a park for people who up front in backyards, but that's a different question too. There's a lot of privilege in this conversation and not a lot of narrative about some of the other sides of these issues. I think that's a missed opportunity for the city again, to have done something different. I think our priorities on this are just really messed up and I don't know. That's all I have to say. I guess if we wonder why rent control is coming, this is why it's coming. And yeah, it's a it's again, it's as I said three weeks ago, it's unfortunate because rent control is not it is not a perfect policy. But this is why the city is in the hands that it's in. And this is why the people decided to bypass the city completely and just put it to it initiative, because the city continues to approve these single family home projects as the land use element proved with some of the folks who spoke here tonight. We're on the wrong side of that as well. The land use element is going to increase single family homes in the city and pretty much shrink Long Beach. Long Beach is a growing, vibrant city. We want to be green. There's nothing green about single family homes. There's nothing green about suburbs. I encourage everyone to look at the literature into that as well. Thank you for your time. Thank you. That concludes public comment will now take it back behind the rail. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank you, thank staff for the great comprehensive report and I want to thank the public commenters as well. I think there are some some some misconstrue, some conceptions, this misinformation that I'd like to just try to clear up on this. Number one, the park in particular, this was a key point of the development agreement. It was, I thought, a win for the neighborhood because the neighborhood had been promised the park for at least ten years prior to that. And the the site that the park now, the future Molina Park will be on was a blighted site that had no possibility or no future because we had run out of redevelopment funds. And so we had to get creative. When this development agreement came forward to to build single family homes, it was actually rejected by many of the residents. As was mentioned, there was a lot of concern that it was too dense. So I don't know that I would have been able to get any other type of development agreement approved in the neighborhood, particularly anything with any more density. And it was a tough, tough trial to to to pass the agreement as as as is, which, in my opinion, is very still very good for the neighborhood. In the biggest gap area that we have, a $3.5 million park being built, developed, but also guarantees for street sidewalk improvements, a new traffic signal and other improvements for the neighborhood, a neighborhood that has been neglected for decades. When I say at least three or four decades had been had been neglected and had no sense of community or public investment in that neighborhood there whatsoever. And so this development agreement came in, provided an opportunity for us to to to make some changes. I was very, very steadfast in and heart with the and was was proud of the development agreement that was negotiated because it held the developers feet to the fire to build homes, but also to develop and deliver a park. But what we did not foresee in for forecast is the construction delays that come with the entitlement process. This was a multi-agency endeavor. They had to deal with the Army Corps of Engineers, L.A. County, several city departments, departments. Development Services, public works, parks and RECs. And there was that strip of land, which I think is a little bit of misunderstood that is owned by the county that was actually came up after the development agreement was actually approved. And that took several weeks to to kind of vet out with L.A. County. I think it's it's prudent for us to and I'm supportive of the amendments to the development agreement, and I'm asking my council colleagues to support it as well. This is a good project. And to the point that this is going to delay anything. I don't see that happening and I don't see that that is in anybody's interest that the park is going to be delayed. I think if anything, it'll be fast tracked. But what what I understand from the changes that that have come forth, this is just an insurance policy to make sure that that that that everything falls together in line. As you can see, the park is close to being complete as is. I'm very impressed with the the progress that has been made on the development, not only the housing development, but the park as well. And I look forward to hopefully cutting a ribbon in the next few weeks with the community. Thank you very much. And I encourage my colleagues to support as well. Thank you. And I'll just add my strong support for as well as a great project. It figured we figured out through this how to get that park built. When Councilman Orson articulated, redevelopment ended and there was an expectation to build a park there. So when you look at that, you look at, you know, the biggest gap that offers wetlands, the improvements to the river. I think there's going to be become a very, very special place that the whole community can be proud of. So I just want to say good work and my support. Yes. Thank you. And also want. To just just point out the Dominguez gap is maintenance by the county of Los Angeles. Good morning. We're doing a lot of park improvements and a lot of wetlands improvements along the L.A. River, just across the Alamo. We'll be kicking off the the the Forest Wetlands Project, which will be maintenance by the city of Long Beach. The lands and the the maintenance agreements and development agreements are pretty complicated. And unless you know specifically who that we're the ownership or the means, it can be very confusing. And so I appreciate all the comments. Thank you. Thank you. Good project members. Please cast your vote. Motion carries.

Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. R-7043 for the City of Long Beach Old Court House Abatement and Demolition; award a contract to Environmental Construction Group, Inc., of Signal Hill, CA, in an amount of $3,690,000 for abatement only, and authorize a 20 percent contingency, for a total contract amount not to exceed $4,428,000; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) by $1,373,000 for a transfer to the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW); and increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $1,373,000, for a total project cost of $4,428,000, offset by $3,055,000 in currently appropriated Fiscal Year 2016 non-recurring General Fund resources and the remainder from bond proceeds. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_11102015_15-1148

A report from Economic and Property Development. Financial Management Recommendation to award a contract to Environmental Construction Group for the City of Long Beach. Old Courthouse Abatement and demolition for a total contract amount not to exceed 4.4 million District two. Thank you. There there is a motion in a second before I get there. I know staff. Do you have a short presentation? Yes, you do. Presentation by Mike Conway, our director of Economic and Property Development. Mayor Garcia, Members of the City Council. This item requests authority to enter a contract with Environmental Construction Group Inc, the perceived low bidder for environmental abatement of the old courthouse. This is a rebid of an earlier bid in October, which was rebid in a manner that allows the city to contract only for abatement rather than for abatement and demolition. This approach allows abatement to start immediately, which needs to be done in the interest of public safety. Regardless of the ultimate fate of the courthouse building. Demolition of the courthouse building will require a separate action by city council at a future date. In response to this invitation to bid, seven bids are received, ranging from 5.9 million to 8.5 million, with six of the bids within $700,000 of each other. The initial low bidder, U.S. demolition was rejected as a result of an error on their bid bond. The city has long held posture regarding the reliability of bid bonds, which require that the bond is clearly valid. On its face, U.S. demolitions bid bond referred to the prior invitation to bid, not the current one. While this may seem like a ministerial error, it does call into question the validity of the bid bond. And the city's long standing position is that this error cannot be waived. Waiving this error in this case would call into question all prior rejections based on similar criteria and may expose the city to additional protests and adverse unintended consequences. Two more protests were received which were reviewed determined to have no merit and were rejected. This is an important to understand that bids of this monetary magnitude, with pricing so closely compressed, are almost almost guaranteed to generate protests. But time is of the essence for this abatement work to begin and staff request that council approved staff's recommendation. And I'm available for your questions. Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to thank the staff for their diligence. I know this was a long process, so I do thank you for being careful and diligent about this. Q Councilman Richardson, so we're going to have any public comment on this item. Please come forward. If there is public comment. Okay. Go ahead. Eric, could you characterize the address? I'm suggesting this council hold this off. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't see in the files any. A report from our city auditor relative to the very issue of. This or raising or replacing the city hall or the entire concept of. What the city has been doing with in terms of planning, I think instead of hiring, instead of relying on willy nilly. You should rely on a friend. Request a report from the city auditor. So we understand fully the dynamics and whether or not this makes sense. And from the number of people I've talked to who are very familiar with city business, they say this is a catastrophe in the making period. So there can be there should be no harm in looking for and asking the city attorney's city auditor to present a report on such a seminal project. This project should last 100 years. So another six weeks or eight weeks is not going to rock the boat. Period. And this reminds me the way you approach this is there are three things that always stick in my mind where this is before many half of the council was here, where we disposed of property in a really inane way. Somebody came before the council and said, There's an orphaned piece of property nobody wants whatsoever. So they sold it for 17 to $0.19 an acre before the ink was dry. The guy made $1,000,000 on it. And it turns out that orphaned piece of property apparently had a sibling. Must have been but ugly. Because they'd only got 8 to $0.10 an acre. And of course, the one that sticks in my mind the most is when the city got rid of such a distressed property in such a distressed area as a 45/2 walk from Ocean to Broadway and gave away their Broadway hotel for $1. And I'll always remember that one because that was at the same time that the ladies of Cartagena. Holding policies. Secret Service. To their contract and tried that they were trying to get out of and so it. Your fiduciary responsibility is to request the city auditor to present a report on the feasibility of that. Absent that, it says, you know, and you're aware of there's something fishy that she does not want to. She should not get inside of. Thank you. Speaker, please. Good evening. Kevin De I'm an attorney from Alvarado Smith. I represent us demolition. Speaking on this item was interesting because the staff report was entirely lacking what we heard from the staff presentation tonight, which is what necessitated me to come down and speak to you, I think, on the dias for each of you, because the last minute nature of this, we have provided you a big protest letter with tons of law and tons of analysis of this situation. The initial comment was very interesting when it was described that the contract could be awarded to the perceived low bidder. That's because the the bitter that the city is looking to award the contract to tonight was not the actual low bidder. We heard the commentary about the rejection of a bid based upon the misidentification of a bidders bond. The bid bond that we're talking about here is a preprinted city form that was completed correctly. It included a reference to a prior project. That's true, but it was dated after the submission date for the prior project. It could only have been valid related to this project. And so included in the letter is the initial bid protest that that we present. And the timing is kind of interesting on this because the bid from us demolition was timely. It was the low bid. Six days passed and they heard nothing. All of a sudden, out of nowhere, they got a letter from the city, Tulane letter, saying your bids been deemed non-responsive and has been rejected because of the bid bond issue. That same day, U.S. demolition had a letter from their bid bond contractor. It's included in the packet to say that the surety was standing by the bid bond. That issue was off the table. It's ministerial. There is case law on this issue, county of Menifee. It's in the letter that that kind of irregularity can be waived and is waived routinely across the state. You're protecting the public fisc. You're using money from the general fund to abate hazardous materials in your courthouse. You have a responsibility to choose the lowest responsible bidder. The bid from US demolition should never have been rejected. That wasn't there. The. The problem that was created was the. Rejection of the bid came one day before a bid protest was due. So US demolition has put together a complete package. Asked for responses from the city have gotten nothing necessitated this hearing tonight. So the bid protest is twofold. It's very simple. We'd ask that you pull this from the calendar tonight. Don't vote on it. Have the city attorney have a have staff, look at it and analyze the bid protest. In light of the authority we've presented to you, our bid was responsive, shouldn't have been rejected. The second issue is that the potential awardee has material misstatements of fact in the bid on the public contract you're about to award. We presented evidence to you in the bid protest letter. So the the action item for you is either pull this or direct staff, our staff to analyze this further and take another look at us . Demolitions Bid Board. Thank you, sir. Time's up. Okay. Is there any other public comment on this item? See no other public comment on this item. There is a motion and a second on the floor. Members, please go ahead and cast your vote. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Item number nine.

A MOTION confirming the appointment of Afua Kouyate to the King County cultural development authority (4Culture) board.

KingCountyCC_02162022_2022-0010

Our next agenda item is the appointment of. I'm going to say this correctly and the q yoti to the Ford Culture Board for a 3 to 3 year term representing Council District two and for culture as our King County's Cultural Public Development Authority and administers our arts and heritage programs, we have MIA critical support from a central staff to provide this briefing, and we do have the counter gate with us today so we can ask questions over here from in just a moment. We also have Claire Michelle from Fort Culture to answer your question. So go right ahead. We're. Good morning councilmembers. I'm Lee, a critical Bobby Council staff. The materials for this item begin on page 15 of your packet. This item before you is a motion to confirm the appointment of a black coyote to the board culture board of Directors for a three year term expiring on December 31st, 2024. And I'll provide some brief background and an introduction as necessary. Okay. And then turn it over to the chair for any questions that councilmembers wish to ask the appointee. And our culture is governed by 15 Board of Directors, a 15 member board of directors who have to have a demonstrated commitment to and knowledge of cultural resources, be active and experienced in community and civic issues and concerns, and have the ability to evaluate the cultural construct, the needs of cultural constituencies in the region as a whole. Board position to which you are considering today is to be appointed by the County Council member representing County County Council District two, which is, of course, council members. A HOLLEY Ms. Keelty's experience includes 40 years of cultural arts leadership in King County, the Pacific Northwest and beyond. She currently serves as Executive Director for the ADF, UK Cultural Education Workshop and has served as a cultural arts instructor teaching West African music, song and dance. She has also served as a therapeutic foster parent and is a registered therapeutic counselor. The appointment of Mr. Yachty to the Fort Culture Board appears to be consistent with the process and policies governing board culture board appointments. And that concludes my staff report. Q Harry Met Sally. Are there any questions of the. Key role. I'd like to welcome this committee to our meeting today. And I'd like to congratulate you on your appointment by our county executive. And I ask you to just give us a little bit of your thoughts about the appointment and what you bring to the board. We'd like to hear from you. Great. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Yes, I am off for a quiet day and my pronouns are she and her. I'm a native of Seattle and I do live in district to a rainier Valley resident of South Seattle. And I'm just really honored to be able to have this this transformation happen within myself, because my. Whole love life is around. People. Africa and. Transitions. I'm really. Excited about the work that my organization has done. In South Seattle for over 40 years. Our newest program is the Rainier Valley Creative District, which was city endorsed February 22nd of 2021. And we received our state certification. August 16th of 2021. We're having this I'm. Sorry to interject, and we're having technical difficulties. I apologize. We're going to just need to pause the meeting. I'm going to ask the chair to do that. I apologize if we could just have a second. I'll talk with the chair and then she'll restage your. I'm so sorry, if you don't mind. No worries. Thank you so much. I am so sorry. Thank you. You are in the meeting now. Madam Chair, we are ready to start the meeting. Should I continue? I would give it 1/2 of full tilt. The chair comes back on there. I was just talking with them. Are able to begin to resume the meeting. And we're sorry about that, but we believe that everything has been taken care of. So this tell if you'd like to resume your remarks. Thank you. Well, I'll just continue by saying. That. My work has been about empowering youth and. Families. Into becoming their authentic selves through the. Study of African music, song and dance. And I really love. Being the voice. Of the people. So I really look forward to sharing, you know, my my lifelong journey, how it can derive. In many ways. As serving in this capacity. And we're doing a lot of a lot of work that is supported through the state of Washington. And I'm just really excited about being a council appointee, and I'm ready to move forward. Thank you. Thank you. And again, congratulations. Have you. Have you been able to attend a meeting of the culture board yet? I have. Yes. And do you have any thoughts about what you would be bringing to this board other than what you just said, anything really poignant that you perceive about the board? Well, I've always been a consumer of our culture and before that the King. County Arts Commission. Being an artist. And so just I'm really excited about being on the other side while actually being teeter. Totter, right? Because I'm still, you. Know, consuming and just really, honestly, authentically being the voice of the people. You know, I live in this district and we see a lot of challenges and we. See a lot of strengths. That need to be balanced out. So I'm excited about the process. Terrific. You obviously have a very strong background and I'm very excited about your being on the board. I'm wondering if any of councilmembers Hawaii has anything you'd like to comment on? I was so honored to be able to recommend Afua to this position. She has really deep roots in King County district, two decades of experience and history in celebrating our culture and infusing that culture into our youth, and you really using it as a vehicle for improving our neighborhoods. I've seen her around performing and teaching, and it's always a privilege to be able to run into you. And now you get to bring your gifts and your talents to all of King County for a culture board. So I highly encourage all of my colleagues to support. Thank you so. Much. Thank you. And Claire, Michelle, do you have any comments for culture? We're very lucky to have a four star. That's a very, very important comment to make and I am happy as well to I am serving on the board as well and an ex-officio capacity. So it's a wonderful board and of course, the wonderful organization that we have for the county. Are there any questions from any of my colleagues on the council? Any remarks. Councilmember Karen. I just want to welcome you aboard. And I'm excited to have your participation and and excited with your background, both in your outreach to both in your art and in your outreach to to our youth through your foster care program. Thank you. Are there any other comments or questions? Vicki. Well, Miss Katie, we are going to take a vote on this. And assuming that we recommend a do pass with the do pass recommendation to the full council, you will not be required to attend that council meeting, and we will be voting, I believe, on consent. And again, congratulations on this and look forward to seeing you at the next meeting with that. Mr. Vice Chair, would you please move? Proposed motion 2020 20010 for recommending a confirmation of this group of 32 Board. Culture Board. Councilmember Satelite. Would you like to do that? So move, Madam Chair. Okay. Thank you. And, Lester, any other comments or questions matter? The clerk. Would you please call the roll? Thank you, Madam Chair. Council member. Dolce. I got some member DEMBOSKY. I got as a member done, I can submit an adjournment. I. Council member. Berry, I. Council member up the growth. Council Member Van de Boer. I got some members say hello. Hi. Madam Chair. What is my eyes? No nose in nice case. Thank you very much for the vote. We have approved motion 2020 20010. And unless they hear anything contrary, we will send this motion with the pass recommendation on the consent calendar and expedited to the February 22nd Council meeting. Congratulations must be obtained and I don't believe there be any problem with your being confirmed with one election at the Council meeting next Tuesday. With that. Yes. We will now move on to item number five. Number six, center agenda. And so my number is changed to the next item. On the agenda is a briefing number 2022 BS 0029, which will be on the Arts Fund Covered Report. And we have with us Michael Greer, president and CEO of Arts Fund, and Sarah Steadman, vice president of Strategic Initiatives and Communications with us.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the establishment of an annual gathering celebrating the life and legacy of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; and adding a new chapter to K.C.C. Title 2.

KingCountyCC_09192018_2018-0381

To speak to our regular calendar, regular order. Thank you very much for your presentation. We'll turn to item 13 today, which is legislation which would, I guess, formalize a long standing celebration practice here that we have at the county in partnership with the public to honor Martin Luther King Jr. Our namesake, Andrew Kim is going to present on it. This is offered by Councilmember Gossett and myself. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Andrew Kilmer, Council Central Staff. The staff report for this item begins on page 475 of your agenda. Get the ordinance before you. As you mentioned, Mr. Chair, would establish an annual gathering celebrating the life and legacy of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Since the adoption of Motion 6461 in 1986 to change the namesake of the county to Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The county. And celebrate the life and legacy of Dr. King on an annual basis. And since 2004, the celebration has traditionally been have taken place at large venues. The proposed ordinance before you today would formalize this annual gathering. Since 2004, the annual gatherings have been coordinated by the Department of Executive Services with assistance from an inner branch team composed of representatives from county branches, departments, agencies and offices. However, in 2017, the Office of SGA, the Equity and Social Justice, assumed the coordination of the gathering due to some personnel changes. For 2018, the Executive modify the format of the public gathering to a conversation café, which explored issues of race, equity and justice in small groups of figures that was open to county employees. The proposed ordinance would require the Office of SGA in collaboration with an inner branch team to plan and convene the annual gathering. It would also require the gathering to be held in the second week of January, be open to all county employees and the public, and be held in a county venue that would accommodate all the attendees , the USDA and in collaboration with the inner branch team with widely publicized the gathering. And lastly, the proposed ordinance would authorize the use of county's general fund to fund the annual gathering. The Office of ESG Staff stated that the cost of the gathering would, as required by the proposed ordinance, would cost approximately $20,000 each year. And the Office of ESG Staff affirmed that they would be able to take up the work as required by the proposed ordinance and state that they have already begun planning for the 2019 Annual Gathering in collaboration with some representatives from the different branches, departments and offices. Lastly, Mr. Chair, staff has prepared Amendment One, which has been distributed to members to modify the statement of facts, to clarify the history of the gathering, and require the Office of ESG to invite, rather than convene representatives from the various offices and require the representatives to. Receive ideas and feedback from the community on the planning of the annual gathering. That concludes my remarks, Mr. Chair. We also have in the audience Matthias Whalen, director of the Office of ESG Advisor. And Andrew, thank you for your work on this legislation. Turn it over before I do. Councilmember Garcia just one. But I just I just want to say this historically has been one of my favorite things to do here at the county. The celebration has been inspiring and uplifting historically with musical presentations and awards to kids from around the county for essays and really also educational to remind us and to educate us, or at least me, about the work of Dr. King and to keep current and keep expanding my mind anyway, on issues related to civil rights, equity and social justice work. And this process that we are proposing be established would be to ensure that a broad representation of county employees continue to be involved in the planning and execution of the event. That it reflects kind of a broad perspective, that it involves the community, not that we are cementing any one particular type of celebration, but that we are cementing a process to empower folks to ensure that we get a celebration, an event that is meaningful and and helpful to help us achieve our goals and missions here. At least that's my in my interest on working on this. And then if I could just work with those, I'd like to offer Councilmember Garza an opportunity as a as a sponsor. And then to you. And I thank you, Michel. I wanted first to thank you as the co-chair, for your articulation of the reasons for this ordinance. I would only add that last year, the perception and I want to use the word perception because I don't know what the objective facts were. Many out there on the county staff there on the MLK committee and then other mostly African-American staff from all around the county. So it appears to us that they're watering down and making the celebration only available to employees of King County. We liked it when all the middle schools in Seattle were involved, were and had kids writing essays. We liked it when at least they and other people in the community were invited to the event, and we had it at venues that were larger than what we would need if we'd only laminate things there. So and then people brought up other issues relative to the celebration. So we thought that it would be wise and helpful that we could go back and talk to the staff here in the broader community and tell them that we've kind of institutionalize having this event and keeping it as broad as we can. And I thought that was good. But I also wanted to say that I thought that the criticisms that the executive staff that have overseen this effort had received were also valid, that it seems kind of state it needs to be more creative in terms of speakers and cultural events and other kinds of speakers. We need to be more creative than just sending a letter to middle schools asking how to sponsor our contacts. We need some staff or volunteers that really work the issue of having the community involved in our countywide celebration of our Namesake's birthday because of the historical importance, but the potential political importance of having Martin Luther King and his life and his teachings and his example available to us and carrying on and developing public policy in implementing those policies and bringing all people together and and what he called the beloved community. So that is the rationale and reason and B, behind. Then an ordinance form that we celebrate in this manner. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity. Thank you. Councilmember Gossett, Consumer Council. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I strongly support this proposed ordinance and would like my I would like to add my name as the sponsor. And I have a question for Andrew. It might be better from me to I'm not sure. The next item on our agenda is to create the legislative branch, equity and Social Justice team, and would that automatically then be part of the Inter Branch ESG team? I'm not sure how that little word. To. You would, and automatically the members of the ESG team wouldn't automatically be part of the coordination of the MLK annual gathering. It would be some of the members can may represent the legislative branch to be part of that team, but there's no requirement in the proposed ordinance that they would be. Would that be something we could amend this to do? I would. I mean, I don't know how this all works. Maybe, Mathias, you could give some response to that. As it comes up. You are definitely open to either amending this legislation to include the ESG legislative team members or the motion that would be before you. The next item to have those members be part of the MLK Gathering Celebration Coordinating Committee. Okay, terrific. Thank you, Andrew. Hi. Good morning. In terms of the the celebration that we're doing right now for 29. Tea Partiers, would you like to give us your name? Yes. All right. Dr. Matthias, balance around the director of the Office of Equity and Social Justice. Right. So, I mean, the process that we have done is historically there has been a MLK committee that has put the celebrations together. So we went back and asked those participants of whether they wanted to continue to be part of the committee. Al Sanders from Council, for example, continues to be in that committee and a number of other from the executive branch and some of the separate like that. Agencies too are part of that. And in addition, in the spring, as I was creating the committee, I made a call into the Inter Branch team for other representatives. So we have about half of the current participants are from the previous committee and we have some new participation as well. May I continue? Sure. I think committees. So is the inner branch team informal in terms of its composition and or is it not formal? It's it's by by or the the the 2010 ordinance that we consulted about this ordinance really lays out that we should have an entire branch team that should be appointed by or represented by directors or appointees. So all department heads and agency heads appoint people to that team. Sometimes we have chiefs of staff, sometimes we have background, social justice managers. And that position for council, the regular representation is from Carmel Ennis, from central staff, and then we have from Council of regards the office, we have regular participation but also the the there's a special representative and then others can attend as well. And Carmella's an official representative. Yes. In the past it's also been Michael Reid was has been a part of it and some other central staff. I should I mean, I would think it's not Carmella who's official, but her position would hold that. Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure what what what was forwarded to me from counsel was that it was Kamala MLA who was going to be there or her position. Yes, exactly. Who's the represent. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Lambert. And then we'll take this item up. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, first of all, I think that the idea of being inclusive is really important and maybe a county wide email going out to every employee saying, are you interested? Because we don't always know people's interests or their backgrounds or what. And when I first came here, I, I tried to get on the committee and the first year I didn't get accepted. In the second year, I thought waiting, I guess accepted last year to be on it. So maybe if they knew I wrote a book about Martin Luther King, they would, you know, think that that might be a good thing for me to be on the committee. So I wrote that I'd written a book and I didn't get on the committee. And the next year I had a copy of the cover of the book to say it actually exists and I just don't get on the committee. So I think for some. People. Maybe there was a feeling that they that only certain people could be on the committee. And so it didn't feel inclusive to me when I first got here. So anyway, I think having because we don't know what people's backgrounds are, we don't know that they were friends with Martin Luther King or they're his children, his grandchildren, or they lived next door, you know, whatever. We have no idea. And so we put it out to every Kent County employee and let them right into you. You might find a broader base of people who would really like to be involved. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Lambert I Vice-Chair is helping me run the committee here. Councilmember Gossett Can we ask him to put it before us as the lead sponsor and then Councilmember Cole's do you want to offer the amendment there? Okay. Councilmember Garcia, would you like to offer this legislation, this ordinance? Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this time, I accept their privilege of putting forth and recommending to the members of the committee of the hall that we adopt and move to the County Council as a whole. Proposed Ordinance 2018 0381 related to establishing an annual gathering celebration of the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Thank you, Councilmember Gossett. Councilmember Coles. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move adoption of amendment number one. All right, thank you. And Amendment One is the refinements articulated by Andrew earlier with respect to the findings of fact and the operative section language about inviting all in favor of Amendment one, say i ii any opposed and one carries no turning to comments on final passage and councilmember calls as initiate a cosigner sheet here. If other members would like to sign on, it's available. Just let us know. Councilmember Coles. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just I'm very supportive of this and of course I'm voting for it. But I would like to talk with Andrew and or materials about whether we could come up with an amendment, if appropriate, is addressed. Addressing what I brought up already about council, he has changed to a legislative body ESG team that we could prepare that for the full council if we go ahead. Okay. Thank you. And Councilmember Gossett and. I thank the very appropriate materials, because I think that our ESG team is different than the Martin Luther King Committee that put on this event of the separate entity. Yeah. So I think that's very wise that we do the research and figure out how they either state separate and how they work or if it's necessary or helpful there. I wanted to ask Jay members also on the other committee that that ought to be good. Thank you. Mr.. Thank you. All right. Anything else? Want to thank Councilmember Coles and Councilman Baldacci for signing on as co-sponsors and markup when you call the roll on this item as amended. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Bell. Duchin. Councilmember Dunn. Councilmember Carson. Hi. Councilmember Colwell. Councilmember Lambert. Councilmember McDermott. All right. Council member of the Grove. Councilmember one right there. Mr. Chair. Right, Mr. Chair, the vote is nine eyes, no no's. All right. We've given a do pass recommendation of that. Given that the legislation calls for that second week of January, why don't we expedite it? Since there may be an amendment, we won't put it on consent, but let's bring it up as soon as we can. Diaz, thank you for being here, for your work on this important celebration. And all the other work you're doing in this office is great. Thank you. And I think the upcoming celebration will not disappoint. So thank you. Very good. Thank you. We have some singing. We have some spoken word. All right. Yeah. All right. And, like some music as well. Yeah. Sounds good. Okay. Was anybody there for the pickle speech? Does anyone remember the pickle speech? Speaking of spoken word, very good. Recommend you go back on KQED and watch it. Excellent Speaker. All right. Our final item today is propose motion 2018 0282 offered by Council Chair McDermott, Councilmember Garcia and Councilmember Cole Wells.

Order for a hearing on an Audit for Boston Public Schools Special Education services and return on investment. Councilor Mejia rule 12 was invoked to include Councilors Lara and Fernandes Anderson as co-sponsors.

BostonCC_06082022_2022-0724

Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please read docket. 07240724. Council on Me offer the following order for a hearing on an audit for Boston Public Schools Special Education Services and return on investment. Thank you. The chair recognizes. Councilman. Here, Councilman. Here. You have the floor. Yes, counselor. President Flynn, I know that my colleague has. What have I co-sponsors? Also has a time commitment. So, given the fact that I've done a lot today, I would like to ask if you would be willing and my co-sponsors who are going to be joining me would be willing to allow us to bring up give my colleague an opportunity to talk about both. I know I said no at the beginning, and I'm switching it up just because of time. I didn't know that we would be here until 4:00 today. So with that said. Mr. Clerk, please read the the added docket, please. Talking about 0725 Council on Me here offer the following order for a hearing regarding the Boston Public Schools Transportation System.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending the Official Land Use Map (Chapter 23.32) to rezone land within the Lake City Urban Village and along Lake City Way; amending subsection 23.47A.005.C of the Seattle Municipal Code to remove certain restrictions on street-level street-facing residential uses; and amending Section 23.47A.009 to adopt development standards for certain properties along Lake City Way.

SeattleCityCouncil_08082016_CB 118675

Agenda item five Constable 118 675 relating to planning and zoning amending the official land use map to rezone land within the Lake City Urban Village and along Lake City Way and many subsection 23.40 78.005. C of the code to remove certain restrictions on street level, street facing residential uses and amending section 23.47 8.009 to adopt development standards for certain property along Lake City, where the committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Councilmember Johnson. Thank you. Council President So this council bill in front of us reflects several years of outreach by the Office of Planning and Community Development in the Lake City community. It doesn't change any building heights in Lake City, but what it does is it promotes some opportunities for us to create a more pedestrian friendly street along Lake City and in the Lake City Neighborhood Business District, Civic Core. The zoning change, as we described, is as capacity neutral, and we had some really good discussions about this in committee. The bill effectively expands the pedestrian designation within the urban village, which allows for us to change some of the way that the building meets the street. Does things like prohibit commercial development from having parking lots in front of the building and requires them to be built behind the building, for example. The bill would also effectively change some design standards for large lots, so it would ask us to do some setbacks on large lots over 40,000 feet. We had a request from the community to reduce some of the setbacks in those large lots from 45 feet down to 35 feet. And that amendment was passed out of committee. And these, along with other design standards that we're adopting today, we think are going to really result in a community that continues to, as they build in building new buildings, be a more pedestrian, friendly, walkable neighborhood that they aspire to be. And that concludes my remarks. I believe Councilmember Wise has some things you would like to achieve. Councilmember Johnson comes from a worse. Well, I know that you're not all excited about zoning changes, but some of us really are. I know, Robin. I'm excited. I'm excited to vote for the zoning changes today. Lake City is a vibrant, growing community and certainly benefit from the mandatory housing affordability framework that will be coming from this council as well. The changes in this legislation will create development guidelines and pedestrian designations to ensure new development meets the needs of the community that's becoming dense and needs to increase walkability and access. I want to thank Councilmember Johnson for his leadership on this legislation. I also want to thank Katie Sheehy from the Office of Planning and Community Development, who has spent years working with the neighbors in Lake City to bring these recommendations forward. And most importantly, I want to thank all the community members who dedicate their time and their energy and told their stories and came downtown to provide public comment . Without their hard work and concern for their neighborhood. A lot of these changes would not be happening today. So with that, I'm happy to vote in support of this. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Worse. Any further comments? Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Bagshaw. Burgess. Gonzalez. I Herbold II. Johnson, Suarez, I. O'Brien, President Harrell high eight in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and the chair will sign it. Please read the next agenda item.

Recommendation to receive and file an update on the activities of the Veterans Affairs Commission over the past 18 months. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_09182018_18-0802

Motion carries seven zero. 27, please. Item 27 is a report from Health and Human Services recommendation to receive an update on the activities of the Veterans Affairs Commission over the past 18 months. I think you're going to hear the side of and then do the the public comment. Councilman Richardson. Thank you. I wanted to just take a moment and acknowledge the Veterans Affairs Commission and the hard work that they've led. This was one of the third, fourth proposals I brought. The city council was to begin the process of developing this new commission. And I'm really proud of the support that the city council and the Budget Committee and everyone has led to establishing this in the Health Department. We're really proud of their work and we want to see and I'm looking forward to this update. And side note, I want to just sort of refresh this issue that that Veterans Affairs strategic plan is still seeking funding. It's been pegged about $40,000 needed. So we're going to try to advocate for that in this upcoming budget. And so we'll try to keep that issue alive. But I look forward to this this presentation. At the presentation. Thank you. Good evening. Honorable Mayor and council members like to introduce Gina OVERHOLT. She is our program manager for the Veterans Affairs Commission and she'll give a brief report and will be open for questions at the end. Thank you, Kelly. Honorable Mayor Garcia and council members, thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this brief update on the Veterans Affairs Commission. I'm Gina OVERHOLT, the coordinator for the Veterans Affairs Commission, which is administered administrated by the Health Department. Our core purpose, the Long Beach Veterans Commission and advises City Council on matters of importance to veterans in our city. This slide continues and shows additional details on the rules of the commission. It highlights the many achievements of those who have dedicated their lives to protecting the country. Serves as an advisory body to the Council regarding the well-being of military veterans. Provides recommendations pertaining to the affairs of veterans. Evaluates and recommends programs, policies and practices to assist veterans and acts as a central clearinghouse for information, programs and services relating to veterans. One of our objectives. Oh, I'm sorry. The original ordinance ordinance requires that at least four of the nine commissioners be veterans. One from each council district is the nine. We have seven out of nine commissioners are veterans. One of our objectives to act as a central clearinghouse for information, programs and services relating to veterans. Towards this end, we created a Facebook group page where we post on the average five times a week. So the that's just a snapshot of the the cover page and the URL is at the top. So I invite you to be one of the 200 plus followers that we have. Another one of our objectives is to provide recommendations pertaining to the affairs of veterans residing within our city. Towards this end, we've worked with other city departments such as Long Beach Fire. We provided input on the impact of 4th of July fireworks on veterans with PTSD and collaborated on the social media campaign developed around this issue. So this is an example of one of the messages. City Council, as you know, tests the commission with developing a strategic plan that includes programs and policies designed to assist veterans in multiple capacities and build stronger connections between local veterans and the community. What does the commission recommend that the city do to serve and support veterans over the next 2 to 3 years? The plan's recommendations must be thoroughly vetted, supported by data and well-developed, so they provide specific action plans to achieve strategic goals and objectives. The Commission developed temporary working goals based on their insights and expertize as a starting point. Goal one Economic Development Increase veteran employment by advising the City Council on ways to increase transitional employment opportunities, patronage of veteran owned businesses and private business ownership for veterans. Goal two Awareness and Recognition Increase awareness and recognition of all Long Beach Veterans, Service members and their families by advising the City Council on ways to regularly celebrate and recognize our veterans. Goal three Information Resources and Social Support to serve as a clearinghouse for information pertaining to resources, services and social support available to veterans in the Long Beach area. In collaboration with the city and and by advising the City Council, go for underrepresented groups. Identify and raise awareness of underrepresented veteran populations by advising the City Council about groups that may not identify as veterans and therefore may not seek assistance. So where we are now, we've developed a work plan to complete the strategic plan with existing staff collecting data. What exists on the Long Beach veterans population? What data exists on the Long Beach population already? And how do we access it? The next steps data analysis, identifying stakeholders and stakeholder interviews. And the plan is slated for release in July next summer. So I wanted to. Take a moment to invite you to the recognition ceremony for Lone Sailor. We're working with Partners of Parkes on this. It's on Saturday, October 13th, 10:10 a.m. to noon with the presentation starting at 11. The lone sailor is is in Bluff Park at Ocean and Paloma. So then I also wanted to take a moment to let you know that Long Beach Veterans Affairs Commission will also be participating in the 21st annual Veterans Day parade. We invite you to the Veterans Day Parade and Festival, which kicks off at 10 a.m. on Atlantic Avenue in North Long Beach. So the Long Beach Veterans Affairs Commission meets on the second Wednesday of the month at 5 p.m. at the Health Department's main building on Grand Avenue. Thank you, honorable Mayor and Council members for the opportunity to provide this update on the Veterans Affairs Commission. This concludes my presentation and I'm now open for questions. Thank you very much for that presentation. That was great. And I know that we have some of our commissioners here as well. And I just wanted to also thank them for their incredible work on the Commission of Councilor Richardson. Oh, I echo that. Congratulations. We want to make sure that we continue to support this commission. We. I'm really impressed at how engaged all of you have become. You've attended numerous events you were engaged in. You were there when we opened up the new veterans Fowler Plaza at Highland Park. And I look forward to getting you the resources working to get you the resources you need to present a really comprehensive, strategic plan that we can take very seriously. I applaud the work you've already done. The fact that a lot of the things you called out are in alignment with many of the things we've brought up in terms of including ensuring that veterans are included in our economic development strategies and that we continue to place a laser focus on underrepresented groups. So thank you for your hard work and I'm really proud to support you and continue the good work that you're doing. Thank you. Catherine Ashton. Thank you. Also, I second this motion. Thank you for the great report. I want to just recognize the veterans commission because this is a one of our newer commissions and you guys have really stepped up and really taking your role seriously to the point where I think, you know, they've had to say, hey, slow down a little bit, but I'm glad to see that there there's some focus of some some guidance. I speak regularly with our veterans of the commission representative for the eighth District, Sylvia Contreras, her and her husband. I know they're very, very involved. You continue to have my support. And like I said, I'm very encouraged by this report here and keep up the great work. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez. I just want to say thank you as well. I come from a long line of veterans and my family. Also being I was married to a marine for that went to Iraq. So a lot of people don't know that about me, but that is really I just really love this commission and all that it's done. What I'm specifically appreciative of is the data analysis portion. And so we're having discussions about digital inclusion. And I would love, as were growing that discussion and including more members, I would love to have one of the members of the Commission come to the digital inclusion discussions to talk about from your angle, what would make that initiative much better. So thank you for your service, your service not to just the city but the country as well. Thank you. Councilor Pearce. I want to echo the same appreciation for service, appreciation for staff. I know our commission sometimes it depends on how much staff energy and how much time and how the commission works together. And this is one of the commissions that I think everyone that's invested in it, including the council members in North Long Beach, have done a great job on. So thank you very much. I look forward to continue to work. I'm particularly excited about the job opportunities in the transitional piece, so let me know how I can help you all. Thank you. I'm closing the council comments. Any other public comment on this? Sorry. And please come forward so we can move on. Go ahead, sir. Thank you very much. When I was with the five state lawmakers. The state doesn't do a whole lot in terms of veterans. That's usually the feds or the county. And so very much I commend the city, commend the commissioners and the sponsor for this. One of the things that is one of your points is the economy. There are 3 million who have served in uniform in the last 20 years in open war. And in light of those 3 million people, a lot of businesses are aggressively pursuing employees who are veterans. Starbucks, if you're going to go to Starbucks, they are hiring 25,000. Staff personnel who are in have been in uniform. So when you find businesses who do encourage military service personnel. Absolutely. You can engage that. This was the capital of the Pacific fleet for almost 80 years. The presence of Mr. Roosevelt as the head of the Navy in World War One and as president in World War Two, does remind that, honey, that Long Beach is at the center of the military status of this nation. So absolutely not only do you have jobs that can be encouraged, but if you had a V to the letter B and B, your bed and breakfast can be VB and beans. You can lead the nation by the creation of an encouraged growth of tourism with veterans, with VB and B you can tell the local businesses. Why don't you give some discounts to veterans coming over? Why don't you give some lower costs for rooms? Why don't you give some housing that is for a month? Why don't you give some meals that are for free? VB And BS is something that can be a tourism growth for this city. Thank you, sir. Please cast your votes, members. Motion carries. Thank you. So I want to let me hear. If I call your name, please line up so we can make this expeditious sampler, this Bill Shorten and just trying to get folks that are in different groups. So let me start with Bill.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the lease of City property; authorizing the Director of Finance and Administrative Services or the Director’s designee to execute a 99 year lease agreement with Africatown Community Land Trust for former Fire Station 6 located at 101 23rd Ave, Seattle, WA 98122, for use as the William Grose Center for Cultural Innovation to provide for culturally responsive services that support the African-American community in the Central Area to create pathways to self-determination, and for future development and expanded activation of the property as described in the lease.

SeattleCityCouncil_11022020_CB 119905

Thank you. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the court please affixed my signature to the legislation committee reports of the City Council. Item one Will the clerk please read item one into the record? And then one counts. About 119905 fell into the lease of city property authorizing the Director of Finance, Administrative Services or the directors designee to execute a 99 year lease agreement with Africa. Town Community Land Trust for Former Fire Station six, located at 101 23rd Avenue. Seattle, Washington. 981224. The use as the William GROSS Center for Cultural Innovation to provide for culturally responsive services, to support the African American community and the central area, to create pathways to self-determination and for future development and expanded activation of the property as described in the lease. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I need to pass Council Bill 119905. Is there a second? Second? It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Member must get it. You are the sponsor of this bill and are recognized in order to address this item. Thank you very much, Madam President. I really am excited about this and the next item on our agenda today. This legislation and the following one come to the Council after many years of advocacy from members in the community. We recognize the long wait that these organizations have gone through and their strong advocacy and their continued commitment to making sure that the plans for these two areas and these two sites continue to move forward. We both through this council and previous councils, have worked with them and and helped to advance this legislation in front of us , recognizing the opportunity that this place provides for us to create a true community space. We do recognize that during budget deliberations, we don't often take up additional pieces of legislation. But given the long wait that these organizations have gone through, it's an incredible opportunity and privilege for us to be able to move this forward today. I want to thank the council president who's been working with us to carve out time during both the council briefing to make sure that both pieces of legislation had the time and the opportunity to provide the historical context to it, and also to make sure that we got these items added to the agenda. This is an incredibly important opportunity for us to both highlight the work that's gone into these efforts, but also to have public recognition for the long advocacy that it took to get here. Last week, we heard from representatives from Africa, town, community, land trusts one worry from flourish financial and please come again about what this site will mean, particularly for black youth in the neighborhood named after the entrepreneur, the building developer of the site of the Central District, William GROSS. This center would invest in education, skills and job opportunities for community members, particularly youth serving as a hub for innovation already taking place in the Central District. This community asset will help close the gap we are already seeing in Seattle where there is an astronomical economic growth that is not resulting in all communities benefiting. In fact, economic disparities have grown, particularly in Seattle's black, indigenous and people of color communities. The opportunity to provide support through Africa, town, community, land trust. And from this former site, which was Fire Station six for the use of William Grove Center for Cultural Innovation, couldn't come fast enough and really excited about the vote today. Thank you, Councilmember Muscat, for those comments. And I see that comes more. Salon also has her hands up. And colleagues, for those of you who may also want to make comments, please do let me know because first one, please. Thank you, President Gonzalez. I am, of course, very happy to be voting yes on this and finally voting on the legislation, leasing the former fire station six to Africa down. Community organizers have been demanding this for years and this legislation has long been overdue. In a sense, today we are celebrating the property transfers of the former fire station six and in the upcoming item, the central into community control. After years of organizing and the efforts of hundreds of community members. And at the same time, we have to ask why does it take years? And in the case of the central over a decade to get a central single building into. Permanent community needs. Why did the mayor said on this legislation for almost three years of our term and why did she finally agreed to move on it now? Ultimately, I believe that we would not have had this legislation in front of us had it not been for the tremendous impact of the Justice for George Floyd movement all around the world, tens of millions of people took to the streets in multiracial protests against police violence. In fact, just in the United States, we had over 26 million show up. But also in opposition to the crushing neglect and underinvestment in our black and brown communities by the political establishment in cities around the country and around the country, the political establishment have, under the pressure of that movement, conceded real community investment, which is a victory for the movement even, and however small they are very important nonetheless. But at the end of the day, the political establishment is not conceded. It's power in any real sense in city after city. The police have not been defunded by 50%. Or do you find it at all? In reality, although some small changes have been made in different cities, which is also important. But they but we have not seen the scale of affordable housing that our community needs, communities need. And what we see is political establishments making the smallest investments that they can get away with in the face of community pressure. It is excellent that these property transfers are going through. It's a testament to the organizing of Africa Down and the Black Lives Matter movement as a whole. And while welcoming this development, we also should remember that Africa donors proposed to develop a whole city block in the heart of the Central District, at the site of the former Cairo Center, to provide a full square block of affordable housing to help prevent and reverse the displacement of working class black people from the central area. And as of now, only Councilmember Morales has supported the amendment from my office to the budget amendment from my office to make sure that this project is fully funded by the city. And I really urge all council members to support this because it should not take another five, ten or 15 years for them to win that project as well, because we know that affordable housing is in dire crisis and whatever investments we can make this year, we should make them, especially in the face of the pandemic. So again, I'm happy to vote yes and will continue to support African Downs community development in the budget vote later this month. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilmember Salon. Any other comments on the bill? A hearing and seeing none. Will the court please call the role on the passage of the Bill Herbold. Yes. Juarez. Hi, Louis. I. Morales. Yes. Mosquera. Yes. Peterson Yes. Sergeant. Strauss. Yes. President Gonzalez. High. Nine in favor. None opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation? Item number two Will the court please read agenda item two into the record? Agenda Item two. Countable.

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Downtown Long Beach Associates (DLBA) to identify methods and estimated costs for activating the section of Victory Park adjacent to the former Jergins Building Property, including but not limited to temporary pop-up retail, tourist, wayfinding, historical and arts-based installations; and Request City Manager to also explore ideas and estimated costs of activating the parking lot at Seaside Way and Pine Avenue (100 East Ocean Boulevard) with DLBA.

LongBeachCC_06022015_15-0497

Communication from Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Recommendation to request the City Manager to work with the DLP to identify methods and estimated costs for activating the section of Victory Park adjacent to the former Jergens Building property, and also explore ideas and estimated costs of activating the parking lot at 100 East Ocean Boulevard. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Many of you are familiar with the southeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ocean Boulevard with its artwork on the wall. This portion of Victory Park has been closed off to the public for decades, which is a shame, as many of you have driven by given the potential for this corner to serve as a focal point for the city and for downtown, an innovative space that inspires tourists, conventioneers and residents to cross the great divide of Ocean Boulevard. Councilmember Gonzales and I believe we have an opportunity here to bring a temporary use to the site that breaks down the visual and psychological barriers to pedestrians. We have thought about it for probably years and decades. How to make ocean not seem so, so large, so wide and and so untenable. The debate, which I know Mr. Craig Cogen is here tonight, is willing is a willing partner dedicated to revitalizing public spaces and improving pedestrian activity. Each of you receive Dove's recent report. Each of you council members discussing the opportunities for temporary pop up retail at the corner. I thought April Economies did a fantastic job of showing us what's possible in the way of activation for this important corner. So what we'd like to see is the Dolby and city staff exploring those possibilities and bringing them back with cost estimates. From there we can discuss all the funding options available for that space. And with that, I'd appreciate your support. Councilmember Gonzalez. Yes. I want to thank you, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, for bringing this forward. I think it is very important that we are looking at this. The areas revision, revisioning is such a large piece of the Renaissance currently happening along Ocean and Pine Avenue in the downtown and a smooth transition in to our convention center. And nightlife is vital for tourists and employees, as well as locals who benefit greatly from continued growth in downtown the part of downtown Long Beach. This part has such a legacy and history, something that can be that can continue to be built upon and restructured in a modern, well-planned way. And working with the deal, Bay, will be a positive transition for the area. I know Council District One has worked on many projects with you all and we're excited to move forward with this item. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I too am very excited about this. And even though studies cost money, I think this is a worthy thing for staff to study because I think this is a great item that will enrich and activate this area and give us some opportunities. So understanding that the staff is going to have to go back and come up with some alternatives for us, I think it's a very worthy investment in our city. And I want to thank my council colleagues who worked diligently to get it to this point. So thank you very much. Councilmember Urunga. I couldn't help it. I knew the opportunities there. Now, this is a worthwhile study. It did stop it. Going to come back with a real solution to a blighted area that we need to fix this. I totally support. I want to thank the council members who brought this forward because it's about time we address that block and that area. It is a very important aspect of what we want downtown to look like, and I'm looking forward to see how much we're going to spend on that corner. But as far as a previous subject, I know it's going to come back expensive and I know I'm going to vote it down. So anyway, thank you. So that's councilmember. You're on his way of saying I've left that corner blighted for far too long. Point taken, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address council on this item? Please come forward. State your name. Hi. My name is Ryan, ultimate executive vice president of Anderson Pacific and also chair of the Public Realm Committee for the Derby. We're very proud to be working in partnership with the city on trying to re-energize this corner. That, as many is known, has been blighted and neglected for far too long. The Public World Committee is dedicated to public improvements that really work towards the benefit of the greater good and see this as a first step in the right direction. As you all may recall, the Urban Institute was commissioned by the DLB to come in to study the ways that we could improve the urban fabric of the community . And this is one of the recommendations that came out in terms of reengaging this corner and in bringing people back into the fold who are appreciative that part of our investment as well was in working towards funding this report by April kind of meetings that that demonstrated, I think, a very pragmatic approach to the solutions on this corner, which we do think will always. Work towards providing economic. Benefit. I speak more to the tourism aspects of this and obviously providing open space is much needed in the city. So I want to thank Councilmember Gonzales Vice Mayor Al Lowenthal for their stewardship in this and look forward to the future partnership together. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Is there any other member of the public that wishes to address the council on this item? Item 15? I also wanted to mention that this is an investment in this corner. I know this is a very prime corner, and it's one of those last unfinished areas that I think will complete our efforts in the downtown. Although it's an open canvas, it's going to be very important. Part of the pop up strategy is to show potential to really market that corner in a way that having just an open space doesn't quite do. So I appreciate the support for the investment and really the creativity that the DBA and the Urban Land Institute and others have brought forward and said that it's possible. It is possible and we can use it as a flex space and change it from time to time, depending on what the city and residents and stakeholders would like to see there. With that council members, please cast your vote. Motion carries nine zero. Thank you. Item 25.

AN ORDINANCE relating to taxation; delaying the effective date of the heating oil tax on heating oil service providers under Chapter 5.47 of the Seattle Municipal Code; and delaying the date of the Office of Sustainability and Environment’s first annual heating oil tax program status report.

SeattleCityCouncil_07192021_CB 120123

Agenda Item one. Council Bill 120123. Relating to taxation. Delaying the effective date of. Heating oil tax on heating oil. Service providers under Chapter. 5.470 Municipal Code. And delaying the date of. The Office of Sustainability Environment's. First annual Heating Oil Tax. Program Status. Report. Thank you so much. I moved past council bill 1 to 0 one two, three. Is there a second? I can. Thank you so much. It's been Ed to pass the bill. I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Morales, who is the sponsor of this bill to address the item. Thank you. Council President So this bill would delay the effective date of the heating oil tax on heating oil service providers. Colleagues may remember that in response to community concerns about the impact of this tax, particularly on low and middle income households during COVID, we delayed implementation last August, delayed through 2020 September 1st, 2021. Another reason for the delay was related to Washington's pollution liability insurance agencies, new heating oil loan and grant program. We what had been discussed as a grant program last year now sounds like it might be going to a loan program. And so replacing these oil takes can cost tens of thousands of dollars. And for low income families, this is a real challenge, no matter how eager they may be to participate in a conversion. So June 1st of this year, the Office of Sustainability in the Environment provided an update to the heating oil loan program and based on feedback from from customers and others. And because the those final rules have not yet been put in place, OAC is proposing that we delay another six months before this tax becomes in effect. So that is the bill that's before you. I do want to thank members of Teamsters 174 and other labor partners who've contacted me about this bill. Many of their members would themselves be subject to this and are frankly nervous about the impacts of having to, you know, have pay the tax that would be passed on to them and also just bear the cost of making these kinds of conversions right now without assurance about the kind of support that they would be willing to get. So they're supportive of this delay while we assess other funding streams and while we wait for the final rule changes from clear. So that is what's before us today. And I'm recommending passage. If you have someone on our list for that description, are there any additional comments on the bill? Councilmember members, please. Thank you. I will be voting yes on this legislation to delay the implementation of the heating oil tax that Durkan first proposed a year and a half ago. The climate emergency is an existential threat to all of humanity, and we must have a serious and internationalist approach to ending greenhouse gas emissions. And in this case, unfortunately, the heating oil tax is not a serious approach. Yes, heating oil is a terrible fuel. But the reality is people in Seattle do not need a tax to motivate them to switch away from heating oil. Heating oil is expensive, dirty and inconvenient. And the main reason people still use oil burning heaters in Seattle is when they are simply unable to afford to switch to something better. Ideally electricity. My office discussed between 50 Seattle and they confirmed that from their outreach. They found that it is overwhelmingly poor and working class households that have oil heaters and people are switching to other types of heaters whenever they have the means to do so. Ultimately, that means that mail Durkin's proposed climate solution is yet another regressive tax, which is not a surprise. This is very dangerous. Not only does the tax have a very small potential impact on the climate positive impact to deal with the climate crisis. It also adds to the false narrative of blaming consumers and ordinary people for the climate emergency, which lets the big businesses responsible for 90% of greenhouse gas emissions off the hook. We need the opposite. We need we need measures that will actually change the way corporations are functioning. And ultimately, what we need is a militant climate justice movement nationwide and internationally that can take fossil fuel companies into democratic public ownership. We also need to fight for policies on the way to achieving all of those larger goals, which are frankly, urgently needed. That is why the Amazon tax movement fought to tax big businesses to fund the Green New Deal, for Seattle, to make funding available for people to retrofit their homes, for weatherization, and to get away from fossil fuels. And the big business taxes we won include a substantial 20 million climate infrastructure investment paid for by taxes on polluting big businesses, not on working people. Of course, $20 million is far less than is needed because the Amazon tax will significantly reduce when it was rebranded as Jumpstart in an attempt to minimize the essential impact of the grassroots movement. If climate organizers are motivated to fight to increase the Amazon tax next year, to expand the investments for dealing with the climate crisis, and we should absolutely be fighting for that. My office will obviously be standing with them. The city also needs to support the Stop the money pipeline movement, demand to boycott the financial institutions and insurance companies that fund fossil fuel infrastructure like tar sands pipeline. This is an excellent example of policies that we need to do in the here and now. My office as chair of the Sustainability and Renters Rights Committee is preparing legislation to empower the Green New Deal Oversight Board to review and rank financial institutions and insurance companies applying for City of Seattle grants. It is big business and the super rich that control the infrastructure of our society under capitalism. And we must build the movement to make them pay for the infrastructure to end this crisis. I'll be voting yes on this vote. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any additional comments on the bill? I don't see any other hands raised customer or moralist. Anything else to add before we call? The. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Well, the piece called a roll on the passage of the. Strauss. Yes. Herbals. Yes. Suarez. I. Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Most gather by Petersen. I so want. Yes. Thank Council President Gonzalez. High nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign. It will please affixed my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Well, the clerk please read the short title of item two into the record.

Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending Alameda Municipal Code Chapter 30 (Zoning Ordinance) to Streamline Design Review for Small Residential Additions, Window Replacements, and Green Roofs, Update Work/Live Ordinance Requirements, Update Lot Line Adjustment Procedures, and Make Other Miscellaneous Administrative, Technical, and Clarifying Amendments, as Recommended by the Planning Board. (Planning and Building 481005)

AlamedaCC_11052019_2019-7374

Public Hearing to consider rejection of ordinance amending the Alameda Principal Code Chapter three Zoning Ordinance to Streamline Design Review for small residential additions, window replacements and green roofs. Update the work live ordinance requirements. Update the lot line adjustment procedures and make other miscellaneous administrative, technical and clarifying amendments as recommended by the Planning Board. Hello, Mr. Tie. Yes, me again. Thank you, Madam May. Or members of the Council. So this package of zoning text amendments, we are amending chapter 30 of the aluminum code, which is the zoning ordinance. What it does is it would further our climate action goals and as well as some other goals and priorities in the city to reduce costs for housing maintenance in the city of Alameda. It would encourage job growth as well as bring our standards consistent with leaders state requirements. There are three areas that we are addressing with this package of zoning amendments. The first are design review streamlining measures. We are streamlining window replacements. This would include energy efficient windows. Those would be exempt from the zoning review. So no more public hearings. Public notices. Similarly, small additions. We were allowing. Those that review. Process to be streamlined as well as green or vegetated roofs. So those have climate benefits. With regard to the work live studios, we are proposing to expand to locations in the city where they are allowed currently work. Live studios are limited to areas in Alameda Point and the Northern Waterfront. We are expanding that possibility to all commercial zones. We are also making revisions to the size, limitations or requirements for work live studios in order to get more smaller offices. We we've done a survey that kind of tells us that this small business space is needed in the city. And so. That effort is consistent with the. Economic development strategy plan. Last but not least, we are proposing changes to the property lot line adjustment process. That ordinance hasn't been updated in 30 years, so we are simply making updates to reflect best practices and to comply with current state law. So I'm available. Any questions and do we have public speakers on this item? Okay. And so do we have any clarifying questions on the staff report or comment on that discussion or. Yeah. Okay. So that's the luncheon to discussion VICE. We're not quite very short. I wanted to appreciate all of this again by listening the planning board meeting. They did amazing work on this. I appreciated the in terms of the development standards, the switch in parking, and I just wanted to flag and actually ask my council members what they thought about can't get into it's not agenda has been in terms of just discreet discretion if perhaps in the same way that we're changing parking requirements here if we could ask staff to to look at the city parking requirements citywide for the same reasons so they're having a big impact on our and I think are I time it time time is now to to have this conversation so anyway with I checked in with the city attorney he said that giving that direction would be perfectly acceptable tonight. So I'm ready to move this forward. But I also like to move it forward with just discreet discretion for staff to look at it, look at look at how we might make similar just to. Bring it back to us. So. Yes, right. Okay. And you know, I realize I had a question on the staff report, Mr. Cherry. So on page three and I support this. But the the amendment would reinforce work live studios as commercial spaces and they could essentially be located in all commercial manufacturing and mixed use zoning districts. And the restriction on work with buildings to existing work, with studios to existing buildings will also be eliminated. My question is, and again, I think this is a good thing. We need more housing and we need more. This has been pointed out in the staff report. This is a way to help improve our jobs, housing balance. And and if you live and work in the same place, you don't have to commute. But how how do we take into consideration the impact on schools if work lives studios include significant numbers of families with children because I know some do already and it means how does that is that the school district's problem? How do we how do we approach that? Yeah. So kind of the broader answer would be I think there are state laws that say that if there is development in local city, uh, we, the school fees basically take addresses the demand on school so that responsibility isn't necessarily the city's burden. But specifically with this issue work live studios there were other cities call these live work the reason why Alameda calls and work live is the emphasis on work therefore. Strict limitations are on the living portions. And with these amendments that we're doing today, we're further reinforcing that these are work spaces. And as sort of, you know, for maybe one or two individuals to live comfortably in, not really intended to big families. I mean, these are really studio spaces. So I would just say, to be realistic, I mean, there is a move toward tiny homes, you know, housing people and a much smaller footprint. And so I don't think we can pretend that some children might be a part of these households. So that absolutely is true. But in that in those cases, they're the work live studio and the occupants would have to keep a valid business license. It could it could happen. But the restrictions or requirements that we have in place are really catered toward people running businesses out of these places. So many of you. Thank you. Councilmember Odessa, thank you. I don't think that's correct, actually. I think when this ordinance was created, the emphasis was on work, not live. Yes. And the way in which that emphasis was put into life was by having a standard of 101,000 square feet of work space. So what you're doing here is you're reducing the standard of 1000 square feet of workspace to 500 square feet of work space. And. And that was that was the key issue back in 2003 when we dealt with this issue. And we're also. Voting against this back then and. We're also adjusting. This today. So I finish his comments first. I think if someone wants to reduce their work area from the current 1000 square feet standard of 500, they can get a special use permit or a variance or whatever it is. Right. They don't need we don't need to change the rules. Right. They could conceivably. If if we didn't. Yes. But what we are doing in terms of adjusting the minimum work requirement, workspace requirement to 500 is we're also adjusting the proportion of the living space so that if you do propose a 500 square foot work live studio, you will have a much smaller 30% living area. But that would also be legal. It would be a nice micro area and people can, you know. So you're really turning this into from work, live to live work. So and frankly, I think this goes against measure and that was the heart of the discussion as to why I voted against it in 2003. Because now when you make it live work, you're basically making a multi-family residential and. That's just my opinion. Thank you for sharing your opinion, Councilman Brody. I mean, I have a different opinion. I would like it to be live work, and I don't think it goes that far enough. Instead of work live, because we had this discussion with was it building eight over at that Alameda point. But I appreciate all the work you guys have done to bring us to this. I wish we could have gone further. But, you know. Maybe next time. As you come. It's all right. And I will just say that I spent all of yesterday in Sacramento at a policy meeting on addressing our state's housing crisis, and we just can't provide more housing fast enough for our residents and their ability to create jobs. And and things change. Times change in the in the intervening years since this first came about and some of you may remember it was rhythmic that wanted to go into the old clamp swing building and there was such an outcry and you know what would happen and it would turn Missouri on its head. And and it was just, you know, the start of terrible things to come and look what an amazingly successful enterprise, rhythmic, has been and has brought so many cultural offerings to our city, to our our school children, and also to visitors from outside of Alameda. And yet we placed so many restrictions on them that there haven't been very many of these work live buildings or spaces developed since then. So I you know, again, I think that changing times call for fresh looks at the way we've done things. So I'm certainly prepared to support this. Okay. Anyone else who do we want to make a motion? I made a motion early. Oh, I'm sorry. Let's get going to make it again. Okay. But I'll just I'll just point out to your point, the rhythmic that somebody was sued. Rhythmic was sued using our work live via Measure A and they lost. I mean, the the measure is the measure argument lost. So the courts have already found that this is not out of compliance with measuring. I just. Yeah. No, no, no. And I was there was a lawsuit. They found the previous ordinance. This would change that. So this this could conceivably be. I would argue that and I don't mean to, but I would argue that this actually makes it much more difficult that this is going to be house the housing the housing portions in these units become significantly smaller. 150 square feet on a 500 square foot unit is not micro-housing. That's almost inhumane housing. So we can argue and we'll see. Maybe somebody will will sue. But I don't think I, I again, I disagree with the characterization. That's fine. When I read this, I was like, holy cow, this is going to make the housing side of this much more difficult. But I think we can also rest assured that the city attorney's office has had a look at this before it it came to us. Okay. We've had a motion by the vice mayor, a second by Councilmember Vella, correct? Yes. Okay. All in favor. I oppose the motion passes 4 to 1. Thank you. All right. We move on to item six C.

Recommendation to receive Charter Commission appointments and reappointments pursuant to Section 509 of the City Charter and Section 2.03.065 of the Long Beach Municipal Code.

LongBeachCC_05202014_14-0379

Adam, 12, is communication from the Office of Mayor Bob Foster with the recommendation to receive the Charter Commission appointment and reappointment pursuant to Section 509 of the City Charter and Section 2.6 moved 3/2. Moved there by way of explanation. The Police Citizen's Police Complaint Commission has one new appointee and three reappoint these and they have an awful big workload. That's why I'm doing this. A little out of order. It does require two votes. The first is to move the appointments to the council from the Civil Service Committee. I think that's correct. Mr. part. You want to describe this. Mayor. Thank you. The pursuant to the language municipal code, these appointments need to be reviewed prior to placing on the council agenda by the Personnel and Civil Service Committee. That action did not happen, and the Council has the authority to waive at its discretion that requirement. So the first motion would be to waive the requirement to present it to the personnel in civil service. So moved, moving, seconded and any member of the public to address council on that motion. Seeing the members cast your votes on that motion. Motion carries eight votes. And secondly, we would we would vote on the nominees. The way I'm buying them is here. And she's the nominee to fill the about one year left on the term at the Harbor Commission. And then there was a big baby with the first district representative. Mr. Garcia, you might want to say something about. And then three re appointees, Raul of Norway, Brian Ryder and Emmanuel Walker from the second an at large and ninth district, respectively. So. Mr. DELONG Yeah, I just want to make a comment that I'm extremely supportive of all your nominations, but in particular, Lou Ann Bynum. I've known her for a decade, and she's going to be an outstanding addition to the Harbor Commission. So thank you in advance for your service. Lujan. Thank you, Mr.. Whoever you are, Mr. Neal. And a brain cramp there for a moment. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I concur with my colleague, Mr. DeLong. I'm in complete concurrence, but I would like to acknowledge Mr. Manuel Walker, who has been a tremendous leader, and Nawaf Lone, beaten in the ninth District and commend him for his exemplary service to your community. Thank you so much, my friend. Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, I'm going to start off with congratulating and welcoming Terry. Terry has been a fantastic advocate in the Long Beach area, particularly in Wilmore and the historic area. So we look forward to having you on board and thank you for your for your service and for serving the city of Long Beach. I also want to add my my remarks also to Luann. I think, Luann, you and I have known each other for probably 15, 20 years or so. And it's been a pleasure to work with you at Lombard City College as colleagues and as as friends as well. And so I welcome you to the the Port of Parma commissioners. You could do a fantastic job. The mayor made a good choice. And so good luck because a lot of work to do. Mr. Johnson. Well, thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank all the nominees for your service. You know, we've said it before, but really couldn't do the work of the city without people like you willing to step up and volunteer. So I want to thank you in advance. I would like to. Mayor, if it were okay, just maybe invite Ms.. Bynum up to say a few words. And I just had a one question I want to answer. Yeah. I think one thing we've done very well over the city or at the port last few years is reach out to the community, particularly the west side. And I just wanted to hear from his Bynum. I know you've had already done a lot outreach at Lumbee City College, but your thoughts on how because the port is so tremendously important from economic development perspective, but also because of the effects, the negative effects on the West Side, what your thoughts are in terms of reaching out to that community and and having kind of a sustained dialog over the next few years. Thank you. First of all, I want to thank Mayor Foster and all of you for this consideration. I consider an honor. I think it's an awesome responsibility to be involved with the harbor and be a harbor commissioner. But your question is, is right on the harbor and the port is a major economic engine in this community, and there's a lot of jobs tied to it. It's jobs creation. It's job retention. I think our future in terms of where jobs are going is tied as well to the port and advanced transportation. But having said that, the port is also doesn't operate in a vacuum. It operates with the city of Long Beach, and it's tied to the residents in our community. And I applaud the work that the port and the commissioners have done in the past to take leadership to mitigate the environmental concerns that our our citizens have to deal with. And I would anticipate I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive. I think they can be done together and I think they can be done. Both of them, you know, to make sure the port's competitive at the same time ensure that our citizens have clean, healthy environment and are able to to coexist well with the port and the means for both of them. I want to thank you for for the answer and very excited to see your service. And I would invite you to know when you have a chance to sit down some of the West Siders and I can help facilitate that. And I think we've done some great things in the past. The West Side plan is one thing you may have heard about that I think really creates the conditions for a win win, that the poor can grow and succeed in the neighborhoods and get better at the same time. Just like you talked, I don't think we need to have a zero sum game. So thank you for being who was willing to serve and I look forward to working with you in the coming years. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Mr. Neal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I would also like to I don't see Mr. Northey in the audience, but I would like to publicly commend him as well. But prior to him moving into District two. He was a vital asset in District nine, serving on the Human Rights Commission. And I would like to acknowledge his service to the city as well. Thank you for doing that, Mr. Neal. He is all over the place and he's a he's a great citizen to have in this city. He's always willing to help. And I'm glad to bring that because I have all the nominees stand up, please. If you're here, I. I want to publicly thank you for your willingness to serve me. A lot of people don't realize this. It is time consuming and a lot of energy to serve on commissions. These two in particular take a lot of time. And I want to thank you for being civically responsible, willing to give your time for the betterment of the community that we could not do this without you. So thank you very much in advance for your service. Appreciate. We have a motion and a second. Any comment on this? This motion? My members cast your votes on the nominees. It's. And this motion is to appoint the nominees. That is. Correct. We already dealt with this as the appointment. Motion carries eight votes. Thank. Thank you, members. Congratulations to you all and thank you again for your service. Item 20 clerical read. Item 20 is a report from the Long Beach Airport and the city manager with the recommendation to authorize the city manager to execute documents for a new lease with cinema aircraft. Executive Transportation for property located at 4301 Douglas Drive in Long Beach.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP DV14-034 and award a contract to e-Plan, Inc., dba e-PlanSoft, of Los Angeles, CA, for $406,320, for providing an Electronic Plan Check System, 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_02102015_15-0108

Thank you. Please. Next item. Vice Mayor, would you mind just doing a couple of these for me? Thanks. Item six. Items. Item six Report from Development Services and Financial Management. Recommendation to Adopt Specifications and Award of contract to EA. Plan for 406,000 for providing an electronic plan. Check System City Wide. All right. There's been a motion by Councilmember Richardson and seconded by Councilmember Andrews. Any member of the public that wished to address council on item six. Councilmember Urunga. Yes. Thank you. I notice here if this is a a new system that's going to be coming in, I'm guessing not too far off of a guess that there are some issues presented with the current system. And I'm hoping that the reason, the purpose of this coming through to us is that there's going to be a change in turnaround times or that it would be a cost saving to the mayor council. I'm going to turn it over to Amy, but this does not reflect. An issue with our current system. This is a huge innovation that takes us into the 21st century to. Allow. Architects and folk to use the Internet and get to us digitally. So, Amy, if you could tell us what we're getting. Yes, sir, that's correct. Madam Vice Mayor, members of the city council, this is not replacing an existing system. This is actually an augmentation to our services where we will, as Mr. West said, create essentially a portal through our Web site where we would now now allow electronic submissions instead of hard copies of permits and plans to our planning and building department. We do believe that this will eventually increase efficiency and turnaround time so that that is something that we do expect would happen. But this is definitely cutting edge and very innovative and this is something that we've been working on with tech services for approximately two years now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. Thank you and thank you, Ms.. Borek, for for the clarification on this. I just want to just highlight that this this electronic plant check system is something that will, I think, increase efficiency in service to the residents. It is an innovation. And, you know, it shows that we actually have some good talent and some strong talent within our own ranks here at City Hall. And so I just want to compliment staff and say, job well done. Thank you. So we're very excited for this. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. And I'd like to add some comments as well. I wanted to just let staff know that I thought this was a great idea with true potential for our city staff. And as Ms.. Burdick said, it's not something new but will contribute to our goal of being a 24 hour city. And I do have one question how do we plan on letting our architects and contractors know about the service? We actually have been beta testing this with some of our architects already, so they have been working with us to work some kinks out. We got basically a six month trial run of software that allowed us to beta test it with some folks to work out some kinks. And we did all of that before we did the RFP so that we knew specifically what we were going to be asking for. So once we get this in place and it speaks to our existing system, we will then hold training for the architecture and contractor community, which is something that we do when we roll out new initiatives. Thank you. Councilmember Richardson. Thanks, Vice Mayor, and thank you for bringing up the outreach. That's what my question was going to be. So I'll just take this opportunity to say great work. I think this is going to go a long way in terms of helping us as council offices to respond to our own communities about projects that might be taking place in our communities. So there's a wide range of benefits to having this stuff online. To have an on demand statistics and numbers and statuses of where we are in the process. So congratulations and keep up the good work. Great. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I want to thank the department services department in making this great step forward. I think that I've heard positive impact on your feedback from the local businesses. Anything we can do to automate and take things online and give people a more customer focused experience at City Hall is a big part of being the business friendly city that we know we are. Thank you. Thank you. We have a motion on the floor. Is there any public comment on the item? Seeing none. Please cast your votes. Motion carries seven zero. Thank you. Next item, Madam Clerk.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission; authorizing the Executive Director to execute an agreement with the City of Kirkland for renewing an independent ethics program for the City of Kirkland; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_06062016_CB 118702

To read it into the record? Yes. Agenda. Agenda item number eight cancel 118702 relating to the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission authorizing the executive director to execute an agreement with the City of Kirkland for renewing an independent ethics program for the City of Kirkland and ratifying confirming certain prior acts. The committee recommends the bill pass. Councilmember Gonzalez. Now it's my turn. Okay. This is Council Bill 118702. It's an ordinance that is submitted to us and proposed to us by the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission. I we discussed this during committee hearing this morning. It is essentially an official authorization for the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission to enter into an hourly based contract with the City of Kirkland on an as needed basis to provide the City of Kirkland with ethics, advice and investigations on ethics complaints. This is a renewal of the contract that was originally instituted in 2011. The legislation as drafted would not require the Senate Ethics and Elections Commission to come back to the Council for approval in the future. And the Education, Equity and Governance Committee recommends that the bill pass. Are there any comments? He's called the role on the passage of the bill. O'Brien so want extra. Burgess Gonzalez I. Johnson Suarez President Herbold. I hate in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Item nine Agenda Item Down Council. Bill 118 694 relating to hearing some filing fees amending section 3.02. 125 Civil Code to add exceptions for cases brought to enforce Chapter 14.07. Chapter 6.500, Chapter 14.19 and Chapter 14.20. The committee recommends the bill passed.

AN ORDINANCE relating to appropriations for the Human Services Department; approving a spending plan; amending Ordinance 126237, which adopted the 2021 Budget; lifting a proviso; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_03152021_CB 120011

Agenda item eight Counts Bill 120011 relating to appropriations for the Human Services Department approving a spending plan and may be ordinance 126 237, which adopted the 2021 budget legend, proviso and Red Line confirming certain prior acts. The committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you so much, Councilmember Herbold. You are the chair of this committee, and I'm going to go and hand it back over to you and provide us the report on this. Fantastic. Thank you so much. First, just a little bit of process background. Members of the Public Safety and Human Services Committee probably remember that Human Services Director how and how and her name presented a deep overview on this work at the January 26th Committee meeting. And following that presentation, I'll responded more fully to questions that were developed in a memo from committee members and shared on February 18th, Human Services Department released the four proposals related to this funding on March 1st, and this request for proposals is available on the Human Services Department Funding Opportunity Web page. And on March 4th, my office sent out to committee members the central staff memo describing the legislation and the memo from how with more details about the work leading up to and creating RFP public safety. And the Services Committee members voted the legislation out of committee unanimously last week. And just to talk a little bit about what the legislation is all about. Last year during the budget process, we responded calls from community to invest in alternatives to policing and made an effort to to forward funding that we had dedicated during the summer rebalancing process. So as we now observe one year anniversary since the death of Breonna Taylor at the hands of police, it's clear that these calls must be heeded and that this work is as urgent now as it was last year. City Council answered the call by creating 16 million to invest in community led organizations that are creating community safety on the ground every day in Seattle. And last year, the Human Services Department moved quickly to award 4 million of the $16 million to the Seattle Community Safety Initiative and says these are funds that are working to build community safety hubs and wraparound services in three Seattle neighborhoods under the leadership of community passageways. We then collectively urging the executive to expedite its portion of announcement. Our community has been waiting to receive this investment since Council first voted to approve it last summer. Legislation before the Council today lifts a proviso on the funds, which requires the Council an ordinance, a spend plan organized within the intercept model submitted by the Human Services Department of Safety and Human Services Committee members. Her station from the Human Services Department on that plan last week and unanimously voted the legislation out of committee. The new investment will bring together a court four organizations dedicated to reimagining how safety can be achieved in Seattle and the resources they need to lead the way in creating safety in our city. This is exactly the kind of investment recommended in a recent report. The 40 members of the National Commission for the Criminal Justice System that increased violence and offenses as the country. It will move the city's community safety strategy towards a public health centered harm reduction model of restorative justice and crime prevention while ameliorating harm caused by the criminal legal system. The. Thank you so much, Councilmember Herbold, for those comments. Are there any additional comments on the bill? Hearing no additional comments on the bill. Will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of Council Bill 120011. Lewis. Yes. Morales. As Macheda. I. Peterson? Yes. So what? Council member. So what? Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbold. Yes. Suarez. President Gonzalez I in favor and opposed. The bill passes and the terrible sign it will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read items nine through 12 into the record?

A RESOLUTION setting the public hearing on the petition of Grand Street Commons LLC for the vacation of the alley in Block 14, Jos C. Kinnear’s Addition to The City of Seattle in the block bounded by 23rd Avenue South, South Grand Street, 22nd Avenue South, and South Holgate Street in the North Rainier/Mt. Baker Hub Urban Village area of Seattle, according to Chapter 35.79 of the Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 15.62 of the Seattle Municipal Code, and Clerk File 314459.

SeattleCityCouncil_10042021_Res 32020

Agenda Item three Resolution 32020 Setting a public hearing on the petition of Grand Street Comments LLC for the vacation of the Alien Black 14 Jesse Canaries Edition. Thank you so much. I need to adopt resolution 32020. Is there a second? Second? It's been moved and seconded to adopt the resolution. I'm going to hand over to Councilmember Peterson, who's the sponsor of this item, to address it. Thank you. Council President colleagues. Resolution 32020 simply sets the date for a public hearing on whether to vacate a city owned alley to benefit a proposed affordable housing project called Grande Street Commons, located in the Mount Baker neighborhood. All street vacations go through the transportation committee, but due to budget season, this public hearing would take place at a full city council meeting on Monday, November eight. Thank you. Are there any additional comments on the resolution? Caspir Mosquito See that you have your hand raised. Thank you very much. I want to thank Chet Petersen for their work on the Transportation Committee, always looking for opportunities to partner transportation and housing and walkable, livable Seattle. So thanks for your work on this legislation here today to move this more quickly forward. I do want to thank you for your work, to understand your work quickly to move this. As we understand, the project is ready for groundbreaking in December and needs the street vacation in place before then. And just flagging that this is one of several affordable housing projects that I've learned of recently that require street vacations from the city. While typically projects are required to compensate the city for the appraised value of the land, which can be anywhere from several hundred thousand dollars to upwards of $1,000,000. And in these cases where it isn't, where it is, where it is, an affordable housing project that is trying to be built, it's precious time and limited public resources for building affordable housing that I want to make sure is not just going back to the city to pay for the street vacations, which I think we all agree makes no sense. So I'm excited for this step today. I think that the issue overall was brought to our attention by Pastor Seales. So I also want to thank who we're working on with and working with on an affordable housing projects such as church owned sites in the Central District, and looking forward to continuing to work with Pastor Seales and the Mount Baker Community Housing Office to work on future legislation to help continue the process and making sure that street vacation fees for affordable housing projects are something that those who are developing affordable housing don't have to go through. And I see this as complementary to that larger vision. So thank you so much for your work on this, Councilmember Peterson, and look forward to working with you central staff and Erin house in my office who's been a who's been doing a lot of research to get to the bottom of of how we can avoid that sort of revolving door of funding back to the city to really just expedite creating affordable housing and utilizing our public land efficient efficiently. So just teeing up more conversations to come in the post budget conversations in December and next year. And thank you, Councilmember Peterson, for all of your work in the future. Any additional comments on the resolution? Gilmore, Hanson, Peterson. Anything else to add? Okay. I'm hearing I'm seeing a a no, thank you. So will the clerk please call the roll on the passage on the adoption of the resolution Herbold. Yes. Thank you. Juarez by. Lewis Yes. Morales. Yes. Let's get to. I. Peterson I so want. Yes. Strauss. Yes. President Gonzalez. 9 a.m. favored unopposed motion carries. The resolution is adopted. The chair will sign it. Will the quick fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the correct please read items four through eight into the record?

A RESOLUTION expressing The City of Seattle’s opposition to offshore oil and gas drilling and exploration activities, including seismic airgun blasting.

SeattleCityCouncil_09102018_Res 31834

The report on the Sustainability and Transportation Agenda Item three Resolution 31834. A resolution expressing the City of sails, opposition to offshore oil and gas drilling and exploration activities, including including seismic erosion and blasting. The committee recommends a resolution be adopted. Customer Brian. Thank you very much. It's unfortunate that we're in a world where we can't see where Seattle and smoky days in the summer because of forest fires and the pristine coasts of Washington state, which has been off limits for oil and gas exploration for a long time. Then we actually are having a discussion about is it a good thing or a bad thing to be doing offshore drilling off our coasts? But the reality we face today is that the current administration has signaled the opening up most of the coastal waters on both the Atlantic and Pacific Coast to potential offshore oil and gas exploration . And it's important for us to weigh in, to state our opinion. We think that is a bad idea for a variety of reasons. This resolution has two sections. The first states that the city of Seattle finds that offshore and gas drilling and exploration unnecessarily risks economic and ecological health, and therefore opposes any plan or legislation that encourages oil and gas development exploration offshore that would impact the residents of Washington State. The second section states that the mayor and city council firmly oppose offshore and gas drilling and exploration and call the governor Washington the state legislative delegation, the federal congressional delegation to all to take all steps possible to prohibit and prevent such actions. Further called on the Trump administration, including the Federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, to halt such activity. We've seen a lot of voices standing up saying something similar. I believe we'd be about the 75th jurisdiction in Washington state to pass such a resolution. And we've seen I've seen governors, both Democrat and Republican governors from Atlantic and Pacific states stating strong opposition to this entire proposal, including including the possibility of offshore drilling in Washington. So I would urge your support and that's it. Thank you very much, Councilman Brian, for bringing this to us. Any comments or questions or concerns on the resolution or about the vote on those in favor of adopting the resolution? Please vote i. I those opposed vote no. The motion carries, the resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it. That concludes our agenda. Is there any further business coming for the Council? If not, we stand adjourned and everyone have a great rest of the afternoon.

Findings, Conclusions, and Decision of the City Council of the City of Seattle In the Matter of the Final Assessment Roll for Local Improvement District No. 6751 (Waterfront LID) and the Appeals of Multiple Appellants.

SeattleCityCouncil_06142021_CF 314476

Agenda item 745314 476. Finance conclusions and Decision of the City Council of the City of Seattle and the matter of the final assessment role for Local Improvement District number 6751 and the appeals and multiple appellants. Thank you so much. I move the adoption of the findings, conclusions and decision of the council as presented in clerk filed 314476. Is there a second look? It's been moved and seconded to adopt the findings, conclusions and decision of the Council. I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Juarez, who's the sponsor of this item, this clerk file, and looking forward to being walked right them. Thank you. Council president colleagues, we have item seven. Eight. And nine that all have to do with the lid. So Kels question, I guess I'll just do each individual. As we call them in. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. If your comments are divided up in a way where we can do that, that'd be great. Otherwise, I can have the clerk read the next two items into the record if if you planned on addressing them all at once. Can we do that? Would you mind? Sure. Madam Clerk, can you also please read item eight and nine into the record? The short titles are fine. Thank you. The Report of the Public Assets and Native Communities Committee Agenda Item eight modifying, approving and confirming the final assessments and assessment role of Local Improvement. District Number 6751. The Committee recommended the bill pass and Agenda Item nine Council 1200 73 relating to financing public improvements within local improvement district number 6751 authorize and providing for the issuance and sale of local improvement district bonds. The committee recommended the bill pass. Great. We will take an individual vote on each of these items. But for purposes of the discussion, I consider, whereas you may now address all three items as part of your comments related to the subject matter. Take it away. Thank you. So Council, council colleagues and. President. As you know, we've been working on the list for a while. So I'm just going to go ahead and briefly touch on item seven, eight and nine, starting with, of course, agenda item seven. And that is the clerk filed the finance conclusions, the decisions, and this document is the written record on the matter of the waterfront with six. Seven, five one. The Council's adoption of the findings and conclusions decision would approve the final assessment role with the local improvement district, with revisions recommended by the hearing examiner, which also denied each of the appeals and confirmed the hearing examiner's recommendation for each. The what I should say. That is also on the clerk's file is all of the appeals, the hearing examiner's decision, the initial report, the final report, and also a chronology dating back to 2000th November 2011, I believe. So the whole history is there. So we made sure. That that was in the clerk file. For everybody's reading and recommendation and which all of our. Colleagues got as well as the public. And we had a hearing on that. The second item and item number eight, Council Bill 120072 approves the final assessment role. Again, this would establish the final assessment role for the construction of the improvements of the list numbering six, seven, five one. That's the number of the list. And the third is the bill that authorizes the city. It's the financing piece to issue bonds to pay the cost for the improvements to the waterfront lit. So Council President, this all came out of committee unanimously. And so I as the chair, I would ask. That the. City council adopt the clerk file item number seven, which is clerk file 314476. Agenda item number eight that I ask the committee or the full council to pass council bill 120072. And I ask that full council pass council bill 120073. Thank you. Council President Thank you so much. Council Members and thanks for addressing all three items at once that it's going to make it much more efficient. So colleagues. Any additional comments on any three of these items? So we're talking about items seven, eight and nine related to the live customer. Lewis, please. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to take a moment to really thank Chair Waters for her transparency and accessibility throughout the process and her committee. I am not a member of the relevant committee, but certainly this is an area of intense interest in District seven and I really appreciated the opportunity to be able to drop by the committee, be able to ask questions of central staff and and other relevant analysts on these various bills and get clarification on things that I was unclear about. Just speaking generally to the entire Waterfront Land Project, which I'm free to do here in this open session and in this context. I did just want to share some of. The takeaways from that hearing and from the questions that were asked. You know, I do think fundamentally it is appropriate to seek the use of local improvement districts for significant, significant infrastructure changes that are going to have the benefit of the entire neighborhood as a whole and part. And we know that there's going to be considerable improvement to the core of downtown, to the waterfront and to the area around the Pike Place Market from some of the investments that are going to be paid for partially through this list. I do want to say, you know, I I know that there are cases out there of folks who are going to get caught in. The boundaries of the local improvement district where payment could be a hardship and that the residential portion of the list as a whole is a fee is a fairly small portion. This was useful information from the hearing that I attended that it's about 20% of the $174 million, just to remind the general public. The lid is assessed to pay for about 49% of the improvements involved in this project. 51% of the improvements to be paid for with other taxes and with private philanthropy. But I think it is important to flag that the residential portion of the land is a fairly modest part of the overall project. I would certainly be interested in pursuing in the future, especially as we go through implementation and assessment, that if there if there are people reporting significant hardship over the course of the period where people are expected to pay into the lit under the council, explore some kind of mitigation for the residential portion of the LED folks that are assessed based on a hardship to pay or based on on other extenuating circumstances. But that said, having reviewed the clerk's file and having reviewed the rest of the process that the hearing examiner and that the relevant committee and indeed a lot of the outreach work that has gone into the overall waterfront project, I cannot say sitting here in the in a quasi judicial capacity that this that this to lead has or and I have to agree that this led has been conducted in a way that is squaring the law and the rules around how a lead assessment is carried out and implemented. For those reasons, I am going to vote today on all three pieces of legislation to move forward on this project. But I do want to flag that going forward, the residential portion of the land is something I would be interested in exploring future ways to mitigate over the pendency of the assessments in cases where there is real hardship, particularly for people that are on fixed incomes. With that, I don't have any other comments. Madam President, I do just want to once more express my appreciation to the Chair for for being very accessible throughout this process and allowing ample opportunity for me to engage. If you come from our Louis any any other comments on the bill. Right. Because there was any closing remarks before we close out debate. Yes. I want to thank Councilmember Lewis. I'm glad you had an. Opportunity to read the Clarke file and that the law aligns itself with the state law. Thank you for that. Yeah. This led the number 675 one means that we've had 6751. Leads since the turning of the century, which. Aligns with state law. So that's great. I'm glad you had a chance. To look at that and that you approved. So with that council president, I'd like us to take a vote on that. Thank you so much, Councilmember Waters. Thanks for closing our debate. Hearing no additional comments, will the clerk please call the role on the adoption of the findings, conclusions and decision of the Council as presented in clerk? File 314476. Lewis. I. Morales Yes. Peterson. Yes. Silent? Yes. Strauss. Yes. Verbal. That's. Whereas s council president Gonzalez I it in favor and then oppose. The motion carries and the findings, conclusions and decision of the Council as presented in clerk file 314476 as adopted. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the findings, conclusions and decision of the City Council on my behalf? We have already read items eight and nine into the record and have debate, so I'm just going to call each of these items up individually for a vote at this time. Well, the clerk, please call the roll on the passage of item eight, which is one minute squirrel here. Council Bill 120072. Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Petersen Yes. So want. Yes. Strauss. Yes. Purple? Yes. Whereas. Yes. Council President Gonzales. Yes. Eight in favor. Nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it with a quick. Please fix my signature on the legislation on my behalf. Okay. Moving over to item nine, which again has already been read into the record, described and debated. So I'm going to go ahead and just call this one up for a vote now. So will the parties call the roll on the passage of Council Bill 1 to 0 073, which is item nine? Lewis. Yes. Morales. As. Peterson Yes. Swan Yes. Strauss. Yes. Verbal? Yes. Whereas s council President Gonzalez s eight in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will this affect my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Well the quick please read item ten into the record.

Recommendation to receive and discuss an overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2019 budgets for the following Departments: Harbor and Water; and

LongBeachCC_09042018_18-0744

And so that would be the the option of the council that they'll be discussing a little bit later today. So we do have some for presentations and I know questions as well. And so we will begin with our harbor department presentation and then we'll go into a wider department presentation and we'll go into questions on on those items. And so, Mr. Weston, to turn this over to you and then introduce our presentations. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council members, these are final two. Presentations from departments tonight. These are non city manager departments, the water department. And the harbor department. So first offering to go with the executive director. Of the harbor department, Mr. Mario Cordero. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, and members of the City Council. I'm pleased to be here tonight to present the Labor Department's budget for fiscal year 2019, which is 982 million and $272,000. But before I commence, let me acknowledge people who are here from the poor language, beginning with the president of the Harvard Commission, President Tracy Gosk, who who's in the audience, and also newly appointed deputy director Noel Hasegawa. Director of finance Sam Jumblatt, and two members of his team, Don Kwok and Jason Broad, and also from government relations, Tamara Ashley and Nina Turner. Operational excellence. That is environmental sustainable. When you look at this slide. I suggest to you that we're so proud as a city. They have a port. Which from a national and international perspective excels in excellence, that it's environmental sustainable. In addition, I'm here to tell you that our financial state is very strong and we are making investments necessary to deliver the services, the projects and administration to enhance our standing as a world class seaport and a leading gateway for the Trans-Pacific Trade. And as you may be aware, the Trans Pacific trade route is the most important trade route for this country. No one even comes close second. And our mission here at the Port of Long Beach is to further the economic standing of not only the city, but the region. And the state of California. The proposed budget. Includes here our capital program, which you'll see almost $700 million or 70% of our budget is earmarked towards our capital improvement budget. Three programs in particular, you'll note, in yellow account for 80% of our capital spending for fiscal year 2019. This investment and these initiatives on the part of the poor Long Beach will continue to improve the industry leading service. That we give and enhance or sustainability. That, again, is part of our brand. The bridge to everywhere. As you know, we're almost two thirds completed this iconic bridge. A conduit of international trade. We'll be a landmark not only for the city but for the state of California. It will be the second highest cable state bridge in the United States this year. We're allocating 150 more, 154 billion excuse me, $154 million program for the completion of this new bridge for the upcoming fiscal year. A second very important capital improvement project is the Long Beach Container Terminal, otherwise also referred to as our Middle Harbor Redevelopment Project. This will be a include a gold building or gold led led gold statue building. The further the green port brand that we have at this port, it will be a 311 acre terminal with the capacity of moving 3.3 million containers. And for context that terminal alone after completion. Would qualify as the sixth largest port in the United States. We have now allocated for fiscal year 2019, $182 million appropriated towards phase three of this mega project. And as you know, we're all looking forward to next year. For the completion of the new headquarters for the poor Long Beach as part of our partnership here at the Civic Center. And we'll be making our final payment as part of this fiscal year 2019 budget with regard to the commitment by the poor Long Beach. So next year, rather than driving to City Hall from East Long Beach, I'll be walking across the prominent and I'm looking very forward to I'm sure I could speak for the commission or staff to be part of the Civic Center family and come back to downtown Long Beach. As you can see, our operating revenue. In terms of source funds is our biggest source of funds. Again, to put this in perspective, 75% of our revenue comes from our container terminals. 75% of our revenue. And thus our emphasis as to why we have a capital improvement project at the tune of $4 billion at this port. We are projecting additional debt of 300 million face value for fiscal year 2019 as part of our 600 million. We expect to assume over the next three years. This, of course, would be gauged at the time of issuance based on our need at the time. The Harbor Department does enjoy a strong a Double-A rating with a stable outlook with our respective credit agencies. In fact, our annual audit this year, in the spring of 2018, US from KPMG came forward before the Commission and indicated analysis was the best audit for the poor Long Beach going back 15 years. So we're very proud to continue not only our brand as a green port and our leadership in sustainable development, but in addition continuing the financial strength that this port has always exhibited. So there is the source of our funds. As I indicated, the operating revenue is a strong for for fiscal year 2019. We're projecting 389,605,000. As you know, we had record year for fiscal year excuse me, calendar year 2017, looming 7.5 million containers. We expect a 5% growth for fiscal year 2018, which would be a 3.3. 5% increase as compared to fiscal year 2018. So with that, again, I'm very optimistic with regard to how we continue to lead, not only in terms of a leading container gateway, but also in terms of how we continue with our financial strength and the revenue that comes from this great port. Here are some of the highlights, as I referenced with regard to capital expenditure again at the tune of $695 million. And again, 70% of our budget goes to our capital improvement project. Our operating expenses are mostly due to one time items. And of course, I'm very pleased to stand before the council and specifically referenced the Tidelands transfer for the fiscal year, which will be approximately $20 million. That is the highest ever for a fiscal year for the pro Long Beach. We do propose ten additional full time equivalent employees as part of this budget. Greenport policy. As many of you know, in 2005, the poor little Amish decided to move forward. Very leadership role with regard to the what I believe the shot that was heard across the world, the maritime industry as being the port that branded itself as a green port. Yes. In 2005, they may have been just words, but as you know, there were five basic principles that we will protect the community from harmful environmental impacts of port operations. With regard to emissions that we would distinguish. Number two, the port as a leader in environmental stewardship and compliance. Number three, that we will further and promote environmental sustainability development. Number four, employ the best available practice practices to implement technology to reduce environmental impacts. And lastly, and just as important, become engaged with the community both in terms of our community nonprofit involvement and not only with the non-profits, but with the educational institutions. Now, in 2005, those may have been just words, but let's look now in terms of what was accomplished. The accomplishment in terms of reducing emissions is here in terms of the empirical evidence. Before you know it, 97% reduction in sulfur oxides, 88% reduction in particulate matter, 56% reduction in nitro nitrogen oxides, and of course, 8% in greenhouse gases. And as you know, with our most recent initiative, the Clean Air Action Plan of 2017, we are not just about reducing emissions. We are about eliminating emissions with the goal of being zero emissions in terms of cargo handling, including by year 2030 and zero emissions in terms of the transportation mode and moving containers, more specifically, trucks that by 2035, we will have zero emission trucks all throughout this gateway. So this also indicates itemize is for you are community involvement in terms of our community engagement 1.3 million budgeted in fiscal year 2019 as part of our commitment for community investment grants and of course our sponsorships with regard to the various nonprofit entities at the tune of $1 million. So what I've had presented here in a very concise manner, I can represent to you that not only is this the greenest port in America, and not only is this a leading gateway in terms of being part of the nation's largest port complex. Yes, we invest our money to make sure that we continue on the road of operational excellence. But at the same time, we also have a very appropriate investment to our community engagement. And we live by what we said we were going to do in 2005 with regard to a definition of what a green port is. So with that, I'm very honored to present what I just presented to the Council, and I'm open to any questions that you may have regarding our budget. Also available here is again the way the finance director, Sam Jumblatt. If there's any questions, I may not be able to answer. So thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. So any questions? Yes, Mrs. Price. Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. And thank you for taking the time to brief us individually in advance of the meeting. And congratulations to the new deputy executive director. So welcome to your new role. I did have a question. There was a front page article I want to say on Saturday, maybe about the tariffs and how they might impact port business and port operations. And that's something I thought was would be something interesting for us to talk about. I'll throw that out there. Possible suggestion for the Tidelands Committee, maybe, because I know that's a topic of a lot of discussion in terms of the tariffs and what impact we think they might have. So it might be something worthy of a longer conversation in a different venue. But but while I have you here, I wanted to. Thank you for your question. And Councilwoman Price, in fact, that's probably the most often questioners pose before me and this commission in the last several months by the media. That is the impact of tariffs and this trade war that we're engaged in. But before I give you that answer, let me first say that the poor lobbyist recently did announce the appointment of a new deputy directors. One of them is here to see Nino Hasegawa. The other deputy director was unable to be here this evening and that's Ric Cameron. So going forward, the poor language is moving forward with a new model, which I think represents the requirement given how much we've grown not only in terms of our cargo, but in terms of our staff and the required staff that's necessary to continue with the stellar operation of this port. Now, to your question, which I think is a great question. The port alone, which has joined with the California associate of port authorities to assure concern with regard to the tariff trade issue. So preliminarily, at the present time, we have in place the first step of this administration's movement on tariffs, which is at the tune of $50 billion in cargo value. So right now, our staff had done some preliminary figures that if in fact, we'll continue to monitor this, there hasn't been any significant impact at this point. However, later this year and for sure by the turn of the year, we're going to be in a better position in terms of what that impact is , particularly with regard to the second half of calendar year 2018. Preliminarily, we believe that impact may be anywhere in the neighborhood of 7 to 10% in terms of cargo value. So we are concerned about the the tone and the involvement of this trade war, particularly the application of tariffs of even more of a serious concern is whether or not the administration will move forward with an additional 200 billion in tariffs with regard to cargo value. If we move to that point. I suspect that the American consumer will feel the impact on that for sure, because when you move to a 200 billion level tariffs, you are going to see an impact on a number of consumer goods that are the day to day purchases of the American consumer. So I still maintain a sense of optimism that given that the potential impacts of moving forward to that final step will be, in my mind, very serious to the supply chain and international trade here in the United States, as well as our global partners. Again, I still have a sense of optimism that the parties will come to a meeting of the minds of some point, because history will tell us that prior attempts on moving forward with tariffs are actually a short term option. And when we step back and look what those long term impacts are. So that was a great question, and we'll continue to. Monitor those impacts. In light of that. Has the port adjusted perhaps its budget for federal advocacy? Yes. Okay. Well, number one, we're going to continue with the high level of federal accuracy that we've had, both at the federal level and at the state level. Now, I will say this. I'd like to also bring further context to this potential impact. And I'm talking about the 200 billion in tariffs. Keep in mind that the global recession that commenced here in 2008, 2009 and lasted for a few years, there was serious impacts at the Port of Long Beach with regard to not only the movement of cargo during the global recession, but in terms of the revenue growth. But nevertheless, as I've showed in these slides, the Harbor Commission decided to move forward with the road map that they believe is very important. And I'm talking about their continued commitment to the Capital Improvement Project and their continued commitment to the principles of the Green Port Policy, and their continued commitment to make sure that we move forward with both environmental stewardship and operational excellence. So if you go back and assess in the last ten years that trauma of the global recession and not only the poor Long Beach had, but the global community, I think what's coming ahead, if in fact it does come. I, I can stand here before you and feel very optimistic that we will continue with our leadership, continue with our priorities. And I don't believe that even in the worst scenario, will approximate the kind of impacts that this port underwent and withstood post the global recession. So again, I'm trying to give some optimism to the potential scenarios, but I think one thing for sure as it relates to this budget, it's a very good budget. I think our finance director will support the fact that our ten year forecast at the Port of Long Beach is a very good forecast. And again, with that, I entertain any more questions that the council may have. For sharing that. And and again, I just wanted to take the opportunity because you were here, but there's probably not the best venue to have this discussion. But it's a really interesting discussion because as we watch national politics and national policy changing all around us, there's bits and pieces of it that are impacting our daily lives, of course. But because we're a port city, this, this the tariff issue is something that could impact us very dramatically economically. And it's the single most common question I get from folks outside of the city when I tell them I'm the long on the Long Beach City Council, they ask me about how our port is doing in light of the tariffs. So I appreciate you touching on it and I look forward to talking with it further, talking with you about it further. Well, I think I represent that our commissioners are very much on this issue and are doing everything they can to make sure that we move forward in a way in which not only is sustainable, but again, monitor these issues to minimize any potential impacts. And last, I would say, just for your information on this issue, on this question, on Friday, I will be in Sacramento, along with other executive directors of the state of California and other port directors in the state of California to address this issues in the governor's office. So I think, again, we're doing everything we can to raise consciousness to this issue. Yes. Thank you. Is that the way to me? Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Good. Mr. Sweat? Yes, Mario and the whole port team. I've just really enjoyed getting great briefings from you all, not only around the budget, but any time, whether we're talking about Metal Harbor or our cleaner action plan. I just want to say how much I appreciate you all. I think that you've done a great job with the port. Looking at how we restructure, looking at how your community engagement is. Today, I had the pleasure of being in L.A. for a press conference with other city leaders throughout California, and we were talking about our efforts to green our communities. And so I was able to really highlight all the efforts that we've done here at our port. And so looking at this budget, I think we had our briefing. I want to echo how exciting it is to have the largest Thailand's transfer, how exciting it is that you guys are making your final payment on the building and your commitment to the Civic Center facility. And so I don't have any other questions. I just really it's nice not to have questions, but just to say good job and I don't have to ask questions today because I have so many briefings with you guys. I really appreciate it. Well, thank you so much, Councilman Pierce. And I also like to add that and represent to this council that for this year we had a pretty rigorous process at the Port of Long Beach with regard to our budget. I want to thank the Budget Committee that consisted of President Tracy Gaskill and Commissioner Liang Guzman. And as well as the the three other commissioners, Bonnie Lowenthal, Frank Colonna and Wayne Bynum. It's a it's a very engaged commission. And I think it's as I like to say, a lot of times you have the perfect commission for these times in terms of the skill set that these commissioners bring and the challenges that we have. And, of course, the objectives are formidable. So it's very blessed to be in this position for sure. Yeah, I think Long Beach as a whole is really blessed to have such a great team. So and I definitely I also want to echo Councilmember Price's comments. I know we've got our Harbor Commission Titans meeting tomorrow, but down the road, I do think the terrace conversation is a fascinating one, that we could just have a community meeting to kind of unpack that a little bit. So thank. You. And as Councilman Price indicated, we'd be more than happy to appear at a at another setting to specifically engage on that issue. Thank you, Councilmember Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes, thank you, Mario. And your team again. Commissioner Gorski, thank you so much for your work on the commission. I think this year is phenomenal for us to look back at and see that we've had record numbers. A few things that we want to thank you on behalf of First District residents, Pier B, which I know was a huge issue, but we got through it. But I think it's for the long term. What we see, it's going to be exponential for our city and for our port cleaner action plan, of course, as Councilmember Pearce had mentioned, and Gerald Desmond, which is huge for the connection to our city and to the port and just to our friends across the harbor. So I just want to thank you for those efforts. Tomorrow, we do have a Harbor and Tidelands meeting coming up, I'm sure, as you're aware. So thank you in those efforts as well. I know that's a long discussion, but we appreciate it. So thanks again for everything. Thank you, Councilwoman. Thank you, Councilmember Gringo. Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank you, Mario, and your staff for the wonderful work you guys are doing, especially your community engagement. That has been very helpful, been very fruitful in terms of what you've been able to provide for the community. Your 10,000 Trees program is just moving right along. It's been a great program and it adds to the greening of Long Beach and in regards to being able to plant those trees all over the city. You mentioned in Slide 12, you mentioned the the successes of our Clean Air Action Plan and have been the representative that represents the the area where the impacts of port movement and goods movement is highest. And it was somewhat mentioned already by my two predecessors in regards to the Clean Air Action Plan. Could you give us just a high level synopsis, summary of what the Clean Air Action Plan does in regards to how we are working towards knocking down our particulate matter, NOx and our greenhouse gases? Sure. As I referenced and thank you for your question, councilwoman. Councilman, I apologize for that. All right. Could put. Out. They were pretty good. So. Great question. As I referenced earlier, the great thing about what the problem is is doing in partnership with the city in terms of implementing what the city would like us to do is we are moving forward with zero emission and it's just not words right now. There's a partially 13% of cargo handling equipment that's already electric at the poor Long Beach. We have going to the point of our advocacy. I would like to thank our government relations people in doing a great job with regard to making sure that we be the beneficiaries of grants at the state level and federal level. So I think these grants are very important to further continue the endeavors that we have for the 2017 Cleaner Action Plan. So with that, I think you're seeing now that even though our goal is 2035 for all sewer emission trucks, I really believe I'm very optimistic that we're going to reach that goal a lot earlier. There's already demonstration projects in terms of electric trucks and hydrogen fuel cell trucks, zero emission. Recently, if you follow one of our recent press releases, we have applauded Toyota. One of our terminal operators gave them kudos with regard to their decision to move forward with a project under the Toyota Logistics Services name of a hydrogen fuel cell power plant and a power station. So this is what's come in here at this gateway, particularly at this city and at this port. And I'm very excited that I think you're going to see the benefits of this, your emission policy, a lot sooner than what we think. So right now, we presently do have demonstration projects at our terminals that is working with our terminals with regard to putting in place. Technology that's there or here, it's not ready for the market. But we are demonstrating these projects right now, the terminals anywhere from all electric yard hustlers to, again, equipment. And of course, in the transportation mode, you're seeing how this port taking the lead from this council and the state of California are moving forward with, I think, a great story in terms of zero emission transportation. And again, I want to thank you for your efforts on that mean I think you as a commissioner back in the early 2000 started this whole green, green, green port movement. You know the great story on that councilman and you're and councilwoman Granger going back to my original you reference those were the days of a councilwoman and longer who had also a great say on this. But I will say this I think all that has been accomplished by the staff that we had at the port. Let me see. If you look at the staff that we had, a poor Long Beach, these young people, the Rick Camerons, the Heather Tom Liz, who were here back in 2006, are still here at the port. And for them, 2017, it's just like a no brainer in terms of not only the skills that they bring, but in terms of these guys are going to accomplish. All on that point. I really want to thank the staff here at the Port of Long Beach who have been here all through these endeavors and and will be here to the end, because, again, it's a great story, not only for the city of Long Beach, but it turns out absolutely represents you. You go anywhere in the nation. And when you talk about the poor Long Beach, the first thing that response, people are going to say, yes, that's right, the green port. You guys are leaders in environmental initiatives. So with that, I want to thank not only the leadership from past city council back in 2005, but in terms of our staff who put this together and ran with it. I'm looking forward to our continuing successes in that area. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. I come from a supernova. Thank you. Thanks for a great report. And my colleagues had mentioned the record transfer amount, all the support you do for the community and also the harbor tours. That is just an awesome program that you have and my residents really appreciate it. I also want to say thank you to the board and congratulations on the naming of the Kodak Co deputy executive directors, Ric Cameron. And you forgot to mention that Noelle is a fourth District resident. So that means. Oh, that's right. Thank you. Okay. I will say that when we talk about the community engagement that's been referenced to, you know, the $1.3 million in community grants, the $1 million in terms of the nonprofits, I can't think of any other Port in America that has that commitment. That's more than just words. It's it's it's you look at our budget and when you look at the budget of any entity, your budget represents your values. So on that, Mark, I think we're doing excellent and I will represent to you that the President ask you that's one of her main priorities for this budget is to make sure that we continue at every opportunity, consider expanding this type of engagement. So I would like to again make sure that those kudos are given to the commission who set this policy and. Vice Mayor Andrews. Yes. Mosquito, I think. I don't think you need any more accolades because, you know, when you came back, everything just exploded. And because of fact, a lot of that is because. I definitely think so. Because the fact that your work is that you have behind you, those individuals are fantastic. But we just came back on our cruise and I thought I went to Hawaii. Those individuals that work with us, I mean, the sixth District, we thought we were really in heaven. Thank you, guys. And thank you for allowing us to have our community to be able to go through that. Thank you, guys, again. Well, thank you, Cosmo. And thank you for your support. You know, I think to the T every council person here has supported these initiatives at the Port of Long Beach and and in our one on one meetings on the budget. I really appreciate it on behalf of the Commissioner myself, your ongoing support because again, this is the greatest port in America and proud to be part of the greatest city in America. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to just chime in and say what a fantastic job you are doing. The reputation of the port is strong. You know, when I'm invited to participate in different leagues of, you know, cities or SAG, you know, folks have a great year. The Port of Long Beach has a great reputation. Your staff represents us really well. It's gang and all these other areas. So hats off to the government relations team and I want to continue to work with you on issues related to economic inclusion. And we've had ongoing conversations. But being the economic driver, we are. We have an opportunity to really be an asset, a national standard for economic inclusion. The way that we've done on cleaner action plan, in the way that we're doing in community reinvestment. I think the next big thing for the Port of Long Beach is really making a mark and being a national standard on economic inclusion. But thanks a lot and continue your your your fantastic leadership. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Cordero, for the great presentation. I want to thank you and your department for all of your amazing contributions to the city of Long Beach, but to our national economy, I mean, our port of Long Beach. There is no way that you can have a have a conversation about our national economy without having a conversation about the port of Long Beach. I want to also take an opportunity to congratulate your newly appointed elected president, Tracy Gorski, who is also a district resident. Congratulations. And Noelle also followed you and worked with you for many years. Congratulations on your recent promotion. And yes, hats off to the government relations team and your entire organization. I want to specifically thank you and the port of Long Beach and the port commissioners for your investment and continue to communicate our commitment to our community through your community grants fund. And I would just invite you to opportunity just to talk a little bit about how the Port of Long Beach is giving back to the city of Long Beach and how the poor Long Beach can continue to give back through the grants application process. Because I see a number of folks in here who are, I think, in organizations that could benefit from some of the great work that your department is doing so well. I'd like to thank the staff. I would like to thank the community for the advocate advocacy that we witnessed here going back years ago. Because, again, for those of you who remember back then after the implementation of the Green Port policy in 2005 and people were questioning people in the industry and other parts of the country were questioning greenport policy. And the problem is, what does this mean? There was a lot of hysteria about that. We were going to lose business as a result of environmental initiatives. But I think when you see the numbers here at the Port of Long Beach, we proved quite to the contrary. So I'm very proud to be here now, years later in this position. Not only it's not about words, it's about facts. And I think with that, back then, I remember saying that for the poor at Long Beach, it's not about the benefit to the few, but it should be the benefit to the many. And it goes to your point, councilman, councilman, that this budget reflects that. You know, back then we were fighting for 100,000 in community nonprofit allocation and then it went incremental to it was always a debate. But because of the leadership of commissioners that came after me and the now exemplified by our present, our current president Tracey you guys, you know, you have 1 million just on nonprofit commitments to the community, 1.3 community grants as a result of emission reduction assistance or protection protection against harmful impacts. I mean, add that up 2.3 million, including the 20 million transfer to the city. You're talking about $24 million that this port contributes as a department of the city to the city. So I think we should all be proud in terms of what this port stands for, because as we move forward, there are many who continue to question these environmental initiatives like zero emission. But I will also answer to those and say what I said back in 2006. We feel confident of obtaining objectives, these objectives. It will be done. And last I will say, for our friends in the in the industry who are very much many supporters of this, none of these demonstration projects would happen without our partnership with the Marine terminal operators and the stakeholders. So I think it's a great story for for this port, the city and the state of California. Thank you. Mr. Cordero, I want to just add a few a few words. We move on to the next presentation. I know I've I've heard the obviously the budget presentation before, so I apologize for having to step to step out. But I wanted to just congratulate you and your executive team for another great budget that it really speaks to where the up the board the port is growing green initiatives community investment and a focus on infrastructure. You probably already mentioned this, but you know, we have the most robust port infrastructure program of any American port and we're very proud of that and very proud of the record cargo and the reductions of emissions. And so thank you for all that. I do want to thank a president who Gosk you for her leadership. And you referenced something that I think is important to uplift, which is the the amount of funds that are going back into the community as it revolves around both on the mitigation side and on the granting side have actually dramatically increased in the last year, year and a half, thanks to the leadership of the board, particularly an initiative that President Gorsky led on the board, I think beginning about two or three years ago when you first started work on it , which looked at how do we increase the amount of community funding that we're doing on an annual basis. So that was something that was important to me in appointing President Garcia, and she has carried that through. And I think, you know, just to trace you, Tracy, and just the other board members just want to thank you. I think the community is seeing tens of millions of dollars more back into directly into the community because of the actions of the last couple of years. And I know that that will continue. And so I'm very grateful. I know the council is very grateful that our new the way we allocate community resources is really stepped up. And so just thank you to the board for that and of course, for just the leadership in what you do every every day. So thank you to that to the harbor department port of Long Beach. Thank you. And we'll move on to the water department. So thank you so much. Absolutely. Thank you. That was a great presentation by Mario. But if you talk to his wife, Gloria, she'll tell you the best run city department is the Long Beach Water Department. So everything that people love about the Long Beach Water Department, it starts with those people behind you, the men and women of our Long Beach Water Department. We serve 90,000 Long Beach customer accounts. We're stout 24 seven for water and sewer services and emergencies and for emergencies. We handle 10,000 emergency calls a year on the water side. Long Beach's water meets are exceeds all federal and state water quality standards. You may not know, but we have a full service laboratory over at the water treatment plant over on Redondo, and those scientists and technicians perform 70,000 water quality tests a year. And something new that we started this year is we've started testing the drinking fountains at the Long Beach Unified School District Schools K through 12. We tested for 41 schools this year. We had to take a time for summer vacation because we have to wait until school's in session and we'll finish the remainder of the schools this year. We also offer that service to private schools also. So if any private school would like testing of their drinking fountains. We'd be happy to do so. Sustainability. Long Beach Water Department is famous for its lawn to garden program. So far, we've replaced 6 million square feet of lawn in Long Beach, and with that Long Beach using about the same amount of water today as we did in the 1950s, despite a 40% population increase. Capital needs. We're going to obviously continue our reinvestment into our pipeline system. We're going to develop and rehab local water wells and storage tanks. The more way we can get locally, we can avoid buying expensive imported water. And then we're going to transition. Long Beach Water Department's 90,000 meters to smart meters. And we'll get into that in a little bit later in the program. On infrastructure. We have 2500 miles of water and sewer pipelines to maintain. Since 19 9091, we've replaced over 225 miles of water main pipeline. And this year, we're going to be reinvesting $31 million in pipelines in CERP work. What we do is we focus on our most vulnerable pipeline. And so in the early nineties, when we were experiencing close to 200 main breaks a year, we started focusing on cast being pipeline in the city. And you can see the results in that chart behind you by focusing on that and using our money wisely. We've had an 8% drop in main breaks in the past 25 years. This something near and dear to your heart. Quality control for street impacts. Every time we replace a pipeline, we dig up the streets. And so we've completely revamped how we do things at the Long Beach Water Department as far as how we handle the street repairs. In the past, we had two different crews, two different supervisors on the same project. They were not coordinated. And so we've changed that. So now one single supervisor and one crew looks at it as an entire project and handles it. We have on site inspectors to confirm work meets professional quality and that projects for strict quality specs. Smart Meter program. This is the largest financial investment we've made in quite a while. Something that's important to understand is army or advanced metering infrastructure. It's not like how you used to remember smart metering, where it just went one way, where it was just used as a meter reading function. This now allows two way communication between the customer and utility. So we get the meter reads and we can convey information back to the customer so they can use that. We have 90,000 parking meters to be either retrofit or replaced, so any water meter that exceeds 13 years of age will replace it. Everything else will just add that little white register on top that you see in the picture. Customer benefits. An important customer uses less water and lowers their water bill. This will eliminate billing errors due to inaccurate manual reads. Right now, the manual meter readers have to go into the vaults and there's dirt in mud over the meters, and lots of times it ends up in errors. This will eliminate that work faster billing dispute resolution. So where if you call in with an issue, our person on the phone can look at your meter as we speak. And then we eliminate also the substantial cost for manual meter reading. So in the old days, it used to be Southern California Edison, the gas utility, and the water usually going out to the house. Right now, it is only the water utility has manual meter reading. So it's very expensive. So we're going to save at least $2 million a year in those costs. Just no customer benefits. Wireless will be caught and fixed more quickly, reducing repair costs to customers. We can actually see down to the when you flush the toilet in the house. And so if you have a leak in the middle of the night and you see a steady flow of water at 3:00 in the morning, it'll give us an indication that there may be a leak at your house and we'll notify you. We plan in the future to introduce remote meter turn on this will eliminate customer wait time and further reduce costs. This is something that will be very fascinating. So rather than waiting for something to go out of your house and turn your water back on, we'll be able to do it remotely from our site. Cost conscious. Like I said, it was a very expensive project that we're undertaking. So one of the benefits, though, is that the gas utility in Long Beach actually implemented AMI a couple of years ago. And so we're being able to utilize their existing communication network and data management software and save money. That way, we obtain the best value. By bidding out 109 separate line items. Such as meters, lids, boxes and registers to try and get the best price from vendors. And we're hiring the current meter reading company as the installer of these smart meters and they already know the city and they'll be able to use existing staff and move them into this new project. Something I want to clarify is the typical monthly bill. There's been a lot of confusion with Measure M So back in October 1st, 2017, the the typical monthly bill for the water and sewer was $55.96. And then we had on January 1st we had the lawsuit settlement. And so our water commissioners reduced our water rates and sewer rates and dropped the average bill by $3.06. People seem to forget that that occurred January 1st after measure and passed. We raised the rates or we proposed raising rates 7.2% on the water side, zero on the sewer side. And that will just simply bring the water bill and sewer bill back up to where it was before. So we want to make sure that people understand that there will be no net change from October 2017 to October 2018 with this with this rate increase. I want to make sure that everybody understands that this rate increase is for Measure M only. We will take another look mid-year at our own purposes and see if there is a need to adjust water and sewer rates at that time. Even with this, I bring this back up to where it was in 2017. You'll see that Long Beach has the lowest combined water and sewer bill, if any major city in California. Quite a bit lower than virtually every other city, including Golden State, which serves parts of Long Beach. So, Mr. Gardner, I just want to just stop 1/2. I think I've seen this chart before, but I just think it's really a striking chart and one that I hope, you know that the community is also aware of. This does show very clearly, just when you look at a kind of apples to apples comparison of what our our water rates are versus the other agencies, it's amazing at just what we've been able to accomplish as a community and just the work that you and your team are doing and the savings that our ratepayers are paying when it comes to water and so and water and sewer. The combination of water and sewer. And so I just wanted to make sure I've seen this chart before and it always it's always good to see. So thank you for that. Thank you. Something I want to just touch on real quickly is something that comes up in the community. And I think it's important for everybody to understand. And that's the cost of bottled water versus our Long Beach tap water. If you look at this, 600 glasses of Long Beach tap water, you can get for the same price as one bottled water. So remember that. Nope, no plastic packaging. And so when I see the mayor drinking a glass of water, I appreciate that. That's good. Advertisement. Thank you. So I want to close with just something that I think is important to understand. Since 1911, we've been serving the community of Long Beach. Our Long Beach waters, gluten free has zero calories. We deliver it to your home. Not it doesn't take next day. We deliver it whenever you need it. If you call us at 10:00 at night, we'll turn on your faucet. It can be used indoors or outdoors, removes most body odors. It's safe for children, pets. It's okay to drink and drive using our product. And you never have to remember Passcode before using our product. So that concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Oh. There it goes. That guy's a Hall of Famer. Think you missed it. Mr. Gar, thank you for that presentation and let the council make some comments. I'll have some comments as well. Councilman Price. Oh, sorry. Because you were on a great job. Thank you. Councilmember Pearce. Also great job. I'm really happy about having the one team on our street so that we're not ripping up our streets many times. I want to echo the mayor's comments on our low water rate. I know that we don't want to increase costs for working families, but it is worth noting that that is a very low water rate. And as long as we are conserving, I think it's good. But I always encourage us to take a to take a look at that. And I know that we have a video shoot coming up where we are going to go out and we're going to learn all about the smart meters and we're going to do a go Long Beach video on it. So I'm really excited about that. But great job. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I really appreciate this presentation. This year I've had more connectivity with the water department than usual. And in my community we've had a couple of instances where seniors had their water turned off for forgetting to pay their bill. And that happens from time to time. And the idea that you would be able to turn on their water remotely is a huge, huge, huge impact to people. When on this particular street on Steve Lee, we had neighbors bringing down buckets of water so people could flush their toilets because it was a home that had three senior citizens living there and a daughter taking care of her parents. And so I know that these types of technological advances are things that sometimes we take for granted. But when you see what a community has done to be able to maintain the public health of a house and what it means to turn water back on in an instant, these kinds of things really need to be celebrated. Secondly, I know that I'm the water rates are of of discussion. And one of the things that I think is always really important is that when you look at the fifth District, that second bar does serve Long Beach residents. So Golden State water, while it is the second lowest, it still is $26 more a year. And there are entire neighborhoods in the fifth District that are served by by Golden State. And so it just shows that where you live from neighborhood to neighborhood, it does make a difference. And so I really appreciate all the work you guys are doing to keep water rates low. One thing I want correct, it's $26 a month difference. I'm sorry. That's right. Thank you. $26 a month difference. And that that's. Dinner for a family of four in my household when I ate at my mom's house the other day. My mom always tells me this meal was under $20 for all four of us. And so I wasn't invited. Italian sausage sandwiches, you'd really enjoy it. And so thinking about that on a weekly basis, on a monthly basis for someone like my mom, who's a senior, other people in our neighborhoods who are seniors, who are living on fixed incomes $26 a month is a huge difference. And so we really appreciate that. And then finally. This year was the first year that I had my house free piped, and since then I will tell you that the taste of water coming out of my faucet far exceeds the taste of any bottled water I've ever tasted. And so I'm just a big proponent for cleaning out your pipes and or replacing them if they need to be, and drinking the true, true American spirit of bottled water through these nice reusable straws. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Silvano. Thank you. Great presentation. And you know, I'm going to talk about customer service. I've spoken to you quite a bit in the past about that. I think your department has by far the best customer service in the city. Thank you. But you don't. Unlike the poor, you don't have a second in command who's a fourth district resident. Right, but. But I'll give you a pass. You yourself were born and raised in the fourth district. Okay, so we're good. But I think the customer service focus that the water department has is is a tremendous asset. And while we look forward to technological, technological changes for turning water on off, you guys do a great job right now. I think it's just two weeks ago we had an emergency situation in the fourth District where some special needs residents needed the water turned on quickly. And you were on vacation and your staff jumped. Right. In fact, I think they even did a better job than when you're here, which I think I think there is there's an old adage that you can really tell a well-run department how well it runs when the boss is away. So kudos on that. Thanks. Take off next week, okay? Yes. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. You know I love you because you're an Lamu lion. So that's first and foremost. But secondly, you run a really great shop and I just want to thank you. I'm glad we're very transparent, especially with so much going on in national news about water quality and testing and elbow has been tested. So I just thank you for providing those numbers. And my residents are also very happy that our water rates, you know, the people often say rates are going up, but we are very low considering the high level of service that we're given. So thanks to you and your team and the commission as well. If I can just touch on that, testing the schools. We did over 1000 tests last year at Long Beach Unified School District. We found two drinking fountains that had issues and the immediately replace it and solve the. Problems of issues. Councilor Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just wanted to chime in and say what a fantastic job you and your team are doing. Thanks a lot for your hard work on figuring out the situation on Corwen. Corbin. Corbin we appreciate that. You know, we had a conversation just a week or so ago about the lawn and garden program. I fully support that program to participate in that program. So I want to make sure that, you know, when I know we're at, what, 250 now? We're at $2 to 50, something like that, $3. We're at three or back 2000 now. So we're back. We're up to 6000, $6,000. That's huge. 1500 dollars for design work. Which is. Wow. I mean, I mean, we should go share that with everyone because a thing when I didn't think it was 3000 and now is that six. That's that's a big deal. I mean, we get some retroactive. No, no. Okay. Thanks a lot. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Chris. Great job. I just want to let you know that after going through this, getting a large book here, I only thing I've done that was really exciting was the last page. So I just wanna let you know, keep up the good work. Good guy. You guys are doing a great job. Thank you. Councilman Austin. So thank you very much for the presentation. I certainly appreciate all of the hard work and efforts of all of the men and women in your your department. I think it's one of the best run departments drama free through in the city. I did want to just just comment on the one of the slides that that showed how low and where our water rates compare to others throughout the state. And just ask the question, I mean, are the disparities large many disparities in the state that have actual lower water rate rates than the city of Long Beach? Actually, there's quite a few cities that have very different rates, and it's largely a function of if you have imported water, primarily, which is very expensive or if you have a large supply of local supply. We're about 5050 right now between local supply and imported supplies. So if you have a city that has one 2% local supply, they'll probably be a little bit less expensive than us. But we have very low sewer costs in Long Beach. And so if you look at the combined bill, we'd be competitive and probably lower than virtually any city. Thank you for that. And then I'd be remiss if I didn't just remark on all of the the commitment to replacing water lines means throughout my district and throughout the city. Some of it has been a bit of an inconvenience to a number of our residents, but I think long term, it's a it's a it's investment, it's infrastructure work that that that's important. Can you just speak to where we are with with with that process? Sure. It's a wide and what we can expect in the future. Sure. So we work when we try and plan far in advance which pipelines we're going to replace. And then what we do is we talk to public works and make sure that we're coordinate with public works and with the gas utility so that we're only digging up the street once. What I had mentioned earlier was in the past, what we were doing was we were going down the street and doing the mains right down the middle, and then we would put a temporary patch on that. And then another crew would sometimes two months later, sometimes a year later, we come back and do the service lines that feed off of that. And so you'd have a temporary patch there for four months in a neighborhood, and that temporary patch is supposed to be there for about ten days, and we had some well over a year. And so we've we've eliminated that by doing it as one project. So the time should be much, much less intrusive on a neighborhood, and it should save us money. The quality of work should be much, much better than what you've experienced in the past. Thank you for that. And just to follow through on on that point, as you know, we are investing a lot of money and resources into repairing streets, residential streets and arterials throughout the city as well. Can you speak to how your department is coordinating with public works to to ensure that we're not duplicating efforts, we're not cleaning, we're not fixing the streets and then going in and tearing them up to do water work, water infrastructure. Sure. Part part of that is using gas and planning in advance. As you may know, we now have Sean Crombie on our team over at Water and coming from Public Works. He's able to really understand the nuances of working between both departments. He's also handling the engineering right now for the gas utility also. And so having him in charge of that and working on that with public works, I think you're going to see I won't say none, but you'll see virtually hardly any conflicts now with public works. That'd be great. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. Councilman Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank you, Chris, for the great presentation that you're one of the things that I like about your department. And since you've taken over the worried primary that you're very proactive in as a Councilmember Austin has mentioned, in terms of fixing the pipes. I remember a couple of years ago when you first came out to the department, there was an issue that Flint, Michigan, was going through with their with their pipes and dirty water. And I asked you if you could give the city council an update as to what the water department is doing here proactively to ensure that we don't get that type of problem. And you were very responsive, and I'm glad to see that you continue to look at our at our piping system and trying to address all those issues there. One of the things that came up this past year, obviously, is the fact that we have a lot of parks that are brown and in desperate need of water. And while there might be a lot of that being been necessary for the Parks and Recreation Department, I know we have got it out here in the audience. Is there any kind of coordination taking place between you and Parks Recreation? To look at how we can best make sure that our parts are getting enough irrigation, sort of as well as in. Yes. Another part of that question as well is that we have a lot of a number of mediums that are also in need of water because the trees are dying or are getting brown as well. So that's a very much concerning to many of the neighborhoods. And I have a major median in my area in the seventh District. Daisy, Daisy Street, as you know. And the big concern there is that a lot of those trees are dying. Some are old. I mean, it's obvious, you know, just nature takes its course. However, I would like to know that that if they if if they're dying, it's because they're old, not because they're they're dying of thirst. So is there any kind of coordination that you're doing with Parks Recreation Department to make sure that it doesn't happen ? Yes, Jerry and I had I call them Jerry because I can see these. Cattle row that aren't let's see the world there they are out there. And I had lunch last week and one thing that I offered to him was give me a wish list of what Parks and Rec needs. And, you know, and we'll try and be creative in how Long Beach Water can work with Parks and Rec as far as the irrigation of the parks. We've been working with them for the last year and a half on how to fix that, providing as much expertize as we can. We've offered to help them with trying to receive grants through Metropolitan Water District and other sources. Same thing with the medians. We make the same offer to work with Metropolitan Water District and other agencies to try and maximize grant funding to address the medians. What we've done in the past, this is the second year we've done it with in conjunction with public works and Parks and Rec for the Medians is we actually had a water truck that we filled up and go where the irrigation is not functioning and water the grass and the trees with that water. I'm glad to hear that because obviously it's as we continue with this drought that's going to be very important that we keep our medians irrigated. And congratulations in the great cool on taking crumby from public works I mean that's that's going to be a great good joining of efforts in interior public works and water working together thank you very much. Yeah when things I told Craig back it was it's great to have John Crumby stay in the family. So even though he transferred departments, he's still certainly involved with public work still. Thank you. And let me let me just add, Mr. Garner, again, thank you to you and your team. It's been great to work to work with you and to work with your commission. You got a great group of very active commissioners, as you know. And they're really involved in the community and I think have contributed so much to having this great water department that we have that we're very proud of and we're incredibly proud of, particularly the community work, I think like the port, which we mentioned. I think you guys are out there doing the community work, the sustainability work, the conservation work, and we really appreciate that, that leadership. And so just thank you for for everything you do for the water department and for and please give our best to the commission as well, because we're doing a great job. Thank you. Especially Commissioner Cordero. So thank you. And see, no other questions. That concludes both our harbor and our our water department. What we're doing now is we're entering our our budget hearing. We're taking public comment only to close the hearing on on water and on water and harbor. And then we will go into all the budget items. But then you're going to have public comment on the entire budget also. And that's in talking to the chair. We're going to separate that operated out. Yes. So we're going to close up. We're going to do public comment right now only on port and water. And we're going to close that final hearing up. And then when we go on to the budget, I know there's folks here that also we have public comment for the actual budget. So we're going to go right into that as soon as we're we're done. So please only water and port. Hi. My name is Ann Burdette. I didn't come here tonight to speak on this matter, but I was very impressed with Mr. Cordero's presentation, and I'm very excited about our report. And I would like to say we can't forget that all those containers are moved by workers. And when we talk about a green port policy that is dependent upon protecting the community and operational excellence, I think it's really, really important that we factor in the workers who are being subjected to wage theft and misclassification. I'm not telling you something you don't know. I've spoken with the Tidelands Committee on this topic before. Long Beach has contracts with companies that are currently being sued by Los Angeles for their practices. There are suits that have been brought and adjudicated and the State Labor Commission has ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and now there's enormous amount of waiting time while they appeal it. I really think that. Our. Reputation. Is excellent. I really appreciate that we are considered one of the most important and and most valuable ports in the world. I'm proud of that. I just think that we are factoring in only our economic and community advantages. But we're forgetting the incredible sacrifice that many of our workers are making every day when they receive paychecks that are a fraction of the amount of work that they've put in. So I want to suggest to the council we can't have contracts with trucking companies who don't follow the rules. And the California Supreme Court has ruled very, very clearly in dynamics that there are three conditions that must prevail for someone to be an independent contractor. And I think we have to respect that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker speakers lists on water and port. Please come down the last speaker. Okay. So the speaker's list is close after the gentleman. Okay. Hi, Karen, retired and resident of the first district, working in the second district and representing Long Beach Gray Panthers. We also stand with the port truck drivers and their misclassification for our community to get to the healthy point where we need to be. We also want to see our port, which is a large economic. Engine driver in our community. Do the best it can. And Mr. Cordero has done an. Outstanding job in bringing all the entities together to make that happen. We also. Want to advance the cleaner action plan as fast as possible to reduce the rates of asthma in our disadvantaged communities that live along. The. Freeway and near the port. We also want to commend the port. For your community. Engagement. A number of organizations that I work with have received community grants, and I can't tell you the difference that it has made in the quality of the programs that the community has been able to offer. And we hope that that continues and that more community organizations. Learn how to apply. And to understand that that's a benefit that the port provides that a lot of other entities don't. For the community and the community needs to. Take advantage of that. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Hi. Carelessly fifth district. You have my address on file. I went for the first time the other night to the Water Commission and there was about 20 people there that were all opposing the 7.2% rate increase. They told us at the end of the meeting that they had received a total of 57 inputs on it and all of them were opposed. But then they mentioned that for this to do any good, what we really need is 51% of the people who get a bill, get a water bill to be opposing it. Now, I don't think 51% of the people who get their water bills knew about this. And not only did they not know about it, that would be a pretty stiff opposition that you'd have to mount to do that. I don't know if there's really an interest in getting public input on the water bill, but what concerns me most is this is something that's going to hurt everyone. It's going to hurt people who really don't have the money for that increase. I mean, there are people that have to go out and try and buy a sweatshirt for their child, for school, and you're putting your hand in their pocket. And I just think we could do a better job of managing our money. You know, I think we need to live to learn to live within our means like you do in any household. And the eternal search for more revenue is something that we should go back and look at. What can we do to live within our means to not be hurting these people? So I would be opposed to approving the rate hike, and I'm sure that anyone who knew about it would. Thank you. Thank you so much. And our last speaker. Here is a short. Okay. I'll be quick. I think the port has done a great job in cleaning up everything. I've. I've also briefly spoken with Chris, and I think the water company is probably one of the most efficient companies that I have in the whole city. Just my observation is that like some of these departments that are the furthest away or furthest out of control out of the city's control seem to be doing. And I'm trying to I don't want to sound like I'm being critical, but they seem to be doing better than the rest of the departments. You know, and I'm just wondering, maybe we should start thinking about. Doing that with other departments because I don't know if that's something that happens at too many people. Too many cooks get in the kitchen, but maybe it's a little bit better. Again, I'm just trying to I'm not trying to be critical at all, but I'm just noticing that I used to work at McDonnell Douglas a while back and the management, they would take these two week vacations kind of on their retreats. And what they would notice is that each time they went on these these retreats, the efficiency of the company just went through the roof. And they there was some kind of discussion on whether they should take three or four, and they refused to do it because they thought their jobs might be in jeopardy. And this is really the truth. And so I'm just saying that you're seeing a, you know, a really good manager here that's that's running this department very well. The gas company, they run very well, very efficiently. And you're seeing the harbor is just doing a great job in there. I mean, I can't even say enough accolades for the amount of of smog or, you know, air, air, air pollution that they have removed. And I mean, we're still up there, don't get me wrong. But but the amount of air pollution that that they've removed in a short period of time is just dramatic. It's a great job, you know, so, again, nothing critical about any of the people. But I do have one thing to say about our to a water guy here. I do have a bottle. It says Long Beach Water. So it is a plastic bottle just to let you know. So you have a good day. Thank you very much. That concludes our water and harbor budget hearings. I want to thank all the council members for all of their questions and I think the public for their comments on that. And so will conclude the budget hearing and will begin going into the rest of the budget. But we will conclude that that portion of it. And so, again, thanks to our water and harbor department and we'll just begin the rest of the budget hearing in just one minute. So thank you very much. Hmm. Let's go and take a we're going to go to just a two minute break and then we're going to start right back up with the budget. Okay. Now. Anything you can. He's been living here. It was. I think that's. And. That's. And. And. On for. You can. We're going to go ahead and call the budget hearing back into order so we can have everyone please take a seat. And I know the council is coming back, so just over the next minute, please grab a seat and we'll come back to. Anything that you don't. Bottom, right? Sure. You know, I feel like I don't know when you have a sign that says don't be. Oh, I'm sorry, Larry. I'm just saying, Larry. Yeah. I'm. And then they did the sidebar. We're, like, rocking it out. Can the rest of the council come on and please? And if I'm going to go ahead, let me get the roll call one more time so we can restart the hearing. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pearce, Councilwoman Price, Councilmember Suber not here. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrew's Councilmember Durango presented. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia. I am here. I think we have our quorum. I know the rest of the council is is coming back here in just a sec. So what we're going to go ahead what we're going to go ahead and do is start the formal budget adoption process and begin with public comment. I want to make a few comments. And just before we before we begin, there are there are a series of budget votes that actually have to happen tonight. And again, the council could go through and adopt the whole budget tonight or or adopt it next week. And in just a few moments, we will. Councilman Mongo, we're making a series of motions as we go through the entire the entire budget. And I believe it's about 17 items that we have to actually vote on vote on tonight. I also want to make sure a couple of things. I know that there's some folks that are that wanted to speak to this. So I want to clarify as well. I have talked to the chairwoman of of the BFC. And so I know that when the recommendations for the mayor's proposal come forward, I know that the chairwoman will be supporting the full recommendation numbers. We've talked about that and about where we can find some where where the funds are for different things. And so I am, of course, supporting fully funding the recommendations that I made as part of the with those funds and those other items. And those will be discussed at that point. But I know that I've gotten Mongo and I've had some good conversations about those, and she'll be explaining kind of the thought process and where we're getting what as we go through the process. And so I know that there was some conversation about that. And I want to just to mention that and she also will be recommending some other additions that other members of the council have been talking about and asking for. So she'll be discussing those when we get to the budget as well. And so I want to thank the PSC and the members of the Council as we begin. And so let me begin, Madam Clerk, we can just read all these as we go, and we'll start with item 1.1 and go through all the way 1.17 before

Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute a Solar Power & Services Agreement and related documents with SunEdison Government Solutions, LLC, for a 25-year term for the purchase of energy produced from solar photovoltaic installations at five potential municipal sites within the City of Long Beach, and any necessary amendments that do not change material terms. (District 5)

LongBeachCC_12092014_14-1019

I'm here. Moving on to item 11, please. Item 11. Recommendation to authorize city manager to execute a Solar Power Service Agreement and related documents with Sun Edison Government Solutions District five. Can you get a motion move for a second? Okay. There's been a motion and a second public comment, please. Yes, very good. You clear the trash. If Jim HANKLA, Jerry Miller or the city manager would not have to ask this question. But given that. 1/2, Madam Quirk, is the timer on in the mic. Going to be too short? Okay. Just need some. Given the. Dubious conduct and shenanigans around the electrical pad at Marina Vista Park. What I would like to get specifically is knowing that the five locations for these sites. R will remain within the fifth District. And that before any other location is cited, the council person for the district. At least for District three will be notified. If you've done your homework. What? But this is. It's. It's. To project into the future. They're entering into a contract and going to set up solar energy systems at five different locations. The there are five now that are set forth in the fifth District. But the way the contract is written, you're going to have the type of conduct that happened in with electrical pad in Marina Vista Park. So I'd like to. I'd like to. All this over our head, get a commitment from the city attorney that there will be no other installations unless the council is duly notified. Is there a problem with having that assurance that we're going to expect honesty? And integrity and not have somebody try to slip something in. Or will it be the same West of Orleans approach? Sure, as you know, that you're not able to ask questions of the council during this time unless they want to ask the question. All I'm looking for is an honest person. Is there one here? Let the clock tick and see if there is an honest person here. What? For the record, Mr. Cole made this it's 930 in the evening on this on the. December the fifth. Excuse me. December the ninth. You get an idea of what the the problem is here. Thank you for making my point. Thank you, sir. There's motion on the floor. Councilman Gonzalez, to the question. Just had a question for our city management staff. I know that there had been discussions about a local hire component for this, and I just wanted to confirm that there was just a preliminary discussion on this. I don't want to hold this up. I just want to ask whether that was a confirmation on your end or not. Councilmember I certainly know that there were conversations today between SunEdison and one of the labor groups. Mike, do you have anything to add on that? I understand that there is some preliminary discussion going on that may lead to an agreement with this group, though not necessarily a completed this evening. Okay. That's all I wanted to know. Thank you. Okay. There's a motion. Please cast your votes. 10:00 motion carries seven zero exciting plays. Item 12 Recommendation to authorize City Manager to submit an application for the Airport Improvement Program Grant for Fiscal Year 2015 District five.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the AIDS Memorial Pathway project; authorizing the Director of the Seattle Office of Arts & Culture, on behalf of The City of Seattle, to accept a license agreement for the installation and maintenance of artworks that are part of The City of Seattle’s Municipal Art Collection on property owned by Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, a regional transit authority of the State of Washington, and leaseholder MEPT Capitol Hill Station Joint Venture LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_05032021_CB 120037

Agenda item two Council Bill 120037 An ordinance relating to the AIDS Memorial Pathway Project authorizing the Director of the Seattle Office of Arts and Culture on behalf of the City of Seattle to accept a license agreement for the installation and maintenance of artworks that are part of the City of Seattle's Municipal Art Collection on property owned by Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I move to pass Council Bill 120037. Is there a second I can. Thank you so much. It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilor Morales, this is your primary sponsored bill, so I'm going to hand it over to you to provide the committee's report. Thank you. Colleagues, you'll recall last year we passed Council Bill 119739, which accepted a donation of $750,000 for from the Seattle Parks Foundation for this AIDS Memorial Pathway Project. We are now at the point of installation of this project. And so, as the clerk said, this is to establish an agreement to allow this project to be installed at the Capitol Hill light rail station. In the last few months, so the AIDS Memorial Parkway is a community driven, community funded project to use public art as a physical space to tell the story of the AIDS crisis and includes a civic call to action through engagement, reflection and remembrance. For those of you who have been through the Capitol Hill area in the last few months, a few of the installations are up already, including Stormy Weathers. In this way, we loved one another, which is inside community roots, housing station house. And this is a tribute to the missing narratives of women and black people who lost who we've lost to the AIDS crisis. And then just last month, crews installed one of three groups of statues called We're Already Here around Kyle Anderson Park. And these statues resemble protest signs that evoke the historic moments of public convergence. And that that project will also be the final piece of that installation will happen in the next couple of months. And the idea is to finish this project by June in time for pride so that the piece will be completed by then. And so this council bill, again, is just to confirm that there is an agreement to install the next piece at the light rail station. And I moved adoption. Thank you so much, Councilmember Morales, for that description of this really important project. Are there any additional comments on this bill? All right. Looks like there are no additional comments on the bill. So I'm going to ask that the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill. But Alice. Yes. Must get to. I. Peterson. I so want. Yeah. Strauss. Yes. Yes. Purple goddess. I. And Council President Gonzalez I in favor and unopposed. Thank you so much. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the court please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read items three through seven into the record? Agenda items three through seven appointments 1860, 1861 and 1863 through 1865. The appointments of Rick are Lucy and Ebony Karenga as members. Seattle Arts Commission for terms to December 31st, 2022, and the reappointment of James Myles, Sarah Wilkie and Michael Me Williams as member Seattle Arts Commission four terms to December 31st, 2022.

A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Mile High United Way for the administration and execution of Denver’s Small Business Emergency Relief Program during the COVID-19 health crisis. Approves a contract with Mile High United Way for $4,400,000 and through 12-31-20 for the administration and execution of the city’s Small Business Emergency Relief Program (SBERF), specifically using federal coronavirus relief funds, citywide (OEDEV-54859). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 6-29-20. Councilmember Flynn approved filing this item on 6-4-20.

DenverCityCouncil_06082020_20-0530

You're welcome. Anything else on this item, Councilmember? Okay. Um, Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and that's 530. Councilmember CdeBaca, this one's also yours for questions. Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Is there anybody here who can speak to the Mile High, a united Way component of this? So I will do my best again. We have been asked not to send people down to the meeting unless bills are called out. And we got this call out too late tonight right before the meeting started to get anybody around here. So I'm going to do the best I can and we'll follow up if we need to. But go ahead and and I will try. And and we make it we we do our call outs on Mondays so we can check in on Monday mornings for the call outs. But we are curious about the equity rubric here. We've been giving out small business relief. We haven't gotten a full account of what each business is getting and which businesses fall under the disadvantage business classification. We also haven't gotten the rubric that we've requested multiple times regarding how we prioritize equity in our small business relief. Can you speak to any of that? So we have sent out a number of materials about how prioritization is going on. I'm happy to present those again. And our report was put out on Friday that talks about the number of businesses that are female owned, minority and female owned and minority owned that was sent out to all of council on Friday. We have about 500 grants that have been made. 75% went to grants of businesses with less than 500,000 in annual revenue, and 65% went to either women or and or minority owned businesses. Half of the grants are more than half are sole proprietors or micro-businesses with five or fewer employees. So that report has been sent out. I can resend it if that's helpful. That's not what we're looking for. That's the aggregated data. We're looking for disaggregated data by districts in a spreadsheet that shows us next to the business. If it is classified as a disadvantaged business and how much each business is getting. That is not data we've gotten and we've made several requests. And so I would like to make sure that going forward, that's something that we're getting because the disaggregated data is critical for us. Right. And that report has listed the individual businesses that have been awarded to your point, that does not identify whether they're disadvantaged. So I will pass that request on. It does identify the council district for each of those 500 businesses and the amount request on. Yes, thank you. You're done on this one, Councilmember. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And thank you, Skye, for pinch hitting on short notice there. We appreciate it. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens. Council Member Kennedy I believe this one belongs to you.

AN ORDINANCE relating to historic preservation; imposing controls upon the Campbell Building, a landmark designated by the Landmarks Preservation Board under Chapter 25.12 of the Seattle Municipal Code, and adding it to the Table of Historical Landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_12042017_CB 119141

Agenda item seven, cancel 119 141 relating to historic preservation, imposing controls upon the Campbell Building and member designated by the Landmarks Preservation Board under Chapter 25.12 said I misspoke code and adding it to the table. Historical landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of this atmosphere. Can we recommend the bill pass? Council Member Herbold Thank you. This piece of legislation imposes controls on the exterior of a building called the Campbell Building. The Campbell Building is located in the Alaska junction. Cupcake Royale is its tenant. It was designated earlier this year by the Landmarks Preservation Board because it meets four of the six criteria for landmark preservation. Only one is actually needed for landmark status, and the movement to nominate this particular building was unique. It came as a result of community efforts from each the Southwest Seattle Historic Historical Study Group, together with the Southwest District Council, the West Seattle Junction Association, the Junction Neighborhood Association and Arts West. They did a community effort where they surveyed the historical resources within within the the junction, and they issued a report called What makes West Seattle Junction Special. And this is one of the buildings that rose to the top four for their attention and bringing it to the Landmarks Preservation Board. I want to thank Council President Harrell for allowing me to have this heard in my committee. Normally, this would be heard in a committee that is no longer meeting, but by it being heard in my committee, it allows the owners to apply for tax credits by us acting by the end of the year. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any further comments? If not, please call the role on the passage of the Bill. O'Brien. By Sergeant Bagshaw Johnson for us. Herbold I was kera I President Harrell high eight in favor in an oppose. Bill passed and Sherman sign it please read items eight 311 together.

Public Hearing to Consider Endorsing: 1) an Annual Report on the Status of the General Plan and Housing Element, and 2) an Annual Report on the Status of the Transportation Choices Plan and Associated Work Program Priorities. [Consideration of an Annual Report is exempt from review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA only applies to actions that have the potential to cause a significant impact on the environment.] (Planning Building & Transportation 481005)

AlamedaCC_04162019_2019-6593

Thing to consider. Endorsing an annual report on the status of the general power and housing element in the annual report on the status of the Transportation Choices Plan and Associated Work Program Priorities. Evening. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Members of the City Council. Andrew Thomas, Planning Director. I am going to present tonight our annual report on the general plan and housing element, as well as your transportation choices and these these annual reports which were reviewed by your Transportation Commission and your planning board in February and their recommendations on the on on these two separate annual reports are included in your packet. These are annual reports. They're an opportunity they're important for our planning efforts, both in land use and transportation. It's an opportunity for the community and the council to sort of check on our progress, look at what we've done over the past year, but probably even more importantly, to talk about what we need to focus on in the future for the benefit for the public. I know the council knows this, but it's all about setting priorities. Your last couple items, you discussed this, you know, limited resources, limited, whether it's staffing or financial. Lots of needs, lots of desires. So it's all about really making sure that on all of these issues that we, the council and the staff and the community as much as possible, we're all sort of on the same page pushing on this, on the right projects, the right priorities. So this is really an opportunity to have those that kind of discussion on an annual basis. We don't need any sort of formal approval tonight. Tonight is not about like, okay, we're done. We're finished. It's really about an opportunity for the council to to to review our recommended priorities and and give us adjustments. Give us your thoughts, your ideas. This will then influence other documents and other projects. In a few months, you'll be looking at your two year budget. This is this is an opportunity for you to sort of adjust some of the priorities, which would then you might see adjusted in your two year budget. So it's a chance for us to get some feedback from you on at a very sort of a 30,000 foot level. It you might tonight indicate to us, hey, these are some there's a lot of information in these reports you might tonight direct us to to schedule a future meeting with the council, a workshop on a particular initiative or a particular project that you feel really needs a lot more discussion because there's a lot of material on these reports that we don't there's not enough time tonight to talk about every single project in depth. So if that's something that's interest, it's important to you. Please let us know. You know, obviously your thoughts and your comments will influence how we talk to the boards and commissions about these various issues. So it's very helpful to know really and make sure that we're on the same page with you as to what your priorities are. And then, of course, on a daily basis, we're working with other agencies, our transportation partners in the region, other jurisdictions, our neighbors in Oakland. So it's just it will influence how we how we do our jobs as staff at all sorts of levels. Let's start with the general planning report, as you know. But for the benefit of the public, we have a general plan. It's required by state law. It needs to be up to date. It needs to be internally consistent. The last comprehensive update of the general plan was in 1990. You have been busy, though, in the last few the last 20 years you've dealt you've created a number of new elements which were required by the departure of the Navy. You did your northern waterfront element. You've updated your transportation element, your housing element a few times. We have a brand new safety and noise element that you just finished a couple of years ago. But there are four elements that have not gotten a comprehensive update essentially in 20, 29 years. And it's time it's so really the priorities are we need to tackle a comprehensive update of our land use element. It is just there are portions of it this are badly out of date. The other thing that we need to keep checking and making sure that all these elements are internally consistent as part of the land use element, one of the big priorities is the climate change update. This is, you know, in 1989 when the last general plan. Was comprehensively updated. You know, the concept of climate change and sea level rise just did not enter the conversation. It has entered into your general plan through your safety and noise element two years ago. But now it's time to start integrating this in a much more comprehensive way and making sure, because you've got your climate action plan coming to you in the upcoming months and will be really a big part of the community discussion over the next couple of months. And of course, your most recent resolution declaring an emergency on this. This is it's very important that we have your general plans sinking up with your climate action plan. Obviously, our parks and open space elements need to be updated. This is something else that we think we can get done in the next two year cycle. And then, of course, just making sure we have an internal update of the entire document. This is a this is a big workload. But we think with the with with the help of the community and the planning board, we can get these elements moving through in a series for your final review and approval during the next two year period with the with the priority being the climate change update and the land use element followed by open space and parks. Let's move to the housing element. This is also an annual report required by state law. We do this every year with the council. It's an opportunity to check in on where we're at as a community, on our housing element. Our housing element, as you will remember, is we updated every eight years. We updated every eight years in response to a state requirement to show the state how we're going to accommodate what's called our regional housing needs allocation or arena, which is the term often referred to. We are right smack in the middle of our eight year period right now. So we're in the 2014 through 2023 period. We have done eight years. Our arena, just to remind everybody, is 1723 new housing units. What's interesting about the arena is that it has it, and this is not surprising if you think about it. Yes, there's a need for 1723 more housing units in Alameda, but a large proportion, over 50%, if you just look at need, is in the you know, the affordable categories, the very low, the low, the moderate categories. So there's a within that larger regional need, there's a a really large percentage of it is at the lower level affordability. So halfway through, we have issued building permits for over 600 units. That's about 35%. So it looks like we're lagging if you want. If we were going to spread this out over the eight year period, we would, you know, we want to be further along more like eight, 900 units. But there is a couple projects, one in particular, the Del Monte project that we approved four years ago, if that project had been built on a was had been under construction and built, as we anticipated four or five years ago, we would actually be ahead of schedule. So what's interesting about Alameda, because we tend to have fewer projects, but they are larger projects. One or two get delayed and it starts to really sort of throw off our numbers. In terms of 2018. Last year it was a very good year for housing in Alameda with the two big projects of animal terminals and Alameda Marina . We entitled 1500 housing units. We won't see those units necessarily. In fact, we definitely will not see them all built during this cycle. But that's going to make a big difference on the next cycle. So, you know, as the council knows, but I think we people in the community sort of forget when we have these hearings, the planning board do, oh, 600 units, people sort of think like we're going to approve them at the planning board, and then two days later, they're all going to be there. I mean, the units that we're building, the 600, most of those are at Alameda Landing. We approved that project originally in 2006, but they're finally getting built and occupied now. So there's a real lag on this. In 2018, we issued 181 building permits, so we're slowly chugging away. I think with the entitlements that we have approved over the last four years, it looks like we will hit our 1723 building permits over the eight years. I you know, we'll see. There's a lot of things that are out of our control that obviously the regional and local economy is a big part of whether we'll make that going. Well, we've certainly entitled enough units to get there, but the state tracks building permits. So we really need to think about building permits in terms of whether we're going to meet our goal, what we're probably not going to. In fact, we will most likely definitely not meet. It is with even though we may get 1723 new building permits, we're not going to have 56% of those in the low income categories, as you know. But for the benefit of the public, we require that every project provide 15% affordable housing. So at that rate, we're obviously not going to get to to 56%. We do have the benefit of a very active local housing authority, and their projects are 100% affordable. So that's going to help. But the real message here is we've got to keep approving these projects and we have to keep working on looking at ways that we can incentivize encourage more units in the affordable categories. So looking at this, your planning board priorities, which are reflective, of course, of staff's priorities as well, and very similar to the priorities that we discussed a year ago. Keep expediting the review, especially of affordable housing. Move those projects through our process as fast as possible and encourage them. Number two and the planning board spend a lot of time talking about this. We need to keep looking at our zoning codes. It's not and our fee structures. What can we do to. What little things can we do? Or big things to really encourage affordable housing, workforce housing, affordable by design housing, really sort of broadness. And there was the staff report that was in the packet wasn't as clear about this as it should have been. And the planning board sort of reminded me at the last meeting, no, it wasn't just the deed restricted, affordable they were talking about. It was these the workforce housing, the types of things that this council has talked about in the past. For example, right now, our impact fee structure in a multifamily project, you know, our fee structure is, is if you have a very small unit, a studio, and then another unit that's four bedroom, three bath, you know, the the impact fee is the same. You know, that was an example of one of the things they started thinking about. Maybe we should be think rethinking that, you know, if we really want small, affordable by design units, maybe we should try to incentivize that by adjusting the fee structure or the zoning requirements. Obviously, number three is a big one. Transportation Committee Planning Board and Transportation Commission keep pushing this. We got to keep working on transportation to support this, you know, future housing as well as improving transportation throughout the city. We'll talk a little bit more about that in a second. Zoning amendments to really support and our need for additional supportive housing. Homeless shelters and services. Senior assisted living projects. And one of the the we don't have good definitions of these in our zoning code we are not clear where we would like these services located or as clear as we could be. And one of the sort of concepts that have been we've been talking about at the planning board and among staff is, you know, these are always these are tough issues to talk about. It's very, very tough when you start dealing with a project in a particular neighborhood for these kinds of things. And we need to start setting the standards in our codes that every neighborhood needs to do its part. It's we shouldn't be getting into a conversation of, Oh, my neighborhood's not right for this. You should make this thing go to a different neighborhood. It's every neighborhood in. Alameda needs to do its share. The resolution you did earlier with the wellness center, with the church, perfect example. Every neighborhood, any church, anywhere in Alameda who wants to do that should have no question that they can do that. And then, of course, objective design standards. This is something that's come up through recent changes in state law, but it's also important and supports all this. We need to make very, very clear what our expectations are for design. We need to be able to write them down, set them as measurable, objective standards. What this does is it it has the benefit for the community. Let's be clear what our expectations are. And then for when the projects come through, we don't spend a lot of time just discussing what our expectations are. You either meet them or you don't. If you meet them, we should be able get you through this entitlement process fast. All right. Moving right along. Let's move to Transportation Choices plan annual report. This is your you adopted this plan. It's a comprehensive plan. Council member de SOG was the first council member many years ago to say, hey, it's time for a plan like this. And then it took us several years to get it done. But we're glad to have you back for the first annual report. You wait long and. At. The. We are. I won't I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about what we accomplished in the first year. But I'm going to just jump right. To sort of. From our perspective, what are the priorities for for next year? And this is when we talk about transportation. It's resources are the issue. There is so much work, so many transportation projects. There's 39 projects and in this plan. So it's all about setting our priorities. And because there's no way we don't have the resources, we don't have, whether it's staff or financial, to do all things all at once. So it's very important that we as a community kind of focus on what we need to get done and then get it done and then move to the next one. So our priorities as outlined in the annual report, and I'm focusing now very much on the next two years, this is once again important. And the reason we really started talking about two years in this annual report is because we were very conscious that in a couple months you'll be looking at a new two year budget. Big priorities, ferry services. We've done a great job. Our ferry ferry ridership just continues to grow. We are going to break ground on a new third ferry terminal this year at the Seaplane Lagoon. Obviously a priority. We've got to keep doing that. It's still a lot of work to be done and we've got to get it. We got to get it opened in 2020 when the first housing opens at Alameda City. We are also working with WETA, our partner in this and with the three money to make to. Then when that opens, we will be expanding our services to San Francisco as well to Oakland in the South Bay. So that's a huge win for Alameda. It's where we're almost at the finish line in 2020. We can't sort of get distracted. Got to keep going on that. There's a new initiative that we're working on. And let me just preface, I said at the beginning, this is not something that just, you know, the there's two transportation planners helping Rochelle Wheeler myself. And then we've got our public works staff who also Scott's here and Liam's here and there and their staff. You don't have a huge Transportation Department to do all this. So these guys are doing all the work. I will just interject that we have quality, if not quantity. Yes, that's. Right. We're we're all worth three people. The we are just earlier this year, we started working public works and transportation planning on parking management. This is something we've talked a lot about. But, you know, charging for parking at ferry terminals, we've got of parking and we're we have our new residential moving in in Alameda Point. Our transportation strategy for only two point depends very strongly on parking management. We want to. So charging for parking at ferry terminals making sure that we don't just turn Alameda point into a giant parking lot. This is a major effort. We'll be back in July, late June, July with a comprehensive report on this, because when you start charging for parking, it means you start taking seriously enforcement of parking. And this is so you're not going to enforce your parking. The charging isn't going to work. So that's a big thing coming up. And a lot of work, bus services. We continue to work with our partnership with AC Transit and we think that that's been a very successful partnership. We need the big the big push. We've done a lot in the last couple of years with the opening of Site A at Alameda Point in early 2020. Not only do we well, we have if we do everything well, have the ferry services running. We will also, as required by the council in the development agreements for site, a 15 minute service connecting site to downtown Oakland. So this will be the beginning of the first time in a very, very, very long time, if ever, you know, really good transit. Services from the very western edge of the island into downtown Oakland. And then, of course, we are continuing to build slowly, but we're constantly trying to build our citywide E-Z Pass program. So where have all new developments are being entered into this easy pass program? The goal of that program, for the better, the benefit of the public is we would like to ultimately get to the point where most, if not all, of the city of Alameda is a member of our program, meaning you have a pass to get on transit. Right now, that pass program is just eligible for AC transit services. The ultimate goal, if we could, you know, and this is not something we're going to accomplish in two years, but to build tours is to be able to have everybody be able to have a pass. It gets them on ferry services, water shuttles and or busses so that, you know, we basically turn all of our residents and and employees into transit users. And then, of course, Transbay Services is something we are constantly working with AC Transit on. Alameda Residents use transit transbay services. As the council notices, those lines are often packed, people are left behind. So that argument that nobody rides busses does not hold true for Alameda. Let's just talk about the priority. So that was that was ferry service and bus services. Let's talk about estuary crossings. There we are. We continue to work on these. These are not efforts that get done in two years or one year. But they they are efforts that if we don't work on them every year, they will not happen. So it's something we try to keep our eye on the ball on this. A couple of things. This has been a priority in the transportation plan for four years. None of our crossings meet what's called the Lifeline Standard. So in the event of a major earthquake, we're not guaranteed that any of our busses and bridges and tubes would still be standing. We would like, as a city to get to the point where we would know with with a fair amount of certainty that at least one would be standing and usable for whether it's evacuation off the island or bringing of emergency services and facilities and personnel onto the island. We've been focusing on the Miller Sweeney Bridge, and that is a a listed project in the regional transportation plan. But we don't have the money yet and we don't have the plans yet, but that's the one we've been targeting. We have also been looking at how do we improve access from Alameda, specifically West Alameda, to a across the estuary to Oakland. There are several pieces to this project. One of the big piece that we've been frankly working on for too long, like 17 to 18 years, is what's called the Oakland Alameda Access Project. And it deals with the connections between the tubes and the I-80 freeway that lower that lower left slide. This is an effort that we are working on fairly with the county. This is not a city project. This is a county project with Oakland and Alameda to improve the freeway access. But what that and improve that basically automobile commute connection. But what that conversation is also really brought to the surface and is the lack of an adequate connection for bicycles and pedestrians from West Alameda to Oakland because that that that path in the tube is just completely inadequate. And that is generally the conversation about a future bridge, a pedestrian bicycle bridge. We this year we came up with a conceptual design for a lift bridge. It's shown on the top, right? This would be a bicycle and pedestrian bridge crossing the estuary lift bridge from Alameda Landing to Jack London Square. We are working with the county and the region to to to get the money to do the next phase of that study, which would be a more detailed feasibility study. This is a concept plan. What we don't really understand is what it would cost to build. Obviously, this is not something the city of Alameda could ever afford on its own. This is something that we would have to convince the region and the state is a necessary regional facility connecting Alameda to Oakland. We other thing that's interesting about this is if we're going to build something like this, which is a major structure, we should probably build it to a lifeline standard because it may not be adequate for everybody to drive back and forth every day on their with their cars. But in the event of a major earthquake, we would sure want that thing standing up so that emergency vehicle could get across. You know, this thing is going to be about 18 feet wide. Bikes and pedestrians in an emergency, we could get an emergency vehicle across or an ambulance. This conversation is also discussed. You know, these are long that's a long term vision. That's something that takes another 15, 20 years to fund and build. So we got to keep thinking about shorter term solutions. The water shuttle connection is something that we as a city continue to work on. We have been requiring every project in Alameda to build a water shuttle landing. We require every project now, I mean, to provide money for transit. The vision here is once we get enough people living on the waterfront, both on the Alameda side as well as the Oakland side, we then start have the critical mass to start funding a water shuttle operation back and forth between oakland and alameda. We've also been talking to the oakland a's about this and the region. If they are if the region is going to start working on the freeway, which is going to affect the bike, pedestrian connections through the tubes, obviously, then maybe they need to help us fund this water shuttle. Likewise, we've been talking to the a's and the city about and the c of almeida's letter on the a's e.r. Indicated that this is something that they should also be thinking about funding as a connection between oakland and. At least during game days when the congestion from the new 35,000 person stadium would further impact that interchange right at the I-80 freeway, which is already in deficiency, it's been in deficiency for 17 years. Lastly, the conversation with the A's has generated a renewed effort to look at the possibility for a gondola connection between Oakland and Alameda . We met a week or two ago. The mayor was there with the president from the A's and they came over to talk to us a little bit more about this. And I thought it was interesting the way they describe it. They they are designing a gondola to go from BART to the new stadium at Jacqueline Square. And the way they described it is, you know, that they want to make it easy for their fans to get from BART to their new stadium. And they said told us, look, every time we show this to anybody in Oakland, whether it's the mayor of Oakland or the head of transportation in Oakland or the just folks on the street in Oakland, the very first question they ask is, well, can you extend that over to Alameda? And I thought that was interesting because if there is an opportunity to extend a gondola over to Alameda, if there's one already being built in Oakland to get to BART, that's a really intriguing opportunity for us. We have done some initial look at this and we are working with them on the next phase of this study of this gondola. What would it really take to extend it across the estuary in the same basic location? Connecting to Jack London. And one of the interesting things that really struck me is if we could extend it all the way to the intersection of Atlantic and Webster, which is our main sort of right to College of Alameda and all of our busses, sort of central west Alameda. The thing that's exciting about the gondola is if you get on there, you are at the entrance to BART in 6 minutes. I mean, it's the thing about these is they're just incredibly quick and you don't wait for a gondola. You just walk up and the next one shows up. There's no wait time. So we don't know if it's feasible, but we're studying it and we're going to be looking at it this year with the Oakland A's. Let me just quickly move to the last few. Last but not least, in fact, in fact, many in many ways, probably most important, the transportation choices plan talks a lot about if we really need we're really interested in trying to reduce traffic, reduce greenhouse gases in Alameda. We've got to make the walking experience, the bicycling experience more pleasant and safer. People need to feel like it's easy to walk, that it's easy to bike, that it's safe for their children to walk and bike. And that's how we're going to we can make a big difference in terms of on island congestion. So we're got a number of projects underway. I'm just going to name four of them. We've been the city of Alameda has been making great progress on the cross alameda trail. That's a dedicated bike pedestrian path across the entire length of the island from Alameda Point all the way to the Fruitvale Bridge and into Oakland. The section in Alameda Point is under construction right now. Um, your public works department started construction this year on the next phase, which is Main Street all the way to Constitution. Your Parks Department finished the Jean Sweeney segment last year. We've got plans in place and funding for the next segments behind Del Monte, although there are some holdups there that we're working on, and then we've got the construction money to do the next phase, which is grand to Broadway. Last year, the city acquired the necessary right of way from Union Pacific to get to the Tilden Bridge. We will be coming back later this year with final design concepts for the segment between Grand and Broadway. That's on Clement. So that project is making great progress. We still have a ways to go. Central Avenue that the design process on that is still underway. We will be back in June with a update report on that and the request for authorization for the next phase of that. We're also working to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety and car safety, frankly, on central, which is is an issue. And then Otis Drive as well as the main street section going up to the Main Street Ferry terminal. I won't talk about all these. We've got a lot going on, but all with the same goal, making these streets safer. And so the people feel more. Comfortable using alternative modes of mobility. Okay, that's it. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Does the Council have any clarifying questions before we go to our public comments? Okay, hearing then. Do we have public comment? We have four speakers. Okay. We have Denise Trapani, Ruth Abi's, Heather Little and Pat Potter. So Denise is up first. Thank you. Honorable Mayor Ashcraft and. Council members, thanks for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. 11 years. That's how long the scientific experts at the United Nations say we have to completely redesign our carbon emitting systems. 11 years to make the changes that we need to avoid catastrophic effects of climate change. In California, the majority of our carbon emissions are from transportation. Specifically, 40% come from light personal transportation. That's how we all get around. To put that into. Perspective, it took us over three years to get one stop sign installed at our most dangerous intersection at Santa Clara in Sherman. And yet we're not seeing a single policy proposal in any of our plans that would change either what we're doing or, more importantly, how we're doing it. I'm really frustrated that we're not seeing any policy change recommendations in either the team or in the scope of work for the active transportation plan that was recently approved. There's nothing in there that says we're actually going to do anything any differently. They have big lists of projects in there and they're great projects, but they'll be design funded and approved in exactly the same way that these projects have always been. Meaning it'll take another three years to get another stop sign installed. By contrast, as an example, Cambridge, Massachusetts recently passed a city ordinance stating that any road improvement project would have to include a physically protected cycle track. They made this bold policy change in order to get people out of cars and to give them a safe alternative to driving. And that's the. Type of leadership I would expect to see if we really think we're in a climate emergency, which we just declared. We cannot be spending years in the design and community outreach phases anymore. We have 11 years to make these massive changes and we've spent the last five years discussing whether the lives of people who are trying to make a difference on their own by not driving, we've been debating whether their lives are worth a few parking spaces on Central. Where is the leadership. In holding public works accountable for the fact that we have zero consistency in how pedestrian signals work in Alameda and that we almost universally time lights and signal phases to favor cars over pedestrians? Where is the leadership and telling leader that we're not going to allow free unlimited parking at our ferry terminals anymore? Or forget wieder. Why do we still have free unlimited parking everywhere here on Sundays? Where's the leadership in telling the planning department that we're not going to approve sidewalk encroachment permits anymore? When a parklet could fill an outdoor seating need, it would show that you value public space for pedestrians over personal car. Storage in our business districts. Where's the leadership in changing the. Policy so a private business owner can't dictate whether or not a bike rack gets installed on a public sidewalk near their business? Where's the leadership in telling the building department that we're not going to pass building inspections of retail? Thank you, Mr. Panay. Our next speaker. Abby. This is Abby, followed by Heather Little. Thank you. Good evening. I have you. I'm on the sustain of. Sustainable Development Planning Committee of CASA. So I wanted to clarify that. And we've had Mr. Thomas come to speak to our committee and we are very thrilled to see the movement forward on the general plan and the land use plan. You will have the draft climate action plan and resiliency plan before you in the next couple of months. That planning process has been a good process. It's been a public process, but it's been done without the direction and leadership of the entire council. And it is the land use plan and the general plan that actually provide the policies for the city. The Climate Action Plan will identify projects and they will be great. We consider it kind of a down payment on the future, but we need a really visionary general plan. Alameda is the most vulnerable city in the Bay Area to the impacts of sea level rise. And we need a visionary land use plan that takes us into consideration to the end of this century and beyond. So we very much encourage the next steps, whatever you need to do in terms of your budget process into getting those updates and and having a robust public process over and above the Climate Action Plan, which was great, but that was begun with the prior council. We need your direction and your leadership in this next phase of having a general plan that will reflect the vision of the city. Thanks. Thank you. Next is heavy metal products. Hi. Good evening. Mayor Ashcraft, City Council, thank you so much for having me speak tonight. I was talking about, you know, my time coming for council and I'll talk in just a second about how it's in my mind. It's been three years, three years, three years since I've been back in city and involved in all these conversations. But my God, I mean, losing to Andrew. Talk about how long it's taking to get some of these conversations and how long it will be taking to get some of these ideas to come through. It really humbles me in terms of what we are faced with and also makes me want to challenge all of you to kind of really think about the bureaucracy that's involved with some of the decision making that we're having to go through in order to get some of these actions to pass through. So with that, my comments tonight are three years ago, nearly three years ago, I came before city council. Many of you were sitting on city council when I first brought to you forward the accident that incurred with my husband, Mark, when he was run off the road on Main Street. That was absolutely horrifying to me. And that meeting was a real wake up call for me to the importance about ensuring that we have safe and reliable opportunities to move around this city. And from that day forward, it really became a priority of mine to engage with all of you and with other city leadership around ensuring that not only pedestrians, not only cyclists, and not only drivers in the city of which I am all three have safe and consistent and accessible modalities of transportation that I can choose from that also allow me to access are varied opportunities around the city. But three years later we have recognized the importance of ensuring that we have those safer streets and we did adapt and believe in Vision Zero as well as the slowdown in town campaign. Three years later, we declared a climate emergency for our city in recognition of the geographic constrictions that we do have and will be facing in the very near future and three years later. And I hear that the primary complaint throughout our city right now is issues with traffic, you know, traffic congestion. How are we going to get in and off this island? How are we going to deal with deal with it? And we know that we're building more housing and I am totally in support of that. But we've got to do something and we have to be able to provide people with predictable and accessible methods of transportation and result of that. So I'm here tonight to add my voice to those who have and continue to urge you to move forward with the Transportation Commission or the transportation plan, transportation aspects that were added to the general plan 11 years ago, 11 years ago. And yet we're still stagnant. In following through on many of those priorities, we have had enough, at least as far as I'm concerned. I've had enough with the planning, with the input, with the discussion. And to me, it's time to set forth those priorities and move forward with the goals that have been identified. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Little Pop Hunter. And then we have one more speaker, Lucy Julie. Good evening. Good evening. Thanks very much. I would like to reiterate what everyone has been saying. We are now in a crisis. You've acknowledged it. You've done the work as far as passing unanimously the climate emergency. So that does mean that you have to change the way you do business. It doesn't make sense that these plans come up and they go through all of these. They go through the Transportation Commission and then they that meets every other month and then they get reviewed and then they come back and then they go through all of these iterations. When we're in an emergency, you really do need to step it up. And hats off to Cambridge. The city council said we need to get more people on bikes. The way you do it is you provide a safe way to get around town. That's something you could do. You could just say, we need to get people on bikes. Therefore, this is what we're going to do. And you don't let it end up being a discussion with a few business owners, whether or not they like the idea or not. It's your job to make it happen. Thanks. Thank you. And our last speaker, this daly. Hi. I'm Lucy Lee with the bike walk Alameda. I'm here to implore you to keep us moving forward with meaningful, transformative changes to our transportation system. We have plans. We've been working on plans. I've personally been working on plans for 20 years. Right. And some of them are great. They really have good things in them. They're already there. We could implement great things with them. Dennis mentioned some of the bits and pieces of the unwritten policies that end up keeping us from making our streets safer and better. But let's just start from now implementing the policies and the plans that we already have to make our streets better. Please think. Thank you. And that was our last public speaker. Okay. We will close public comment now and let's hear council comment. And so so we structure this in the well, I mean, I'm open to suggestions. Mr. Thomas presented the general plan and the transportation annual report. Do we want to jump in? Talk about housing first. Talk about transportation first. Jump all over the map. What would you like to do? Councilmember by councilmember. And would you like to start? All right. In terms of the general plan. And housing. You know, one of the things that I think we we need to have more of a discussion on is when we talk about workforce housing and things like that, how much of the housing that we are entitling is really going to be to buy versus rental property? Because I think what's the missing middle is? Where is that first unit that that people can actually enter into property ownership with? And I you know, it's not lost on me that we're having a public hearing after this on our fees and our master fee schedule. But I really do think that part of how we incentivize and streamline the process is by by stop acting. We need to, as a city, I think, stop acting as this bigger way where we engage in kind of rigorous design review. We really need to give people kind of much like we have with our different business districts, kind of here, pick from this, choose from this. And then, you know, here's your menu. As long as it's within this menu, you're good to go. And I think that if we can do that, we can kind of streamline things so that it's a more affordable process to actually allow construction to occur with still giving feedback and everything else. I just think we need to spend time on the menu and then go from there. But I would like to have a conversation about how many of these units are going to be available for purchase by individuals and condo sized as opposed to, you know, this is all going to be rental property and we're basically just going to be a city that essentially, no, you can't buy here if you're in the middle class. I think that that's a problem in terms of the transportation choices plan, you know where to start. Okay. So we did declare Vision Zero. That was something that I was very passionate about. But I think we need to also focus on. We need to continue to focus on that. And part of that is the daylighting. We have, I think, just a major problem, especially on connectors, major thoroughfares and the connectors to those major thoroughfares and cut through. Sherman is one of those. There are a lot of feed in streets that go into Sherman and that and especially as we lead into Jane Sweeney and we're trying to get people to use the cross Alameda Trail, we're trying to get people to bike through. We need to daylight a lot of those corners. And I think that that's something that we should spend some time on and it will help. It makes driving safer. It makes our cyclists safer, and it makes our pedestrian safer. And I just there have been so many intersections where I've almost been run over. I've witnessed just up and down Sherman as somebody who used to live on on off of Sherman. The number of cars running through there and on to other, whether it's getting onto Buena Vista or getting on to Santa Clara or Central, it is a major kind of access point that connects all of that. And we we really need to focus on daylighting, I think, between those streets. Sherman's one example, there are others. I just think that it would be a good use of our resources to actually focus on the daylighting. You know, in terms of our roads. You know, our replacement costs are quite high in terms of what we have to do and our capital costs. But again, there's a lot of things that go on our roads. And, you know, it's not just single occupancy vehicles. It's our busses. It's our city fleet and the wear and tear, it's bikes. And I think that, you know, saying that we're going to focus on ten miles. That's nice. It's a nice start from the state. I really do think that as we think about transit and how busses and and bikes are using all of these, I really do again think that we need to think a little bigger on that and really, you know, not just do the patchwork. We really need to think about how we're going to make sure that all of our roads and our major connectors are where we need them to be so that it's just about maintenance. And that will, in the long term, cut our costs down significantly. So just like we've done with our budget, I think we really need to think about what's the cost savings long term, if we can actually kind of think a little bigger, implement a little faster on some of that stuff. Bike share line bike left. What next? And how do we how do we fill that need? It was a tremendously popular program and it really did help with that. First and last mile also helped it with engaging our youth and getting folks to use non single occupancy vehicles. And so how do we how do we fill that void? The gondola. You know, I'm always going to support as many crossings as we can get. And I think the future with Oakland is going to involve any crossing that doesn't involve single occupancy vehicles. But I would love to see the A's and Oakland really also embrace the bike ped crossing because that has to happen. And that's to me like the non-negotiable. We need that on on the West End. And it can't just be that that biking is for everybody that's, you know, on the east side of town. But if you're on the West End, sorry, you get subpar conditions. And I don't think that just having a gondolas actually is going to solve that need. It's going to be cumbersome to get your. But I mean, I don't even know how that works. I don't know if it's ADA compliant. There's a lot of questions that I have. I just think that we we need that lifeline on the West End. And so I'm glad that they're looking at Alameda for another crossing. I'm going to be supportive of that. But I would also like in exchange to get their buy in on. The bike ped crossing, which we've been working on for some time. And we really do need to get serious about figuring out what the cost is going to be and then start working towards that. On the shuttle bus expansion, I hope that will look at things like the new proposed proposed. At this point, measure has passed, but connecting those areas, if we if we do have the free shuttle bus expanding, I want it to connect with places like the McKay site and some of these others, because if we're going to have that free shuttle, it really does need to serve our community and go to sites like that. So as we look at that, I would like there to be a consideration of who are we, who are we moving, where are we moving them to, and who are the community members that are most in need where this is really going to make a difference for them? And I think that that's one of those sites that that we really should be looking at, as well as the new Alameda Point collaborative site. So those are those are my comments on this. I think we've come a long way. There's certainly a lot to celebrate in our plan. And, you know, I think we've made tremendous gains. But I also think we kind of need to continue to think about how we're going to, you know, and the reason I mentioned the road replacement plus the crossing plus the daylighting is to me that that hits at all the different elements of transit we're really trying to accomplish where we can get multiple that benefits. And we do have more housing coming online and we need to prepare for that. So thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Vela, let's just go to line, if you don't mind, Vice Mayor, next way simpler for me. So thank you. And the housing element. You know, I would like to look at some policies. We're clearly we're clearly not reaching our affordable goals. And the reason we're not reaching an affordable goal is because we're not building enough actual market rate housing. And so the market rate housing that could be affordable is going to people who then fix it up and make it more expensive than it is. You know, we are going to have to and that's probably a bigger conversation for another day, have a discussion about whether we want to be in a city where we are paying , paying for people to be able to live in homes that are affordable, or if we're going to actually start building the community in the region, that that is affordable. But one way that we can use slightly more market rate ways of doing this is to increase the availability of accessory dwelling units. I remember when it was passed, there was this large fear that holy cow, thousands of people were going to come in and apply to put it in accessory dwelling units and now the number is 38 with 20 actually moving forward. Yeah, I know. There goes the neighborhood. I'd like to look at a way that we can use the accessory dwelling unit law to actually increase the number of accessory dwelling units, maybe by limiting the square footage so that, you know, you can currently build one unit up to 1200 square feet on certain lots. How about if you could build two units of 600 square feet? It may actually make it so that the rent that you collect from those units could actually better cost cover the cost. So I would be really interested in looking at that. You know, we heard at least three, if not four speakers earlier talk about climate in our climate emergency declaration. We know that one of the number one things we can do to impact climate, which has impacts on transportation and whatever else, is our land use and where we site housing. Our general plan and our housing element that comes out of this plan need to address that. And I will be looking for for, you know, explicitly how are we using our land use to to impact our climate, our climate impacts? On the transportation side, I want to say first, I appreciated that you pointed out we have two transportation planners and like three public works folks who, you know, I work in a transportation division that has more staff than the entire city staff of Alameda. And sometimes I have to remind myself, there's only a couple of people here working on this stuff. And they do they do huge amount of work. And I'm really very appreciative for the really good work and the mayor's comment about quality over quantity. It definitely holds. So so thank you for that. In terms of the transportation choices plan in the next two years, I want to I would like us to really look at the fact that our transit goals are very well made, a point oriented for the most part. They're not connecting to Fruitvale, they are not connecting to BART, and they are not connecting to downtown Oakland yet. We know that is where our transportation problem is. I fear that we are allowing our development. We need to work on the Army to point stuff, but we have a development plan for Alameda Point and it has all sorts of measures and whatever else we need our city planning to really be transportation planning to be focusing on how to get people so they're not driving over the bridges to BART and into downtown Oakland. That's our low hanging fruit because unfortunately, when you look at the transit use in Alameda, you capture all the people who take BART to work for their commute. But a lot of those people are driving to BART, so we're getting counted as yay, we're great at transit, but at the same time we're having the impact of, oh, those people are all driving and and impacting our traffic. So. On the active transportation plan. It was said a couple of different ways by speakers we had tonight, but I had written down that plan needs to have a robust protected bike lane network. It cannot just be here are two more streets we are going to work on. That will be unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. We need to start moving the needle on climate and in transportation mode and we are not going to do that until people who have eight year olds are comfortable saying, Hey, go right to Jimmie's house. It's two neighbors hoods over and there are there is a safe way for you to do that without me. Maybe it's 11. It's probably a little young. I did it when I was ten. 11? Sure. I would like to see a start effect. And Daylighting is a great example. I'd like to see how we can start doing some quick and effective things. We are doing a great job of moving very expensive, very long term projects forward. That is not a complaint. We need to keep doing that. I'd like to see more get in the in the queue so that we have a continuous program of that. But between daylighting using cones to test ideas, etc., kind of tactical urbanism, whatever, we need to start making changes now. I sent a tweet I saw online to city staff last night that was complaining about all the parents in town who have to lock their cargo bikes up outside the martial arts studio on I believe it was Park Street. But I know this happens on Webster's where there is no place for people to park their bikes when they get to the place they are going. That is a low, quick and effective thing. So when when I see something that our one of our two year goals is to put in 50 bike lane bike bike racks citywide . I'm like, we are not trying very hard. I know. I know where that comes from. I'm not complaining about the effort that people have put into that. We we need a goal. How do we put in a thousand bike racks in two years? Whatever. But it's got to be meaningful. We could put ten in front of the Alameda Theater and have them packed every single night of the summer. That would be 20% of our two year goal policy that came up as well. I would like to see that's something we can get done. We don't have to wait for an active transportation plan for some of that. Let's get these policies done. We need to, you know, whether it's the pedestrian push button policy where we have a consistent way to prioritize the active transportation modes that our general plan says are our priority or whether it's the vision zero goals of actually looking at Nadeau in our lane widths and having a safe streets design as opposed to a traffic throughput design, we need to do that. The Broadway Jackson Project, I would like to ask that that come back for discussion. I think that that project is not well understood. The voters were sold, that it was a multimodal project and we are spending a 75 to $90 million on what is eventually essentially a freeway rebuild with no true bike impacts there. So I would like to see that come back so that we can actually have a conversation about, you know, kind of where does our council even stand on that project? What are the benefits and what do we really think we're getting out of that? At the end of the day, that project has to become multi-modal or it's not something we should be pushing. In my mind. The Lifeline Bridge. I think that's really important. I don't think it has to be a six lane Fruitvale Bridge rebuild like is in the county plan. I think we could look at the $90 million for that bridge and whether or not we could use that on the bike bridge or something else. And I'd like to kind of keep that in mind. The ferries I'm all for looking at right sizing the parking and using. Pricing to to make it work better for people who need parking. But the Harbor Bay Ferry we've been were six months in since we cut like 120 parking spaces out of the availability for that ferry. And in that time, six months, we have had four months where ridership month over month was less than the month before it was. The ridership is continuing to grow. It is we do not have a parking problem. We have a people not not walking and biking to the ferry problem. So let's use let's not spend a lot of staff time trying to figure out how to build more parking at ferries that are having growing growth without with with the parking that we have. Lastly, in my last minute, I know we do have an existential climate problem. We need to prioritize that we are the city in the Bay Area that has this problem unlike any other. The budget is where our values live. I will be looking for how we have adjusted our budget in the for the coming two years to show that these new priorities that we have said the climate declaration, the transportation that we adopted two years ago, etc., are the places that we're putting our efforts, whether that is looking for how we can increase our staff from 2 to 3 to get the projects we are saying are our priorities done or whether that is how are we using our road, road paving program to highlight places that bike lanes and additional benefits there? You know, I really want to see this budget document as a as a as a statement of values for our city. But it's a great plan. Hopefully. That was helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember de SAG. Right. Thank you very much. Let me begin by restating something that resident Ruth Abby said, because I think it's it's important. Is she to summarize what she said, she said, we need a visionary general plan that takes us to the end of the century and even beyond, and one that involves a robust public process. I definitely want to second that. I do think that we need a visionary general plan update that is done comprehensively along to two axes axis. The first axis would be one where we are, in addition to updating the 1990 elements that we are also taking a look at the transportation even though was done in 2008. I think we also have to take a look at especially the circulation aspect to the transportation element. And I think we have to update our general plan in a comprehensive manner connecting the different chapters. And this would also apply to the housing element in terms of the type of housing that that we really want to begin to create policies around. So I think that's why we need to look at updating not just the 1990 chapters, but also current and up to date ones like the 2008 transportation. And also we're looking at the housing element. For me, what's driving a desire to update the general plan in a comprehensive manner are a variety of things. One, we take a look at what's happened at the Harbor Bay Business Park, where recently the development agreement is. If I read that letter right, the development agreement is now expired. And what that tells me then is, you know, do we really want 100 feet buildings as a right? And given the concern expressed by Harbor Bay residents about, you know, you know, a five story building, certainly that wasn't 100 feet but is still five stories. I think this is a rare opportunity for us to begin to take a look at not just land use is at the Harbor Bay Business Park but throughout Alameda. When we look at, for example, Sacramento, which is issuing a lot of rules that are almost superseding local control when it comes to building residential in neighborhoods, I think as a charter city, we can begin to work within the context that that that Sacramento says, you know, how much building that you should create, how many accessory dwellings you should do you know how much buildings should be done along transit corridors? Because we might one day have a part line. We can head that off the past by having a general plan that begins to address those issues. So and then the other thing that's kind of driving my desire to look at a general plan update in a comprehensive manner, looking at the linking up the different chapters is, frankly speaking, when I look at the major bike pedestrian projects that are coming down Otis Drive or it's in Central Avenue, I get where people are coming from with regard to that. But to me there seems to be an inconsistency between the circulation and the designations of some of these uses. And I think to the extent that we hammer out, you know, what it is that we really want on these routes or even on any other routes, then I think the specific projects like an Incidental Avenue, uh, or, or the Otis Drive projects, I think that they become more coherent. Now, the second axes by which I believe the general plan update process should be done comprehensively is one. Again, going back to Ruth Abbey's statement, one involving many residents in the process. Like a blue ribbon commission, we might reach out to the League of Women Voters. We might reach out to Alameda Citizens Task Force. We might reach out to to the realtor groups. We might reach out to the renter organizations in town to help us in putting together some kind of blue ribbon. Because for many counties and cities, when they update their general plan, it is done in a comprehensive manner. And frankly, it does cost a lot of money. I have no doubt about that. So I will argue that that we ought to have another workshop on this just on this matter. Now, finally, in terms of the Transportation Choices plan, I'm very excited about what was before us. I want to I want to second the priorities that that were were reviewed this evening as well as in the staff report. And I want to say, in terms of the transportation choices plan, the point of the transportation choices plan was actually implementation. So that's why we have projects in there. So the point is that as as we're as a city, as city officials were beginning work, beginning to tell staff where we want you to place your limited number of staff persons in terms of which projects should move forward. So for those residents here or on the air, on television, when they hear the transportation choices plan, it's not just another plan. It is actually an inflammation implementation document. So I really appreciate that moving along. I really appreciate the fact that we're doing this check in. I am excited about the the Oakland A's gondola idea. I would just, you know, make sure to I would caution us to be careful as we move along because it might not just be about a gondola, could be about something else. And we need to be very careful as as we move that. But I think if we if we do everything right, I think a lot of people could come out winners. But but but there are some issues that we definitely need to look at when it comes to the gondola. So I'm very hopeful about tonight. And I just want to add one more thing about going back to the general plan update process, why it should be done comprehensively. For example, one of the chapters that is out of date is the Parks and Open Space chapter. You know, as we do, as we link up the Parks and Open Space chapter and do that in connection with, say, our land use, one of the policies that could come out of, you know, the public process for the Parks and Open Space chapter could be that, you know, because every park basically has a side, a road right next to it. We could put potentially one of the policies that could potentially come out could be in encouraging, you know, electric for electric cars and prioritizing cars that make a commitment to multi, you know, multi occupancy ridership. So that's, you know, something to think about, especially in terms of dealing with the climate action issues. So so that's my $0.02 is comprehensively update the general plan along two axes involving most if not all the chapters and also involving a robust public engagement process. And to have further discussions on that obviously, and also to encourage us in moving forward in the transportation choices, priorities that were discussed tonight and also keeping an eye on the gondola. Thank you. Councilmember Desai, Councilmember Brody. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you for your presentation. I mean, I do think in you we do have a visionary person. So I put a lot of faith in you and your ability to to get things done. I'm not going to use my whole 9 minutes because I think my colleagues have said a lot of things that are important to me. I do share the frustration of some of the public comments. You know, I think and you're not you and I met a couple of weeks ago when we plotted out, like I still have the piece of paper, you know, the 3000 or so units that we've entitled in the four and a half years I've been here and we have, what, 50, 60 built? So it's it's completely frustrating to me. You know, I don't mind taking the political hit for proving housing, but I'd like to see the benefit of it at the same time. Right. And, you know, just for me personally, I'm sure I mean, I'm sure everyone a lot of people are in the same boat. I'm starting to look in the market and there's just not a lot there. And then you look at a condo that's two bedrooms and a laundry, 550,000. And then you see that it it sells for 610 or six, 20, you know, ten, 12% over over list price. And, you know, there's just not enough supply. And if we're going to look at our general plan, which I'm perfectly fine, you know, looking at, I don't think it should be bogged down in a process that takes forever, because it's just frustrating to me that things just get bogged down and they take forever. I do think we have to start thinking we're running out of horizontal space. We need to think vertically. And I think that's where we're going to be going in the future. And, you know, I worked in Sacramento for a while, so I understand a little bit of what's going on there. But, you know, cities have abdicated their responsibility to provide housing. You know, we've had a chance. And instead of providing it, most cities try to find ways to stop it. So I understand why Sacramento is doing what they're doing, because nobody else wants to do that. So they have to step in and say, okay, we're giving you a chance to self regulate and you're failing. So now we have to tell you what to do. So, I mean, I think the way we can avoid that is to build more housing and we have to do that. You know, just seeing 15, 16, you know, housing units on the market, you know, it's incredibly frustrating if you're, you know, trying to buy a place to live. And as the vice mayor said, you know, a lot of these units, you know, we should be giving or we should have market rate. So our lower cost housing is not inflated in price. So I think that's something we have to do a better job of. And if we can find ways to streamline improvement or approval, streamline the issuance of permits, get get shovels in the ground and get things built and get our people housed. I'm more I'm in favor of all of those on transit. You know, I appreciate all the comments there, too, as well. You know, just a personal anecdote. I had this this whole issue with, you know, being able to see people intersections. I just got hit the other day at Franklin. I slowed down because I remember when I was walking precincts, I almost got hit in that crosswalk. So I slowed down in case somebody was in the crosswalk. But the guy coming out on through didn't see me and he almost barrel into me. So if I didn't slow down because I was afraid of hitting somebody, he would have hit me. So those are things I think that media, a customer constant, L.A. brought those up. I think that's something super critical. And again, the frustration. Of the public comments. This Central Avenue bike lanes should have been done months ago. I mean, we gave direction. It kept coming back. It kept coming back. We gave direction to staff to go do the safest way possible and get it implemented. And now it's still going round and round with people. I mean, we need to do a better job as a council. I totally agree with with the public comments. We need a better job as council setting policy and not letting things drag. And, you know, with all due respect to the vice mayor and Broadway. Jackson, 19 years and I'm not interested in bringing something back that's been debated for 19 years. Things just need to get done. And I share everyone's frustration with that. You know, I don't really talk too much about specific projects. I mean, the good news is the lawsuit on our M three got thrown out and they're not going to appeal it and challenge it so we can access that money for ferries. And I think it was a $300 million over the course of erm three, four ferries. I think that's exciting. That's the to me the way of the future, the cross Alameda shuttle that the business groups have been pushing. I was glad to see that on there. You know, we have to do we have to do this cross this, this extra crossing faster. You know, it's already languished. You know, I just frustrated that I share the frustration with people that, you know, these things just languish. And with all due respect to a robust community process, I mean, that's part of the reason why some of these things languish, is we try to make everyone happy and we're never going to do it. And we were elected, I think, to make these decisions. We have super competent staff. Again, I think you're very visionary, Andrew. If any more people to get these things done, ask us for more people. I think that's something we would be I just I would be open to I want to speak for my colleagues, but we need to start getting things done. And I share the frustration. And, you know, I hope that and I ask the public, tell us what you think we could do better. I mean, if we're not setting the right policy, if we needed to do something like they're doing in Cambridge, we need to do more of the things like we did with the climate action emergency. You know, tell us what what we could do better to help you, you know, accomplish what you what you, what you're frustrated with. So I'm excited. But I also share your frustration. And I just want to see things, you know, get moving. Del Monte first vote on council was to try to overturn that. Five years ago it didn't pass, but it's still stuck. Nothing's happened. So I wish we can get off the dime and get things done. Thank you, Councilmember Otis. So these are exciting topics and I think we have a, um, energetic new council that's going to get some things done along with our outstanding staff. So it is my privilege to be one of two mayors who represents Alameda County on the Legislative Policy Committee of the CASA Compact. And we have a very aggressive meeting schedule of once a week in San Francisco. And yes, I get there by public transit. And the kinds of compact is 15 very robust mandates policies to achieve three goals to protect produce and preserve protect is to protect residents mainly tenants to produce more housing because we're seriously under housed as a state and preserve is to preserve the existing housing we have because much of our housing and certainly in Alameda our rental housing stock especially is very old. So what we're doing because there are more than 200 pieces of legislation involving housing that are going through the legislature, although that is being that number is being winnowed down . But each week we have a particular theme that we cover. I don't even know it, this week's theme as we usually get it the night before. And then I have to read through all these bill summaries. But last week we did protections. So tenant protections and there is some exciting legislation even looking at bringing back a form of Costa Hawkins or getting rid of Costa Hawkins, I'm not sure what that is, but we spent a large part of the session last time on Adus accessory dwelling units, so I know all of the ADU bills have moved out of their committees and on to Appropriations and I'm not sure what, you know, this week's, you know, horse trading yielded, but some of the things that are being proposed in these various pieces of legislation is not to require that the resident of the main House, if you will, because they need an accessory dwelling unit as a usually unit behind or in the basement or, you know, converted garage, not to require ownership. That did raise some concerns because people talked about it changing the character of neighborhoods you always have to be careful about. So what if people buy these? Yeah. Or rent them but then turn them into Airbnbs and so and I think we have a um. Well now I'm getting ahead of myself. Um, but I will a little spoiler alert. Our new city attorney who starts next month comes to us from the city of Santa monica, where they have implemented some, some ordinances to protect from just that sort of thing. Um, but as something that I think is exciting is, and I actually brought this up in the committee is that we're looking at, we're seeing more prefabricated housing being used for aid use and prefab housing has come a long way. It used to have sort of a a stigma attached to it. But you should see some of these units if you haven't already, they are easy to put up. There is much less impactful on a neighborhood where an aid was going in and the building trades have. They've pivoted and they understand that, yeah, there's a new way of building residential units and they have training facilities and they're learning how to do this. So this is a way that we and in Alameda, we were a little ahead of the curve because we did our ADU ordinance, but they're mostly the complies with all the new state law coming. And one of the things was brought up by some of my colleagues that there's so much bureaucracy and that adds to the cost of a project and therefore stifles housing production. There is pending legislation or proposed legislation that would limit how many hearings a project could go through. A city could have, you know, maybe three. And then that's it. It's either it moves forward or, you know, you're done with your housing, with your hearings. After that, the and I will just say that the county of San Mateo, um, one of their, their representative mentioned take a look at the county's website. They have a housing department and it is a very user friendly website. Take a look, Alameda, folks, and see if there's some things we could we could emulate. The and so what we're looking at when we look at this proposed legislation is the you know, how does it meet the three goals of protection, production and preservation? Also, how does the legislation impact the jobs housing balance? Because that's something communities are struggling with. We tend to be, um, I think we're a more housing rich community than we are jobs rich and we are trying to achieve that balance and certainly the financial impact. We don't need more unfunded mandates. We've also told our the representatives, the committee chairs and MTC in a bag that we want to see more carrots and fewer sticks. For those of us who are doing quite a bit, we want the to have best practices rewarded. There was a piece of legislation proposed, but it's been pulled that would have taken away transportation funding, SB one funding, if you didn't meet your production numbers. And, you know, we don't have a lot of control over what gets produced. But anyway, this is an ongoing process. We're working along with the budget process, to get our recommendations in and hopefully impact some of the legislation. Okay. Quickly, in my 3 minutes, I'm just going to go through. Okay, the housing element. Okay. I think that what can help Alameda and other cities is we are looking at some infusion of state funds and that's even beyond I think it was perhaps one and two that we passed last year. The governor has added 500 million and it doesn't sound like a lot, but he's added that toward affordable housing and I think more is on the way. Okay. I'm jumping over to transportation because I talked a lot about housing with the cost of compact. Yeah. Line bikes pulled out. I know. Dockless bike share seems to be a challenge. I would love for a staff to look for another replacement. I agree with Councilmember Vella. It is a great way to get people out of cars. And to close that first last mile gap. Bus passes we talked about or the report talks about the city wide easy pass program at a meeting. And I can't remember whether it's cost compact or maybe East Bay Economic Development Alliance. They talked about how there are no I think it was cost cutting back some county I can't tell you which one in the nine Bay Area counties is making sure that bus passes are made available to people like the homeless population, people who are, you know, very vulnerable populations. And so I know I'm sitting with two colleagues who are on the AC Transit Liaison Committee. If I don't know if that's something that AC Transit is doing or if you could bring it up. But I think that that's important just to give people that access to get to the services that they need. And the we do need to make our streets as pedestrian and bicycle friendly as possible. And I also agree we need to move forward on Central Avenue. I mean, there's there's a finite range of possibilities. Let's choose the best one and let's get going. We can't please everybody. All the merchants safety should always be our first priority. Safety of drivers and drivers last probably after pedestrians and bicyclists the Alameda shuttle exploration I'm I'm okay with that but are we duplicating AC transit. I feel like Alameda residents don't realize quite how extensive AC transit is. Maybe we need to do a little more public outreach on the apps that you can use to plan your route. I find them to be great. We do need more EV charging stations across the city. Let's do that. And the gondola to BART and the a's terminal, it's worth exploring. I mean, anything that gets people out of their cars, it's not mutually exclusive with the the bike bridge. But I don't think we take anything off the table at this point. And really quickly, because I have public works and city engineer in the room, the pedestrian signals that flashing cross light on Otis Drive by Lane School have been on constantly for weeks. They don't go off and it's going to just make people, you know, less aware of those things. Oh, it's flashy, but no one's in that and that could be dangerous in another situation. So if you could get that fixed on anyway, let's move forward. Let's get these things done. My time's up. You are. Thanks, everybody. So, staff, you've got your your direction. We're all set. Thank you. Very much. Thanks for spending this much time talking about this. It was very helpful. You'll be hearing back from us shortly and often. 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.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Municipal Art Fund; amending Section 20.32.030 of the Seattle Municipal Code to remove the timing limitation on the use of funding.

SeattleCityCouncil_07302018_CB 119298

The Report of the. Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Canadian Item Ford Council one when 1988 related to the Civil Art Fund amending Section 20.30 2.0 30 Oceania. Ms.. Baker to remove the timing limitation on the use of funding. The committee recommends. The bill passed as amended. Councilmember Herbold, thank you. The Seattle Municipal Arts Fund is where percent for arts funds are deposited and spent. Current Seattle municipal code governing spending requires that funds be spent within three years. This is intended to ensure that funds are spent in a timely manner. Unspent funds return to the general fund and a two year extension is possible. These policies were adopted back in 1967 and led to some challenging spending of the funds because many capital projects spend the art only portion at the very end of the project. So this can result in funds being spent for established artists who who know the process. But the intent of this legislation is to allow for broader outreach from artists, from unrepresented communities. The the amendment will. Allow for a longer. Period of time of spending, but it will also require a report back to committee to track impact and success of this legislation. There is a report back that will be required annually from 2018 to 2022. In that report will require information on new projects that public arts funding will support. The size and number of those new projects compared to 2015 and how the Arts Office has conducted outreach and community engagement, particularly to underrepresented communities and communities of color. And also report back on the balance of program funds for each year. That reporting back function is a result of an amendment that went through my committee with the support of committee members. Very good. Thank you. Any questions on this bill? Or comments. If not, please call the rule on the pastor of the Bill. Herbold II Johnson. Whereas. Macheda I. O'Brien So aren't I? BAGSHAW High President Harrow High eight. In favor and. Unopposed, the bill passes and the chair of the Senate is right next to an item.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Sections 21.15.590, 21.15.1470, 21.15.2005, 21.15.2810, 21.25.502.A.3, 21.32.020, and Table 32-1; by adding Sections 21.15.245, 21.15.595, 21.15.707, 21.15.1054, 21.15.2195, 21.15.2273, 21.52.219.8, and 21.52.232; and by repealing Sections 21.15.510 and 21.52.213, relating to assembly uses, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_12042018_18-1053

Now we're going to move to our hearings here. And one, would you please be. Hearing one report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation under the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt a negative declaration. Zero two Dash 18 Declare Ordinance Amending Title 21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code read for the first time and lead over the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading and adopt a resolution authorizing the Director of Development Services to submit amendments to the Long Beach zoning regulations to the California Coastal Commission citywide. Can I get a second? Thank you. Our first and second. Who do we need to have a report on this? Oh. It's a hearing. So, Linda Tatum. Sure. Good evening. I have a very brief. Please. Please be quiet as you leave. Have a very brief staff presentation regarding Re Lupa, and I'll start by defining what Lupa is. It's commonly referred to as Lupa, but is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is a federal law that was adopted in 2000 and just two. Just to clarify the origins of it, it was originally. Adopted by the federal. Government as a way to to make sure that prisoners or folks who were incarcerated, incarcerated were not unduly burden on their ability to practice their religious activities. And that was the genesis of this. But it has spread, and it now includes land use and zoning to make sure that religious institutions are treated fairly relative to other assembly type uses. So that's essentially why we're here tonight. It is based upon a complaint that the city received from the Department of Justice regarding our current zoning code. And the observation that they made is that our code has not been updated since probably 20 years to specifically address religious uses. So this was essentially a clean up. It gave us the opportunity to go back and update our code to treat assembly uses for religious institutions in the same way that we treat other assembly uses, such as a movie theater, a banquet hall and other types of uses where you have an assembly type characteristic. So fundamentally what this code does is it updates the definitions it goes through. I think we have commonly referred to a religious uses as churches, but we've currently it just based upon the number of different religious practices. We've eliminated the use of calling it churches and we now refer to them as religious institutions. So there are a couple of other just minor definition that we brought into current practice in terms of terminology. We also are making sure that we're upholding the the community standards for how assembly uses are treated and focusing on the potential impacts for those uses. And more specifically, we have cooperative cooperated with the Department of Justice that in the changes that we're proposing to the code and they have been accepting of those changes, we took this item to Planning Commission. We had no concerns or issues. They adopted it unanimously and they were very supportive of this change. And with that, we're asking for your support. To. Adopt this code amendment. And that concludes staff's comments. Thank you. And any public comment on this and you. CNN. Please cast your vote. Rock n. Roll cop. Yeah. Oh, that's right. Roll call. Excuse me. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pierce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember City pronounced. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrews. Here I am. Councilmember Rhonda. Councilman Austin. All right. Councilmember Richardson. Motion carries.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing and grant an Entertainment Permit, with conditions, on the application of Ciderlab, LLC, dba Ficklewood Ciderworks, at 720 East Broadway, for Entertainment without Dancing. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_04142020_20-0304

And just a name. Hi. Okay. Item 33. Item 33. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to receive supporting documentation under the record, conclude the hearing and grant an entertainer permit with conditions on the application of thicker wood cider work at 7 to 0 East Broadway for Entertainment Without Dancing District two. This item requires an oath. Our opponent is on the line. Anybody who is going to be offering testimony, do you and each of you solemnly state that the testimony you may give in the cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? I didn't expect. You. Okay. We'll now have the staff report. Presenting will be Bret Jacobs, business operations officer. Good evening. Honorable there and. Members of the city council tonight you have before you in. Application for entertainment. Without dancing or Spider Lab LLC doing business as the Norwood. Cider Work located at. 720 East Broadway. Operating as a restaurant with alcohol in Council District two, all of the necessary departments have reviewed the application. And have provided their recommended. Conditions as. Contained in the hearing packet. As well as the piece where I. Stand ready to answer. Any questions council may have. And that concludes staff's report. So that concludes that report. If we are going to go ahead and have the the the those that are speaking to this item that have been have also something to add. Go ahead and make your comments, please. Mr. Stephan and Jim. Have nothing out of this time unless there's any questions. Okay. Is there anyone else speaking from those videos? Okay. I'm seeing none then. Governor Pierce. Customer appears. Governor Pierce, I have you queued up. No one you may not know. She might not be back on. He refused to suffer the life left side. Yeah, but she's. She's queuing up, so. Okay, so can I get another motion, please? Someone queue up on the queue system to move this. Okay. I have a message from District nine, but I got another motion and a motion for District six. There's a motion and a second. I will go ahead and do a roll call vote. Is there anything else that is. Nothing of bad stuff, Mr. America. But there's nothing else to add. Okay. But District one. And. District two. District three. I worked for. My. District five. I District six. Hi. 758. Hi. Nine. Hi. Rosanne Cash is thinking. We're now moving on to our final viewing item, Madam Court. This really.

Recommendation to request a report on the possibility of preparing a City-wide survey on the prioritization of City services and citizen/user satisfaction of existing City services. This survey process would be open to all Long Beach residents and employees and would specifically emailed/mailed to citizens who come into contact with the City through any of our City Departments. The City of Long Beach currently offers a brief survey following a submittal to the Go Long Beach application, however, it is unknown what other survey mechanisms are currently being utilized. As part of this agenda item, staff should prepare a report on what other City departments currently utilize a survey process to gather data that can assist in budget allocation decisions. The report should consider all options including on-line surveys for residents who have pulled building permits or obtained a business license or a survey on our community outreach efforts from residents who provide feedback through "Speak Up" Long Beach. Additionally, the City (1) should explore a City-wide resource on servi

LongBeachCC_06022015_15-0496

Thank you. Thank you for being here tonight. If we can go to the regular agenda item and start with item 14. Communication from Councilman Price Councilmember Super nor Councilman Andrews. A recommendation to request a report on the possibility of preparing a citywide survey on the prioritization of city services. And citizen user satisfaction of existing city services. Is there emotion? And a second place. I'll do it. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I wanted to bring this item forward, and I thank the council colleagues who have signed on to the item with me. I think it's very important when we approach budgeting season and the process involved with determining what city services the public views. It's critical that we do a study to determine whether or not survey tools can be used to help us gather information about what citizens actually believe. Many, many years ago, when I was in grad school, I wrote my thesis on the purpose and utility of citizen satisfaction surveys. And in support of that thesis, I prepared I created a citizen satisfaction survey that was supposed to be modeled after a business government, a business customer satisfaction survey to determine really what the residents felt about the city services that they were getting, what city services they believed were critical, and provide the city with opportunities to enhance and better improve its service delivery models. I know that the City of Long Beach has in the past embarked on a very expansive survey analysis of its residents. And I know that some of our departments currently have surveys associated with the services that they provide. For example, I know that we have a survey mechanism available through Go Long Beach. This particular item requests staff to really evaluate the purpose and utility of surveys and to provide us as council members some information regarding what it would take for us to have a survey tool in place that would help us prioritize city services with the understanding that we are going to be entering budget deficit years and we're going to have to make some difficult choices regarding what services we are going to fund and invest in. You know, every single week we get requests from different organizations for various programs, and oftentimes the folks that are bringing the request to us are not completely aware of our financial situation. Our financial situation going into the next three years specifically is dire. It is not a positive financial situation. So when we're thinking about programs that people are presenting to us. Sometimes programs are wonderful and they provide a lot of opportunity to improve the city in any one particular area. But we may not have the money to fund it. And I think it's important as council members that we gauge really what do the residents and the taxpayers of our city, the people who live here and and contribute to our tax base, what do they expect to see from us in terms of government services? That's where our focus should be. That's where our emphasis should be. We should be focused on the specific services that the residents believe are the required services that the city needs to provide and figure out how to make those better and improve upon those and allocate our precious resources to those areas. So that's the intent behind this particular item, is to request staff to come up with long term survey methodologies that we can employ. And also short term, our budget cycle is coming up I think in August is when will have the budget release to recommendations released. And I think it's important for us to try to, even though it's a very short window, try to develop a short term survey methodology to allow us to be able to reach out to residents. Perhaps we could do it on Speak Up, Long Beach or SurveyMonkey or some other survey tool that would at least give us a small baseline of what our residents are thinking in terms of core city services that we can use to guide us, not to direct us entirely, but to guide us during this year's budget process. And then looking on into 2017, I'd like to see us have a more detailed and thorough survey methodology in place that we can use to find out how we should prioritize our services as we enter into even more significant deficit years. So that's that. Thank you. Councilmember Turanga. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I am concerned about the costs associated with a program of this magnitude, given the likelihood that the surveys web based. Am also concerned for the ability of lower income residents in my district to have equal access to the survey. Also, given our recent passage of a language access policy. For the sake of equity, we would need to include other way to use languages in Long Beach, in industry and the survey's methodology, including Spanish, Carmi and the Gulf. Lastly, if we are currently asking departments to make proportional cuts, can we really afford to fund a survey program to be able to financially implement any suggestions brought forward by our residents? Most of the time, when a series initiated is done with the idea of changing or implementing a new policy, and I feel that it brings a false sense of expectation from our residents and I am unable to support the same at this time. Thank you. Councilmember Andrews. Yeah. Yes. Thank you, vice mayor. You know, I think it's a good idea to provide our constituents, you know, with up to date information on the city and city budget by conducting surveys. I also think that it's very important that everyone has access to this information by having these surveys put it not only in English, but Spanish , Kumai, Tagalog, Vietnamese, just to name a few, since everyone is not the access to computers. We should find other ways to reach out to our constituents, whether it is by fliers, brochures going door to door, community stakeholders like the churches. We need to make sure that we reach our four corners of Long Beach. This is a way for people all, including into this process. And I would like to thank you for bringing it to the diocese, Mr. Wise. Thank you. Councilmember Alston. I thank you. And I just wanted to, I guess, get some clarification either from the maker of the motion or from staff. Does this item actually have a cost associated with it or is it asking for a report? The item is asking for a report. It specifically says there's no fiscal impact. But in regards to survey technology, there's also free surveys that are available. The intent behind the item is to develop a methodology to find out from citizens where they want the city to spend its money. It's not really designed to target a specific survey methodology or a range in terms of what the survey methodology would cost, because there are free surveys available that staff would also explore as part of the study. So right now, as it reads, there is no fiscal impact, but there could be. And it sounds like you are thinking in or directing staff to look at the free option. Absolutely. Especially for the short term survey. But the particular item that we're voting on is asking staff to explore what the cost of surveys would be and what methodologies available. I would add, there's going to be obviously some some time and cost associated with exploring the cost. I don't see a real problem with that, but I will just just just say that since this is looking toward our budget and you have expressed and I think express very eloquently the challenges that we face in coming years with our budget. If there is any real cost associated with this, I'm going to have an issue with that. But tonight, I'll go ahead and support it just to ask the question. Thank you. Councilman Austin, I wanted to ask the city manager what would be staff's next steps with an item that would indicate that there's no fiscal impact at the time, but may anticipate one depending on your research. Would you let us know how you would bring that back? I'm. Vice mayor, council members. We certainly would expect some type of a fiscal impact for a long term strategy that would go citywide and deal with the things that Councilmember Urania talked about. Maybe a consultant or maybe a new team or something like that. But that's something that would probably come back to you probably in 90 days or so. I don't think that it would come back to you quick enough to be utilized for the fiscal year 16 budget. That said, part two of this item would be for us to quickly look at one of our existing survey tools, as Councilmember Pryce talked about. And it might be something that we could just simply be web based and get out as fast as possible without a cost or a minor cost. And we would put that back to you on a two from four on what we would be able to do. Our Memo to the City Council and see if the council would want us to get to go forward with a tool like that so that you would have something before the fiscal year 16 budget actions. Thank you. And with the Long Beach Go app. When someone uses Long Beach Go, the government outreach app to report whatever they see graffiti. Is there a feedback? There's a feedback item that comes back, and I'm not sure if every council member was aware that when our constituents use that, they get some way of being able to say what what their feedback is to the issues that Council member Yarrawonga raised regarding language access. Are you and your staff prepared to incorporate that as part of your review based on the commitments that we've made to include as many of our non English speaking residents as possible? I Vice Mayor, I don't think that we would ever consider coming back to you without adhering to all the policies that we've adopted. So. Absolutely, yes. I didn't think so. Thank you. Councilmember Councilwoman Pryce. Guys. I was cued back up. The other thing that I wanted to point out is this is a very common methodology that municipalities are using all over the nation. It's there's books written on how important it is before people vote on policy to understand what the needs of the residents are, what the priorities of the residents are . There are numerous standard surveys that are already in place and available that the city can use and modify so that they would reduce the cost that would be associated with utilizing such a survey. I believe there are already sample surveys that the City of Long Beach could actually tweak to tailor it to the specific services that we provide in the city of Long Beach. So it's not like we would be reinventing the wheel. This is a methodology that is being utilized throughout the nation so that people can basically have some support in budget period prioritization. So I think it's important it makes the budget process a lot more objective and it makes us a little bit more able to make decisions not based on the specific group that's asking for an item, but rather what the values of the community are in terms of the core services that they consider to be vital to a city's function. It's basically quantitative statistical data that says what the residents of the taxpayers of the city want to see from their city government. Councilmember Mongeau So speaking to the the value of such a tool in the graduate program that I attended and have continued to work with over the last decade, and they have a course that actually the second year master's students do these surveys for local governments and nonprofits at no charge and they come out and they do an interview. My current full time employment has utilized them. I have had many of those students as interns in my council office to gather the information from our residents that I'll be presenting at the June 27th State of the Fifth. But I strongly encourage the city staff to explore both the Long Beach State and USC UCLA options that we have available to us, because they, year after year can use the work of the prior class and see the types of tools that have been used. And many of the budget directors across the region have used similar tools so that there would be no costs, in which case I would be supportive. Councilmember Urunga. Thank you. Vice Mayor I have to respectfully disagree in the fact that there is a cost associated with it. There's staff costs. There's a cost that staff has to do in terms of doing the research necessary to find a tool or an instrument that is going to be as extent as as wide as it needs to be to contact all the portions of the communities that are going to be impacted by any policy decision that we make here in the city council. It's going to be a survey that it has to be comprehensive. It has to be complete. It has to be strategic. And it has to be one that is going to be realistic for the citizens of Long Beach if they're going to be responding to this survey. If I heard that the city manager correctly, this is a survey they would not be able to put into implementation right away. It's a it would be a survey that is not going to be effective for the current budget year this year. It would be something that would be used next year. So in that consideration, that is the reason why I'm not able to support this motion at this time. Perhaps next year, perhaps in a new budget year once we already completed this one. But I think that moving forward with a survey, even if it's just a report to come back to us, I think that we're not ready for that at this time. And that and even if it's a short term one, it would be incomplete. I mean, if we're going to do this, let's do it right. Let's not just do it half, half way, short term only, not long term. We need to be as comprehensive and complete as we possibly can. And that takes time. And I'm not ready to support it at this point. Thank you, Councilmember. Your Honor. And I wanted to share I don't think anyone disagrees here that we should not receive resident feedback or stakeholder feedback. That's something that we all do through council offices. But as a city on policies, there is value to opening up as many mechanisms as possible for feedback and reports do costs money. And I will ask all of us to consider that everything we do, even the items here that don't that say that there is no fiscal impact, there is because staff has spent some time preparing the item. This entire book has cost money just by the level of the number of hours every staff member has put into it . So that's the nature of public service. There is a cost. We have many, many, many. Public servants in the audience that provide a tremendous amount of service throughout their careers here. So that's that's our business. We provide service. It's not free. It's never been free. And I understand with Councilmember Durango saying that we are in tight budget times, we will continue to be in tight budget times. But there is tremendous value in opening up the ability for residents to communicate with us in a manner that's relevant to them. And I'll give an example, which I think many of you are aware of the national civic. The National Civic Day of Hacking, the hackathon that is on the sixth, I believe, the city of Santa monica is participating. I would encourage the city of Long Beach if we're not already participating to do that and put out a challenge to students and developers and all the individuals that love working with data to come up with something that we can use that is minimal in cost, that is usable on a web enabled device where most residents may have access to a Web enabled device. Not all residents, but most, and will figure out a way to capture those that do not have those devices to bring them in as well. So there are opportunities and I think there's great value in considering them and being as flexible as possible. And I think that's what this council is supportive of and that's what we intended when we discussed the language access policies, access to as many people as possible, which also means communicating in the tools that are relevant to people, not just the tools were willing to provide. And and I think that's what this council means. But I do I do appreciate the prudence, the fiscal prudence, especially being chair of the Budget Oversight Committee and knowing that we're coming into budget conversations and I appreciate the city manager's notation that we will probably not be able to take this up with this fiscal year. But something that we should look at now united your head. When I mentioned the hackathon, are we doing that? A hackathon is scheduled on Saturday, June 6th, was going to be at the Expo building this transition to the aquarium. So it'll be a marine based hackathon at the aquarium on Saturday. So is your ISD direct your is it I.T. department here? Is the IT department in charge of that? Not they're not in charge. It's we're an ancillary use. We're trying to hook up wi fi for the hackathon at the Expo building and it's transitioned to the to the aquarium and will be involved somehow. So what I was recommending is actually the city participating in opening up whatever data we may have already opened up and offering that as a challenge, not just a venue. We're certainly happy to offer venues, but it's the civic day of hacking. And so that should mean that our civic center participates as well. And this would have been a great opportunity to submit that to these genius brains that will show up. You know. So that would address, councilmember, your biggest concern. They're willing to give free consulting and free expertize, all for the privilege of working with our data. I think so. Thank you. Councilmember Price and Councilmember Richardson would like to add something. Thank you, Vice Mayor. We've I've heard some good arguments about this, both in favor and against. And I'm going to I'm going to support this. And just a few points to note, I support feedback and surveys, and I think they can be a great tool. In my experience and surveys in my particular area of town, online surveys really capture only the engaged people, folks who have access to a service and familiar with the service. But for those folks who may not have access to services or may not be familiar with the services, you have to take an additional step and actually have a one on one personal connection in touch with that person to actually better understand and better engage that that that survey. So I'm confident that city staff is going to evaluate sort of the language barriers that Councilmember you brought up and then access issues. The other point I want to I want to say is, you know, I was able to watch the last round of cuts that the city had to do. And people can say what they want about about proportional budgeting. But the fact is, certain departments we still have today because we didn't deviate from that, we were able to protect some libraries, some parks and other services that are really a drop in the water compared to a drop in the bucket compared to police and fire. And I will be want to just be careful that we don't one way or the other, sort of have some unintended consequences by having more surveys in one department, then having, say, one survey for fire and one survey for for the larger departments, whereas these other smaller departments do a number of different programs. So those are just a few things I would want to just pay attention to as we move forward in the survey. So I'll be I'll be supporting this. Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of the public that wish to address the Council on item 14? Biosphere. So after Gary comes forward, would you like to come forward? Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor and members of the City Council and Staff. My name is Gary Shelton. I believe my address is on file. A survey, you know, complete. There's 240 some odd thousand households in the city. So completion in that respect could be a lot of surveys. I believe that the wording of the item in the first paragraph is that the process would be open to all Long Beach residents and employees and would specifically be emailed or mailed to citizens who come into contact with the city through any of our city departments. And that made me think water, gas, trash. Again, we're back up to 340 some 8000 households. It would be a very, very big survey. Now, that doesn't I'm not trying to say that's bad or good. I'm not even trying to come down on one side or the other of this motion. I'm hoping that maybe there's even more communication behind the rail as to the feasibility, because the possibility is what requested here. But in every in all expenditures of time, effort and money, we talk about feasibility when something is going to come out. The other end is a project or a program. Council member Urunga expressed that he would hope that it would be complete and strategic and realistic. And I think that was a good triumvirate of points to be thought of. As you move forward on to this, I'm only concerned that you would be asking the city manager to come back with a report that gets us nowhere. That's really my only concern. I think a survey would be great idea too, but I'm not sure it would really get us anywhere, you know. And lastly, surveys always have a sampling methodology, but we've already kind of ruled out are we talking about one in ten are going to be asked questions or one in 100 or maybe one in a thousand or maybe only one in 10,000 people in the in the city asked any of these questions to get a plus or -3.4%, you know, range of error on this thing that would make any sense to us. But it's just I have concerns and I'd like to hear it fleshed out a little more from behind the rail before you ask the city manager to try to flesh it out himself. Thank you. Thank you, Gary. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Vice Mayor. This is an excellent motion, I think, brought forward by Councilmember Price. My name is Kim Rising. I will be addressing a separate issue this evening. However, I have a master's degree in political science and a bachelor's and also have done post-doctorate work. One of the required courses, of course, is statistics. When you're a graduate student and I've had experience working in both the city of Tacoma and the city of Flagstaff, and I'm dating myself here. My master's degree was 1975 prior to the city swarm, and we did very effective surveys without the help of the current statistics. And it's further in my career, I've worked for the Democratic Party, where we've measured ideologies and political psychology, and we have not used necessarily I.T. responses. There's a variety of universities and colleges in this area, especially Cal State University, Long Beach, USC and UK, that graduate students in political science. And I wish Dr. Garcia were here because he could back me up on this in order to get their degrees, they have to do this type of volunteer work. And indeed, even if you ignore the i.t and the language issue, statistically, this is something that people would be readily able to volunteer and pass the data further on to ongoing classes. I thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is julian morales. I'm a student at Cabrillo High School and I live in the the Craftsman Village area. And I'd like to add a lot to what Mr. Unger said in my specific neighborhood. Most of us are Spanish speakers, and I talked to a lot of them. Not one of us knew there was an election happening a year back. And I think addressing these people on the fact that there's going to be a survey is going to be a lot harder if it's not done in person, because a lot of these people don't either trust or understand what's happening in the government. And I still think they deserve a word on what's happening. And on another comment on the. On getting people from the hackathon to work. I do a little bit in programing and I can tell you to create a survey of this magnitude would take between weeks, two months. And I do believe they're going to get there even though they're going to charge to do this. It's not something that any program would just want to do for free out of charity. And if you do find them, you still have to find people that speak in other languages spoken in Long Beach, which still creates even a bigger challenge. So. I would say that I'm against it solely for the fact that I do believe is going to cost too much to be able to get this running and to get it running in all languages. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your feedback. Are there any other public speakers? I would like to address the Council on this item. Okay, so we have a motion and a second members. Please cast your vote. Motion carries eight one. Thank you. And members, if I may take one more item prior to taking item 25, I would appreciate that. Item 15.

AN ORDINANCE relating to gig workers in Seattle; establishing labor standards requirements for paid sick and paid safe time for gig workers working in Seattle; and amending Sections 3.02.125 and 6.208.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_06012020_CB 119793

Will the clerk please read agenda item to interview the record? Agenda Item two Constable 119 783 relate to gig workers in Seattle establishing labor standards requirements with paid sick and paid space time for gig workers working in Seattle and amending Section 3.02. 120 56.208.020. I was going to propose. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. I will move to pass Council Bill 119793. Is there a second? Okay. It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilman Ross gave a you are the sponsor of the bill, so you are recognized in order to address this item. Thank you, Madam President. I would like to move to amend Council Bill 119793 by substituting version five A preferred version three B. It's been moved. Is there a second pocket? It's been moved and seconded to substitute the bill. Councilor Mosqueda, I will hand it back over to you so that you can address the to. Thank you so much, Madam President, and thanks to my council colleagues for all of your engagement on this issue. As you know, paid sick and safe leave is something that the city of Seattle has been proud to have implemented in 2012 and paid sick and safely, as we know and as you talked about during the initial passage, is not just about the workers it protects, though that's critical. It's also about protecting the community at large. When workers go to work sick, they interact with other people. They take longer to recover. They have the potential to infect their coworkers and members of the public. And when workers don't have the ability to take time off for safely due to domestic violence, they are unable to get the support and resources they need to be safe. It's in light of the importance of paid, sick and safely for both the workers and the community at large that we want to make sure this vital labor standards protection was extended to gig workers, especially in light of the critical work they're doing right now to serve our community. These are our friends, is our neighbors, these are our family members. And they deserve the same protections that every other worker needs under paid, sick and safely in recognition of the broad and long lasting health and safety and economic stability benefits that paid sick and safe leave. Have we wanted to make sure that we built on the good work that you all passed in 2012 for the council members who were here then, and also to make sure that we extended the protections that we all passed as a state when we voted to implement Initiative 1433 that I had the pleasure of, part partially leading in 2016, we're proud of these protections. We're proud that they have been a leading example for other states and cities across the country. But we also recognize that these protections largely only apply to traditional W-2 employees. And that's why it's problematic to leave gig workers out, especially at a time when we've seen gig work for medically increase in the past decade, where roughly around one sixth of workers across the country are doing gig work. As our council has said a number of times, this is not just about the gig economy, quote unquote. This is just about the economy at this point. Workers are being left out who are essential components of our economy, and they don't have paid sick and safely. Especially now during the coronavirus, given the amount of work that is happening right now from workers who are delivering food, who are delivering groceries, who are driving people to essential appointments across our city, we need to make sure that their needs are met. And keeping them safe. Allowing them to be protected from getting sick. And also making sure that if they get sick or they need a safe day, they have the protection they need for their day to day protection so they can get paid. This is about interacting with members of our public. Many of these workers have countless contacts with individuals throughout our community. As you heard from the folks who testified today that go right up to the doors of our neighbors, right up to the doors of our house to deliver groceries, to deliver food, and to provide folks with the essential services that they need. It is critical that they have protections if they are sick or need to take a day off to take care of their family members. Many platforms that we have worked with over the last two months, two plus months. At this point, we're on to ten weeks of engagement with stakeholders. Many platforms have stated that they are providing sick leave for their workers. But we've heard from many workers that they don't have access to adequately or it's hard to access the policies that have been offered. We've been working to make sure that this legislation is in the right form to protect the workers and make sure that it's implementable and make sure that the actions are receivable from the workers so that when we pass the law, the workers can actually get to take advantage of sick and safely when they need it. We've been in coordination with a number of partners to get this right, and many of those partners include you on City Council for all of your feedback over the last two weeks. Thanks so much to a few folks and then I'll stop and save a few. Thank you for the end council president. But I want to say thank you to the labor unions and worker advocates, including working Washington Teamsters 117, MLK Labor U.S. 21 for helping us develop this legislation. Thank you to the platforms we have briefed and sometimes heard feedback and incorporated that feedback from entities like Postmates, DoorDash, Uber, Eats, Uber , Lyft, Uber, Lyft, Instacart and the Seattle Rideshare Association and drive forward. Thank you to our friends at the National Employment Law Project, the Center for Popular Democracy and the Center for Law and Social Policy at the national level for helping us learn from policies across the country and here locally. You saw an email from Jasmine Mera Kareem I'm sorry, Jasmine Riot at the Office of Labor Standards, who provided us with some feedback earlier today. And over the last few weeks they have been very engaged with us. Also, folks like Kareem Libertas and Jenny Jen from the Office of Labor Standards, Kylie Roth and Anthony Mariama from the Mayor's office. They have been tremendous to work with and we're happy that this legislation is passing. Hopefully with your support today. Madam Chair, I'll save my thank you's for hiring a bull from Central South and Central Creek after comments because I think they deserve a few more minutes. But with that, I just want to say thanks again to all of you for your feedback. This legislation is stronger because of your input and I think we have a lot to be proud of here. Even though we recognize this is the first of many policies that these workers need to be protected. Thank you, Councilmember Mosqueda, for those remarks. Colleagues, this morning at council briefing, of course, we discussed the we had Karina bull join us for a substantive conversation and briefing an update on what was included in the substitute bill. So I think we're all familiar with that. So at this point, we are voting first on the the substitution and then we're going to vote. We're going to have a second motion where we will vote on the on the bill as substituted. So. So I would if you have substantive comments now on the the substituted bill on sort of the underlying policy, I'd ask for you to save those until the second motion so that we can go ahead and get the substitution in front of us to allow for that conversation to move forward. So are there any comments for the sponsor or questions for the sponsor on what's included in the substitute bill before we vote on putting the substitute before us? Okay. Hearing and seeing none are there. I will ask the clerk to please call the role on the adoption of the substitute. Morales. Council President Gonzalez? Yes. I think I froze up. Are we are we voting? My apologies. We are. It's okay. Totally fine. This is the nature of technology in these remote settings. So what we are voting on now is not the substantive bill we are voting on putting forward in front of us the substitute version of the bill. We will then entertain a motion to adopt this substitute version and then hear comments again. Does that answer your question, Councilman Morales? You may have lost Councilmember Morales. Okay. Madam Clerk, I'm going to ask you to call the roll on the on the bill, and we might have to circle back to Councilmember Morales. Council member Macheda. I. Councilmember Peterson. I. Council members want. Council members of the one. I. Council member Strauss. II. Council member Suarez. I. Councilmember Herbold, I. Councilmember Lewis, I. Councilmember Morales. I. I. I council President Gonzalez. I. Nine in favor, nine opposed. Thank you so much. So the motion carries and the substitute is adopted and version five eight of the bill is now before the City Council. Are there any further comments on the bill as amended? Colleagues. I'm scanning. Okay. So council members, the want has raised her hand. Anyone else have any comments? So I can put you in the queue because we're losing. Okay, great. So we will hear from her. So what then? Councilmember Lewis. Then Councilmember Peterson. Councilmember Swan, please. To Brisbane. I will of course be voting yes on this legislation to extend Seattle's paid seven sick day protections to gig workers. Gig workers deliver groceries. Drive for Uber and Lyft. And do many, many other jobs essential to our society. These are jobs like any other, except they are marked with the legal fiction that they are one person, small businesses instead of employees of a corporation. The result of this legal fiction is that workers are suddenly no longer protected by labor laws, and the bosses do not have to pay the employer's share of Social Security taxes. And the workers are denied their rights to organize into a union to collectively bargain for a fair contract with their boss. This is totally unjust, and it's a clear example of how, under capitalism, the working class must continually organize and struggle to avoid falling farther and farther behind. We should remember that 100 years ago, over a hundred years ago, no workers could legally form unions in this country, but courageously they did anyway, often having to defend their picket lines against physical attack and threat to their very lives. In the 1920s, the US military was even deployed to bomb the picket lines of striking miners. Today's courageous and historic struggles. Workers won the decent contract that formed the so-called middle class that lasted for about two generations, which of course, is not accessible for most millennials now. But those labor, those protections were won through those labor struggles. The right to organize was won through a struggle. Since then, over decades, big business has been attempting to claw back every gain that workers fought for and won. Wealth inequality. Inequality has ballooned, as we know, and an estimated one out of every five workers in the US is now classified as an independent contractor, also known as gig workers. So in other words, this is a problem that is that is something that all working people should be fighting against. Ultimately, gig workers will need to unionize with or without the legal permission to do so, because we only have the power in the workplace when we get organized to fight for it. In the meantime, however, I am happy to support this legislation to extend basic, safe and secure home rights to gig workers in Seattle. This is extremely important. Only I would raise the caution around enforcement that I had spoken to when we had had this discussion in council meeting, leaving when we first discussed it. Seattle 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. They do excellent work, but they don't have enough resources. If your boss steals from you, it takes many months even to get the money you are owed. And we have seen how ruthless giant corporations like Uber can be. This can be disregarding workers rights, workers rights. The Office of Labor Standards is currently understaffed. The Mayor has instituted a hiring freeze, claiming that there is not the budget to adequately staff the department because of the COVID related budget shortfalls. These shortfalls are not automatic. They are not an act of God. If Mayor Durkan and the City Council were willing to tax big business and raise progressive revenues, we could have the resources to stop austerity to fund departments like the Office of Labor Standards to the extent that they needed to be fund in order to fully function in protecting workers rights. And in addition, creating more public sector jobs, building social housing and the Green New Deal as a background on movement is demanding as many and as many people in public comment indicated today. Gig workers deserve to be protected with space, safe and sick. Time rights, that means. It's important to support this legislation today, but we also need to push back and refuse to accept austerity that is coming down the pike. And we should adequately staff departments like the Office of Labor Standards and expand progressive revenues. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Sawant. Next up is Councilmember Lewis, and then we will hear from Councilmember Peterson. Thank you, Madam President. It goes without saying, and I'll say it at the top that I will be voting for this legislation. I just wanted to briefly do a shout out to Dan Beacon for his reporting. On the report. I can't remember her saying. Why can't it be it? I mean it. I love that I should never underestimate their ability. To go on. As a member. Councilmember Herbert Okay. Got it. We got we got we now have here all conversation. Councilman Lewis. You're down here. Let me let me let me regain my composure a little bit here. So as I was saying, I want to do a shout shout out to Dan Beekman for his reporting this weekend, which I made some points that I just wanted to highlight and that I think are really prescient. He interviewed a driver named Daisy Taurus who, before driving for one of these gig based platforms, had worked in a hotel and had been an employee and as such, was entitled to paid sick and safely. He interviewed a gentleman named Zach Albacete, who was driving for an app who, prior to COVID, worked at a car dealership and in that position would have been entitled to paid sick and safely. I bring that up because I think it is is a horrible harbinger of things to come in our economy, post-COVID, that the openings and opportunities that are thriving for people who have fallen off in the economy that existed pre-COVID, who were already in positions where earnings and benefits were not keeping pace with the rising cost of living, are now sustaining themselves economically by working for these apps and do not have these benefits. That all of us have taken for granted in the normal economy over the last decade, as folks have fought for and successfully won, including many of the folks on this council , higher wage borders, a sick and safely, in some cases, nationally mandated vacation time. And it's just critical that legislation like this I'm so grateful for your leadership on this council that is being put forward, because this is a massive gap in this economy. And every time we have one of these downturns, as we did in the oh nine, 2010, 2011 downturn, there has got to be very conscious work on the part of leaders at all levels of government to work really hard, to try to make sure that inequities that I'm enduring, a desperate time in the economy taking a hit don't get entrenched, solidified and become a new normal that shapes what the economy on the other side of the recovery looks like. And, you know, I I've heard stories. I cannot speak to them personally. And if there used to be paid internships, for example, in the workforce or I've heard about, you know, mandatory overtime or a defined benefit pensions that existed during the period of middle class growth that council members alluded to. We need to really make sure that paid sick and safely through this legislation, but also more broadly is a fundamental part of our economy. When we come out on the other side of COVID and that it is during COVID as well. So thank you. Councilman Mosca and I will be voting for this. And I really appreciate your leadership. Councilmember Lewis. Next up, we'll hear from council member Peterson. And if any of my other colleagues wish to make comments, please, please do let let me know. Councilmember Peterson, the floor is yours. Thank you. I wanted to thank Councilmember Mosqueda for her generously giving us more time to review this legislation. That was very helpful. I know that your city council staff and our central staff have worked really hard on this. I also appreciate your working with the executive on just the how to practically implement the legislation and also for reaching out to those in the private sector who would be impacted by the legislation. Also, I wanted to shout out to work in Washington for their advocacy for this legislation. So I will be voting for the legislation. And just wanted to thank Councilor Muscat. Thank you. Thanks so much, Councilman Peterson. Colleagues, any other comments on the bill? Okay. I'm not. Oh, you will get the last word. Any other. Any other of my colleagues want to give any comments on the bill before we hand it over to councilman to close this out? Councilmember Strauss saying thanks to everyone for working on very important legislation. Thank you. Thank you so much. I also want to thank Casmir mosqueda for her work on this. I know she's been working on it for quite some time, obviously, and such such common sense legislation that during a period of time when there is a high level of, you know, high level of risk to exposure to a highly infectious disease that we will provide this coverage to the sector of workers is just is just common sense, not just for the health and safety of the workers, but also for the people that they interact with as sort of a Connector of Services. I really want to appreciate Councilor Moschino's efforts on this. I absolutely agree that there's a lot more work that we need to do in this space and look forward to an opportunity to finally be able to engage in that in that body of work in the coming in the coming months. So with that being said, we're going to go ahead and move forward here. And there appear to be no more comments or debate on this. So I'm going to go ahead and ask Councilor Mosquito to close us out and then we'll be able to call the roll on the bill. Thank you so much, council president and thanks to all of our Council colleagues for your comments on the paid sick and safe leave ordinance for gig workers. As the council president said, it is common sense. And even though it makes sense to give workers sick days during a global pandemic, you can imagine there was a lot of complex policy conversations that went into making sure that this policy was going to be actionable and that people would receive these benefits. And the two people that I want to thank again are Carina Bole from central staff and a chief of staff in my office. Those are the folks that I'm going to be passing along this thank you to. And I know they're probably watching with great anticipation as this labor of love over the last ten weeks looks to be about to make it over the finish line. A huge thank you to Carnival for the hundreds of hours that she has put into this piece of legislation, her energy and her knowledge and her willingness to think of creative solutions and for doing it all with incredible patience and grace. As you saw this morning, as she presented to our council colleagues and Senator Cory for her endless hours, hundreds of calls with various stakeholders, multiple meetings throughout both days and nights and weekends to make sure that voices were heard, ideas were incorporated, and that the important nuances were worked out. This is a really critical policy, and I think it will have lasting impacts for both the workers and the protection of all of our health in the upcoming months and years until we can get both a vaccine for COVID, but also more importantly for the broader protections that every gig worker needs to have as they are truly essential workers with or without a pandemic, and wanting to look to continue to strengthen the protections for those workers as well. I do want to thank, as you've heard over the last three or four weeks, folks have been writing in, calling the folks who you heard testify today, people in the Beckman article and others. These are the workers who themselves have had to not only figure out how to sustain themselves in this crisis, but really have put in a ton of work to crafting this policy with us. So thank you to the workers impacted by this legislation who've been at the table to help craft this basic set of protections to provide a floor so that every worker can have access to sick leave. This is an incredible win for those workers and for the city as a whole. The permit, the public comment from today's workers and over the last few weeks have really spoken for themselves. You all have heard these stories that I want to lift up. Just a few comments that we heard from today. And then last week, what you heard from Jason today was a sentence that really resonated that I think we should just spend another second or two to reflect on. He said, Don't call me essential and then not pay me like I'm essential. Don't call me a hero. Treat me like I'm human. He was followed by Mr. Thomas, who talked about how critical it is for us to make sure that folks actually have the safe leave, that they need, the sick leave, that they need to make sure that they haven't been left behind. And as he goes to the door, he sees people put their wallets away because of inherent bias, racism that continues to perpetuate in our community. It should go stated explicitly that the vast majority of workers that we're talking about protecting today are black and brown workers. And the vast number of people that have been left out of state and federal policy in terms of labor protections are black and brown workers. And that was true when we passed the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights last year. Thanks again to the council members who supported that legislation. And that, you know, we've made tremendous strides across the nation and passing that it's because they were explicitly left out of the federal protections at the at the national level, and we took the action to protect them. And today, yet again, we're standing up, especially for those who've been intentionally left out of labor protections in the past to. Make sure that our vulnerable workers, workers who are now calling essential, have these explicit protections as a critical component of our economy and making sure that they have the safety that they need during the time of the pandemic. And in recognizing that these are mostly black and brown workers. And then lastly, I want to leave you with the comments that I shared from Carmen, who is a GrubHub driver. She says now that people are hungry and hiding in their homes from the virus, I am suddenly essential and risking exposure to highly contagious, possibly deadly viruses to fetch people's dinner. That's why we need sick leave. I was sick with extreme flu like symptoms throughout March, although extremely weak, constantly coughing and having trouble talking in a full or taking a full breath. I kept working as a delivery driver because it was my only source of income. At times I was too weak to work or finished my shift. I lost my opportunity to earn income. Gig work was my only income, so I am now behind on all my monthly bills. I work as much as possible, but there are days where I only make enough for the next day to put gas in the car and grab a few groceries. I do not live paycheck to paycheck. I live day to day. I live order to order. I do not know how I will financially recover. I'm still experiencing waves of COVID 19 symptoms. At times I am not able to work with sickly. I will now make sure that I will never be in that situation. With sick leave. I would have not had to work when I was very sick and possibly spread the virus with sick leave. I would have stayed home with sick leave. I may have recovered faster. So thank you, council colleagues, for all of your work to support this legislation. And it's a great day. Thanks for all the workers and their time and for all of the stakeholders who provided input on this piece of legislation. Thank you so much, Councilmember Mosqueda. So that closes out our debate on this particular council bill. So I'm going to ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended. Morales, I. Mascara. I. Peterson. I. So what. I. Strauss. I. Juarez, I. Purple. Lewis. I. President Gonzalez hi nine in favor and then oppose. 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. And congratulations, Counselor Muscat, on the passage of that bill, and especially congratulations to all of the all of the workers who will be covered by this new protection. It's really, really is a good day for them. Okay, folks, we have other business. I understand that Councilmember Morales does have an item in other business, so I will go ahead and hand it over to her for her remarks and have her walk us through her request.

AN ORDINANCE vacating the south 168 feet of the alley adjacent to Lots 17 through 24, lying between Block 55 and Block 56, Boston Company's Plat of West Seattle, near the Alaska Junction of the West Seattle neighborhood of Seattle, on the petition of Fauntleroy Place LLC (Clerk File 308171), and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_12142015_CB 118592

Agenda Item 51 Constable 118 592 vacating the South 168 feet of the alley adjacent to Lot 17 through 24, lying between block 55 and BLOCK 56. Boston Company's plat of West Seattle near the Alaskan just excuse me. Junction, excuse me. Standing in the West Seattle neighborhood of Seattle on the Petitioner Fauntleroy Place, LLC, in ratifying confirming certain prior acts committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilmember Rasmussen. Thank you. This petition has all the requirements of the City Council and the conditional approval have been met, including all of the public benefits. And the committee has reviewed that and the all of the departments have recommended approval and the committee recommends approval as well. Thank you. Any questions or comments? Sure. Please call the role on the passage of the Bill Garden. I. Gonzalez. Harrell, Licata, I. O'Brien Rasmussen. All right. So on President Burgess eight in favor. Nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Is there any other business to come before the council? So I would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the service of Councilmember Licata. Councilmember Rasmussen and Councilmember Gordon. This is the last formal meeting of the City Council where these three members will be present, and we appreciate your dedicated public service to the people of Seattle. You've all served with distinction and with integrity, and that's important in our democratic society. Do any of my colleagues wish to share any comments? Councilmember Harrell Well, I had a lot of time in a speech lined up for each one of you a piece. Please go ahead. But it's 522 and I think Councilmember Gonzalez and I have a 6:00 appointment. So in all seriousness, I just want to say it's been my my honor serving with the three of you. I think he's just served with distinction and commitment to the people of Seattle. Never expected to agree with all of you when I got elected, because I haven't found that human being yet that I agree with all the time. But certainly my respect for the three of you is at an all time high and I don't think you're going anywhere. Hopefully so. We'll hopefully still be the beneficiary of your sage advice. But it's been my honor serving with the three of you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember O'Brien. Thanks. I. I've been on the council for six years, and I don't know what a council would look like without the three of you. So it's going to be a brave new world we're heading into. Perhaps more importantly, I don't know what it's going to look like with the three of you on the outside as advocates. And I look forward to continuing to hear your positions and opinions as we move forward. So thanks for your public service for so many years. Thank you. Councilmember someone. Thank you. Councilmembers Jean Gardner and Dan Rasmussen. I think we had some really great discussions and lively debates and we also had agreement on various things. I mean, one of the things that was of real consequence and it's evident today, which is through the wage theft enforcement ordinance, that one of the factors in that whole process coming that coming to fruition was the statement of legislative intent that I drafted, that Councilmember O'Brien and Councilmember Rasmussen supported, and the full council voted on that in the Budget Committee, which, you know that I'm grateful for those kinds of opportunities where we were able to do that. And Councilmember Legarda, of course, you know, we've had. I have. I mean, you've been on the council for a long time, but for my two years I've had a really wonderful time getting to know you and working with you on so many important issues. And even though you won't be here, you know, formally on this body, I have no doubt and I have every hope that you will be a part of building this historic movement that we have started to build, not only in Seattle, but nationwide. I think the whole nation should have the benefit of your experience and your true dedication to the interests of workers and those who are marginalized. Seattle has been really, really fortunate to have you, and I hope that we continue to get, you know, even more of a benefit of your of your activism. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Let's remember, Gordon. Well, I just want to say it's been such a pleasure to serve. I can't tell you. I really thought after a long newspaper career, this was the frosting on the cake. And it has been. There have been so many wonderful things that we've been able to do. And I'm so grateful to the voters for electing me. I'm so grateful for my fellow council members for putting up with me. And I would have been rather disappointed if we hadn't had at least one little controversy on this last, final council meeting very much. Council Member Lakota. I will make this mercifully short on time. It's been a pleasure working with all of you. I've really enjoyed your honesty and great open discussions and the last meeting to go to. Well, what a great, joyful struggle. And we accomplished a lot. Thank you. Thank you. And I can't wait until you're on the other side of that podium addressing you as a citizen. And we can stop you after your 2 minutes. Thank you. Councilmember Rasmussen. Thank you. As customer Gordon said, it's been an incredible privilege and a joy to be a member of the city council. The first time I was up here, I was so nervous I could not stand up to speak and I just hope that I wasn't breaking the council rule. So it took a while to become comfortable, to stand to speak here. Now I'm ready to leap to my feet, just as Councilmember Harrell often does. So I feel like I've grown in this job. And also I think Councilmember Swan made a very good point. While we have disagreements at times. I do think that we agree far, far more times and that sometimes our styles are different. But I think that our goals of having a just equitable society in this city and moving what we are able to do here out into the state and nationally and even internationally is is the same . And so sometimes a lot is made out of a few disagreements. And it's interesting in that we've always been accused of being such a polite city council and and such a boring city council that when there is a disagreement, it's almost headlines. So I, I thought that the discussion this afternoon was, was productive and healthy. And I hope that we have more productive, healthy discussions in the future. And again, thank you. I've really welcomed working with all of you, including of all of our wonderful staff, our clerk's office, our central staff, my staff, which is now nearing, I think , a dozen after about 12 years. So it's been great working with with all of you. Thank you so much. And Beverly Barnett, of course, all the staff to their wonderful. Thank you very much. Councilmember Gonzalez. So as the as the freshman the newest member on the city council, I wanted to express my gratitude to councilmembers Licata and Gordon and Rasmussen. In the short two and a half weeks that I've been a city council member, I have already learned so much from from you all and am incredibly appreciative of the hard work and effort that it takes to be to be in this role and to serve the people of Seattle. So thank you to all three of you. I think I think between the three of you, you have decades and decades of service and you've left a long a long you're leaving a long legacy of really great promising work for the city of Seattle. And thank you so much for your service. Thank you, Jean, Nick and Tom, thank you. You you've served well, so thank you very much. And we're adjourned.

AN ORDINANCE adopting a budget, including a capital improvement program and position modifications, for The City of Seattle for 2020; and creating positions exempt from civil service; all by a 2/3 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_11252019_CB 119689

Please read the agenda item number 32. Gentium 3032 Council Bill 119 689 Adopting a budget including capital improvement program and position modifications for the City of Seattle for 2020 and creating positions exempt from civil service by two thirds vote of the City Council. The committee recommends the bill passes amended. Okay. This is the final adoption of the budget. We're going to turn it over to Councilmember Bagshaw, who I want to say before you begin, thank you, thank you for working. This is a lot of work and a lot of commitment from you, and I appreciate it the way you handled it from start to finish. Councilmember Bagshaw, you have the floor. Thank you. Well, I've got about five pages of thank you's, if you will all recognize the good work that you have all done. Council, central staff. How come you're hiding in the background and where are your colleagues? But let's let's say I want to start by saying last year in our 2019 budget, it really reflected what our collective commitment was to areas that needed our most attention, and it included what we built on this year around housing and homeless services, the hygiene. And we will get to all these thank you's and lead the criminal justice reform. And I just want to acknowledge Lisa Guard Tara moss, thank you very much for being here. And I'm going to get more to that in a moment. But this year, as we continue to focus on these commitments, I was so impressed by how all of us here not only got along, but focused on those commitments that were most important to us and that that's where we put our highest priorities. We did indeed build on the mayors budget, and that was that was great. But as Councilmember Gonzales, you said from the beginning, we're going to put our own priorities on this, our own mark. And I believe that we've done that. So just as a couple of examples, a few things that we ended up doing, 2.15 million to build up to 100 more tiny homes. We heard from so many people who are living in tiny homes saying that this was an answer for them. And as somebody who's been working on this for at least nine years, I could not tell you how happy I am. Clearly, I think we need more, but that is a good start. I am honored that the 1.8 million that we put in for the Bill Hopson Clinic moved forward. I want to say thanks to Daniel Malone, DC As many of you and I know, many of us were good friends with Bill Hobson, but this makes such a difference to me personally. I also want to say thank you for the 1.6 million and this is Councilmember Herbold and Councilmember Suarez for unsheltered individuals to get access to bathrooms and showers and then to provide diapers and women's hygiene products, expand trash collection at these encampments, that's made a big difference. And Councilmember Sawant, I just want to. Add, Councilmember. Saw the record. She was my co-sponsor. Thank you. And just the 1.5 million we put in today for the youth program, Education and Diversion. It was $1,000,000. Councilmember Herbold, that you did, as we pointed out, $3 million in our original budget and additional $2,200,000. Councilmember Swan, thank you for that. I'm very excited and this is Councilmember Pacheco that you push this with the 1.6 million to keep our enhanced shelter beds for youth open, for youth that are experiencing homelessness, to have that support, to have the legal services that they need. And I want to recognize all of the people, the advocates, the providers, whether it's Melinda Giovinco or others, that just make sure that we have services and places for youth to be at night and more. 24 seven more places, more support for them will help people get off the street. Councilmember wise, big thanks to you for the million dollars that you have really pushed to expand homeless services and improve outcomes for American native Indian Alaska Native homeless individuals makes a big difference that and the murdered and missing indigenous women. That's something that you have been advocating for. I'm deeply thankful for that. So we're also addressing the council's highest priorities around criminal justice reform, as we mentioned, public safety, transportation and environmental protection. So I'm not going to beat that one too much. You know where we're going with it. Thanks to our Seattle Fire Department for getting health one up and operational this year. It was a big deal. And then also the moneys that we put in to redesign Thomas Street to help complete market to fly the work we're doing down in Fortson Square to make yes crescent the improvement a reality. So with that and the 3.5 million to our local genius, thank you so much for all the work that you've done. With the additional money that you were able to get from the Ballmer Foundation. This is going to move us from a position, one of which we're proud of, to one that is going to be great. So I know that was we're being able to measure and monitor, and you've already done so much in that regard. We're going to come back and see, yes, this is an option that is way better than putting people in jail. So thank you so much, Lisa, for all your good work and all of your colleagues there working on that. So with that, I want to say some very specific. Thank you, Ali. Poochie, you're hiding back there. But to you and Dan, Peter, thank you for your leadership on this. It was a spectacular time for me working with you. And I just really appreciate your management, your calm, everything that you did to help this become a success. And Lisa. Okay, thank you. And Tom, thanks for the work that you two did on spreadsheets. A little known secret up here is that I break out in hives when I have to look at numbers by myself. So you really were terrific in making that happen. Thank you for that. Jeff Simms and Tracy there. They're hiding somewhere. I think Jeff is is gone. But Tracey Ratcliffe, he few are listening. Thank you for all the work that you did on Human Services and the regional governance, not only to date, but what's to come. Amelia and Jody, thank you to for the two of you. I am so respectful for your keeping us on track. Everything that you've taught me about substitutions and amendments and and adopting things, keeping us on track. So thank you both for that very much. Greg Doss I don't know where everybody is, but Greg, if you're listening and Carlos Lugo on the work that you've done on criminal justice reform. Special thanks, Greg, for working on lead with me and helping with all of the good work that we have done on the resolution, the drafting, just keeping that on track. So. Greg Doss thank you, Brian. Good night on. It's the special on education and utilities and thank you that we just had Calvin Chao and Eric McConaghy come in. Calvin, thanks for all the work that you've done on transportation. And of course, Eric, I'm just so appreciative of the work that you and Amy Gore have done. I mean, you've got a broad catalog of work you were doing on Seattle City Light and Human Services in the works on TNC. So thank you, gentlemen, both for that Lish Whitten and Ketel Freeman on land use. I cannot tell you how many times poor Ketel in ten years has had to explain land use 101 to me carrying a bull for your office, Office of Labor Standards. Thank you for your tutorials on that. I think I mentioned Brian Goodnight already around education and utilities, but the focus that you individually have had have have really meant a great deal to me. I share your work on civil rights Kelvin I've mentioned and Eric, you walked in the door just at the right time. Yolanda So the great work that Yolanda you have done around helping me support and get forward with our urban trees ordinance, the environment, climate change, you and Michael Brian are a great team there, so thank you all. And so colleagues, let me just turn my attention to you for just three more minutes if you bear with me . And so, Councilmember Mosqueda, thank you for bringing Camilla here. Thank you for all of the work. I've missed you. I'm glad you're back. Truly your dedication to workers over this last year with the hotel workers that you've done, the domestic workers, it's just mattered so much. And I just appreciate your leadership and our work to promote more child care. And we are getting a mama's room here in city hall this year. We put $100,000 into it. So that is in your capable hands now going forward next year. And Councilmember Swan, I do want to recognize and say thank you for your dedication to the people of the city. Many people's lives are really better because of you. Excuse me, Councilmember O'Brien. It's been ten wonderful years working with you, your commitment to climate change, the good work that you've done on all environmental issues. One time I know that the stranger said to me begrudgingly, that that I was sort of a nice person, but I didn't hold a candle to you. And I'm I'm I'm honored and appreciate so much the work that we have done together. So thank you for that. And Council President Hiro, you have been my buddy, my favorite linebacker and defender for the ten years that I've been on this. And you really understand how much we all need each other in this community. And I think, above all, I appreciate the fact that, you know, that excessive individualism doesn't build. The city we want. It's something I've heard you say many times, and you are a colleague that I greatly appreciate. And I just want you to know that. And thank you for caring for all of us and for Seattle. And Councilmember Gonzales, since I'm now turning on this site. I just appreciate so much your knowledge of the law, your willingness to dove deep into all issues, including public safety issues. And you've done a tremendous amount about protecting and promoting and teaching us about immigrant and refugee issues. And that has meant so much to me. And I know that all of our neighbors are going to be better off because of you. And it's just been an honor working with you and your number your number two here. And Councilmember Herbold, I get so much appreciation thinking about your long journey. I mean, 18 years, I think, is the legislative aide and into where you are now, the number one champion of D1. And it's been my pleasure. But I also I want to thank you personally for your advocacy for not just your district, but the whole city and the work that you've done, bringing some special support and attention to South Park, better transportation to West Seattle, fighting for sound transit and ways that we need to, and being very smart about operation costs for roads, for the busses, for streetcar, that's really in your hands going forward. And I just want you to know how much I appreciate that. And Councilmember Pacheco, what a delight it has been working with you. Thank you. You jumped in here, I think, in April of last year with both feet and you have been unflagging. Thank you so much for helping us with this, for building on our colleague, council member Rob Johnson's legacy as well. You've done a lot for us, so I appreciate you. I want to recognize you and then Councilmember Suarez, not least at all. But I just I want you to know how much you make me smile thinking about D5. Everything is around five. But as I as I mentioned earlier, what you have done to promote justice for missing and murdered indigenous women and also to support our good friend Colin Echo Hawk and Chief Seattle Club. It's been my honor working with you, and I just want you to know, Holy Mountain Woman, how much deep respect I have for you. And we have a favorite movie character, wind in his hair. And as he said, you will always be my friend. Thank you. So thank you all, everybody for steering, helping me work this budget. It's been a complete honor to work with all of you and I am so pleased how far we've gotten this year . So you can call me in Boston and I'll be here to work with you anytime. Thank you guys for your. Thank you very much. Well, we have item number 32 in front of us, which is the vote on the budget. And I think. Did anyone else want to say any words before he passed? Councilmember Revenue Councilmember Skater. I do want to say a few words. I thank you, Mr. President. I know I haven't had the chance to be with you over the last six weeks, so I do want to take a few minutes to express my appreciation first to my staff Sadia Parekh, Aaron House, Aretha Basu, Frida Cuevas, who have been working with all of you and all of your staff to get our priorities incorporated in this budget. Thank you, Councilmember Bagshaw, for your incredible work, to work with our office and to reach out and to ask for our input and feedback throughout the process. As I'm on parental leave, I thought it was important to come back and I had somebody asked me, a reporter asked me why come back today? I think the importance is to highlight the work that they have been able to accomplish in my absence. I do want to underscore it is really critical, though, that people who have the ability to take that parental leave, take it. You get 12 weeks starting in January thanks to the state and a law that passed. So don't forget to take it. After this budget vote, I will be going back on leave. And we know that it's important to have not just those laws on paper, but to make sure that they actually work. You all as colleagues, your staff, central staff, my team, the communications team have been able to support me and my office and my family in making sure that the leave was there for us and that we were able to take it. That it wasn't just black words on a white piece of paper that truly I was able to take that leave and have the support around me to make sure that these budget priorities were included. So thank you so much to again my incredible team at the team throughout the office and central staff and all of you council colleagues and your team for helping to make these priorities possible. I do want to highlight a few things that we were able to get into the budget. Mr. President, if this is the appropriate time, very appropriate. Again, thanks to the incredible work of our office, Aaron House and Central Creek on the housing, affordable housing, working with central staff. Ali and Tracy, we were able to secure an additional $20 million. It's $19.75 million that we could redirect to affordable housing efforts that are possible now. You heard people speak today about affordable housing efforts, like the folks from Africa Town who have projects that are ready to be built now and they just need additional funding and support from the city of Seattle. We redirected some of those funds so that $20 million can go into affordable housing efforts. Now, by redirecting $2 and making sure that the Mercer Walk sale dollars went into efforts that are ready to be built. Now we're really moving forward on affordable housing efforts that the community has prioritized. And with your help and with the Council share of actions support as well, we were able to get efforts into the housing budget that not only put the funding there for affordable housing, but the community preference. First, we funded community preference. We funded affirmative marketing efforts. These are two public policies that we've worked on with community over the last two years, and now we're putting funding forward so that there will be equitable engagement by those most affected by the legacy of redlining and racist, exclusionary policies that allow for folks to not only build the housing that we need , but build it in the community's eyes and make sure that those who are most risk of displacement, those are the lowest income folks get to come and live in our communities. Still, we put funding forward to continue the efforts that we had last year. If you remember, we did the Racial Equity Toolkit on our current zoning policies because our current zoning policies are much like other cities throughout the nation where we've excluded, intentionally excluded through historically racist policies, communities, specifically communities of color from living in areas that have high access to opportunity. When we do the racial equity analysis and now with the comp comp plan that we incorporated here, we will be following in much of the same footsteps that cities like Minneapolis have done, where we've taken a look at the blueprint of our city and said, why do we continue to have a single family housing zoning in much of the city? 75% of the city still has that zoning. How is that contributing to displacement and gentrification and prohibiting people from being able to live in the city and stay in the city? I'm really excited about that effort to make sure that there's both anti displacement efforts and that we're looking at building more inclusive housing through by undoing these past discriminatory practices. I'm really honored to have worked with many of you, including Councilmember Sawant and others who've supported the tiny house villages with the $815,000 that we got in four tiny house villages. That's another 40 homes. If you think about it, that's about another 75 individuals potentially that can live there. That is a drop in the bucket to I know what we want to work on next year in terms of allowing more tiny house villages. It goes without saying that this council's in a constantly told be smart with the public dollar, invest in proven practices. Well, I haven't. And here for the last six weeks to see it. So I got to say it again. Tiny house villages are proven practice to get folks into permanent housing. 40% success rate of getting people into affordable housing versus a 4% success rate for math on the ground. This is ten times more effective. We ought to be investing in these small, tiny house villages and other enhanced 24 seven shelter models that I know the council . Councilmember Bagshaw, as chair of the budget, has prioritized in past efforts. So thank you for including those tiny house villages. And that's the criminal justice work that has been done. This is another great way for us to be effective with our dollars. This is about an early intervention. It's like a public health model, right? If you want to invest early in keeping the community safe, you invest in public health or when you invest in restorative justice and harm reduction strategies. That is a public health strategy. That is a harm reduction strategy. It saves lives and it saves dollars. So thank you so much to all of our folks who've been working to move funding back into the sex worker harm reduction program, the Restorative Justice for Youth Programs, and working with community organizations like Park Slope, Creative Justice, We , Passageways, Rain, Beach Action Coalition and so many more. I'm really excited about the funding that we got in there for the Green Light Project, which is run by the people of color sex worker outreach project. Very excited about the funding that we got in for retraining speedy officers who work with sex officers so that it's really about coming from those workers themselves and not a patronizing way of thinking about how somebody should engage with that work. This is coming directly from the workers themselves. Continuing the line of work and inventions investments. I'm appreciative of the support for the apprenticeship coordinator and the electrical compliance officer. Again, these are upstream investments to make sure that people get into high paying jobs. I wish we could have done more with investing in the Office of Labor Standards, and next year I'll be working with all of you to make sure that we can have additional enforcement measures and dollars put in place for both education and enforcement . And this is important for the high road employers, small businesses who are doing the right thing and getting undercut by the guy next door who's engaging in wave stuff. And it's also important for the workers themselves. We passed so many pieces of legislation here with this incredible council and previous councils. We just need to make sure that those policies are followed through. And thank you, Councilwoman Bagshaw, for your past efforts on child care. And I know that we will continue fighting for additional child care throughout the city. I'm disappointed to hear that some of the private partners that we've been talking with about wanting to open additional childcare facilities across the city have just been told that some of the places that they're looking at is not possible. We need to look at this like we do with health care, that it is not getting picked up by the private market. This shouldn't be a market good and we shouldn't be thinking about everything we can do from the public policy perspective to invest in public childcare so that 0 to 3 and 0 to 5 child care is affordable, accessible and throughout our city. So that's something that I think is on our to do list next year and we'll continue working on that. Thank you for all your work. And lastly, I know you guys have been working on it for a long time, so I will stop talking. But I do want to thank our council colleagues who've been working with us over the last six weeks in my absence. I'm really proud of the the approach that we've taken in this budget and. Councilmember Bagshaw with the small amount of additional funding that was included that you found. I do think that there is it reflects the budget reflects that you put those priorities towards helping people who have been most marginalized and the highest need. So thank you for that. We had to work within the constraints that we have. And so I think that this, again, calls on us to find additional revenue, equitable revenue, so that we can have an equitable investment in our most vulnerable communities. So we're not thinking about investments for lead verses, investments in tiny homes, investments for child care versus investments in workers and health care. These are things that I know we all want to do. So I'll be looking forward to working with all of you to make sure that we find equitable revenue for a more equitable society. Thank you all for your work and I'm happy to be here and happy to be taken off after this. And thank you for your support as I do that. Thank you. Councilmember skater, this given given the fact that this is the last budget item, maybe we just sort of come down the. The day is here and if there's any comments I'm not saying comes from whereas comes from so on. May I say one more thing? Just as you were coming this way, I was also thinking of my mom. She came to watch her daughter. So thank you for watching her. That's my mom, Patty, in the back. I really appreciate. It. I didn't see anyone wave. Where's Mom? She's back in the office. Oh, in the office? She was on TV. Thank you, Mom. Very, very, very appropriate. Councilmember, what would you like to say? Something or catch from Brian? Yes, please. Councilmember 20th floor. Thank you to all our central staff members who, as usual, have provided incredible support. Ali Banerjee I shall Anker Drummond. Amy Gore. Kittel Freeman. Lisa Kaye, Calvin Chow Greg does Karina Bull, Geoff Simms, Yolanda Ho, Paddy Reagan and Kirsten Aristide. And done eda for everything that you have done to help myself and me make available all the people's budget amendments and for your commitment for on the issues. There are many people in the staff who have worked on other parts of the budget, but these are you know, this is about the budget amendments. And I apologize if I left any names out accidentally. I definitely also want to thank Amy Gore specifically for doing the final draft of our TNC and Restorative Justice amendments the last few days. I know that was rushed work, but it was done extremely well. I also thank councilmembers who have supported the amendment, and I also think that the support we've had from our activists around the city and especially those of us who have really campaigned around the people's budget amendments. And I wanted to say, you know, because it is also this this is a budget vote that we're taking after an incredibly historic election season where we had, you know, for for several months, I was saying we have had everything but the kitchen sink thrown at us. And then the kitchen sink was also thrown at us and we were able to prevail. And I think the people's budget, the successes that we have won to the people's budget movement and this is the sixth iteration of the People's Budget campaign that we have done this year is a small but important example of what you can win when you build a really active movement. I want to thank everybody who has campaigned not only for the people's budget demands this year, but for all the six years that we have done it. And I think it shows and as I said, in a small way, but in an important way, the people's budget successes show that organizing works, that when you fight, you do , indeed, when you don't win everything every single time. But it really works. Some of the specific examples that we are one that are, you know, prominent this year but also have come on the shoulders of organizing for several years. Today, the Seattle Times has a really prominent article on the law enforcement assistance version. And Dan Diekman, one of the coauthors of the article, is right here, and I want to thank him also personally for his coverage of for several years on many important issues. And, you know, just to make a distinction between the Seattle Times reporters and The Seattle Times editorial board, talk two totally different components. I couldn't resist that. But, you know, the progress that we have seen this year on the law enforcement agencies diversion and undoubtedly I'm thankful to all the council members who have supported this. But narratives matter. And if our narrative is that a very generous council that this or that, I think it misses the point. As a matter of fact, expanding the lead and in fact having lead take form in the first place required community advocates to really, really push forward. Community advocates like Lisa Dugard and others who are sitting here who have played an incredible grassroots role. And I'm sure Lisa and others, you will remember the townhall that we did at the Miller Community Center on Capitol Hill several years ago, I think five years ago now. And there we built the initial pressure to expand lead from its original pilot in Belltown to Capitol Hill. And in fact, that meeting was momentous because I remember we I was actually treasurer of modestly trying to say, okay, can we please do Capitol Hill? And then we had representatives from the NAACP come there and say, why aren't you talking about a central district? And that's how that took shape. And I think that's extremely important to recognize. Doctor Mosquito, you mentioned the tiny house villages. It's very important and I thank you for signing in support of. Then I look forward to the passing the bill next year to make the land use code flexible so that we can also make sure that Daniel's villages can be sited throughout the city. And I thank you in advance for all your support on that one as well. And I'm excited about that. And thank you Councilmember Back show for also for supporting this. But I also wanted to make clear that one of the key things that this council did, you know. In in. Contrast to what the mayor has done, which is really important, is to take a really strong position against shutting down tiny house villages. And the initial proposal from the mayor has been to shut down Georgetown and not leg. And we are absolutely I think we are united in not shutting down Georgetown. But I also want to reiterate in solidarity with Nicole as well that we don't want to shut down like either. I know that there are issues and we need to resolve those issues. But shutting down a tiny house village is not a solution. It's never going to be a solution. And I find it quite egregious. And in the middle of a very cold winter, the mayor is proposing that December 9th is a date. I don't think that is viable. And I really appreciate community members, including host community members like Carol and others who have been here, who have said that they're going to be standing there, even engaging in nonviolent civil disobedience, disobedience, if that is needed. And of course, you can be sure my community organizers and I will be there in solidarity with them. I also want to. They say very clearly, we do. We don't want to pit and hand shoulders against Chinese soldiers because we do need to expand and shelters also. But we have to be clear that the the majority demand from home people who have experienced homelessness is for tiny house villages. It is not for enhanced shelters. Let's be very clear about that. We've also seen incredible community organizing to the people's budget from the Vietnamese Senior Association. And many of these seniors have put young people to shame by their enthusiasm and their energy. And I think they are not going to be stopping there. I think they want to fight for free, free public transit, among other things, and I'm really inspired by them. We were also able to win $15,000 for dedicated funding for Indigenous Peoples Day. I'm glad to say Councilmember Suarez and I were able to push for that together. And controversial. You already mentioned the mobile bathrooms. A real change said everybody poos and there and they have a chocolate cake not a book to celebrate the victory. And very, very importantly, we were able to win funding for one, a city funded only against evictions faced by renters. Last year, we saw just the unbelievable effectiveness in preventing evictions and preventing evictions. One of the major things we need to do to prevent homelessness. And so we were able to win one Adani in the initial draft of the budget. And then because of continued organizing, we were able to win two, organize, funded. And I think that is incredible as well. We also have won two important statements of legislative intent. One supports the demands of workers and their unions and the film and music industry. And I really thank Doug Newman and the whole consortium of labor unions who have spoken up to be included and also for those yet another one to ask the Seattle Department of Transportation to make. Funding proposals to make public transit free for all. And I think this is an incredibly important component of a Green New Deal. We're not going to win a green a real green new deal and a reduction in carbon emissions unless public transit is made free for all. So it doesn't matter what income you have, what age you are, you get to ride on public transit. And and finally but not least, we have just won the $522,600 that community organizers and activists have been demanding for restorative justice programs like Community Passageways, Youth Consortium, Corner Riders and Creative Justice. And that and I as I said this morning, I was so happy that that Councilmember Robert Shaw and I were able to co-sponsor that amendment. I'm glad we found a way to do that. And I wanted to really credit the community activists who have gone the extra mile to able to be able to win this. And they were right when they said in public testimony that this is only the beginning. Just to put this in perspective in numbers, the police get more out of the city's discretionary funding than any other department, 409 million. That is almost a thousand times more than restorative justice programs that, you know, the funding that we won this this year around. So we're talking about the fact that we have a lot know we have a long way to go. The city is spending more money on motivational speaker training for police sergeants than it is on racial justice at this moment. And so I think that's also important to recognize. So we have one incredibly important component. And as I said, I voted yes on the package of amendments that makes the mayor's budget proposal better. And I have been happy to support my colleagues proposals as well. However, and this will come as no surprise to my two other councilmembers I'm going to vote no on the whole budget. So I just want to make it clear I voted yes on all the amendments that make the budget more positive, but this is a vote on the budget as a whole, and I cannot and I've never been able to in good conscience vote for a budget that, despite the gains that were won on the council, still represents changes on the margins. And when you compare the budget, that is supposed to be a moral document to the social needs of our city and the deep inequality and racism in our city, it simply is not a moral document as far as what we have right now. It continues to rely on regressive taxes that burden poor and working class people. While corporations continue to get a free ride. It continues to fail to address the housing and homelessness crisis. Despite the gains that were made to our amendments, it continues to prioritize repressive policing over actual justice to our communities of color. It prioritizes regressive, regressive measures like tolling. And I don't want to be told yet again that somehow there is some progressive way of doing it, because as an economist, I have never seen a conjunction doling that is progressive. If there is, I'm happy to support it. But as of now, that is just funding, though what the mayor has proposed is simply funding propaganda to push this idea rather than guaranteeing renters a right to a lawyer and know. Because it's not enough what we have. One social service workers continue to be paid poverty wages in a city with some of the richest people in the world. So with all this insight, the budget still fails to meet human need. And I really hope that because of the mandate that we have won this year, that movements will come back next year with renewed vigor , with strong statistical evidence that when you fight, you do win. Because we saw that happening this year, despite everything thrown at us, we were able to prevail. And I don't want us to rest on our laurels. And I hope that when January comes around, we will get back to serious organizing to win taxes on big business, to win rent control, and to make this city affordable and livable for everybody. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Swamp. Before we proceed, I do want to remind all of my colleagues we do have a parks board meeting after this meeting. Just to remind you. Councilmember O'Brien, would you like to say a few words on the budget? Q I, I just want to thank Councilmember Bakeshop for your leadership in the last two years on this. You've done an amazing job of balancing the needs of people in our city and council members. You've done a very successful job of shepherding our interests in a way that gets all of us wins in the areas you want . You've also created space for us to have the public debate over issues and fight on on those things that are really important. And that's not an easy balance. I've never tried to get that job in my ten years here, and I'm grateful that you were willing to serve in that role, because I know it's a lot of work, something. Your customer base, I. Think it comes from Brian comes from members on my right comes from Gonzalez. I'm going to be fast. So I wanted to thank Councilmember Bagshaw as well. So that's a good pick up for me. I just really appreciate the last two years of the process that you've shepherded us through and let us through really appreciate all your leadership and your ability to be able to prioritize so many different desires and needs from your colleagues. Appears a really want to thank you for for the work that you've done over the last couple of years to make sure that this is a successful process. Also, I want to thank council central staff. You guys are amazing and do really awesome work and really appreciate your responsiveness and and just your the countless number of hours that I know that you all have worked to make sure that we have a balanced budget that really does reflect the council's priorities. So thank you all for that. I also want to thank my own staff, Cody, Brianna and V for all the hard work that they've been doing to make sure that our officers funding priorities are included in the budget. I just wanted to take a quick minute to go through some of the things that we're exceptionally proud of in terms of items that were included by the chair in the 2020 budget that we'll be taking action on. Now, we're really excited about being able to champion fully full funding for civilian led police oversight agencies. We're stoked about being able to provide additional resources to the Regional Domestic Violence Firearm Enforcement Unit to get dangerous guns off of our streets. We have advanced several statements of legislative intent to implement reentry workgroup recommendations to support formerly incarcerated individuals who seek to reenter the economy. We have also included statements of legislative intent to examine the impact of our investments in the criminal legal system on communities of color and other vulnerable populations. We've included additional funding for hub in the box, emergency response, emergency management communication stations across the city. We've included some funding for a public life study for the Capitol Hill Echo District to activate public spaces for climate resiliency and stronger community connections. We've allocated about $100,000 to address the diaper gap for families reliant on shelters, tiny villages, food banks and child care facilities. We've also included some additional funding and direction to the Department of Education and Early Learning to expand birth to three child care options, including investing in comprehensive development of a comprehensive set of strategies to be able to expand access and and affordability for Seattle families in the birth to three child care category, we've directed that the expansion of additional child care assistance program dollars be prioritized for infant care. We've modified the ADA in India ADU financing to make sure that it is within reach for low to middle income families with a racial equity lens applied to make sure that the future pilot doesn't unintentionally exclude communities of color. We have proudly championed a $750,000 pilot program. The hope the Home for Good Pilot Program. To provide a rental assist to provide rental. Assistance to to those individuals who may be on disability benefits and facing housing instability. Really want to thank so many of the advocates, the Spokane County Homeless Coalition, for their. Advocacy. In bringing the issue to us to really talk about why it was important for us to take this interim step. So this is a huge investment. Really proud of it, really grateful for all of the collaboration both in City Hall and outside of City Hall to stand this up and really looking forward to the impact that we're going to be able to have, the positive impact we're going to be able to have with with that investment. And then. Lastly, we were able to establish. A $375,000 resiliency fund to support our immigrant refugee neighbors from ongoing and emerging threats from the Trump administration in partnership with the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs and so many of the community leaders who have identified that we need to be ready in 2020 for the ongoing attacks on immigrant and refugee folks who live in in our city. So really honored to have been able to champion some of these additions to the 2020 budget and really am grateful to Chair Bagshaw for hearing our priorities in my office and for including them in her budget. Really, really appreciate it and really proud of the work that my team has been able to do through this budget process to make sure that this budget reflects our priority. Thank you, Councilman Gonzales, because of our. Vote. Thank you. In addition to appreciating, honoring, valuing and just really not any words to say how helpful and useful the work of several staff has been through this budget process. Thank you. Thank you. I want to thank also my staff, Alex, Noel, Jean and Dmitri. Thanks to the budget chair for being very, very patient with me in particular and not pushing too hard when sitting down and in my office and hearing what my budget priorities are. My resistance to narrowing. Them down too much. And how patient you have been with me in my resistance to wanting to to give anything up. So I'm really pleased with how this budget has resulted in important budget initiatives for my district as well as for citywide issues that are really important to me. So as far as the District one specific proposals, I'm really excited that the D1 community network led the way to get funding for their West Marginal Way, Safe Streets and accessibility improvements at the Long Duwamish Longhouse, specifically new funding for planning and design of that project. Really excited that we've been able, by working with the residents of South Park and the Public Safety Committee, that we've been able to continue funding for a South Park public safety coordinator. That position is so important to that community in raising their voice to address their public safety needs in that neighborhood. Getting a commitment that we will receive some information from the Department and neighborhoods on a strategy to develop a community led, police based violence prevention initiative in Westwood and South Ridge to help address some of the public safety issues there and hopefully have it be modeled on the very successful Rainier Beach, a beautiful place focused on young people in that in that community as a restorative justice approach, also putting forward the ongoing and continued focus on the work being done for the rapid, rapid Ride H line. The budget actions that we've taken allow us to have continued focus on that work and make sure that the community's voice is heard. Finally, as it relates to District One issues, appreciate that the funding for a natural capital evaluation study is included in this year's budget. This is led by the Seattle Greenspaces Coalition, something that they've been working on for four years now to get the city to actually begin to continue, consider the value of our of our natural assets , in our in our planning process. And then as far as some of the citywide priorities I have, as well as community members related specifically to public safety and public health, we were successfully able to add funds for a third firefighter recruit class to address long term staffing needs, while also giving them the flexibility to expand the sizes of their two existing recruit classes. We've added funding to expand the Encampment trash program of Seattle Public Utilities, allowing them to pick up garbage at more unsheltered encampment locations throughout the city. We have as been as has been stated earlier, we worked with the Real Change Everybody Pooh's campaign to fund five mobile pit stops to increase access to bathrooms and hygiene centers. And then we've also added funding again in SPU for a pilot program of mobile pump out services to Arby's to limit the environmental damage to our waterways as it relates specifically to homelessness and housing. As I mentioned earlier, I appreciate having the opportunity to work with both council members, Gonzalez and Juarez, in getting some funding into two initiatives that they had already proposed to actually deal specifically with the needs for diaper distribute distribution on one one area, diaper distribution in shelters and in the other diaper distribution in hopefully in in child care centers. We're also looking at. In the area of housing, adding funding to the Department of Construction inspections for two new positions to support tenant and property owner outreach and education associated with the about five new pieces of legislation that we've passed in the last couple of months. These new positions will allow the Department of Construction and Inspections to support tenants in having their rights enforced under those laws. Also adding funding for renters rights, outreach and education organizing. Many thanks to Washington can be Seattle, the tenants union and allyship and advocating for that for that work. And then our continued proviso on the navigation team appropriations in the Human Services Department so that this Council can continue to have appropriate oversight over the work that's being done around engagement with people living in encampments and maintaining the public safety of of the locations where those encampments are found. As it relates specifically to civil rights issues. I appreciate the opportunity to direct existing funds to community based organizations to respond to hate violence, as well as separately from that, requesting that the Office of Civil Rights spend a portion of its 2020 proposed budget on community based organizations that will create restorative justice approaches to individuals committing hate crimes and adding two new permanent positions for the Office of Civil Rights for a dispute resolution mediator, and another to help with anti-discrimination and anti-harassment training. Many thanks in the area of transportation and utilities to transit for all in their work. To advocate for a report from the Human Services Department on how we can work to subsidize transit passes for employees of Human Services Department contracted service providers, as well as funding to Seattle Public Utilities to improve, shut off notification to tenants in multifamily buildings who often do not get advance notice of impending shut offs. And then finally, in the area of economic development in arts and culture, I want to thank the workers and members of the labor movements representing the film, film and music industry. Folks specifically looking to redirect admissions tax to body OED specifically for a film and music program lead to help the film industry, requesting that the Office of Economic Development provide recommendations regarding the creation of a film commission. Imposing a proviso on the funding for the Creative Industry Policy Advisor position to require engagement with the film industry in developing the responsibilities for this position. And then lastly, related to arts, really appreciative of the ability to direct funding to support the Seattle Rep's Public Works program for for the opportunity for the Seattle Rep to work with many of our service provider and the recipients of services in our city to give them the experience of producing and participating in a live theater work. Thank you. Thank you. Cathy. Horrible. Kathryn. Rebecca, would you like setting words on the budget? And I do have time reserved at the end of the agenda for you especially, but. They just took the words from my mouth. But just thank Councilman Rebecca Shaw for being leading a very inclusive process in this budget. Thank you, Kathryn Pacheco. Okay, so let's vote on item number 32. Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Pacheco, i. So what? No. Major Gonzalez. Purple Eye, Juarez Mascara. Hi, O'Brien. Hi, President Harrell. Hi. Eight in favor. One opposed bill passed in show Senate. Thank you. Thanks for staying here to please read items 33 and 34 together short time if you can.

AN ORDINANCE relating to historic preservation; imposing controls upon 802 16th Avenue, a landmark designated by the Landmarks Preservation Board under Chapter 25.12 of the Seattle Municipal Code, and adding it to the Table of Historical Landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_12132021_CB 120235

Agenda Item 22 Council Bill 120235 An ordinance relating to Historic Preservation Imposing controls upon 802 16th Avenue and adding it to the table of historical landmarks contained in Chapter 25.32 of the Seattle Municipal Code. The committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you. Madam Clerk has Member Strouse back to you. Thank you. Council President. This legislation imposes landmark controls on property located at zero 2/16 Avenue in the Central District, also known as the Immaculate Conception Convent. The home was constructed in the neoclassical style by architect Edwin Holton and includes several exterior stained glass windows. The house was constructed beginning, beginning in 1900 for the family of Thomas Constantine, then stage manager for the People's Theater. It was later purchased by Future City Council member and later by the Immaculate Conception Church for a as a convent for nuns. The house sat empty for much of the 1970s due to redlining. While vacant, the house became a space where children roller skated and local bands practiced and practiced, including Hometown Hero, Garfield Bulldog, Jimi Hendrix. How the home has since been divided into four apartments and is occupied by owner Sue Perry as well as daughter Amy. I hope I go pain. I'm so sorry, Amy. I know you are a leader in so many ways. You say one more time. Ago being. A gopi and thank you. Sincere apologies. Dr. Hagopian. The house is being designated under three of six standards for designation that it is associated with cultural, political or economic heritage of the community. It embodies characteristics of architect of an architectural style, and that it is an outstanding work of the designer or builder. Controls will apply to both the site and house exterior, including its stained glass windows council president. That's the committee report. Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss. Appreciate it. Are there any additional comments on agenda item 22 Council Bill 12023 Thank. Because we're asking to please. You very much. And Councilmember Strauss, I'm very glad that you mentioned Professor Hagopian as well. I appreciate the family's interest in this parcel. And as we talked about in your committee, I think this is a great example of what Professor BEAUBIEN talks about, which is public health and community health, centering on an ability for folks to have cultural spaces and places to gather. And housing and community spaces all accessible to our community is something I'm really excited about. And Amy noted that in her and her conversation about how this site has been used over the years, and I look forward to future opportunities to hear stories like that in the future and in the future with the use of this location. But that it was a great time to focus on community and public health. And I wanted to just thank Professor Hagopian and her family as well as the folks who made the the recommendation and passage possible. So thank you for coming. Councilmember Strauss is the chair of the committee for shepherding this through and looking forward to supporting it. Thank you so much. Any additional comments on agenda item 22? Harry Nunn will fill the role on the passage of Council Bill 120235 Agenda Item 22 Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Mosquito. Hi, Petersen. Hi, Strauss. Yes. HERBOLD Yes. Whereas I council President Gonzalez I eight in favor and unopposed. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the Court please read Item 23 into the Record.

Recommendation to request City Manager to provide a report within 60 days on the number of private, non-profit, and public shelter beds that exist in Long Beach. Also include in the report, the number of rehab, medical detox, sobriety, and other addiction related beds available in Long Beach and the surrounding area. As well as include an estimate of how many of these types of beds would be necessary to best serve the Long Beach homeless and those suffering from addiction. Additionally, include a report on the feasibility of the City providing incentives to create additional homeless ness and addiction related beds, including medical detox beds in the City of Long Beach.

LongBeachCC_12042018_18-1071

Okay. Now that's in the public comments. Now we will move to item number 18 with a quick please with the item. Communication from Councilwoman Price, Councilmember Pierce, Councilmember Super Na recommendation to request the city manager to provide a report within 60 days on the number of private, nonprofit and public shelter beds that exist in Long Beach. And also include a report on the feasibility of the city. Providing incentives will need to be put on that. No. I believe this is from a council member. Yes, it is. It's okay. And the items are pretty self-explanatory. I think we just need to get more information. And I look forward to the recommendations that we're going to receive in the coming weeks from our Everyone Home Task Force. But without having access to the number of available public, private, nonprofit shelter beds, our police don't have the right information to provide services and options for people that they encounter. Our outreach teams don't have a place to route folks to with accurate information. And so this information, I think, is vital for us as we move forward as a city in making decisions about how we go about tackling some of our challenges with the homeless population. Thank you. Mr. Soprano. I stand in support. Thank you. And also I want to thank the couch comes from a prize for this, bringing this forward, because sometimes you speak to the homeless people at my floor office and try to refer to them and, you know, to come back to the multipurpose service. You know, it's very frustrating for me to hear some of these, you know, individuals tell me that they have been turned away for whatever reason. And I don't know that. But, you know, I think that Councilmember Price, you are, you know, opening up so we can get some form of that information back and can also have a listing of these, you know, requirements that individuals need to in it, you know, do these and, you know, for the homeless back to where their cities are and where they're located for the council district. And this is not only just a matter of are we also I just would like to know that we are told in favor of that. And thank you very much for bringing this to the diocese. Okay. Now, could we have a count public comment? No one's here. Look. Roll call, please. All right. Oh. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pierce, Councilwoman Price, Councilmember Super nine. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrews. Councilmember Urunga. Councilmember Richardson. Yes, out of 19. 19 with strong. Okay, fine. Item 20, please. Would you please read the item to do 20? What do we know? 22. 22, please.

A MOTION confirming the executive's appointment of A.C. Petersen, who resides in council district six, to the King County cultural development authority (4Culture), as an executive at-large representative.

KingCountyCC_02242020_2020-0074

Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to offer public testimony today? Anyone else? See, no one will close the public hearing. And that takes us to our first item on business item in today's agenda. We have a motion confirming the executive's appointment of A.S. Peterson to the Council District six seat for the For Culture Board , actually, who resides in Council District six to the full culture board as an executive At-Large member for the remaining remaining three years of a unexpired term that would end at the end of 2022. Miss Peterson is an active community member and has a background in the arts meeting the criteria for board members established in the charter and to open the presentation council. Staphylococcal zoghbi. Ms.. Crackers IP. Thank you. Good afternoon. Council Members Amelia Crackles IP Council staff materials for this item began on page seven of your staff report. As the chair stated, this motion would confirm the appointment of A.C. Peterson to the board culture board of directors. And just a quick briefing, a quick recap of the board culture board. It's board culture is King County's Cultural Public Development Authority. It was created in 2002 to administer King County's arts and heritage programs, and it's governed by a 15 member board of directors. Directors are to have a demonstrated commitment to and knowledge of cultural resources, the active and experienced community and civic and in community and civic issues and concerns, and have an ability to evaluate the needs of cultural constituencies in the region as a whole. And directors are to represent a range of talents, experience, backgrounds and viewpoints. Directors must be residents of King County and are chosen to reflect the geographic and cultural diversity of the county. And directors are appointed by either King County Council members or the executive and confirmed by the King County Council. So Miss Peterson, who sits beside me, lives in Kirkland, and she's a resident of Council District Six. She was appointed to fill a vacancy for the remainder of this term for Position 13, and she was appointed by executive Dow Constantine. She has a Bachelor of Arts degree in architecture and recently recently retired as the communications officers for UW Libraries. She's produced numerous works of dance and choreographed both locally and nationally, and the proposed motion would confirm her appointment to the board culture board for the remainder of this three year term, expiring December 31st, 2022. And her appointment is consistent with the criteria established in the Fort Culture Charter or called for park board members. That concludes my Stack Report. Thank you. Senior Questions. Leia, Welcome. And on. There you go. Hello. Hello. Good afternoon. Thank you. Just to piggyback onto my introduction. Numerous day jobs have been in arts administration at Northwest Asian-American Theater and on the boards contemporary performance presenter Before I most recently went to UTEP Libraries as a communications officer. My volunteer work also includes narrating at the talking book and Braille library, where I specialize in pronouncing Japanese words and names. So they select books for me for that. I guess I welcome any questions. Are you already participating in the Forum Culture Board? What interests and passions have you found before the board already? I've served on the Arts Advisory Committee for six years and what I'm really most passionate about is inclusion for people and artists and administrators of differing abilities. And that is already part of the mission and has evolved as part of the mission most recently and representing geographic diversity as well. I grew up in Seattle, but I've been living in Kirkland since 2003, so I'm getting a different view of the county. Also, as an arts, a reviewer for sustained support, I've traveled really all over from federal way to to Duvall to Snoqualmie, to review, to observe arts performances and review them.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 8101 & 8351 East Belleview Avenue in Hampden South. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from B-8 with waivers and conditions, UO-1, UO-2 & B-8 with waivers, UO-1, UO-2 to S-MX-8 (former chapter 59 zoning to suburban, mixed-use), located at 8101 & 8351 E Belleview Ave in Council District 4. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-1-22.

DenverCityCouncil_03142022_22-0125

11 Eyes Council Bill 20 2-1 16 has passed. Thank you, friend, for being here this evening. Councilmember Sawyer, would you please put council bill 20 2-1, two, five on the floor for final passage? I move that council bill 22 does zero 1 to 5 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing on Council Bill 20 2-125 is open and we have Brandon Shaver here for this is the staff report. Thank you for being here. Thank you, Madam President. And good evening, Council. I'm Brandon Shaver, senior city planner with CPD presenting an official map and application at 81, a one in 8351 East Bellevue Avenue. I requested to three zone 2smx8. This request is in Council District four at the far edge of our city in the Hampton South neighborhood, just at the northeast corner of South Ulster Street and East Bellevue Avenue. This is a larger site, just under 14 acres currently used for commercial retail. And the proposal here is to rezone to allow for a variety of building forms at a maximum building height of eight storeys or 110 feet. Existing zoning on these two parcels, as well as most of the surrounding area is B eight, with waivers with the adult use and billboard use overlays. Also further to the east, there's an open space zoning as well as some single unit. And then Arapahoe County of the city of remote villages directly south. So on the first side of 81 on one he's of the avenue has some waivers in a condition that were approved in 1988. These waive certain fabrication uses, waive the sale of goods and certain structures also provide a maximum of 2 to 1 and lock them into a condition of a site plan that was approved the time of the last rezoning for the other site, 8351 East Bellevue Avenue. These waivers were approved in 1978 and are very similar. Weaving fabrication uses the sale of goods and certain structures, waiving the gross floor area to 2 to 1. They are also waiving the right to erect structures in excess of two and a half stories and waiving the right to erect freestanding retail or strip retail shopping areas. As I mentioned, both of these sites are currently mapped with the use overlays. However, these are not wanting to be retained by the applicant. The first adult use overlay staff found that there is sufficient remaining land left in the city for folks to exercise their First Amendment rights and for the billboard use overlay again not to be retained and there are no existing billboards on the site. This is largely due to the Denver Tech Center Architectural Control Committee, which provides protective covenants independent of the city's land use regulations and particularly relevant to the site. They prohibit adult uses, prohibit billboards, and require a 40 foot minimum building setback along both South Ulster Street and East Bellevue Avenue. This site went through a large development review as it was larger than five acres and was found to have regional significance in the evolution of the tech center. This produced an older framework which outlines potential regulatory steps and the sequencing, as you can see on this slide. O. The R also requires a community information meeting that was led by the applicant team. This was held back in July of 2020 and we had more than 70 attendees. The applicant team presented their development plan and CPD staff was present to explain the regulatory processes, sequencing and present equity analysis. Overall, most of the comments received were positive and supportive of the project. Again with existing land use on the site is commercial retail. Some commercial retail also exist in the surrounding area as well as some office and multi-unit residential uses. Here are some photos to give you a sense of the building form and scale in the immediate area with the subject properties on the bottom left. In the bottom right. Moving to the design standard differences between the existing versus proposed zoning. The proposed zoning again would allow for a maximum height of eight storeys or 110 feet, would allow a variety of building forms and also introduces, build to and transparency requirements. There is also a proposed affordable housing agreement that has been executed prior to this meeting. This is a little complex, more than we see usually as it contemplates three options for the developer to choose from. Options B and C would result in more units are a D for affordability, more in line with the current expanding housing affordability proposal, which is under public review. This application was sent out for notice last July. Between now and then, they've worked on the infrastructure masterplan and negotiated the aforementioned housing agreement. This was the planning board on January 19th, where it was moved forward unanimously in favor. And to date we have not received any letters or comments from our nos or the public. Moving to the review criteria first being plan 2040. This request is consistent with the number of goals and objectives and strategies which organize by vision element. Moving to Blueprint. Denver This is also consistent with the suburban neighborhood context and the regional center feature place, which envisions a high mix of uses and larger scale buildings. It's also consistent with our future street types, as both East Bellevue Avenue and South Ulster Street are commercial arterials. This fits in to our regional centers growth area strategy, where we expect significant growth for the year 2040 to the amount of 50% of new jobs and 30% of new housing. Also consistent with a number of strategies here and Blueprint Denver, which speak to encouraging higher density at our regional centers, rezoning properties out of the old zoning code, and aligning our high density areas, high density residential areas and your regional centers. As part of this application through the sites we did a full in the equity analysis to consider this provides three equity concepts which I ran through briefly. I ran through these with the applicant at the Pre-Application phase and provided them with an equity brief and then they provided us with an equity response for staff review. Overall, the subject sites were pretty well on all these measures, but significantly lacking in the number of income restricted units. So first, with access to opportunity, the site has more than average access. The low access is only two. There is no access to a full service grocery store and staff finds that the processes would allow for a broader range of commercial uses, potentially being a grocery store or fresh food options. For vulnerability to displacement, this area, of course, is less vulnerable based on all of our metrics, except for the percent of renters. Therefore, staff finds that this rezoning would allow for additional increased residential densities and also provide an opportunity for housing for additional housing options, including for sale units if we can ever get those developed under city . So we also use supplemental data for vulnerability to displacement. This helps us better understand how neighborhoods and areas change over time. And again, while this area does square less vulnerable, some of the data points are included in the staff report and presentation that helped tell that story. So what I thought was interesting is that racial composition of this neighborhood is much less diverse than we see citywide. However, it is becoming more diverse by the city is becoming more white. Also our population over the age of 65. This neighborhood does have a greater proportion of residents that fall into that age category. It is increasing at a much faster rate than we see citywide. Also, when it comes to median household income, this part of the city does have a little bit higher above median household income, but these incomes are not increasing as quickly as we see citywide. This course is having moderate housing diversity. Again, I mentioned that we have zero income restricted units down here and it's also less diverse when it comes to bedroom counts. So staff found that this rezoning, in conjunction with the Affordable Housing Agreement, would allow for more housing, including affordable housing, and provide some two and three bedroom units for jobs. Diversity. Not surprising, since it is in the tech sector, these jobs skew more towards innovation categories and the rezoning would allow for additional retail jobs. But overall, no limited no impact on overall job diversity scores. So what do we get from the equity analysis? There are some guaranteed outcomes, those income restricted units and some three bedroom units. There are also some commitments that are still under discussion through the development of the infrastructure master plan. Those include an upgraded RTD bus stop, a better connected street network through the site, and an increased open space more so than we see in our user requirements. And there's also another need that came through the equity analysis, and that's the need for a grocery store and or fresh food options. This was also noted in the community information meeting and the applicant has been working diligently to make some kind of commitment to one of those options. This also meets the next two criteria as it would result in the uniform application of the Sun District building form, use and design regulations in the state and further public health, safety and welfare by facilitating increased housing density, air services, amenities and employment. The justifying circumstance of this rezoning is that the city adopted the Denver zoning code in 2010, but the property remained in former Chapter 59. Lastly, this is consistent with the suburban neighborhood context, the mixed use district purpose and intent statements for x eight. Therefore, CPD recommends approval of this application based on finding review criteria have been met. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Brandon. We have four individuals signed up to speak this evening. Our first speaker is Thomas Reagan. Eddie. Madam Chairman, two members of council. This is Tom Ragged Eddy, and I'm here to answer questions if they if subjects arise that require my comment. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Randy Frye. Yes. My name is Randy Frye. I'm with Shea Properties. I'm here to answer questions as the need arises. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker. Their last name is Mander. And Jerry. And I have that they're going to be in person. It doesn't seem that we have anybody here by that name. All right. We'll go ahead and move to our fourth speaker. Peter Culshaw. Good evening. I'm in person. Thank you for your time and consideration of our rezoning application tonight. I'm Peter Coles from the Executive Vice President with Shea Properties in Colorado. And we're joined virtually by everyone I can imagine that can answer any question as well as a workman who's been working on our outreach to the community, which has been extensive. I'm pleased to say that to my knowledge, we don't have any public opposition to this, which probably means I've just jinxed it, but hopefully not. I mean, Square is on the south edge of Denver. It was developed in 1979 and at the time was really cutting edge and very cool retail center. It was relevant. Now, a little like me, it's past its sell by date and we're looking for a new energy for that part of the Denver Tech Center. Our vision is for an exciting, vibrant, mixed use redevelopment, which will add energy to this area and the surrounding uses. We've worked extensively with city staff and it's been terrific to work with, work through the LDR, process the equity analysis and reach what I think is a innovative, affordable housing agreement with most redevelopment is intended to be in keeping with consistent with the city's applicable plans and studies. So again, I'll be brief as I can. Thank you for your time and consideration. All right. Thank you very much. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council on Council Bill 22. Dash 125. Councilmember Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to ask Mr. Gulshan if you wouldn't mind coming back to the podium. On The Affordable. I know it gives three options, but do you know which of those three you would choose to partake in? We don't yet. Our intent and our desire would be to do the option which has the most affordable housing, which is the third option which is off site. Yeah, we've actually done a number of affordable projects in the metro area and this is something we have made a major commitment to do. You already have another site in which you would do that if you choose to. Go that route? We have some options. We have not kind of gone forward with them pending kind of thing. All in Denver. I'm just curious whether any of them are in the adjacent county next door and if they are, how that sort of applies to I see one of our staff from the host. I mean, everything we will do will be in the city and county of Denver. Okay. And we have done affordable housing in the adjacent counties. But what we would do is we would do it in Denver. I'd like to ask our host representative if we are if we allow any of our developers to build something on an. Adjacent. In adjacent county and count that towards Denver's on or do we mandate they have to do it in Denver? Brad wanted staff of Department of Housing Stability. I would love to compel affordable housing development in Greenwood Village in another county, but I, I don't have that ability. So we have the realm of our city boundaries to work to work with in to this wasn't a question you asked, but in the agreement for the off site satisfaction , the location has to be within the either hand in South or South Moore Park neighborhoods, partly because that's an area where we don't have hardly any affordable housing to speak of. There's a lot of opportunity down there, a lot of great access to schools, jobs, amenities. And it's a it's a there's a dearth of truly restricted affordable housing and into because there are the affordable housing development in their own right. And we were we were willing to work with them on an offset agreement that would generate 2 to 3 times more affordable units than the onsite component would traditional agreement. So this is one that was fun to work on and happy to support it. Great. Thank you. I have no further questions. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Ortega, Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Brandon, could you address a couple of points that I find a little confusing on Slide eight? There's a map of all the adult use overlays around the city. And then on map or map on slide nine, there's a reference to the Tex Center Architectural Control Committee. That looks like it's in conflict with the adult use overlay map. First of all, on the map, I'm kind of surprised to see a bunch of adult use overlays down in my neighborhood. I will address that at another hearing. But the entirety of what appears to be the tech center is covered with the red overlay, which is the adult use overlay. Yet on Slide nine, it says that the architectural control committee has protective covenants and then stresses relative to this site prohibits adult uses. So how do we have the adult use overlay over the text center? But they have an architectural control committee says you can't have them. Is that true? That's a great question and you are correct. Thank you. I ask only great questions. Thank you. Maybe would attorney Tom Ragan Eddie, be able to address that? How do we reconcile that? Because we have to have. You know, a certain. Acreage or acreage. To allow that. So how can we have the entire tech center with that use overlay? But we have a committee at the tech firm says we don't allow it. I don't know if Tom can. Maybe they can answer that. Councilor Flynn, I can answer that question if you'd like. You know, this is a it's a result of historic practice. The you know, the public regulation that the city enacts is wholly different than the private covenants that are. Applied by the developer. And have been applied by the developer, the. Tech center from the beginning. They control the private governance. You control the public regulation. And what the law says is the stricter controls. So where the city would permit adult amusements and activities and an overlay, if the covenants, the private covenants which are imposed by the tax center on their property, prohibit those. Then the law would enforce that regulation. Because of the stricter. Good time. It is that the city's point of view as well? Yeah. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Good afternoon. Good evening. Members of Council, Neighborhood Services and city attorney. I do agree with Mr. Reagan that as far as enforcing the stricter regulations in this case, it would be up to the tech center to enforce those. You are correct as well, Councilman Flynn, in that we have to, as a city, provide reasonable alternatives of communication for for that type of speech. And at this point in time, there still exists you will one throughout portions of the city. Thank you. Speech. The adult. The adult uses her speech. What did I say? I guess that's true. It's. It's free speech. I, I just I'm not familiar with the how many words are actually spoken in those establishments, but. Thank you, Brandon. Other requirements and maybe Tom. Mr. Magneti, you could address this also under requirements in the architectural control committee beyond the ones that we've addressed in the presentation that might have an impact on this rezoning. Also a good question. Maybe. Yeah, maybe. Mr. Haggerty or somebody else on the applicant team is better aware of other protective covenants other than the city might have on this property that I didn't look at for the zoning section, perhaps. Okay. And Brandon, I noticed I noted that there are two properties in this application and that one of them was the original rezoning or zoning was in 1978, I think, and the other was 1988. And in one of them in the presentation you said, Let me see if I can get to the right one, that one of the one of the waivers was waiving the amount of gross floor area to be greater not to be greater than two times the area of the zone lot, which implies that you could have a structure taller than two and a half storeys that's different than the one in 1978 that waived the gross floor area not greater than two times. But it also had a waiver of the right to erect structures in excess of two and a half storeys. So on the larger parcel, could there have been a taller structure because you have the the two times air, but with a smaller footprint you could go up four or five storeys. That's a good distinction. And you were correct. There could have been a structure. They were different waivers. Thank you. All right. It doesn't matter since we're getting rid of both of them, I imagine. But I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam President. That's all I have. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn, did you want to hear from Mr. Reagan? If he if he had anything to add on whether there are other regulations of the architectural control committee that have implication or application to these two parcels? Okay, great. I know our producers had him in the queue. Councilman Flynn, I'm not aware of any. Thank you, madam. All right. Thank you, Mr. Reagan and Councilman Flynn, Councilmember Kenney. Thank you. Council President. I had a question for Brad Weinberg. First, I want to thank the team. I think we talked before you filed as you were exploring. If I recall correctly, that, you know, thinking about the site and housing options. I'm a little surprised to see the increased number of units at the lower a am I. That's unusual. And it tells me that they're unlikely to choose that option. And I see that it has a higher number of two bedrooms. So anyway, it's a higher standard and that's the opposite of what we usually do. So I just I'm trying to figure out is, is this kind of a red herring? It's in here to look like maybe we'll do 60, but we really won't because why would you do a higher percentage at a lower AMI with more two bedrooms? It's just it's an unusual option. On the surface. Councilwoman, I would agree with you again, Brad Winick with the Department of Housing Stability. Both of the stand alone onsite and the offsite options would require the support of low income housing tax credits through traffic through Chaput. So we wanted to support them in creating a life tech opportunity in these neighborhoods, if they could. We need the first option as a fallback plan in case they are unable to achieve an allocation of of taxes and bonds or low income housing tax credits to support those options. We went right to my next question, which was they're also unusual percentages without particularly see without a subsidy. And so how does it you know, I guess I'm a little again, tax credit projects would be a much higher percentage of units. Right? They would probably be 100% affordable, maybe not all at this exact, am I? But we don't do a lot of you can't tax credit one fifth of a building or one third of a building, in my experience, maybe some 4% crazy thing. But anyway, it's. They're. They. Again. Why wouldn't we just say try for a tax credit project on site with a minimum of 50 units or try for a tax credit project offsite? And if those are unsuccessful, then move to the fallback. Why make them such small percentages? Because the tax credit project would not be 12 percentage of units. I guess we could have gone about the that that way. But the percentage is relates to the number of market rate units on the subject property. And so if they end up building 500 unrestricted market rate units on the property, they're in the process of trying to rezone. They would need to come up with if it was 20%, 100 units offsite. So they wanted to allow themselves some flexibility in terms of the size and scale of the offsite development. Depending on the parcel, they were able to identify the the low tech program for which they would apply. That might be the best fit. Got you. Okay. So I misreading the slide. I want to say it back to you. It's not a standalone option where 12% of the units in the building are affordable. It's a standalone option that represents 12% of the units on the site. Correct. The slide does not communicate that, but that. Just because all this went into one slide. Brandon. Right. Right. I know. I know. You guys get your less real estate. Okay. That clarifies for me. The other question I want to ask is, what does the agreement say about what skin in the game comes from developers? So this is all about the idea that, you know, it's a way of exchanging height for affordability. I mean, that's the fancy way that these agreements work, right? So you're getting some additional entitlement, you're doing some affordable, but generally speaking, you're doing that without subsidy. If you go with option two or three, you've got, you know, federal tax credit subsidy, potentially gap money from the city. What's the equity in terms of the developer? Does it limit the gap financing from the city? Does it require the land to be provided to the project for free? How is it that we're not completely taking the obligation off of the developer and moving it to the public side if we go with option two or three? So with either of the options two or three, if they were to also accept funding from host for a gap financing, we have the right to negotiate for more and deeper affordability as part of that development. But if otherwise, if they're able to proceed successfully with a Chapa ward, we're we're okay with the outcome because the outcome produces an order of magnitude but 2 to 3 times more affordable units at a deeper affordability and what we would be able to negotiate via an integrated option on site. And so and we also are requiring that in order for them to pursue those options, they have to, for example, the off site option. They have to show evidence that they own a parcel that is sufficient to meet the needs and record a covenant against it before they're able to pull permit on the the subject property we're discussing this evening. Yeah. And I think that's tricky. Very few projects are able to satisfy the city attorney's offices timeline requirements. So I, I support creative solutions and off site, we did this at the Globeville area, you know, with, with the recent agreement there. And in that case, they avoided that issue by just doing a transfer of cash so they didn't have to time all of the transactions properly. Let me share my concern with you, and then you can tell me again what the agreement says, because I'm not sure if the agreement addresses my concern. My concern is the city of Denver get something like maybe 3 to 5 tax credit allocations a year period. We probably have a dozen projects that could use them, which means that when you get it. So I want two things. When I'm looking at an affordable housing agreement on a big redevelopment site, the first thing I'm looking at is, is the city getting mixed income community, right? Is there a mix of housing happening at the site or is it all just, you know, upper income? And and so any housing on the site, no matter who pays for it, no matter how it happens, is, is is achieving that mixed income goal. The second thing I'm looking for is that I want to see a net additional number of units than I would have seen otherwise. Right. I want to grow the pie of housing if I just move a tax credit project from some other half acre site with the developer who's applied it and instead I move it here. The city is not actually getting more affordable use units because we only have 3 to 5 tax credit projects. So I can move the pieces around the board, but I'm not actually getting more units. So here's my concern. I have never supported an agreement that gave a development credit for a tax credit projects unless there was a way that their actual contribution ensured that the city was getting more units than we would have gotten overall, i.e. the land is free. They don't get any gap financing. Somehow they are paying for that housing in the same way that they would have if they did an option. A for example, if they do option A, the development is subsidizing housing, right? It's doing it through, you know, spreading the cost throughout your entire proforma. If you do option B and C and you're simply financing it with tax credits, and if you come to the city for get financing, but even if you don't, let's say you're just using all public sources, but you've. Charged. An affordable developer or a different LLC within your company for the land, you know what I'm saying? So I guess you've got to share with me, Brad, how does the agreement ensure that this development is subsidizing the cost of B or C to the tune where I'm not just moving a project that might have been elsewhere onto this site and the city's not actually growing the net supply of housing. Our team too. And then if the team from Shea wants to to year for them as well but. In order that the B or C would not happen, you know, but for it. Right. I mean, so it's it's again, I think given that the need and the lack of affordable housing in this area, normally I want the same. You want council woman. I want mixed income opportunities throughout the city. That's why we're working on the city wide policies we're working on. But in this case and in this location, there are so few deeply affordable units and yet so many offices and retail establishments that employ and pay salaries that for for folks who would qualify to live in more deeply affordable units. We're getting 2 to 3 times the number of units via A, B and C and at a meaningfully lower level of am I right in terms of what the tax credit program can provide versus what can reasonably be integrated into a market rate development. And so that's why we're willing to. To negotiate this off site agreement opportunities and options for this development, and also because they have a track record of successfully developed developing properties. And so they have a like a better or higher likelihood of being successful in the Tampa process, given their experience. Would you guys like to speak to it? And then I'll just I'll ask you a follow up question, Brad. So don't go far, but happy to hear if you have something that I mean. Maybe clarify how we've been doing our other deals. And that has been we've been either acquiring or contributing the land so that that's how we've been putting these deals together. And the second part is that we've been trying to do more scalable projects. It allows the staffing to be more cost effective. You can staff it more appropriately. And so the genesis was maybe bigger than it sounds, but it was it was our intent would be to go and buy a piece of ground and contribute it and make it happen that way. When you say contribute, you mean provide at no cost. Right. Okay. Brad, does the go ahead? Well, a lot of the time we've been putting it in as a tail subordinate bond so that if there is any cash flow, we can we can get a little benefit. But that's the intent. Got it. So I just want to clarify, Brad, does the agreement require that? It does not speak directly to that now. So and I just want to ask really very clearly if this development. Got 100% subsidy for 60% of my units and option two or three. And they didn't provide free land, but they got money from chaff. They got money from the state. And our agreement would allow them to get credit even without any cash contribution or land contribution to the project. Yes. That's problematic for me. I appreciate your intent. Our agreement should reflect that. It should reflect the fact that this is. You know, I had the same conversation Councilman Flynn may remember with Loretto Heights when that was being negotiated. It's not enough to say that we're supportive of a tax credit project happening, and we'll introduce the people who own the land to the people who are going to buy the land. And then it all happens. You know, this is about the development participating. And so it concerns me that we didn't negotiate that that that level of protection from the entire project being publicly subsidized. That's that's what concerns me. I'm very hearing. You very clearly about the benefit of having a tax credit project in this part of town. So I'm willing to think about it for a minute. But I just this isn't you know, that's not what other other developments that are negotiating agreements with the city, generally speaking, are covering the cost of the housing. They're not just going to the public sector for the same am-I. If you said to me they can only get credit if they do additional lower emissions than I'd be with you. But you're telling me they could completely publicly subsidize this? Am I? And that's the part that I'm struggling with. So I'll let it sit there. I'll consider the other criteria that, you know, have been discussed in terms of the plan, criteria, etc.. But I'm struggling a little bit. Thanks. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Canete. Councilmember Ortega read a little bit more. Don't go too far, Brad. Know. So what is host's expectation in terms of the timing of when the affordable units get built versus when the project that's before us tonight gets to move forward? Sure. So as I mentioned, again, red wine and Department of Housing Stability, as I mentioned earlier. Right. They they need to evidence that they have ownership and record a restriction against an off site property before they were able to proceed with the development on this property. And then if they are unsuccessful in delivering or starting the start of the development process for the affordable units within three years of starting here, then it reverts back to onsite integrated option one and they would have to immediately record a covenant on the 81 one and neighboring property and then work to integrate the onsite affordability into that so that if either through no fault of their own or some other externality, they're unable to get tax credits or bonds to finance it. Then we still have the ability to ensure that there is affordability as part of this development. What's the trigger for when the three year starts? Is it within three years from when the project is completed? Is it three years from when this process tonight happens? I believe I believe it is from permitting for the for the first phase at the subject property. But I have the agreement on my computer and can come back up if I'm wrong. Okay. And then one last question for the developer. Is this intended to be a for sale project or a rental project? It's it's all rental. Rental market. Rate, rental. Market rate rental. Okay. Well, it's going to be a mixed use, so there'll be retail, uh, multifamily and then office. Right. Okay. So I guess part of my question or concern is that if, if it gets all leased up and it gets built before the affordable is ah. Done, you know. It's like when we did Stapleton, we made sure that the Affordable Is were tied to as development was occurring so that we didn't push it all back to the end and never see it get done. And so that's part of why I'm wanting to make sure we have some clear understanding of when when this affordability of housing comes online so that it's not something that never happens. We would write the leases on the market rate with the provision to allow for this. We wouldn't want to be caught by not being able to fulfill the affordable portion of the agreement. So you're saying you would reserve some units within yours if the if trying to do this off site does not work out? Is that what I'm hearing? Yeah. Okay. I just want to briefly. Fahad, you want to finish off? We knew we weren't going to be able to fulfill options two and three. We would reserve the units within the homes, within the market rate development. And what what's going to determine whether you will know that is that whether somebody is able to secure the low income tax credits, because we know that's critical to a project being able to write down the cost to provide it at a lower EMI level. I think it's a mixture of things. I think it's bond allocation, it's tax credits, and it's also securing the right piece of ground to do it on with the right approvals. So there's a bunch of moving parts. We have done a number of these. And in is that timing spelled out in the agreement? It is, councilwoman. So for the offside they would have to construct and market all of the income restricted units within three years of the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a residence, a residential building on this property. But keep in mind too, so if within three years are unsuccessful, one, they have to integrate back to the onsite integrated option upon lease renewals within their property. Right. And so as leases turn, they would have to kind of revert to the 10% and 80% requirement on site and there would still be a property granted underneath their control, but it would have a recorded covenant against it that would require affordable housing on the offsite location. And so even though that the timing may not work out perfectly in that instance, we're getting some on site and we still have another property that has a recorded a covenant against that to ensure affordability also in the future . So just to be clear, Brad. The Certificate of occupancy on. You said. Within the first round of the certificate of occupancy. For the first residential building on this. That was my point. So it could not apply to the commercial. It's only the housing. Piece that the commercial components will be. We'll pay linkage fee. Got it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Brad. And thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Councilmember Black. Thank you. I just have a couple of questions for one of our city attorneys, maybe Nate. Nate Lucero, I. I have a question. We're talking about the affordable housing agreement. And can you just remind us, is that one of the things we should consider when we are evaluating the criteria for this rezoning? So I know that there are changes coming down the pike with respect to affordable housing. And and so moving forward is going to be required not only in the inclusionary housing housing ordinance or whatever we're going to call that from now on and part of zoning. But right now, affordable housing is something that is separate from from zoning, and it's not necessarily part of. The review. Criteria. However, we do have statements in our plans, our comprehensive plan blueprint Denver that that ask that developers in the city consider affordable housing when rezoning. Okay. Thank you. And then, Peter, I have a question for you. The property you're hoping to purchase, Brad mentioned it needed to be in that statistical neighborhood or the south, more statistical neighborhood, which are both in the Denver Tech Center. So I just wanted to clarify that those were the neighborhoods. And have you all started looking at possible properties in those areas? Yes. We're obviously very familiar with all the properties that are available so that we have actually had preliminary conversations. But pending tonight's outcome, we we have not taken it beyond that. Okay. And can you tell people on the council who may not be familiar with this part of town, just sort of about the character of this part of town and the Denver Tech Center? And it's not it's not really a it's a it's more of a commercial suburban area and not a residential suburban area. I'll let you describe it. There's a lot of tall buildings and there's at the Bellevue Light Rail Station is there. That goes up to 20 stories. Yeah, basically, the north part of the tech center really started out as an office park. It was pretty much all office buildings. We've been guilty of developing some of those. Over time, it's morphed into a little more mixed use with more residential. But it's really predominantly a business park with with multifamily. There are some condos before we had construction defect litigation which got built. But it's, it's, it's a true mixed use business park in that sense. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Black Councilmember Kinney. Thank you. You might have said this, Peter, in your presentation or prior, but are you all master developing and anticipate having separate vertical developers? Are you self developing? And just refresh me again on the size of the parcel and the scale that we're talking about in terms of the residential potential, I know that it's early and phased out all those caveats, but if you can just refresh me, please. Sure. It's 13.8 acres. Um, it currently we're thinking that it would be between. And I'm going to give a range 4 to 500 multifamily units. About 50,000 feet of kind of high end service retail and then an office building probably will round it out with another 100 to 120000 square feet. So I don't know if that answers the question where we are. We will be the developers of all of those portions. We actually develop all of those products and we hold for the long term. Typically, we don't sell, so we're taking a very long term view to how this is developed. We obviously buy and sell affordable as well. So I don't know if the answer to your question. Yeah, I think so. Brad, I have just one more question for you about the accompanying agreement, which I understand is separate. And we are not voting on the content of it today, but it is, of course, you know, connected to the equity criteria that the staff were analyzing. Does the agreement contemplate any freezing or committing on the linkage fees, or is it just that you will pay the applicable linkage fee at the moment that the commercial development is created. Is the latter. So they're not guaranteed at today's linkage fee rates, whatever the fee is when they build the commercial, is what they will pay. I don't believe something. It's not written into the agreement, but I'm trying to think through the. All right. If the agreement silent on it, then presumably they would pay whatever it is when they pulled the building permit. I think. Right. Building permit is the time for linkage fee. Okay. All right. Thank you. No other questions. Okay. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Canete. And thank you, Brad, for answering those questions. The public hearing has closed comments by members of Council on Council Bill 20 2-125. Councilmember Black. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you all for being down here tonight. Brandon, I did want to thank you for speaking really quickly during your presentation. We appreciate that. And I asked Peter about describing the character of this part of town. And it is a lot of office buildings and a lot of surface parking lots. And we are starting to see infill of housing, which is much needed. And it's an area that I said earlier is near the Bellevue Light Rail station and there's a lot of employment down there. And so it's much needed that this development that they're talking about is called Marina Landing, which is a very funny name for the Denver Tech Center that does not have a marina. Um, but I do remember when it was built, I was in high school and it was very cool. But if you look at it, it is one story. There is no density surrounded by parking. It's very car oriented and it is exactly what we don't want in Denver and we don't want in this part of town. And as Peter commented earlier, it will be mixed use and it's all uses that people were interested in. And when we had the public meeting with for the large development review, that's what we heard from people that they would like it to be mixed use. And one thing we did not hear from community members was opposition. There was no opposition whatsoever. Um, I will be supporting this. It meets all of the criteria. I think the affordable housing agreement is creative. I know that this developer has a very good reputation for doing what they say they're going to do, and they do have experience in building affordable housing. So I encourage my fellow council members to support this, and we will contribute to our overall housing stock in Denver, including adding housing units that are affordable. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Black Councilmember Kinney. Thank you. Council President, I appreciate the staff presentation and the the criteria that were laid out I to celebrate the I know Councilwoman Black has worked to bring more urban format and walkable development to the district. And I recognize that this represents all of that. I, I wouldn't be able to support this on the equity piece and the conformance with plans. Unless I knew that there was another vote coming from this council, if there was an affordable housing agreement. And I just want to explain what that means. This council gets to vote on all contracts over $500,000. I have not seen a tax credit project with 60% of my housing that didn't need that much or more money from the city of Denver to come together. And so what I think that means is that this council gets another vote. If we go with option, if this developer's able to identify land and put together a tax credit project, they will be coming before this council with a request for gap financing of some level. And at that point I will not vote for it. If the land wasn't free and if there wasn't adequate financial contribution from this developer, it may come when I'm off this council. So I say this to my colleagues. I do not support any financing for a tax credit project if the commitments made today are not brought forward. So that, I think, is the chance we have to correct what was not fully negotiated in the agreement, simply because I think that's how the economics will work. Right. If you're able to do a 60% my tax credit project with no gap money from the city, well, then with and with none of your own money, I guess you'll be creative enough that I'll just congratulate you. If the state puts in that much money or some other entity puts in that much money and you don't need our money. So I feel like what we have is a backstop to make sure that the adequate amount of investment from the project is part of making it happen . And so I hear the point and especially, you know, given the the dearth of of this housing in this part of town, I feel like I'm weighing the risk of, you know, the financial exposure question versus the benefit of getting a tax credit project in this part of town. And it seems worth it to me. So. So with that, I feel like I'm comfortable that the plan criteria of, you know, getting to the equity outcomes and ensuring a mix of housing is is met. And I'll ask everyone to keep an eye on it with me, if you wouldn't mind. That's just my plea to my colleagues, but I will be supporting it based on those criteria. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Each and I'll go ahead and chime in. Since we don't have any other speakers, I appreciate Brandon and Brad for their answers tonight. I'm constantly asking Brad, why do we get all of the affordable housing in D11 and different communities? And we don't see it around the city. And so I appreciate the work that's been done on this and definitely take that cautionary tale. Councilwoman can reach that. We need to keep close eyes on this and make sure we get everything that has been proposed and more if possible, when the time is right. And so I will be happy to support this tonight as well. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 20 2-1, two, five, please. Black I. Clarke. I. Flynn. I. Herndon, i. Cashman. Kenny Ortega, I. Sandoval. Hi. Sawyer, I. Torres. Hi, Madam President. Hi. Madam Secretary. Please close the voting and announce the results. 11 911 IES Council Bill 20 2-125 has passed. Thank you to the speakers and the staff for the presentation. Our pre adjournment announcement on Monday, April 11th Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 22, Dash 209 changing the zoning classification for 3455 North Birch Street

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 4334 Lincoln Street in Globeville. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from E-SU-B to U-SU-B1 (allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 4334 North Lincoln Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-7-22.

DenverCityCouncil_08012022_22-0583

Together to work on this rezoning application so that it wasn't just one off rezonings in the neighborhood. And this neighborhood is currently going in the neighborhood planning initiative, which we're talking about rezoning to allow accessory dwelling units. So I like the proactive nature and I believe it meets all the criteria and ask my colleagues to support it . Thank you. Thank you. Another in the queue. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council 20 20582. Kenny. I. Sandoval. I will take it. I. Sawyer, I. I'm black. I see tobacco. Clark. I. Gilmore. Herndon. Hines, Cashman. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. You have a nice. 11 eyes council with 20 2058 who has passed? Councilmember Hines, will you please put council bill 20 220583 on the floor for final passage. Yes. Council President I moved the Council bill 20 20583 be placed upon final consideration and to pass. Has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 20 2053 is open. May we have staff report? However, once again, my name is Timmy Vinous with CPD. Before you today we have four, three, three, four North Lincoln Street, which is a single unit zone district applying for a single, single family zoning district with accessory accessory dwelling. So this one specifically is located in cancer district. Can you see the map as described in the Globe Hill neighborhood? So the site itself is kind of has I-70 to the north as well as Interstate 25 to the west. The property itself is 6250 square feet, and the request is to allow for an accessory dwelling. The current zoning here is SUV, which is the urban edge single unit view with the minimum lot size of 4500 square feet. We do have some idea, which is a light industrial zone district with a year or two, which is a billboard overlay in close proximity to the south as well as north to the south and east and west. But predominance though area is single unit. The site itself is it's a single unit residential home, as you can see in the top left corner. It's a one story structure. And as you can see here and in the neighborhood, we put down this one story, single family house. So this has gone before our planning board in May 2nd and it was approved unanimously and is before you tonight with no comments. There are five specific criteria that we analyze when we're looking at a specific map amendment. The first one is consistency with adopted plans. So we're looking at three specific plans, which is Compass and Plan 2040, Blueprint, Denver Land Use and Transportation Plan and 2019 and the Local Neighborhood Plan of 2016. We think comprehensive plan. We're looking at specific strategies that the staff report calls up. But I'm going to just focus on a few here. The first one is equitable, affordable and inclusive. Go to strategy, create a greater mix of housing options in every neighborhood for all individuals and families. Stronger an authentic neighborhood go one and strategy B is ensure neighborhoods offer a mix of housing types and services for all diverse populations, as well as the environment to result in a strategy. Remote info development, infrastructure and services already in place. Now blueprint in the small area plan specifically call for a different neighborhood context so applicants applying for an urban edge here blueprint is calling out for urban specifically for the neighborhood context. When we look at the residential low future place type, it is predominant single unit uses as well as accessory dwelling units are appropriate here and then Lincoln is a local street, which is primarily characterized by residential uses. And then within the Future Growth Strategy map, it is classified as other areas of the city where we anticipate 10% of the employment and 20% of new housing in this location. As well as Blueprint has specific policy that mentions aid use, which is under the land use and bill form housing policy number four, which is diversify housing choice through the expansion of accessory dwelling units throughout all residential areas. Now within the local neighborhood plan. The subject site is classified in the land use as single family. With an 80 you are under recommendation be one of the talks about allow accessory dwelling units to enable aging in place, additional income through rental and to increase the population density of neighborhood without altering its character. More specifically, and there is guidance within this area for updating the neighborhood context. So this is where the original zoned district is urban edge. This plan specifically as aligned with Blueprint Denver, calls for an update in the neighborhood context. So the Denver zoning codes are urban neighborhood context as opposed to the currently mapped urban edge context better reflects the use of alleys limiting or prohibiting curb cuts from street access and the continuation of detached sidewalks where possible, as well as tailored minimums on lot sites, which is an area where the existing zoning requires a 4500 square foot minimum zone that the Future Zone District should maintain to 4500 square foot lot zone, not minimum, which this is what the applicant is applying for. Four criteria two, three and five. It is called out within the staff report and under the fourth criteria justified circumstances, a city adopted plan as specified in the Globeville neighborhood plan as well as blueprint members. Therefore, CPD recommends a based on the findings of the report here have been met. Staff is available for any questions you may have as well as the applicant. Amanda Brien is also on the cross-party. Thank you. Thank you. We have no individual signed up to speak on this item this evening. Are there any questions for members of Council on Council Bill 20 20583. Seeing none. Public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council and Council Bill 20 20583.

Recommendation to receive and file a status report by Centro CHA, Inc. and California State University, Long Beach on the Economic Profile of the Latino Community in Long Beach.

LongBeachCC_04162019_19-0353

Okay. Let's see. Next item that's been moved up is item number 11. Madam Clerk, please read. Communication from Councilmember Urunga, Councilwoman Gonzales, Vice Mayor Andrews and Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation Receive and File Status Report by Central Asia and California State University, Long Beach on the economic profile of the Latino community in Long Beach. CA, Councilmember Yu Ringa. Thank you, Mayor. I'm very pleased to welcome the members of the community to come here and talk about the impact of Latinos in the economy here in Long Beach as well as originally. We had a nice conference a couple of months ago at the the Convention Center, which was very informative and provided a lot of good information about how we can all work together to create a better economy. So I'm very pleased to welcome Professor Armando Vazquez Ramos and our newest elected professor. Elected professor. Professor at Cal State Long Beach, an elected member of the Board of Education, Juan Martinez. So I don't know which one of you is going to be making the presentation tonight, but you're certainly welcome to come forward and get it going. We're also joined by the executive director of Central Cha. Jessica Quintana. Thank you so much, Councilman Harrington, and thank you so. Much for the opportunity to be here today. Bear Garcia, Members of the City Council. City Manager Pat West. We're thrilled to be here tonight. As you know, the organization is the largest Latino serving agency in the city of Long Beach. And we're. Bringing today the first Latino Economic Impact Data Report for the city of. Long Beach. If you can imagine, this data report has never been done in this city. And. You know, we were very fortunate. To be able to be commissioned by the state of California. Department of Social Services, to be able. To uplift this data. For years, we've been telling the story and the needs of the Latino community. But, you know, we needed to be able to have a data and a. Roadmap to be able to help guide some of the decisions, you know, with our families and youth and children here in the city of Long Beach. So we're just thrilled and pleased today. More excited, you know, for the first time, really having this. Partnership with the university. With our city government, with our community leaders that are here today. I know you see some of the folks sitting in the audience. And so this really took and a labor of love. Love, a little nervous. But, you know, we launched. The first ever Latino Economic Summit. We held a Latino. Economic roundtable to really look at the data and discuss, you know, what are some of the challenges, what are some of the successes? You know, what are we doing right? What are we doing wrong? And then really looking at our communities, you know. Where are our Latino families? Where are our children, where of our youth? You know, as an. Organization, we've been working on initiatives to promote. Better jobs. And I know we have our workers here today who will talk about jobs and better jobs, but really looking at, you know, how do we develop those. Education. Pathways, how do we. Strengthen our workforce. Development programs that we have an equitable workforce development programs for all. And really looking at the violence in our communities and in opportunity. So we are pleased to have this partnership with Cal State, Long Beach and with our local city government, with our economic development department. This can never happen without the partnership. This is how we work together to really look at our communities and and promote possibilities. And so without. Really? I know. It's just, you know, this is something that we have been developing for years. And, you know, this this partnership. You know, with Cal State, Long Beach and. The Center for Community Engagement, it really started with just, you know, looking at how do we make things better in our community. And so having a conversation with Dr. Wayne Bennett this and really pulling together our resources and saying, how can we make this happen, you know, with the resources and talent, expertize and time, you know, that it took to make this happen. You know, this this this was all done by the resources of our city. Of our. Education department, in the community. You know, there was not a. Dollar that was invested, you know, from any other place. And I don't think we would have been able to get this kind. Of report or paid for it. You know, for our city. So I just want to thank everybody for their time, for their investment in our community. I want to thank, you know, our economic development committee, our city council members, you know, our team who is here in the city and sitting in the audience. I know we have some of our leaders. We have Cal State, Long Beach, Armando Vasquez from the professor from Cal State, Long Beach. We also have run Aureus was a former director from the health department. We have Teresa moreno who sits here. We also have her, Linda Chico and our board chair, Mario Gonzalez. You know, these are all folks. That have, you know, lived Long Beach and and were really invested and. Want to see our communities and our families do well. So, again, thank you so much for your time. But. Jerry Garcia, distinguished councilmembers, city staff and our committee members. We ready rock n roll, ready to see this thing. All right. So I want to reiterate, this is a preview has not been rolled out or disseminated publicly. There are a couple of things here that are we're in the process of updating. So this is the kind of the first public roll out of this preview. So I want to make sure to address that. This is a best practices community engagement initiative. That's a partnership between, as Jessica mentioned, the nonprofit sector central to our university, Cal State, Long Beach, our distinguished city, in particular, our economic development leaders. So I want to make sure and highlight that this can be a model that we can continue to leverage and build on and share across our country as well. So the goals and objectives of our project, it's twofold. One, it's to help us better understand and address key economic education and health data for Latinos in Long Beach. And second, it's in alignment with our university's vision around the public good. And this can only be done through these partnership and community engagement opportunities. The concrete objectives of our profile, if you will, we're still trying to name it something. So any help with our branding is much appreciated, but our objectives are very clear. One is to share this report in community settings. So this is the first public opportunity for us to do that. Second, and it's to spark discussion around key policy considerations and implications. We want this to be an action oriented document. Third, to serve as a mechanism for ongoing work updates and further development and dissemination. And then lastly, it's to help inform future research and decision making. So that's why we take this very seriously, being able to roll this out with you all here today. So we're going to start off with the data, and it's my great pleasure to have partnered with the chair of the economics department, Dr. Seiji Steinmetz. Why don't you take us through the data? Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council on City Staff are looking forward to seeing many of you at the 2019 Long Beach Regional Economic Forum this Thursday. It's a collaboration between our Cal State, Long Beach and Mr. Kessler's department. Oh, he's not looking. I totally blew that. I'm giving you a pitch here, sir. So between our department and the economic department, there is so much we want to show you. And we only have a few minutes, so I'm going to take you through what I'm going to call a brief profile of the Latino community in Long Beach. I might even skip a few slides. So first, let's look at the population. There are about 230,000 Latinos living in Long Beach right now, representing 43.2% of the city's population. Close to 80% are of Mexican heritage. And about 13.2%, excuse me, are Central American or South American heritage. So we see the part of the Latino population in Long Beach has grown over the last few. Over the last decade, although it's been a bit flat in more recent years. And again, this is going to be a big data dump. I'm just going to show you a bunch of stuff and most of the slides in front of you. Population. One of the things I often ask people, just when they started asking me, how did I get involved in this project? And sort of what motivates me? I often ask, Well, let's look at all of the children or all of the young adults in Long Beach are all 18 excuse me, all youth, 18 and under in Long Beach. What what proportion of all Long Beach Latinos under the age of 18 were born in another country. And the number I usually get is 20, 30%. That's sort of the common discourse. But I want to point out that, yes, although 33.4% of Long Beach Latinos are immigrants, only 4% of all Long Beach Latinos under the age of 18 are immigrants. Put differently, there's only about 2400 immigrant and Latino children in Long Beach or. One thing to note, too, by the way, overall, of all the immigrant population approaching, half of the Latino immigrant community are naturalized citizens. All right. So what I've done is I know it's a little hard to see, but this is what you want to do is look for the patterns here, the darker shades of green. This is a heat map of the population, the Latino concentration in the city. So darker green means a larger share of Latinos in the neighborhood. So if you look for the darkest green areas, we see. The 710 freeway along the left side and then the four or five coming through the city. And then above the 91 up there is the greater Long Beach, we might call it, or north of Long Beach. And we see that there are some fairly you know, the darkest green are 50% or more Hispanic, Latino. And we see that there are some pretty identifiable areas that are predominantly Latino. Particularly in downtown and north of that, towards central and the north side of Long Beach. In terms of education. If we're looking at the population of Long Beach Latinos over the age of 25, 37.6% of Long Beach Latinos in that age group have less than a high school education. Now, by comparison, 10% of all other residents in that age group have less than a high school education. That being said, 15.3% of Long Beach Latinos have earned a bachelor's degree or higher. And we're going to skip that one in the interest of time looking at health insurance coverage. There are 23,000 plus Long Beach Latinos who do not have health insurance coverage. Looking at children. There are over 2200 children in Long Beach who do not have health insurance. The working of the working age population, 18 to 64, 16.3% of the Latino community is going without health insurance right now. Three and a half percent of kids in Long Beach and in the Latino community. Two and a half percent of our seniors. Health insurance covered rates have gotten better, though. Looking at the graph over here in the orange is the health insurance. It's the percentage of Long Beach who are uninsured, who are Latino. And below that, in the blue line is the percentage of Long Beach residents who are in, who are not Latino, who are also going without health insurance. So we've seen declines in the uncovered rate. That's good news, right, that the uninsured rate has declined by 13 and a half percentage points within the last decade. Probably in no small part due to community efforts like at Central Cha's. Thank you. But also, at the same time, there's you could see there's still a persistent gap between Latinos and everyone else in terms of being uninsured. Okay. So let's look at some more economic data. And again, we're just gonna give you a brief economic profile here. Look at the occupations of Long Beach Latino residents, and these are in very broad occupational sectors. So management, business, science and art. Think of that as like the professional sector, for lack of a better way of phrasing it, white collar jobs. And then we have their the service sector, sales and office sector. And then the last two categories are natural resources, construction and maintenance and production, transportation and material moving. We can think of these as more of the heavy lifting jobs in blue are all other residents of Long Beach, and in gold are the Latino residents of Long Beach. And it gives you a sense of the composition of the workforce who lives in Long Beach? There's a relative there's a disproportionately low number of Latinos working in the management, business sciences and arts sector. And but a relatively high proportion in what I'm calling the heavy lifting jobs and in the service sector. And what that's going to do is that will inform what we're going to see next. If we look at median household income among one resident, again, gold is the Latino resident's median household income over time in blue is in this case it's overall right. So while Long Beach Latino household incomes have been rising, although flat in the most recent year, there's about a 14.7% gap compared to the overall median household income. The Latino median household income of about $51,000 per year is about 14.7% lower than overall. Now, keep in mind, too, there's an extraordinarily large labor force participation rate among Long Beach Latinos. Now, if you were an economist, you wouldn't just geek out on this number. 70% is an extraordinary labor force participation rate. Seven out of ten working age Latinos who work in law, who live in Long Beach are in the workforce. That's phenomenal, actually. All right. So despite having a higher labor force concentration, there's still lower household incomes. All right. I'll skip that for now. Now, let's look also at unemployment trends over the or the more we'll say over the last decade. And what I want you to do is pay attention to. Again, we have in blue is everyone else in Long Beach. And in gold, we have the Latino community. I want you to pay attention to the end points of these trends. Right. When? Times are good during prosperous economic times. There's relatively little difference in the unemployment rates between Long Beach, Latinos and all other Long Beach residents. But when times become more difficult, when unemployment rates rise, who gets hit the hardest? Along those lines. The poverty rate among Long Beach, Latino families is 16.4%. One in six Long Beach Latino families lives below the poverty line. By comparison, 9.8% of all other Long Beach families live in poverty. All right. So looking at a trend of poverty rates over time, on the right, we see that the poverty rates have fallen . All right. For the Latino community, they've been fairly flat for everyone else. But persistently, again, we see systematically higher poverty rate. Then among all other Long Beach residents. All right. And this is just one type of heat map we can do one snapshot. What we've done here is I've said let's look at predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods. In other words, neighborhoods that are at least 50% Hispanic, Latino. And also then I said, of those neighborhoods which have a 20% or higher poverty rate or some one in five families in these neighborhoods is living in poverty. In these predominantly Hispanic Latino neighborhoods. And what we see as a pattern, we we can identify. So you think of this as among the poorer Latino communities. Where are the most stricken, predominantly Hispanic family neighborhoods? And again, we could see along the seven, ten quarter around downtown towards central and up on the north side of Long Beach . And also, by comparison, we can see some of these same areas in the surrounding region. It's almost as if there is a imaginary line at Redondo and the four or five that that divides the region. Okay. That being said, what we want to also illustrate for you what I mean, we basically illustrated some challenges for you. I think what we also want to show you is the extraordinary economic impact that Long Beach residents have on the community. And to take us through the economic impact analysis first, let me just I'm going to give you the world's fastest lesson on what economic impact analysis is. All right. And it's through my mad clip art skills you can see here. So. If I have a job right, I'm going to I'm going to take my earnings and I'm going to spend it on groceries and I'm going to spend it on coffee and I'm going to pay my rent. Okay. And then the grocery store and the coffee shop and my landlord, they're going to take my money and they're going to go spend it on goods and service as well. All right. So we call this the induced effect. My dollar in earnings spent in the community multiplies throughout the economy. In this case, we're going to focus just on the Orange County and Los Angeles County's almost trillion dollar economy and long, Long Beach Latinos contribution to that trillion dollar economy. Also, when I work, I need a computer and I need a chair. So the people who made the chair and who made the computer, they're also getting paid and they're spending is also rippling out into the economy. So these multiplier effects permeate through the economy. And what we end up with at the end of the day is we can measure for a specific group like Long Beach, Latinos, how their economic activity permeates through the economy and ends up having a large impact. All right. And to take us through that, we have our extraordinarily celebrated economics undergraduate student Megan Anni, who's going to teach us about the Long Beach Latino economic impact. Hello. So according to our. According to the findings from our impact analysis, we find that over 100,000 jobs held in the region are by Long Beach Latinos. These 100,000 jobs generate $33 billion to the local to the local region. And these 100,000 jobs also sustain an additional 79,000 jobs throughout the local region. This are the $33 billion of economic impact, also accounts for roughly 40% of long beaches. Total impact into the economy. So now. Now let's focus on Long Beach, Latino immigrants. 52,000 Long Beach. Latino immigrants are working in the local region. These 52,000 jobs create $16.8 billion. Real quick, I think the distinction is important. When you say immigrants, you're including both documented and undocumented immigrants. That's correct. I just want to make sure people are aware what that data point is. I just want to make sure. Yes. Okay. So that is correct. Immigrants we are going to consider undocumented in addition to documented. And so looking at Long Beach, Latino immigrants, we see that. 52,000 jobs in the local region are held by these Long Beach immigrants, Latino immigrants and the economic output generated by this by these by the Latino immigrants alone generates $16.8 billion into the economy. This accounts for 20.6% of long Beach's total economic impact. To the out to the region. So. These 52,000 jobs also create an additional 39,000 jobs into the local region. So let me restate that. The 52,000 Long Beach Latino immigrants employed in the local region are creating an additional 39,464 jobs in the local economy. Now, this. Oftentimes, we have a misconception that Latino immigrants are taking jobs when in fact the data supporting that they're creating jobs in the local economy. So now let's go ahead and just take a look at our self employed Long Beach Latinos and our self employed Long Beach Latino immigrants. These are essentially our entrepreneurs in the region, and we find that Long Beach Latinos represent about 9000 of these jobs held in the region. And their economic impact accounts for 2 billion. And that's roughly 2.4% of Long Beach, just total impact. And it also sustains an additional 5000 jobs into the local region. Focusing on self-employed. We see that focusing on self-employed Latino immigrants. We see that they account for 6852 jobs in the local region, and this generates an additional 3000 jobs throughout the region. Thank you, Megan. Okay. So moral of the story. Latinos work more than anybody else, but earn less. That's what the data shows. Higher labor force participation, less earnings. And Latino immigrants generate a huge impact into our regional economy. So Latino immigrants create jobs, don't take jobs away. So what's next for us? So we've had two community stakeholder meetings. As a Councilmember Wodonga referred to, we had a Latino Economic Summit in the fall. We also had a policy roundtable with systems leaders and these were some of the next steps that have been proposed to us that we were going to work on the rest of this calendar year. One is to present this rollout report in different community context and community settings and provide ongoing updates. We're working on the current update right now for this year, which will be released in fall of this calendar year. Second, to include more comparative data. So how are we doing in relation to other cities comparable to ours? And then how are Latinos doing in relation to other population subgroups? So that will be included in the update. Third, how do we leverage, support funding and partnerships both public and private around what the data is telling us here today? Next, how do we also explore alignment with our local, regional and state efforts, strategies and initiatives? Economic Blueprint. Dr. Simons referred to the Economic Forum in two days next to identified targeted action oriented strategies, policies and programs to address these conditions and issues, not just from a deficit approach, but how do we continue growing our economy based on the efforts of Latinos here in Lambics, and how do we make policy decisions again to enhance those efforts? And then lastly, a developing policy framework to better understand the data. The data by itself tells us something. But how how do we frame the data around policy needs, policy implications and move forward that way? So out of these stakeholder meetings, these are the policies have emerged. And what we're hoping to do is start developing recommendations out of the policy areas. This is a first sneak peek at how we organize the recommendations and the data provided at our stakeholder meetings. So policy areas are around economic inclusion, closing opportunity gaps in education, eliminating health disparities and immigrant integration. So this is the way we're framing the data moving forward. What do we mean by implementing economic inclusion? It's really developing policy framings that address Latino poverty and wealth in Lambic. What do we mean by closing opportunity gaps? Again, framing the data around Latino educational outcomes. So although in our region, high school graduation rates are improving, we still have a systemic gap which we refer to as an opportunity or equity gap. Next. Eliminating health disparities. Again, framing our discussions around Latino health inequities. So the fact that we have children uninsured in Long Beach tells us something, what can we do about it? And then the last piece here is around immigrant integration. So we have data here that shows that immigrants are a vital part of our economy. How do we build. Protections. Around our immigrant populations and how do we increase support for our immigrant populations, given that they are contributing. Members of not just our local society. But our local economy? So that's the preview for you, distinguished council members, city staff Mayor Garcia and. Our community members. And we're looking forward to providing you some. Next steps on what the data and the findings. Demonstrate. I want to thank again our colleagues here from the university, from the Economic Development Department here, and, of course, our partner in crime, Central Asia. In this effort. Thank you. Thank you very much, Dr. Benitez. Let me let me just do two things, and I'm going to turn this back to customary ranga in a minute here. What I want to thank, of course, just all the the collaboration that happened here. Obviously, any time that the university gets involved in such a large research project, I think is is a great thing, especially when you're partnering with Central Cha, a nonprofit agency in the work that's happening in economic development at the city. And so I just want to thank all the partnerships. We know when you get the head of the communication program in and the heads of our departments and all the folks at the university so engaged in this work. This work is also very important to President Connerly, who I know is very aware of the results. I just want to thank the Cal State Long Beach family for four for doing the work, which I'm a proud member of, by the way, which I love you guys. And let me let me let me add that two things that are not here that I think are critical. One is I remember and I talked to Jessica about this a few years ago, you might remember when the State of Black Long Beach came out, that report that was, I thought, really well done at the time. And I know a lot of folks had discussions back then when that report came out about all the information that that that provided around the African-American community and the challenges that there were different needs and other populations would also be great to have data on. And so I think, you know, the folks that were involved in that report and I think to where I think them also for that work and the fact that this is happening within within the Latino community is also really important work. And so I just wanted to uplift that. And then I also wanted to add that the number that the numbers that aren't in here that I that I find important are the numbers around Long Beach Unified. And I know Dr. Bennett is you know, this as good as anyone at the while, the population of of Long Beach Latinos is 43%. The population at Long Beach Unified is much higher than that. 54.5% mayor. And and can and continues to grow pretty rapidly year after year. And so I think what that what the what the data shows is, you know, we have to ensure that that I think it's our interests that every population succeed. Right. Regardless of of of color of where people are in life. And I think that is the mission of this work is to ensure if if Long Beach is going to have and be successful five, ten, 20 years from now. It will it will achieve success if the Latino community also achieve success because it's a growing continues to grow up growing piece of this pie. And so we know this is a community that still lags behind in some of these indicators. And so we want all of the we want every population wannabees to succeed. And and I just want to thank you for the work you bring on on this important topic. And so thank you very much to the whole team. So with that, I want to turn this back over to Councilmember Ringo. Thank you, Mayor, and very observant about what's taking place here. And I want to thank Seiji and Dr. Benevides for bringing this forward. The question I have is an effort for being here as well and to set the shop. We're putting this together. I mean, it's things don't happen in a in a vacuum. And there's there's a lot of support and impetus that goes into this when when I see my my, my my former colleague Ron Arias in the audience and my friend, my former professor and student Armando Vazquez Ramos, they're still involved or still engaged because we need to continue that into the future. But more importantly, I think that this preview is very timely. We know that in 2020 comes the census, the 2020 census, and we know that we're going to get a lot more information from a result of that, that census data and in terms of employment participation and community participation in the economy as a whole. But also one thing that wasn't here and perhaps it's another story for another time is voting rights. Obviously, if there's any one thing that's important to us as city council members is a voting patterns and and voting participation and education among the Latino community. We all you always hear the same refrain, yep, Latinos, maybe 40% population, but they only vote at like 5% or 10% of the total electorate. So that's another aspect of maybe what what I said Richard could focus in on in terms of not only the economic impact of Latinos in the region or an anomaly specifically, but also the affects of the voting patterns as well. But I want to congratulate you. Thank you so much for putting this together, bringing it forward. Perhaps two years from now, we could get another one once the 2020 census data is out and we could evaluate it and study it and see where we at at that point. So I want to thank you for for being here. Thank you very much, Councilmember and Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. Thanks again for delivering this amazing report. I had the opportunity to see this live with over 100 or so, probably over 200 people that attended. And it was really great to see all of the in-depth data and be a part of that. And I know that thanks to all of you, Megan, Seiji and Dr. Benitez and Central Cha and Cal State, Long Beach. The collective work. I know this will be a living document and evolving document. We're already getting an update, which is exciting and I'm just very glad to see this. This is not only unprecedented in our city, but it's unprecedented in the region. You go to L.A. and they're like mind blown that we actually have an economic impact report dedicated to one demographic that is growing at a rapid rate here in our city. And I've said the same thing relative to Councilmember Turanga is that it'd be really nice. I mean, the Cambodian community is now asking for their own economic impact report, the LGBTQ community. So it's just we have so much potential there. And especially given the fact that Swedish Japanese friend of ours is delivering the Latino Economic Impact Report is amazing. Thank you, Seiji. What you're doing is is incredible, and I look forward to working with you in any capacity possible. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Vice Mayor. Fine, thank you very much. You know, I apply that. You know, I think after the mayor was speaking of, you know, the African-American Vietnamese, we have such a diverse city in which we live in. I think an impact like this should be done all over our city. So we'll all know where we are. But I think on first of all, I'd like to thank Councilman Murang'a for taking the lead on bringing this to the council. And I would also like to thank Central Cha and Cal State Long Beach for that diligently and effort in compiling these reports. This report validates what we have all known for a long time. Latinos are an important, are important, vital and growing segment in the city of Long Beach and in the sixth District. We as a city must take this fact into account and plan for the future. We must ensure that we develop the process of a 2030 strategic plan, and we use this strategy that will include Latino communities. We must dedicate more funds, more funds into the language, access and digital inclusion. Lastly, Senator, share your leadership on this effort has been extraordinary and it's always is is solving issues in our community. And I want to thank all of you again. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Councilmember Richard. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to just share some share some thoughts. Councilmember Ranga, thank you so much for allowing this opportunity to see this presentation here at council. I saw it the first time I saw it was with Councilwoman Gonzalez at the roundtable. And I was impressed then and I'm impressed now at the detail in the organization on how the data was presented. It really paints a clear picture and I love to see the team how organized the team is at presenting this one. Seiji Jessica from Central Cha. Megan You know I can't wait to hire Megan one day. So my my larger takeaway here is that, you know, over the last few years, there's been this constant threat of equity. And it's been coming up at council, it's been coming up in the community. This common denominator, it's common language. You know, you see, here's a Latino economic equity profile discussing racial equity. There was just the policy link equity profile. There's a conversation about Parks Equity and Office of Equity. And what we're hearing is that it's time for the city to really acknowledge that equity is important to our values and it needs to be woven into our service philosophy as the city. Baked in knots, sprinkled on top right braid at the root. What we do in every department. Because, you know, I think the mayor said said it best is that when the Latino population thrives, Long Beach thrives. And the same goes for people of color. And everyone in our city, as you know, as people thrive, our entire city thrives. And that's important. I also like the fact that the way you framed it, you you you tied in opportunity. And I would even say open with the opportunity. Have people understand that asset, the asset, the the aspirational framing that Long Beach is doing great. But imagine how much greater we would be doing if we had racial equity in our city, if we had if we closed our racial wealth gap in our city, if people had access to owning homes and starting businesses and we're making money, imagine how much greater Long Beach would be. And everyone can sort of connect at that point. And then we say, but here's the barrier, here's why we're not doing as great as we could. It's because certain communities need attention and they need you know, we need to make sure that we're being intentional at closing those gaps. And so those are my my thoughts that I think it's I think this is very timely. I thank you for for this presentation. You clearly have my support, as you know, as we continue this conversation on economic inclusion in the city, I'm going to continue to engage you to make sure that we again, we make this in and then we braid this throughout things that we do. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman. I really appreciate the work. This was a phenomenally done report. I would only I want to echo councilman or vice mayor Andrew's comments, but I also would love to see the data. There's some L.A.. County reports that also talk about mentorship versus home. Ownership and that ability to then be able to afford health care and the others and then what local opportunities we could have, where we. Encourage those who are selling off their wealth to sell it to those who live within those apartments already and to condo. Wise, even smaller, smaller units, whether they're even triplexes or quad plexus, so that there's the ability to have that ownership. Because the L.A. County report that I remember talked a lot about the difference of two communities that were significantly similar in every aspect. Except for. The ability to own your future through housing. And so just great report and I can't wait to see more. Thank you so much. And congratulations to everyone, especially all of you that pitched in to make this happen. So great work. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I echo the comments of my colleagues. Fantastic presentation. I definitely learned a lot and you guys did a wonderful job, especially to our student presenter. Fantastic job with your presentation, so thank you. I know that we live in such a diverse city and having come from an immigrant background myself, it's always interesting for me to hear the different economic data that we have and educational data that we have of the different communities. I know I actually save the presentation. I'm going to give it to my son's teacher tomorrow. He goes to Long Beach Unified and they're studying this issue right now in a human geography class and talking not just about cultural demographics and information, but also the impact of working families in terms of the development, the development of, you know, successful, I guess, contributors in society. So finding that in places where you have, you know, family members, everyone is working outside the home because they have to to, you know, live live within the expenses and the costs of living within that community. What kind of impact does that have on unemployment in the future, education, those kinds of things? So it's very interesting. We live in such a diverse city. It's very interesting to learn as much as we can. I welcome these kinds of studies and reports as to every every population in every different, diverse segment of our of our society. I think it helps us really understand the journey that everyone has to take, regardless of their race or financial background, but the diverse journeys that everyone has to take. So I appreciate it. And I thank you, Center Cha, for bringing this forward. And thank you for these awesome mugs. I appreciate it. I appreciate you guys continuing to educate us and partnering with us. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilwoman and Councilmember Pierce. Thank you. Great job. Great collaboration. I applaud you. I think it's really important to remember when I was at Cal State where I met Professor Juan Benitez, I did one of my last papers there was on immigration and the contributions that it made that they make into society. And it's so fascinating to see where the different thoughts come from. And so I really appreciate having an academic look at the economic impact because it is so important. Jose Lin D.A., who I mentioned earlier today. He worked three jobs. He worked at the Westin. He worked at the Hilton, and he worked the convention center. And so now having, you know, he was Latino. He had three kids. And so what is the economic impact for somebody that finds themselves in this poverty area, finds himself working more but making less? What's that impact on families and how does that impact their health? How does that impact study practice like it is so intertwined? And so to be able to have you guys really make some policy recommendations to us. I mean, one thing that's clear being on council is we might have ideas, but we really need to rely on experts to come forward and say, here's some models that we should try. And so I, I also want to give a shout out to our economic development team. Recently, we had a small business that was going to be put on the market, and their employees, all Latino, had worked there for many of them for 30 years. And so he was talking about selling. And if he sold to a Starbucks or Jack in the Box, those employees would probably lose their jobs. But with the work of community members and council working with economic development, hopefully now that ownership is going to go to those employees with this great grant program that our team has worked on. And so how can we use opportunities like that to think outside the box versus just how do we just build this one level of wealth? You know, and so how do we think creatively about that? And then in downtown? One of the things that I think we're going to start working on is how do we fill our office spaces? Like what type of job should we have in downtown that will contribute to a thriving downtown? What opportunities are there for Latinos, for African-Americans, for our community and communities to own businesses and operate in our downtown as well? So I would say one other area that I don't think we talk about a lot, but prep I got to I'm a renter and I got a prep notice at my house and my landlord said, don't tell the city you're going to be here. You don't have to do that. Because he was scared about what they might find. If your landlord tells somebody that is undocumented or poor and struggling to make every single dollar count, they're likely not going to let somebody in to help make their lives better. And so I think we as a city have to continue to think about that. And so those are just some some thoughts off the top of my head, but I really appreciate the work and I look forward to hearing more from you guys and seeing how we can collaborate. Thank you so very much. Thank you so much, Councilmember and councilman. Thank you. And I'd just like to lend my words of support to this. This is a very, very powerful economic report. I want to salute and commend the the information. I want to salute and commend the partnership, but most importantly, to the work and the work that will be done. This this report really kind of warms my heart, makes me very proud of our city because I think very few cities actually can can put together this type of partnership with the city. A world class university driven by a passionate community based organization like Central China, with with with collaboration and and of so many people involved in this, I had opportunity to actually go in and personally attend the Latino Economic Summit a few months ago, sat at the table with some some very thoughtful leaders. I learned so much just in the couple of hours that I was able to see there to to to be there for that. And there was so much more powerful information shared during that period of time that obviously you couldn't go into all of it here today. But if there is an opportunity, I would love to get that entire report to and possibly to the entire city council, because that data is very powerful. And as an elected official, I want to know as much as I possibly can about all of my constituency groups to be able to make good, sound decisions. And I think the report that you guys have put together, the presentation here this evening, will help us move in that direction. Moving forward, I think one of the big takeaways that I got a few months ago after attending the the economic summit was that, you know, we really have to turn to really. Focus on creating good jobs in this city. And I think one of the indicators there was not so good in terms of the economic forecasts. One of the presenters gave in terms of the type of jobs that are going to be available in the future. I think we really need to look to to stem that tide and figure out how we can make sure that people are going to be compensated so that they can have the good health care and access to good health care, the access to education and good housing. And that is what's going to be the great equalizer or the equity that will come from that. And so, again, I wanted to just commend you all. Thank you for this report. And also thank my colleague, Councilmember Yarrawonga for bringing it forward is very conscious. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And I want to thank all of you again for a great presentation. I'm going to do we're going to do public comment just as a as a note. We do have another large item right after this. So if we could just limit public comment as much as possible. If there's public comment, please come forward on this item. Okay. I guess that's going to be good. Okay. We like that. Good evening, Mayor. City Council. Ron Audio's eighth district. I simply just want to thank each and every one of you for your comments and your thoughtfulness in receiving this report. I can say that I've been coming down here for. Close to 40. Years, 24 as. A city staff member, and a lot more before that as a as a community activist and now as a as a a veteran of many of those things. But this council, without question, in my mind, is one of the most representative city councils that we have ever had. You actually look like the Long Beach that I know. And we just want to congratulate you guys to make us feel the way that you've done tonight. That was it. That didn't happen. 25, 30 years ago. You know, we were on the. Outside trying to peek. In. And now with each and every one of you and. Who you represent, I just want to congratulate you guys. You guys are doing good work. Keep it up. I think Long Beach is in very good hands. Thank you. Thank you, Ron. Next speaker, please. And I'm going to close the speakers list after these four speakers. Okay. So thank you. Good evening. My name is Lily and I'm the director of Health, Education and outreach for the Children's Clinic. And Dr. Nicholas, our CEO, sends her regards. She couldn't be here tonight, but we really wanted to thank Cal State, Long Beach, Go Beach. They teach students really well. Thank you very much. I think I graduated with a mayor's class. And we also want to thank Central Cha. Thank you very much for bringing this very important report. You're very right. We are geeking out over the data the children's clinic has. It's one of the largest nonprofit clinics here in Long Beach. We have 13 clinics across the Greater Long Beach area, and we serve well over 40,000 individuals ranging from ages zero two all the way to the grandparents. And this report is going to greatly influence our strategic plan moving forward. We don't just do 1 to 1 patient care. We're very focused on social determinants of health and from a public health point of view, socioeconomic resources and having success and access to all of these things that were presented in the report makes a huge impact on health. And it's really. Important for us to focus on these. Health and these economic and health inequities to. Make sure. That we have positive health outcomes in the community. And we're going to try to partner with all of. The stakeholders in the room and hopefully with the city and all of the council people to make sure. That TCC is able to. Deliver more. Services and health care and insurance to our community members. Thank you so. Much. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Our last speaker on this item. Uh, hello. Good afternoon. Uh, Mayor Garcia and the City Council. My name is Abraham Ordaz. Um, I was raised here in Long Beach. Um, I lived in the Eastside for the majority of my life growing up. I was, um, unfortunately gotten into a lot of trouble in and out of school. Um, never really attended school. Unfortunately, I didn't graduated when I was supposed to. Thankfully, um, after finding a few resources, I was able to complete my high school diploma. Um, I finished here Long Beach Conservation Corp in December 1328, 2018. Um, I found Santa Rosa due to a court mandate. I had to do a few community service hours for an altercation I got myself into with the law. Um, thankfully, my probation has been terminated on April 11th, 2019 on. Central Georgia has benefited me greatly by giving me access to job training, job certification, and now a part time job as a project coordinator here along Port Vila. I am grateful for the opportunity to learn, make, graphic design, screen printing, e-commerce and marketing with sales and retail. If it wasn't for Central China, I would probably not been in the position where I am. I probably would have been out in the streets doing what I was doing before. We have provided these lovely coffee mugs that we had made ourselves by our team members here. Lambie's. Uh, central to. Uh. Uh, please check us out is for the dot com. Um. All Oh all of the proceeds that we get back from the sale from making all of these. Um. Uh, cells will go back into the communities to help people out. I want to thank my mom, Jessica Anthony, in the central team for all these opportunities. Um, thank you very much. Thank you. Good job. Excellent. Where until. I want you to tell. Where can we. I'm going to. I'm going to go buy that hat you're wearing right now. So where can we get working? We buy that hat and other things that you're selling. Um, well. We have a. Budget to tell it, tell everybody. We have a location. And the mix of people back. People on the TV area. Um, we have a location here on Long Beach. Boulevard and PCH. Um. But if you, if a lot of people can make it out there, we also have a website. Um, it is a long beach port vila dot com. And right there you'll be able to find all their products. And what I mean a well-designed logo and look. And it looks good. Mm. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I'm definitely buying that hat. That's my new hat. Okay, so we have a motion in a second. Members, please cast your votes. Mm. Motion carries. Great. Thank you very much. We're going to go ahead and move on to the next item, which is item number 21. No, I'm sorry. Item for the play, item 14.

Proclamation Declaring September 1, 2015 as Alameda Fights Back Day to Promote Awareness of the Fight Against Cancer and the Alameda Relay for Life.

AlamedaCC_09012015_2015-1963

All right. Our second proclamation of the evening is for Relay for Life. Just Nelson is here to receive this. I guess I'll now read the proclamation. Whereas cancer is a group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled growth and spread of abnormal cells which, if not controlled, can result in premature death. And. Whereas, cancer is predicted to strike one out of every three American women and one out of every two American men. With an estimated 1.7 million new cancer cases diagnosed in 2015 and an estimated 590,000 cancer deaths in the United States. And. WHEREAS, The American Cancer Society is the nation's largest voluntary health organization and has funded research for cancer detection and treatment techniques, thereby dramatically increasing cancer survival rates and decreasing incidence of certain types of cancers. And. Whereas, the American Cancer Society is a recognized, nonprofit, community based coalition of local resident volunteers dedicated to eliminating cancer as a major health problem for the past 100 years. And. Whereas, Relay for Life financially benefits the American Cancer Society, research and patient support programs and educates local residents. And. Whereas, September 1st is the American Cancer Society Statewide Fundraising Initiative Paint California Purple Day, which invites local retailers to donate 10% of their proceeds that day. Or if that donation of $100 to the Alameda Relay for Life and rare September 1st is the first day of the 2016 Relay for Life fundraising season, with the Relay for Life in Alameda embarking on its 22nd annual fundraising event. And Borough's Relay for Life of Alameda is one of the oldest Bay Area American Cancer Society Relay for Life Events and has raised 1,558,000. Over the last two decades to help in the fight against cancer. And. Whereas, the American Cancer Society is Relay for Life in Alameda is a community event that provides an opportunity to network with businesses, associates, family and friends with the common goal of making a difference in the fight against cancer. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Treasurer Spencer, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby proclaim September 1st, 2015, as Alameda Fightback Day in the City of Alameda to promote awareness of the fight against cancer and urge all residents to recognize and participate in Relay for Life of Alameda and to shop at local participating businesses. Thank you. Come on up. There's a few here I know that are very active in Relay for Life. Introduce yourselves and then share a few words. And share a few words. Yes, I am Deanna Huey, and I think I know most of you. And. Your words. Thank you for recognizing us. We know that cancer has affected everyone in this room somehow, whether it be a loved. One or friend. And raising funds is a. First step to. Finding a cure. I'm Anne Marie. Farai. I'm the online chair and have been a member of the event leadership team for several years and for many years before that just been somebody who walks the track and amazed me. The first time I went there, I thought, you know, like, this is one of almeida's best kept secrets we have. I don't we have raised over a million and a half dollars, one and a half million dollars in the 20. This'll be our 22nd year. And just the more we can promote it and work for a world with less cancer is good. Thank you. Thank you. And I also want to thank the city of Alameda and city council members for supporting the American Cancer Society and its mission to fight back against cancer and find a cure so that nobody ever has to hear the words. You've got cancer again. For all of you that don't know, really, for life. It's an annual event. We do have a date. Your calendars. This as a 15. 16. Sorry. Next here and now. And now. Say it. Say it into the microphone. And the people watching on television can hear you. So description. Okay. I didn't realize I was on TV. Our date is June 25th, 2016. Please mark your calendars. Also, sign ups are officially online. If you're interested in creating a team and joining our event, please go to WW W Dot Relay for Life Dawgs Alameda, S.A.. Don't forget that California in there. And and and thanks again. And we hope to see you June 25th, 2016. Oh. Thank you. Next, oral communications, not agenda. We do have a speaker.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to submit a grant application, through the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services, to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the 2014 Continuum of Care for Homeless Assistance Program, and execute all necessary documents, subgrants and any amendments changing the amount of the award or extending the grant term upon receipt of HUD funding. The grant award amount will be between $5.5 million and $8 million for a period of July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_09092014_14-0710

Automate as a report from the Health and Human Services Department with the recommendation to authorize the submittal of a grant application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the 2014 Continuum of Care for Homeless Assistance. Second, there's been a motion in the second, and I'm going to first begin with Councilmember Richardson. So can. I have a few questions, but I want the Department of Health and Human Services just to walk us through this quickly and then I have a few questions about how we move forward. Excellent. Mr. West, we have Susan Price here to answer any questions and the director, Kelly Colby. Honorable mayor and city council members. Basically, since 1995, the city has applied and received annual funds through the HUD Continuum of Care Program to support the Multi-Service Center, the Villages at Cabrillo, a 26 acre site where we have over 1100 formerly homeless folks in shelter and permanent housing. These model programs were created in the early nineties closure of the the Long Beach Naval Base. The 2013 funding award was 6.9 million provided for ongoing renewal funding, with one new project for permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless. There are 28 total projects funded in the 2013 Continuum of Care Application. As I mentioned, 2727 of those are existing projects and one of them was a new project. And this is basically the health department leading a grant application with 12 sub recipient agencies that are nonprofits providing services to address homelessness in Long Beach. In the 2013 application, Long Beach, along with Columbus, Ohio, became one of two S.O.S. jurisdictions across the country to be designated as a unified funding agency. What that means for us is basically that the city of Long Beach, in its efforts over the course of the last, I'd say, 2 to 5 years, has positioned itself well to be able to make local decisions based on that $7 million competitive funding that we receive annually. The overall system and just kind of a little brief note about what the system entails. The overall system of care consists of approximately 1950 beds for emergency, transitional and permanent supportive housing. The high occupancy levels are tracked through the homeless management information system on a daily basis through our Multi-Service Center, which is located over on the west side of the city. Currently, the mercy is in a modernization project. It's been closed for construction since March and will be reopening anticipated in October of this year. The impacts of that have been somewhat noticeable in that we were seeing about 2000 people in any given month over the course of a year. The Multi-Service Center serves about 2600 visits, a fairly significant volume of service that has been decentralized since March. The kiosk system, collectively with all the different agencies, as I mentioned, serves about 5400 people and duplicated in a given year. Bellamy. Continuum of care, as I said, is an annual competitive application submitted to HUD on behalf of this system of care on an annual basis. The overall process takes about three months between the RFP that HUD does and the RFP that the city does to select its sub recipient agencies. The continuum of care is both funded and unfunded partners, and so therefore it is a very broad system of care. But what we're talking about tonight is basically the application that we submit to HUD, which has yielded us approximately 6.9 million in prior year. And with that, I'll close and respond to any questions that you may have. Thank you. Councilman Richardson? Well, I just wanted to say that, you know, coming out of the budget and acknowledging that the health department is less than 1% funded through the general fund, this is a great program and I'm proud that you are applying for this grant. I want to particularly note that the 12 or so agencies are spread across the city. We've got even in the ninth District, you've got the children's clinic here. I want to I want to I want to express that I do pay attention to these things, and we are going to pay attention to how successful these programs are in touching all corners of the city. It's really important to me and congratulations, and we hope that you receive this funding once again. Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you. I, too, want to thank you for your service to this community and for tackling what is objectively a huge issue that requires a lot of long term solutions in our city. I consider the Homeless Services Division and your outreach team a leader in regional initiatives, the Gateway Cities Council of Governments Homeless Strategy, the Service Planning Area eight coordinated entry systems for chronic homeless and Family Solutions Centers, both operating from San Pedro Harbor Interfaith Program. The Long Beach Continuum of Care is a model for other jurisdictions with a multi-service center, a police department, quality of life unit, interdepartmental collaborations, and a broad base of service providers and engaged stakeholders addressing this very complex issue . I know that in the third District recently we've had a lot of issues near certain areas of our community surrounding the Belmont Pier, and the work that you have done has been outstanding. It's clear to me that we have much work to do in the area of homeless services and that it's important to strike a balance between quality of life for our residents and the rights of those without homes and the gaps in resource capability and capacity to effectively address these issues. I thank you for being innovative with your resources and for the outreach that you do to bring additional resources and attention to this issue. I think you're doing excellent work. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Andrews. Yes. I also certainly want to thank you, because the fact that you've been like a beacon in our sixth district, whenever there's a call for the homeless or individuals who need that assistance, I mean, you've been there on time, and I truly want to appreciate everything you guys do for us. And thank you again. Thank you, Councilman Braxton. And I would be remiss if I didn't also thank you and congratulate you in advance, because I know we'll continue to do a great job here with the health department. Anytime we get constituent calls either from our business districts or our residents regarding homeless, we can count on the health department to be there with their team to address those issues. So thank you very much and look forward to your continued great work in the city of Long Beach. Thank you. Councilmember Ranga. I want to echo the support that our council members have given to the Health Department in regard to the services they provide. It's already been mentioned that 1% of the total funding to get is from the general fund. So a lot of what they bring in is from outside sources. This is an opportunity to continue that funding that comes from the outside. And it's having been there, worked there, done that, been there with them side by side. Yeah. I don't know what I said either. I know that that's a great staff down there. And Director Jalopy has that has gotten a gloppy sorry has gotten a wonderful staff and having a wonderful staff. And I know that Susan will continue to provide the excellent services that they that they have done for all these years and looking forward to the ribbon cutting for the embassy when that opens up about hope. I'm invited and you'll be invited, sir. We want to ride in your jalopy. Okay? Okay. Thank you. See no other council comment. Any public comment on the item? Seeing none. I believe there's a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Motion carries nine votes.

Recommendation to request City Council support of the CARE Court framework that will create a new State policy for Mental health services - and request City Manager to examine the feasibility of the local program being administered by the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services (LBDHHS).

LongBeachCC_03152022_22-0283

Fantastic. Thank you. And I was cut off a bit earlier. But but we are going to close in in memory. We do have a closing council district extension facility. We're going to move on to item number 13 and let's do a voice motion. I'm pretty sure the council councilmember supervisor was read. It was read the item on 13. Communication from councilman super not Councilwoman Allen Councilman Price recommendation to request. City Council support. For the CARE Court Framework and request City Manager to examine a local program administered by the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services. All right. Council members who bring our motion there. A second here. I'll second its price in a pricing. Okay. Price. Okay. Let's go ahead, Councilman Supriya. Okay. Thank you. I will just read one sentence from the agenda using memo that's also included in the press release from Governor Newsom. The care court framework was created using the evidence that many people can stabilize, beginning healing and exit homelessness in less restrictive community based care settings. The plan focuses on people with schizophrenia, spectrum and other psychotic disorders who may also have substance use challenges and who lack the medical decision making capacity and advances and upstream diversion from more restrictive conservatorships or incarceration. And my comments will be brief tonight before I handed over to the second of the motion. But that's not because I'm not enthusiastic about this. I can tell you that the governor made his press release on March 3rd, and this item was agenda for this meeting tonight, four days later on March 7th. I firmly believe in this because it represents a paradigm shift in the way we're dealing with this crisis. And that's exactly what our constituents have been asking for. I noted in a press Telegram editorial that it was reference that, yeah, this this problem started when our governor, Ronald Reagan, closed all the mental institutions. I'm sure we've all heard that line before, but that if you want to say that he signed a bill rather than veto it, the linchpin bill, that was in 1967. So 55 years ago, what has always struck me about that analysis is that we've had seven governors since Ronald Reagan was governor of California and both ends of the spectrum, very conservative to very progressive. And I don't think Ronald Reagan was that powerful a judge and we just lacked the will to address this. And finally, Governor Newsom has to tackle this issue head on. And I'd like our counsel to stand in support of that tonight. I also want to say that I'm fully aware that this has to be passed by the legislature and all bills are tweaked along the way. But in principle, I'd like us to support it tonight. Also, I added to this that I would like to see local control here. The item as presented is not set up that way. It's for counties. But we do have our own health department and I've already talked to the director of Health and Human Services who mentioned to me, well, this is kind of this is a civil court based system, and we don't have that ability. But you know what? It's very early on in the process. So all I'm asking is for city staff to work on a system that we might be able to have local control over. So with that, I'd like to hand it off to the Secretary of the Motion. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Supernova. And thank you for inviting me to sign on to this item. This is an item that's obviously a very important item in terms of a lot of the things that are happening in the area of criminal justice reform and early interception and connecting people with services rather than causing unforeseen or unanticipated negative interactions with law enforcement and the justice system. In recent years, we've definitely seen the landscape change and although many of our state laws have been that have been implemented were done with good intentions, there have been negative consequences of some of those. So I'm thankful that the Governor is proposing this new initiative that will help better address the needs of those most urgently in need, those with addiction related issues, those with mental health issues and concerns. Those individuals that struggle to adequately care for themselves and would truly benefit from a focused effort to get them back on the right track, will benefit from the judicial intervention that will allow first responders to be able to refer people to the CARES Court program. The CARE Court program will allow for those for whom it may be difficult or even impossible to take the first step towards making major changes to their lives be connected with services in up to 24 months of care and treatment that will help them lead to a path of stabilization and help fully independent living. The one thing that I think is is really important to note is we have so many different collaborative court processes that are available in the state of California, whether it's homeless court, white court, which is whatever it takes court, drug court and now care court are systems that are designed to help support people as they go through a process to connect with services, to get the support they need to be able to transition from one place in their lives to another in a position of strength and support. And this seems to do that. Although Councilman supervised, correct? It's so early in the process, I don't know exactly how it's going to work out, but local control would be great. But if CARE Court is similar to any other collaborative court or any other judicial intervention model, it's going to be a collaborative effort that is going to have to come through the county in many ways, because the county is going to be the county that places the order upon the individual and orders a specific treatment plan. I know that this process is expected now to start with the legislature, and I know that there's a timeline that's anticipated to go with that. My biggest concerns are the costs associated with this. And so I'm hoping that city staff can continue to track this legislation, if we will, if we write this off or if this letter of support so that we're mindful of what those costs will be. And we can advocate for L.A. County, which will be the justice system that this CARE court will be administered out of, is sufficiently funded to be able to accommodate all those who might be able to need and benefit from this treatment. So I want to thank Councilman Super now for bringing this item forth and really huge applause for the governor for being innovative in terms of connecting people with services that they need. Becoming stabilized, whether it's from substance abuse or mental health, is something that often does require judicial intervention to get people to that place. And I'm grateful for this path. Thank you. All right. I saw Councilwoman Cindy Allen raise her hand. Councilwoman? Yes. I just want to also say thank you to Councilmember Supernormal for including me on this item. We know that a significant number of homeless individuals in our street are in desperate need of additional mental health services and care. And this item explores how we can better care for people in need within our community. And the L.A. County Board of Supervisors voted today unanimously to support the CARE Court program. So just thank you again, Councilman Supernormal, for bringing us for this great item. Thank you. Thank you. Before we I. I see you councilman's and any other comments inside the chambers? I have comments. How do we signal to you here? I was going to go to the people in the dais first, then we'll come here. So, Councilwoman Durham before. Her. It's a matter of trust. Okay. So thank you. This hybrid is a learning process. So first one of the thing, councilmember student Sabrina for bringing the item forward with the COA coauthors of the bill. I mean this item, you know, I do appreciate bringing this forward so that we can have conversation about what we're doing in this crisis that we have around our homelessness challenge that we face. And I think that while this is early on, I think, you know, we kind of started that conversation with I think the vice mayor had brought kind of a mental health item and how do we localize it from county to mental? So I hope that our staff would look into that as well. In addition to how are we going to partner with the state better as part of the housing plan? Because as much as we're able to provide a variety of mental health services that we can look into, ultimately all of them will need homes, stable homes in order to be able to recover and I think get back on a healthy path. So I think that to me needs to, in addition, be looked at. And I just want to mention, you know, there is there is a fine line that I'm processing between why I do understand the need to do some level of, you know , insisting people get services and treatment to whether where it's voluntary. I think it's really important then that we look into it and consider what that means and what that looks like in a way where I think it's respectful for everybody and that's a healthy process. Right. So so those are my comment and I look forward and how we can learn more and our local city can can see how we can take steps forward in some of these consideration that we're sharing on at the dias at the moment. Thank you. Certainly. Thank you. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And also I want to thank Councilmember Supernova in the COSIGNERS for bringing this forward. Obviously, this was I see this as a welcome approach to a very serious mental health and behavioral health crisis facing our streets today and exacerbating our homelessness crisis. Make no mistake about it. I want to thank you, Councilman Suber, not for for bringing it up and reminding us that we've been moving forward in a state would have failed realignment strategy for over 50 years now. And I think this really must. We need to stop it and stop it now. I will say that I think we need to be fully engaged here at the city council to ensure that whatever is decided in Sacramento, it comes with the necessary local funding support that we need, whether it's going to the county or directly to the city or pass through. We have a health department which uniquely positions this city to do a lot more than others. I think we need to look at building capacity for community, community care support, and I know we are doing that simultaneously. And I think this is going to be will require a major reprioritization of our state resources today to provide the necessary care to literally thousands of people that are that needed on the streets today. So this item has my support, my full support. And I know that there's going to be a robust conversation in Sacramento in terms of how this looks. And I think we as a city council, our city needs to be a major stakeholder at that table. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Sylvia. Thank you, Vice Mayor, for the opportunity. I just want to give a huge thank you to Councilmember Supernova and Councilwoman Allen and Councilmember Price for bringing this item forward. I think it's very important, especially right now in the times that we are living in right now. This is a continuous, continuous problem in the downtown area and in the first district as a whole. One of the things that I feel is that we have individuals experiencing homelessness who are suffering from mental illness and may not have the capacity to accept services. But it is our responsibility as leaders to try to help them get off the street and get into on a pathway to secure housing. So I just want to thank you for bringing this up. And Gavin Newsom has in multiple occasions expressed one of his top priorities in the in our state is addressing the growing homelessness concern that is impacting nearly every one of our communities throughout the state. And we are and we all know this very well, the pandemic only exacerbated the already existing issue around the need for secure housing, the need to be able to feel safe and decent and living decent standards, and also to please individuals. And, you know, with mental health needs in even more vulnerable circumstances, to be able to place them in programs that will uplift them and help them get out of the path that they may be in right now. So with that said, I'm very, very hopeful for this program. This is something that we need to focus on. I hope that we continue keeping a close eye on it. But I do have some questions that that maybe you, the staff, might be able to answer some of these questions. It may be too early to even have an answer for. But also, these are some of the questions that some of my residents have been asking in regards to peer courts, first of all, and maybe I'll ask in like three questions and then if I have to queue up again, I will. But some of my residents would like to know, first off, when with the care for Fremont go into effect, if it comes to the legislature, that may be too early of a question. And also, what does outpatient model look like or can this. And if we don't have those answers right now, right now, maybe we can keep an eye out for those answers. Our director of Health and Human Services, Kelly Collopy, will do her best. Good evening, council members. So the the primary the. So it still needs to go to a vote. And at that point, there will have to be a lot of design and work. So it's not really clear yet as to when it will be implemented. We would be working very closely with the county in this process and the ability to look at referral systems and service systems and others as part of that process. And in terms of of outpatients, so it really provides different opportunities for people to engage based on the level of service need. So an outpatient opportunity could be, you know, weekly meetings with a counselor. It could be everyday meetings, it could be, you know, multiple days. So it really it can be a lot of different opportunities. But generally, outpatient is not a place that you stay overnight. And so it can be you know, there's a lot of other opportunities from there. Um, I don't know. Do you have anything you want to add to that? Okay. Thank you. Right. Thank you, Councilmember. Any other comments? I was the. Okay. What exactly is the expectations that is being set for the city? How will this seat measure what? Whether or not a local jurisdiction has met their specified duties? And what exactly are those duties? And remember, I don't think those are identified yet. So the local jurisdictions for this purpose right now as they're being mined, says County. And so I don't know what at a at a sub a sub local jurisdiction that looks like as a city. But we don't have any of those in place at this time. Thank you very much. And I knew some of this was premature, that I wanted to get them out there just in case. But thank you very much for your help. And thank you. Thank you. And again, thank you to the maker of the motion. All right. Thank you. But in at bat, my support here, I certainly can't support this sort of you know, I'm a family member and, you know, it's hard to the sort of judicial process is very hard to navigate, even for family members who have someone who's sort of caught up in the mental health, drug addiction space. It's very difficult to navigate. So having a court that's designed to specialize in this and tap into diversion, I think it makes sense. The governor's bottom line. I thanks counsel Mr. Bernoff for agreeing. Of course, we can endorse the state program. In November we took a step. I think this dovetails very well with some of the work that we're doing here in Long Beach in November. We took a step and we asked staff to begin looking at a whole menu of items that we could localize away from the County Department of Mental Health locally. And those discussions are going well. And we just did a study. And so my question for staff is how can this dovetail into this broader discussion about localizing mental health and where are we with that, if you could provide an update. So this is Tom. I'll start. Yes, we do see that there is synergy here. The council did ask us to look at how we can work on mental health, and this definitely fits into that. And we think this is a very good proposal. We do have resources. The council just allocated $100,000 last month to be able to start on that study. And we see moving this kind of components about how we can be involved into that study. So I will turn it over to Kelly to answer more on progress. Good evening. So in terms of the parties, we have been hosting meetings both with the Department of Mental Health and we're in sort of spite with the we are meeting with our local mental health representatives as well as those in the Executive Office at the Department of Mental Health, as well as with the Division of Substance Abuse or otherwise known as steps within the L.A. County Department of Public Health. So we've been meeting with both of those different teams to look at the ability to streamline resources, understand where the gaps are. We're also moving forward with identifying the advisory committee to this effort, and we anticipate that that meeting will be hopefully in the end of April, early May, as we start to move forward. And then we'll also be bringing on a consultant to support those efforts. Certainly. And that's all incredible progress. And I think thinking about the way the courts connect to this is incredibly important. So, so good work, everyone. Please remain focused on this mental health localizing the discussion. Was there any public comment on this item? If there are any members of the public that would like to speak, please line up at the podium. Or if you're attending, virtually, please use the raise hand feature or dial star nine. CNN. Oh, sorry. We have members in person. You have 3 minutes. Thank you. My name is Sherry Ingram. I am a resident. At Plum with. Apartments here on Chestnut. We as neighbors in the area, in the building, we are here as well as the immediate area is concern and question what's become of the vacant store which was once cow. Cop. Very nice call. Something else in Spanish I don't know how to pronounce without being embarrassed. It seems like we've getting a lot of runaround. Nobody knows who this person is. The property is a private, private ownership. Well, why can't the private ownership let you all know. What's going to be happening with that. Particular building? We need a grocery store. We need we need it badly. We got lots of people don't get around, as you see. I am. And a lot of other people. What's going to happen to that particular building that sits on? What the old building was. All the building still there? Someone please answer. We need a grocery store. Vons is too far and expensive. And the rest of them all. A little outreach. But for our local, all elderly disability. Persons without a car. I don't have a lot of money to pay a cab to take him there and then wait around for a cab to bring back home. Les, please find out. What's going to happen to this building. Someone, please. Well, thank you. Where? Where we are. Well, who I'm thinking of. This public comment is limited to this discussion. Promoted. If you could have a word. Miss Tatum is walking over there. Vice Mayor. Miss Tatum. Okay, great. Thank you. Is there any other public comment on this item? There is no other public comment on this item. Okay. Let's go ahead of our roll call vote. District one, district two. I District three. I. District for. I. District five. All right. District six by district seven. District eight. District nine. All right. Motion is carried. All right. Item 14.

AN ORDINANCE approving an agreement to transfer land between King County and the city of Algona and authorizing the King County executive to sign and implement the agreement.

KingCountyCC_10182017_2017-0325

And then item number four at a minimum, five and six, sorry, are both regarding the construction of a new solid waste transfer station in the city of Algona. We have an existing station in the city of EL going to do an operation for more than 50 years and is in need of an upgrade and expansion. We've been planning additional capacity for the last decade. The executive has now proposed locating a new transfer station directly north of the existing site on county owned property within the city of Algona. The two pieces of legislation before us today are a construction agreement and a land transfer agreement, which outlined the conditions through which the city of Algona would allow the proposed new transfer station to proceed. We have Council Staff Mary Bourguignon and Tara Rose here to brief the committee and representatives from the Solid Waste Division are also here if we have any questions for them, and we're hoping to take this up for action today. So with that, I'll ask staff to please go ahead and brief the committee. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Madam Chair. For the record, Mary Burge and from council staff and I'm here with Terre Rose, the materials for this presentation begin on page five of your packets. But I'm going to start with the large map that is at your place. Thought it might be helpful just as a geographic orientation to point out the area that we are discussing. So if you look at the map, you'll see that we are located in the city of Algona. If you follow the large arrow, you can sort of see the surroundings and you'll see that there are two properties highlighted. The one to the south that is highlighted in red is the existing Algona transfer and recycling station. That property was purchased in portions by the county beginning in the 1930s and the transfer station has been operating there since the 1960s. That property is approximately 200,000 square feet. It's somewhat topographically constrained and therefore is proposed to be replaced by this site just north of it that is outlined in Green, which is the proposed location for the new transfer and recycling station. That property is approximately 300,000 square feet. Before I leave the map, if you look just a little bit farther down to the south, you'll see a bright blue line along the West Valley Highway south, right at the border between the city of Algona and unincorporated King County. The agreements contain a provision that the city and county would agree to a boundary adjustment so that the city of Algona would control the entire entirety of West Valley Highway. Along that stretch. Right now, the boundary is sort of in the middle of the road and we split the maintenance. And so for ease of maintenance, as well as cost reductions to the county, the agreement would include this proposed boundary adjustment. If you'll flip the map over, you'll see a closer up view of the two properties. And I just want to point out one thing here in the green property, you'll notice that it's comprised of several individual parcels with some city streets running in between them. Those city streets would be vacated and made over to the county as part of the agreement so that we would then own the property in its entirety to be able to operate the proposed transfer station. So with that, I will turn back to the packets and we'll move to page six. Just a quick history of this property. I mentioned that the existing site has been in operation as a transfer station since the 1960s. In December 2007, when the council approved the Solid Waste Transfer and Waste Management Plan, it recommended that King County modernize the regional solid waste system and develop several new transfer stations, including a new one in South County. In 2014, when the Transfer Plan Review final report was adopted, that decision was reiterated with a proposal for a new transfer station in South County in 2012 as part of its search for possible locations for a new transfer station. The Solid Waste Division purchased the proposed site in Algona and then began an environmental review process that looked at three alternatives the existing site, which was a no action alternative, the new site that had been purchased in Algona as well as the site in Auburn. That environmental review process concluded last year. It identified the new site in Algona as the preferred location, and at that point the city of Algona challenged the Environmental Impact Statement. The two agreements before you today would allow for the proposed New South. County Recycling and transfer station to move forward. They include a land transfer agreement and a construction agreement. And the city of Algona City Council passed legislation approving both of them earlier this year. I will also note, just in terms of the history of this process, that several years ago, in 2012, the Council required that prior to the Solid Waste Division beginning any design work on this transfer station that it conclude commit to and transmit a report on procurement methods for the new transfer station. And it has done so, in fact did so in September of this year and has recommended that it use traditional public works bidding for the procurement for this new transfer station . With that, I'll move on to page eight and just run through the two agreements. You'll see that on the bottom of page eight is a section about the construction agreement, which is covered in proposed ordinance 2017 0324. So I'll start with that one. That agreement first requires that a procurement method be identified. I noted that the division has indicated they plan to use traditional public works bidding, and the agreement would commit that by September 30th of 2019, which is called the Project Decision Date, that the county would select a procurement method, notify the city and take the first major step toward construction. And we have worked with executive staff and understand that they feel confident that they can meet this deadline. Next, the agreement outlines the number of terms that the city and county have agreed to in terms of mitigate mitigation and the permitting process. It would outline the development standards that the county must comply with, as well as the cost for the permitting, which would be a cost of up to $300,000, and would guarantee that the city may condition but not deny the conditional use permit needed to operate the transfer station. The city would also, by this agreement, agree that the mitigation included in the final environmental impact statement is adequate and that the county would agree that the county would complete this mitigation prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy for the new transfer station. The county would agree to be responsible for newer modified utilities needed to serve the new station. Though the agreement does outline provisions for a late comers agreement for any nearby properties and the county and city agree to use the Mitigation Reserves program for in lieu fee mitigation to address wetlands on commercially zoned properties in the city. Next, the agreement. I'm sorry, Americas as possible. So can Councilmember Lambert. Could you explain a little more that last sentence the in lieu of fees for what. This this would be as part of the overall mitigation process the city and county have agreed to a way to manage wetlands and they would use the in lieu fee mitigation program as a way to do that. Explain a little more about that in live the program. So that is I can get you that offline. That is a separate part of the county code and it's a program, I think Erin Austin's has briefed on it within the last year or so. But I can get you that offline if you'd like. Great. So next part of the agreement is that the county and city have agreed to various maintenance and mitigation work that would be completed on West Valley Highway to handle the additional traffic expected from the transfer station. There are maps in the agreement that I don't know that we need to go over, although we can. But there are segments identified and various tasks outlined for what the county would be doing both during the construction process and then on an ongoing basis to mitigate any impacts for traffic to the site. Next, I had mentioned the street vacations that would be needed since the property that is proposed for the transfer station is comprised of several parcels. The agreement outlines a street vacation process through which the county would agree that the city owns the street right of way and the city would agree to vacate this right of way prior to the county receiving a building permit with the county to pay for appraisals and the full value of the right of way. And then finally, there are sections in the proposed agreement that outline the dispute resolution process and, if necessary, an arbitration process. If there are no more questions about that agreement, I'll move on to the land transfer agreement. Let's pause for 1/2. Any questions at this point about this construction agreement? Okay. All right. So I'm just I'm sorry. Go ahead. Councilmember. Very briefly, on the street, they. In compensation issue. Are we when you said we'll pay the full value, is that as it is that unemployment. Has been raised? Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So next, moving on to the land transfer agreement, which is covered in proposed ordinance 2017 zero 325, this agreement where the construction agreement covered essentially the new site. This agreement would cover the existing site and it would cover the county's deconstruction cleanup and transfer to the city of the existing transfer station property, as well as the ownership , maintenance and operation of West Valley Highway in the area that I had pointed out on the map. Specifically, this agreement would require that the county would test, deconstruct and then transfer the existing station property to the city. And there are specific requirements outlined for the county to complete additional hazardous substance testing in addition to Phase one environmental site assessment to deconstruct the existing station by removing all of the facility except the wall, stormwater facilities and sewer water lines within 18 months of the station being closed. Cleaning the property to state standards for industrial properties. And then indemnifying the city. And I will note that legal counsel did point out that this indemnification would continue past the county's closure of the site and its transfer of the property to the city, but identified this as a business decision and not a legal concern. And then finally, as I noted, the property would be conveyed to the city after the cleanup next. As I had noted, the city and county share a boundary that runs along the middle of West Valley Highway in a portion of the area between Fifth Avenue South and First Avenue North. And as part of this agreement, the two entities would commit to a future boundary adjustment so that the city would control the entirety of the West Valley Highway right of way in that area. I will go on to note that fiscal impacts for the two agreements for the biennium are an estimate of $400,000, $300,000 in permitting costs and $100,000 for some of the work needed on West Valley Highway, specifically to reimburse the city for its local matching fund for a grant for that work. In terms of the larger budget for the new transfer station, the budget is estimated at $113 million. This project has been identified as a high risk project, which is part of the mandatory phased appropriation program, meaning that the council would need to approve each phase of the project. At the moment, the Council has, through the 2017 2018 biennial budget, appropriated funds for design and planning work. But future work and construction is not anticipated until the next biennium. And that concludes my staff report, unless there are questions and we do update McLaughlin here from the division. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Very, very good report. Any other questions at this time? I have a sort of a couple of general ones. This appears to all hang together and make a great deal of sense. Do we feel that these agreements resolve all siting issues between the city and the county? I would let the executive speak to that. I want to come on up and. Share your thoughts. I mean, I understand that there are contingencies built in here. But in terms of the decision to select this site and to move forward to the next steps, do we feel that we have a good resolution that is well supported by all parties? Yes, Madam Chair, thank you for the opportunity to be here. For the record, my name is Pat McGrath, and I serve as your Solid Waste Division Director. I do say with confidence that this represents an agreement that settles any, any and all concerns that the city has brought forward. As we as we've kind of pursued this siting approach. And the agreement represents the interests of both the county and the city in a very balanced and fair way. Okay. Thank you very much. And then my second question is, when I look at the terms, nothing jumps out at me as being particularly, you know, the way they all, as I said, hang together when you when you read them in this logical way. But I think about risks going forward. I heard the words hazardous substance testing. And I mean since this is I don't know actually what uses are there now. Do we expect any surprises? That's a really nonsensical question. Do we do we worry about any surprises? Well, we certainly yeah. It's it's a it's a valid question. It's a question that the city brought forward. We don't have any concerns and we don't anticipate any surprises. But there are there are contingencies and in a legal framework, in the event that such is discovered. But the reason we don't have that concern is that we've done some preliminary investigation and and review to make that determination. And we will continue to monitor that process throughout the course of the contract. This contract actually calls for some additional review periods to make sure that if there is anything that it's identified early on and remediation can be addressed in a timely fashion, but we don't have anything to to raise that concern to us at this point based on how that property has been used. Thank you. I will say that for all of last year, the mayor of Algoma was my vice chair on the Regional Transit Committee. So we had, you know, occasion to chit chat about what was going on down in Algona. And he was very complimentary of the way that the Solid Waste Division worked with the city, at least at that phase as we were getting towards agreement. And my understanding is that this is something that they are satisfied with, which is another example. I think along with some of the work we've done in my district recently of the division working hard with our our city partners. So I do appreciate that. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? This is before us for action today. And we have two ordinances. The first one is proposed ordinance 2017, down to zero 3 to 4. I would entertain a motion. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to propose ordinance 2017 0324 with the do pass recommendation. Okay. I don't see any amendments. So with that council member up to the third one, Rick Bauer. Thank you, Madam Chair. I had the opportunity to also know the Mayor of Algona quite well. I represent our going on the County Council, and it's been a roller coaster. But the roller coaster, I definitely found it equally remote. I don't think Pat and his staff are finding that it's the mayor of going is very not parochial. He's very personal and very, very caring about the city. And like a lot of our areas of South County, there is a sense that maybe they were the poor stepchild. And I want to thank you for making him part of the family, because as the process moved forward, he became more comfortable about what was happening. I really admire Dave Hill, the mayor, because he cares about his city, cares about a very tough economic community that doesn't get treated as well as some other cities. And King County and you and your staff did an outstanding job of reaching out, making him a part of the process, making him treated with respect, because that's a big issue for a lot of folks in South King County is a sense of lack of respect from Seattle and so on. Thank you. Publicly and I think Councilmember Banducci for her help on this as well. All right. And yes, ALGON is well represented by its city and its council representatives. So thank you. Any other comments with that? I'll call for roll call, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilmember DEMBOSKY, Councilmember Dunn, Councilmember Gossett, I. Councilmember Cole Wells. Councilmember Lambert. Councilmember McDermott. Council Member of the Grove City Councilmember Yvonne Record. Madam Chair. Hi. Madam Chair. The vote is salmon eyes. No nos. Councilmember Stone and Bond right up to Grove. Excuse OC by your vote. Proposed Ordinance 2017 does two or 3 to 4 will move to the full council with a do pass recommendation. And is there any reason to expedite that? Madam Chair, the companion legislation oh 3 to 5 requires public notice, and it's been tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on November 13. So notes for that if you want. Well, this one doesn't have that restriction, but if you want to keep them together, they could both go together on November 13th. I think it's clean is to keep them together so we won't expedite them and we won't put them on consent. All right. That brings us to proposed ordinance 2017, DASH 0325, which is the companion land transfer agreement. Councilmember Lambert, when you put that before us, I'd like to proposed or in 2017 zero 3 to 5 of the do pass recommendation. All right. It's been moved and is before the body. Any further comments or questions? Okay. Marker. Please go ahead and call the roll. Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilmember Dombrowski, Councilmember Dunn, Councilmember Garza, Councilmember Cole Wells. Councilmember Lambert, hi. Councilmember McDermott. Hi. Councilmember up the Grove. Councilmember one right there. Hi. Madam Chair. Hi. Madam Chair. The vote is seven is no nos. Council members done in. The grove excuse to right by your vote. That measure is also moved to the full council with a unanimous to pass recommendation. So we'll go on to the public hearing and next steps. Thank you all very much for your work on this agenda. Item number seven. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilmember Lambert is correct. We should go back and improve the minutes while we have folks here. So if you would like to put the minutes of October 4017, 2017, meaning before us with the due package recommendation, any comments or questions on the minutes?

Public Hearing to Consider Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by (1) Amending Section 30-10 (Cannabis) to (a) Add Cannabis Retail Businesses as Conditionally Permitted Uses in the C-1, Neighborhood Business, and C-M, Commercial-Manufacturing Zoning Districts, (b) Amend Certain Portions of the Zoning Code to Enable Cannabis Retail Businesses to Dispense Non-Medicinal or “Adult Use” Cannabis, and (c) Amend Certain Portions of the Zoning Code to Remove the Dispersion Requirement; and (2) Repeal Ordinance No. 3228; and Introduction of Ordinance: (1) Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Article XVI (Cannabis Businesses) of Chapter VI (Businesses, Occupations and Industry) to (a) Eliminate the Cap on Testing Laboratories, (b) Allow for Two Additional Cannabis Businesses to Operate as “Dispensary/Delivery” (Delivery Required, Open to the Public) within the Zoning Districts for Cannabis Retail, (c) Amend the Dispersion Requirement to Require No More Than Two Cannabis Retail Businesses to Operate on Either Side of Grand Street, (d) Create a Two-Tier Buf

AlamedaCC_01152019_2019-6384

And so I'm trying to I'm trying to square what our action is doing, because I think it's important. The last time I listened to all the candidates, this is my first cannabis hearing. I was actually hopeful that this would be done before we got here. But from for all of our times. But I'm confused because there's confusion and also in the community about what these actions are doing as they relate to applicants. And so I see Debbie Potter with you and introduce yourself and enlighten us. We use in Development Director. So just to clarify, it is correct that there has been one applicant who has been given the right to pursue a land use permit as well as an operator's permit that that provider is pursuing their applications under the existing ordinance, because the ordinance that the council approved in November is actually effective this Thursday. So they have they have made application and they're pursuing their applications under the original ordinance. That ordinance was for medicinal dispensaries only. So in the event that either the ordinance is reintroduced today or nothing happens this evening and that the new ordinance goes into effect on Thursday, that ordinance will allow for adult use so the applicant could amend their application under the new ordinance and proposed to do adult use as well as medicinal. So it there is an indirect impact on the applicant who's going through the process. And can I ask a quick question? The floor member and our vice mayor knocks later. Yeah. The so the successful applicant the RFP process has the ability that if changes are made in the future you can just amend it. It seems to me that that applicant would then need to reapply and that in under the new program we're making a you know, I would submit that this open government committee commission thing is about the fact that, you know, these changes are substantive. Right. It was unanimous twice that that, you know, public, publicly available dispensary. It's why don't we hear the answer to your question? First, you posed the question of what would happen. And so the and then there's a time for discussion. But this is clarifying questions. Trying to explain my question. But thank you. So I believe that. We staff would permit then an amendment to the land use application as well as the regulatory permit application to permit the adult use sale. Because the new ordinance would then affect that. We would not we did not anticipate running that applicant through that the new RFP process. And was there another part of your question? Well, I guess my so still wasn't my question. My question was, is that how the RFP is stated? Does it state in the in the RFP that if if future changes are made, you can just amend your application? They've been selected, but they haven't even actually completed the process to be a successful applicant yet. They have been they have been granted the right to apply. They have applied for both their land use permit and their regulator permit. Right. Has the RFP allowed? Does the RFP allow for that? I'm not sure. John, I'm going to ask him next. Okay. Thank you. Madam Mayor, members of the council staff and members of the public. John Lay, assistant city attorney, is I want to make sure I understand the question is a question whether or not the person, the ALP, the successful applicant would have to resubmit because the RFP process has already gone through. They applied under a process for medicinal use only. And now we're saying, oh, there's going to be a process for adult use or medicinal use or just adult use. I'm just curious how it is that somebody who applied under a past program can then just say, Oh, we want the other one. Well, one. Of the way to answer this is, um, and I've had a discussion with the. And we staff has had a discussion with the applicant about this, that many of the changes that happened before they reached the stage of receiving their land use entitlement would apply to them. So that would include the adult use provision that you're discussing now, but that would also include some of the other provisions that the applicant has actually expressed concern about, particularly certain sensitive uses that might be applicable to them. And they have expressed concern about the applicability of those definitions. And because of that, I think the the applicant is concerned that many of the requirements are going to apply to them. And as to your question about whether or not they can amend their application, we currently do not have, I don't believe, a specific provision that prohibits an applicant from amending their application. And that doesn't mean that we can't say that they can't do that, but we also don't have one that sort of freezes it in time. They've currently submitted an application, it's currently pending and staff is in the process of reviewing that application. And so I guess the answer to the question is in the instance in which we do have applications that are pending, whether or not an application can be sort of and resubmitted and if it has been done in other contexts, that might guide the analysis. Thank you. Did do that. That is the question. Okay. Councilmember Vela. I want to ask the inverse, which is if and you'd kind of hinted to this, which is if we had changed something that would have negatively impacted them, do they then lose the ability to apply after they've already invested? Well, um. It depends on the particular provision, but, um, that could be a possibility. Yes. And that's something that I believe was raised in a previous meeting as well. Um, and it was in the context of discussing the notion of vested rights. You may recall that discussion. Okay. Okay. Any further questions? Thank you. Sorry. I don't remember the reinvestment, the investment rates, but. Sorry. The best. Thank you. I knew I was going to miss some of that. The event, the vested rights. So you're suggesting that because they applied under the old program, they have vested rights? I don't know if it's actually the opposite. Is that because they've not actually the IRP process, the conclusion of the RFP process provides the applicant, the successful applicant, a conditional award letter that allows them. And the only thing it allows them to do is the ability to submit an application. And from there, it would it would sort of stand in the same shoes as an ordinary sort of copy. But it also has the additional layer of an operator's permit. So just as in operators excuse me, a copy applicant has not had their hearing, has not obtain their land use entitlements. There's also an additional process of getting the building permit. To the extent that there are any improvements that need to be made or any other construction related tasks that need to happen. So they're really starting at square one. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further clarifying questions? So then we're going to go ahead with our question, our public comment. We have nine speakers slip. So under the council rules, that means each speaker has 2 minutes. So I will and keep things moving because it's almost 9:00. I'll call the first three speakers and you can just be ready when it's your turn. I'm a bit of clarification. I've got a spruce up for Mark Kurzman and then I have a speaker slip for Nick Portolesi with a notation, give my time to Mark who's so suggests, you know, under the newest council rules, we don't cede time. But if you would like Mr. Kurzman to have your 2 minutes, he has your 2 minutes and his two. Is that okay? Okay. Then I will take Mr. Palacio out of the out of the queue. But we're still 2 minutes because we have eight speakers. All right, Mr. Holzman, Mark Kurzman, you're your first. And we don't see time. We don't see time. That's what I was telling him, that either one of them has 2 minutes, but one of them can't take two plus two. But, Mr. Blasi, I believe if I was reading his hand signals, you don't want to speak at all. Is that correct? No, no, no. You can have your 2 minutes if you wanted to. You're right here. I can put you back in. It's okay now. Okay. Hi. Hi. Mayor Ashcraft and Council. Thank you. I am my business partners. And I sent a letter to you yesterday that we would like to read into the record tonight. As you're all aware, one of the final acts of the previous council was the finalization of the cannabis business ordinances. It's our understanding that the Open Government Commission has an objection to the nullification process leading to the passage of the ordinances, as discussed at the October 16th City Council meeting and finalized on November 7th. Specifically, the complaint focused on the change from the authorization of two storefront dispensaries and to delivery only dispensaries to the final decision allowing for storefront dispensaries with a minimum of two offering delivery services. Regarding the specific issue, we were attendees to that debate. I reviewed the video recently and we noted the following. The key issue debated was not the visual footprint on the city of having for storefront dispensaries. Primary concern was access to cannabis delivery for patients who are compromised in their mobility. Once council received guidance that they could require a minimum of two dispensaries to provide delivery services throughout Alameda City limits, the physical nature of these dispensaries, storefront versus warehouse, became irrelevant to that discussion. Further, it was noted that delivery only warehouse dispensaries would need to conform to the same regulations as storefront dispensary. And the city attorney gave guidance to the council that the change from warehouse delivery to storefront was not material enough to require a new first reading for public comment as witness to the council meeting in question. It's our opinion that the previous council acted in good faith and by requesting advice from the city, attorney was well aware and respectful of their obligations under the Sunshine Ordinance. Clearly, the LGC disagrees with the city attorney guidance, putting you the new city council in a very difficult position. While we understand that opening up this one issue for public comment is being done to satisfy the request, the LGC we respectfully request that your actions be limited to this one item regarding the public notice requirement concerning the nature of the approved dispensaries and not relitigate the balance of the cannabis. That's time. Thank you, Mr. Huseman. And the next speaker is Rosalind Fortuna. Good evening. I'm Rosa, Linda Fortuna, and I request that Tony Dyson be able to participate in this. It's not correct that he is admitted. He is a property owner. He's a neighbor. He knows the area. And for him to be recused from this is not right. When I heard that, it just didn't make any sense to me. He is a person that would know his neighbors and how they feel and how the families feel in that neighborhood about any cannabis coming, a storefront coming into that neighborhood. So I'm sorry that that's my opinion. Also, he is a citizen of Alameda. That doesn't make this this really doesn't make sense to me. Furthermore, I you know, when I talked to some merchants on Webster Street, I was just shopping. And then. The merchants said. Oh, did you know the cannabis center is coming? And they were saying, We're so upset. And I said, Oh, I didn't know that. She said that she was told that when she went to City Hall. They said it was already approved and then nothing could be done. And then now you're saying, oh, it's subject to the land use permit. So she doesn't speak English very well. She was told that it's already done. Then I there was another merchant that I talked to. She's super upset. She said she doesn't want to see the long lines of people standing out waiting for their cannabis purchases or whatever they do to, you know, to interfere with her business. And she's very, very upset, just like in Oakland. There's just long, long lines. Having you in storefronts is not the right place. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Phil Read. I've got it. Which I would like to remind people. When we voted for recreational marijuana by 68.9%, we already had medical use in medical businesses in our city. I believe we voted for legal cannabis because the real danger is not cannabis. We know that after five years of legalization, that is pretty benign. And what happens if you drink too much coffee, you get the jitters. If you smoke too much weed, you get high. Funny how we all treat cannabis as more dangerous than guns and alcohol in Alameda. Parents are expected to teach their kids how to be responsible around alcohol, cigarets and guns and sugar, fire and a million other worldly dangers. Why can't we just expect the same for cannabis? Statistics say legal cannabis decreases alcohol use, so you are literally killing people if you deny them this, right? The only difference between medical use and recreational use is the intent of the user. In no matter how you use it, it's always non-fatal. You know, the real danger is the danger is in the illegal supply chain. If back in the day, I used to buy weed from gangsters in high school and I've been robbed at gunpoint maybe a few times. It was an acceptable risk back in my day. Where there is a void. They will exploit it. If you take away a healthy legal market, you leave yourself more vulnerable to the illegal markets. And they've had two years to set up shop while you've been sitting on your hands. And the Wild West of cannabis is already here. Also, any changes to the ordinance undermines two years of hard work by the last council and speakers on both sides of this issue. This would also be a hard step away from current progressive values. Legal cannabis protects children, but you also have to look at the big picture to know that I know I don't have to explain to you again how safe a dispensary is. It's guarded and guarded and all that good stuff. Take away. Take it away. And it leaves too many more potential customers just sitting out in the dust looking for new sources. And organized crime will more than take it advantage because currently cannabis is a scofflaw. I'm sitting here with cannabis right here. That's true, Red. Your time is up. And our next speaker is Tyler Chisholm, Champlain Heavyweight Champion. Champion. Good evening, Mayor. Council members and staff. I'm here to speak in support of item six, be and encourage council to once again adopt this ordinance. As we all know, as we are all aware, there have been countless hours staff, council stakeholders and members of the community have put into this ordinance, given the multiple public meetings that have already taken place and yet another staff recommendation to adopt. I would hope this would be an easy vote for council, as noted in the executive summary provided by staff along with their recommendation. Staff notes that 68% of Alameda voters voters supported the ballot initiative to allow recreational use and sale of care and the sale of cannabis. The citizens want this. We we have a solid ordinance that staff the previous council and stakeholders all are all in support of stakeholders, have secured locations and are incurring costs and are prepared to submit applications now. Again, I am in full support of this ordinance and encourage Council to approve the first reading and move for a second reading on February 5th meeting in anticipation of opening the RFP as soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Spencer. Evening Council. City manager. City attorney. But I wanted to speak to and I appreciate all the earlier comments. First of all, I want to. Thank member Odie for. Bringing the first referral on this. Item over two years ago. I want to remind Council that every step of the way we did in fact. Ask our city attorney. If it was appropriate for us. To proceed, especially after the. Complaint. Was brought to the Open Government Commission. And so we I believe we. Were advised. By three city attorneys that it was appropriate, including our current acting interim city attorney. In regards to what happens if you make it null and void. What I didn't see. Discussed was there's always. That 30 day period. After the second vote. When someone can bring. A referendum. And we've just gone through that and you. Know how long it can tie up an item. And I don't know what would happen if we, in. Fact, had. A. Referendum brought during. That 30 day period. That did. Not happen. When we brought our did our final vote on November 7th. Which made it. Effective December. 7th. And if you all. Decide to open it up again. What happens if a. Referendum is brought? And we all know it's. Critical that we allow. Cannabis businesses to open and know that they have that. They can count on this. Council to. Allow them to do. Their business. I strongly encourage you all to give the green light to cannabis business. Let them know that we do. Support medicinal and recreational and that. We all know we've been trying to. Provide safe legal. Cannabis. That has been the cause. We've worked really, really hard. However, that's my why I. Decided to come tonight. What happens then. If we do get a referendum? My guess is that. Everything gets tied up in. Who knows where we are. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker is John Sherritt. Well, good evening, Mayor Ashcraft and members of the city council. Here we go again. Confusion, staff responsibilities that probably have not been met. And I'd hate to say it. What are we voting on or what are we fooling with here tonight? Let me go ahead with what I had prepared. I would like to thank Serena Chen for formatting the cannabis issue and maybe staff should talk to her about how to put something together on the agenda. That makes sense. She has facts from day one and a council member of John Knox wife or at least being open for a dialog on the issue. Where am I coming from? I'm coming from 38 years as an educator with the scene. Too many kids use marijuana as a starter drug. I'm not saying stop all this. I'm saying take time and start something, but start it right and monitor it right. I'm not against American medical marijuana. Dispensary is not in a place where kids have activities such as preschool, parks, etc.. And it is regulated. So since December 19th, 2017, when the original ordinance regulating cannabis in Alameda passed the highly organized cannabis industry and I give them a lot of credit has pulled strings on the acting city manager and some of the council members and has chipped away at many of the protections for kids that were listed in the original ordinance. The changes proposed are examples making again more moves to chip away. I have to cut my whole thing in about half and I just want to end it with a comment made. There is a group formed and a group formed is called Pot Watch to Protect Alameda Kids. And I'm going to say they're going to be monitoring. Everything that goes on with this from start one and I'll end with a comment by a retired. School teacher Candice Good Lehman, a retired, a U.S. city and community member. When she says that's time. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is your time. But you can submit your comments in writing to the city clerk if you'd like to do that. And I come back next time and say that. You certainly can. Do you have is it like one sentence that you have? Okay. And we did get the letter from Ms. even. I'm just trying to figure out who's on first. Thank you. Our next speaker coming from. Thank you. Our next speaker is Deborah mendoza. And our last speaker after Ms.. Mendoza is Richard Paulson. Good evening. Nice to see everyone in the new year. Welcome, John Knox White. And I didn't prepare my statement tonight. I came here and I kind of learned some more information as I went along. But some of you may know that I was involved in. Advocating for cannabis to be permitted here in Alameda. Back in November. I put together a petition for allowing. The delivery only. So one thing I'm a. Little disappointed is it. Went that four. Of the storefronts can have two deliveries, but that. Doesn't. Address that delivery only is are. A way that people most. With the least amount of perhaps wealth, access to resources, equity can enter into this industry. And I and I agree with my neighbor. Who spoke earlier. About, you know. Criminalization. So when we do not, you know, allow people to operate, you know, legally, it does push it does push the underground market, which we don't want to see. That's not what public safety looks like. So I would just I'm also I also. Believe that that we should be able. To transfer medicinal to adult use, because that was the whole you know, that's the whole. The point. Of this new legislation is to allow cannabis to be consumed recreationally. We don't you know, the medical model is from years prior. So it doesn't make sense to me. With businesses moving forward, should that should be. Easy to make. That transfer. Thanks for your consideration and I'll see. You later on. Thank you. Richard Paulson. Ashcroft City Council. My name's Rich Polson. I'm a local attorney here on the island, and I have two children that are school age emerging. The Council to move forward with opening Alameda to cannabis businesses. I've been following this issue and seen firsthand how much time and effort has been put in by the City Staff Council. Long hearings, a lot of public comment, a lot of opportunity for people to raise their issues. And I think there's still seems to be a misunderstanding of how heavily regulated this industry is, not just at a state level, but the effort that the city has been put into it to make sure that the citizens of this community are being protected in a fair and evenhanded way. But I think we need to move forward at this point. I mean, there's clearly demand, popular support is high for this issue. And we should move forward and bring this theory and bring this process to a close to the extent that any complaints about long lines in front of a dispensary. I think the obvious solution would be to open more dispensaries. There's clearly the demand for it, and I think the city needs to move forward and make this a reality. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. That was our last public speaker. So we will move into council discussion. And just for clarification, I'm in the city clerk and the interim city attorney, if you would help me on this. We are actually considering introduction of two ordinances and on the second ordinance, I suggested a word, one word change. Do you want me to read it? It's the it is so interjection to ordinance amending the muni code section 16. And this is paragraph C which currently reads Amend the dispersion requirement to require no more than two cannabis retail businesses to operate on either side of Grand Street. And we would my suggestion, I think the clerk and the interim city attorney agreed, is that we would change the verb required to allow because we don't we're not requiring. But we were allowing. So I just want to note that for the record. Okay, who wants to open the discussion or make a motion for that matter? I guess I'll speak to. Vice, the person who's. Actually weighed in on this. Right. Right. This is not how this meeting was. I expected it to go. I thought we would have at least a couple of new voices up here. And so I'm going to make a couple comments. The first one is I just wholly disagree that if somebody submits under an RFP, that is one thing that they just automatically get to have the more expanded whatever else. I think that that that, you know, it is possible with adult use that there could be furthermore people who are interested in going and as we're expanding forward that's that's a new program. So yeah I kind of think that that's something that maybe should come back from the for the council possibly. I'm going to assume there are legal issues related to that decision, but then possibly in a closed session, I just I did that was completely news to me. And and I it does change it. Well, it changed the complex, the complexion of this board. So I want to I want to I want to I just wanted to mention that I wanted to just really quickly, there were some comments. It's my understanding Mr. De Sung asked to be recused and then confirmed that that his decision was but he was not forced to recuse himself. That's a decision he gets to make. So I just wanted to and as the person who was asking the question, it was not that somebody told him he could not participate. And then I'm hoping maybe at the end of this, Debbie, if you could maybe speak to to Ms.. Fortuna about the process, because it is true that there is a successful applicant, but they have not gotten through the process by which they have been approved and are definitely going to open. There is still a process whereby neighbors will be able to give input, etc. So I just wanted to make sure that was clear. I've really struggled on this and I think that the way that, that, that, that, that this has been set up is I think the agenda its agenda is badly and out of out of whack with what our sunshine ordinance requires. I don't think that even if somebody were to challenge that, I don't think that it means that it would get thrown out. But this is one of the most difficult titles I've ever read. And the specificity of specificity of it makes it so that we cannot talk about anything. We have to either move it forward as written or restart the process again and come back in four weeks with a new first reading. And I think that's unfortunate. I have up until yesterday been using the term I think we need to go slow. And I have heard very loudly that, you know, while being aware that we have been working on this for two years, we've gone slow. I think we still need to go small. And I'm going to just jump ahead to reading, reading the board a little bit. I would be willing to. Support. Maintaining this as written, but I would like to do so with direction to staff that they only issue an RFP for two more two more dispensaries. I don't think there's been a case made for that necessary. I think that we can issue two more and and, you know, take it take it a little take it a little , you know, start small, learn, learn from what we're learning and have the the ability to go out for a fourth as well. You know, I do think that there is some concern out there. To Mr. Sherrod's point. I do want to point out that there is a subsection here that says the chief of police, if there are welfare issues that he leave, sorry. Anyway, the chief of police has the ability to actually take immediate action to suspend operations. If people are violating the rules on these things, I will expect that our chief of police is not going to do so under a very ticky tacky complaint. But if people are doing things that are shown to be attracting or impacting children, I would expect that that action will be taken very, very swiftly. I also the reason I feel well, I would like to see some changes here. I know that a lot of work has gone into this and I'm going to honor that work. From my standpoint, I believe that the annual permit people would be coming back every single year gives us a lot of control. If there are bad actors, they will find themselves. At least for me, having invested a lot of money to operate a business for a year and then not being permitted to continue to do so. So with that, I'd love to hear from my colleagues. Thank you. Who's going next? Councilmember Vela. So I am a little concerned and I want to echo the vice mayor's comments about the interpretation of the RFP. I. I want to assume that we will we will get more advice once there's been a little more research into that, because what I heard essentially from Mr. Lay was that he wanted an Ms.. Potter, was that they wanted to look at other groups and how we'd done things. So I would like to get guidance on that. What concerns me in particular is, especially with the recusal issue, is that essentially if so, does that mean that if there's another, you know, person who's thinking about applying and I live within 500 feet of that, you know, that area that I'm now or any one of us would then be recused. I just I think it creates a kind of we could dove down a rabbit hole where we're in. Essentially, everyone could potentially have recusal issues because of the possibility of future changes or future applicants. And so that when that occurs, it seems to me that that's an issue of kind of general, you know, that it applies to everybody. And therefore, the recusal law wouldn't necessarily apply that. That's kind of an off the cuff thought that I'm having. But I would like to get some clarity on that because I think it will become an issue as to the specificity and how complex this title was. That was specifically in response to the complaint, which said that the title itself did not clarify with enough specificity what we were discussing. And so that's kind of the outcome of that, is that we get these very long titles that kind of lay out every single change since. That was my understanding. That was that was Ms.. Chen's complaint. Additionally, you know, I'm not inclined to change. I haven't heard anything that's that made me inclined to change my position on the substantive issues. I think that there's a lot of misinformation in the community and a lot of people who don't really understand. And I think we need to do a better job of clarifying what the specific process is, where there's an opportunity for community input. And we've had several meetings now where we've heard from community members that are near certain locations. And the feedback that I've given before and I think that this counsel has given before, is we need to clarify where and when the opportunity for those concerns to be raised would be and how people can go about doing that . And that's going to be largely before the planning board. But the other thing that we'd given direction on in past meetings was that there be some sort of good neighbor policy work done where we can kind of establish so that we avoid these sort of ticky tacky violations. But there can be standards put out where people can give feedback and the good neighbor policy can exist. It's something that's been done in San Francisco and other communities so that we know where what sort of things would constitute a substantive violation wherein, you know, the permit would not be renewed on the annual basis. I also think that, you know, regarding the delivery only thing, part of the discussion centered around around the time this came back to us, there were changes to the state regs. Prior to that, the state regs essentially allowed for delivery only to be operated under a different set of regs from storefront properties. And the state regs changed over summer. And they essentially said, nope, delivery only. You've got to comport with all of the regs that exist for storefront property. So now you have to have a separate location, you have to do all these different things. And that's been an extensive conversation that was going on with the state, and they changed those regs over the summer and it did have a significant change. And that was part of the reason for why we said, okay, you know, if they have to be the same, let's make it storefront, but let's require that they offer delivery only. And then the other reason that we we instituted the Grand Avenue dispersion was that the mile dispersion was an issue. It was hard to calculate. It made it difficult to kind of have people planned out. And you you made it dependent upon when different applicants came in, it became a very difficult process. But what we did institute relative to that Grand Avenue dispersion was that essentially you have to have one on each side of grand before you can get that second one. And that was something that we had talked about and we had put in there. And so what that does is that means that we will go slowly. Implementation will be considerate, it will be thoughtful. There is a process. We do want community input. We're not saying no to the community. The community, just like in other conditional use permit situations, will have an opportunity to input and give input. But this will stagger when different businesses come online. And so it's not that we're going to go from. 0 to 4 overnight. And in fact, when we look at other neighboring cities like San Leandro that are similar to two cities like Alameda, San Leandro, Emeryville there, they've been working on their cannabis rags for quite some time. San Leandro just finally got to a point where their cannabis dispensary is finally getting moving through the process. And it's been three years or two years, something like that. Three. So anyway, so I'm not compelled to change the substance of this. I do hope that in the future we can discuss and go over and be more considerate and thoughtful of transparency and access, but also lay out a process where we can address these procedural challenges sooner so that we're not drawing out the process for longer than it needs to be. Thank you. Councilman Brody. I'm way over here by myself. You lonely? You're hot. Just a quick question of the interim city attorney. So I there was a question raised about a possible referendum. So I believe a referendum would either make us like repeal this ordinance, which I think, if that happens, would revert us back to what we have today. Or we would have we would suspend the implementation of it and put it on the ballot, which I think also would revert us back to what we have today. Is that correct? That is a correct analysis. Okay. So I appreciate that. So, I mean, and I appreciate my my colleague, Ms.. Vela, you know, kind of re restating the history. But I think it's important to understand how we got to where we are today. I mean, the important thing to me is we can pass this, you know, we can quibble about why we're here and, you know, whether we should be here or not. But we're still going to have the same thing we have today. And if we don't pass it, we're still going to have the same thing we have today, except maybe a little bit more legal risk that the city attorney is concerned about. So, I mean, okay, I mean, six and one half dozen the other, I'd rather have less legal risk than more legal risk. And also, if I'm looking at this, you know, I'd rather pass it and then, you know, make it a little bit more ironclad. I, I sit up here and, you know, this. I don't know how many times we've had this discussion. I think if I counted it out, we've had, what, like 44 meetings over the past two years. I think 25% of them have had cannabis come up because I think there was my referral, I think to Spencer put in another referral. I think we had a discussion and we had a workshop. So I think that's three. I think we had one ordinance that had two readings, so that's up to five. I think we had a second ordinance that had two readings that's like seven. I thought we did something related to the July 1st testing lab. I don't remember if that was one or two. So if it was two, that's nine. We had the the discussion about the youth centers, that's 11. So now this is like meeting 12. And then if we have a second reading of this, that's like 13 meetings and we've talked about this a lot and I'm not going to use my whole time because, you know, there's probably an hour and a half worth of me talking on this. So I'm a little concerned that we're getting that people are getting a second bite at the apple to try to get rid of this. But now I'd like to pass it and get it done. What we did as a council and this is what I wanted to do. And I think Councilman Avila talked about, you know, San Leandro. I think it's been four years. Someone could check me if I'm wrong and I'm sure it'll be over Twitter if I'm if I'm incorrect. But it's been four years since they issued the first permit, and I think they're just starting to open. And then they had to go back and do a second one and then they had to go back and do a third one. So what I wanted to do here, and I think our council agreed, was set a framework to allow these businesses to go forth and let the market and let the planning process sort it all out. And then so we're not coming back, you know, you know, every time doing Whac-A-Mole, when, you know, somebody said somebody got a wrong deal here. Somebody didn't get a fair deal here. You know, we set the framework and the market will decide if there's four, maybe there won't be, maybe there'll be four and they'll be long lines and we'll have to reconsider that. Maybe they'll be one. Maybe in four years like San Leandro will still be struggling to have one open. I don't know. That's what the planning process is for. That's what the market is for. And I think our our job as council was to set a high level policy and put the framework in place for those other processes to play out. I think that's exactly what we're doing. I prefer that we don't have any delay in our piece. And, you know, I'd like to keep the same for so I'm not going to support any direction that would change our piece from, you know, four to any other number. So that's where I am on this. Okay. So I'll go last. And I, I think my position has been pretty clear all along. I have supported medicinal dispensaries all along. Testing laboratories, manufacture delivery only is fine. But I am troubled that we have managed to with a, you know, three two majority but it was still a majority morph into all of the dispensaries being able to dispense adult use as well as medicinal. And I know I've heard the statistic cited that 68% of Alameda residents voted in favor of legalizing recreational cannabis. And I'm sure I was one of them. But that was not a vote on. Wanting to have it in our in our city, in just any location. I am troubled because I don't think we have been respectful to segments of our community. We have an open government commission for a stated purpose, their mission, and they're there. They're the tasks that they're to complete and conduct were reviewed by the city attorney's office. So it is somewhat curious that the city attorney's office is now telling them, no, you don't have that authority, but be that as it may. I've also been troubled with the changing definition of youth center and the fact that I don't think we've heard or that we've been respectful of merchants on Webster Street. I get that they can come to a a hearing and object. But I think it was perhaps premature for the Webster Street or the yeah, the West Alameda Business Association to say that the Merchants Association approves this when we've heard from an awful lot of Webster Street merchants who certainly don't. But I do have a question for the city attorney. Interim city attorney, is the the issue of the changing or changed definition of youth center? Is that coming back to the council? No, unless there were three votes to have the matter returned to the council. Okay. Well, I doubt that that would be the case. Okay. So so I'm not going to support either either of these ordinances, but are we ready for a vote, folks? And city clerk you want us to do each separately. Do a vote on both. The vote and both. Okay. So is there a motion to consider introduction of, you know, let's well, that probably doesn't make a difference. Okay, we're okay with that city attorney interim city draft. Okay. So public hearing to consider introduction of ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code as stated in the first paragraph of item six B and then introduction of ordinance, amending the municipal code by amending the articles and zoning districts and all stated in the second paragraph of item six B Is there a motion? I'll make that motion as long as I don't have to read the whole thing. I was avoiding it too. We have a motion by Councilmember Otis. Do we have a second? Is there any discussion? I'd just like that Vice Mayor. Discuss for a couple of seconds. Sure. And rather than make an alternative motion or whatever else, I guess, I mean, I'd like to ask for consideration of limiting the RFP. I haven't yet heard a heard a. The original consultant on this said that Alameda should look at 3 to 4 dispensaries. I haven't heard a compelling reason why four has to be the number, and I've heard that people are okay with Ford, but I've also heard a lot of concern in our community, and I just wonder if we could pass this and then do the RFP for three and and and vote and get at least three votes on this to just move it forward, get rid of the, you know, legal whatever that the attorney has referenced. I am just wondering if you would be willing to consider that I'm making a last minute. I know you said no, but I'm asking again. Madam Chair, if I may, and I did say I wouldn't be and I. I still wouldn't be. I appreciate the ask. I think if I recall correctly, the consultant said it's like one dispensary for 15,000 people. So, you know, Ford may actually be one less than our market would support. So because we have, what, 78, 79, almost 80,000 people. So, you know, I would like to just keep the process that we passed and keep moving forward with it without any changes. Your hand. Councilmember Avila Yeah, and that was a point that was also raised at the I think the last time that we voted on this. And specifically he had said it was for one for every 15,000, and that was based off of the total number of sales that they do per day plus the the volume that that because they're limited in terms of how much they can sell per day, blah, blah, blah, blah. Okay. So we've had a motion and a second all in favor. I opposed. No. Okay. So the motion is tied to into. The item film. So so yeah. With more legal risk and exposure to the city. All right. Thank you, everyone. And at this point. I'm just going to give you a roadmap of. How we're going to get our. Oh, yeah. We have another calling. Um. Okay. I'm sorry. You've lost him. How could you lose a council, mate? I thought he went through there. Okay. A Tony de song? Yeah. This one here? Mm hmm. So while the city clerk is hunting for our highest council member, we've rarely lost one for long. This is. This is the way the meeting is going to proceed, unless anyone has strenuous objections. We're going to finish items seven, eight, nine and ten and 11. I'm going to adjourn this council meeting. We are going to go back for a brief closed session because there was one item, but it's a short item we didn't get to before this meeting. And then we will return. And I'm told, I believe, no more than 30 minutes. Mr. Potter, give me a nod of the head, everyone. Okay? No more than 30 minutes for the closed session item, and then we will come back. And take a break. I don't want to do. An issue and then we're going to come back. To use the bathroom. Okay. But I'm still I still want to proceed, as I. Know you guys can figure. Out what. To figure. Out. Okay. Okay. We are going to take. Are we still in the matter? No, we we finished. We finished that item. It's done. And okay, we will take a ten minute break. This meeting is resuming at 940. Thank you. It's 940 and we are going to we're going to we're sorry. Went the wrong agenda. Okay. City Council. Okay. Here we're. Okay. Thank you, everyone, for keeping that to 10 minutes. And this is what we're going to do. Well, I'm just having a little trouble bringing my agenda up, but I'll try again. Okay, so we are on item seven and this is a meeting. It's a little unusual because we have a special meeting following the regular meeting, but I'm going to insert a brief, brief closed session because there was an item with Debbie party that we did not get to before seven. We had to come to the 7:00 meeting. We were a little late to that, so please bear with me. So I'm going to just go down the list. We are now at City Manager Communication. No report. All right. And do we have any oral communications non agenda? Okay. And we don't have any council referrals. How about council communications? Councilmember Odie, can I start with you?

Recommendation to adopt resolution to ratify City Manager’s Proclamation of Local Emergency regarding the serious and imminent threat of monkeypox virus (MPV). (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_08092022_22-0950

Thank you. We're going to go ahead and do item 31, please. And I'm 31. This report from Health and Human Services Recommendation to Adopt Resolution to ratify City Manager's Proclamation of Local Emergency regarding the serious and imminent threat of monkeypox virus citywide. Thank you. Can I get a motion in a second, please? I think we're all we've all been briefed on the declaration which which I know we just recently did through the city manager. Any public comment on this? If there any members of the public they'd like to speak on item 31 in person, please end up at the podium and zoom. Please use the raise hand feature or Die Star nine now. See none. That concludes for the coming. Roll call vote, please. Councilwoman Cindy has. Hi, Councilman Allen. Hi. Councilwoman Price, i. Councilman Sabrina I. Councilwoman Mango. I. Councilwoman Sara, I. Councilmember Ranga. Hi, Councilman Austin. Hi. Vice Mayor Richardson. Yes. The motion is carried nine zero. Thank you. Mary Gordon. Do the for ballot measure items next. And so we'll just do these the the only measure I think that we get a fuller presentation on from what I understand talking to staff will be the KPCC presentation. We'll go through the others fairly quickly unless there's additional questions from the council, and then we'll do the PCC. So let's start with item 17, please, if I can get a motion in a second.

A RESOLUTION to enter a partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to participate in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Urban Conservation Treaty for Migratory Birds Program encouraging the exploration and incorporation of bird-friendly policies, design, and best practices for creating, enhancing, and maintaining safe habitats for migratory birds and other urban wildlife.

SeattleCityCouncil_10172016_Res 31713

I appreciate that very much. Thank you. Agenda item number one, please read it into the record. The report of the Full Council Agenda Item one, Resolution 31713 ten three partnership with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to participate in the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Urban Conservation Treaty for Migratory Birds Program. Encouraging, encouraging the exploration and incorporation of bird friendly policies, design and best practices for creating, enhancing and maintaining safe habitats for migratory birds and other urban wildlife. So this to me this customer whereas customer in worse how was thank you I have a lot of paperwork got scrambling Thank you Councilmember worse for bailing out. Yes. This is a resolution expressing the city's interest in joining the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Urban Conservation Tree for Migratory Birds Program. I think you've all heard me speak about this at least three week, three Mondays in a row. This resolution will accompany the Department of Parks and Recreation participation in an event tomorrow, October 18th, officially joining the effort to preserve migratory bird habitats in our urban landscapes. Obviously it passed out of committee and I would recommend the full council support. Thank you very much, council members. Any further comments? Are those in favor of adopting the resolution? Please vote i. I. Those oppose vote no. The motion carries. The resolution is adopted and chair will sign it. Please read the next agenda item into the record.

AN ORDINANCE relating to street and sidewalk use; amending the Street Use Permit Fee Schedule authorized by Section 15.04.074 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_11212016_CB 118827

Agenda items five 310. Count the bill 118827. Relating to street and sidewalk use committee recommends the bill pass agenda item six Cancel 118828 relating to street and sidewalk use. The committee recommends the bill pass. Agenda Item seven Council Bill 118829 relating to Seattle Department of Transportation. The committee recommends the bill pass agenda item number eight Council Bill 118 830 relating to the financing of the Central Waterfront Improvement Program. The Committee recommends the bill pass agenda item nine Council Bill 118855 relating to parking rates. The Committee recommends the bill pass and agenda item ten Constable 118847 conditioning the Seattle Department of Transportation 2017 Grant Application. The committee recommends the bill passes amended. Okay. Any comments from the chair on a year? That is five through ten? Says no. Please call the rule on council. Bill 118827. Herbold I. Johnson Whereas. O'BRIEN Sergeant Bagshaw. Burgess. Gonzales President Harrell nine in favor. Nine opposed to the. Bill passed in show assignment. Please call the roll call on council. Bill 118828 Herbold Johnson Suarez O'Brien. Sergeant Bagshaw Burgess Gonzales. I President Harrell eight nine in favor nine opposed the. Bill pass and chose to sign it. Please call the roll call on council. Bill 118829. Herbold. Johnson. Whereas. O'Brien. Sergeant Bagshaw. Burgess. Gonzalez. President Arrow. Hi. Nine in favor and unopposed. Came the bill passed and Cheryl sign it to call the roll on council. Bill 118830. Herbold I. Johnson. Suarez. O'Brien. Sergeant Bagshaw. Burgess. Gonzalez. President. Herald. Hi. Nine in favor and unopposed. Thank you. The bill. Passenger will signage. Please call the roll call on counts. Bill 118855. Herbold I. Johnson Whereas I. O'Brien Sergeant Bagshaw. BURGESS Hi. Gonzalez President. Herald Hi. Nine in favor and unopposed came. The bill passed and Charles, sign it and please call the roll call on council. Bill 118847. Herbold. Johnson. Suarez. I. O'Brien. Sergeant I. Victor. Burgess. Gonzales. I. President Harrell. Nine in favor and unopposed came. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. And, you know, it's always important to keep our viewership on Channel 21 up. So I want those viewers to know that these are some very important agenda items that we're voting on. And we will have time at the end to elaborate on why we voted for some of these items, because many of these items, again, a lot of community members and activists and council members worked really hard to get these agenda items. But we just want to get the voting part out the way we don't want them changed to channel what they don't change channels like this anymore, which you get the draft. So please read. Agenda items 11 through 15 into the record.

Recommendation to direct City Attorney to prepare a resolution, and any related documents, for the November 3, 2020 ballot for voters to consider a $298 million housing bond at $25 per $100,000 assessed valuation for the creation of affordable housing in Long Beach, with funds available for extremely low, very low, low, moderate, and workforce housing, crisis shelters and homeless services facilities, motel conversion programs, and other solutions to address the housing and homelessness crisis in Long Beach. Direct City Manager to prepare a report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach, strategies to address housing affordability and homelessness, potential types of projects that could be funded with a housing bond, estimates on the number of units that could be constructed with a revenue source dedicated to affordable housing, and report back to the City Council within 90 days.

LongBeachCC_01072020_20-0019

District four I, district five I, District six, District seven, District eight. Ney and District nine. Thank you very much. Motion carries. And then with that, we will move to item 22. Communication from Councilmember Richardson. Councilwoman Zendaya's recommendation to direct city attorney to prepare a resolution for the November 3rd, 2020 ballot for voters to consider a 298 million housing bond at $25 per 100,000 assessed valuation for the creation of affordable housing in Long Beach and Direct City Manager to prepare a report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach and report back to the City Council within 90 days. Thank you. This is an agenda item from Councilman Richardson as the lead author. So I'm going to turn this over to him for the presentation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Happy New Year to everyone. And I think it's appropriate that we start the year off right by taking an opportunity to weigh in on one of the biggest issues impacting our city and our region. Housing and the homelessness crisis. Is this easy? Thank you. Thank you. We are on a limit here with our presentation is easy. No, it is not. Housing has never come without its own controversy when we discuss this topic. If you think of almost anything related to housing and that's okay, I think the proposal here that we're going to discuss tonight takes a lot of that into account. My hope is that the presentation will provide context and clearly outline a proposal to identify a revenue source to both support the production of affordable housing, housing it's affordable and to expand our capacity to address homelessness in our city. Tonight's proposal is a culmination of nearly three years of studies discussions before our council with community members, staff and stakeholders. Before we begin, I want to thank a number of key organizations have taken steps to bring us to this point. The Long Beach, Everyone Home Task Force, a coalition of stakeholders, education leaders, nonprofit leaders who work together to meet to put together a plan to address both of these critical issues in our city. The United Way, everyone in campaign who's done an amazing job helping to spread the word that it is possible for us to make a real, meaningful impact on the lives of thousands of residents in our city. The Housing Justice Coalition that is always at the table speaking up for justice in our city. The Long Beach Interfaith Community Organization and ministers all across town have been in communication with us from the last year to lift up Long Beach Families Coalition, who's taken a lot of work to conduct research over the past year to put us in this position. The Long Beach Homeless Coalition in Long Beach, the Long Beach Gray Panthers, and I see a number of individuals, the L.A., O.C. Building Trades Council, who are with us this evening, as well as the hundreds of residents who are engaged in this process. Thank you all for engaging tonight's proposal. Ask the city attorney to draft language for City Council Review and consideration for placing a $298 million housing bond on on the November 2020 citywide general election ballot for the purpose of boosting affordable housing production and creating affordable and creating additional homeless shelter capacity with our city. The recommendation also requests that the city manager present a study and analysis that includes the total cost breakdown ways the measure could work. Housing need in the city. Projects eligible for funding with the housing bond. And to present a plan to ensure that we're making the greatest impact with these dollars. To be clear, this is not a vote to place the measure on the ballot tonight. It's a vote to advance the conversation beyond studies and provide the public and the city council the language and the facts to take action within the next 90 days. We are not voting to put this on the ballot tonight. Tonight, we're voting to give directions to city staff after we've collected information over the past three years on what we'd like to see come back to put us in a position to move forward with a ballot measure. And I just want to be clear on that. Next, we we all know the California's in the midst of a housing crisis, which, you know, I want to provide a little context, context which significantly impacts housing affordability and homelessness here in Long Beach. We're we know that addressing this issue has been a top priority of our city council. And since 2016, we've reviewed and asked staff to report to prepare reports on ways to increase affordable and workforce housing, provide pathways into housing for those experiencing homelessness, and furthermore prevent individuals from falling into homelessness. This is not a new proposal. Recommendations to create housing and to create a housing bond have been brought before this council five times in the past three years, which you'll see on the next slide. Affordable housing and homelessness remains an ongoing conversation for the City Council, which first began in 2016 when the Affordable Housing Workforce Study Group assembled by Mayor Garcia and chaired by former Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal. Since then, the following actions have taken place by the City Council and city staff. In May 22, in May 2017, the City Council adopted a plan called the Revenue Tools and Incentives for Production of Affordable and Workforce Housing. This report included 29 recommendations, one of which was the creation of a local bond measure for affordable housing production to replace the missing, the lack of funding or the gap caused by the loss of redevelopment. We used to invest $23 million a year into affordable housing production. Next, four months later, on September 2017, city staff reported back to the City Council on Costs and Benefits of a local housing bond to capitalize our housing trust fund and support affordable housing production. Two months later, in December 2017, we launched Everyone in Economic Inclusion Initiative, recognizing housing as a fundamental component to economic success for all Long Beach families, and highlighting the barriers to homeownership for an entire generation of families in our city. Five months later, the mayor appointed to everyone home task force, made up of dozens of stakeholders from business, the education community, the health care community, the affordable housing community, and multiple multidisciplinary city departments, and many more to to explore. Creating a comprehensive plan to address our housing homelessness crisis. In July. 2018, the city council voted unanimously to request the city manager to report on the gaps in services, in housing and precariously housing, those experiencing homelessness, as well as funding strategies and an implementation timeline for a local dedicated revenue source. A month later, August 2018, not only did the City Council consider several options for potentially funding a local revenue source, the council also took an additional step by unanimously providing a budget allocation of $50,000 to continue researching funding solutions for affordable housing. And four months later, the City Council unanimously adopted the Everyone Home Long Beach Report, an evaluation of existing services, funding streams, needs and recommendations to address, affordable address homelessness and housing affordability. The first goal of the Everyone at Home Long Beach Report is to secure local, sustainable funding. All of this brings us to tonight. And with the city council's approval, we can move forward with a request for resolution and a report on potential on a potential housing measure to address the gaps identified over the past over the past three years. This timeline shows seven steps over the last three years that the city council has taken to help bring us to arrive at this point. Each blue step indicates when a housing bond was either recommended, recommended or discussed. The point here, it's not a new idea. The Everyone Home report is comprehensive. Indeed, it does a great job of analyzing the city's current homeless services, projecting a need for homeless prevention housing. The items in Orange are the numbers that we know. Roughly 4000 people experience housing, experience homelessness each year in Long Beach. And during the 2019 point in time homeless count, almost 1900 people were counted homeless in a single day in our city. 1275 of those people are living unsheltered on our streets. 52% of those people were experiencing homelessness for the first time. 60% of those individuals are likely to experience homelessness for more than a year. Over half of Long Beach residents, over half of Long Beach residents are rent burdened, paying more than 30% of their income on housing. 58,000 people in Long Beach are categorized as precariously housed and on any given night could slip into homelessness. The items in great our home, our housing and shelter needs identified locally and by the state. We required to build 202,893 affordable units, and we have 817 in the pipeline. We have a need for 500 shelter beds and I am glad and thankful to the North Long Beach residents into the Long Beach City Council that we have taken steps by building a 125 bed Atlantic Avenue Avenue Bridge facility in North Long Beach. But we still have a 375 bed gap. 125 beds is not going to solve this problem for our city. Improve Everyone Home report. We need roughly 350 permanent supportive housing units and 450 rapid rehousing units to expand housing opportunity. The amount in red is the capital needed to build 2000 low income units and facilities for shelter capacity. It's clear that we know what the issues we're facing. We know which solutions will help address the problem. The funding in tonight's proposal is adequate to help us meet the needs and close the gap. The Everyone Home report identifies existing funding in the state is helping, but the amount of dollars provided by the state is slim compared to our need. The state provided $275 million to large cities to share on a one time basis. It's not going to close that gap. Our total our total need is greater than the entire amount that the state allocated to major cities. Let's put that in perspective. Now a bond can be used on various infrastructure projects across the city, such as shelters, facilities for mental health and construction, loans to build affordable housing. Bond funding can be used for the acquisition of nuisance motels for conversion. Expanding shelter capacity to make our community safer and more stable. And homebuyer down payment and second mortgage assistance programs to assist Long Beach families achieve the goal of home ownership in a bond will help Long Beach residents across various income levels, including students, two working families, teachers and seniors on a fixed income. Let's compare this bond to other local measures within our city. Here's a chart that shows the Long Beach Unified School District and Long Beach Community College bond measures in recent history. They'll be USD measures K, K and E were in the amounts of 1.2 million and 1.5 billion respectfully, respectively. And the Long Beach Community College District bond was in the amount of $850 million. The proposal tonight is $300 million. It's saying it will not only address this critical issue, but does so at a fraction of the of the cost of previously approved measures in Long Beach. And to be clear, I know there's a lot of numbers floating around, but the the the 2019 median assessed value on a single family resident in Long Beach is $346,000. That's the median in 2019. Assessed value for single family residents that would turn into the average dollar would be 86. The average, should this proceed, would be $86 per year on an average single family residence. To break that down, that is $7 a month for every single family residence. I know that folks are overburdened. I completely understand. But we're talking to put this in perspective, the proposals allow the residents to vote on $7 less than your next Netflix bill. Listing your Disney plus bill. I've got a coffee, I've got a soda. I drink plenty of those once a month. This is significantly less. And we're we're not imposing this. We're asking voters to consider this. Here's more information on the proposal. There are a number of accountability measures and enhancements to make this to address. Some of the concerns have been raised. The proposal includes the establishment of a citizen bond oversight committee, along with mandatory audits to ensure transparency and accountability. That is, that the funding is used accountably and effectively. The proposal includes an opt out process for seniors over 65 years old, as well as individuals disabilities, to ensure that this assessment does not overburdened vulnerable populations. The proposal includes a recommendation to negotiate local hiring on construction through a project labor agreement with the Building Trades Council to ensure that any construction activity creates local jobs and economic opportunity for Long Beach families. And finally, the proposal includes a recommendation for performance accountability, measures to improve upon housing, bond efforts in other communities and make sure that we are actually accomplishing our stated goals. We have an opportunity tonight to take a take a first vote, a first vote for you in the step toward letting voters in Long Beach decide on how we as a city address Long Beach address homelessness. This effort has been researched and discussed by our City Council. For more than three and a half years. We've studied the housing crisis. We've identified solutions that can help address housing affordability and homelessness in our city. Now's the time to consider this option and let the voters decide. The longer we go without considering this action, the more costly it will become for homeowners, renters and and those experiencing homelessness. They are reflect respectfully submit this proposal to the city council. Thank you. Thank you. Public comment first. And with that, we have three we have 70 speakers. 70 speakers. So with that, that's 2 hours. Okay, just hold up. So what we're going to do is for the first 30, you will get 90 seconds. And after that, you will get one minute. We will start the first 30. I'll call of you maybe eight or nine or ten at a time. Mr.. Mr. Vice Mayor, what is the protocol of meeting? Is that the protocol? Yes. 90. And then. And in one. Minute. Yes. 90 seconds. In one minute. Okay. I have no idea. Okay. The first I got two words from Matthew Taylor. Know that he is just one. Great time. You did. Yes. Thank you very. Much. By Matthew Taylor Stevens. 90 seconds. Excuse me. If you will have your turn, please. Listen, I want to say this, Bobby. I'm sure the mayor is listening. He's here. Yes. So I fully support the the bill to to have the bond for the homeless. But I'd like for us to spend our thinking. It is not only homelessness that is causing the problems and a lack of homes. It's the lack of a broken spirit that we have of people who are unemployed, who are also in the streets . And some will be most do not only have home providing and places to provide homes for people. We're going to have to do some things are providing employment, some spiritual uplift, some family assistance. We have to take the whole person and give them some love that we have not given them a long time. And so I think that this is going to be a fantastic start, but we must take the total human being into consideration and make sure that we don't leave anything out. And that's including their total person. We must love them, care for them, and really do something to make everyone have a place to live and to be respected and to have a home. Thank you, Dr. Watson. Okay, I'm going to call a five more people. You guys can just line up in this order. MATTHEWS, Stevens, Tommy, you guys and Ivan and Milt, you guys please line up in that order. Matthew Stevens, Tommy, Ivan and Mel. I guess I'll jump the line. You just go. Okay. Go ahead. Counsel Tommy five. I represent IBEW Local 11. I'm here with the IBEW folks that's here tonight to support this proposal moving forward. We feel that, you know, just having a tool in place when it comes to affordable housing and homelessness, you know, it just barely scratches the surface. You know, and we understand that, you know, we understand that bond measures like this helps, you know, help cities, you know, to be more aware of homelessness and, you know, housing. We we understand that, too, when it comes to building an infrastructure. And hopefully when this comes to comes to light, that we're there to help these folks get into a good career and help uplift them at the same time. When it comes to this bond measure. But we urge the city council to move this forward and then to bring it back 90 days. I think that's what Councilman Rick's Richardson mentioned. But I just wanted to thank Rex Richardson's office. And then of all the community, you know, groups that, you know, that come together and, you know, to bring this forward to to you tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And Matthew Taylor. And Matthew Taylor statements update you guys, please line up. And Ivan Jamerson, it doesn't make any difference. Just whoever steps up, you can go ahead. Okay. I respect your offer. You speak. Okay. Thank you, sir. Your name is you. Steve Updike. Here for affordable housing for gay people. LGBTQ people. A lot of senior housing is owned by religious groups, and they discriminate against gays, as you know. And there's these rich real estate people. They are they're running low and middle income people out of the Long Beach area. They want psychiatrists to label people as mentally ill just because. They can not afford to pay rents. How crazy is that? We know that they are up to we know what they're doing. The Christian law enforcement people still discriminate against gays and pushes them into psychiatry. To stop them from being gay. Is like a gay conversion therapy and we know it and you know. It too. The city has in bed with big real estate investors. They should be building gay senior housing to make up for the crimes they have committed against gays. But it allows over 100 years don't make the taxpayers pay for it. Make these people. Let me name off a few people. There's Steve Bogey. Bagel your back. Okay. Big, rich Armenian man down here at Marcus and Millichap. Get these people to put their fair share and they're making $1,000,000,000 off you people. And when Mayor Garcia. Is old, he's going to need a place. Where he can live. And we think that we should name the gay senior citizen Robert Garcia, LGBTQ senior home. Now, that's fine. Thank you. Time for your next. A remarkable. Improvement. You state your name, sir. Matthew Taylor. Okay. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this ballot proposal. I'm in District three with my wife. We are not homeowners, so it would not affect us. Nonetheless, we have significant concerns on this proposal. I have no doubt that this proposal is a well-intentioned move to make Long Beach a more equitable city. But this catch all proposal would spend $300 million and increase the bureaucracy to fight windmills without providing any services to address root causes of much homelessness and makes the goal of homeownership all the more difficult. We've all grown accustomed to hearing homelessness described as a housing crisis. Yet my wife and I have gone handed out dozens of lunches on numerous occasions to the homeless in and around Bixby Park. We sat on the grass and listened to their stories. And though anecdotes don't make statistics excuse me, with the exception of four individuals, every person we have met where substance abusers and a number of those likely having mental illnesses, everybody home study stated 21% of homeless self-reported having a substance abuse issue. If that is a self-reported percentage, I'm left wondering how much higher the actual figure is. There are serious mental health and drug issues plaguing Southern California and the root of much homelessness, and this would do nothing to address those needs. These are difficult issues. Thank you. Please, please. Could you show some respect for the speaker, please? That. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. City Council of Long. Beach, please. State your name, sir, please. My name is Mel DeLuca, and I would like to answer that privileged white person who spoke before me. Giving out sandwiches in a park doesn't give you the knowledge to understand what homelessness is. I have I have given out many sandwiches, which I'm only stating to answer him. And for all the people I have met, some have substance abuse issues. Most cannot afford housing, and that is why we are here. We can't wait until we are like the city of Los Angeles, where they just approved the first open, their first housing project. From a bond measure they started in 2016. We need the help now. Thank you, Council President Richardson, for proposing this. We need to push this through. There are studies. What is needed to solve homelessness? It doesn't take a study. It's homes. It's affordable housing. It's workforce housing. Let's get this done right now. Thank you. Thank you very much. Ivan Jemison. Good evening. My name is Ian Jamieson. In response to the moronic remarks made by the gentleman before last. Going to a homeless encampment and talking with a dozen people does not make you an expert on the issue. Far from it. Around 40% of the homeless people experiencing homelessness in L.A. County are doing so because they cannot afford rent. They do not have substance abuse issues. This goes to the very complex root of the homelessness problem, which is that people are simply being priced out of the housing market. As to the 60% of L.A. County homeless people who do suffer from substance abuse issues. The Housing First modality has been universally shown to be the only effective way at addressing substance abuse. You get a person and this is not counterintuitive stuff. I do not have to be Albert Einstein to see the logic of this getting somebody to get off meth when they have to worry about being raped or burgled or even killed on the streets is way more difficult than when they're doing it in the comfort of a warm apartment. So in conclusion, sir, you are an idiot. Okay, well, these people line up here. Well, Akerman, flat. You real? You present an to call your name. Ackman. That's your real. Alice Stegman. Joe, why don't you do? And Mr. Hoover. Okay. Could you please type in that order or whichever? Doesn't make any difference. Go ahead. Councilmember. Please state your name. Second County office. My name is Linnea. Okay. And I am a resident of Long Beach 90803. I am a doctor of public health and an educator as well as a health care provider. And after 40 years of experience, I. Can say in the CDC and the. National Institutes of Health support this that shelter and housing are the way to take care of many of the ills of society, including homelessness, illness. And, yes, many of the homeless are mentally ill. But if you were put out on the street for a year, you might be mentally ill as well as a health care provider. I assumed that the women that I took care of had been raped because. That is the. Reality of many women that are living on the street. So if we want to take care of many of our social ills, we need to look to the social determinants of health and housing our residents. Thank you. Thank you. That's how you cancel. My name is Rio. I just moved to Long Beach and it's pretty cool. Anyway, homeless people who are addicts and mentally ill are people and also deserve a right to live in Long Beach. And. Period. I myself have dealt with mental illness and being like put in an institution for it. And the only reason why I am so well put together now is because I had a home and I had a supportive family and I had the resources to do all these things to address this issue throughout my life. So I don't understand how people wouldn't have severe trauma. And. Like being homeless and it only really gets worse. Like the longer that you're out on the streets, like you're more likely to die. But why should you have to like all of the like homeless people who have who have the like. Basically if you have your resources, you can. Become the better version of yourself that you were meant to be. When people talk about people's potential. Maybe the next person to cure cancer is actually homeless, but they ended up dying on the street. So maybe we should do something about it. Not maybe we should. Thank you. Thank you. Actually, the. Okay. My name is Alberts Demarche and I'm a resident. Long Beach. You know, on my way up here, I access in a912. Look, I know two. 190216. Here you go. I'm away up here. Just like when I went to Boulevard and Sixth Street in between Seventh Street, right in front of Walgreens and CVS. There are people that sleep outside of CVS and Walgreens every night, and I see more tents popping up because people can't afford to actually pay rent. And of course, they they actually they're drug addicts, people who do actually have substance abuse problems. But there are a lot of people like people who go to City College, people that no, they go to obviously the college they actually are students, but they can't afford to pay rent. So they actually sleep in their cars. They live in like homeless shelters. And they also look to continue coming to school. But, you know, I think it is really important to do something about the homeless situation right away because the homeless population is growing like this, larger than it was last year, larger than it was six months ago. And I really would like to see you guys do something about it right away. Don't wait to six months from now. Next year, live. Do something this week. No, thank you. All right. Thank you. What was your name, sir? Excuse me. What? Your name? My name is Albert. Thank you, sir. Okay, Mr. Weinstein. No, thank you. There are good things and. Not quite so good things about this proposal. The sensible thing about this proposal is it asks. For a. Look at what can we do? The weird thing about this proposal is that the one definite thing it puts in front is a tax. This is a. Simply a tax proposal. No guarantee. As to which specifics this tax revenue would be spent. On. And absent the study, apparently there is a need for study to just. See that the problems allegedly addressed would be addressed. It gets the impression that we started out with how much can. We done. The property owners of the city for. And then maybe spend that? Well, you know, it's true that 300 million pales in comparison with some other bond issues, and that's a plus. And it's also true that you're. Going you would go to the voters. To approve that. But on the other hand, if you really want to solve. Homeless problems. Fast, this won't do it. Another thing, too, is that. There is a quicker. Solution to housing people. A lot of people in that is. To take this building, which has. Lots of room in it. And tell the people thank you, said miracle people. Thank you. To go ahead and thank. You. What I do namely do. Most of. My working business. Excuse me person on the internet next. Which is what I've been doing as a state proxy. For 15. Years. Yes. Yes. And okay. We have Michelle. We have Nadia. Andy Hollis. Christina. Jo Jo Nicholson. Just come on up. You guys just come right on it. Just. Just mention your name when you get a second. Write it up. Kristina. Roy. Hi. Today I will be sorry. You. Please give us your name, please. Yes. Good evening, City Council. My name is Andy and I will be representing on behalf of link housing. I'm a resident at Linc Housing, which I've been visiting for a year. I previously was homeless and in foster care. The rate of the rate of homelessness in the community is rising, especially for young adults between the ages of 18 to 25, like myself and older adults as well. There is a high demand of housing for homeless youth and adults, but a lack of resources, which is a major problem in the community. I feel having stable, affordable housing for young adults, transitioning to adulthood and having additional resources for adults who are chronically homeless as essential. I believe housing should be a basic human necessity, which is why I'm speaking today to shed light on a very serious issue that is affecting our community. I was able to receive affordable housing and which helped me alleviate the trauma I experienced while being homeless. Thank you very much. Next. Ah, yes. My name is Hollis Stewart. I live in the first district downtown. I have a condominium there and my wife and I wanted to speak to the tax thing because I am someone who pays taxes right now. I am building that, you know, here in the city and I would be glad to pay some more tax in order to provide housing for people who need it. Because that's the way that's the way we build families. That's what we have. Children grow up with some confidence by living in a place and being able to be part of a community. And this is so important in terms of how you end up being when even when you go to school and universities and all that. So we do need this. We need it now. And as a matter of. Well, it's not a mental discharge thing I keep hearing about. Yes, there are drug users out there, but there's also a lot of people who drink alcohol every Saturday night downtown in all of our nice bars and nobody talks about them. It's like outrage in the street or something. No, we the people we are fighting for here who are homeless are people who need to have a decent place to live. And I pay the tax for it and I hope a lot of others will do. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Want to show you my side since I made it. My name is Christina Cervantes. My husband and I are District five residents, and before that we lived downtown. My sign says Long Beach. Thank you for housing veterans. Now let's get safe homes for everyone. I've had many interactions with our homeless residents and most of them have left me feeling helpless. I provided them things they've asked me for a heavy blanket for an older gentleman, my favorite picnic blanket from my car and directions to the multi-service center and bus fare for a young man and some warm homemade food. And a couple of times a little bit of money toward a hotel. Stay for a young couple and other young men and always a smile and a listening ear. But the main thing I know they need is the one thing I can't provide them safe housing. There's a senior at my church that just lost her housing. There are people beginning to camp on our church's property. How can I give them hope in finding safe housing when I know the city is so short on affordable housing? It makes me feel helpless. I can't do this by myself. I'm one person. I simply ask that you give caring residents like me the chance to make a real difference for our neighbors and now become before we become more like L.A., I have hope we can house more people because I know we've done it for our veterans . Let's provide safe housing for everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Next. My name's Nadir Tushnet, and I live in the third district. The benefit of the bond to the community is clear. It provides funding. For a path. To security for those. Who are experiencing houseless. Ms.. As we know. The longer people are on the street, the worst. Their lives are in many dimensions and the worst it is for their children. There are children on the. Street as well. We have to remember that. I am a homeowner. I am retired. That makes me a person of privilege. I know that I need to use my privilege not to benefit me, but to benefit the community. In my tradition, Rabbi Hillel said, If I am not for myself. Who will be for me? If I am not for others, what am I? If not now, when? Thank you very much. Okay with the next group of interviews lined up this Sunday, Christina Christian, Jo Nicholson, Christina Oak. Every entry and the idea that Donald. Downfield. So I know I might have backed those names up and is close to it. So you come up with now your name and we'll just scratch off with that. So do what have you got? Segway. That's good. I mean. Okay. Christina Petit. Jo Nicholson. Christina. Attorney, Joe Nicholson. Okay. Hi, everyone. I am Dr. Christine Pettit, executive director of Long Beach Forward and a sixth District resident. As a member of the Everyone Home Long Beach Task Force, I stand in strong support of this item that will realize one of our task force's top recommendations of establishing a dedicated source of local funding for homelessness solutions. As we all know, Long Beach is in a severe housing and homelessness crisis. The time is now for our city to proactively tackle. This crisis actually was yesterday, and we need these proven solutions, including a local bond measure, to be approved by voters. We are not asking the council to pass a bond measure tonight. We are simply asking the council to take the first step to give voters the opportunity to vote on it in November. This item is about opportunity, an opportunity to transform and save lives, especially our most vulnerable residents living on the street, experiencing chronic homelessness and cost burden. Families who live on the brink of homelessness. This is an opportunity to end homelessness with homes permanently and cost effectively and humanely. And we saw the statistics about how effective it is, how cost effective is. It's also humane. And this is an opportunity for Long Beach to get its fair share of available resources to unlock county, state and federal dollars that we have not had access to. Tonight is an opportunity to let Long Beach voters decide in November. Please vote yes tonight to make this first step. Thank you. Yes. Hello. My name is Zoe Nicholson. I live in the second district. I'm asking you to take a moment with me and the. I know this to understand this. Each of you have one of these in your pocket. Imagine going home tonight and saying, Well, honey. I'm sorry, but I couldn't afford it. So you're leaving your toys, you're leaving your spouse. You live in the fridge, you live in the stove, you live in the sheets because you couldn't afford this. You'd be crazy, too, in no time. Imagine how you'd be in a year. Imagine in the eyes of your partner staring back at you. But I'm here to tell you. Lucky you. You get to do what I would do anything. Anything to do to sit on that side of the circle. And to vote yes. We're going to study this. We're going to conquer this. We're going to make sure that everybody has a key. Thank you. Next. That evening, everyone my name is Leonardo. How your I live now at the stroke with elastin I used to live in the square with. Lena Gonzalez. I was homeless 16 years ago. My daughter was one year old. She says 17 hours just going to school for exiting high school this year and going to the Marines. She experienced that homelessness when she was one year old. She still remembers it up to this time. And I don't understand. Before the rent control ordinance was passed, effective this year, on January last year. Most of the landlords in District eight rent increase was 50%. For my case, it was to raise 600 soon. I'm beginning to be out there as of being homeless again. So hopefully we get some more help. Funding for better housing. Affordable and supportive housing for elderly, low income and homeless people. Thank you. Thank you very much. Tonight is tonight here in Europe. Delia. Christina? Christina, you. Ever. So I apologize. And Sandy lives here. I was inability to come right up. Heather. Sandy Lane. Rebecca Moran. Those individuals, please come right up. Okay. You can start. Thank you, Councilman. And I can be president. Sixth District. Uh, I'm in support of the. The housing bond. My question in regards to, um, the study that comes along with it to the sponsor, to Councilman Richardson, is what are the guarantees that we have that we're going to house, uh, people who are in precarious living situations, who currently live in the city of Long Beach and that people who live in the city of L.A.. Because as it stands, I live in the sixth district, and there's no district in the city that rivals the amount of affordable housing units that are currently being built in the sixth District. However, that being said, a majority of the district's affordable housing units that are being built are primarily housing people in the city of L.A. or County of Los Angeles housing lists, which are people who live in the city of L.A.. So I'm curious to see how we can push this narrative to house people who currently live in and in Long Beach or who currently are homeless in the city of Long Beach. Uh, because I figure, you know, I don't mind paying the money. And I figure, you know, if, if, if the burden of this is on the taxpayers, maybe we can also get some kind of tlt, uh, quid pro quo thing that we did for like Molina and friends down the street with the hotels. Maybe we can get some, some of that burden alleviated, not just on us, but also like, you know, some of the businesses as well. Thank you. Thank you. Mm hmm. Good evening. My name is Suni Lee Chang. I'm the chief operating officer for Link Housing. I was also a member of the Everyone Home Task Force and a member and a resident of the eighth District. We saw the numbers that showed that, relatively speaking, this is a small bond. But I'd like to offer you the practitioner's perspective that that explains it shows that while it is a relatively small number, it packs a mighty punch. And the reason for that is that when we locally are able to commit dollars, that attracts other dollars from the county and from the state. So I'll give you an example. Councilwoman Andrews, you were gracious enough to advocate for. The spark at Midtown, which is 95 units of. Affordable housing in your district. The city put in $3 million for that site. We are. An affordable housing developer and. Any of our colleagues would be able to take that. We took that $3 million. We got 18 times as much money from the state and from the county, and we were able to build a 50 plus million dollar project there. We're doing the same thing at PCH and Magnolia in the first District said, you put in $2 million. We're able to build a $24 million project there. What you're proving tonight has the ability to have a much greater impact. And also to put this all in perspective, we spend all of this money on our educational system. We have a first rate nationally award winning school district. We have this wonderful thing called the college promise. We invest all this money and these kids go through school and they can't afford a place to live. Let's fix that by putting. This bond. Before the current. He's I am to do a thrash and took a resident of the eighth district and a homeowner. I'm also the executive director of a regional nonprofit that leads work around economic development and housing policy strategies in local cities. As a housing expert. I sit on the board of Directors of Housing California, and I'm vice chair of Proposition eight, the Citizens Oversight Commission. My housing policy experience brings me before you today. You see, first we have a problem. It's been noted here today that our crisis is pushing people out of our city and in some cases certainly onto the streets, sidewalks, churches, storefronts, cars, trailers and even on railroad tracks. This creates a safety hazard as well as a financial hazard. It's the cost of not housing people that we should all be concerned about. This is complicated, trying to figure out how do we create the policy that is nuanced and necessary in order to house people? But that means that we must have courage. We have the chance to answer the call. You see, proactive leaders dissect policy options and look for solutions. More than 65% of. The voters. Here in Long Beach have said they are interested in this housing solution. Let's get moving. I've had conversations with many people in my community and many of them feel that they are one rent hike from displacement. That's not how people should feel if they're living here in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. That's. Good evening. I'm Rebecca Clarke. I lead link housing, nonprofit housing, affordable housing developer here in Long Beach. And I wanted to speak and speak in support tonight. This housing crisis that we've all been talking about is affecting. I actually live in Bixby Knolls, and I'm starting to see more and more homeless in this neighborhood, which previously didn't see a homeless problem. So it is everywhere. And Long Beach's diverse with a broad spectrum of people. And we love that. We want to see all incomes be able to afford to live in Long Beach. And that is changing. We're losing people that are being gentrified out and who are going to be left with a sort of a one dimensional population. The cost of land in development make it impossible. To build housing that is. Affordable, let alone providing housing for our homeless. And I know I've heard complaints from a few taxpayers saying we already pay enough taxes. We pay taxes into. The VA for. Affordable housing on the County of Los Angeles. Measure H. But in fact, that is for services, not for building affordable housing, not for permanent supportive housing. So, as Suni said, every dollar that is put in leverages a great number of dollars more and. Also money for services. So responsive. Well, communities all across California are really stepping up at the local level and realizing that they can make a difference. So Long Beach, move forward. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Hi. My name is Heather Pentecost and my families are fortunate enough. To own property in. District eight. And we love the city of Long Beach. I believe it. Is our responsibility. And our honor to assist those in our city who are rent burdened. And I urge my city council member to vote yes to explore this opportunity to fund more of this vital housing. Thank you. Thank you very much. That's. Good evening. Councilmembers. My name is Lauren Elam. I work with Link Housing, nonprofit organization, District seven. I have also been a resident here in Long Beach going on 13 years now, District two and I stand before you here this evening. Council members, in closing with a community that has not only humbly awaited for opportunity for stability that is well deserved, however more so earned, let's envision this vision. A previous study found that it would cost taxpayers 10,000 per homeless person to give them a. Permanent place to live. And services like job trainings and health care. That figure is 68% less than what the public currently spends by allowing homeless people to remain on the streets. What are we what are what are we as human beings if we ignore the suffering of others? Let the voters vote and the community thrive. Thank you. Thank you very. Much. And as Sandy lay here, Sandy Lay. Actor Stephen Richardson. Jordan Wayne. Any of those individuals who. Okay. This is going to go down to the next level, go down to one minute. So it's only late here. And come. We're not. Yeah. Welcome. Yeah. Come right up and state your name. So we got 70 names on here, so please just get in line. My name is Jordan Wynn. I am a second district resident member of the Continuum of Care Board and a part of everyone in Long Beach. I want to start by thanking everyone who is in this room for turning out, and I'd ask if you're in support to stand up if you can, and raise your sign. Stand up. Raise it. High. Council members, Long Beach is ready to end homelessness. The voters are here and they are ready. As you can see, I'm speaking. Up in support of item 22 and I urge City Council to vote yes and take this important first step towards funding for neighbors experiencing homelessness. I want to thank council members Rex Richardson. Mary is in the House and Dee Andrews for initially bringing this forward. This modest bond will go directly towards comprehensive housing solutions that help fill the gaps in our continuum of care. No matter how someone. Falls into homelessness. Supportive housing makes social and medical services work more effective. Costing half of what it would do. Administrate on the streets and in Long Beach, we've seen great success with this century. Villages like Cambria. One of our biggest and most state of the art supportive housing developments in the country, has a 96%. Success rate at helping recover formerly homeless individuals. And keeping them housed. Over 50,000 people are experiencing housing instability with 90% or there were more of their income going towards their rents. And we need to be clear, we can afford this. The median homeowner in Long Beach would pay $87 a year or $1.66 per week. And we want to make sure that's clear. And I urge council to vote to approve item 22 and take the first steps toward a safer and healthier Long Beach when we bring everyone in. Thank you. Comment off. Steve, members of the Council and Dr. Robert Garcia. My name is Pastor Steve Richardson. I pastor a church in District one today. One seven 2020. We mourn the death of 57 individuals who died from simply being homeless last year in the city of Long Beach. That is 3% of the counted population of people that are homeless. We have been working with the homeless population for the last nine years from Good News Church. We've given out over 15,000 meals and at this time, homelessness continues to be a bigger problem than it was just yesterday. We're living in a time when the average worker can barely afford to live in the city that we love. We're also experiencing the daily manifestation of movement of people from their apartments into cars and on the streets, because they cannot pay the high rents. For those that have been experiencing homelessness, the most innovative, cost effective way to provide permanent housing is permanent housing with social services. Inside of the building. This bond will help restore the lives of thousands of seniors, emancipated youth, low income and homeless people that have been displaced in our beloved city. 2500 units would make a huge difference throughout our city to combat the lack of affordable housing and those which are experiencing homelessness in our city. Long Beach has been extremely agile when it comes to commercial development and capital raising for infrastructure. This bond would go a long way to make sure that our city remains cutting edge. If it costs $86 per year. Thank you very much. Yes. Thank you. Yes. Next. Good evening, City Council. My name is Deidre Fulcher. I'm part of the downtown Long Beach and I urge the city. Council to proceed forward with this. And then put the ban on for the November ballot. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Now we're going to go into the one minute situation. So the individuals coming up, neither colors. Well, yes. Stephen Smith and a Christian in Baraka can recite and. Is that Dutch? Yossi. Okay. Hi, I'm Kim BROSH. And my concern is because my son, who has schizophrenia, isn't able to live independently because. He can't afford to live. Anywhere in the city. He has to live with me or be hospitalized when he lives with me. He has no activities. I'm going to work all day. He doesn't have anything to do. He's not responsible for anything. It would be much better for him to live in his own place and take responsibility to the extent that he can for his own life. One part of this measure that I'd like to suggest is that people like me who don't own a home in Long Beach could contribute to this fund on a monthly basis. I would be more than happy to contribute $10 a month to this project. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mexico. Good evening. Council. My name's Steven Smith. I've been homeless for 20 years long under the seventh street in one more district. I came to the council several times. I spoke to council members about projects and stuff like that. The officers taking out property, throwing in trash trucks. Something's going to happen. I'm in. I hope the council's in. And I could speak to Rick Harrison on the side. He's having ideas. I'm taking them to the mayor's office. And I also challenged mayor during Grand Prix to put up his money for one person, one person concerned and one person take him off the street for one night. I got $10 in my pocket right now. Out of it. Anybody else want to put in? I got a thank you very much. That's the one person of the street. I got $10 on it. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to acknowledge the. Eloquence and power of the community tonight coming forward. You know, we really don't know each other very well. And this is one way we get to understand that we really have a lot of really heartfelt and powerful voices, really articulate. And it's just really humbling. Thank you, neighbors. I just want to say that increasingly I wrote this down. Increasingly, our community members are becoming homeless as a consequence of systemic failings, not personal ones. Oh. This is an attempt to make a decision as a community to acknowledge that we have failed to make the right the right decisions regarding the people who live here. Now, as that gentleman said, you know, we have. Thank you very much, residents. That's it. I just want to make one more final point. I'm sorry, I had 3 minutes. The connection between private for profit development and I higher number of what constitute affordability and and no rent control and low wages , you know, is is our responsibility. Just to thank you very much. Thank you. Karen retired, representing the Long Beach Gray Panthers tonight. We're a strong advocate for moving this initiative forward. I have been homeless. I was homeless for three months because my boyfriend broke up with me on a Saturday night. And when you can have no access to services after midnight. I don't want anybody to have to experience and go through that. We've seen a number of women come up here and talk about homelessness. One of the fastest growing segments of the homeless population are women. I worked hard all my life. I've had a job since the time I was 20. I make 1430 $2 a month in Social Security. I'm one of the lucky ones. I have subsidized affordable housing. Very few people in our community have that advantage with my little salary. If people would give up to two Starbucks trips a month, I can afford $7 a month and I'm willing to put more than that in. I think the community is willing to step up. The council should be, too. Thank you very much. That's. Okay. Could could I have these names come up with Dooley, Lee Smith, Christian? Those individuals, please come up. Julie Lee Smith and Christian. All of those individuals spoke. Duly. Lee Smith and Christiansen. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I can't do that. Good evening, Council. I'm Nina Dooley. I work at Linc Housing and I'm also a board member at SCAMP Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing. We know it's more expensive to pay for city and health services for people who are living on the street. Having local. Dollars invested in affordable housing allows builders. Like link to score points to leverage the larger sources of money from the county, the state and also federal sources. We need to show that our. Own city. Is willing to invest. Please use your common sense. Have compassion. Move this forward and put the housing bond on the ballot and let the people of Long Beach decide. Thank you. Good evening. My name is James. I'm not signed up to speak, but I have a solution for the problem. James. Excuse me, sir. Yes? If you haven't said no to speak, you will not be able to speak. Know this. And that's. That's just to give you an end. Like you have to sign up to speak. Yes. But you're turning the solution down. Okay, well, thank you. Okay. Larson. Larson here. 3000. Excuse me. Yeah, go ahead, sir. Good evening, counsel. Happy New Year's. My name's Ray Lawson of the Carpenters Union Local 562. We believe we live here. We work here like my carpenter, brothers and sisters. Stand up. We support the passing of this bar. I just want to tell you the story of one of our apprentices, Kevin Smith. He lives right here in Long Beach. He's apprentice. He got out of prison. He went to the Brother's Keeper program. He was able to get training and get placed. He worked in Long Beach Community College on a renovation project there. He also worked on building this beautiful building here with some of our subcontractors. And we believe that if he lived here, you should you should be able to work here. And a new project is coming up. Apprentices should be able to work on these new housing projects that are coming up, and they will be able to afford to live in those projects once completed. So that's what we believe in training a workforce, a local workforce here that can work for the future and building up Long Beach. Thank you very much. Oh. It's Christmas in here. Was she okay? Excuse me. She's already spoken to Matthew. And Lee Smith. Closely. And Stephen Smith. Either one of those individuals. So how carelessly here? I don't have any objections. To the idea of integrating some affordable housing into our neighborhoods. It does matter to me how it's done. We need to have community meetings. People care about zoning and it's important to get this right to practice transparency and inclusiveness. The city has much homework to do before putting out a bond measure. Please delay this item and require that a study be conducted with those that work with the homeless, asking them to make recommendations and outline a plan that has some. Chance of helping helping those in need. Well, homelessness and affordable housing are key issues in the city. The suggestion to combine the two topics under one bond. Measure with the goal of treating. Both as if they are driven by the same forces. Doesn't work. We interviewed some people that run homeless facilities and also a social worker. And one of the things they said. None of them, none of the three we interviewed believed the homeless problem was driven by a housing issue or that I. Don't blame you guys later. Or that it would be solved or that it would. Be solved. Improving housing. Thank you so much. Okay. All right. My name is Arthur Jordan. I've been homeless most of my life since I was young. You know, honestly, I believe that, you know, there's always a way out. There's plenty of opportunities. I think mostly it's just right now it's a lot of overpopulation going on. There's not a lot of buildings people can live in. So honestly, I feel like maybe if we could, um, you know, just fund some more programs that would, uh, you know, help the people that I would say not really in a, in a major difficulty, but just mostly in a, in a situation to where, you know, they could make a better life. And that's, you know, I think it's a lot it's a difference of some people right now. They don't really want somewhere to live. They rather live with family members or some would rather live on the street. You know, it really just depends, uh, mentally. So, you know, I don't really think that people should just discourage the homeless, but I feel like we should just all encourage them to. To want to be better. That's all. Thank you so much. Okay. I'm just. Please, that. Okay. Michael Maslin, new Milton Gonzalez. Oh, okay. Wayne has always spoken whenever he spoke. Sharlene. Wayne, please come up. As the Stefano. Venezuela's. Janette. Barbara, please come up. Gregory Moore. And now you. You can go extra. Good evening, Mr. Vice Mayor. Council members. My name is Michael Massey. I'm the chief development officer for Jamboree Housing Corporation, a statewide nonprofit, affordable housing developer. Congratulations to the council for considering this and voting yes on this. By voting yes on this year, recognizing that economic development depends on having housing for workers across the economic strata. That homelessness costs society $100,000 per person per year. And for the most profoundly troubled of the of the homeless population. The top 10%, if you will. It's the cost is $400,000 per person per year. By taking a measure like this. You're recognizing that the city of Long Beach cares about those people and is willing to make the effort to provide the appropriate housing and to compete for the leveraging of the other sources of funding that are needed to be gathered in order to make an affordable housing development possible. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next. Good evening, council members. I want to thank Rex. Richardson for bringing. This proposal. You pronounce. Your name. Please. My name is Charlene when I live in District seven. I'm here tonight representing the League of Women Voters of the Long Beach area. The league supports the use of private and public funds for facilities to provide. Housing to people who. Are experiencing homelessness. In Long Beach. We recognize that all levels of government must address the underlying causes of homelessness and the means of preventing it. We are here today to advocate for affordable housing, for those capable of independent living and supportive housing for those that need job. Services. And psychological counseling on site. We need all individuals to be in housing, seniors, students, low income homes and homelessness. Thank you. Hi. My name's Stephanie and I'm from District four. I'm here to talk about young people right now. Young people. It's almost a joke that none of us can afford housing and we have to live with our parents. And I'm lucky enough to be able to live with my parent. But a lot of LGBTQ youth are not welcome in their homes and are thrown out on the street, don't have any mental health resources and fall into addiction. They deserve homes, respect and care. So please consider supporting LGBTQ youth in your vote. Thank you. Bismillah Rahim. In the name of God, the most merciful and most compassionate. I am engineer Mohammed Banat. I used to live in Long Beach here. I am here on behalf of all the people who are poor and needy and homeless people instead of Long Beach to support this resolution. I believe deep in my heart that $298 million is not good enough to tackle this big challenge. Heads on to end homelessness in cities as great as Long Beach, but it's as good as a start, and we need to start at some point. We really need to find enough courage to help families. They are homeless now and prevent more families falling victims to join the long line of homelessness due to the fact of higher. And lower minimum wage. Don't. Good evening. Mayor Garcia, council members. My name is Jeanette Barrera, and I'm a candidate here for the second district for city council. I have been practicing mental health and social work for the past four years in education for ten here in the city servicing primary. Mary, send us your district and Rex Richardson's district. Thousands of hours of me working on the streets have been designated in those districts. Specifically, you cannot treat mental health if you cannot have your basic needs met, and that is housing. It is this working experience that I have had working here in the city of Long Beach and is why I'm standing before you as a candidate. So I encourage all of you to vote on this bill because it is crucial for us to move forward. And I'd like to thank the young woman who shared her story, mentioning that she was from foster youth and how difficult it was for her to find housing, because that is specifically the group that I work closely with. And how do you expect people who are transitioning from housing, who are young to afford 1690 dollars for a one bedroom apartment? Thank you. Thank you. Before before Mr. Moore speaks. Let me just get the next group of folks to come up. Danielle Curtis, Brian Russell, Marla Roach, Melody Ozuna and Ron Miller. In that order. Danielle Curtis. Brian Russell. Marla Roach. Melody Ozuna and Ron Miller could please line up. And then we'll have Mr. Moore speak. Okay. Before I begin my time, is Councilmember Andrews around? Because actually my remarks are specifically to him. You know, I think he may have just stepped out for. Okay, can I can I let some other people go and then come back and play when he comes back? Thank you. I guess the milkman. Good evening. My name is Daniel Curtis. I am a lifelong city resident. I have personally faced homelessness. I am not mentally ill or drug addicted, but I have a loved. One who is. And I'm not here for me. I'm here for. Him. I wish to voice my support for. I don't care if it's bonds or taxes, whatever it takes, whatever it takes, because he deserves. A home, just like you and I do. I think we need. To establish in order to make this supportive housing measure work, we need to establish year round supportive services. Not just building construction. Those services should include intervention for addiction and serious mental illness. I also. Believe we need to increase our Long Beach Police Department Quality of life team and our Lombard. Fire Department heart team to be able to provide response, intervention and services around the. Clock because homelessness doesn't just happen during regular business hours. I think that would free up our civil services to. Focus on the most serious calls that we have. I ask that the city address co-occurring issues of addiction and serious mental illness when considering homelessness and how to help them. I ask that we set up our most vulnerable residents for success and not failure. Thank you very much. The next speaker, please. Brian Russell. Right here? Nope. Mala. Mala. No melody. Okay. Please come forward. Good evening. My name is Melody Osuna. I am privileged to be a homeowner in Councilmember Austin's district. I'm also an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. I run a medical legal partnership here in Long Beach. It's a county run facility over on 14th and Chestnut. As legal aid attorney, many of my clients would benefit from this housing. Regularly, I meet with folks who are on the verge of homelessness because I'm at a health health care facility. Many of my clients are often injured, and because of the injury, they lose out on work that results in a loss of income. And for those who are rent burdened, that means that that loss of paycheck means they can't afford rent. This type of housing could be the difference between keeping these folks housed or having them fall into homelessness. Supportive housing services are 43% cheaper than keeping someone outside. Thank you. If you. I know it was. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. I'm Ron Miller, executive secretary of the L.A. Orange County Building Trades. Ron, I got to say that I work downtown L.A. every morning, and as I'm going down first Street at six in the morning, there's two blocks of tents right on the sidewalk. And I can tell you that the building trades affiliates and the Carpenters, we stood up on Triple H and Measure H for the county. We're starting to see the fruits of our labor there. They're cutting ribbons on new affordable housing units in the city of L.A. but it's too late. You guys have an opportunity to get ahead of this? I think you've got a couple thousand on the street. You got 6% of your community college population that are homeless. This thing should be looked at just like a school bond. It's going to reduce crime. It's going to maintain your property values. It's going to help clean your community up. And you guys need to get ahead of it. So let's let's take the step. Let's not wait another five years and continue to make the sausage. Let's do something. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Moore, if. You want, I'll just. I'll call you. I'll just call you at the end. Okay? Okay. Speakers will be Alex Flores, Linda moran, Martin Gravelle, James Shepherd, Rene Castro and Alan Greenly. In that order. Alex Flores. Linda moran. Martin Gravelle James. Or. Or maybe it's. Hi, Ms.. I'm sorry if I don't correct René Castro and Alan Greenly. Thank you. Good evening, counsel. My name is Alex Flores, and I'm an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of L.A. The Legal Aid Foundation helps low income tenants and a variety of clients all throughout L.A. County, especially in our office here in Long Beach. While a variety of clients come through our doors with many different issues, all of them have the same problem. And that is affordable housing or lack of affordable housing. The problem is that most of these of these tenants are just one paycheck, illness, rent, increase or emergency away from facing homelessness. The problem isn't that there actually isn't the apartment out there. The problem is that they're not affordable. So actually allowing the residents of the city to look at the opportunity to fund affordable housing will help our clients in Long Beach greatly. Thank you. Thank you so much. Get it. Mr. Mayor, my name is Rene Castro. Nice to see everyone. I'm a resident of the third district and I work first century housing. We run the villages at Cambria. As you all know, we provide housing. We're located in the seventh District for 1500 formerly homeless residents, including 800 veterans, 400 children and the rest families. I'm very pleased and honored tonight to introduce one of our residents, Thomas Bias. Thomas is a veteran Army veteran. He served in Vietnam, Vietnam era Special Forces, and he's one of our residents. He's going to be housed in anchor place. I just want to echo what Sunni Lee Cheng said a little bit earlier. The anchor place is a $54 million project. The capital stack on that was 12 different sources. And that that takes our developers a lot of time to find all that capital with this kind of investment the city is doing. We can make a huge difference in terms of homelessness in the city. So thank you so much for your time. Thank you so much. Thank you to. Thank you. Let me just make sure I know we had some is is Linda Brandt here? Is. Martin You're. MARTIN okay, James? James SEVERANCE Yes. And then is that Alan behind James before Mr. Chairman, before you go, then I'll have the next few speakers also line up. That'll be Maria Lopez, Molina, Flores, Sullivan, Lewis and Mike Murchison in that order. So we'll have James Shefford, Alan Greenlee, Maria Lopez Molina, Flores, Sullivan Lewis and then Mike Murchison. Thank you, please. Hi. Good evening. City Council and the mayor. First of all, I'm a product of affordable housing. I was on the streets down in Skid Row. I slept in those dens for many years and got the opportunity to move to Long Beach when the century villages of Cabrillo housing units opened up. That was for the Family comes 2008th December 2008. And one thing I did I have learned about homelessness. Is this. That if you get someone else, they can be able to think and be. Able to. Do things for. Others. And I'm a firm believer of paying it forward. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, and members of the City Council. My name is Alan Greenspan, the executive executive director of the Southern California Association of Nonprofit Housing, a regional housing advocacy organization that represents developers like Linc and Century and Jamboree, who you've heard from tonight. I'd like to express my appreciation for the leadership, Mayor Garcia and Councilmember Richardson, on this issue. And I thought tonight that I would try to invite some. Additional voters and constituents in. The room by way of sharing my way of sharing with you some information from a recent poll that we conducted at the end of the year last year. Homelessness is the number one issue in the front of the minds of voters today across the state of California. And housing affordability is number three. 89% of those that we polled considered homelessness to be an extremely important issue in our state and in fact felt that local and state governments should do something about it. I hope that you guys will consider these findings as you think about this important vote. And I request that you approve them. Thank you very much. And thank you. Yes. Good evening. My name is Maria Lopez. I'm a proud one day resident. And also, thank you for supporting the item, Mary and Rex. Also my thank you to you. My name. My name is Maria, obviously. I live in two blocks, probably away from here. And wow, has this area developed? D one has developed its fair share of affordable housing, to say the least. Right. And so we are here in support for not just affordable housing in certain areas, but throughout all the city. Right. We want to make sure that folks are not just included in certain areas of our city, but in all parts of our city inclusively. Throughout this whole past year, we talked about random protection as rent control. And the first thing that always came up, what's build more, build more, build more. So congratulations. Let's build more. Make sure this passes tonight. Thank you. Thank you. I might have Mr.. Mr. Moore speak. I know that he couldn't speak earlier, and so I'll let him come up. Yeah. Thank you, Vice Mayor Andrews, I'm going to direct my comments directly to you. Originally, you were a co-sponsor of this measure, and I gather you took your name off of it because you heard from some of your constituents who were against paying the extra, again, the median $7 a month or whatever it is to fund to help the most vulnerable people in our society. I think you're where you were coming from in co-sponsor this bill. You were in the right place. And I just want to emphasize that, again, tonight's vote is not about putting this on the ballot. It's about having the city attorney prepare the possibility of putting on the ballot. And I think that the right thing to do at this point is to let it go forward. I'd like to see us on the ballot and let your constituents decide directly. The citizens of long. We decide directly whether we want to pay that $7 a month median to help these vulnerable people. So I please urge and I urge all of you to vote in favor of this at this juncture. Very easy call. Thank you. Thank you. And then just give me 1/2. Just I'm caught up here on the speaker. So I is is this so is this is is Melina Flores here? I called. Okay. No. Okay. So then. Well, so then before before Mr. Lewis speaks. So we have Sullivan. Lewis, Michael Jackson. Believe it, says Muhammad, but not. And Phil Hawkins. I'm sorry. Okay. MUHAMMAD But not okay. So we'll have Sullivan, Lewis, Michael Jackson, Phil Hopkins and then Carina Rodriguez will be the next speakers. If you can, please line up. Yes. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and council members. I just want to say add a little bit of clarity. You know. Homelessness is a huge issue, obviously, and it's a no brainer that we should. Support this measure. But what I want. To what I want to say is let's not spend a whole lot. Of time meeting about it and doing surveys and research, because there are hundreds of organizations out. Here that have already done that work. Right. So in an effort to get things done faster, can we agree to. Work with those organizations closely and and bring more residents to the table? Because homelessness is a community problem. And while there are. A lot of credentials and accolades up here, I don't think you. All alone. Can solve this problem alone. And I don't expect you to. And so can you include us, the community. In in a more in-depth way throughout this process? Thank you very much. That's very good. Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Mike Murchison. I'm here on behalf of the small property owners of Long Beach, on behalf of the apartment association, on behalf of thousands of rental property owners. We want to see this item received and filed for the following reasons. We're concerned that 38% of the residents that have single family homes or owned rental properties wound up having to pay for this tax. When it gets on the ballot, assuming it passes, there's 38% on the backs of these. 38% will be paying this versus the 62% that don't pay for this. Secondly, the other thing that occurs to us is there's no guarantee and vice mayor, I've spoken to you about this before. When you're building low income housing, there's no guarantee that it's going to benefit only Long Beach residents, no guarantee of that. So there's a possibility that people from outside Long Beach that are homeless could benefit with low income housing. Finally, whether it while there's, you know, probably 200 plus people here tonight that are very passionate about the issue, I'd like to remind everybody that much like local elections here in Long Beach, that doesn't represent the Maine electorate. Thank you. Thank you, Nancy Baker. Hi. My name's Phil Hawkins. I'm with the Pacific Association of Realtors. And I want to talk to you about three items. A lot's been covered here tonight, but when I look at this item, I keep reading the agenda item and you know, this is going for affordable housing. But do you realize you're increasing the cost of housing to support affordable housing? So every house that has already been built here in the city of Long Beach is going to cost more to purchase or live in. Let that sink in a second, because, again, we're asking that current people that live in Long Beach pay more to help affordable housing. So you're pricing out the affordability of your current stock already. The other thing I want to mention is I don't like to do suggestions without a solution. I Googled today and I did some research. There's a program called No Place Like Home Program that the state of California has. They have over $2 billion ready for for applications. The city of Long Beach, to my knowledge, and I did some research, has not applied for any money. Thank you very much. Next ask. So I'm. Next. It's is. Kevin, Mike and Williamson. Are those individuals here? Arena Cavern, Mike Williams and Muhammad. Hi. My name is Kevin A and I'm here to support the bond on housing. So a lot of people are going to throw statistics out, but I'm going to stick with the heart of the issue. So to the councilman here and the councilwoman. I want to ask a rhetorical when you walk into a grocery store and you see a homeless person right. By the. Entrance or the type of person that looks him in the eye and recognizes their struggle, or the type of person just walks inside. Tackling the symptoms and not enough. We know the symptoms are and we treat them on the daily. There's a lot of people who run organizations here that tackle the symptoms with the little funds that they have. But this bond will go a long way in making sure that we tackle the catalysts of the problem. In closing, I want to end with a quote from our very own Rex Richardson. All the solutions to the housing crisis we've all talked about boil down to we need more capacity. This bond will help fund all of it. It's something we have to give the voters a shot at passing. Thank you very much. Next. Hi. My name's Mike Bowers. I'm a constituent of the first. Um, I'd like to thank Rex for introducing this bill. I know you endorsed Elizabeth Warren. I think she'd be proud of you for this. Wealth tax. Wealth tax. I think the deck was also great that you prepared. I think it really highlighted the struggle the city has been going through recently, as well as the the potential ballot initiative. It noted that five times this has been discussed by city council. Right. And since May 2017. I just want to say how many more homeless since May of 2017? Right. How many more have been raped on the streets? How many more have been assaulted on the streets since May of 2017? And most importantly, what will that DEC say in two years? Right. What will that say about your voting record and what you guys are doing here tonight? Okay. This is about community. This is about allowing the community to vote. This is about building a stronger and more equitable community for all. Just tonight in this room, you see support from renters, homeowners, union members, homeless community members, all standing in solidarity and support for this. Thank you. Thank you. It's clear and your voting record will be clear on this as well. Thank you. Hello. My name is William Hernandez, and I've been born and living here in Long Beach. I met Vice President Andrews a couple of days ago. A few days ago, actually. I actually mentioned to him about the homelessness situation. That we've had. For a very long time. And I saw this look in his eye, and it definitely, definitely felt like he he wanted to do something about it. And he stuck to his word, something he told me. And I told him that. I'm stick to my. Word as well. And I'm here today to show them. Um. Here. To the people here. They want a change about homelessness, say I. I mean, come on. This is only the room. You've got the whole city. Thank you. As Muhammadu. Very is. Okay. Or is there anyone who hasn't spoke, you know, that that's queued up to spoke. I mean, you speak. Okay. You signed up to speak. Okay. If you if you have, you can come up to my daughter and. Good evening. Your name? Frank Zambrano. My name is Frank Zambrano. I represent the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters. And I want to thank all of you for your for your hard work. And Councilman Richardson, great presentation. It was a great sense of understanding with all the numbers of the need for this. I don't have all the answers from the fixes or anything like that. But I can tell you to be able to to to attack what is what is here right now, which is homelessness. What we can't do is create jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. This project right here is going to create the opportunities for this homelessness, to be able to give them training, to give be able to train them with something that's going to carry them much above and beyond getting off the street. So I stand here in front of you in support of pushing this forward and and creating these opportunities for these homeless individuals. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hi. Barnaby Valderrama. Excuse me. The individual's going to come up now. Have you signed up to speak? Okay, fine. Come forward. So I am a resident of Lambie's fourth district and an employee of Link Housing, and I'm here to support this bond measure. I'm to tell you guys something you already know. Affordable housing and languages are very important to the well-being of the city. Affordable housing will give the homeless individuals access to improve their mental and physical health. And have access to jobs. And this will allow us to allow them to contribute significantly to the dynamic. Growth of this city. Housing is a human right. Thank you. So I just I know that I want to make sure that we have every one of the speakers list. But what I'll since I know we've have a few folks that have that weren't here. Let me just make sure. Is everyone here signed up on this on this list? Okay. So I think I have the other person in there at the end leading the that will be the last speaker. And then just please announce who you are at the start of this other. My name is. Ida Norbert. And I am a resident. Of District three. I'm super fortunate. I retired from. I was a building inspector in the city of. L.A. and I could figure out why people weren't. Building housing and in my methods, a little different. I work with private builders. We've we've built like 1100 units, and I'm actually building on my property in Long Beach. I drew my research and found out that I can put four units in the back of my house and they will be. Affordable units using the density bonus. And and. So it's. Going to take everything to. Tackle this problem. Okay. And I and I was homeless back in the nineties, and I, I am a. Product of those services that have to get to those people. I'm I'm a I'm the product. Of the services. And, and I was. Able to to become gainfully. Employed and become the kind of citizen I wanted to be. Thank you. Thank you. That's Nicholas. My name is Mohammed Hassan. I'm a citizen of District Two for about seven years now. I'm a homeowner. District two More than willing to pay high taxes for this cause. I support preparing the resolution because residents should have the opportunity to vote on whether they're willing to pay 20/5000 of a percent on the increasing value of their properties to invest in this city by giving back part of the gains they made to ensure hundreds of those priced out of their house housing due to rising rents temporarily without housing due to job loss or emergency expense. Students without sufficient financial aid and parental support. Youth in the LGBT community no longer welcome in their parents homes, individuals with mental and addiction related illnesses, and many others relegated to the streets through no fault of their own. Where a significant percent are likely to die can have a roof over their heads and services that help them back on their feet into work so that they can pay taxes and spend money to sell to stimulate the local economy and support the city. A yes vote would be a vote to invest in the city likely to save lives. Thank you very much. It's a significant return for the city. Thank you. It's good to be. Good evening. My name is Marlin Goodell. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, council members. I am a student of social work at Cal State Long Beach. I'm also a owner and I live in the District three and I've been privileged to live in this city for five years. I'm more than willing to pay my fair share of our our property to be able to give affordable housing just at the beginning of the year. My neighbor lost her home because she didn't have affordable housing after 15 years. Her rent a one bedroom, three, maybe 300 square feet in District three went up to $600. And I said, where are you going? And she said, I can't afford to live here anymore. So I'm hoping that you guys can support this because you guys have done so much already for the city. But we need a little more. And we need we need you guys to support us and let us the residents, the owners make that decision. As well. Thank you. Thank you. And and our last speaker, please. Hey, my name is McKayla, and I am a resident of the eighth district here in Long Beach. And I'm here with everyone. And I'm also a friend of as the venue in the back. She mentioned that a lot of people our age who have gone to school and no longer and cannot afford to live outside of our homes with our parents. Ah, I was actually just sent a meme while I was sitting there about a private hallway space for rent $650 a month. And that's just kind of the joke is $600 a month to live in a hallway. So that's kind of the situation that a lot of young people are living in right now. And I'm really glad that we're starting a conversation about how the city can provide affordable housing for people experiencing homelessness. But it would also be great. We could also start a conversation about how the Long Beach Police Department also treats people experiencing homelessness, because that's also a huge issue as well. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. That concludes public comment. We do have everyone queued up on the speakers. Just let me. I know, Councilor Richardson, did you want to Cuba any you were. There with your. Presentation and items. Obviously. Thank you to everyone to your comments. I encourage the city council to have a robust dialog and let's try to try to find a pathway forward tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is the second year of the motion councilwoman sunday has. I just want to say thank you to Councilmember Rex Richardson for inviting me to be on this and this item. As you know, I'm very, very excited to hopefully turn this over to our city staff so that they can bring our recommendation over. We have been looking for solutions to this crisis that we're in. We're in a homeless and affordable housing crisis, and we have been in it. And really what this is, is it could be a potential solution. And I think that just because of that, we owe it not only to ourselves here out on the dais, but we owe it to our community to at least look into it. So thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Sun has a Councilmember Turanga. Thank you. And I want to thank everybody who came out tonight on both sides of the issue. But mostly I will be voting for this. To say it upfront, direct. That's the way I like it. But you know, when we talk about what are the issues here, and the issue is basically letting the voter decide what they want. This is not an item tonight that we're going to vote on to say we're going to go forward with a bond. It's not to be very clear, and I think Councilman or Councilmember Richardson said that very clearly. And his presentation, by the way, was a great presentation. But the point is, is that it let the voter decide if they want to be taxed on a ban on a bond and an amount that's going to be very, very much affordable. Mr. Richardson mentioned about, you know, you can go out and buy one less latte that's seven bucks. There it is. There's your monthly contribution towards ending homelessness. So when we come to to how we're going to deal with this, this ban will also provide us with with a holistic approach on dealing with homelessness because it's been brought up. Homeless people are not only those who are addicted to drugs or who are alcoholics or who are mentally ill. We also have students, we have families, we have renters. We have people who are normal people like you and me, who, through some quirk in fate, become homeless. And we need to address that. And the issue is that we don't have enough housing stock in Long Beach to be able to deal with that. And we know that it's not only a language problem, it's a regional problem. We're dealing with it in L.A. as well. And I could tell you, you know, I'm proud of Long Beach. We've we've been able to deal with the homelessness issue here in Long Beach very well up to this point. But if we don't do something about it, we're going to be bad and it's going to get worse. And we want to avoid that. And not only that, if we don't go forward with it with this item to look into, get the research, get the financing back explained to us to help, to organize how we can move forward with this. It's going to be imposed on us. And we did this before with with the cannabis issue. As an example, we brought this to the city council. The citizens want to present a plan that was going to be very workable. It was voted down. What happened? It went out and we got people signatures and they put it on the ballot. And what presented on the ballot and it passed, by the way, came up a lot more severe than what the city council was proposing. Is that what we want? I don't think so. We want to get ahead of the curve on this. We need to get ahead of curve as a city council where we are the ones to determine what type of bond we want to put on the ballot and not have the county not have the state of California impose on us to tell us what we need to do in order to create affordable housing. So as I mentioned that right from the start, I'm going to be I'm going to be supporting this tonight. Well. Thank you. Next up, I have. Next up, I have Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Okay. Well, I want to thank my colleagues, Councilman Richardson and Councilwoman Van de House, for bringing this item. So. And I want to thank all the people that came out to support. And I know that in our office, we received, I think it was 168 emails from residents on this topic. So I'm grateful that everyone is engaged, and I think we all agree that both housing and homelessness are major issues of import for the city, each separately and absolutely deserve additional attention. Long Beach has recently. Undergone a major, very difficult process to update our land use land use element with the goal of creating more opportunities for housing development and incentives to do so. And in my opinion, in order for us to continue to develop housing and to incentivize affordable housing, we need to be looking very creatively as a city of how we how we work with developers to incentivize these new buildings and these new units. As we see throughout much of the city, new construction and new units being created. We know that more housing is needed as our residents and families grow and Long Beach continues to be an attractive place for people to live for the many reasons we highlight regularly. I believe we need to continue focusing on getting more housing built here in Long Beach, but I have major concerns, as do the residents in my district, about using property taxes to do so. We also all agree that homelessness is a pressing issue for Long Beach and for our residents. But I do not believe that a housing bond alone can solve the issue of homelessness, because the issue of homelessness is best addressed for a multifaceted approach that encompasses services and programs for the homeless population. Time and time again, we've seen that the best way to get help to those suffering from homelessness is through services and programs that address sometimes the root cause of the issues that may not be economic in nature. A bond like this would be strictly ineligible to be used for programs or services and would simply be only available for land and development related costs. And although the city of Long Beach continues to work to address homelessness, and Councilman Ranga mentioned very poignantly that we are doing a great deal in this effort and we are, in fact one of the leading cities in successfully addressing this issue. We know that we have so much more to do. We know that the residents of the city of L.A. passed a housing bond in 2016, and three years later it was announced. And many of you have mentioned that the first units were built, and that's 40 something units. Three years later, if we are looking to rapidly create housing, too many segments of our population ranging from extremely low income all the way to moderate income workforce housing. Then a bond would seem to be a very slow way of approaching this goal and it would be an uncertain way of approaching it, since we do not have a sense of what development costs or the housing market may look like four or five years from now. Housing and homelessness are both important topics, but they are separate topics. But we should be careful not to make residents think those problems can be solved with a single new car based upon property owners alone. I'm going to be making a substitute motion at this time to ask city staff to research the alternative funding sources that are available to the city through state and federal dollars that can mitigate the housing costs that we have anticipated needing. I think before we go to the property tax option, before we ask property owners to pay more, we should find out what is available to us and whether what is available to us will mitigate what property owners would have to pay. My office and I have been involved for the last week and researching different state and federal funding options. We have identified 12 different state funds, which my office is happy to work with city staff on, that we can tap into to at least mitigate the total need before we ask the city attorney to put in place language that would be voted on or a ballot measure, which is what we're doing today. So we can say over and over again that we're not going to put this on the ballot tonight. It's just misleading. What we would be asking the city attorney to do is to prepare language for submission as a ballot proposal. So I think putting in that process into motion without knowing exactly how much money we have access to and how much money we're still short on is really unfair to property owners. Let's find out how much we actually need before we start asking people to buy less. Because I got it, guys. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councilwoman. By running out of time, I don't have a. Yeah, no, no. Your guys. I got the timer. Thank you very much. Councilman, your time's up. If you want to recue, please, please do so. Okay. But I believe, just to clarify, there was a substitute motion that was made. And, Councilman, just if I can clarify, the substitute motion was to have city staff look at state and federal options, at options to look at funding, housing affordability and and affordable housing as it relates to all the all the categories and bring that back to council before looking at any property tax bond that I get to that I get it. Okay, guys, I'm just I've got to. Guys, thank you very much, people. Folks, I have to get the meeting going. So that was the that was the most substantive motion that was made. There is a second on the substitute motion councilmember super now councilor Supernanny comments. Yes. Thank you. First, just a point of order. We sat here and listened very patiently day everyone since 7 p.m. so I just asked that that respect be returned. Thank you. I agree with Councilwoman Price's point, and my job is to represent the residents of the Fourth Council District. And it's not that they oppose this, that they it's that they oppose this in overwhelming numbers. And I'm we were at like 97, 98% opposition. We have one person here standing up now. So let's drop it down to 95%. Still, we haven't had anything with with that type of opposition that I can remember in the four and a half years on council. I think the goals are noble. I think we're all on board for the goals. But I agree with Councilman Price that this item as written, it's you can see it right up there on the wall. It says a ballot for voters to consider. So with that, I'm happy to second the motion. And thank you so that there's a there's a substitute motion on the floor. Everyone, please. I got we got to have the council discussion now. So please, it's got I have a long list of folks that want to speak their so councilman price councilman to point out the motions on the floor. Next up is Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I want to first state that in building on what Councilwoman Pryce said, there are people in my district today whose housing cost associated with their property taxes would go up 17%. And these are seniors who live on a fixed income. And I know that that doesn't mitigate the discussion that you had, that they've built wealth in the equity of their home, but they're not trying to use that equity. There are seniors who bought their homes long time ago. Their property taxes are at a certain amount, and an additional $250 a year on their current assessed value would be a 17% increase for individuals whose current Social Security check is $662 a month. And so we don't want to push them out of their home. I want to I want to talk a little bit about who the true heroes are. I hope that those of you who respect Justin and Megan Kerr and Andy and the others know that I've taken meetings, I've provided feedback. And I think it's important that the feedback of the Fifth District that I receive is considered, because in my election we had a 40% voter turnout. And I think that it's important that we talk about not just an exciting thing that we can all get behind, but what could pass, and are we at a point where we know? Second, I want to talk about a real hero, Indi Andrews, and a lot of the talks I've had over the last week, a lot of people tell me where does D stand? Because he's the one who gives out the turkeys at Thanksgiving. He's the one that brings toys to the poor. He's the one who protected us and takes the. Portable housing, and DE is the one who knows better than most that the people who live in his district are really, really strapped with rental costs, and that a lot of times property owners will pass that cost on to them and they cannot afford that. So when he came to me in July and asked for a $50,000 budget item to do a study, it was put in the budget and the champions that voted on that were Al Austin and Suzy Price. They're the Budget Oversight Committee that put aside the 50,000 for the study that you're kind of asking for. The study that you're asking for does not include the robustness of the original 20th August 2018 item, and someone commented on how this is similar to marijuana. We really need to follow the course that we already started in August 2018. Changing direction now is not the answer. And for those reasons, I hope that my colleagues, especially on the Bossie and those who have done more for homeless than anyone else. I hope that each and every one of you respect us enough to keep the dialog honest and support, receive and file and maintain the course. We started thinking. Substitute. Substitute motion. Okay. Hold on a sec. So there's a substitute substitute motion. I just want to clarify is. The substitute substitute is to receive and file the report, the agenda item. Okay. So just to clarify, we have a substitute substitute, which is to receive and file the agenda item, which is just to basically receive the report today. Then there's a substitute motion, which is Councilman Price's motion, which is to do a study on federal and on state opportunities to look at funding. And then there's the original motion which Smith made by Councilmember Richardson, which has been read into the record. Mr. City Attorney. That's correct. Okay. Just want to make sure that the council is clear on where we're at. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. I'm going to try to speak quickly because I have a lot to say, especially after hearing from my colleagues. First of all, thank you, everybody, for coming out. I personally have been coming to counsel for over ten years with many of you in this room asking for the city to put aside funding for housing. This city, we have done a lot. We have three heart teams. We have quality of life officers, a multi-service center, clean teams. We are building we are opening a winter shelter. We are building a year round shelter. We provide vouchers and other services, which is wonderful, but we have not once put any money significant enough to put into building housing. Homelessness is the one issue. Homelessness is the one issue where the answer to the problem is in the name. They are homeless. They need homes. When we sit here and act like that's not the issue, we are doing something that is either hiding the ball. It's acting like we don't know what the left hand is doing different from the right, or it's simply a simple word called hypocritical that says that we want to do one thing, but we're going to do something else. But this vote, again, is not about how much money and how many houses in all of those questions. This vote is about democracy. This vote is about saying that the voters deserve the opportunity to vote on this. And if they vote it down, then that's fine. But right now, I know that the polls I've done in my district, it's 80 and 90% of people that want housing and they want services for seniors. Our arena numbers right now are close to 3000 units that need to be developed in Long Beach alone, 3000. We heard from developers that were here today that said that they sometimes have to put together 12 different funding sources to build something. We've heard from developers here, we've heard from our our health department that when Long Beach puts money up, we get more money. We've also heard that it could cost upwards to $100,000 a year for one person to be on the street. So we know that $7 a month is not too much because those people that call my office and send me photos of people that are homeless in my community. They don't want to spend any more money. But the news is you're spending more money today than you would if we had a bond measure. So I have a couple of. I have a couple of questions that I'm sure I'll have to queue up again because I normally run out of time. You know, I tell my colleagues, I know that sometimes we get on different sides and cannabis was mentioned. Hotels can be mentioned. We consistently drop the ball and waste a lot of money and a lot of energy dealing with politics instead of doing what we know is right. I've taken a vote before. I've taken a vote before. That didn't let me sleep at night. And so I hope that as we go through the process tonight, that you think about going home and being able to put your head on a pillow, being able to actually sleep because you did the right thing. So allowing this to go to the voters is absolutely the right thing. Couple comments. There was a comment mentioned by merchants and that said that there was no way that we could guarantee that this bond money would be used for Long Beach residents. Someone on staff able to answer that question for me. So, Councilmember, we understand the proposal that Councilmember Richardson has would be a dedicated funding source for affordable housing. So under California law, that would be all housing bonds need two thirds. That would be dedicated. It would go into only affordable housing. And there's only certain uses that it could be that it could fund couldn't fund services, it would fund housing, construction, the things that are listed in the item. It's my understanding that it could fund development, but there were certain types of wraparound services that it could fund as well, that it wasn't only development. That's something that we've heard. We don't we haven't reached that point yet where we know exactly what services could or could not do. Our initial scan is that it really is for the construction and the land acquisition. But if you're asking us tonight, what you would be doing is asking us to bring those answers back of exactly specificity, how much we could spend, what we could spend it on, what we couldn't. We've got a high level overview at this point. We would be doing additional deep dove. And it's also my understanding that we could put in there that the suggested conversation was that seniors would be able to go down to the registrar's office and they would be able to do an opt out. That's the request in the item right now. We would take that and research that and bring back, you know, how that would work and what the what that would be. And we need to know the answer to that question. Yes. That's my understanding from the research that I've done as well. I think that I look forward to hearing the rest of the conversations. I want to remind folks that our health department also reminds us that Housing First is a model that we as a city say that we support. And while we've done everything else, we haven't done a Housing First model to the fullest extent because we haven't built housing. Ow! Ow, ow, ow. Thank you, guys. We're going to think. I'm going to. I'm going to. So, Councilmember, you want to. You're going to just cue back up. Okay. So customer appearances queued back up. Let me move on to Councilmember Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank my council member for starting the New Year. All right. We are certainly talking about the most important issue in front of our city. And I'm going to just say that that while I support affordable housing and building supportable housing, more affordable housing in the city, I'm not sure that this is the only solution. And I think looking at alternatives to to to to to to building and getting revenue that that may be available to us is something that we need to look at first. I have talked to many of my constituents over the last couple of weeks about this particular matter. And many folks are very, very overburdened. They feel overburdened with taxes. I'm going to run down a list of of actions that we have taken as a city, as a county, as voters over the last four years. Right now, measure a L.A. County parks, which is a parcel tax measure M L.A. County Transportation, which is a sales tax measure. WW was the L.A. County Water Tax, which is a partial tax measure. A local here, Long Beach was a public safety and infrastructure sales tax measure. E of Columbus Unified School District was a property tax measure k. Let me see if I school district was also a property tax. And these are ongoing revenue sources that we are dealing with right now, a measure elbphilharmonie city college. These are all bond measures that have been passed within the last four years. And I would just say most of these these measures are are still underway. They're still generating revenue. They're still creating jobs. And we have not yet met our obligations completely to the voters on these particular measures. In 2017th December 2017, the Trump tax plan was also passed, which capped what a homeowner can write off of their home at $10,000. For a lot of folks who may not understand that, but for many of the homeowners in my district who I represent, that created an additional tax burden on them. Right. And so this is not as simple as, you know, I don't know if it was $0.84 or, you know, $7 a month. This is compounded on a lot of other issues. And from what I'm hearing from a lot of our our our our my constituents is that, you know, they want to help. They want to do more. I think there's opportunities for us to do more. I like to look at those options a little further. And so I'm not completely comfortable moving forward with the with proposed here this evening, the $50,000. I do want to ask staff we did create a fund in the appropriation and if we're 19 to initiate work on housing related homeless services list in early 2019. And I'm Mister City Manager. What specifically has been accomplished with that $50,000 from 2019 and how much remains? Yes. So that $50,000, we had a list of next steps when we talked about this issue last at the council in August of 2018. And it was kind of a large you know, if you wanted to move forward, we there were some recommendations on how to how to do that. The council at that time gave us about $50,000. So what we used a portion of it for was to do some additional analysis with our bond counsel to understand some of the mechanisms, to understand how a bond would work and how, you know, could be could be used. So we have some of that good data that we would use if you want to move forward tonight. And we have about we use about 15,000 of that. So we have about $35,000 left. But to me, that that the direction was already given when we made that appropriation to study this and understand what could be done. As it stands today, we we don't have a plan. Is that correct? I'm not sure I'm following the question. So when we appropriated the $50,000 that was given to staff to study this issue. Correct. So the next steps that were talked about on April or in August were a couple of things. I'll just read them for the record. Review measures passed and proposed in other cities, which we've done. We've used structures for broad based outreach to partners in the community, tie in strategies with the Everyone Home Task Force recommendations, develop a list of potential funding categories in highest need based on outreach. Educate the community on need, on what can be accomplished, and set aside resources. And then so the $50,000 is what was set aside. That is a pretty big work plan. And so we started with what we could, which is the understanding other cities. We frankly needed kind of this discussion for to really jump into this and really go and do all the rest of that for you to tell us, like get going and actually do this. So that's really what the direction is tonight. So we've started. We've got a good sense, but what you're asking us to do in the agenda item tonight is bring back resolution language, but also then really understand and do a deeper dove on all of the recommendations, how much would be funded in each category and bring that back to you as well as some of the other questions about debt burden and what this would mean for for the city. Thank you. I think it counts. I know that time's up, but when you back up, you're welcome to as well. Our councilwoman and the house. Hi. I'm. Again, one of the things that we're asking tonight is to just, you know, bring back a plan, a solution. I think that we've been trying to find solutions for affordable housing and homelessness for a very long time. One of the things that was excluded from from the downtown plan was the inclusionary housing. Another thing that we've been trying to find solution for is is that like, for example, we brought forward the tenant relocation was which was repealed. So I think that we need to really move forward on this item, with all due respect to what my colleagues are saying. I think that, you know, this is the way to find those solutions and to really lay out a plan on how we address affordable housing and homelessness in our city. And the reason that I'm the most passionate about these two items is because I represent the first District and the first District. It is so impacted by one. We have the most affordable units in the district right now. And then any other district, I would say. But not only that, we also have even the greatest need for affordable housing in the First District. And so that's why I'm so passionate about this, because we need this in the first District, but not only in the first District. We need to be fair and bring all that to all our districts. And if we don't go forward with this plan, I think that we are leading our not only our our community down, but our city down. And as a city officials, as elected city officials, we really, really need to to move forward and really find some positive solutions that will help us move this plan forward. And I think that that's what this this issue is doing. If we pass this. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Mango. Thank you. I want to be very respectful of Mary. I know that you weren't here. A part of the dialog in August. The motion being brought forward by Councilmember Richardson is actually stating what we decided in August. To look at all types of solutions is not the direction we want to go anymore. We now want to go with a housing bond. It's it's refocusing from a all solutions approach to a this is the solution. Furthermore, I feel as though as enumerated by acting city manager Modica the current direction, if everyone votes yes with what is on the floor right now, will bring back and study those funding categories, as was outlined in the original motion made in August. And furthermore. I'm sorry. I've been sick. So just give me 1/2. And furthermore. There are alternatives and other solutions that may have greater support, because one of the things we don't want to do is put forward an item that does not pass. And so for that reason, I hope that my colleagues will support the item on the floor to continue down the path of looking for the most solutions and bring back the funding categories and see all alternatives that are that are possible. And there was. Mr. Monica, you said we needed more direction. And I feel that that's not a great statement, because there was a memo that came out from Mr. Gross's office that outlined the 50,000 and the direction. And so I felt as though I feel as though if there was a concern from staff that they did not have enough information, perhaps that should have come to us before today. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So. Yeah, I want to just. You know, in listening to my colleagues, I completely you know, I get it. You get you got concerns. And, you know, the thing about my presentation, I started off by saying, let's have a conversation. There's been two motions before we were able to have some exchange. So I want to have a little bit of exchange. So the first point is there's no way to sneak this by the city council. The first vote needs a majority of city council to give direction to explore this. Craft language. Crafting language is key because it allows us to test the language in test. Your last point Council about viability. The initial two polls were conducted. A number of things were you know, the city conducted a poll two years ago on this and the ban was the most popular. You know, we conducted a number of other polls. This had enough support to have this question. The next step is to test language and actually evaluate real impact. That's the next step to make a real decision. The second step requires two thirds of the city council to put this on, and it's six votes. There is no way to sneak this in. If we somehow get one more council member to support this, it will need a supermajority of this council. There is no threat with doing the research on this motion because at the end of the day you will need a plurality major. You will need. A majority of a two thirds majority of the council members to adopt this and send it to the voters. So there's no there's no sneaking this by you. I didn't make I got my time. There's no sneaking by by the council. That's what we're doing. And so, you know, so I get it. You know, we want to you know, what's in front of us actually does make sense. The other thing is not a lot of conversation in the public and, you know, one side and the other and I get it is, you know, it's 2020. This is a decision point. This is why we should put it in front of the public to make the decision. That's our responsibility, not to make decision for people, especially in an election year, on something that is controversial. We should put it forward for consideration or at least take the step to do so. You know, there were there was a there was a constant question about no specifics, false bonds or more specific than any other measure. Bonds have to specifically outline the use of these funds in the next step should this motion move forward, is to actually take the next step on further specifying the details of the bond so you get more specificity. There was a statement about whether this fund, these funds can be used for Long Beach residents. Our current approach of asking the county in the state to you to be our solution, the county, the state has more strings. They have limitations on how those dollars can be used. I toured the shelter in Anaheim. It was funded by the city of Anaheim, their local tax dollars, and therefore that shelter is for the Anaheim homeless population. And if another city wants their homeless population to come in, they have to pay. They have to pay for their own homeless. What I'm saying is our current strategy of taking drawing down dollars from other communities exposes us to taking on other communities homeless. That's what people are actually saying. We have to pay to have the additional protection that all people want to protect their neighborhoods. That's that's smart. We have to consider that for our own public safety needs and to be able to have a manageable homeless population, that just makes sense. Someone said we already pay for these two major AIDS. Two points measure AIDS funds, services. People said this is only infrastructure. Yes, because we have a funding source on services, we need to build the capacity, heart infrastructure capacity. Here's the bonus, too, that other communities that have passed the local measure have leverage that to bring down other measure additional measure dollars and leverage. I think Sonny made a made a strong point a point about this small amount packs a major punch. Additionally, we don't even pay into measure H, we pay in them. It's a sales tax, not a property tax. And we don't pay it because we have our sales tax cap in Long Beach. So we receive millions of dollars annually. We have not paid into Measure H. Mr. MODICA, can you confirm this? So people know that this is the truth. Mr. Mogaji. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that question? Measure H, L.A. County, major, east of the city of Long Beach. Our sales tax include a contribution to measure H. So currently we do not pay into measure H. So we are currently at our cap for sales tax and so that money then is collected by the city. But we do not currently pay into measure. H now under. Now we will pay into it a little bit for a couple of years given whatever the outcome of the vote on Measure A's, that's that's different. But currently we receive the funding we don't contributing. Right now Mommy's doesn't pay any money into the into homelessness and affordable housing production of local dollars. We don't do that. So that's a myth. Councilman Durango, you mentioned one lottery per person. I just want to be clear and I kind of don't like when people do the latte thing. I said it. You said it is not one per person is one per household per month, meaning just one person in a household, not one . Councilwoman Price, I understand your concerns. I understand the social cost of of, you know, doing something that maybe your district is not is not exciting. Your district. I completely understand that. I serve on SCAD, where we have to work with people from Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County to figure out a way to come together. I completely understand my hope. My hope was that we can have a dialog. I've reached out for dialog. I know there's concerns on how many people we can talk to do the Brown act, but my hope was to really have that conversation tonight. Before jumping to a conclusion, I placed a proposal on the table that was vetted. It's been in the public and press for over a year. When my swearing in speech, I said that we were going to pursue this. That was going on two years ago. We publicly talked about this in the prerelease polling. Everyone's known we're talking about there's plenty of opportunity to talk and there's still opportunity to talk. So so that's the conversation about need, a multifaceted approach. We have a multifaceted approach where we're lacking is the actual infrastructure of shelter beds. We had a discussion on council about Martin v Boise, about our limited our limited ability to enforce encampments and keep communities safe. It is a direct connection and it's all continue to evolve. But it's clear that there is a direct connection on how much capacity we have to serve our homeless in order to enforce our local camping laws. We had a debate about a debate about it a little while back. Now it's coming back in front of us. This is what we debated about before. Now it's now it's here. The Supreme Court sided with, you know, the appellate court. And here we are today discussing that we need to have capacity. Our Congressman, Alan Lowenthal, issued an op ed last week specifically telling Long Beach, hey, the writing is on the wall. You need to do this. In addition. Hang on. Hang on. Just just real quick. I'm glad I only said so. Just just just remember. Hold on. I'm not. I'm not sure. Finish up, but just chance. Councilman, your time is up. So I'm going to have you finish up this one question or thought and then I got to go. Have you read? Okay. I'll just recue and finish up this last statement then. Recue, please. All right. I'll just I'll just continue. I wanted to sort of talk to the different councilman, but I'll start with that Councilman Price. But I wanted to give the councilman councilman anything and read some good points. And let's talk about those. But I'll get I'll get to that. I'll come back to that. So, so again, where was I? So. Really? I got lost. Girls, have you with you. Oh, the expert the in the motion to explore the state in other dollars we we've explored that so we've explored that everyone home has explored that city staff has full time staff that our health department is like 97% grant funded. Like all we do is explore these funding sources. It's consistent and these are experts. All they do, they do. They're better at my council staff and probably all of our council staff are doing that research. What we know is that much of that funding is unavailable to us because we don't have a local revenue source. It's matching dollars, much of that is matching dollars. So we have to have a local funding source. Come and what. Have you. So that's about to knock you back up, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Count Councilwoman in Dallas. Hold on. Thank you. We so we have we have a lot of we have a lot of folks queued up. So I'm just trying my best to get through everybody. So please, councilman Sunday House. Thank you. Just a quick question to Tom Modica. Can you clarify for me? I know that there's a possibility to see if people with, you know, seniors to opt out of of such tax. Is there a possibility for just in general people who are going through, you know, who are low income or going through financial difficulties, who can really not afford the $7 tax a month? So I don't know if we know today exactly how that would work. So part of what we would ask you to do in a motion is tell us what kind of exemptions that you're interested in. And so the ones on the table right now that we're supposed to be looking at is seniors and disabled. If you know, you're asking us to look at other exemptions for low income and others, we would need to take a look at that. Okay. Thank you. So with that being said, I just feel that, you know, I know that this is a controversial issue up here on the dais. But one of the things that I feel we need to do is make sure that we present it to our voters. And I think that's the right thing to do, because if your constituents like mine, if they vote against this and they're very passionate against this measure, then it won't pass. You know, but I think we actually need to give them the opportunity to vote on this. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. Now that I've blown off some steam, I'm going to try to be quick and just ask a couple of questions and with a little bit of a brief history lesson, we both we mentioned two times that that we had people go to the voters for ballot measures. And one thing that I just want to remind everybody is that when we don't do it ourselves, those other parties that are interested, they craft the language. So there were things in Claudia's law that I didn't love, but because we didn't put it on the ballot, we didn't get to craft that language. There were things in cannabis the same thing. So I want to hear from my colleagues. I see that some of you guys are queued up. I'd like to hear from you. You know, in addition to seeing how robust we are, we are trying to tackle this issue with all these different tools. What is it about putting this to the voters? That is your hesitation. And I know that we have different constituencies, but really just understanding, it seems to me like the most responsible thing an elected body can do to make sure that we design something that's right for Long Beach. So I'd like to hear from you guys on that. Okay. So let me let me continue. Councilman Austin. Okay. So I wanted to just just follow up on some of my comments as well. I mentioned a number of the existing measures that, by the way, I've supported most, if not all of them. And I think many of them are delivering and doing good work for them that they intended to do, particularly when our school district , community college district measure A for the city of Long Beach has been doing phenomenal and I continue to support those. The issue that I have is, again, adding something else to the to the voters, to the taxpayers in Long Beach. I've heard from many of my constituents that they have been hit hard and it's starting to impact them. I just want to, with all due respect, clarify that point. I also want to just say that I've been watching the state of California for some time now, and I do know that we do have a $20 billion rainy day fund in the state budget. Right. I will re-emphasize that. $20 billion if the the governor today, who is very much committed to affordable housing and if the legislature is very much committed to affordable housing, we're able to put $2.5 billion to a statewide housing crisis and give the city of Long Beach the money that we are requesting. We can get that and the taxpayers don't have to be taxed twice. And so I would just say that there are options out there. If we are creative, if we work together, we can get there. Again, I think we are all on the same page in terms of resolving the issue of building more affordable housing in Long Beach. It's how we get there. And so I will propose looking at other options. I know that that's an item for us or under consideration under one or two motions to actually allow us to to study and ask staff to look at that. But I also think staff is doing that anyway. Right. Our staff is looking at creative solutions anyway, because this council has shown its commitment to to to dealing with this issue. And so, again, I want to just clarify where I was on that issue, but also throw out some some alternatives for us to think about in terms of money that may be available. It's already there for us to deal with this important crisis facing us. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you very much. I'll be brief here. So. I want to thank Councilman Austin because he actually articulated just a moment ago what I wanted to say, and I'm sure I can't do it justice. But, you know, and I and I appreciate. The guidance from some of my colleagues and what leadership and representing residents means to them and what it should mean to me. But I do represent the residents of my district and I represent the residents of the city as a whole. And what I can tell you is that we have no idea sitting here right now what specifically we've explored in terms of available funding options and how much we can tap into. If we had a good estimate on that, then maybe we could lower the amount that we want to tax property owners. Maybe the figures that you're putting out there, maybe it's a dollar or $2 plus a month. And I know we're talking about these things in the context of coffee. I'm not sure why that is, but when property owners look at their tax bills, they have multiple bonds, hundreds and thousands of dollars that are being paid into different bond measures. And like Councilman Austin, I supported many of those and I think they're doing excellent work. The Long Beach Unified School District Bond, for example, has benefited schools throughout our entire city. And I think they've put that money to good use. And I have no problem as a property owner paying that bond every single year or twice a year. But I think we need to have an understanding of how much we actually need based on what's available to us and what may be available to us with this administration that's made this a priority. Before we start to think about taxing our property owners, I have a real issue with taxing just property owners. I personally think that that will result in higher rents because I think they'll pass through those increases. But I think there's a fundamental fairness issue and that's my opinion and it's my opinion based on my conversations with my district who overwhelmingly oppose this proposal. Now, Councilman Richardson made a point about let's get the language in there so that we can test the language. Well, you know, I appreciate that. I understand what that means for a political sense. But, you know, our job isn't to craft language that we test the residents like guinea pigs to see what they'll vote for and what they won't vote for. For example, I bet you 90% of the people that you poll will tell you they have no idea what a general obligation bond means. Many people don't realize what they're being asked to do in support of affordable housing with a lot of these pollings. So I think that we need to be very cognizant that when we're putting ballot measures out there, I mean, let's not I mean, Councilman Pearce, I understand what you're trying to say about the other ballot initiatives. I really wish we wouldn't go there because, frankly, there was a lot of false advertising and some of those measures. And we can't expect voters to dig deep into these issues like you and I and the other members of the council are expected to do as part of our jobs. So our job is to educate people. What we're trying to do is tax property owners to pay for something that we don't know yet, how much will actually need because we don't know what state funding sources and federal funding sources are available to us at this moment. So I'm not in favor of moving forward on this at all. And so I think that it's important for us to, you know, take a step back and think about our options. And so with that, I will have. Hey, guys. Hey, everyone. We got no, no, guys. This is time for the deliberation and everyone needs to speak. So I'm going to continue down this list. Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I was. So a few more here. I have a list of things. So, Councilman Price, before I move on down the line, I agree that we need to have an understanding on need. The number 300 $298 million was based on the need established in our Everyone Home report. This was conducted by by our our experts in our communities that are already doing this work as well as our city staff, our health department, our development services department, economic. They were involved in establishing the number. So this was connected to that. But secondly, the numbers flex. Let me just say, if that's the reason that people are want to support this, I'm going to say it very clear to the council members the number is flexible. If I want staff and I had a conversation with Mr. Modica that the idea is the number should meet the need. If we find that what's in the proposal is off by a dollar higher or lower or whatever it is, that's what we want to know. We want to pick it out the right number. It's not about what sounds good, $25 or whatever it is. And we've given that flexibility. I reiterate that. Now bring back the correct number to meet the need as identified. That's in the recommendation. Secondly, we don't need that. Hang on. Secondly, the second part of the most so the first part in motion is important because it allows us to do we've already done a lot of research on that top level research. The first part of the motion allows us to take that second step. And language is key because that's how we figure out more specifically, the general debt, the general. So the debt obligation for this, how long it will have to stay on all those details that we really need in order to make a full decision we need. And that's encompassed in the first part of the motion. The second part, the motion asks for all the other things we talked about. What specifics can we do that what's what is the plan? We did this on measure A. When Measure eight came, we sat we created a plan on how specifically we would invest that we can actually do that. But if there are other things I want to throw into that study, we can do that tonight. Let's put that if we say let's do tracking. I also want to explore options that don't raise taxes. I'm always going to say no to that. I'm a property owner to let's see if we can do it to the magnitude to close the gap. That's that's the purpose here. So we need to be able to include that into this recommendation. Councilman Austin, you made a number of great points. I know how our districts are very different. I know that a number of our districts in our city are very different. I understand social cut, social cost, the cost of taking certain positions. So I completely understand that. And my hope is that we can create space to find a motion that you can support. Frankly, there's we need to ultimately need six people on this council tonight is five. But we're ultimately you need six members of the council. We can't do this, frankly, without two additional members of the council. If certain members have already indicated that they are closed minded to a property tax option whatsoever, that limits the field. So I frankly don't know a way to do this without you. So I'm going to just try to create a narrative or dialog that allows you to address the concern. And I understand that concern. So opening open to explore additional options, we explored 29 options. This was one of them. But I'm okay with saying, Hey staff, if there are others we think might be viable to the same amount, including that in that I'm okay with doing that. Secondly, the reason Bond is in front of us because there are some natural sort of advantages. We've taken all every step except the specific step. We've never done a bond in Long Beach. Never. So the city attorney needs to actually get bond counsel and all of these folks and do that research. If we do something allows them to do that research, I'm okay tonight. Secondly, I think the part of the there's two parts of this motion. The first part I think that folks that I'm hearing have a trouble with is the part that says bring it back to council for consideration. The next vote is the vote to consider it. I'm okay if that if if you know, we're in if that creates a tough spot for people, let's do that. But the. Formation encompassed in the first part. Just bring it back as a part of the study. I do want to see. I want to take the next step on the bond, but other things. But we have to make sure that those actions that city staff would do under the first recommendation, short of bringing it back for consideration, we would have to take that action to do that. I want them to spend these next couple of months, two, three months actually doing that research. And I get 2 to 3 months because that's what the city attorney said would be required. I don't want to waste I don't want to waste three months when they could do that research. Now, engage bond counsel, do that research now. So in order for us to even have that conversation, we need in order for us to have that conversation, we're going to have to procedurally figure out some space to get to a place to compromise. I understand that the first two comments out the gate were substitute motions. I've done those games before. I understand what that is. We're going to have to we're going to have to create space for that. So in order to do that, the motion to receive and file. I don't think that's a reasonable motion. I think we should vote down the motion to receive and file and create space. I'll make a motion in place of that that simply says we will move forward with the second part of this motion. And in the first part we will take the meat of it, the actual context and details we need, and include that in the second part. And we're going to move anything about bringing it back to council for consideration so that if people want to know that we vote, is there anything about this? Is voting to pass a ban? No, we took a step. Absolutely. Explore this and other things. We certainly do. We have we have moved the ball and put us in a better position to do this. And ultimately, if by the time we're going to give you into this plan and as much as you want to want to be engaged in, it's not where it needs to be. We can't move forward without six votes. I think that's that is. Reasonable, a reasonable request and it is open. And, you know, these other things that Councilman Price mentioned about whether the number is higher or lower. There's flexibility within that proposal as well. So that is my respectful offer to you. I'd love to hear if you're open to this, because procedurally, either the substitute motion we need to be removed, our council would have to substitute motion would have to be removed or our city council have to vote that down in order to create space to make this happen. That's where we are. From a supernova. Thank you. I'm kind of digesting what was just said. I heard the word close minded and I was in the capital games. Our Democratic classes here referred to as games, and I couldn't differ more from that assessment. The councilwoman from the second District asked a question and I'll paraphrase it. I don't think it is rhetorical. I think he really wanted an answer. What's wrong with just placing this on the ballot? And earlier, you invoked the word democracy in describing that this would be a democratic process to put it on the ballot. And I'll just tell you what the constituents in the fourth District have told me. They've asked the question, what is Democratic about asking 38% of the people to foot the bill for this? And they've further stated that, you know, if this is that important an issue, shouldn't we have everyone in, to borrow a phrase? Shouldn't everyone be in to pay for this? So that's an answer to your question. So I seconded the substitute motion, and I'm ready to call for the question. Okay. The question the question has been called and so concerned. Richardson has queued up to speak. So I think we're going to take a vote on the question. QUESTION Correct. That's Renee. I think there's a second on the question. I think constantly comes on the second question. But you said second. That you would need to vote on a call for the question. Right. So so I. Need a two thirds you need a two thirds vote to end debate. Okay. So just to be clear, I'm not sure if the clerk. Are you able to. We'll probably have to do roll call because of Councilman Price. So so just to clarify what's happening for everyone up. So Councilman Super nine has made a motion to end debate essentially. And so that motion has to be voted on by the council before we can continue having any more any more debate. And so that is the motion that's on the floor. And for it to pass, I believe, Mr. City Attorney, two thirds of the council has to vote to end debate. Six votes. Yes, six votes. Okay. So the motion is on the floor to end the debate and then do a roll call vote. So when a voter I wasn't clear, it required six votes to end debate. Mr. City Attorney. That's correct. You need a two thirds vote to them to be. One queued up. I just had something to say. If it's important enough to get six voters. Let's go ahead and vote the other six votes for that, because I think there's only one more person to go ahead. Let's do it. It's not debatable. It's the conflict question, right? No. Okay. So you're saying that we're just going to end debate and vote? Correct. There is no debate on the call for the question. The vote on the call for the question that fails. So we're doing you go back and. That's exactly right. And you say something. When I made that motion, there was no one cued up. And so just to be clear, there's a call for the question, and that's what we're voting on to end debate. So an I vote ends debate and never, of course, allows that debate to continue. So I do a roll call vote. District one. Name. District two. District three. I. District four. I. District five i. District six. At the. District seven. District eight. And District nine. Hey. Yeah. So the motion fails. So the debate continues. Whoever you up next. Debate continues. And so let's go back to the conversation. So next up is Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Of course, it's an important debate. We respect our council rules. But at some point you have to say that some of this is silly. We you know, you get a few minutes and you got to come back. Some of it is silly. I think we need to explore occasionally looking at suspending those rules. I just have a few more thoughts here. So the attempt there was to open up a discussion. There was no response to that. It's sincere. I will make it again if by the end of my comments are there. I am open to that. But I put that offer on the table. It was not acknowledged. So here's what what the way that where I see this, I think this there's been a lot of like conversation that like dividing us and we shouldn't let this conversation divide. I'm sorry. Point of order to have the floor working people chime in. Are we able to meet the minimum? I'm. I'm sorry, Rex. I just didn't have you on mute. It was a mistake. I'm sorry. It's just really loud in here. I'm sorry, Suzy. It comes out everywhere. Okay, so. All right. So I know that this is controversial. I know that we need to it's my opinion that particularly in 2020, in a presidential election year, where people are already paying attention and we're getting a larger sample of voters than we typically get . We typically have low turnout elections. We have a high turnout election and get two thirds vote in an election of, you know, probably 60, 70% turnout is already a heavy lift. I feel like we need to take that step. It's clear to me, based on the comments that we don't have the support for that tonight. We just don't. And, you know, to put it in perspective, we've all had difficult votes. We've all seen us air on the side of, you know, we're going to take you know, we're going to look at the facts. We have a debate. We'll get there. We had we've seen our counsel and our staff prioritize incredible projects and get there. And we were fortunate to sit in a in a community in a civic center today. Today, a civic center has placed our our city incumbent for the next 40 years on that service. And we got there on every single vote. The majority of this council got there. We got there even though we had concerns about the Belmont pool, $80 million pool investment. We had concerns. We made the case. We made it stronger. We got good union jobs there. We got there. We got there. We had the debate. We got there. Yet tonight, we don't have the political will to simply let the voters have a choice. I think that I think that is shameful. And this council is not a great moment. There is not a lot of risk on a two thirds vote. Not a lot of risk on asking the voters of Long Beach to weigh in. Not a lot of risk here. If there's as much uproar about this, then the voters will tell us that at the ballot box. And it's not it's not on us. It's on the voters. You know, so, you know, that's that's you know, it's a point there, I think, that we're sort of undercutting the democratic process here rather than give people a chance to vote. We're forcing residents, nonprofits and all of us to find a different option. We're going to have to go back, go to, you know, nonprofits and these individuals and tell them the city council will not would not give you a chance to vote. You're going to have to go collect signatures and get this done yourself. That's what we're telling them. Just to be clear, that's about a half a million dollar effort. We're going to say, rather than save you the people money. Working families money. We're going to force you to go out and get signatures just to have an opportunity to vote. It's unfair. It's completely unfair when there's plenty of opportunities to compromise and all of that. The conversation will continue to do research. We've done amazing reports that have been lauded, and we're open to doing more, more reports. But this is simply kicking the can down the road. And frankly, inaction does harm and is more expensive. We pay more and more money. We have our clean team and all of these resources that we invest that are frankly counting dollars, all of this that we do to clean up an encampment. What happens a week later is right back. It's right back. It's not an upstream long term solution without building housing. It is more expensive to not house. This is a reasonable thing and we have a responsibility to have an honest, open debate about this, which is not what is taking place tonight. Most recently I mentioned this before Martin V Boise. Our ability to simply say, you can't be in our parks and our streets and our right away all rights of way that's being challenged. Our ability to do that has been challenged. We cannot sweep the homeless issue into the seams of life, into our riverbeds, into our river freeway on ramps, into North Long Beach, in the shelter. You can't do that. We have to actually build capacity. We've been playing we've been playing nice. But I got to I got to tell you, the count the rest of the council of these people are not playing nice and they're not playing fair. They're looking out for them. That's the reality here. I'm proud of our residents for stepping up and building that shelter. If that didn't give, opening up and building that shelter didn't give us an opportunity to give the voters a chance. What the hell are these people doing? We're not playing nice on this. We're not playing nice on these anymore. Okay. Look, I'm gonna say one more thing, Mr. Mayor. This, you know, this is about this vote today was about simply having a discussion moving forward in the discussion. Clearly, folks are voting and to protect their interests and maintain the status quo. That is what people are doing. And we were sent here to find solutions and to fight for those solutions and have courage. And that's not what the city council is doing. So I move that we end debate. I mean, I move that. We close debate. It's not debatable. Okay. So I think that there's a it's a motion, same motion as you know. I'll let it go. Go ahead, Councilman Pearce. Customer Pearce. Thank you. Um, there was some back and forth. Darrell, Thank you for, for answering my question. I think that your answer was a reason to vote no on the ballot measure, but not a reason not to give it to the voters to decide. While that number might be accurate, it might not be, I'm not sure, 38%. But we have to. Today we're just supposed to focus on do we get some research back and do we give it to the voters? And so I obviously, the we kind of see the lay of the land after all these votes. Every time we have one of these votes where we are not talking and having a dialog, but we're talking at each other, it creates more tension. It creates more problems. And every time after one of these nights like tonight. There's tension between all of us, and it's really hard to get work done. And I think that, Councilmember Richardson, I applaud you for the ability to really you take an issue and you run with it. And you built a community coalition of people that put a lot of. Money behind it, that. Took, you know, the housing issue and really said, what can we strategically do? You tried to be smart about it. You listen to all of the research that went out. The mayor put together his task force. We had all of these initiatives come forward and none of us were able to lead on the issue to really provide us with something big that we could do. And honestly, this bond measure is pretty small. You know, it's the smallest one of its kind. And so it's sometimes I worry that because you lead with such a great vision on those pieces, that people are inclined to vote no. And I think it's really unfortunate because the city, a half a million people, we should be able to work together better. And so I you know, there's no debate. But I have to take the moment to say that I respect all of my colleagues for stepping up and being a council member and leading. I really wish that we could figure out how to get away from the politics, because that's why people don't trust local government. That is exactly why they don't. And so, Daryl, thank you for answering my question. I wish that the other council colleagues would have answered it and had a real dialog with us about how we can come to a solution. But here we are. Thank you, Councilmember Gringo. You know, I normally don't recue on these types of discussions because I like to be straightforward. What I said, as I said, and I stand by it. But you have to. Some of this dialog that we've had here, it's. It's it's. I'm feeling bad, I'm feeling sad because, you know, we really don't have to go there in regards to on occasion being disrespectful when I want one another's opinions. But let's face it, homelessness is a wedge issue of the 2020s. We're going to be dealing with this issue not only 2020, but a 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30. If we don't do anything about it now. I participate in the California League of Cities. And this is a very heavy issue in an elitist city. You're talking about all of the cities in state of California. We all meet together. We all talk about what are the important issues of the moment. And homelessness is the number one top issue. And it always comes down to one thing and it's consistent across the state and it's called NIMBYism. Not in my backyard. And that's what I have heard and that's what I keep hearing. And every time we bring an issue, we bring in whether it's a bond or it's a grant or an application for more funding. It's you know, I don't want to pay for it, but yet why don't you clear up that river or there's all kinds of camp camping going on in a river. There's people camping out in our parks or my doorway to our business is being blocked because there's a homeless person there. Why don't you clean that up? I get tons of calls to my office about the homeless situation. And what are you going to do about it? What? What are we going to do about it? I can do about it without your help. And what we're doing here, or what this proposal is proposing to do is to get precisely that. To get your help. Vote the help of the voters. You without your help. Homelessness will continue until we get more. Until everybody. Everybody's homeless. What's that going to look like? Your budget. Bunch of campgrounds all over the place. We don't want that. What we want is people to be able to be housed, to be bathed, to take care of their children, to educate their children, to educate themselves, and to live the American dream. And without getting addressing the homeowners, the situation, we're not going to get there. So I'm going to leave it with that, is that this tonight is not putting it on the ballot. It's to do the research is to do the backup that 25 cent per $100,000 might be different. And I'm pretty sure it would be a lot lower than that. Probably would be 18, maybe 1750. But it's not going to be 25. I'm pretty sure of that. So I'm going to be voting down the substitute substitute vote. I motion. Okay. Let me I want to just we're going to go ahead and start doing some procedural votes. I want to just clarify, there's a substitute substitute motion that Councilman Mongo that receives and filed the report. There is a I'll. Before I go. Continue. Councilman, you cued up. Thank you. I just want to say that. I'm really disappointed that the conversation went to a place where people are making false accusations, that someone's trying to be sneaky or name call or any of those things. That's not who we are. And what I hope that I will hear right now is a vote that passes the substitute substitute motion to continue to support the direction that this council unanimously voted on in August. And I hope that we can continue to look at all solutions, not just the one that Rex has determined to be the best one. And I'm open to hearing alternatives. I've had those conversations. I hope we together can decide and hear best which one has the best chance of helping All Long Beach residents? Okay, guys, we have we still have more more comments of pure counsel of Richardson, and then we're going to go to the votes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. More people queuing up, so we'll continue to queue up. Richardson. I just wanted I just wanted to just just state that there is there is hope, folks. And this is not the end of the conversation. Okay. The you know, we can continue to work together, continue to try to we have to continue to try to work together on this council to find solutions. I'm committed to that. I apologize if I got a little passionate on this and I apologize to the public. It's important. I apologize for that. And I commit to work with my colleagues on finding pathway forward because it's not really about me, it's about the people. And that's I honestly like deep in my faith, believe that that's what we should be we should be doing. And to be clear, just the state is there's there's no plan for revenue for affordable housing, so to say. So this vote should be clear. The receipt and final vote is simply to do nothing. That's what this vote is not we're not referring reverting back to some of the plan. There is no plan. We've been exploring options. I didn't come up with this idea. Council has given direction on this idea. What, six or seven times we've heard this. So be clear. This motion is do nothing. But we're going to continue to work together to do something. We will do that. You have my commitment, a number of council members here. I do feel this is this was just not right for them. And I understand the social cost there. And if it wasn't there, I hoped for a dialog to get to a place where we could find something that's not today. We will revisit this together. We will try to get to a place where city council members can agree on this. And it doesn't stop you, the public, from continue to push and advocate. Do what you need to do. 2020 is an incredible opportunity. If the Council won't give you a voice in 2020, then you need to go collect signatures and do it. I commit to help you. If you do that, that's what you should do in November 2020. If not, we're going to try it in 2021. I just don't think that we should wait. So thank you again. Hope is not lost. We will work together. Thank you. And councilwoman. And they have. Yes. As one of your newest members to the council, one of the things that I do look forward to is working together on tough issues like this. And I commend you, Councilmember Richardson, for acknowledging that that the best way to move forward is for all of us to collectively work together. And with that being said, be new to the council and becoming from the community and being big on affordable housing. We've been waiting for a solution, any solution for years and years and years. And so I think that, you know, every day we get closer. But the only way that we're going to really accomplish this is to work together. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Diaz. So let me let me just review the procedural vote. So we have a substitute substitute motion by Councilman Mongo to receive and file. Then we have a substitute motion by Councilwoman Price to look at, to study and look at other federal and state solutions as it relates to affordable housing and homelessness. And as a report to come back to council. And then we have the the original motion, which is the motion is read and submitted by Councilman Richardson. So, members, please. It'll be a roll call vote on each one. So the first is thus is councilman mango substitute substitute of the the roll call vote. District one. Ne. District two, district three I. District four i. District five i. District six. District seven, District eight. And District nine. Okay. So that motion fails. The second the second motion. The second version is the Councilman Price's substitute motion. Out of order, Mr. Mayor. Named district two, District three. A point of order, Mr. Mayor. So now that it's freed up, I'd like to put a motion on table. Mr. City Attorney. I think that. Under under the rules, there is room at this point for a substitute substitute motion that can be made that would be go back to the first vote. So the answer is yes. And I would like to exercise that right. Okay. Well, all right. Just just just to be clear, so another motion can be made now that the substitute, the first half substitute was defeated, correct? Correct. That's correct. Now there's room. On the floor. I want to just to be clear, there's still the councilwoman price motion is still on the floor, as is the original Richardson motion, correct? That's correct. If another motion is made and seconded, it becomes the substitute substitute again and again. Okay. So, Councilman Richardson. I would like to make a motion to include in the second part of my original motion, which is frankly very similar to Councilwoman Price's motion. It's to prepare a report on needs of. The Board of Energy. One of order. Mr. City. Attorney. There was a vote in process. I call a point of order prior to the vote being called. Check the records. Correct. He did call the point of order before the vote was completed. Usually you're doing a roll call vote, so only two votes were cast. We did call a point of order and the vote stopped. You can make another motion to end debate, which ends all discussion and all motions, and then you have to vote on all of your motions in order. But that motion in debate needs two thirds. Two thirds? That's correct. Zero. The motion. Now, that's fine. So, I mean, yeah. So we're going to just follow the the rules as laid out by the city attorney. So, Councilman Richardson, thank you. You know, I've been you know, you never know when you're a I encourage young people to join students organizations because you learn order really well. I learned that back and somebody by our members that, look, I have a motion. My motion is to include the second part of my motion, which is to direct, prepare a report on affordable housing need strategies that address affordable housing and homelessness, potential types of projects to be funded with a bond estimates on a number of units that could be constructed revenue source, dedicated affordable housing and report back within 90 days . So the second part of that motion I want to include I also want to include the additional options that Councilman Austin referenced. I want to include those into this and the research into the proposal on the floor. The research short of bringing it back for consideration for consideration of a vote. So just do the research. Do the research on the bonds, present it and all the other options and all the affordable housing needs. That that's the motion so as not to move forward tonight if people are concerned that this is not the option. You don't have to be concerned about that. This is literally to get information very similar. Councilwoman Price's motion, except mine says we've done a lot of work on this one. I understand. I hear you. If you say this isn't the right one, but, you know, it's pretty close, right? I feel like we're pretty close and we can figure it out. So I don't think we should just abandon it with all the work that's there. We should include that as well as others. So the research needed in order to move forward is what I want to conduct. Is that understandable? Mr. Parking. Part. Part of it was you prepare the report, come back in 90 days. I get that. The second was to conduct the research on a possible bond measure. In addition to what I believe you were saying, the alternative funding from state and federal sources to mitigate the housing issues? Absolutely. And then you wanted to include Councilman Austin. I don't know what Councilmember Austin's ad was to that. We will. But additional resources. And additional options, I think it's very similar to what Councilmember Price had actually proposed as well, looking at federal dollars options there, looking at the state options. But I would also mention that Councilmember Richardson is the chair of our state large committee. This would be very much part of our state ledger agenda in terms of going after budget dollars in Sacramento to to to address affordable housing. And we'll do our best on the federal ledger side as well to make sure that that our voice is being heard. Because I know we have a very supportive congressman here in Long Beach who can be a voice for that as well. Absolutely. And you have my full commitment. Commitment on that. That will be the top priority of our state legislative agenda. And we're going to work on that. I'll become I'll become President Skog in May. That will also be our priority there to address housing and bring down local dollars. So to be clear, it's all those things you mentioned what we're doing. We're going to take the part out in the first part that says bring it to, you know, bring it to the city council, bring it to the city council for consideration. So don't bring it back with a recommendation to pass it. We're clear that the council doesn't want to do that right now, but I want you to do that research, the Bond Council, all the questions you couldn't answer yet until we gave you a target. You have a target. Try that. And the conversation about how does it relate to other resources? Let's just assume Everyone Home report is a year old and there are new resources on the table and that may bring down the amount of the bond from $25 to $20, right. From, you know, seven bucks a month on the average house to $5 a month. I just want it to make sense. So if there's additional resources we can leverage to bring this cost down. Absolutely. We want to do that, but we want to be in position to it's a not for the next two months, three months, not do anything. We'll start working on this, put us in a better position to maybe come together on this. That's what this is. You clear on that? Thank you. That is my motion. Thank you. I have a councilperson. And then I have Councilwoman Pryce. Okay. So now we have a new motion on the floor, and I think it merits a little bit of conversation as well, because in the staff report, Mr. City Manager, I think it mentions that moving forward with this would would require a shifting of priorities from other affordable housing recommendations previously approved by the City Council and potentially away from other bond projects already in progress and intended to save money. Can you please elaborate on that and and help us understand what priorities will be shifting? Should we move forward with this recommendation or this this motion by Councilmember Richardson? Yes. So when the council passed its fiscal policies last year, they updated the way that you want us to look at kind of fiscal impact and look in terms of staff resources. The item that was proposed by Councilmember Richardson, this is this is a big deal. We talked about this a lot tonight. This is really big stuff. So we are expecting that this will take some staff resources to do these reports. We actually believe it's going to be longer than 90 days. So with the additional time, we're able to just spread that out. So we're probably looking at 90 to 120 days. We don't have a list of exactly what would be impacted, but we we would move things around. The team does believe that we can get back reports. We'll take whatever you've asked us to do and we'll put it in the workflow. I will ask John GROSS to look at that. But in terms of the the bond financing, but we were assuming you were moving forward with the bond and actually bringing it back, which then, you know, that affects the Treasury staff. So, John, if you could add a little bit about the Treasury impact, if there is any from the recommendation. And this the current motion as as the manager said, it does not call for Bond to come back, but it does call for information on bond funding. So there's still would be some research and actually probably some significant research. But on the other hand, with the kind of timeframe that the manager's talking about, 90 to 120 days, my my guess is that we can fit that in the bond projects that we were talking about, but I think are not going to be impacted with that kind of timeframe. Are things like the port bonds, the airport refunding bonds. Those are at least two that are being worked on and are scheduled in Carnival Cruise Line, all of which are in the pipeline and could be impacted. My best guess is at this point that it won't be. Okay. Also, I know one of the priorities that has been discussed and I know the council is looking forward as well as the community is looking forward to coming back. That could impact the conversation regarding housing and affordability. Is the inclusionary zoning where we at with that and where when do you expect that to come back? And is that one of the priorities that would be shifted as a result of this? I ask Lynda Tatum to respond to the timeline. Yes, our staff has our consultant. We are expecting by the end of this week to have some reassessment by our consultant to respond to some issues that that came up. So we think that or right now we're anticipating that this would hit the Planning Commission for Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in February and back to the City Council approximately March. All right. Thank you. That's all my questions for now. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I'm a little bit confused as to how this motion is different than my motion. So, Mr. City Attorney, can you clarify that for me? Mr. Parking? Yes, Mayor. Members of the council. The difference that I see in the substitute substitute motion versus the motion for or the council member from the third district is this requests the report back. That was in the original motion from the city manager to come back and then adds what is essentially the substitute motion to study alternative funding for state and federal sources to mitigate the housing issue? So it is basically the substitute motion. In addition to asking the city manager to prepare the report and then the third possible portion of that substitute substitute motion is to request city attorney to do the research on the bond issue, but not to prepare the resolution and related documents to bring back for council consideration to place anything on the ballot at this time. Okay. So I'm not I really don't see a substantial difference between my substitute motion and the substitute substitute. So I know I'm not as much of an expert in Robert's rules as some on the council, but so it sounds like it's a modification of the first motion, but it's not going to be coming back to council with a proposed resolution. My understanding is that is correct, that whatever there will be a report that comes back, it sounds like between 90 and 120 days to the council with the information that was requested in the original motion. But what will not come back at that time is a resolution prepared by my office and the related documents for the Council's consideration to place a ballot measure on the November 3rd, 2020 ballot. Okay. So if I'm understanding this correctly, that I may not be the substitute substitute motion that directs the city manager's office. And to some extent, I guess, the city attorney's office to explore a bond measure for property owners. Is that correct? That's my understanding is. That's correct. We will be doing taking this time during this nine or 90, 120 days. We were directed to continue the research on what related documents and resolution we would need to prepare in the event the Council wanted to consider placing something on the agenda. But we wouldn't finalize that or bring that back until sometime after the report is presented to council and we received direction to do that. Okay. So this is, you know, one of my concerns when we talk about we're just putting it on the ballot for the voters to vote on it, even if you're against it. We're just it's democracy. The problem is this incredible amount of staff resources being utilized for this. And my substitute motion basically says before we start to think about taxing property owners, let's find out what additional sources of revenue are available, see how that changes our calculations, and then explore how we're going to meet that funding gap. Because in my opinion, we've put the cart before the horse. We're saying we have a funding gap. We don't know how much we'll be able to offset the funding gap with outside assistance from the state or federal authorities or departments. So let's just figure out the map what we need and tax property owners with it. I cannot support additional taxes on property owners, and especially when I know that the central funding out there that we have not yet explored. To its fullest. So I would encourage my colleagues to first get the report on what funding options are available, then determine what the needs are, and then determine whether we want to go after that funding gap through property owners or through some other sort of assessment that perhaps more than just property owners are paying into. So I ask council to please support my substitute. I think it's asking for the same thing that Councilor Richardson is. I appreciate his willingness to compromise and ask for that additional information. I think it's crucial. But I do think asking property or even exploring the concept of property owners having to pay more taxes, well, we don't exactly know how much we need is irresponsible. Thank you. Thank you. And what I'm going to do before I turn to Councilman Richardson is who's cued up next is I'm going to clarify who I make sure that I understand what the two motions are. And Councilman Price and Councilman Richardson can clarify for me if I don't get it correct, because I have a couple of councilmembers asking asking exactly the motion. So the substitute substitute motion by Councilmember Richardson is essentially to take the the portion that does the city study on the bond as outlined in that in that motion. And maybe he can clarify and not do any of the bond preparation work or any of the preparing of any types of resolution. And also add to that the piece of Councilman Price's substitute motion, which is to have to go out and look at state and federal funding opportunities of on a funding of affordable housing and or housing for folks experiencing homelessness. So that is Council Richardson's motion. And Council Councilmember Price's motion is to just go and ask staff to begin doing research on funding from state and federal sources on on affordable housing that were that we're discussing today. And then the main motion is, again, the original motion as presented. So that's how I've read it. Councilman Price, to have your your motion correct. Councilman. I know that your Councilman Price. Councilman Richardson, do I have your substitute correct? I'm not sure. I'm going to restate right now. So whatever the city attorney. Okay. Well well, do we do I have it correct up to this point? And if you want to clarify, you can be here. There are three motions ahead of us. One was my original motion. Correct? The second motion is Councilwoman Price's motion. Correct. I'd appreciate if we can only speak on the one that's on the floor. It gets confusing if we don't. Well, I appreciate that. But I also need to clarify the motions that are on the floor. And so you have the floor. I think we will make it make it a lot more clear. Okay. I understand that. I'm just getting other questions about what's being voted on. So I just want to clarify. So you have the floor so you can clarify. But I think as of where we are today, I'm sure city attorney, I have it correct as to what the motions are there on the floor. Correct. That's correct. There's actually only one motion on the floor, but. There are three that are brought up. So, Councilman Richardson, thank you so. For the sake of just process, in order for this vote to move forward, it only needs a simple majority. I understand Councilwoman Price's concerns. And for the sake of this, if they are closed off to any exploration of any revenue source, that's not the university we're talking to right now, talking to the council members who say there is some wiggle room here to move forward. That's that's who we're talking to right now. And so the motion is the second part of my original motion direct city manager to Prepare Report on affordable housing needs in Long Beach. Strategies to address housing affordability, homelessness. Potential types of projects that could be funded with a housing bond. Estimates on the number of units that can be constructed with a revenue source dedicated to affordable housing and report back to the City Council within 90 days. It adds Explore additional revenue sources and options that are not tax related as well as other revenue sources. Explore them all. That's what it is. It additionally takes, hey, take the next step of exploration or research into the impacts of the bond. We need to know that even if the citizens were to do signatures when it comes to the city council, they ask go do a report on what the impact would be on this bond. It's something we do all the time. Do that. On this, you have an amount of resources already identified in the fiscal report. That's why I the fiscal impact report already outlines and there's resources and what would need to be had to happen to do that. City staff has said we need to amend from 90 days to 120 days. I'm fine with that. We need. But what I'm saying is, short of preparing the motion for city council to vote on whatever the resolution for city council short of preparing that. You know that part, to put us in a position to do it, we'd have to take that extra step of then affirmatively asking staff to bring that back, if that or whatever it is. The option. I think this makes sense because some good ideas did come up tonight, particularly is there a way to adjust the number, make it lower by looking at other strategy? I'm okay with that. I'm okay with that. So this is frankly a compromise motion inclusive of feedback from council members who have been open minded on this issue. That's what this is. That's what the motion is. Okay. We have. That was concludes public comment. I'm sorry, counsel comment. So I think that the motions as I had clarified them earlier, stand. And so we right now have we can take a vote on the substitute substitute motion by Councilmember Richardson. So I'm going to begin again. We'll be doing the roll call vote and we'll go down. District one. Yes. District two. District three? No. District four. No. District five. No. District six. District seven eight. District eight. No. District nine? Yes. I believe motion fails. Motion failed five. Okay. So now we're going to the substitute motion, which is Councilwoman Price's motion. So let me can do the roll call vote. Councilman Price's motion district one name. District two. No. District three. Yes. District four. Yes. District five. Yes. District six. Yes. District seven. Hey. District eight. Yes. District nine. Okay. That motion carries. Is that correct, Mr. Attorney. For motion commencing passes five four. That motion carries five four. So that's the motion. That's the motion that carries and passes. Okay. So we're moving on to the next item. So let me go ahead with so we're going to go ahead and take a one minute recess and then we're going to go right back into item 19. We're. I'm. Do you? Kill the children. Have. Actually the. The NSA is coming. He were coming back from recess, if I. The clerk will call the roll, please. Councilwoman in the house. Councilman. And Councilwoman Pryce. Councilmember. Super. Now. I'm sorry. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrew's Council member. Your anger presented. Councilman Austin. Councilmember Richardson. Mayor Garcia. Thank you. Is, is is. Do not twit here. Steve Updike or Tsuyoshi. Party. Are any of those folks here?

AN ORDINANCE relating to water services of Seattle Public Utilities; revising certain water rates and charges for service to wholesale customers, and amending Seattle Municipal Code Subsection 21.04.440.E in connection therewith.

SeattleCityCouncil_03162015_CB 118329

Thank you. Any questions or comments? All those in favor of adopting the resolution vote? I opposed vote no. The resolution, as adopted in the chair, will sign it. The report of the Public Utilities and Neighborhoods Committee, please read item three. The Report of the Seattle Public Utilities and Neighborhoods Committee Agenda. Item number three Accountable 118 329 Related to water services of Seattle Public Utilities, revising certain water rates and charges for service to wholesale customers and amending sentiments to code subsection 21.0 4.4 40.8. In connection there with the committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilmember Bagshaw. Thank you very much. Seattle Public Utilities supplies water to 20 water utilities under long term contracts, and this includes a number of our suburban cities, water districts and the Cascade Water Alliance. And we enter into long term contracts with SPS customers, and they pay rates sufficient to fund improvements that specifically benefit their service area. The rates are updated periodically. They have not been updated since 2003, and this particular wheeling contract that we're now looking at entering into will really deal with increasing capital project to repair and recode a 2 million gallons storage tank, an updated allocation of the same storage tank and increasing pumping costs due to electrical power costs. The two impacted are going to be Olympic view and North City and our committee recommends do pass on this council bill. Thank you. Questions or comments? Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Suzanne Bagshaw. Ga Ga in Harrell High Lakota O'Brian. High. Rasmussen. High. President Burgess High nine in favor not opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Please read item for.

Message and order for the confirmation of the reappointment of Matilda Drayton as a member of the Boston Housing Authority Monitoring Committee, for a term expiring February 28, 2024.

BostonCC_03022022_2022-0319

a term expiring February 28, 2024, and talking numbers 0319 message in order for the confirmation of the reappointment of Matilda Drayton as a member of the Boston Housing Authority Monitoring Committee for a term expiring February 28, 2024. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. Now. Councilor O'Hara, chair of the Committee on Housing and Community Development, is seeking suspension of the rules and passage of these dockets. We had similar dockets in the last meeting, which we also suspended the rules and passed council of our review working to speak on this. Okay. Okay. We will take the vote on each docket separately. They cheer, they cheer. Recognizes District City Councilor Frank Baker, Counsel Baker. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to make a point about the last meeting when we did suspend and pass the the new members for the the this housing board. At the at the time it was happening, I was unable to speak. I was having something going on. But I think it's our duty for for confirmations, especially when they're not three appointments, new people. I'm sure you don't know what the Housing Housing Board does. So the reason for hearings and reason for confirmation of the people that are coming on those boards for us to find out what they do . It isn't just asking people who they are, what they like, what color you have. It's what. Why are you good at going to be good for our city in this job? And actually, what does it what does the job entail? So we would also be asking VHA executives, probably, I would think, what what the task of the housing board is just a stake in him. Is that. Mr. President, I'm not. Look, these are all re appointments and we we routinely routinely suspended past reappointment. But I think with appointments, we should be looking we fight for confirmation powers school committee, I think at a baseline should come here and we should confirm those school committee appointments. That's something that we don't have in the original legislation that Eddie Eddie's dad put forth. The original legislation had city council confirmation powers within it. When the legislation came back to us, those those confirmation powers were taking out for the school committee, I stand up because there's a reason why we have confirmation powers. So just a statement. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Counselor Baker. Thank you for those comments. They they are very helpful. As these re appointments counsel Lara is seeking suspension of the roles in passage of these dockets. We will take the vote on each docket separately. Mr. Caulk on Docket 0315. Yeah. Okay. 1.20315 Console virus suspension of the rules in passage. Again, docket 0315. All those in favor say aye. Aye. I opposed say no. The ayes have it. Docket 0315. Council are seeking suspension of the rules and passage of docket 0316. All those in favor say aye. Aye. I oppose say nay. The ayes have it. Docket 0316 has passed. Council are seeking suspension of the roles and passage of docket 0317. All those in favor say aye. Opposed say no. The ayes have it. Docket 0317 has passed. Council are seeking suspension of the rules and passage of Docket 0318. All those in favor say aye. Aye. I oppose any. The ayes have it. Docket 0318 has passed. Council are seeking vet suspension of the rules and passage of docket 0319. All those in favor say aye. Aye. I oppose say nay. The eyes have it darkened. 0319 has past reports of public officers in other. Mr. Clark, please read docket. 0320.0320 communication was received from the City Clerk regarding the 2021 2022 University Accountability Statistical Report.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications for Request for Proposals No. HR15-088 and award contracts to Centro Community Hispanic Association, Inc., of Long Beach, CA; KRA Corporation, of Fulton, MD; Long Beach Unified School District, of Long Beach, CA; and United Cambodian Community, of Long Beach, CA, to provide qualified services to operate Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Act Youth Academy Projects, in an aggregate annual amount not to exceed $1,700,000, for a period of one year, with the option to renew for two additional one-year periods at the discretion of the City Manager; and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contracts, including any necessary amendments thereto. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06022015_15-0487

Report from Human Resources and Financial Management. Recommendation two Award for contracts to provide qualified services to operate Pacific Gateway Workforce Investment Act Youth Academy projects in an aggregate annual amount not to exceed $1.7 million citywide. Mr. City Manager. Vice Council Members This is Nick Schulz, the manager of our Workforce Investment Board. So, Madam Vice Mayor, members of the Council, this item is to award four contracts for qualified service providers to operate our year round Federal Youth Workforce Investment Act programs and Academy projects. Again, the aggregate amounts not to exceed $1.7 million. It's for a period of one year with an option to renew for additional two years based on qualified performance and financial management. Thank you. Councilman Andrews or Councilwoman Gonzalez, would you like to address your motion? Thank you. Councilmember Urunga. Thank you, Mayor. I'm very glad to see that this coming forward. I think that the more we help our youth and help them with their leadership development, the better we all are, and especially when it comes to the future leadership of our city. But do you have any kind of data or any kind of information that would that you can share with me in terms of activities in the seventh District? Specific to the 77th District? No, we did. We haven't segregated that at this point in time. Last year, the Pacific Gateway combined youth programing, a combination of state and federal money, served about 796 participants. I will get you the data per zip code and segregate that by districts. I appreciate that very much because I do have a high school in my district that I think would be a very that would benefit greatly from this type of program. So I'm looking forward to that information. Thank you. Councilwoman Mango with regard to the performance measures that the nonprofits who receive this funding are measured against, do we have the number of applicants versus the number of jobs and then the number of hours per candidate completed during the program? And if not, could we require that the contractors report out on that this year? Are we using the statewide system for this or the. We have a local yes. For these particular awards. It is the statewide system because it is this is 100% federal money that you're approving tonight. So all of the contractors who who are on the list with to be rewarded or who have qualified under the new RFP process met or exceeded all performance measures. We do have some contractors who have not operated in the system before. And do we have a dashboard or crystal reports that draw down from the state system that show those specific criteria? As mentioned, the hours per candidate, the number of candidates accepted all of that. So so what we have is we can show you, again, educational attainment from beginning of program to end program. We can show you any attainment, retention and wage advancement in employment, and we can show you continued into secondary or post-secondary education. The military or other things in the federal program will be considered positive exit. So having worked in this program, one of the things that I will say is that in the state of California, because our minimum wage is different than that of the federal minimum wage in this particular category, the state of California does not have an apportionment greater than those hours awarded to other states. And so our youth are actually getting less work experience than youth in other communities across the country. And so that's one of the the things that I look forward to discussing in terms of exemptions, because these entry level jobs that give people their first job opportunity are really pivotal. And reducing the number of hours in a summer is detrimental. And it was even more detrimental is to reduce the number of youth who get to participate. So I'm very supportive this program, and I look forward to the information that is drawn from the state system to be included in our open data platform. So everyone in the community can know how successful our contractors are and that they can compete against one another to have the best stats, to have the best educational performance for their youth that are involved in the program and the highest yield of employment. Thank you. Councilman Austin. Yes. Thank you. And I'm excited about about this the opportunity here. I think there's a lot of good work that will be performed by a lot of reputable community organizations. I see four were selected. I I'm obviously aware of three Central CHA, Long Beach Unified and UCC Cray Corporation out of Maryland. Can you give us some background on what they provide and what their nexus is here to Long Beach? Sure. And I'd start by saying we had five applicants for four award. Again, the the three local that you mentioned and one out-of-state applicant. I will tell you that we funded all of our local applicants to the capacity that they requested through the RFP process. CRA was funded at about or is recommended to be funded at about half what they requested. They're a national organization based out of Fulton, Maryland. They are a for profit corporation difference. And some of the nonprofits that we have here locally and we're funding. They have been in business since the 1980s. They operate many programs across the United States. Closest geographic program to us in California would be San Diego, where they've been successful over a period of years. And also in Alameda County in California. Other questions with regard to Kerry? Well, the next is here to Long Beach. I mean, do they have an office? And how will participants in these these job training programs? So they are. Excuse me. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but they are in the process of negotiating for space here in Long Beach. Some of the partners in their application that signed letters of support and will receive receive subcontracts from Kerry to provide services are the Long Beach Unified School District. Our YMCA has Long Beach Community Action Partnership, the Boys and Girls Club, the Long Beach Community College, the Job Corps. So so they worked very hard on the ground to put together meaningful partnerships, do to help them engage and understand the Long Beach community. Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate it. There's been a motion and a second. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address Council on item 19 saying none? Members cast your. Vote. Motion carries nine zero. Kate. Item 20 Report from Police Recommendation to receive and file the application of Moon for an original application of an ABC license at 149 Linden Avenue, Suite C District two.

AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance 126000, which adopted the 2020 Budget; making appropriations from the Emergency Fund for public assistance during the COVID-19 civil emergency; making an appropriation from the General Fund for public assistance during the civil emergency; and making appropriations from the Revenue Stabilization Fund for public assistance during the civil emergency; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_07202020_CB 119812

Every part of the Select Budget Committee agenda and one constable 119812 amending ordinance 126000, which stopped the 2020 budget making appropriations for an emergency fund for public assistance during the COVID 19 Civil Emergency. The committee recommends that the bill passes amended by the council with the. Yes, he recommends the bill passes amended. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Okay, so let's go ahead and dig into this particular item. Let's see. Councilmember skate as chair of the committee. You are recognized in order to address this item. Thank you, Madam President. And just to be clear, did you want items one and two together or item one as a standalone? Thank you for the reminder. Clarke Madam Clerk, can you please also read item number two into the record just to allow for debate on both? But we will take votes separately on both issues, but just to allow for discussion of both. I'd appreciate it if you could also read an agenda item to. Agenda Item two Resolution 31957 Establishing spending details by year end program area for the spending plan adopted by the audit of Capital 119811 that establish at the authorized use of the proceeds generated from the payroll expense tax authorized by the ordinances reduces capital 119810. The committee recommends that the resolution be adopted. This amendment council members must gather purpose. Gonzalo Suarez, Luis Morales, the watch and Strauss in favor with an abstention from Councilmember Peterson. Thank you, madam. Claire. Again, thank you, Councilmember Musketeer, for the reminder to read both into the record. Appreciate that. I will go ahead and hand it over to you because we're mosquitoes chair of the committee so that you can address both both items. There are a couple of amendments for some amendments for consideration. And I will go ahead and take those up after you do a general introduction of both the Council bill and the resolution, what is yours? Thank you, Madam President. I want to thank my Council colleagues for your tremendous work on items. One Council Bill 119812 and item two Resolution 31957. Together, these make up the jump start revenue spend plan, both for immediate COVID relief and ongoing support for small businesses, working families, seniors, our most vulnerable, and our business community as we create a more resilient economy as we recover from COVID. I'll speak to both items real quickly in order to tee up our future conversations for both the bills and the amendments. Just like, again, reiterating my tremendous appreciation for all of you, your offices, our central staff, the community at large, and my office. My office spent hundreds of hours on the phone with community partners working through the details of the Jumpstart Spend plan and the previous proposal to raise revenue. This was built off of tremendous advocacy and organizing efforts and community and among organizations who are calling for a more progressive proposal to be in front of us, to pass progressive revenues so that we can address the immediate crisis that is presenting itself because of COVID and the ongoing need for us to invest in housing and support services to create a more equitable economy. I'm really proud of the work that we have put together here as a council. As a full council, we have come together and we've provided feedback to each other and incorporated information that came directly from communities, including from organizations who are led by communities of color, including from feedback from large and small businesses, including feedback from labor unions and immigrant rights organizations, housing advocates and homeless advocates, transportation and environmental justice advocates . As you look at this final proposal in front of us with the detailed spend plan and emergency COVID relief, it has the input from a tremendous amount of individuals and organizations who we deliberately worked with to create the spend plan and the COVID relief. It invests in promoting health and creating jobs and reigniting our economy in a more equitable way. It includes small businesses and immigrant rights advocates and environmental justice. Those are folks who get credit. We want to make sure that the folks who put pressure on from the outside tax, Amazon organizers and activists, individuals and communities who for years have been calling for progressive fare. Now you all get credit and council colleagues, you get credit. We got this over the line. We worked tremendously hard and in a collaborative way to make history. We're pushing forward a tremendous amount of support for our most vulnerable communities and reinvesting in our local economy, because that is what the data says to do. And all cuts, budget or austerity approaches in the time of a recession only prolong pain for both local economies and our most vulnerable residents. So the detailed spend package, the proposal in front of you for immediate COVID relief will help support families, small businesses and our most vulnerable. Because you all came together and we pushed this proposal forward with tremendous feedback and input. I actually think that having conversations with folks via Zoom and calling in options created more opportunity for community partners to provide public testimony. People who were able to call in between shifts, people who are home taking care of loved ones were able to engage in this public policy process in addition to our traditional avenues that we've offered when we are meeting in Non-Covid times. The public input on this has been tremendous, and we want to thank all of you for your input to the COVID relief proposal, to the long term spending proposal, and to the Jumpstart tax package. This is what happens. This is what it looks like to lift up the voices of those shut out by establishment politics of the past, who listen to what a community needs, who find ways to get to Yes, this is what happens when we have folks in office who don't accept the way things have always done, who aren't going to just give lip service, voice of action, who are smart, collaborative, progressive and frankly, this council. We're tired as well. We are tired of being in a declared state of emergency for housing and homelessness for year after year and not seeing more money go into housing. In fact, this was the third year in a row where the mayor's proposed budget reduced the city's input on housing. We're tired of being in a state of emergency for homelessness and seeing the number of homeless folks grow year after year without a safe place, especially in a COVID setting to be in non congregate shelters like the CDC demands. We are tired of being in one of the most prosperous cities in the nation and lauded for our progressive values. Well, one in four children go without the needed food that they need because of food insecurity. And we're tired of the same old rhetoric about the need for austerity and the need for cuts being drummed up on the cusp of a depression. When we know that cuts only prolong recessions and the past cuts that we have seen imposed in our state and in our region in the past time of a recession only hurt families and businesses. We need alternatives. And this progressive revenue proposal and the spend plan and COVID relief offers that create a solution. We're tired on behalf of our constituents, and that's why we're acting. We're tired of those constituents are tired of doing everything right, but not being able to get ahead, not being able to keep a roof over their head or put food on the table because they realize and they've been calling on us to have action for so many years because in doing everything right, they still see an economy that prioritizes the few while leaving the many behind. So this is our way to push back. This is our pushback against status quo politics in an in the middle of a deadly global pandemic with the highest rates of unemployment and business closures ever. We are doing something that has been proven to invest in our most vulnerable, to spur local economic activity and create a more resilient and equitable economy by passing Jumpstart Revenue Plan and the detailed spend plan today. We are offering relief relief to families that they will be able to pay rent, relief to individuals, that they will be able to put food on the table. Relief to small businesses. That they will have flexible dollars they've been asking for to pay for what they need to open businesses again and put people back to work by passing Jumpstart. We have identified the resources that resources needed to provide COVID relief in this year to make sure that people's urgent needs are met due to COVID . Next year, we're investing in core government services to keep parks open, to keep libraries open, to make sure child care can function. To make sure that the basic services that we rely on every day don't have a cliff. And in the out years, we're investing in building housing, housing those who are homeless and investing in small business supports. I want to make sure that folks know we have done this in a thoughtful, in a creative and a deliberative manner. We have not spent down the entirety of the emergency funds to clarify any misperceptions that are being put out there. We are offering relief, assistance, security and stability. So again, thank you for doing all that you've done to make sure in 2020 we have emergent needs met in 2021. We maintain essential government services like parks and safe streets and libraries. And in 2022 that we invest deeply in supporting a diverse business and local economy and housing those who need support. Now. I really appreciate all that you've done. We've put forward a smart proposal. We've used the very few tools that we have in our toolbox and a legally sound way. We are rebuilding our economy in the out years, and we're investing in those who need the support right now. I really appreciate all that you've done and I'll have some more closing comments in a bit, but just so incredibly proud to work with all of you and to work with the entire community, organizations and individuals who've helped make Jumpstart and the Spend Plan and Relief Package a reality today. Well, said council member Muscat. It makes me all excited about calling this to a vote soon. Okay, folks, we do want to hear comments from folks about the bill and the resolution. We do have a couple of amendments that we've got to work through. I will take those separately. So before we open it up, as we traditionally and typically do, to hear comments about the the the bill. I'm going to go ahead and ask Councilmember Strauss to address Amendment One as published on the agenda. So I'm going to hand it over to Councilmember Strauss to walk us through his, I believe, two amendments. And then we will consider that amendment and call the bill to a. Excuse me. Then we will consider amendments to the resolution, and then we will have two amended versions of legislation before us and open it up for general comment. So, Councilmember Strauss, you are up first. I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to you to address to move your Amendment One and to open up debate for that. Thank you. Council President. Just double checking to hear what I thought. I heard. You would like me to move the amendment. Is that correct? Yes, if you. I don't. Thank you. You're not required to. But it is your opportunity to move your amendment. So if you wish. Wonderful. Thank you so much. A move to amend council bill 119812 as presented on Amendment one on this agenda. Is there a second? I can. It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment One. Councilmember Strauss, you are recognized in order to address the substance of the amendment. Thank you. Council President. Amendment one would increase the Small Business Stabilization Fund Grant Funds eligibility to 25 FTE. Last week I spoke to my you as my colleagues and the public about the need to change the requirements from fixed employees to full FTE full time equivalent to allow for part time worker to also have consideration for part time workers. What I have heard in the interim is that the need to increase that threshold to 25 is there and is in our cities. So this amendment increases eligibility for the Small Business Stabilization Grants funded by the bill to include nonprofits and businesses with up to 25 FTE ees as an increase from ten. I had heard a lot of concern about the impacts of COVID on restaurants specifically and the anticipated wave of potential closures that could be coming soon. Resident restaurateurs from District six and across the city have told me that FTE ten FTE is not high enough for them to capture many of the restaurants in need of our support . While restaurants are a labor intensive industry, it often exceeds ten FTE fees, and restaurants also oftentimes survive on the narrowest of margins. So in addition to raising the cap on FTE, this amendment would also add language ensuring that businesses that have already received a grant through prior funding are not eligible for a second grant and adding a geographic equity as a consideration in the distribution of of the grants. The reason that the coming round for the second grant is being put in in this amendment is because we do not have enough money in our funds to even serve all of the small businesses that I have applied to want to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to receive funds before people come for a second dip. So. Those are my comments. Council President and I appreciate the consideration. Thank you, Councilmember Strauss, for that description of Amendment One. I'm going to go ahead and open it up for debate. I've already received one message. And that is from Councilmember Juarez, who would like to make comment. Colleagues of anyone else would like to make a comment. Please signal by raising your hand or sending me a message in the chat box. Okay, go ahead. I see you, Councilwoman Morales. First up, Councilmember was. Thank you. I will be supporting this amendment. As with Councilmember Strauss, I have been hearing a lot from small businesses citywide, not just District five in particular, also from the SBA, from the queer community on Capitol Hill and their small businesses, that it simply would not work and essentially wait many of them out if we did not do an increase from 1050 to 25. And I think I don't need to go into all the detail about where we're at with this recession and small businesses and COVID. But my point is, in order to, at least to some degree, keep some of these businesses open who are barely hanging on. I will be supporting this amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Morales. Thank you. Council President. I. I will say that I am struggling with this amendment. I know. That we have you know, we just. We just included language in. Our Green New Deal and our equitable development language in. The earlier. Part of the progressive revenue package. That really highlights the greater disparities that we have in some neighborhoods. You know, we funded EPA because of the history of. Redlining that has left greater disparities among Southend neighborhoods. So, you know, I'm struggling a little bit because I completely. Understand the need to. Support small businesses across the city. And I know we want to make sure that every neighborhood, you know, that the. Businesses. In every neighborhood, commercial district get access to. Technical assistance and operational support that can that can help them. So I also understand that as a former restaurant worker myself, that many businesses have lots of part time employees. So I understand increasing to 25 FTE is I guess what I would say is if we want to adjust the criteria so that more businesses are eligible, that's one conversation. But we know that businesses who receive funding already in the first round. Were predominantly people of color. And from my perspective, this amendment would eliminate the opportunity for future funding for. Small businesses. Owned by immigrants and people of color and just sort of perpetuating the generational wealth gap. So I am. Not going to. Support this amendment. And I will say that I fully support Amendment two are being offered by Councilmember Strauss, but I can't support Amendment one. Thank you so much. Councilmember Morales, Councilmember Herbold. See here. I'm off mute. Great. So I have a question. You know, I heard loud and clear from when they started this small business stabilization fund that they're they're narrowing of the eligibility to five employees was their best way of ensuring that eligibility was narrowly focused on using an equity lens, narrowly focused on low and moderate income business owners in communities of color, and that in increasing the number of employees for businesses, it makes it a little bit more difficult for us to make decisions with that kind of equity lens. And we've already agreed to increase the eligibility from 5 to 10 employees for for eligibility. And so I just want to see if the if the sponsor, Councilmember Strauss, has any information related to specifically the number of eligible businesses with this increase to to 25. My understanding is that already received 5500 eligible applications for the first round of funding, which was only available at that point to businesses with five or fewer employees . And even though 5500 eligible applications were received, they were only able to make 250 grants. So I'm just wondering, do we have, again, estimates of the number of businesses that would be eligible and and then the number of of grants it would be possible to make with these new funds if we increase the eligibility to to 25 . I remember Strauss. Yeah. Thank you, Councilmember Harold. I do have that information. I don't have it at the tip of my fingertips. So let me see if I can't find it and just send you an email. Right now, I know that you are correct that this would enlarge the pool of eligible businesses to a great degree, which is also why I brought the other two elements to this amendment about not being funded a second time and distribution across the city. I will just raise that. There's even with that distribution across the city, there is still going to be a focus on equity versus just spreading peanut butter across across a number of different businesses. So let me try and find that email about the level of number of businesses that would be able to receive this funding. Any other questions or comments on Amendment One? Okay. I'm not seeing any colleagues. I like Councilmember Morales, am also struggling with this amendment. I did oppose it in a version of it in committee last week. My position has not changed. I think that the points or the questions by Councilmember Herbold are, you know, my primary concern about increasing the amount. So it's important for us to you know, and I was in I worked with Councilmember Strauss on increasing it from 5 to 10. That was work that we did in partnership in order to sort of modulate where we, you know, sort of where we're setting the line for for the size of a small business at about five was probably too small. Ten seemed a little bit more appropriate to really target in on those mom and pop main street shops that we really are hoping to be able to provide assistance to. My concern with opening it up to 25 FTE is it seems to me to be a pretty aggressive pendulum swing in the opposite direction. And, you know, 25 of those could be up to 50 employees or maybe even more. And I worry that when we start getting into that number, that volume of employees, that we're no longer talking about a small business in the way that we intend. So for that reason, I'm going to continue to oppose this particular amendment. I certainly appreciate the spirit and the intent with which it was brought forward. But but those issues have unfortunately not been resolved for me from my perspective and from the feedback that I've heard from some small business owners, particularly those small businesses who are owned by folks of color and or immigrants and refugees. So that being said, it sounds like we are ready to take a vote here. So I am going to ask the. I'm sorry. Councilmember Strauss, please. Just wanted to highlight. Thank you. Council president. Just wanted to highlight that we did work in partnership to make the initial change. And I and I appreciated being able to work with you on that. Just saying thanks. Thank you. Councilmembers Grass. I always appreciate working with you as well. Okay. So with that being said, let's go ahead and have the clerk re call the roll on the passage of Amendment one. Lewis, I. MORALES No. Macheda. I. PETERSON. All right. So what. They. Excuse me. I'm sorry. So long. No. Thank you. Strauss. I. Purple. They? Juarez. I. President Gonzalez. Now. Five in favor, four opposed. The motion carries an amendment. One is adopted. Are there any. I'm sorry. Before I open it up for general debate. I understand there is a Second Amendment also brought forward by Council Member Strauss, so I'm going to recognize you, Councilmember Strauss, in order for you to move the amendment. Thank you. Council President. Sorry, I'm just having some technical difficulties with these screens. Thank you for your time and thank you for the consideration. Colleagues on my amendments, I move to amend Council Bill 119812 as presented on an amendment to on the agenda. Is there a second? It's been moved and seconded to adopt amendment to. Councilmember Strauss, I'm going to hand it back over to you and recognize you in order to address amendments to the Council. If you don't mind. And there is a recently distributed version two of Amendment two that I just want to make sure was before the city council, before Councilmember Strauss addressed amendment number two. You're saying that I need to suspend the rules? See. It's only a correction. It does not it does not change the facts of the amendment. It just corrects some technical numbers in the amendment. So it matters. It's all in line. And numbers try to see what it might addressing and whether she was able to. Okay. So we don't. Madam Clerk, just so I'm clear on the procedure here, we don't need to amend the motion language that was just made by Councilmember Strauss. You just need him to, for the record, address what the changes are to the most recently distributed version of Amendment two. Correct. Okay. So the bill has excuse me, the amendment has been moved and seconded. And so, Councilmember Strauss, again, I'm going to ask you to address Amendment two as it was recently circulated. So in doing so, if you could explain for the record what the difference is between the published version of Amendment two and the recently circulated version of Amendment two that would be required per our city clerk. Thank you. Council President. This the changes between what was just attached to the agenda and what was distributed is a simply. Let's see the updated amendment. And this is simply an admission to AIDS funding increase in Section four as reflected in the table and corrects the table y number to the column to reflect the added funding increase . Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss. Would you like to make any other remarks or comments about Amendment two? Yes, thank you. Council president. This amendment would add $4.7 million to the to the funding for small businesses support. I came to this number because it would bring the total funding for small businesses support to 25% of the 2020 Jumpstart expenditures, a request that I've heard from small businesses. And despite what some have said today, this does not run down our rainy day or emergency funds. To complete an additional $4.7 million means about 450 more small businesses in our communities will receive grants. That may be the difference between weathering this pandemic or closing down for good. I recognize that there is a concern with spending additional dollars out of the revenue stabilization fund, which is why this amendment is about half the size of the previous amendment that I brought last week. As with the other 2020 expenditures, if this amendment passes, I will be bringing an amendment to Resolution 31957 to replenish the Revenue Stabilization Fund in 2021. We know that when small businesses stay open and keep employees, more people are able to spend money in our economy. This is exactly how and the importance of the middle class. When the middle class has the dollars to spend in the economy, it keeps activity moving as well. More taxes are collected as these businesses stay open. I urge my colleagues to consider the crisis that small businesses are facing right now and allow us to scale our response to the stimulus package. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Strauss. Are there any comments or questions? Councilmember Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. And I want to thank Councilmember Strauss for bringing this forward, as I did last week. I think that it is important that we talk about what we can do for the small businesses that are struggling throughout this crisis and trying to really make ends meet under really unique and extreme pressures. I just think that given the amount of borrowing that we are doing from our emergency reserves, I am not in a position where I am going to vote to dig even deeper into the remaining amount of slack that we have capped into these reserve funds. Just given all of the other spending that we are committing to and knowing that next year we are going to have to rely on these reserves for a potential additional round of balancing and that preserving. What slack we do currently have in here is something that that I want to make sure that we maintain a commitment to and not dig any deeper. The other thing that I would cite is, is it does look like we are going to get another round of community development block grant money in the in the near term, or at least the executive seems to be optimistic that we're going to get another round of community development block grant money. Those funds have formed the core of our direct relief to small businesses. So we we have that potentially to look forward to to to come into this space. You know, I do think that part of our fall project in looking at the 2021 budget should include some discussion around some kind of tax relief for small businesses as well. And I know Councilmember Strauss has been a leader on that. I think that those are the things that I would would prefer to focus on rather than continuing to draw down from our reserve funds. So I am going to going to respectfully vote against this. It is hard to vote against it, but I do think that just based on how much we are currently spending or borrowing to be more accurate from our reserve funds, maintaining that the small amount of slack that we do have is is an important priority. So for that reason, I'll be voting no. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Any other questions or comments? Councilmember Peterson, followed by Councilmember Mosquito. Thank you. Council president. Thank you, Councilmember Straus, for advancing this. I was happy to support the previous amendment. I do have some concerns with this one. We did receive a correspondence from Deputy Mayor Mike Fong, noting the executive's concern with with spending more of the revenue stabilization fund and zeroing out the emergency fund. I do support the bill as a whole and intend to vote for the bill as a whole. But to do more at this time, I have concerns with you. Just wanted to explain. Explain that. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson. Councilmember Mosqueda. I thank you, Madam President, and thank you to Councilmember Strauss for bringing this forward. Similarly, I appreciate where you were coming from with this. I did support the previous amendments. I am not going to be supporting this one. I want to push back on the false narrative out there that somehow we are using all of the emergency reserves, which is not true in the underlying bill. And in fact, it wouldn't be true with your amendment. Even if it were to hang, there would still be some reserves there. But in line with the initial crafting of the bill and what other council members have said, I think we are intentionally leaving a reasonable amount of funding in the emergency funds for the next year if needed. I will not be supporting this. I do appreciate you bringing it forward and I hope that this offers clarification on the misinformation that was put out about the emergency reserves. I'll say more about this later, but I think this whole conversation really underscores the importance of us having these rainy day funds in emergency reserves. If ever there was a time to use them, it is now. So I think we have done that in a responsible way with the underlying bill. I appreciate where you come from. Sadly, I'll be on on this today, but I really appreciate your work on this and look forward to working with you to support small businesses as we move forward with implementation and getting these dollars out the door. Thank you, Councilmember Mosquito, for those comments. As usual, the sponsor of the amendment will have the last word. Are there any other council members who have any comments or questions on amendment. To see. Councilmember Peterson? Hi. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify my earlier comments. So there are the two funds emergency fund and Revenue Stabilization Fund, and I guess there is money left over from the combined funds. I acknowledge that. I just technically, I think we're are we draining down the emergency fund, but the revenue stabilization fund will have some money left over. I just wanted to clarify. I wasn't trying to. I wanted to clarify that I was just specifically talking about the One Fund. But then there's the other fund that will still have money left over, whether we pass Councilmember Strauss's amendment or not. So thank you for letting me clarify that. Absolutely. Any other comments or questions on Amendment two? Uh oh. And I'm sort of scanning. Looks like no other council members have a comment here. Councilmember Strauss, do you have the final word? Thank you, council president and colleagues for your consideration. Just again, restating that to combat the false narrative that is out there, even with or without this amendment, we would not have been spending all of the rainy day funds, as has been described by some in the city government over the last couple of hours. So with or without this amendment, their city council is not fully utilizing all of our capacity to fight a pandemic and a number of in an economic recession with dollars that have been saved over past years to fight such recessions and unforeseen emergencies. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Truss. Appreciate that. Okay. Colleagues, I'm going to go ahead and close out debate on Amendment two and please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment two as recently circulated. Lewis No. Morales. I. Macheda. So. Peterson now. So what? No. Strauss. I. Purple. They. Juarez. Yes. May I get Morales vote? Morales. I thank you. President Gonzalez. Now. Three in favor. But three in favor, six opposed. Okay. Thank you so much. The motion fails. An amendment to is not adopted. Are there any other further comments on the bill as amended? Councilmember Mosqueda, did you want to have the final word or do you want to speak now? Sure. I just actually was going to offer some clarification for the viewing public on a potential amendment that I was thinking about. And I'm not going to walk on related to tiny house villages, except now's a good time to clarify that. Madam President. Let's announce an amendment to the council bill as opposed to the resolution. Yeah, that's correct. Okay. Let me let me go ahead and recognize you in order to address what could have been an amendment. But is it an amendment? And then we'll take we'll take comments on the bill as a whole, as amended from other colleagues. Councilman Mosquito. Wonderful. There was some conversation last Wednesday about the amendment related to tiny house villages and non congregate settings. While I voted last week to retain the flexibility that I thought was needed to include COVID relief spending with regards to non congregate spending so that it could be used for tiny house villages and things like hotels and motels. I was thinking about offering some clarifying language because we know how important it is for all non congregate settings to have the support that they need for addressing the current COVID crisis, like addressing the ongoing shared bathrooms and shared food areas or eating spaces. And I am really conscious, though, of the fact that tiny house villages, along with hotels and motels, are a much better alternative to existing congregate settings. We were thinking about bringing forward an amendment to clarify some of those pieces just for the viewing audience and for folks who did testify today. The amendment that folks were referring to was adopted last Wednesday, and so the 3.6 million is specifically allocated for tiny house villages. I think to the degree that we can get those villages stood up in quick time and that offers relief to folks who are currently in congregate settings or outside in the elements to have a room , a roof and a secure place to live. Obviously, that's a much better location. We really want the mayor and the executive team to spend those dollars and to the degree that there's any hang ups or concerns. I'm sure we'll be following up with all of the advocates from the house, housing and homelessness advocates to make sure the money gets out the door. But just to offer that clarification, I'm not going to be bringing forward a clarifying amendment today, and the amendment stays within the bill. Thank you, Councilman ROSQUETA. Are there any comments on the bill as amended? Oh, Councilmember, please. And then Councilmember. So. So thank you for the opportunity to provide some closing comments on this really critical action that we are about to take. This is necessary and crucial support to limit the damage being done by this public health emergency and to ensure that Seattle residents, small business owners and nonprofits have the support they need to survive right now. We've learned in the past that engaging in austerity, budgeting and slashing programs only leads to a prolonged struggle to recover, both for individual businesses and individual households and for our economy as a whole. This, for me, is the lesson of the Great Recession the legislation takes to heart and makes targeted investments where they can do the most good. Focusing on small business owners that make our city a special place to live and are operating under significant uncertainty and providing jobs to people in our community and nonprofits that are working tirelessly to care for the people most impacted by COVID and also providing essential jobs in immigrant and refugee communities who are shut out by other forms of relief. And for people who are struggling to pay their rent and those who are attempting to survive unsheltered as well as for small landlords who also rely on rent to pay their bills. And then finally, as it relates to very, very critical food relief, this bill puts a premium on helping households who are struggling to put enough food on the table and whose meal programs have been otherwise shut down. Again, I really appreciate that this has been so targeted for our investments throughout the end of 2020, and I appreciate the opportunity and the privilege to work with council members as well as the broader community who has who has weighed in on this , not just the taxing legislation, but also the spending plan. So thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Herbold, for those remarks. We're going to hear now from Councilmember Swan and then Councilmember Lewis. Thank you. Today's vote by the Seattle City Council, along with the historic Amazon tax victory earlier this month, represents the culmination of three years of determined grassroots rank and file organizing. Our movement has forced the city establishment to dedicate at least $18 million per year from the Amazon tax revenues for publicly owned, permanently affordable housing for black , working class and poor families in the Central District, and has dedicated funds for the Green New Deal and tiny house villages. Our religious one because we overcame the opposition of big business and the political establishment who have fought us every step of the way. Make no mistake about it, the Amazon tax and today's filing for black community housing in the Central District are not the result of political, quote unquote, collaboration with big business, but rather a product of a working class movement led by socialists, by workers, by unions, and by BLM activists. Activists because of whom we won the first of its kind ban on the use and purchase of chemical weapons by the police. And we now see Mayor Durkan attempting to undermine that legislation and also doubling down on her loyal representation of big business interests by refusing to sign the Amazon tax that has been approved by the majority of the Council. Hundreds of voters have volunteered to join this truly grassroots movement. We held for action conferences. We organized protests. We organized a car caravan. But social distancing during the pandemic. We marched in Olympia when they attempted to pass legislation banning our city from taxing big business. We organized the grassroots of the labor movement and progressive organizations. And most importantly, we launched a tax Amazon ballot initiative to represent a concrete and material threat to big business, which was operating in the backrooms to undermine the Amazon backed legislation in the City Council. And in fact, on the streets as part of the Justice for George Floyd movement, we gathered 30,000 ballot initiative signatures before 20,000 in just the first 20 days of the protests. Big businesses themselves have admitted that they were forced to concede to the tax Amazon and the Black Lives Matter movement. As Dave Hooper of even Stellar Restaurants, a company that viciously opposed the Amazon tax and the $15 minimum wage, said, quote, Our industry would have been disproportionately hammered by the Morales proposal. I was trying to protect our industry for sure from the competing proposal that I thought was incredibly harmful, unquote. These quotes and the quote by former Mayor Ed Murray in which he admitted that it was the 15 ballot initiative and he said, I believe that coffee now had the potential of passing and that would have been incredibly detrimental to our restaurants and small businesses, unquote. These are quotes from big business representatives. And they are. They remind us that the interests of the super wealthy and of working people and the poor are diametrically opposed to each other. And what is considered extremely progressive for ordinary people and the majority, the big business and wealthy interests consider it harmful to them, even though they have massive cash reserves and the overwhelming wealth of our society. Even though it's the majority that goes to work and creates that wealth. And that's why it requires a political struggle to win victories for the majority. The political establishment, corporate media and others are fighting to make people believe that progressive change changes like Amazon Tax come from sitting down at a table behind a third door with someone like Steve Hooper to come to a happy compromise. But in real life, the compromises we see are a reflection of the balance of power in society. So if working people understand that this is about power, then we can win greater gains in the future because we will focus the strategy of our movement on building worker power and empower the marginalized and the oppressed. Not to mention the renters who are now going to be facing a tsunami of evictions as soon as the moratoriums are lifted. If, on the other hand, the establishment succeeds in convincing people to put their faith in collaboration with big business, then it will end up building the political power of big business even further and will make future victories for working people and people of color far less likely. I'm thrilled to be able to vote yesterday on the ordinance and the resolution in order to make available tens of millions to fund emergency COVID relief for our communities and the potential to build affordable housing for black and brown communities in the Central District and other parts of the city, and funding the Green New Deal and immediately establishing five new tiny house villages. All of this has been hard fought and hard won. We will need similarly emboldened movements to win gains in the next three weeks. In the summer, budget vote of the Seattle City Council, for which will be on the budget for the remainder of 2020. For those who may have participated with the People's Budget Campaign every year, the last year we will be voting on the fall budget in the in the fall of 2024. The budget of next year. So let's make sure we immediately geared up for winning the victories we want to win in the People's Budget Summer 2020 campaign. We are demanding the police department be funded by at least 50%, which means defunding them by at least $85 million for the rest of this year, and demanding that those funds be transferred into socially constructive causes in the black and brown communities. And to make sure that the city's jobs, the inhumane and ineffective sweeps of homeless neighbors and to fund rent are organizing and eviction defense. So I invite everybody who is watching this to the People's Budget Summer 2020 Rally and March on Tuesday, July 28, at 6 p.m. at Seattle Central College. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. So once we all now. From Councilmember Lloyd. Thank you, Madam President. I'll be brief so we can we can get to the final question here on voting on this today. But I did just want to briefly say that I'm really excited that we're taking this big this big move as a council to really make strong, noticeable and meaningful progress on what was our original state of emergency this year, the massive crisis of so many of our neighbors living on the streets in a in a state of homelessness, sleeping in vehicles, sleeping in tents, and making sure that we as a city are acting with the sense of urgency that that demands and making sure that there is there's meaningful progress that all of us in Seattle want to see. Regardless of our position, we all have that same interest, which is to get folks who are living unsheltered inside, where they can live with dignity and where they can have the support that they need. There are several measures in this plan that we're passing today that will provide that immediate relief in partnership with but with providers and with with our neighbors. And how we have shaped this over the last several months, I'm really proud to have worked with the sponsors and with other members of this council and with Councilman Morales on the amendment regarding the tiny house villages, among other investments that we've made. And Councilmember Mosquito, your leadership in making sure that this was at the forefront of your mind in drafting this relief, to really respond to the the massive amount of tents in our streets with folks in them with nowhere to go. And honestly, the without having those outputs from doing outreach, not making meaningful progress throughout the spring and the early summer. So I'm glad that we finally are doing that. I'm glad that we can finally go back to our constituents and say that we are taking action urgently to have movement on this in 2020 and hopefully the beginning of of even more to come throughout the rest of this plan. So thank you so much. Thank you. Councilmember Lewis, are there any questions, any additional comments on the bill as amended? It looks like there are no additional comments from other colleagues. I also want to say thanks to Councilmember Mosqueda and her staff for all of the work that you all have done to get us to this point. Obviously, last week was a momentous occasion or a couple of weeks ago it was a momentous occasion because we actually voted on the substantive bill. This is another opportunity for us to, again, prioritize those areas of funding that we think are critical in the city's effort to recover from the economic crisis caused by this pandemic, and appreciate the opportunity to continue to be supportive of taking local action where we have not seen action from our state legislature or from our region in terms of addressing the regressive nature of our tax system. And so I do appreciate your ongoing effort to pull together to make sure that we have an opportunity to ask the wealthiest corporations to pay their fair share and to give the council an opportunity. To. Clearly articulate where it is. We want to see prioritization of expenditures. It is my hope that the executive will actually spend these dollars. We can only appropriate dollars. We cannot force the executive, the mayor, to actually spend any dollars at all. But it is my hope that will choose to spend the dollars, as opposed to allowing folks to not reap the benefits of the appropriation choices the City Council is about to make today. By passage of both this Council bill and the upcoming resolution. So thank you, Councilwoman Mosqueda, for your leadership on this. I know there is much more to come through our ongoing budget deliberations. And with that, I'm going to hand it over to you to close out debate on this council bill and the resolution so that we can take a final vote and consider the last pieces of the resolution. Thank you. Council President And thanks also for your stewardship as we helped put together the timeline and the framework to get this bill over the finish line. Council colleagues. It's been through hundreds of conversations with businesses, immigrant rights groups, environmental and housing groups with labor and businesses that Jumpstart came together and everyone said these two things . Residents in Seattle want solutions and they want leadership. Jumpstart Seattle offers solutions and the leadership needed to provide immediate COVID relief and support in the out years to weather this crisis. This proposal that is in front of us, both the revenue that we passed two weeks ago and the detailed spend plan and COVID assistance here was thoughtful , inclusive, strategic, smart and carefully crafted. We welcomed anyone to the table who wanted to advance progressive revenue in Seattle as the prime sponsor of Jumpstart. You can accuse me of a lot of things, but everyone knows I'm inclusive, deliberative and data driven, and you don't have to take it from me. We pulled together economic experts from around the country, economists who said the same thing from Economic Policy Institute, from the University of Massachusetts, from in the Public Interest, from front and center, from Budget and Policy Center. Together, they said that past recessions have proven that when governments invest in small business, housing assistance, food assistance and support for small businesses instead of cuts on austerity, local economies can weather crises in a more equitable way and local economies rebound faster. There is a proven return on investment in the strategies that we're advancing today. We have shown that when we invest in our community and our most vulnerable, there is a multiplier effect and we all benefit. We have very few tools in our tool belt in the state of Washington. We have chosen in the city of Seattle to use one of the tools that is a progressive tool to raise revenue in this vital time. And the proposal in front of us is on solid legal ground. The same attorneys that the mayor relies upon for her legal advice help advise us on crafting this policy. And it is a known fact that payroll taxes are a commonly used tool that one one that's a progressive tool that cities can rely on to raise revenue . We intentionally built off of the legally sound strategy that business and labor and community groups were negotiating in Olympia. And I want to thank Representative Mac Reid for her leadership in Olympia and for her ongoing input on the Jumpstart proposal. When the bill stalled in Olympia, we immediately reengaged with some of the same folks who were engaging in Olympia to assess how we can move forward in Seattle, to act as a good partner with our state and our regional efforts to not just say we're going to wait for the next year, but to truly engage and step in when the state and the region was not able to advance so that we could provide immediate COVID relief and outyear support. So, yes, of course, there's other progressive tools that I have been an advocate for for over a decade, and that includes income tax, that includes capital gains. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis, for advancing those conversations. That includes corporate income tax. But until we have some of those tools that we can advance, we need to provide relief. We are going to do so in a responsible way here with the payroll tax that's in front of us. And of course, I would support an income tax. As we know, the mayor wants that and so many others. We've talked about an income tax, but we cannot in a responsible way implement a flat rate income tax without a rebate. In the conversations that I've had with the mayor, I have been very clear it would be irresponsible for us to impose a flat rate income tax without a rebate for our lowest wage workers and know they can't afford 500 or $600 back to the city in a time when they can't afford to pay rent or put food on the table. This Jumpstart Progressive Payroll Tax bill is the most responsible and most progressive tax proposal we could put in front of us to act in good faith with state and county actors as we advance other progressive strategies. I will remain committed to working on progressive revenue just as I have over the last decade. We will continue to fight for more relief for our lowest wage workers, for small businesses to right side up our upside down tax code. Absolutely. That will continue to happen. And in fact, we're so committed to it. We wrote a predictability clause into the legislation so that if action were to happen at the state or local level, we would also accommodate that in our statute. But we have to be realistic. Those that support is not coming in the immediate future and Jumpstart proposal offers that relief that we need for communities, for small businesses, and for our most vulnerable right now. I want to echo the council president's comments. And while the bill itself was not vetoed. The mayor has not committed to getting the funding for COVID relief out the door, which is critical. The critical effort for us all is to make sure that the mayor allocates the COVID relief dollars as specified in this law after today's vote, because any delay would mean the consequences for our city's health and recovery would be dire. It would be a dereliction of duty not to get this out. And by definition, dereliction of duty. It means a shameful failure to fulfill one's obligation. It is our obligation to provide immediate relief right now to those who are facing COVID crisis. It is our obligation to make sure that immigrants and refugees who've been left out of federal assistance get the support they need. It is our obligation to help small businesses open up so that they can hire more people when they're given the green light under COVID. And it is our obligation to make sure more people can keep a roof over their head and put food on the table so that they can be healthy, sustain themselves and their family, and weather this crisis that has COVID. So this is not a theoretical exercise in crafting progressive policy. We are doing this in the midst of a public health crisis, a pandemic where housing and food insecurity is not just a moral crisis, it is a public health crisis. We're in the midst of a civil rights uprising where black and brown folks are getting hit with higher rates of COVID 19, higher rates of hospitalizations and higher death rates. And coronavirus is leading to more black and brown communities getting laid off, being on unemployment or without the necessary supports that they need from state and federal governments . We're nine and ten black owned businesses who applied for federal support through PPE didn't get it because of the long history of racist lending practices. So we are doing this again as a good partner, stepping stepping up and offering progressive revenue, stepping in where the federal government has not been able to and where the state government has not been able to convene yet. We are doing this to make sure that we've done it in a smart way to offer relief and make sure that these dollars get out immediately. So we look forward to working with you, to working with the mayor's office and our entire community to make sure folks can realize the assistance that has been offered in the COVID relief bill and in the out years in the Jumpstart spending plan that is now detailed in housing. We've continued to hear that there is a greater need for individuals to have access to affordable homeownership opportunities and this and rental assistance. And the proposal in front of us deliberately focuses on undoing historic injustices and building resilience and prosperity for black, indigenous and people of color residents. We're really excited about few elements in this proposal that I want to highlight. I'm really excited about how this will invest in the work of Creative Justice and Africa town. And and it also focuses on really great programs like the ones that Councilmember Wirth lifted up today from community passageways for for efforts like the Youth Achievement Center that will be able to provide multiple multipurpose buildings for wraparound services. This is exactly what Jumpstart envisions when it thinks about coupling housing and social services and community assets together, especially in neighborhoods that have been hardest hit by redlining for the immigrant and refugee population, we know that there's thousands of undocumented families in Seattle who were laid off and intentionally excluded from the CARES Act at the federal level . So we've included 8 million in direct cash assistance to small business support and for assistance for immigrants and refugees throughout Seattle. We've heard from small businesses that they just need flexible dollars, give them the flexibility to hire people back. That changed the structure of their business to create more protection for their employees and their patrons. And we've offered flexible dollars in response to what those small businesses have said, that they need it to the tune of $18 million, and that includes child care support because many small businesses told us they can't open up without additional child support for their kiddos or for their employees. They need childcare assistance and we've planned for the future in this in the small in the in the spend plan. Proposal that is in front of us in just a minute. We've worked with business and labor and community activists and environmental justice folks. In fact, Katie Garrow from the Martin Luther King County Labor Council and Alec from 350 Seattle convened a group of 33 leaders plus them to and representing labor, climate, environmental justice, affordable housing groups. And they put together the proposal that we saw in the amended version which focuses on Green New Deal. Matt Ramsey said this resolution simultaneously addresses climate crisis by seeking the reduction in Seattle's greenhouse gas emissions, the lack of affordable housing, job training, opportunities in the green economy, and addresses the health disparities in Seattle's neighborhoods disproportionately impacted by pollution. This is precisely what the goals of the Green New Deal are. He says he's honored to have worked alongside our office and members of Labor, housing, climate, environmental justice communities with a final and final amended version in front of us. You know, the mayor had a quote in the mayors launch on green and just COVID 19 recovery plan, saying that COVID had laid bare the same inequities that are exacerbated by climate change, which disproportionately impacts communities of color, and that we need to address these by addressing long term wealth creation that is of that advanced the health and well-being of black and brown indigenous communities and not just focus on excluding those folks after the fact, but must pursue solutions that address short term impacts and long term. We agree, and this proposal does just that. It invests in making sure that we are acting on Green New Deal proposals, acting on Green New Deal issues, making sure that we're investing in communities hardest hit in both frontline and fenceline, communities that we've invested in creating affordable housing. Because we know that as more people get pushed out of the city, the biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions is car pollution and allowing us to make sure that there's more affordable housing in the city that people live and want to work and stay makes it makes us on the path towards a greener economy. These are the issues we're addressing when we came together and put together the Jumpstart proposal in front of us. This is the moment that we're responding to the city's call for leadership and action. Together, we have come up with the solution. I want to thank again the community, all of my council colleagues, all the activists and all the organizations that have involved with, both pushing for more and coming together with creating these solutions in front of us. We have the blueprint to create a more resilient economy. How is more of our community members feed those who are dealing with food insecurity and make sure that our small businesses have the resilience, resiliency that they need? Finally, I just want to thank my office secretary Aaron House Ed Cuevas and Aretha Basu. In addition to all of the folks on central staff and the communication staff who have been working with us to get the information out community and to incorporate all of your amendments and the final proposal in front of us. We could not do this work without you and the community at large. So thank you very much. Again, colleagues making history, but we've got to get these dollars out the door. That will come next. Thank you, Councilmember Mosqueda, for this final remarks. We're going to go ahead and close out debate on this council bill. I'm going to ask the clerk to call the roll on the passage of the bill as amended. Colleagues, in order to make it easier for our city clerk's office to count your votes in the proper column, there is a request that you vote. Either I for yes or no for no, because a and they sound very, very similar. So if you intend to vote no, make sure it's a no as opposed to nay. And that's something that I'll make sure to occasionally remind us about in order to make sure that we have a clear record for the clerks. So that being said, I'd ask that the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill as amended. Lewis Yes. MORALES Yes. Macheda. Yes. Peterson. Yes. So what? Yes. Straps? Yes. Purple? Yes. SUAREZ. Yes. President Gonzalez. Yes. Nine in favor, nine opposed. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. I hope that helped. The bill passes as amended and the chair will sign it at the clerk. Please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Okay, folks, we're going to go.

AN ORDINANCE relating to tenant protections; establishing regulations and enforcement provisions related to residential rent increases on properties that do not meet basic maintenance standards; transferring primary enforcement authority for all sections of Title 22, Subtitle 2 of the Seattle Municipal Code (Housing Code) to the Director of the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections; amending the penalty structure for certain violations of the Housing Code; amending Sections 22.202.010, 22.202.050, 22.204.090, 22.206.180, 22.206.220, 22.206.280, and 22.206.305 of the Seattle Municipal Code; and adding a new Section 22.202.080.

SeattleCityCouncil_06062016_CB 118678

The numbers the report of the Affordable Housing Neighborhoods and Finance Committee Agenda Item five Constable 118 678 Relating to tenant protections, establishing regulations and enforcement provisions related to residential rent increases on properties that do not meet basic maintenance standards. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. All right. I believe Councilmember Sawant will kick us off. Councilmember Burgess would like to go first. Thank you. This is the tenant protection ordinance that we heard substantial testimony about today. This passed unanimously out of committee. And I'm going to defer to Councilmember Sawant, who's the primary sponsor of the legislation. And you got to remember, Burgess, many of you will remember last fall when the courageous tenants of 6511 Rainier Avenue, south of whom Sara was yesterday, fought back against their abusive landlord, Carl Haglund. When they called my office, my staff and I immediately visited the property and saw what the then Department of Planning and Development inspectors later found to be 220 code violations. And in these terrible conditions, the tenants rent were being doubled because the tenants were willing to organize and fight back. The then Councilmember, Legarda and I were able to really highlight the abusive behavior of Carl Haglund at this and other properties owned by him. The tenants at 6511 were able to win an immediate victory for themselves and working with the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections and the mayor's office. This legislation is designed to give tenants and the SDC a little more ability to defend tenants rights in the future. It makes rent increases illegal on properties that have unsafe housing code violations until the landlord gets the property up to code. The bill lays out a process to do that, and tenants should call the DCA, you know, the city's department. You can call my office, the tenants union, to get information on how to file a complaint. We need to be clear. This bill, if it becomes law today, will only give tenants a tool to fight with. Dennis will have at their disposal a law to challenge landlords that are treating them unfairly. But it will require tenants to continue organizing. And most importantly of all, this bill will not stem the tide of skyrocketing rents, such as a rent control law might. There is no substitute for tenant organizing. And I would urge all tenants who are watching this to set up tenant union chapters in their buildings, like many tenants have done already. The Tenants Union of Washington State and the Washington Community Action Network are available to help you learn more about how to organize in your building and help us organize tenants throughout the city. There is no law that by itself can guarantee that no landlord will abuse the power over their tenant. But we need laws to cover loopholes. It's also important to state most small landlords are not not gouging their tenants like Carl Hagelin or like some of the corporate property management companies that see rental housing as just another investment for profit making rather than as somebody's home. If you are a landlord and you are already treating your tenants fairly, then this law should not affect you in any way. Thank you to all the tenant activists, Tenants Union, the Washington Community Action Network, the Seattle Department of Construction Inspections, and the Mayor's Office to Jonathan Grand Council member Herbold and former Councilmember Liccardo, all of whom were instrumental in this. I also want to especially mention I talked to Councilmember former Councilmember Liccardo and he asked me to pass on his congratulations to all the tenant activists who fought for this. I also want to take this opportunity to announce that I have a draft of the next bill for the Tenants Bill of Rights right here with me. This is one of the several both that my office will come out with this summer, and this bill will cap moving fees. It limits the nonrefundable fees that can be charged for moving in to those that are explicitly allowed under state law. Most importantly, if it passes, that bill will require landlords to offer a payment plan for the move in fees and with a companion bill. A payment plan for last month's rent to Washington Community Action Network conducted a poll of tenants and found that paying the cost of moving in can be many people's biggest barrier to find housing . After you've paid your first month last month and security, many people find themselves having to pay over $4,000 to move into a new apartment, not counting all the time, effort and the stress of moving itself. This can this can be totally unaffordable. And this bill will address it. We can continue and will continue to fight for a full fledged tenant bill of rights in this city. And we will continue to build a movement of tenants fighting for their rights, because ultimately that is the only way to ensure that these laws are respected. When I debated the Rental Housing Association recently on a televised interview about the call haggling law, they clearly threatened to sue the city over this law. They claim it was rent control. It is not rent control. And if it was, it would actually have helped a large, you know, all the tenants in the city as opposed to only those living with slumlords. But what the Rental Housing Association said basically amounted to their members want to violate housing code. They refused to fix the violations and they want to raise the rents anyway. If they are so brazen as to bring this to court, we will need all of you to back the courtrooms to make it clear to any judge that the people of Seattle will not tolerate any more attacks on tenants rights. But, you know, there is a point in what the rental housing association folks are saying. The point is we need the ban on rent control to be repealed. Housing should be a human right. And in a city as wealthy as Seattle, there is no excuse that there that so many have to struggle so hard just to have a roof over their head. This girl, Hagelin Bill, if it becomes law, will be a small piece of legislation. But it is a part of our movement, and we will use it to organize and fight for a far larger tenants bill of rights. And as was mentioned earlier, five council members have already voted unanimously in committee. I look forward to this passing, and I believe that activists are holding a celebratory rally right after the vote downstairs . Thank you. Before opening up to comments to my colleagues, a couple of comments of my own I'd like to make thank you to Councilmember Sawant, as well as all of the folks who have been organizing on this issue this past year and folks who have been organizing for in this community around tenants rights for decades, for generations . One of the things that we've heard from from some folks out in the housing provider community is that they need to raise the rents in order to make the repairs. And I think today this council is going to reject that idea. The reliance on rent increases, the reliance the reliance on rent increases in order to finance basic life safety repairs is completely unfair. And if we do end up one day in an in a dispute in the courtroom that Councilmember Sawant points to as as a place to talk about the legality of this of this law, I think our response needs to be to take this issue even further, less about repealing the ban on rent control, which I support. But there is a part of the law that exists today that says you are entitled to a refund of your rent, not a increase. This this measure that that's before us right now is a very small thing to keep a landlord for raising the rent in the case of of of life safety violations. Tenants already are entitled to a reduction in their rent under the warranty of habitability. And, you know, perhaps we might need to look at having our code enforcement department begin to enforce that in that requirement if if this. Is. A continued pushback that we are faced with. So that's a couple of the points I want to make. Another issue that I wanted to flag that came up in committee is the way the way that tenants enforce this. Law. Is when they receive a notice of a rent increase from their landlords, that landlords will now be required to write on the rent increase itself. The fact that they are in exchange for paying the increase in rent, they are entitled to not have a unit that has these housing code violations. I have a concern that that information may need to be translated, and that's something that I'd like to work with our D.C. Department of Constructions and Inspections Department to look at more. What we've found is that a lot of our laws that we have for tenants in Seattle, they are translated into different languages, nine different languages. But those are the notices that we the city. That's the information that we the city provides to tenants that we do not have a standard where notices from landlords to tenants should be offered in appropriate languages. So I think that's something that if if it is indeed true that our ability to enforce these laws are really there self enforced by tenants, then we need to really make sure that tenants are aware of the laws as well, so that if folks have other comments, I'd like to open it up. No other comments. All right. Those in please call the role on the passage of the Bill O'Brien. All right. So, Aunt, I beg your. Burgess i. Gonzalez i. Johnson whereas President Herbold i. Eight in favor and then opposed the bill passage. Congratulations. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Report of the. I swear, I. Item number six. Agenda item six Constable 118 696 relating to the 2016 budget amending ordinance 124 927 which adopted the 2016 budget, changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels due to changes in city employment compensation and ratifying confirming certain prior acts all by 3/1 vote of the City Council.

Rezones property located at 2698 South Federal Boulevard from S-MU-3 to S-MX-3 in Council District 7. (NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING) Rezones property located at 2698 South Federal Boulevard from S-MU-3 (Suburban, Multi-Unit, 3 stories) to S-MX-3 (Suburban, Mixed-Use, 3 stories) in Council District 7. IF ORDERED PUBLISHED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THIS ITEM. REFER TO THE "PENDING" SECTION OF THE FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS FOR THE DATE. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 9-2-15.

DenverCityCouncil_10122015_15-0573

Testimony is recorded in any item presented to the Council are marked as exhibits and become a part of the public record. Public hearings for 573 is now open. May we have a staff report? Good evening. So community planning and development. This is a rezoning or a map amendment. Location of the property is 2698. Federal South Federal Boulevard. The proposal is to rezone the property from suburban multi-unit three storey to suburban mixed use. Three storey. So the property is located in Southwest and in the City Council District seven in the College View South Plant neighborhood. This gives you a little closer view of the location. It is on the northeast corner of Yale Avenue, West Yale Avenue and South Federal Boulevard. It is about 9000 square feet. Currently a single family structure or office structure. Property owner is requesting this rezoning to allow the existing office use. And again, the proposal is to rezone from suburban context multi-unit three storey to suburban context mixed use three storey. So the suburban neighborhood context is consisted of single family, multi-unit, commercial strips, commercial centers, office parks, single unit and multi-unit. Residential uses are usually located away from commercial streets and resident and arterial streets. Multi-unit, on the other hand, and commercial uses are located on arterial arterial streets and collector streets. The street and block pattern can be very different when we usually have a modified grid, sometimes not alleys, sometimes not detached sidewalks, cul de sacs. So our block shapes vary, and we have pictures here that kind of give you a flavor of what the suburban neighborhood context is. So the surrounding the existing zoning, as I said before, is suburban context, multi-unit, three storey height limit. There is a view plane that covers the property from Ruby Hill. So the height limit on the property would be 98 feet. Obviously, a three storey building isn't going to be that high. So the new plane is going to have very little effect. The current land use is an office and the current building form is this one story structure. This just gives you a little bit of context on the zoning surrounding it. The property. Where it says SMU three and s 12. All of this property was zoned R for under former Chapter 59, which was our highest density residential zone district under Chapter 59. And in the 2010 citywide rezoning was re zoned to fit the context a little bit better of the existing structures. So the. 612 directly across federal is a 12 storey building. It's a senior housing facility. And then the surrounding buildings to our property, to the subject property are three storey multi-unit structures and then a little south. We've got a pretty that's the kind of a strip mall and another pudi across from that and more residential three storey that ended up being CC three a little further south of that. And then in the larger context, we've got an elementary school to the east and then more commercial along Federal Boulevard in here. So as I said earlier, the existing use is office. The surrounding uses are multi-unit 112 storey and then several three storey. And the vacant property just east of our site that shows up white on this existing land use map is currently there are currently some three storey townhomes under construction on that property. So that this just gives you a flavor for what's surrounding our our property. So the upper left is the property itself. It was a single family home that was rehabbed into an office building, the 12 story office. I mean, senior housing is on the bottom left. And then the two, three story multi-unit to the north in the upper right, the three story townhomes under construction to the east of the property in the middle. Right. And then lower right is the across from that across from that, another three story multi-unit structure. So a planning board heard this on August 5th and unanimously recommended approval of this on September 2nd. This application was heard at the Neighborhoods and Planning Committee and it was moved on to the full council floor. And then, of course, here we are today and all of the proper notices and sign postings have been made. The Arnaud's affected by this are the College View Neighborhood Association, Denver Neighborhoods Association Inc. In our neighborhood cooperation and we have had no public comment on this application. So you're well aware of the criteria, consistency with adopted plans, uniformity of district regulations, furthering the public health, safety and welfare. Justifying circumstances and consistency with neighborhood context and zone district. Purpose and Intent. So the pertinent plans for this property are a comprehensive plan. 2000 and Blueprint. Denver. There is no local neighborhood plan. So a comprehensive plan tells us to support the creation and growth of neighborhood business to encourage quality infill development that's consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and to continue to promote mixed use development. Blueprint. Denver The land use concept is commercial corridor for Federal Boulevard. These are linear business districts, usually oriented to arterial streets with high frequency transit routes. This is an area of stability where we want to maintain the character of the area and area while accommodating some new development and redevelopment. As far as for future street classification, South Federal Boulevard is a commercial arterial. These are. Our streets that serve a citywide function for mobility mostly. And. Our commercial streets obviously balance that mobility with access to business. A federal boulevard in on the Blueprint Denver map is also an enhanced bus transit corridor. These are corridors where we want to study, enhance transit and where we want to incentivize it with the possibility of mixing uses or transit friendly uses. UCL Avenue is an undesignated local street, but across Federal Boulevard on the west side of Federal Boulevard, Yale Avenue is a residential arterial street. So staff believes that. This application is consistent with our blueprint Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000 and that it will have no effect on the uniformity of district regulations as this as Annex three will be treated the same as every is mx3 in the city, and that by implementing our plans, we are furthering the public health, safety and welfare. The justifying circumstance is. Changed conditions. Per the Denver Code zoning code, the land or its surrounding environs has changed or is changing to a degree that is in the public interest to encourage the redevelopment or to recognize the changed character of the area. Sorry, I'm losing my voice. Let me take a sip of water. So the changed condition here is that the property had already been being rehabilitated or rehabbed into an office right about the time that the city was doing a citywide rezoning and zoning it for multi-unit. Unaware that the property was being changed, the use of the property was being changed. So we're trying just to acknowledge that change in the use of the structure with this rezoning. So we did talk a little bit earlier about neighborhood context, the suburban neighborhood context. These commercial uses on arterial streets in our suburban neighborhood context are fairly common, along with the adjacent multi-unit structures. The other commercial buildings on the block. We believe that this all forms a commercial strip on Federal Boulevard that's consistent with this suburban neighborhood context and the specific intent of the S-Max three zone district and applies to these areas in intersections where local and collector streets at a scale of 1 to 3 intersect with those corridors. And we believe the commercial corridor is very accepting of this kind of mixed use zoning as is. I said as I said before, our enhanced transit corridors, we want where we want to encourage a mixture of uses that support transit. So we do believe that this is this application is consistent with the neighborhood context and the zone district purpose and intent. And we do recommend approval of this application. Thank you, Mr. Sarah. We have to speak or sign them, and I'll call you both up. First is Garrett Jones. Second one is that Texar? So, Mr. Jones, you can come on it. Good evening. My name's Garrett Jones. I'm the owner of this proposed site and in short purchased the property early 2009 and commenced rehabbing the property into its current use, which is my office. During that period of 6 to 8 months of remodeling and going through the process with the city of Denver, the letters that were sent out about the overlay rezoning process that was happening back then were being sent to the previous owner and not to myself. And so I was unaware of what was going on with Denver's rezoning structure. And so I applied and was granted permission to commercialize the building and put in the ramps and all the necessary things to to receive a certificate of occupancy and deeded the city part of my frontage to meet their criteria that they needed to meet to make it a commercial building. A few years ago, I went to test the market and actually put the property up for sale and received two offers on it. But neither one could close simply because I wasn't aware it wasn't zoned commercial. So that ensued. The process of applying to have it resumed, and that's where I'm at now. The difficulty in having it as an SME U3 building is it doesn't have a kitchen or even a bathtub or a shower or anything that a residential property would have to be able to market the property as a residential property. The whole units commercial was just a sink toilet and a drinking fountain. So that's, in short, why I'm here. Thank you, Mr. Jones. Okay. That Texas. Fat tax of 4535. Julian Street, Denver, Colorado. Mr. President, for the second time, I have to object to the fact that this Council clearly has a different set of rules of speech for speech that it supports as opposed to free speech it's supposed to. Tonight, the room was allowed to be overcrowded despite the council rules. And interestingly, the same people who were cut off when they sought to do a demonstration in opposition to the camping ban were tonight allowed to engage in a loud demonstration and were not expelled from the room as they were previously. It is simply unconstitutional to treat speech that you support. Mr. Text and speech. Are your comments really? Thank you. All right, that concludes our speakers. Now time for questions from members of the council. Councilwoman, can each. Thank you, Mr. President. Just a quick question for Teresa. Why is commercial not an acceptable use in the SMU? What is the mix of uses if it's not commercial? Is it just retail and residential that's allowed in that zone district? I brought a copy. Oh, my goodness. Multi-unit. Okay. That's. Yeah, it's. Are you? I think my colleague just answered my question. I agree. I think I was I was misremembering what the acronym stood for. A unit, melting unit. And there are not very many commercial uses. All right. Got it. Thank you. Thanks, Kendra. Thank you. Councilman McKinney, Councilman Clarke, you have a question for the microphone. Thank you, Mr. President. Yes. So I just want to clarify in the report, it says that when this was converted to commercial, it was an allowable use in the old zoning. And it was just missed that it had been converted. No, when it was converted was in 2000, late 2009. We were in the process of redoing our zoning code and taking a look at all of the zoning citywide. So this was zoned R four, which is another multi-unit zoned district. So when we took a look at this building and it looked like a residential structure and the structures around it were multi-unit, we zoned the whole area multi-unit thinking this was a being used as a residence. And I'm sorry, maybe I didn't clarify my question up in the report. It says that at the time it was zoned r four and that the office use was an allowable use under the R for zoning. Is that. Correct? Yes. Okay. So at the time it was converted, it was an allowable use and then the zoning was changed, which made it not in law will use after it had already been converted because of what we citywide rezoning. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Carter. Any other questions? Public hearing is now closed. Time for comments, Councilman Clark. Thank you, Mr. President. And and thank you for the hard work on this, Miss Lucero. You know, for me, this isn't an easy one to support. I think we're fixing something. That was a glitch in the changeover. It was converted. It was a it was an allowable use when it was converted. And some were got an oversight that has affected our the land use that was allowed and permitted at the time. So I will be voting to support this. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments on 573? Scene on Madam Secretary, roll call. Clark. I Espinosa. I Flynn. I Gilmore. I. Cashman. High can each. I Lopez. Hi new Ortega. I assessment i black. I Brooks. I. Mr. President, hi. Madam Secretary, please, for the vote in our results. 1339 as Council Bill 573 has passed. All right. Next one is 615 as amended. Councilman Brooks, will you please put Council Bill 615 as amended on the floor? Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. I put Council Bill 615 as amendment on the floor. Final consideration to pass. It has been moved and seconded. Public hearing on 615 is now open. May we have that for. Thank you, Mr. President. And good evening, council members. I'm Kyle Dalton with the Department of Community Planning and Development. This application is at 620 West First Avenue and is includes a portion of 90. Galapagos Street is located in Council District seven and it's in the Baker Statistical neighborhood, midway between Santa Fe and Broadway and midway between sixth and Alameda. It. The rezoning faces First Avenue east of Gallup Peg and it's along the west side of the alley, and it's on the eastern edge of what's known as the Industrial Crescent area of Denver. It is located outside the Baker neighborhood historic Landmark District, which is shown on this slide with the Goldenrod dash line. The historic district is to the east and this is to the west outside of the historic district. The property to be risen is 6340 square feet. It includes a four unit to I'm sorry for you in a two story residential building on a 4600 square foot parcel. And then the remainder of the property is included with the larger 90 Galapagos Street property, which has a one story office building and accessory surface parking. And the property owners are the ones making the request. They are requesting rezoning in order to enable a zone lot amendment to conform their zone lots to their current parcel lines. There's not a specific development proposal here, and if nothing else, this slide will really explain why they're here before you. Tonight has to do with a parcel line adjustment that was done since the time of zoning in 2010.

AN ORDINANCE related to surplus county real property; and amending Ordinance 12045, Section 5, as amended, and K.C.C. 4.56.070 and Ordinance 12045, Section 14, as amended, and K.C.C. 4.56.150.

KingCountyCC_08182021_2021-0257

That brings us to the final item on today's agenda, an ordinance that would amend regulations relating to the dispensation of land or unused county owned property and require a creation of a publicly accessible database of these properties. Randy Vina from Council South will provide a staff report. Melvina, the line is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize. My internet connection is a little bit squirrely this morning, so I am afraid to use video and audio at the same time, so I will not have my video app. For the record, Randy may not have council central staff. The materials for this item both began on page 33 of your packet. As Mr. Chair just said, the proposed ordinance would make changes to King County Code related to a publicly accessible database for and the disposition of vacant or unused county owned real property. As background, King County Code establishes requirements and guidelines for the disposition of county owned, real and personal property. The requirements include inventory, documentation and procedures related to the disposition and sale of surplus property. Code requires the facilities management to the division to maintain and update the current inventory of all county title real property along with detailed information as to which county department or agency is and is the department or custodian of that property. These requirements apply to surplus property. However, there is no requirement that the inventory be made available to the public. County code further requires that each departmental custodian submit a report to the Facilities Management Division no later than April 1st of each calendar year that describes the status of all real property under the department's custodianship. The report must document any changes in use or status of the real property and justify the retention and continued custodianship of the property. In declaring real county owned real property surplus. There are a series of steps that must be taken before the Facilities Management Division can make that declaration. First, a department or custodian must justify its retention of the real property. It cannot do so. Or if the custodian determines that it no longer needs the property. The Facilities Management Division must determine whether another county department or agency has a need for the property to provide to provide essential government services. Second, if the property is not needed for essential government services, the division must then determine if the passable parcel is suitable for affordable housing. If it's not deemed suitable for affordable housing, then the division must determine whether any other department or agency has any other need for the property. Finally, if no other department or agents who can demonstrate a need for the property, the division can declare the property surplus. Code provides for different uses of county owned real property that has been declared surplus as an example. Code does require that the Facilities Management Division recommend to the executive uses for county owned surplus property that includes uses by nonprofits for public purposes. And also of note county code does accept the sale at fair market value of surplus property that will be donated or sold to a bona fide nonprofit organization that provides services to the poor and infirm. The proposed ordinance would require that the Facilities Management Division conducts a surplus. Property analysis on any county owned real property that has not been leased occupied are used for a period of two consecutive years or longer. It would also require that the division establish a publicly accessible database of surplus real property owned by the county. There are a few things that the ordinance does with relation to reporting requirements, time considerations and the surplus property database. On page 35, again information about all of those different things. And I'll start with the reporting requirements. As I mentioned earlier, King County Code does require all departmental custodians to submit a report to the Facilities Management Division no later than April 1st of each calendar year. And that report describes all of the real property under the department's custodianship. It's supposed to document any changes in the use or status of the real property, and it should justify the retention and continued custodianship of the property. According to Facilities Management Division staff. Not all departmental custodians comply with the current provision requiring this amount of the report, and so the proposed ordinance would therefore add a requirement that the division maintain and update a list of the department, all custodians that have not submitted the required report. Under time considerations, according to FMD staff, until a departmental custodian has declared to FMD that it no longer needs the property. The property is not under control of FMD and they cannot unilaterally, unilaterally decide that a custodian is no longer using our needs property. This sometimes results in property sitting vacant or unused for long periods of time because departmental custodians have indicated that they no longer need them. The proposed ordinance would therefore give the Facilities Management Division the ability to conduct a survey plus property analysis that is set forth in county code where a county owed real personal county or real property has been vacant or unused for two consecutive years or longer. Additionally, departmental custodians do have control over leasing decisions of property that is under their custodianship. So the proposed ordinance would require departmental custodians to work in conjunction with the Facilities Management Division and other county agencies or departments to determine whether a property or portion of a property can be leased to a bona fide nonprofit organization that provides services to benefit the public. And this provision would be required where the custodian has not made use of or occupied a property for a period of two consecutive years or longer. Finally, with regards to the surplus property database, the proposed ordinance would require the Facilities Management Division to create and maintain a publicly accessible database of all county and real property that has been declared surplus. And it must include details such as the address dimensions and zoning restrictions for the parcel. That concludes my remarks on this proposed ordinance. I'd be happy to answer any questions. We also do have Anthony Wright, the director of the Facilities Management Division, here to answer any questions. Thank you. Council members a hello. This is your audience. Did you want to offer opening comments? Sure. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Really excited to increase Tony Wright's empire. No, I'm kidding. I just wanted to throw a little joke out there and make him uncomfortable. I'm excited to put forward the Surplus Land and Buildings ordinance today and get the feedback of my colleagues. As we've all been seeing, demand for safe indoor spaces has never been higher in our region. Not only have gentrification and displacement been making it harder for people to stay indoors, but so many pressures are making it harder to even be outdoors. Temperatures outside are either scorching or freezing. There's smoke clogging our air. The pandemic has come roaring back, gun violence is spiking and so on and so forth. So all these issues tell me we can leave no stone unturned to increase indoor options for the public. If King County owns buildings or land that isn't using for long periods, we should make those spaces available to our communities. Organizations could then use those spaces for housing, health clinics, office space, after school activities, and I'm sure all of my colleagues can vouch for this. But every week I hear from organizations that want to serve their communities and really important ways, but they don't have the physical space to do so in a region that pushes so many people out. I would say that's the thing that I hear from my constituents about the most. We want a physical space to either do our work, provide housing, provide care for our communities, but we just don't have the space to exist anymore in this region. So my legislation would require King County to conduct a surplus property analysis on county owned real property that it hasn't been using for long periods, at least two years . And then it would establish a publicly accessible database of surplus property owned by our county so that communities or organizations could check to see what's available. I hope this ordinance plays a part in getting people indoors and using our existing resources more effectively. And I look forward to hearing thoughts, concerns and ways to improve the legislation for all of my colleagues. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Question comments. Questions from colleagues. Councilmember Banducci. Yeah. I want to first say thank you to Councilman Rizal. I have for thinking about ways that we can continue to use the resources that we have to support this really important work. We know that we have a housing. We had a real housing challenge prior to COVID, and it's only gotten more challenging since then. So I think that knowing what tools we have in the toolbox and being transparent about that and, you know, holding up to the light, anything that we might be able to do is a really valuable exercise. And so I just wanted to say that up front, there are definitely reasons why the county might want to retain property that it is not currently using. And but I think that having a full inventory of what our properties are and which ones we're holding on to for reasons and what those reasons are would be a very valuable thing to do. Just to give an example, and this is a hypothetical that I'm actually generalizing from a city that I know you can hold on to surplus property sometimes for a very long time because you think, for example, that you may need to expand your solid waste capacity or your wastewater capacity and you're holding onto property because you think you might put a facility there someday. And it's you know, it saves you a great deal of cost when you need to do that. And those are also really important priorities for the county. So I wouldn't want us to rush headlong into let's get rid of all our property. But this is I understand it is a let's understand what all our property is, where it is. Make sure that is public and that we are being intentional about when we're hanging onto property for important reasons and thinking about how we can use the property we really, truly. Don't need. More quickly and more effectively. So if I understand that correctly, I think this is a really good a really good proposal, definitely in line with other policies that the council has pursued over the last several years. But I would love to hear what Mr. Wright has to say about the expansion of his empire that would be of interest to me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Empire Commander. Right. You're on mute. Yes. And I'm I'm following our inside county buildings policy with the mask. So you can't see me smiling and laughing at the comment. So I. But that's good. I, I, I think this is a this is just clarify something. I think the ASP, especially the aspect of the database, I think the database to track all of this because of the history of the county and how it was formed in the merger with Metro and stuff. There's a lot of complexities to the property. We have portions of the the county that can acquire property but can't dispose of it. So having a consolidated means for us to track these and fine tuning the reporting system which we already have underway, I think is going to be really, really helpful. The the evaluation of need, I think, is is an important aspect. And leaving that discretion for facilities that we that may be needed five or six years in the future because they have a clear plan that's moving towards that. But but identifying that means you have five or six years where that that facility might be usable. Being able to capture those particular elements, I think is going to be very useful. I look forward to asking for more money in order to do this database and expand my empire. But no, I think we support this supports legislation. And. The Security Council members. Hello. Thank you. Thank you so much for that, Tony. And I also wanted to just build on what Councilmember Baldacci was mentioning, even if it's not to completely transfer or quote unquote, get rid of surplus land in in the period where we're not using it. The public could get great benefit from being able to use buildings or space in the interim. You know, five years is enough to provide, you know, a safe place for people to go for five years, for organizations to build out their capacity until they can find their own permanent location. Just being able to use these spaces more efficiently is something that I think is beyond valuable. Thank you. You're welcome. Are there further questions? Is there a desire to have the opportunity to take this up in committee in the future? Is there an interest in emotion today? I would like to move it today and most our colleagues want to discuss it more in committee. I would be happy to wait as well. People have more thoughts they want to work through. Councilmember Bell, DC, you're off mute. Are you telling me some? You want to be talk? I just will state my support for voting today if you need that. Thank you. Councilmember Ismail. I think you should make a motion and take your chances. So move. Mr. Chair, I would like to move the legislation. Thank you. Motion Councilmember Zelaya's moves. We give a to pass recommendation to ordinance 2021 to 57. Any further discussion? Madam Couric, would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Biology Councilmember Dombrowski. Hi. Councilmember Dunn. No. Was a member Kowalski I council member Lambert. Coffman Lumber I council member of the call. I council member one night that. I found some members online. Hi. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The vote is eight I's Council Member ten voting no. Thank you. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to ordinance 2021. 257 will advance that to full council on the regular calendar and in regular timeline. Madam Clerk, did we miss any votes today?

Consideration of Mayor’s Nominations to the Civil Service Board, Commission on Disabilities, Golf Commission, Library Board, Planning Board, Public Art Commission, Public Utilities Board, Recreation and Park Commission, Social Service Human Relations Board, and Transportation Commission; and Mayor’s Appointment to the Rent Review Advisory Committee.

AlamedaCC_06022015_2015-1701

Federation of Mayors nominations to the Civil Service Board Commission on Disabilities Golf Commission. Library Board. Planning Board. Public Art Commission. Public Utilities Board. Recreation Part Commission. Social Service. Human Relations Board and Transportation Commission. And Mayor's Appointment to the Rent Review Advisory Committee. So this evening. I'm not a we're not doing transportation or. Correct. Right. We have one speaker slip. Four Smiley. Good evening, Madam Mayor. Council members. Know you have a big item with the budget on the agenda, so I'll try to be brief, but I just want to. Say in my. Day job I work for the county and I really appreciate. It. Listening to the considered discussion you had. On the body camera item. There's a lot of. Discussion even at the county level about data retention and surveillance policies. And it's very refreshing to see you all. Have that discussion and. The police department stepping up to be. Accountable and setting example for other departments on how to work with a policy body and the community on on those types of things. I understand you're not going to be taking up the Transportation Commission. Item this evening, but I did want. To attend to. Just say that I hope to continue to serve on the Transportation Committee and receive the nomination to. Be reappointed. In the four years that I've gotten to serve with the other commissioners, it's been a privilege to work with them, city staff. And residents in that public process. I've really I've been really encouraged. Growing up here in the on the island and. Working in government for many years, seeing. The active participation of so many residents. At our meetings. For a time, the Commission wasn't meeting. When I started. We started meeting again with. Considerable help from city staff. To make sure those. Meetings took place and the diligent work. Of the other commissioners as well. You know, not every city in our county has a transportation commission. So I think this shows real commitment from this body. Your council, to. Really consider these. Items and. Have community engagement on on transportation decisions. And so that's why I take this volunteer position so seriously, as well as the. Impact it. Has on. Long term environmental impacts due to greenhouse. Gas emissions, as well as improving. Our everyday quality of life as we move about our island. So with that, I just hope to have your ear receive your. Consideration and support to continue serving the city. Thank you. Thank you. So this evening. I will be nominating candidates for civil service board or my recommend my appointments for Civil Service Board, Golf Commission and Rent Review Advisory Committee. And first, I want to say that we had a very good candidates for all of these positions. I am limited in regards to how many I can appoint. So it's actually a really hard process and for some of these. We we would have. I received input from community members staff. And after actually a lot of deliberation on my part. And then and it's time to do the nominations. So for Civil Service Board, I will be nominating Jan Bryant and Cookie Robles Wong. For Golf Commission. There's two seats. One of us. One is a partial term and the other one is a full term. For the partial, I'll be nominating Ronald Carlson. And for the full ad downing. And then the last one is Rent Review Advisory Committee. And for that position, I'll be nominating Karen Lucas. Those will be the nominations. And then they will come back for approval by count by council at the next meeting, except. For the rent review advisory committee that the mayor directly appoints. Okay. So except for a rent review advisory committee and the rest of these commissions and boards. Members of the public may still continue submitting applications. And we are. Rolling out these as we get through them. So some of them you can expect to see come back on the 16th. And also in regards to when their next meeting is, so that they will hopefully have a quorum at all of the upcoming meetings and then after. So in June and July, you should see the appointments for the balance. Yes. Member Ashcroft. So, um, thank you, Mary Spencer. So I would just like to comment. First of all, I appreciated hearing from Commissioner Miley. I have actually been at a transportation commission meeting. I think we did a joint planning board Transportation Commission meeting when I was on the planning board. And I've also had occasion to sit in on a transportation commission meeting. And I would say that this is just the kind of applicant, current serving commissioner that I'd like to see more of. And why is because as you can see, he's young and I appreciate hearing that perspective. We often find that it's almost you know, it's something that takes a lot of time and to be in the midst of a full time career, to have a family and to take time out to serve your community, I think is something laudable. I think anyone who's done a good job in one term as a commission, really, as a commissioner, really should, and by tradition has always been reappointed. And I wouldn't want to think that we're trying to make our commissions very homogenous so that I mean, in terms of maybe opinions and outlooks and, you know, wanting people to just vote a certain way. It goes back to what I said earlier, that I think we as a community, certainly as a council, are better served by a wide array of differences of opinions. And I really do like whenever ever I'm out and about. And people often, you know, young families that have moved down, me meeting, they tell me how much they love Almeida. Love what's going on? Love the development. Added Alameda Landing. I've been hearing that a lot lately. I always say, Well, wouldn't you love to serve your city on a border commission? Go online? They go, Oh, it takes so much time. I just don't have time. So I really hope that we're encouraging people who are already doing a stellar job to to keep doing it and that we will look for diversity of, I know age, geographic location, ethnicity, professions, all those different things. Thank you. Any other member body? Thank you, Madam Mayor, for putting forth your nominees. And in a way, I respect the prerogative of the mayor to make these nominations. I mean, I think there should be some respect to the the council is provocative to approve them. And I hope as you go through deliberations, you'll give serious thought to renominating Mr. Miley. I think he has served the community well. I think it's important to have an independent voice on these these boards and commissions. These are where the issues that we ultimately decide percolate through the community, where there's a lot of discussion, a lot of back and forth, a lot of forming of of policies and recommendations. And then, you know, after we have that back and forth on both sides, you know, we get a chance to weigh in and either ratify those or send them back for reconsideration. So I really respect the job that Chris has done as a as a fellow government staffer. You know, I think he brings a wealth of knowledge and connections to to the position. And I really think he deserves an opportunity to be renominated. And I hope that you give strong consideration to renominating him. And I'm also happy that Cooky Roberts Wrong is going to be on the Civil Service Board. So. Thanks very much for making that that nomination. So any other member comments? I think we have many good applicants that are diverse and I am working with staff and community members on feedback for all of the positions and I actually I do welcome more applications. If there's anyone else that's interested in applying for these other positions, step up, feel free to. And you can always in fact ask staff if you have any questions about what what the position entails or any other members that are serving currently. If you'd like more information, feel free to inquire. All right. That being said, I will. Now, at this point, I'm going to do it during the meeting. Oh, sorry, sorry. We did have two additional. Speakers under oral communications, if we could go back to that. On prior to going to number eight. Okay. And do we have those lips? That's all right. And just so you know, we would just be adjourning the first meeting, but then we have a second meeting. All right, Linda Weinstock and then Ken Petersen.

A resolution by the Council of the City and County of Denver, sitting ex officio as the Board of Directors of the Gateway Village General Improvement District, approving a Work Plan, adopting a Budget and making appropriations for the Budget Year 2019 and approving a Mill Levy, and approving an Amended Work Plan and adopting an Amended Budget for the Budget Year 2018. Approves the 2019 Operating Plan and Budget for the Gateway Village General Improvement District in Council District 11. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 10-31-18.

DenverCityCouncil_11192018_18-1245

Provides Resolution 1242 has passed. Council is now convened as the board of Directors of the Gateway Village General Improvement District. Councilman Cashman, will you please put Resolution 1 to 4 or five on the floor? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that resolution 18 dash one, two, four, five, be adopted. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for resolution one, two, four or five is open. May we have the staff report? Good evening, board members. I'm Michael Kerrigan with the Department of Finance, Capital Planning and Programing Division. I am before you tonight to give the staff report and request approval for the Gateway Village General Improvement District 2019 Annual Work Plan and Budget and a 2018 Budget Amendment. The district is located in the northeastern section of the city, northwest of I-70 and Chambers intersection. It consists of approximately 243 acres on the eastern border of Montebello. It is completely developed and primarily consists of residential property. Responsibilities include maintaining the landscaping of parks within the district. City Council approved the formation of the Gateway Village General Improvement District by ordinance and number 551 through 1994 and establish City Council as the ex-officio board of Directors of the District. The Creation Ordinance also created a district advisory board made up of property owners. Within the guide, the ordinance specified that such advisory board should conduct and manage all affairs of the district as the authorized agent for the Board of Directors, including its financial and legal affairs pursuant to Resolution Number 32 Series 1995. Denver City Council authorized the District Advisory Board to create a work plan and budget for approval by the Board of Directors annually. The Gateway Village 2018 Budget Amendment reflects total expenditures and fund transfers of $1,000,036.30 $6,913. This change reflects the reduction reflects the reduction in expenditures from the 2019 budget due to delay in the Joey's planned landscape improvement project. The funds allocated for the landscape project in 2018 rolled into the 2019 budget. The Gateway Village 2019 budget proposes overall expenditures of $1,491,803, with total revenues of $619,914. The district will also transfer $500,000 into its Capital Project Fund. The district will assess 20 mils of property on real property within the district. During 2019, the district plans to undertake a major landscape and major landscaping fence improvement project. Landscape improvements are anticipated to include tree lines, entry monuments and improvements to the retention ponds and drainage channels. The district expects to spend approximately 1.37 million on these improvements. City staff has reviewed the 2019 Budget Work and Work Plan and recommends it for approval. Jeffrey Erb of Center and Vandewalle, legal counsel for the District, is also here and available to answer questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have three individuals signed up to speak this evening. Again, I would ask that you come to the front row as your time will start when I call your name. First up, Jeffrey. Good evening, Jeffrey Erb. I'm general counsel for the GID, and I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Next up, Jesse Pierce. Good evening again, members of council. My name is Jesse Pierce. I'm representing for Denver Homicide, a loud black star action moment for self-defense and community commitment for change. Community action and commitment for change. I am against this. But again, like Sekou already said, we are just going to go through with this anyway. I don't even know we have a public comment. Gateway Village. This is close to the airport so I'm just is going to make make way for all the new transplants that we're expecting to come to this city more unaffordable house. And this is going to be very expensive for you to live in this neighborhood. Gateway Village. So, yeah, it's just business as usual. Well, like I said, I'm running for office. City Council at large 2019 sweep. Council. Like they sweep in the homeless. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Chairman Sekou. Chairman SIEGEL. Next. It's a movement for self-defense. Positive Action. Commitment for social change. May 2019, city and county of Denver represent the interests of poor working poor. The oppressed. They exploit it. The abused. The disrespected. Just so we're perfectly clear. These general improvement districts. Inherently. Were intended to improve the neighborhood where. Folks came together, pulled the resources together to do projects that were of mutual interest and benefit. For those who lived in that area. When the decision was made consciously. But the business community. The political community. And folks who were pretty much lap dog lackeys of capitalism decided to come in and seize these neighborhood for the economic interests of the few at the expense of the many, and then surreptitiously bang your tax receipt where you didn't even know you was getting charged. But you moved into neighbor and you bought a house or you started renting. But part of your rent was to pay this tax, this mill levy that came from the people who are paying the rent that was too high. So here goes the pimping. Legalized pimping by political. Pimps and streetwalkers. Who have no shame whatsoever. But it's all game because you're hoping they never find out what you're doing down here. But there's a problem. Somebody showed up and somebody told it to. And in the process, a whole lot of folks didn't really like this guy. But the one thing they can never say is that, chairman, say, who ever came down here for 15 years and lied to the people about the liars and conned and manipulation and the slide, the slick and the wickedness that's happening in this body. 13. Are your time is up. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Seeing no questions. The public hearing for Resolution 1245 is closed. Are there any comments from members of council? Council, I'm going to do anything on this one. No. All right. Sing. No comments. Madam Secretary. Oracle. Black eye. Brooks Espinosa, my friend. I. Gillmor. I Herndon High. Cashman. I can h. I. Lopez I knew sorry. Ortega, i. Susman, i. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting in notes results. Twice.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute agreements with the Long Beach Unified School District for the operation of the After School Education and Safety Program at Burbank, Edison, Garfield, Grant, King, Lafayette, and Lee Elementary, and Hudson K-8 school sites; authorize the required 15 percent in-kind match of $207,929 in the form of Community Development Block Grant and General Fund monies; execute any future documents, including amendments, necessary to accept, implement, and administer the agreements; and Increase appropriations in the General Grants Fund (SR 120) in the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department (PR) by $1,102,544. (Districts 1,2,4,6,7,9)

LongBeachCC_07212015_15-0699

Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to execute agreements with the Long Beach Unified School District for the operation of the After School Education and Safety Program. Authorize the required 15% in-kind match of 270 207,929 and increase appropriations in the General Grants Fund in the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department by 1,000,100. $1,102,544. District 124679. Thank you, Madam Clerk. There's been a motion by Councilmember Richardson and a second by me, Mr. West. Acting director Steve Scott and Gladys Kaiser, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council. The item before you tonight is to execute agreements with the Long Beach Unified School. District for the Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine to operate afterschool programing. Onsite at. Eight Long Beach schools. This is a. Program that's funded through the. State and administered by Long Beach Unified School District. The department is one of eight providers, contracted providers. Through the district. We provide services at eight sites. The remaining. Seven providers provide services at another 49 649. Sites. This is our eighth year providing the. Service and we expect to serve about 200,000 students this. Year. We're open for any questions. Thank you. Is there any public comment on the item? Seeing none. Members, cast your vote. I'm sorry, Councilman Andrews. It's late. It's late. No. It's. It's not late, Councilman. All right. Good. You know, as a teacher, I really see the hands of the importance. You know, the benefits of my school program. And I think that they are linked in the significant gains. You and standardized test scores and work habits, as well as reduction in behavior. You know, after school hours are always the peak time for juvenile crime and risky behavior. So I serve this, you know, and prevent this type of activity as well. So I'm definitely flavor in favor of continuing this program for our youth. And thank you for bringing this forth. Thank you, Councilman Andrews. Is there any public comment on the item? Seeing none. Members cast your vote. Motion carries nine zero. Thank you. Item 30. Yes. Yes.

Recommendation to receive and file a presentation from VoiceWaves Long Beach on Youth Justice Research.

LongBeachCC_10222019_19-1068

Ocean carries. 18. Adam, 18, is communication from Council Member Pearce recommendations received via a presentation from Voice Waves Long Beach on Youth Justice Research. Thank you and good to you. Here is Chan Hobson here. Okay. Okay. So, no, there's there is no comment. Customer reports. Yes. Thank you. We're going to receive and file a presentation from Voice Waves, a youth led journalism and media training program of Youth Leadership Institute, a statewide youth leadership and development nonprofit voice wave partners with Long Beach youth from the ages of 15 to 25, whose goal it is to raise awareness on community issues within our local neighborhoods. Trainings include digital photography, video radio, social media to engage community on important local issues. With this platform, youth are provided a creative outlet to be a vital part of our community. So we've invited them here today to give us a brief presentation, and I am very happy to say I attended their presentation. Oh three, four. Months ago in June and it was a packed house of youth and their families and just felt like the kind of community space that we wanted to make sure we brought up some of the work that they've done. So thank you, guys. Blunt speak on. Yeah. 1/2. Oh, sorry. Okay. Do they have their clicker? Okay. Okay. How do we use this? How exactly do we use this? Sorry, I just want to. Okay, cool. Hi. My name is Carlos. This is Michael Lozano. As the councilwoman said, we're representing voice lives and Youth Leadership Institute. And we're here to talk about some of the findings that we got from data we collected as a part of the My Brother's Keeper initiative. Here we go. So the My Brother's Keeper initiative was launched in 2014 to address opportunity gaps faced by young males of color and with the support of the Long Beach Department of Health and Human Services. Youth from Voice Waves and Youth Leadership Institute created a survey and a short form documentary to highlight how these issues exist today on the local level. And so we started this process in February and finished it up in June. And during that time, what you see on the screen where some of the headlines kind of just detailing some of the events that were happening at the time, that kind of. Expose youth to getting involved with the criminal justice system. And throughout the process, we also recorded a podcast featuring a discussion about preventing youth from getting involved with the justice system. This featured community experts such as members of Black Lives Matter. And like our documentary, this can be found on the voiceless website. Voice leads dot org, not dot.com. So our survey, we received a total of 197 responses from youth in Long Beach, and the survey was crafted by the youth involved in the My Brother's Keeper project under the Supervision of Wildlife staff. Our goal with the survey was learn more about the mental health needs of youth both before and during their involvement with the justice system. And as you can see above, a lot of our youth that were surveyed reported being between the ages of 14 and 18. Some were older than that. And they also reported mostly not having a job or being part time workers. And being on free and reduced lunch. Questions about. Give me a second. So questions about gender and about race are both left open ended. As you can see, gender there was a pretty even split with people identifying as male and female, almost 5050. And then with race, the majority of our responders were Hispanic or Latino. But I think there's a pretty good mix that represents the diversity of our city. Most of the world, not most say a lot of the youth. Have had their lives impacted by the criminal justice system. Either they themselves have been involved personally or they know someone who has a lot of their involvement involved, having been interacting with school officials or law enforcement. And we. Sorry about that. Among one of the most startling findings that we got from the survey is that 63% of the youth participants had experienced what they described as extreme stress or trauma in some frequency, with 31% of those youths saying that they experiencing it daily or weekly. And survey participants were also asked to describe how they cope with trauma and other negative emotions. On the screen, you'll see the most popular responses to that question. And for the rest of the presentation, I'm going to turn it over to Michael. Yeah. Cool. Thanks, Carlos. So just to reiterate what Carlos was saying, it's clear that some youth in Long Beach, many youth, too many youth face a high frequency of trauma and intense stress in their weekly or daily lives. That's self-reported by the youth and lobbyist themselves. So given the stress, given the negative life events that occur in their lives, we have to ask the question like, where should youth go to find that release? And so the five most common coping mechanisms that youth reported. Number one was sleep. Number two was talking to friends. And the third most common coping mechanism was creative arts and music. If we notice actually as we engage in this conversation, we're going to realize how important it is to talk to your friends, that this idea of talking, this idea of socialization among young people is really important , especially when we talk about how young people cope with negative, negative emotions such as anger, sadness, anxiety or stress in their lives. So talking to friends is going to be an important factor for the following reasons. A separate question asked youth of all these different coping mechanisms that you rely on, which coping mechanism do you believe is the most effective? So by and large, you said that talking is the most effective way to deal with stress and trauma. Here's the problem, though. Only 17% of you said that they could talk to their parents or family about their negative emotions. There are negative life events or traumas. Only 9% said they could talk to a trusted community member. What about talking to a teacher or counselor? Only 2% of youth said they could do that. 2% out of 197 students. Young people are youth in Long Beach. We talked about what coping methods are most common and which are most effective in reducing stress and trauma. Now we're talking about frequency. Well, talk is important. So how often do youth get to actually talk about their emotions to other people? Unfortunately, we did have to find that one in three youth never talked to anyone about their emotions. Excuse me 1/2. Another 25%. Express themselves to others only every few months. Or a few times a year. Adding on to that, there's a lot of youth who say that there's not many places for them to go for help. Not many people to rely on for support. Given the issues, we actually didn't want one to just rely on like the trauma or focus on that, focus on the problems. We also wanted to focus on solutions. So these are some youth led solutions that the respondents came up with. We asked them, you know, on a scale from 1 to 4, what do you feel are the most effective resources in preventing youth from becoming justice involved? Number one, by far, having a supportive family. Number two athletics. Number three, access to jobs for youth. Number four, music, art and creative media programs. And there's a few other factors up there. That's the top ten, top ten ways that these respondents feel they could be prevented from getting involved in the justice system. The least effective methods. Youth probation. Youth prisons in school detention. Again, focusing on solutions, focusing on the future of limited youth. We thought it was important to come up with three recommendations given this important data that we came across. Increasing restorative justice resources and program visibility across Long Beach. What this what this does, it shifts our solutions, our way of thinking from punitive to conversations, which you said themselves. Conversations and talking is the key to healing is the key to prevention. And we also to a turn youth that are disengaged, that maybe don't find many resources across their community. They become engaged in the community by via restorative justice, via community programs. Recommendation number two, increasing mental health opportunities in schools for both students and their families. Because we saw such a low rate of students being able to talk to their families about their negative emotions. We think it's important to do family counseling in schools. And we have just about 50 seconds left just on the timer. Absolutely. Got you. What this does is shift silence youth from silence to conversation. And recommendation number three, we recommend supporting policy efforts at the local level, at local level that dismantle the school to prison pipeline that shifts our policies from punitive to preventative. For the sake of time. We could we could skip this. But if anyone is interested in a trilingual documentary featuring Long Beach youth and experts on these very issues, go to Tony. You are welcome. Youth Justice Doc. It's in English with subtitles in Spanish and come I made possible with support with the health department here in Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilman ringing. I want to thank you for making this presentation. You presented a lot of ideas there that I think many of us already know but need to reinforce, such as family and detention and probation, aren't real solutions towards dealing with issues that these may be encountering. So thank you for reinforcing that, and I certainly support your efforts. I thank you. And if I can be of any help to you as a mentor or as a person that can share experiences. I grew up in East Los Angeles. This is an example. I was surrounded by many gang members and was even recruited to become one, which I didn't. And my diversion with sports is an example. So thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Pearce Yes. I'll be brief. I just wanted to first take a moment to thank the council members that brought together My Brother's Keeper before I believe Council Member Richardson might have worked on that. So I saw that in the first slide and thought about how much work has been done to get to this point, to get funding for organizations doing this great work while its youth center. And I think it's really important that we as a city continue to talk about our youth as our constituents, and make sure that we as adults are talking about trauma and understanding that it is really hard for kids to talk to us as adults, as leaders in our community, as parents. And so anything we can do to partner with these guys more to talk about trauma informed practices, to talk about restorative justice, I think it's a great opportunity. So thanks for bringing. Thank you, Katherine Richardson. Thanks. I just wanted to just chime in and thank you both for coming out with the presentation. Look forward to talking with you and taking a deeper dove here. You know, you your organization and organizations like yours were the ones who were lifting up and talking about this work well before My Brother's Keeper. My Brother's Keeper came because there was a lot of focus from the White House, from the top that said, hey, we want to focus on this population. And now the leadership of the White House has changed. The national dialog has completely changed. And we're getting back to a lot of the rhetoric and the context that was had that happened prior to then. And what do we see? We see the same organizations that were here before carrying this message are the ones who are here now carrying this message. So I think it's important that while sort of our national discourse has changed, we continue to support the local organizations who are continuing to change the narratives around the circumstances and the lives of people who who, you know, boys and young men of color. So so thank you so much. I look forward to talking to you soon. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. Councilmember Richardson. Motion carries.

Recommendation to Direct Staff to Establish a Process for Recruitment of a New City Manager. (City Manager 2210)

AlamedaCC_03172015_2015-1414

Thank you, Staff. Right. So now we're on six F. Recommendation to direct staff to establish a process for recruitment of a new manager. Good evening, mayor and council members. I'm Stephanie Geller, Brant Sierra, your administrative services director. I'm here today to discuss with you the process and timeline for selecting a new city manager. And staff is seeking some direction on how to move forward at this point. I believe you've seen the report that talks about the general timeline that we're looking at. And I think the some of the major questions that we need to. Some guidance on at this point is the where we go forward in terms of the recruitment. We have two avenues which to choose. One is to do an internal recruitment. The second is to go outside with a recruitment firm. In my experience, when you're hiring someone at the level of a city manager, it is typical to use an outside recruitment firm. They are the folks who are out there with their fingers on the pulse of who's who's available in the city manager, land and city staff. Really, we don't have that information. They will also put out the full color brochures. They know what the trends are and this is what staff is actually recommending at this point. I'm here for any questions on the report or the timeline. Member Daisuke. The question I have and I sent it earlier to the city manager because I seen it recently, one city they've put out to bid the the service to define city managers. For example, in your staff report, you've identified a whole number of potential human resources agencies. I think in the past, I think we just kind of selected one I can't remember generally. Well, we've done both internally and we have selected firms based on you know, I called around to find out basically what they're charging and who's available. And one thing I have found is that some firms are very busy right now. And so it's going to be depending on who's available and who people, you know, say that they, you know, are available to do a city manager recruitment, the city of Alameda, because that's a big recruitment. So let me just the question I have is and I'm not locked into any position, it's just a question that I want to make sure to put out there. You know, what thoughts have you given to putting out to bid? Yeah. Who who we select. Well, in terms of bidding process, and it's a good question, this isn't the kind of thing that normally goes out to bid. Number one, the cost level is quite low. We don't usually put out things to bid until unless they're at a higher price point. And this is also a type of professional service where the cost is, is they're all pretty much charging the same. It's really a matter of who we like the most. And because it's a matter of quality, we can do that without going out to bid. I can simply just call people and find out who's available, who's good, who I like, who puts out, you know, good brochures, who I know does the job. Because we've all been out there and we've been recruited personally and we know who who's the kind of what firms will send out those letters to all those aspiring city managers or experienced city managers. So it's actually easier for us to simply do that legwork without going through a formal bidding process. A formal bidding process would also extend the timeline for another probably two months. All right. Thank you. Okay. There are no speaker soaps. Correct. Member. Ashcroft Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your report. And I agree with staff that this is a major recruitment for our city. We are facing some very big decisions and projects right now. I also happen to know that H.R. is up to their ears in H.R. work. And so I think and I know just from talking to colleagues in other jurisdictions that there are a number of very good search firms out there to choose from. And I think that this will and of course, if we go this route, the private search firm is going to work with our H.R. department. So we certainly tailor the kinds of communications that are sent out. But I know that these firms have, for instance, very extensive databases and and contacts, and they can cast their net wider than I think we would be able to do from here. So I am very pleased that we've selected a very competent interim city manager for the time being, but it's still one of our major tasks that this council needs to take on and soon. So I would follow staff's recommendation there. Thank you. Are there any other member comments? Brody I have a slightly different take on it. I guess. Councilmember Ashcraft is correct this is probably the most important decision will make and. I don't want us to rush into this. And I still believe, like a lot of people here, we are a unique city. I mean, we have our unique challenges with the base conversion and with our position as an island and traffic and egress and. And such. And. I guess my worry is that, you know, we're going to get a cookie cutter city manager because that's kind of what the search terms go out. And we didn't get a cookie cutter last time. And we were blessed that we we had him for the time that that he was here. Wish it was longer, but it is what it is. So, I mean, I'm wondering. Is it? I like the idea of interviewing the potential search firms and kind of talking to them and seeing how they'll understand Almeida's culture and, you know, our specific issues. And because I don't really want to have a cookie cutter search for this. And even if it's two months and we get the budget and all this going on, but, you know, this this is our mark on the city. You know, all all of us. Well, it's going to be our. Our city manager. Well, let me speak to that just a little. Once a for us, if we select a search firm and I'm if our department so recommends a firm, what would happen? The next step in the process is that they would go and then come to you and get guidance on what you are looking for. And they would actually have a process in open session where you would talk about your candidate profile, what you're looking for. And that's what they do. They are in the business of doing that, communicating with the governing body and with staff to find out exactly what you need. And so. I don't if they. Were just going to get a cookie cutter city manager, I don't think they'd be in business long because their job is to heed to the wishes of the folks who hire them. So I think that that's going to be taken care of in the process. If you go out to like a bid process, frankly, that's not normally done. And I'm not sure who would respond. I'm not sure that you would actually get people responding to it and then coming for a question and answer session. And then because of the nature of the public process, you would actually have to do the interviews in public. That would be an interesting procedure. I've never seen that done. I swear. Let me ask a question. When we hired the finance director, did we use a search firm? We did not. Did we? No. Yes, we did. Yes, we did. We did. And what about the assistant city managers? We did not. City managers. Is there anything that would prevent you as the head of h.r. In dealing with a search firm would do. As I explained before, I think the major challenge that we would have as an h.r. Department is in the. Outreach and. In the database. I don't have a database of city managers. I can't pick up the phone and ask people if they're interested in coming to work for the city of alameda. We do civil service processes. We do a whole different type of recruitment. When you're talking about executive recruitment. You're calling on a firm that have these people on the line. They've been talking them for years, and usually they know exactly who's looking. They know exactly the kind of person who would want to come into a city of Alameda and they're going to use their networking capabilities. You know, when there's an opening, you know, I'll get calls or letters and because they'll know who to target. And I can't do that. And we really want that capability. Four days ago. What thought have you? Let me say two things. The first thing is, you know, the question that council member Jim Odey raised was a great question. But by the same token, I thought the response by city staff person was a great response as well. So there was a great. Perry interesting there. I wanted to note that. The second point I want to raise is. So what thoughts have you given the you the the search firm working with a committee not of council members but of should we so decide community members. Is that is that would that happen within the framework of the decision? Absolute. Well, not in this decision. What typically happens is in the process of selecting a city manager first, you know, they'll go out, they'll beat the bushes, they'll get all the letters of interest and the resumes and all that. And they'll come forth with it with a big pile of folks, and then they'll do an initial screening to really figure out who are the most qualified candidates with the the candidates who are the most qualified. Then you're going to be able to pick panels and do panel interviews. And those are your community members, your executive management, and you can pick whatever panels you want to really screen these folks into to going forward in the process and sifting out exactly who you want. But what a search firm will do is they'll put out the pretty brochure after getting guidance from you and what you're really looking for. And then they're going to beat the bushes and they're going to get, you know, 150 applications probably. And then they're going to go through them and they're going to, you know, they're going to vet them. And we really rely on these kind of that kind of professional vetting and they'll, you know, make the phone calls. Sorry to interrupt. Sorry. At 11 p.m.. Okay. We have a motion to continue past 11. I moved to you. Them. All of them favor. I passes unanimously. Thank you. And just continue. And then once he gets into the panel interview stage, that's when staff really helps the firm quite a bit because we're going to help put together those panels and we're going to be scheduling them and then we're going to get all this public input and then it gets really sifted down into who you really , really are looking at based on the scores. And this is just a matter of like a winnowing that that big pool into a smaller pool. And for the initial stages, that's what an executive search firm is so good at. So I'd like to speak real quick. I agree with member Otis comments in regards to how important this is as a council that that we know how important a decision it is. And my most recent experience on the school board was when, when our prior superintendent was brought in, it was, we used to search firm, but most recently we we did it internally. And I personally like the internal process and then then council really does own it. But we but my experience has been you work with H.R. to craft what you're looking for specifically. But then nowadays with social media, it gets out there and and times have changed, I think. And it allows, you know, anyone that is interested to respond when it's posted publicly like that. And then it comes. And what we did on the school board is we set minimum requirements. And if every candidate that met the minimum requirements that we as a board decided that we got to read the the resumes, cover letters and decide who we wanted to then interview, as opposed to leaving it to a search firm to narrow it down for us. And personally. I agree. It is one of the most important decisions that will be made. And I would like I would prefer that we do it internally and then have a council of as much say, you know, where we decide who we're going to interview from the entire pool of resumes that meet the minimum requirements that we decide are important but that we work as the Council. Is just. Hearing your comments as an alternative idea. Keep in mind that you can also ask a firm. They can do the brochures. And the outreach. And then you can ask to look at everything that's submitted. I mean, you can still do that. I think it's the the outreach that we just don't have the internal capabilities for. And in terms of setting the amcu's interest or the minimum qualifications. Again, sifting through 100 resumes, again, our staff is really, really. Booked up right now. And so I'm not sure that we're going to be able. To so personally then I would be interested in someone that does this really as little as possible. I really think that they can they can decide where they're going to post. I mean, with our input, we can help come up with ideas of where to post. And that is very easy nowadays with social media and the internet and people I think really do know. Executives know where to look. But then I would want to hire someone that does as little as possible. We come up with the minimum requirements as opposed to having someone that really is owning it. That's my concern. Yes. Member, I. Guess to kind of maybe add to that and see if those concerns could be alleviated. Is is the proposal that you would just go out if we said, we want you to hire somebody, we don't care who it is. Then you would just go off and do it. I mean, could we say. Pick somebody and bring them back here and let's talk to them. And if we don't like them, I know it's still kind of the interview process, but I'd really like to really to meet the person who's going to be doing the search for us and ask them questions and have them hear from us what we're looking for and have them hear from the public, you know, so they can get a flavor of of our culture and our city. And if that doesn't work well. We could decide, well, maybe we want to go with it. You know, go back to you and say, okay, bring back a different search firm. Or we could say. Okay. We don't like the search firm idea now that we've heard it in more detail. We want to go internal or just have them do, as the mayor suggested, the minimal amount of of work. And then we can do the. I don't know. I just. I'm a little uncomfortable just saying, go off, pick somebody and then we'll hear from you in however many months it is when there's a, you know, a list of finalists. Wouldn't work that way. Again, the the process would be is we'd get into go into a contract with a search firm, and then they would immediately come back and then engage in discussions with you on your candidate profile and find out exactly what you're looking for, how much involvement you want to have. And then it would be a very much of a one on one relationship with them. And you know what you need. I guess the weight of this responsibility is is heavy in on this. So but I appreciate I just worry that we're going to do it. I want to make sure we do it right. Anderson Madumere. Rascoff. At the same time, I first of all, I think we need to heed staff saying that they don't have the wherewithal and the the capability of doing this search. I think we would be selling ourselves short if we simply relied on social media. I think there's some really competent firms out there, and I think we'll see that when we do look at maybe a couple of them, but once we select them and you know, let's cross that bridge when we come to it. But the idea that we have them do as little as possible. I mean, let's get the our money's worth out of the contract that we enter into. We can always make our decision. And I, I do appreciate the that the mayor came from the school board. The city is not the school board in. And I think the school board chose an excellent superintendent and he'd worked there before because I met him when he was the assistant superintendent. So, you know, whether social media was a major factor, I don't know. But I think that this is an opportunity for us to see just what's out there and to, you know, find out what we might not even know about what the potential is. And, you know, at the end of the day, we want to do what's best for the city. Okay. Member de soccer. I'll just say quickly. I think our city staff, Stephanie Sierra, has outlined a process for me at least. She's answered questions that I had. I think her main value proposition proposition tonight, what I'm hearing is that you need a search firm because of their professional capabilities, which go a long way in attracting the right set of candidates . With regard to professional capabilities, what that means is the glossiness of your brochure, the wording that you use, the the channels through which you deliver your marketing materials, including the various social media outlets readily available to us. By the same token, maybe there are some social media outlets that we're not very well aware of. So I think the core proposition you're making about going with a professional in my from my vantage point, I buy into and also the way in which you outline it that. Once you're working with a professional service, that it's flexible in terms of how you engage the city council as well as the communities. I hear that as well. So thank you. I swear. I agree with the comments that I don't want. This Council will lose the opportunity to vet all the applicants. I think it's very important. The. We understand that. And I think in front of that, I think it's very important that we have established some parameters of what we want and whether glossy brochures should the way people. Or looking for jobs. Still look for jobs. I, I have a hard time in, in today's state, so I don't know that we need the the 20,000 plus. Firm, and I'm the only reason I'm considering having a professional help is that from your statement, as you don't have enough people to execute this, even if you felt confident that you could go to the League of California Cities newsletter or wherever you these things are posted these days and and do it in a timely manner so that we can get some recruits in here to interview. I was only saying glossiness as an illustration. But I keep hearing brochures. I don't know that nobody uses brochures anymore, but. Oh, absolutely. It's it's it's very much. But I think to use brochures having gone through the process. Did Riverside have a nice one? But I do. I think where I'm adamant is that I don't want them screening the applicant for us. I think it's very important that we get a shot at looking at whether it's a subcommittee or whether our council that we do the sifting and we do it against the criteria that. Also can share. And then the individual criteria that we have as as council members on our own, because we all have to work with each other and we all have to the person will have the pleasure of reporting to all of us. So in regards to choosing the firm I have, I would like to have more than one meet with us so that maybe two, maybe three that we get to choose who it is. I'm concerned if only one firm comes and talks to us and then we just take that one. And in regards to a color brochure, I actually I don't know if they mail them out to possible applicants. I don't really think it's necessary. I think really you can post anything nowadays and it gets distributed in regards to and I agree with Vice Mayor that we should be determining, seeing, seeing the applications. I think that's very important. And in regards to if we're going to have a subcommittee, actually, but I would not support that. I would think all of us would want to be involved in this decision. Unless someone does not want to be there, that's up to them. I personally would think that, you know, if we all want to be should we should all be included. And Member De SA. One final question for now. Now, when we went about hiring at the time, Debbie Kurita as the city manager, I think this was in 2004. I can't remember. We as a council also went down to the day of Santa Ana. Does the budget contemplate those, those or any related kind of costs that are kind of. Different. And then perhaps, uh. Considered. I'm sorry. I don't understand why you went to Santa. Oh, we went to go and interview people who. Worked with Debbie Kurita on the front. I mean, we went down to meet community members in Santa Ana, right? Mm hmm. Yeah. So I thought it was very helpful. I just need to know. I mean. Well. Could I just remember? I'm still struggling with this because it's kind of a big decision. Yeah, I think the mayor could speak for herself, but I didn't interpret her comment about social media to say we would advertise on social media. I think her comment was people will know about this because of social media. And yet we didn't use a search from last time and we got lucky and we were really blessed. The school board is maybe the school board, but it didn't use a search firm. For the current one. And I think everyone thinks he's amazing and the perfect fit for that job. And there was not that agreement with the previous superintendent who was selected by a search firm. So. I'd really like to hear from one of these or two of these or three of these. If you think it only needs to be one, I guess I could go with one. I prefer more. But if they don't want to do a dog and pony show, then maybe, maybe we don't want to hire them. But I'd like to hear from them and just see what they have to offer before making the commitment that we're going to go with a search firm or that particular search firm. But. I may be in the minority there and may be outvoted, but that's just my hunch. So in regards to members comments, can I hear from the other members if they would be agreeable to having more than one firm? That's what you're saying. Members of your your your group there. Okay. Member Ashcroft. I'm. I think that I. You know, I think there's more than one good firm out there. I think Mr. Garbrandt is extremely capable. If, you know, why don't we let her go out and beat the bushes and see what she finds out? But yeah, we could we could certainly consider more than one if you can do it in a timely fashion. What I would propose is we maybe a. As for me, I saw this week agenda as a meeting where if I can get two or three folks to come up and talk about their experience, I can try and do that. And if I can't, I'll let you know. But I'll put out my feelers and I'll say, Hey, in this council meeting, this item will be agenda ized. I'm not sure if they'll want to be paid for their time or not. But we can see who's available to do that, I think. I think that there are some of them are in our base in Sacramento, actually, most of them are based in Sacramento, though, come to think of it, it may be difficult for them to come to an evening meeting and they might want to be compensated, but. That might be fine. Did you want to make a comment and attitude? Maybe I don't. So are we. And remind me, what were you just looking for? A recommendation from staff. So. Well, some. Some direction. And tell me which direction you need me to go. And that's fine. I can. What I can do is I can call some search firms and find out whether they're amenable to coming to a council meeting and discussing a little bit about their process so you can feel more comfortable about them, kind of look them in the eyes and all that good stuff. And I can see how successful I am doing that. I think. And then as assistant city manager, former deputy. One of them. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I think I know, for example, of one particular firm who's in Southern California who's excellent. In fact, we tried to use her for our finance director position and she was completely booked. I'm on an h.r. LISTSERV and so i get a lot of traffic about who are good, you know, good folks to use. My only concern about the about what Mr. Trauger Brant has. I'm sorry. Your Brent's here just like sorry to call you Stephanie is that you might exclude people who are not local and then that just I mean it maybe that's okay with you. But I know, for example, that this one in particular is an excellent firm and they are from Southern California. And so you might by requiring them to show up, you might exclude them from your possible list of folks. Uh. And Brody, you. Know, I mean, if if he can't buy an airplane ticket from L.A. to. San Francisco or Oakland to make a presentation to get a 20 or $28,000 bid mean. No, no. I mean, that's kind of how it works. You, you know, go out and. I don't know. That's just my thing. So my take on it is it's, you know, we've got still one more item. So is that we've agreed that we're going to go with an outside search for Miss Garrabrants. Sierra is going to contact a couple of them and see about getting them here for presentation. I don't think it's productive to make judgments about what they will and won't respond because we haven't even contacted them yet. But I think I think we'll know more when we know more when we hear back. But I think this is a good first step to take in. So and just so I understand, we're not talking about a special meeting, just an agenda item on. The agenda item. Yeah. Thank you. And and hopefully it would be early so they could just come and right on. If you get, if you ask eight people and none of them say, you know, I'm not going to do that. Then we'll know. And maybe then we'll know that we we have to give you direction to pick one and just bring one back. I don't know. I just. I want to close, just like the mayor and the vice mayor want to see every applicant. You know, I don't want to close off any doors on how we do the selection. Too soon. That's all. And then in regards to a subcommittee of council, we want to give her feedback at this point. I don't think we're going to be able to agree on who that is. So so I think we're in agreement that we would all want to be included in the process. Were there any other issues that you had wanted? Feedback? No. That gives me some direction on how to move forward. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. And then. I am seven. He manager, hasn't he?

On the message and order, referred on April 13, 2022 Docket #0499, approving an appropriation of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) from the City’s Boston Equity Fund to create a special revenue project grant in order to support equity applicants and licensees, as defined by the Equity Program and to established and operate a cannabis business in the City of Boston. The fund shall be credited to the special Revenue Grant Fund from the Boston Equity Fund established pursuant City of Boston Ordinances Chapter 8 Section 13: Establishing the Equitable Regulation of the Cannabis Industry in the City of Boston, the committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to pass.

BostonCC_05252022_2022-0499

The law firm will be the only unit authorized to expend from the fund, and such expenditures shall be capped at $300,000 in docket number 0499. Message in order approving an appropriation of $500,000 from the City Cities Boston Equity Fund to create a special revenue project grant in order to support equity applicants in licenses as defined by the equity program and to establish and operate a cannabis business in the city of Boston. The fund shall be credited to the Special Revenue Grant Fund from the Boston Equity Fund, established pursuant to the City of Boston Ordinances. Chapter eight, Section 13 establishing the equitable regulation of the cannabis industry in the City of Boston. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. 2080480204820483204842048604933049620499 will remain in committee. Mr. Clarke, please let the record reflect that the chair is present. Yes. We're on to motions, orders and resolutions. Lucky Number 068 to Council on Murphy and Flynn on for the following order for a home rule petition regarding electronic application and transmission of absentee ballots for absent uniform services voters.

A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and E.T. Technologies, Inc. to provide on-call storage tank services. Approves a contract with ET Technologies, Inc. for $2,250,000 and through 11-30-26 for on-call maintenance, repair, and testing of city-owned petroleum storage tanks, installation of critical tank infrastructure projects, and removal of obsolete or failed storage tanks, citywide (ENVHL- 202160481). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 12-13-21. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 10-6-21.

DenverCityCouncil_11222021_21-1148

Madam Secretary, will you please put the first item on our screens? And Councilmember Flynn, will you please put council resolutions 1148 and 1149 on the floor for adoption? Yes, Madam President, I move that council resolutions 21. Dash 1148 and. 21. Dash 1149, be adopted in a block. Thank you. If we can get a second. To that. All right, we got it. Comments by members of Council on Council Resolutions 1148 and 1149. Council Member Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. These are two more on call contracts, these ones from Didi. As you all very well know at this point, I have significant reservations about us approving on call contracts without more stringent reporting requirements around it. And so I will be voting no tonight. Just wanted to point out as well that this is at this point, there's been one meeting in the last two months that I haven't called. Out on call contracts. To the tune of several hundred million dollars. And as it's our job by the charter to follow the money, I think that that is irresponsible for us. So I'm going to again be a no tonight. Thanks. Thank you. Councilmember Sawyer. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Resolutions 21, dash 1148 and 21. Dash 1149, please. Ortega. I. Sawyer. No. Sandoval. I Torrez. I'm black. I see tobacco. I Clark. II. When I. Herndon. I signs. I. Cashman. Can you. All right. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce results. There's one night. 12 Eyes. 12 Eyes. Council Resolutions 21 dash 1148 and 21 Dash 1149 have been adopted. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Council Member Can each go ahead with your comments, please? On Council Bill 21, Dash 1291.

AN ORDINANCE relating to Seattle Public Utilities; authorizing the General Manager and Chief Executive Officer of Seattle Public Utilities to enter into a stormwater facility construction and maintenance agreement with the State of Washington and grant a non-exclusive easement to the State of Washington for the stormwater facility, upon, under, and across a portion of the south half of the northwest quarter of Section 3, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., King County, Washington.

SeattleCityCouncil_12072020_CB 119962

Agenda Item 19 Council Bill 119962 relating to sell public utilities authorizing the General Manager and chief executive officer of so publicly center to a stormwater facility construction and maintenance agreement with the State of Washington and granting non-exclusive easement with the State of Washington. Can you recommend the bill pass? Thank you so much, Councilmember Peterson. You are recognized in order to provide the committee report on this council bill. Thank you, Constable. 11996 to this measure will approve a maintenance agreement. Seattle Public Utilities, negotiated with the Washington State Department of Transportation, washed up regarding two adjacent stormwater ponds along I-5 in South Seattle. The committee unanimously recommended approval. Thank you so much, Councilmember Peterson. Are there any additional comments on the bill? Hearing no additional comments on the bill. Will the Court please call the roll on the passage of the bill? Peterson. Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbold. Yes. Suarez I. Lewis Yes. Morales Yes. Mesquita Yes. President Gonzalez, I. Eight in favor and unopposed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please a fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Item 20 Will the clerk please read agenda item 20 into the record?

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution accepting Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND04-18);

LongBeachCC_03052019_19-0155

Okay. We have two hearings, so we're going to get through those first. And so hearing item number one. Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution accepting the mitigated negative declaration. Adopt a resolution approving a general plan amendment. Declare ordinances, amending a zoning code amendment relating to the high rise overlay district and approve a zoning change. Read the first time lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for a final reading and approve a tentative parcel map to consolidate ten existing lots and then northerly 24 feet of the vacated alley into a single fit lot and approve a site plan review to allow construction of a four storey 102,840 square foot office building up to 74 feet in height in the high rise overlay district, including a three story parking structure within the CC and district at 3443 Long Beach Boulevard and 210 East 35th Street District seven. Thank you. We are now going to begin by opening up the the the item. I'm going introduce Mr. Modica. I don't believe an oath is required, Madam Clerk. And so, Mr. Murdoch, I'll do the presentation. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We will hear first from Linda Tatum, our development services director, and she has an introduction and an announcement for us. Good evening, Mayor. Members of the City Council, I'm really pleased to present to you the staff that will make this presentation tonight. That's Alexis Oropesa. And I'd like to also announce that as of last week, Alexis has been promoted to the position of current planning officer. So we're really pleased to have her. She brings a lot of talent to the team and she's worked really hard. And if you don't recall. She replaces Carrie Tai. Who left to go to the port. So with that, I'd like to introduce you to Alexis. Thank you, Linda. Good evening, Honorable Mayor Garcia and city council members. For you tonight is the Laser Fish Office Project. Before getting into the project details, a brief project, a brief background of the project will be provided. In January of this year. The Planning Commission held a public hearing, considered public testimony both in support and in opposition to the project. The Planning Commission made a general plan conformity finding for the proposed alley vacation and took action, recommending the city council approve the project, which includes a site plan review, tentative parcel map mitigated negative declaration as well as general plan amendment zone change and zone text amendment. Following the Commission's action, an appeal was filed and then subsequently withdrawn. The applicant indicated that they had worked with the developer to ensure their concerns regarding emissions reductions had been addressed. So for tonight, we will focus on the entitlements rather than the appeal. The project is located at the north of the four or five freeway in the neighborhood of Bixby North. The project is located at the north end of the block, bound by Long Beach Boulevard to the east, 35th Street to the north and Locust Street to the west. The freeway onramp is located at the southwest corner of the block and Wardlow Road is located to the south. The project site consists of ten existing lots that are shaded in blue and separated by an existing alley that is identified by the black and white diagonal striping. For context, the project site is surrounded by a mix of uses which include residential to the west and south, a parking lot and office building to the north across 35th Street and a restaurant and oil derricks to the to the east across Long Beach Boulevard, as well as a gas station immediately to the south. The western portion of the site is currently zoned single family residential, and the eastern half is located within the community automobile oriented district and also has an existing high res overlay on it. The site photos depict the existing conditions of the site, which is vacant of any buildings today. The middle photo shows the North North-South Alley, which runs between 35th Street and Wardlow Road to the South. The majority of this alley is in an unproved, unimproved condition as depicted in that middle photograph. Previously, the site was developed with a range of uses, including a single family residence. Oil wells on the western half of the site and on the eastern half was previously developed with an office bar, billboard and additional oil wells. The applicant seeks approval of a tentative parcel map to consolidate the ten existing lots into a single 2.02 acre site that is to be developed with the four storey 102,848 square foot office building with a maximum height of 74 feet. The office building is identified, shaded in red in the exhibit, and a separate three story parking structure containing 343 parking spaces is proposed as well. The area showed it show a shaded in yellow identifies the bike parking area that is to be located within the parking structure. Vehicle access to the parking structure is low, located towards the middle of the street and identified by the dual red arrows on the screen. The perimeter of the site is designed with ample landscaping to soften the building's appearance and serve as a transition between the sidewalks and the residential uses to the south and the West. The proposed project will assemble the existing lots into a sizable area for significant development. That includes area improvements, which will include a new Signalized intersection at 35th and Long Beach Boulevard. A second left turn land will be turn lane will be incorporated into the northbound Long Beach Boulevard intersection. And then in addition, there will be improvements to sidewalks, parkway treatments and an approved alley. The architecture of the building makes use of clean lines, generous floor to ceiling heights and large ample areas, window areas that is reminiscent of mid-century architecture and compatible with the area. The eastern half of the site is located within the high rise overlay, which establishes the four storey height limit but allows for the actual building height to be defined through the site plan review process. The Planning Commission found the building height appropriate based on the proposed building form, as well as buildings of similar height along that corridor and the building relationship to the surrounding uses. The building has also been configured to locate the taller elements towards the center of the site along the alley that is to be vacated. The Commission found the project configuration and the design thoughtfully composed and advances the objectives of the purpose of the zoning code as well as the general plan. However, in order to facilitate the project, a general planning and zoning change and zoning code amendment will be necessary. The General Plan Amendment is proposed on the western half of the project site and I identified on the left part of your screen by the diagonal lines. And this would be changing the land use designation from single family residential to allowed eight commercial. The eight commercial corridor designation is characterized as being appropriate along major corridors. Since this area is contiguous with the new designation to the east and is proposed to be merged into a single lot fronting on Long Beach Boulevard, it is found to be consistent with the general plan, especially in conjunction with the development that is proposed. The Planning Commission found the amendment promotes the orderly development of the city, but is also a benefit to the public interest by supporting the investment of an existing business within the city. As a. Commission. As. Oops. A zone change is also proposed for both halves of the site to the CC and designation. The K and CN districts of both fall within the broader community commercial class districts, and this is represented on the right side of your screen. The community commercial class of districts are intended to provide medium scale users that may require buffering to ensure compatibility with adjacent neighborhood uses. These zoning districts are located on both major and minor arterials, located on and located on larger lots adjoining larger scale residential neighborhoods, which is fitting in this location. The proposed change. Is contiguous with the K district that is within the broader community commercial district. The high rise overlay district composes less than 1% of the city's 51 square miles. The project site is within the high rise overlay, which straddles both sides of Long Beach Boulevard, and there is no proposed change to the location of that zoning district. However, the high rise overlay what is proposed is a zoning code amendment to the high rise overlay yard requirement. This zoning code amendment would allow for the averaging of setbacks through the site plan review process. This averaging of setback and discretionary review would provoke promote greater design diversity by providing flexibility in cases where it was found appropriate. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. A mitigated negative declaration was prepared and circulated for public review from December 17 through January 17th. The remedy found that all impacts can be reduced to less than significant through the adherence to the mitigation measures, which range from the inclusion of a second left turn lane of the Language Boulevard to a biological survey. Public noticing was distributed in accordance with the Long Beach Municipal Code. Staff has received one letter expressing support for the project in response to the council notices. The recommendation to the city council tonight is to enact the Planning Commission recommendation with one modification. In that we are requesting that the City Council accept the mitigated negative declaration by action and not by a resolution as indicated in the staff report. With that, that concludes staff's presentation and we welcome any questions you may have. The developer is in the audience, as is our consultant. Thank you very much. Thanks for the staff presentation. We do have a motion in a second. I'm going to ask for any public comment on this item. Now is the time. Getting no public comment on this item. I'm going to go ahead and go back to Mr. Come, Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. Before I make any other comments or questions, I would like to, first of all, thank staff for their work on this project. It's been one long in coming and I also want to especially thank our developers of a laser fish, Mr. Chris Wacker, who has been very accommodating in listening to the reviews and looking at the appeals and implementing a lot of the recommendations that came forward and being able to be a person to work with and a project to work with that that is going to be great for the Long Beach area, especially when we're looking at a major employer here in Long Beach and and a business that it has been very, very strong with Long Beach. And we're glad to have your headquarters here in Long Beach. So we really appreciated over that had to work. If there's any one question ahead had the alley that's in the back, it's a it's an alley that is very tore up, I guess, for lack of a better word. It's not all that a pit and it's just a horrible area. Are there any plans to address that, that alley in the back? Let me have someone answer either at the mike or staff concept developed up after that, please. Excuse me. There are plans with Ali vacation for the entire length of the alley to be improved. What? That's great. That's all I have to say for his project. It's a good project, and I hope that I could get the support of my my colleagues to vote yes. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I want to just add a few comments and say congratulations, Councilman Urunga and the laser fish team. It's a beautiful project and you've done a great job in making sure that the entire city understands this investment that you're making and the commitment you're making in Long Beach. And so I do want to want to recognize this. And, you know, the last thing I'll say that, you know, you know, districts seven, eight, nine, the uptown community is great to see someone place their their headquarters in the uptown community. I think that that's a feather in feather in all our caps we're really, really proud of, but proud about that and I think is going to do a lot for the neighborhood. So congratulations to all of you. And I'm going to be supporting this. Thank you. Councilman Pearce. I yes I too am one of the things staff for this. I had the pleasure of getting to take a tour of the existing facility and see the size of the lot next to it. And it's kind of cool to have like our Long Beach Google like business here and that you guys are opening up a second facility. It's just great to know that we have Long Beach jobs that are staying local and want to applaud everybody for the efforts that you guys did to get us here today. So thank you, everyone. Thank you, Councilman. Well, I'm only slightly disappointed that the final project didn't end up in the fifth District. I will say that the the documentation provided by your team is the most extensive and best project I've seen in my five years at the council. So I thought that for a layperson to be able to look through it, I didn't have to ask the same kind of questions that I've asked and had to learn through things in the last five years. So I really appreciate that. I think it's really approachable and easy to explain to residents because of the way that you put the packet together. So thank very much. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you. And I want to take this opportunity to congratulate my and my good friend, Councilmember Urunga, but the entire big business community and the city for being able to to have laser fisher as a partner, continued partner and expanding their their footprint here in in our community, I've had the opportunity to know Chris Wacker for for some time now. We were here over a decade ago on the YMCA board in Fairfield, and they have always been great community partners, aside from a great business model for our city. And so I'm enthusiastically in support of this. And this four storey building, I think is, is why, you know, when we went through our land use element few few months ago, it wasn't just about housing. It was about also creating good businesses with great jobs in our city as well. So congratulations. Thank you. Vice Mayor Andrews. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I first I want to thank our Councilman Durango for, you know, having this wonderful project in his district. But I think all the districts are disappointed because you can't get in one in all of our districts. So we're just going to buy that time until that happens. But but this is a great project for the city of Long Beach. And it's you know, when I look at it, all I see is jobs because I think it's a wonderful, wonderful project here. And of course, I thank you. And your wife has created a world class company in the city of Long Beach. And for that, the city is grateful to you. And we support and applaud your efforts to expand your companies here and in Long Beach. And I wholeheartedly support this project. And thank you again. Thank you so much, Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. I want to just add on to everything that my colleague said. Chris, thanks so much for being a great partner. We were just singing your praises in Vancouver last week, talking about tech and bringing tech to Long Beach and specifically called out laser fish for being a great partner. So thank you so much. We're really glad to to see this expand and we look forward to seeing you succeed. Thanks so much. Continue to succeed. Thank you. We have a motion in a second. Let me just, of course, add, as you all know, I've been very supportive of Laser Fisher's expansion. I think this is a great project, very excited about the work the staff has done with the community and with Councilmember Ranga in particular. So Councilman, thank you for for helping guide this project. Please cast your votes.

Recommendation to approve the Fiscal Year 2021 second departmental and fund budget appropriation adjustments in accordance with existing City Council policy. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04202021_21-0338

Ocean carries. Thank you. Item 13, please. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to approve the fiscal year 2021 second Departmental and Fund Budget Appropriation Adjustments Citywide. I get a motion in a second, please. Motion by customary ranga second by Councilmember Austin. There is no public comment. We'll call the. District one. I. District to the district two i. District three. I. District four. Madam Clerk, did you get me? I. Yes. Council District three. I got you confirmed. Council District four as and I as well. Council District five. By Council District six. I Council District seven. I. Council. District eight. High Council. District nine.

AN ORDINANCE relating to employment in Seattle; adding a new Chapter 14.22 to the Seattle Municipal Code; establishing secure scheduling requirements for covered retail and food services establishments; prescribing remedies and enforcement procedures; amending Section 14.20.025 of the Seattle Municipal Code to add good faith estimates of work schedules to notice of employment information; amending Section 6.208.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code to condition business license registration on compliance with secure scheduling requirements; and amending Section 3.14.945 of the Seattle Municipal Code to add Chapter 14.22 to the list of ordinances administered and enforced by the Office of Labor Standards.

SeattleCityCouncil_09192016_CB 118765

Bill pass and show sign it. Committee report. Please read the next report into the record, please. The report of the Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Committee Agenda Item one Constable 118 765 relating to employment in Seattle. Adding a new Chapter 14.22 to set limits for code, establishing secure scheduling requirements for covered retail and food services establishments, prescribing remedies and enforcement procedures in many Section 14.20 point zero 25 Ceremonies for code to have good faith estimates of work schedules to notice of employment information amending Section 6.208.0 27 Code to Condition Business License Registration on compliance with secure scheduling requirements and amending Section 3.14 point 945 for CO two and Chapter 14.22 to the list of ordinances administered and enforced by the Office of Labor Standards Committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Thank you very much, Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. So I'd like to just give a little bit of background about how we got to this place. The process began shortly after I took office in February. Councilmembers Suarez, Gonzales and myself penned an op ed that I think really identified and highlighted what the issues were. We're often asked, what is the problem that you're trying to trying to solve and what are that? What are the struggles that workers are having to deal with that this policy would help address? Here are a few of the statistics that we quoted in that op ed at that time. In February, almost half of African-American and Latino workers, 49 and 46%, respectively, report a week or less of advance notice of their schedules. 41% of what they call early career workers. And those aren't teenagers. Those are folks who are between 26 and 32 years old working in hourly jobs. Of them, 47% work part time. And they report that they they will know when they need to work again one week or less in advance of the upcoming week. 70% of workers have on call responsibilities, with the majority of employees receiving less than 6 hours notice before they start work. And 83% of hourly part time workers report fluctuations in weekly work hours during the prior month. With the magnitude of fluctuations averaging a daunting 87%. So that means for folks who are working or who are hired to work approximately 30 hours a week, only about 20 of those hours would be would be stable work hours over the course of a month. These stats really highlight how work schedules disproportionately affect people of color and do not promote the health and well-being of Seattle's working families. Similarly, 40% of households are headed by women who are the primary wage earners in their families, and 63% of those are headed by single mothers. So these these policies not just disproportionately impact people of color in the city, but but specifically women of color. The first time we discussed this issue in the cities civil rights, utilities, Economic Development and Arts Committee was on March 8th, and we had a presentation from Professor Susan Lambert from the University of Chicago. And we learned that these just in time scheduling practices that employers are using more and more is a is a new manifestation of a of an effort on the part of employers to address their needs to control labor costs by staying within hours, doing due to tight labor budgets. All of this leads to greater unsettled scheduling, unpredictability and volatile to volatility, a higher head count of part time workers. Another emerging problem is the workforce is being taken up of more and more part time workers, and fewer hours on average worked. Since that March 8th meeting, the mayor's office has convened 17 stakeholder meetings of both workers and employers. And each one of those meetings was followed by a report out to to my committee. Additionally, I know myself as well as other Council members, have met with numerous individuals, including business owners, workers and worker advocates. The result of all those meetings, phone calls and emails is the legislation we have before us today. The main policy points are, first of all, businesses are only covered if they have 500 or more employees. And for full service restaurants, you also they also have to have 40 locations. Again, 500 employees and 40 locations for four full service restaurants. The way the reason why we focused on these larger employers is because larger businesses have the H.R., the human resources support capable of implementing this legislation. And we also know that the greatest number of hourly, low wage workers will benefit from the most by focusing on this particular population of workers. Another element of the bill is that it will require 14 days advance notice for schedules. It will require a written good faith effort of expected hours at the time of how to hire. It will require 10 hours, right, Tyrus? Between closing and opening shifts. Similarly to overtime, this can be voluntarily waived for time and a half wages for the difference between the start of the shift and the ten hour rest period. The legislation will also require predictability. Pay of one hour of wages. And only for non employee requested schedule additions for schedule changes that are employee initiated or the result of an employer requesting a schedule change and doing so by a mass communication. There will not be predictability pay incurred. Another element is that for folks who are working on working on call or who have there were their hours in voluntarily reduced, those folks will get half time pay. And then finally the the bill as proposed requires access to additional hours for existing employees before outside recruitment environment hiring and that will deal. In a in a large part to address the this move towards part time employment that I mentioned earlier, giving folks who are currently on the job at a workplace an opportunity to get more hours before doing outside recruitment. After the the bill was introduced, there are a number of of amendments made to the bill to further improve it. I want to highlight a couple of them. We have an evaluation of the ordinance that is intended to track its effectiveness over a two year period. And we also have an amendment thanks to Council President Harrell, that highlights the expectations that the Office of Labor Standards will provide technical assistance to business early and often to make sure that they know how to adhere to the law and that the recordkeeping requirements aren't burdensome. Much like paid sick and safe leave and the minimum wage, Seattle is again a national leader in workers rights. Other jurisdictions are also looking at similar policy jurisdictions like Albuquerque, New York City, Washington, Washington, D.C., and the states of California, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, New York State, Oregon and Rhode Island are considering similar types of policies . In fact, just last week, Mayor de Blasio in New York City announced that he's supporting legislation that would prohibit fast food chains from changing employees schedules at the very last minute throughout this seven month process. Many people have worked hard to produce this legislation. I'd like to take a moment to thank folks who have been involved, all councilmembers and their staff, but especially Councilmember Gonzalez and her staff for Brianna Thomas for being so engaged and collaborative throughout this process. The mayor and the mayor's staff, specifically David Mendoza and Robert Feldstein, the Office of Labor Standards, including Bill and Or and Karina Boyle, the law department, specifically Molly Daley, Brendan Asleep. Carlton Sue and Paul Olson. Patricia Lee on our own council central staff and Alex Clardy of my staff. Susan Lambert from the University of Chicago and Lee Golden from Penn State for their academic research, the City of San Francisco and their Deputy Director of Office of Labor Standards, Seema Patel. Over 50 business stakeholders who participated in a very long stakeholder process. I appreciate their engagement and the worker advocates specifically working Washington who not only participated in the stakeholder process but have toiled far, but toiled long before the beginning of our deliberations to elevate the importance of the critical needs for secure scheduling practices and above all , the workers themselves for sharing their stories with us. Thank you. Thank you. Comes from a herbold. You. My colleagues would like to speak to them. The legislation comes from Gonzales. Thank you. I am very excited to be a co-sponsor and a coconspirator, I guess in some ways on this piece of legislation that has taken many, many months to get here. And Councilmember Herbal did a very good job of laying out all of the critical components of this particular law. I want to spend a little bit of time sharing my perspective on it. So certainly after dozens of meetings and countless conversations with business owners, labor and workers today, city council will make the city of Seattle only the second city to respect the time of hourly workers through this secure scheduling law. And I want to thank working Washington. Many of you are here today, along with you of CW and other labor leaders, because you made sure that this city council and that the rest of the city heard that your time counts. Starting in January, Councilmember Herbold and I began the process of having conversations with so many of you and others in the community about why this issue is so important. We heard some of those stories even today, not being able to pay the rent or wondering whether you're one paycheck away from being homeless, shuffling at the last minute to find childcare and sleeping through college classes because of back to back shifts without time and opportunity to rest. These are all choices that should not have to be made by anyone but through our own study of Seattle's scheduling practices. We learned that Seattle is not immune from these burdensome scheduling practices. And what's worse, we confirmed that they fall disproportionately upon immigrants, non-English speakers and. Women. Particularly women of color. This today, this legislation, but more importantly, each of you sitting here. This is what economic security and the demand for economic security looks like. We are shifting the power to workers so that you as workers, can influence and shape your schedules. And that is a critical part of our promise of fulfilling the $15 minimum wage and combating income inequality in our city. It is meaningless, in my view, to have. The nation's highest minimum wage if you only get to work 5 hours next week. That is not income equality. It is hard to imagine how one can reasonably advance in their careers, manage family demands or graduate from college if at the same time you're planning your life one shift and one erratic paycheck in advance. I believe that this law strikes a balance between the desire for flexibility and the need for economic and life security for those working in the restaurant and retail service industries. I myself worked three different jobs in retail and restaurant and in the retail and restaurant service to pay for college. I understand what it means to struggle everyday and to make the tough decisions about whether today is going to be the day that you pay your light bill or whether today is the day that you are going to eat. Those are not choices that we should subject anyone in our city to. And I want to thank you all for reminding us of the importance that you play in our city and in this movement for income inequality, to make sure that we are held accountable to you in that regard. So I want to thank you all. This victory is your victory, and I'm going to be really excited to see this law passed today. Thank you. Council members want. Thank you, President Harrell. I also wanted to begin by thanking all the activists and organizers from working Washington, United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 21, the Martin Luther King County Labor Council, who have been the backbone of this movement for this legislation. Also thank councilmembers horrible and Juan Gonzalez and their staff for working on this. I wanted to especially thank Patricia Lee, who's standing there from central staff who has been working Saturdays and Sundays to make sure the legislation is up to date and actually available to the council to act on. And also, I thank the Office of Labor Standards and David Mendoza from the mayor's office for keeping an eagle eye out for loopholes. I particularly. I particularly thank all the courageous workers who have spoken out for basic rights. The labor movement in Seattle and across the country is growing and fighting back after what have been decades of retreat, defeat and decline. In the 1980s, when many people in this room were not even born, Ronald Reagan broke the air traffic controllers union, and he was only able to do that because at that time, the other major unions in this country could not find the courage to defy the Taft-Hartley Act and join in solidarity with their struggle. And for decades after that, the labor movement and consequently workers all across America have continued to lose. Workers wages have stagnated and declined. Workplace conditions have deteriorated dramatically, especially for women, people of color and immigrants. The wealth inequality has skyrocketed. Until we now have this absurd situation in the world that 62 richest people own as much as half of the world that is the poorest 3.5 billion combined. But now the labor movement and workers are building again, joining together in solidarity. And we are winning. We won 15 sick and save time and we are winning tenants rights as well. And we are going to win secure scheduling in Seattle today. And I agree with Sage Patrick that a worker in Washington who said that what happens in Seattle does not stay in Seattle. So we know that just like 15, this victory is going to be contagious in America. The full force of this movement also had the power to defeat every loophole that big business tried to sneak through at the last committee meeting. Each victory of the workers movement builds the confidence of workers in other cities and to fight for their rights. Activists in Mexico City are now fighting for 15. It is not an accident that workers have to build a movement and a political struggle for decent wages, decent schedules and humane workplace conditions. All these all this backlash against workers is intrinsic to the laws of capitalism. Under capitalism, money is power, and the private profits of multibillionaires are invested into buying out or undercutting their competitors. And whatever big business is the most exploitative to workers. And the environment is rewarded under capitalism with the greatest profit to leverage for greater power to do the same thing with even more intensity. But all this is possible only if workers we as workers let them do it, because without our brain and muscle, they cannot produce, transport, do or sell anything because workers do all the work . We have all the power when we are organized in solidarity to stand up for our interests. When our workers came to council chambers not very long ago to speak out against incredibly abusive scheduling practices. They were joined by workers and representatives by from UFC W and Rosie and the Labor Council, and they have won increased wages and have been emboldened now to fight for real power in the workplace to defend their rights in the future. Thank you to all the activists and workers who are here today to fight for a better life for all people, all workers in Seattle. We also need everyone here to join in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement and the Housing Justice Movement to fight to redirect $160 million that the city says it can raise. Instead of using that money to build another police precinct, which many activists have correctly called a bunker. That money should be used to build a thousand units of affordable housing. I agree. I agree with all those activists today who have spoken on this issue and have said that while it is a significant victory, that we were able to push the mayor and many council members into this temporary block of the bunker, we need this block to be permanent. And what we need is for this money to be permanently allocated towards affordable housing and away from a new police precinct. I also. I also stand. In solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement in opposing a new EU jail. Unfortunately for our movement, I was the I was the sole no vote on the EU jail when the issue came to the Council last year. We need to make sure that we hold all elected officials accountable on both the EU jail and the police precinct issue, because as we recall, the Department of Justice said there is a change of culture that is needed in the police department, not a change in building. So I urge you all to join me at the rally that I am organizing for this Thursday, September 22nd, at 6 p.m. at Washington Hall, which is on the corner of 14th and Gessler. Let's make sure we block the bunker permanently and allocate all that money for affordable housing from 15 to tenants. Right. To secure scheduling to block the bunker. Regular working people, especially young people in Seattle, are showing the power of movements and proving that when we have the courage to fight, we can win. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Swamp. Councilmember Johnson. Thank you. Council President. I just want to say a couple of quick things. As a former restaurant worker myself, I've spent a lot of time working with single moms, juggling work and childcare because of a lack of notice of scheduling. And throughout the legislative process, led by council members Herbold and Gonzales, I heard a lot from a lot of different folks. Brewster's waiting up until late on a Saturday night, not knowing whether or not they'd be working at 4:00 the next morning to open the coffee shop. Workers have been offered part time jobs with promises of hours, only to see more part time workers hired to compete for those same hours. And I've also heard a lot from workers who enjoy their flexibility, getting hours to allow them to go to school or have additional jobs, to be able to trade, shift their employees and pick up additional hours and earn additional tips as necessary. And I think through careful and thoughtful legislation and amendments, I believe that the Council's carefully navigated that balance of predictability and security and scheduling and the flexibility to earn the money that you need and work when you see fit. I also just generally want to say that the cities conversation around this topic is not divorced from our overall conversation about how the city is growing and changing. It's growing fast. We're one of the fastest growing cities in the country and the economy is changing along with it. And when we talk about growth and development and secure scheduling, we're also talking about housing affordability and reliable transit and income inequality and what it means to really work and live in the city. And so I'm proud to be able to vote in support of the secure scheduling legislation and look forward to further discussions about how we continue to make the city an affordable place for everybody. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Johnson. Unless any of my other colleagues want to say any closing words. I think we heard some inspirational speeches among our colleagues. And so when we quit while our head and I asked the clerk to please call the roll on the passage of the bill Johnson II. Whereas I. O'Brien High Sergeant I Bagshaw Burgess. High. Gonzalez. I. Herbold Heck yeah. President Hero. High nine in favor and unopposed. I. Thank you. The bill passed. The chair will gladly sign it. Thank you again for celebrating with us. Please call the next agenda item into the record.

AN ORDINANCE authorizing, in 2018, acceptance of funding from non-City sources (commonly known as the 3rd quarter grant acceptance ordinance); authorizing the heads of the Executive Department, Department of Education and Early Learning, Seattle Fire Department, and Seattle Department of Transportation to accept specified grants, private funding, and subsidized loans and to execute, deliver, and perform corresponding agreements; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_11192018_CB 119390

. And then again, if I'll recognize folks and sort of turn to my colleague, the budget chair, if statements need to be made, but if it's perfunctory, we'll sort of flag that. And many of these items are okay. So read items one and two, the short titles, and then we'll vote on each one. The Report of the Select Budget Committee. Agenda Item one Cancel 119 390 authorizing and 2018 acceptance of funding from non city sources. Agenda item two Accountable 119 391 Amending Ordinance 125 439, which amended the 2018 budget, including the 2018 through 2023 Capital Improvement Program Committee, recommends that these bills pass as amended. Okay, so we're going to vote on these individually transparent bags, so I'll keep turning to you for these items. And so. No, I have nothing particularly to add till we get to item 34. Okay. So any questions on Council Bill one, which is simply the acceptance of the funding from non city sources? Okay. Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Gonzalez Herbold by Johnson Suarez Mesquita I O'Brien so on I Lakeshore High President Harrell High nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passing sure sign it. Any comments on agenda item number two? Just a minute, DCP. Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Gonzalez Herbold Johnson Suarez was Darragh O'Brien so on special I President Hero nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passage or Senate. Please read items three and four.

Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee’s proposed funding recommendations, as amended, to the Proposed FY 21 Budget. (A-2)

LongBeachCC_09082020_20-0861

Thank you. Second budget item, please. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committees proposed funding recommendations as amended the proposed FSI 21 budget. Delimitation. It's over now to a two chair. Austin, obviously. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I guess I want to thank you and all my colleagues and the rest of city staff for allowing me the privilege and honor to be chair of this year's budget process. It was quite tough. This was unlike one that we've ever seen or we've seen in recent years. And at the beginning of this year, no one would have foreseen what 2020 would have been like and the amount of economic hardship that has been created by COVID 19 throughout our community. Faced with a $30 million budget shortfall, much of it due to the projected revenue shortfalls caused by the pandemic, we're faced with many difficult decisions. We're also working to implement a new framework for reconciliation that addresses many of the ways we provide our services to the city. How we envision our services and ensure that there's more equity in these services. But I believe that there are city that our city is responding to new challenges that have been presented to all of us over the past several months. I'd like to thank my colleagues on the Budget Oversight Committee, Vice Chair Pryce and Councilmember Yar'Adua, who spent many hours going over the details of the budget and having many insightful discussions. I'd like to thank the mayor for his recommendations to the budget and for his leadership throughout this crisis as well. Thank you, Mr. Garcia. Mayor Garcia. And we as a city council, I believe, have listened and had many thoughtful conversations during these past months with our constituents. As I know, we have all taken this responsibility very seriously and are trying to find the right balance. We owe a great deal of gratitude to our city employees who've stepped up to share the sacrifices by agreeing to furloughs to help minimize the reductions in essential services to our community during this crisis. And tonight the city council is voting to take a voluntary pay cut ourselves. I'd like to thank the many residents, workers, business owners who participated in this year's budget process as well. Whether it was participating in a community budget meeting or council meeting or taking the online budget survey or email in our offices, your input is important. And like our city, represents a very diverse array of viewpoints and priorities that we must try to balance. I'd like to especially thank our city's budget team, our city manager Tom Modica, financial management director. John GROSS, our budget manager Grace Yoon, and her entire team. They have responded to the rapidly changing financial picture with fairness and have been tremendous. I've been a tremendous resource for information and help in understanding the budget and crafting these recommendations tonight. Thank you all for indulging me in researching and responding to my many thoughts and questions and that of the Budget Oversight Committee. And from the beginning, all three of us on the BSE expressed serious reservations about drawing any further on our general fund reserves, given that reserves will already be needed to you to balance our FY20 budget. And there's still a great deal of uncertainty about the financial picture for Fy21. So we tried to offset. Other often find offsets other than reserves for many of the recommendations we are making to you this evening. This budget probably won't make anyone completely happy. But we did try to listen to the many stakeholders and voices to find a balance to move our city forward during this challenging fiscal year. And so with that, I'd like to read the Harvard Budget Manager, Gratian read the bank's recommendations and turn it over to her. Thank you. And make the motion and ask my colleagues to support this this Budget Oversight Committee recommendations. All right. Thank you. Here are the Budget Oversight Committee's recommendations. A motion to support Mayor Garcia's proposed budget recommendations with the following changes. Add the African American Cultural Center as one of the organizations receiving support. The revised allocation of funds are as follows. $841,000. $841,500, or 49.5% for the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center. 60,000 or 3.5% for the following organizations the African-American Cultural Center. The Camerata Singers of Long Beach, Long Beach Playhouse. Musica Angelica, the International City Theater and Long Beach Opera. $120,375 or 7.1% for Long Beach. Museum of Art. Long Beach Symphony Orchestra. Museum of Latin American Art. Musical Theater, West and $17,000 or 1% for the Measure B Budget Stabilization Fund. The motion to delay the transfer of the Hart team from the fire department to the Health Department for an estimated six months, until staff reports to City Council on the details of the proposed new model and plan, including information on how the transition will be implemented with no gaps in service. How the plan compares to national best practices and how any medical regulations requirements are being addressed. Recognize a one time savings in the Health Department of $207,200 and a one time cost in the fire department of $435,232, resulting from the delay for a total city wide impact to the General Fund Group of $228,032. The motion to revise the proposed business license tax increase on cannabis businesses from a 1% increase to a 0.5% increase and extend business hours for dispensaries by 2 hours, resulting in lower projected general fund group revenues by $200,000. The motion to add one time funds of $350,000 in the general fund group for a fireworks enforcement team pilot in Fy21 to mitigate the illegal use of fireworks and explosives in Long Beach. Motion to appropriate $95,374 in the general fund group and the police department to structurally support the expansion of coverage and services typically done by park rangers to include Bixby Park in MacArthur Park. Request the city manager to report back early in FY 21 on an implementation plan, which could include the hiring of a park ranger position or other operational models to accomplish the service goal. F pushing to appropriate $339,044 in the general fund group and the police department to structurally restore the two detectives and the violent sexual predator unit detective division and as a result not include the proposed addition of a police investigator non-career position. These positions are assigned to monitor and investigate officer compliant chief motion to appropriate 213 $320 in the general fund group in the police department to structurally restore one police officer position in the K-9 unit. The proposed budget had reduced three police officer positions, and this motion resulted in a total of only two police officer positions being reduced each motion to reduce 600,000 in the general fund group on a one time basis with the Police Force Division Pine Overtime Program, leaving 125,000 remaining in the program for FY 21 to help temporarily offset the restoration of the violent sexual predator unit and the K-9 unit position and the additional support for Park Ranger related coverage and services . I motion to request the elected department to contribute additional structural reductions from approximately 4% to approximately 5% of their budget for an additional general fund group savings of $188,655. This would be an additional reduction of $27,982 for the city auditor. $64,375 for City Prosecutor. $62,834 for the Legislative Department and 33,464 for the city. Attorney Chain Motion to increase the current 1.5% General Fund Group Vacancy Factor Non sworn personnel to 1.8% for FY 21, only generating one time savings of $465,606 in FY 21. To reflect potential budget reductions in FY 22 include a technical adjustment to the existing 1.5% vacancy saving factor budget saving an additional $171,509 in the general fund group. This results in a total FY 21 savings of $637,115 in the general fund group pay motion to increase appropriation by $292,521 in the Tidelands Operating Fund group in the fire department to restore the Marine Safety Officer position and as a result not include the proposed upgrade of type of street to an assistant administrative analyst. One position and to restore the reduction of the non-career lifeguard staffing which was proposed to go from 20.3 FTE to 18.75 FTE. This will be funded from Tidelands Operating Fund Reserves as needed include in the review of the marine safety operation. Include the review of the Marine Safety Operation as part of a comprehensive study of fire department in FY 21 l motion to request the City Manager to pursue potential waivers for some requirements of the State grant. Specifically regarding the maintenance of effort provision and the grant period timeline that currently make it prohibitive from a financial and budgetary viewpoint to accept the grant. Staff should report back to City Council during FY 21 with the status update. M Motions request the city manager to study and report. Back to City Council during 521 and options for restructuring library services, including the potential of expanding library hours at some location. Studies should include use of statistics, building conditions, changing usage of library facilities, and other factors appropriate for decision making on future changes. And motion to request the city manager to study and report back to City Council during the FY 21 on potential organizational changes that will reduce costs for FY 22, with the least impact on services and ability to manage and control operations and finances. Oh. Motion to request the city manager to hold positions. Make it more practical and feasible to maximize vacancy savings in FY 21 and to prepare for potential staffing reductions in fy22. Keep in total there is a net general fund group structural impact of $487,574, offset by net one time savings of $487,574. Additionally, there is a Tidelands Operating Fund group structural impact of $292,521 to be offset by Tidelands Operating Fund Reserves as necessary. That concludes the reading of the Budget Oversight Committee. F y 21 proposed budget recommendation. You think you, Miss Yoon? I do have a second on that. Which is counterclockwise. Councilman Austin. Did you want to go back to you are just going to go straight to Councilman Price? I think I've made my comments. Again, I want to encourage us to to to adopt this budget. It has been a painstaking process. And but I believe that this budget will again reflect, as we said from the very beginning, we would pass a budget that reflects the values of the city, the diversity of the city in terms of viewpoint, and puts us in a place to continue the service delivery that our residents expect from from the city. And so those are my comments. Would love to see full support from the Council on this. Thank you. Councilman Price and Q Mr. Mayor, I want to thank Chair Austin for his excellent work and service as his first year on the Budget Oversight Committee. I think he did a great job of balancing a very difficult situation, and I'm grateful to staff for having worked with him on developing the proposals for today. I was fortunate to have had the opportunity to participate in all four of the community budget meetings. So I did have an opportunity to listen to the comments from the residents who participated in those meetings, as well as all the residents who have participated in the meetings for both Bossie and City Council since late July until today . I've also had the opportunity to read thousands of emails from my council district that were sent to our office regarding priorities and of course, the budget survey, which the Third District heavily participated in. From a city wide standpoint, I think there's definitely some consensus consistency in regards. To what the. Core services are, and I'm grateful that this budget allows us to be able to mitigate the loss of those services, although there will be a loss to some of those core services, and I think we're all mindful of that. But I think that the proposals that the BMC is putting forth mitigate those losses quite a bit and I'm grateful for that. I'm also very pleased with our ability, thanks to our city manager, to be able to restore some of the proposed cuts that had been made. To our. Lifeguard and junior lifeguard programs. Those are really important programs. For the city because they provide every child in the city the same opportunity to participate in an excellent program that's built on health, socialization and safety skills. And so I'm very happy about that. I think all in all, there's a lot of great things in this budget and they address a lot of the needs that council members have individually shared with Councilman Austin, with those of us on the BMC, as well as budget priorities that the community has shared with us through their comments. So I'm happy to support the proposals that are coming out of the PSC and urge our colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Chair Austin. Thank you, Councilwoman Vice Mayor Andrews. Yeah, thank you, Mayor. You know, this has been one of, I think, the roughest budget we have negotiated on this diocese since I've been here on the city council. You know, no one likes to see cuts. With everything going on in the world. We must take a step to create reform across the different sectors of our city. With that being said, I want to thank Councilman Austin and his entire Budget Oversight Committee for their recommendations. I'm glad to see African-American cultures, you know, being in combat for funding as I to be committing one time funding for my budget in the upcoming days. I'm supportive of a report back on the employment of a new model to address the world. Our team. Yes. And I want to see you know, one would call that being explored in this report. But I have one question for Chief Lunar. What are we going to get? You know, the staffing for the helicopter unit. And response, if you don't mind. Yes. Chief Lynas is coming up to answer that question. Thank you. Stand by. Good evening, Mayor, and members of the City Council and Vice Mayor Andrews, in our plan, again, this is a proposal. So if all of you vote this in, that's when we'll start working on it. We anticipate that the operations will stay in place for at least the remainder of this year. As we are looking at or working through all the options that we have on the table to see how we can best provide service. And if the proposed reductions go through, there is going to be an impact in helicopter service. There's no doubt we're not going to have the helicopter up as much as we had in the past. But we're in a world now where we're all taking cuts, even though we don't like to or want to. It's a world we live in. So we had to propose everything we could to meet our budget numbers. So I predict it'll take up to approximately 5 to 6 months to get there. And this is Tom. So one thing that is built into this budget is a delay for the items that were civilian izing. We built in a natural delay, I believe, of six months to be able to continue to put those plans together to hire the additional civilian staff so that we could do a smooth transition. Thank you, John and Chief. Okay. And lastly, I want to go on record opposing. A half percent tax increase on the cannabis industry. You know, I understand the intent, but with the current economic crisis we are facing due to the COVID, it seems difficult to impose a tax without doing an economic impact study. And I would like to make a motion to defer this tax increase until an economic impact study comes back in six months to determine the effect of this increase on our general funds and consumer market. Can someone give me a second on this? I have a second buy councilman's in Dallas. Thank you very much counterbalancing that. And finally, I would like to close by saying back in the day, as you know, you know me about fostering leadership. We got through to over 90 session. And I'm hopeful that with the leadership and the effort, I mean, of course, you know, and my colleagues will do the same. And thank you very much. Think before I just continue on I want we do have a motion on the floor so vice mayor and I'm not sure if this was brought up to the B or C. So Councilman Austin, can we fold that into your motion? Is that is that an easier way of doing this? Miss Moon? I am, ma'am. I'm amendable to 40, not into the motion, but I would offer or ask for how we find about balance there. And and I will I'm going to defer to staff on that because I know that there is some specifics in terms of numbers, in terms of this this motion before us. What is that cost us? Projected Council member. So if we do know what tax increase, though not the 0.5% tax increase that the GOP has recommended, but we still keep to our extension. That's part of the motion. Then there is an additional structural cost of 40 400,000, and council would either need to identify an alternative offset for that 400,000 or other recommendations , such as using reserve. And to the maker of the motion and the secondary, if there is a you have some ideas to give us some structural direction on how to make up that $400,000. I am open to that discussion as well. Yes. I always like to keep the conversation going, my colleagues, my concern. Okay. Okay. So then what? I think the way we'll do this is I think, Councilman Austin, you've heard the request by Vice Mayor Andrews and the support on that by customers and De Haas. And so I think we'll keep going. And that's one of the things on the on the table before we get to a vote, we'll try to resolve that one issue. So I'm I will continue on the speaker's list. Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a few things. First of all, a good job. Councilman Austin, on your first budget here, I think I see the method in which the these recommendations reflect all of the council's input as well as the things we've we've heard along the way. I think that that's that's good. So I'm proud to support these things. It's a lot of good things in this budget. Thank you for highlighting some of the Racial Equity and Reconciliation Initiative recommendations. You know, there's a lot here. There's a lot within, you know, from restructuring off the equity this started years ago. And now in this moment, we're going to count on this department. So moving it into city manager shop makes a lot of sense. There's you know, there's a commitment within the city manager's budget to to begin the process reform of the PCC with funding to begin that. That's important. I see that the step to sort of phase in this is this alternative mobile response unit. I gave comments on that in the last item. I'm supportive of that. I want to make sure that those things, you know, we have the time to fold in the input from the community and some of the input from exceptional models. There's a lot of good things here, particularly within within the health department. I see there's we know that there's dedicated reconciliation funds, about 3.2 million, but 1.5 is within the health department that dedicates about 700,000 to create this Office for Youth Development, which has centrally coordinated resources to support our youth. Incredibly important. About 400,000 to support our state. Long Beach violence prevention plan. Upstream violence prevention. You know, there's funding here for the Center for Health Equity, Housing Equity. So all in all, when I do when I take a look at about 40 of the 107 recommendations, about 40 who are represented here within the first year. That's impressive to be able to get to 40 of the initial 107 recommendations in year one of this budget. I think that says something about the seriousness and the commitment that the city council staff put forward to address this issue of this issue of racial equity in our city. There's a few things I want to I want to highlight. I know that we have a right to counsel. We have funding in the mayor's. But no, the right. The council. I have a question with staff on how we plan to to sort of utilize it. It's my opinion. I don't think that we should, you know, take any time, you know, creating a new program. The county just rolled out a program I'd love to see. I'd love to see us or us, you know, utilize these funds in in in partnership with the county to leverage our funds locally and work with a local a local agency that's already established by the county. By the county. So if staff. Mr. Modica, could you speak to your approach on the right to counsel? Yes. So we agree. We would love to contract with the group that has done this work already or has experience doing it. If the county's got a good, sustainable program. We'd like to piggyback on on other successful efforts. So we would start there and see if there's groups that they have that could expand their services. We think that that could go faster or quicker and bring knowledge, and then we'll work to see if we need to do that through an RFP or other type of model. Fantastic. That's what I want to hear. I think that's the best way to go about it. Thank you. Secondly, I know that there's a community interest in a rental housing division. I personally support this. I support getting there. I know it's going to take time to sort of build this capacity. We talked for years about, you know, actually aligning all of our housing work from the housing authority to some of the housing workers and development services. I know staff has already taken certain steps by creating this this all aligning all the housing work under Christopher Coombs. But what the community is really asking for is really some apparatus to really focus on developing a division and actually sort of addressing some of the shifting landscape. There was just a state legislation that just came out. People don't really understand. It's been changing month to month. And we've seen, you know, some of the council offices. We've simply been forwarding out memos and fact sheets from legal aid from other agencies. I think we should be able to produce our own capacity. So I want to want to ask that I know that there is are funding within the reconciliation for housing equity. And I know that we are already counting on on our our city attorney's office in many ways to evaluate what's going on. Are you Mr. City? City, city, Mr. City Manager, is there a way that you could come back and tell us how we can utilize the housing equity position to start putting out notices and fact sheets that are actually city like the city can put forward, not necessarily recirculating things that came from the community. How could you respond to this, this interest in a rental housing division? Yes. So we've taken a look at the request for a rental housing division to create something robust like that actually would take some significant resources. We've costed it at around $1.1 million to create a five or six person division with legal counsel and support. We do think there are other ways to get to the question of how do we provide better housing assistance and resources if that's what the council wants to do? The right to counsel is going to be very helpful. The 250,000. We have a position of reconciliation that doesn't quite do that. It would do something different. I can turn it to Kelly to see are there other dollars within the reconciliation that can help? But if we're starting a new service, we're going to need some additional bodies, though. Kelly, if you can answer that, I know we're at the zero time, but if we can answer the question. One more. Any mayor and council members. So within their funding of the reconciliation. We currently have funding set for the Office of Youth Development, Violence Prevention and Reentry Programing and then public health equity. Going forward, there are some additional funds set aside to be able to support additional investments under those three opportunities. And we also are hiring currently in the process of hiring with homeless services, funding a person to do to really focus on homeless services and housing. And the intent there was to really engage from an equity lens to be able to ensure that we are are ensuring that all of our services have an equity runs across. Homelessness and housing. So there are some funds available that we were looking to further invest into. Other reconciliation opportunities, but we. Could make some of those funds. Available for. The housing equity person. If that's. The intent of the. Council. So I want to that say thank you. SALIBY So that said, you know, I think it's important. I think it is a racial equity issue. I mean, 70% of Latinos in the city of Long Beach are renters. 80% of black folks in Long Beach are renters. I think we have to think about this. I completely understand building out of division may take time. That's not something we can do here. But when the parameters of what we have, I want to make sure that those resources we have within the reconciliation dollars can be used to actually make sure we get started in that work. So I don't know that we even need to make a motion because you already have those funds dedicated within there. I just want to make sure that's reflected and that's that. Now's the time to come back and handle that. The last thing I would say is I see there's a lot of interest in language access. I have more of a common sense question here. Every time we have we have council meetings, we have Spanish interpretation, and we know that there's always issues related to the quality of information . I don't think that we should have to request Spanish interpretation. I know we don't get as many compliance. The bills should remain by request, but I think it might even be more cost effective to simply have Spanish interpretation available at every city council meeting. And so I want to have staff respond to that. If that agrees with this, then great. If not, I'd like to just make a motion that we figure out as a part of this how to make sure that Spanish interpretation is available, available at every city council meeting without without request, given the demand that we've seen. Could you speak to that, Mr. Martin? So I asked the city clerk to talk a little bit about the cost. Their office organizes the the translation. Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. So we do have a cost estimate to provide Spanish translation services at every council meeting, and that estimated cost annually is $64,000. And that's having two translators for approximately 4 to 5 hours at every council meeting. We can do this through an outside vendor. It might be another option to look at hiring a full time translator for the city. And that's something we haven't costed out yet. So I think we should figure I think we should figure that out. So. Mr.. Mr.. Chair, is that just making sense to you? Do you want this as a motion or this is city staffer receiving this other sentiment? I must say that. Can you repeat what you are proposing here? I mean. What it is, is there's every council meeting we've had, there's been Spanish interpretation. I just don't know why we are still going through the process of requesting it when we know we get a different person every time and the quality is not great. So we should be thinking about making sure we should still do by request our compliance. We don't have the same demand on Spanish. It happens every council meeting. Why are we still going through requesting it for council meeting? It should be standard. And so I think that's a more realistic commitment that we should make the language access instead of nickel and diming it here and there. So I don't I want to figure out, you know, what's the best way to go about this need to be in a motion or can staff make this happen? But I think that with all due respect, Councilman, I think staff has heard this, and I think it's the will of the council to improve our language, access on whether or not requesting or where we are with the process to me is a more of an administrative issue and less of a budget matter. And so I would I would, you know, use the direction that you are providing, listen to your concerns, the concerns of others that have been relayed throughout not only this budget process, but but in other forums as well throughout the past couple of years. I do believe it's important that that we provide interpretation. I'm sorry. We've got no pages. Yeah. And I was actually talking about. And. I think we have an open mic. Mr. Mayor. I might. Just. I get where you're going. Councilman Tom. Mr. Modica, after receiving very. You put the network putting down. Yes. So I understand that language access. We'll take a look at what we can do and whether we can do different models. And we were planning on using some of the money that was put aside for language access to invest in this area because the clerk does not have full staffing and money to do the level of translation that we're currently providing. So, yes, we'll look at that. I would say, though, I would request, if you're looking at adding a position as part of the $1.5 million, that that be part of the motion. So that is a substantive budget that that be considered as part of the motion. That's fine. So I'll make sure those are reflected in and my friendly to Councilman Austin the comments about how to treat the 1.5 to make sure rental housing position is reflected within that budget neutral and to also give direction to staff to figure out a way to make sure that Spanish is Spanish is not by request. There may be a number of ways to get there. It doesn't have to be a position, but that staff that staff knows council meetings will have Spanish interpretation available, not necessarily by request. Thank you, Councilmember. Okay. Next up, we have Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I would like to share my congratulations to the Budget Oversight Committee and specifically Chair Austin in the great work that he's done over the last several months. It's a daunting process and he did it with Grace and I appreciate him and the work that he's doing. I also want to thank the city staff. I know how much work goes into the budget and all the questions all of us have behind the scene and how excellent you have been in providing additional resources and discussions for us to have something that was started as a discussion on the EEOC a few years ago, and I brought it up during the budget hearings last week. Again, is that our fleet fund is often looking for maintenance reductions and that a lot of our investments go to help reduce the maintenance costs of our fleet. And one of the ways that we can do that is actually by repairing our streets, our streets, our what are causing our fleet to have so many bumps and bruises. And those bumps and bruises and additional insurance costs are not just burdened by the city, but they're also burdened by residents. So I'd like to propose a friendly that I know to be nothing new to members of this committee and this council, because we've talked about it before. But I'd like to see us redirect 70% of the general fund department capital contribution. That's a fraction of the 45 million in revenue a year that goes into that fund. It's literally only the general fund capital contribution to the Fleet Fund. And I'd like to redirect it to a street and alley fund focused on the worst streets and sidewalks and serve the worst streets and alleys in the city. Percentages approved in a previous motion I made several years ago where you take what the worst street data is and then distribute the which streets will get usage based on the worst 80% of streets and 20% to alleys. Is that something that you would consider? Mr. Austin. Well, first I would ask the city manager, is that is that feasible and doable? And then secondly, would you be opposed to divide by nine in that regard? So on the divide by nine, typically we have funds that are already divided by nine. And the challenge with that is there are certain districts, Councilmember Muranga is one of them, where when we started on the council together into District one and District two had $10,010 million in street repair need where Councilmember Odinga had $20 million in street repair need. And so until we the contributions in the district have the worst streets and alleys, we won't be able to. Furthermore, we did the alley money based on dirt alleys alone. And so we really need to focus on our worst allies next. A divide by nine would put some alleys at the top of the list in districts that their alleys are. Beautiful and amazing compared to what some of the other districts are experiencing. So it's not a lot of money, so it won't go super far. But I do believe it's a good step in the right direction. And you'll notice that every council member received a email of support from or construction trades and they would like to get back to work as well. And this is just a small investment both in the economy and in the needs of our residents. We have committed to our residents that we will repair these streets and we consistently do our best to catch up. But as fast as we are cutting up, more are deteriorating, which is why the based on need is the most important component of the motion. We continue to provide money divided by nine even though the public works director. It stated that he made a mistake in the next revision to the three year plan, that it should have been by need only so that districts could catch up. But it was once again done with the divide by two in percentage. So I would ask that this specifically go towards the worst streets. And I think that it's kind of a blind roulette for us because I don't think any of us know what those next worst streets, the worst alleys will be. But I think that we all know that it would be a good investment. I think the second. So I will I will let the city manager respond to that. And I'm I'm I'm open to to accepting your friendly to do that because I do recognize the importance of infrastructure repairs in my district and in every district in the city. I know that there's tremendous need for street repairs and alley repairs throughout our city. And, you know, I'd be interested to find out if there are other districts that feel like they don't need it. And so the the divide by nine recommendation or thought was was one to, you know, be be more equitable for for everyone in the city, for all of our residents. But I'll turn it over to the city manager to to address the the feasibility of making that happen in this budget. Thank you. And so I will start with infrastructure. It is it is absolutely a fact that our infrastructure does need additional funding. We do have a fair amount of money going to streets this year, actually a little bit more than we do even last year. And I believe it's almost $40 million. I would point out that, you know, we do have some also concerns with sidewalks where we are under litigation to basically meet certain deadlines related to our ADA sidewalk compliance. That said, I'll talk a little bit about the fleet idea. It is a technically feasible idea. We do pay money from the general fund into the Fleet Fund to basically get caught up with our fleet capital replacement. Our fleet has done an amazing job and are under a manager of getting the fleet replacement cycles down from in the past. They'd been in the ten and 15 years down into the into the 5 to 7 year time frame, which saves us maintenance. So this is something you're able to technically do as it's proposed? I do I do want to caution us that this doesn't come without a cost. It would increase our replacement cycles are most of these are PD cruisers. So our PD cruisers are currently at about a five year funding cycle. They're actually at six years because we didn't fund it last year. This would take us to somewhere between 6 to 7 years. And so with breakdowns and maintenance costs that there will be an impact. So it is a politics policy choice that does come with some ramifications to our fleet. Okay. Why don't we come to my office and I know you're considering accepting our friendly. Did you want to? Councilman? WOMAN Margot, do you have any additional other comments? Well, I think that the representation that a majority of them would be PD cruisers is not fair. I only 70% of the fund would be a move. That means 30% of the fund would still be there. And currently approximately 40% of the fund is for Haiti. Cruise or so. It really is management's choice on which department they would have hit the hardest, and I would hope that they would use a strategy and model that would replace the vehicles that were most in need first. I know that vehicles when maintained well, I drive a 26 vehicle with 250,000 miles and it never gives me any problems. I make it every day go and I rarely have any repairs. I think that my mom drives a 1996 vehicle with 100,000 miles on it. I know that's not the same as a 24 hour day, seven days a week vehicle, but not all of our vehicles are 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and looking into some of the vehicles that are a replacement. I think that it's a prudent decision at this time when when you look at how small the $40 million street repair budget gets us and it's great. It does a lot, but it doesn't attack what we at council said a year ago, which is getting rid of the worst streets in the city. We talked about the ten worst streets and the ten worst alleys. We were on national news about our streets and that street has still not been repaired along with others across this district, across the city. And I think that we really need to make that investment for our residents to making those changes. And this is a small amount of money. It's a one year. It's not a multiyear request. And that one year request would go very far. If you think about how many streets it could repair and how many alleys it could repair, and you average of 40 houses per street, which is a very low estimate you're talking about thousands of households would have a higher quality of life because the street outside of their house was repaired because of this kind of motion. And this was something that we all were working on together. And I know that it's difficult when we have a lack of continuity, when we lose a public works director. But I think that it's important that we focus on a two part strategy, one that repairs our streets that's really of utmost importance to our residents. And to that focus is on getting our trades back to work. Okay. Thank you for that. Councilmember Austin, I think you have that friendly to consider. And do I move on or do you want to respond? I am open to the friendly arm, but I'd like to hear from other council members to comment on this as well. And I think, again, the the the eyes wide open again, it's just whether or not it's worth streets or divide by nine. We need to figure out how that should be allocated and directed. Okay, great. And I think I just want to make sure, Councilman Alston and maybe, maybe Miss Yoon, are you also kind of keeping keeping notes on all of the kind of front and Lee requests that the council is making for for Chair Austin so we can kind of review those at the end of the motion or maybe the city attorney doing that. Okay. Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Well, I mean, keep going. Councilman, Mango, anything else? For their. Yes. I want to thank Mr. Austin and the mayor for their recommendations related to our Parks Department and our youth sports programs. I thought those were impeccable. I appreciate the committee's decision to spare our K-9 dog officer. I think that was really important as well, along with our our violent sexual assault crime unit. I think that that's critical. I wish we could have kept an additional or to a sworn. And by merging it with a couple of other units. But I hope that over the next year that PD can come back to us with any other savings that they can find throughout the year with this reduction in the number of sworn positions department wide. I know they'll realize other additional savings that they were counting on, including utilities, gas equipment. And I hope that those savings can come back to us in a way that could either potentially reorg the air ops unit. As one of the callers said, perhaps instead of civilian izing, it just cut it in half or put a detective into that detail. Because if we don't have the detectives out there doing the work, we're not going to have the great outcomes like we had today, where we solve crimes, where individuals with that horrible gang murdered on Halloween night. And so we just really appreciate our detectives and the work that they're doing to make sure that those gangs are on held accountable to the families that are mourning. So, again, thank you to all of that. I have one last recommendation, which is actually a part of item 26. And this council asked the city attorney to come forward with a recommendation on how we could participate in the 10% pay cuts early or at Bossi today, I heard members discussing in the community concerts, discussing library hours, things that are of importance to each of us. And I know we talked about donating back 10% of our salaries to stand in in support of the citywide furlough program. And I am 100% committed to that. What I would also make a recommendation to is that if a councilmember chose to donate that back into the city, that's great and it could go to the general fund. I don't know what it would be allocated toward since they're it's not a part of this budget. But if that councilmember would prefer to make a exact same sized donation to the Library Foundation or the partners of Parks, then that money could be committed back to the city through other programs that would really help and support our parks and library budgets, which are being really hit during this time. So that would be something that I'll be making a recommendation on a number 26. But I really think you guys did an excellent job. Thank you for all of your hard work. Thank you, Councilwoman. Next up is Councilmember Pierce. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, BMC. Thank you, city staff. I really believe that this budget is not only the most difficult budget that we've had to pass, it also provides a lot of opportunity and a lot of room for growth for those that need it most. And I think that that's what we've heard from our community members through this process. And so I appreciate the comments made by the previous council members. I wanted to ask staff on the right to council what is the quickest timeline that we can expect something on that? I know you mentioned that we might have to go to an RFP and I know that the last time we did something like this, it was new and it just took a really long time to get out. So I don't think we have an estimated timeline right now. We're talking about steps to make it go a little faster than a typical procurement process. We understand the urgency. I think understanding if there is a scope of work already written by the county that we agree with and meets the council's needs, that cuts a significant time off. And then if we can use their vendor list and open up an RFP quickly to that vendor list, things can go a lot quicker. So the funds will be available on October one. We would start and then put a process in place. Certainly before the end of the year we would be allocating money, hopefully even sooner. Great. I was going to ask the chair of the see if there was openness to try to put a 90 day, if it hasn't been scoped out in 90 days to have a report back to council. Does that seem like a time period that I even need to make a motion on? I think that you guys can probably. Do a. Guess. I would ask the city manager, is this something that he can work with? Yeah, I think that is the target that we would look to do is 90 days. Beautiful. Thank you so much. On the rental housing division that Councilmember Richardson brought up, it's something I definitely wholeheartedly support. I think that there's a couple opportunities in the budget and I just want to say I think this a Thursday. Sorry, Mike. She got teary. Okay. I think that there are a couple opportunities in the budget for just reorganization and that this is definitely one of the areas that we've got staff in different departments that are working on these programs. And so I appreciate the motion or the conversation that's been had around this. I look forward to seeing what staff develops in full fully support that. The one area the other area I also support the language access conversation. I do know that before the last big budget cuts that the city had under Bob Foster, that people didn't have to request translation. It was just a given. And it wasn't just for the council meetings, it was for the council meetings for any chartered commission meetings. And so I think the commitment that this council continues to make every year, if there's a way to figure out how we can make sure we have somebody and hopefully the same person every week, I know that we've heard many different translators and that sometimes they're not saying exactly what the community members are saying. And we know that it continues to be a challenge. So whatever we can do to get to that I think would be wonderful. On the most the emotion that's already been included around looking at new models. I think it would be very helpful, as I mentioned earlier, if we're working, especially if we've got six months to kind of put together this new community model, working with our community partners, not only those that have come out and supported this, like the community organizations that spoke tonight, or Nathaniel Brown, who's done an op ed on it, but also including mental health organizations, suicide prevention team and trauma informed partners to ensure that we're being thoughtful and thinking outside of the box on how we can provide services for those that are most impacted. And so the only thing that I have that really is, in addition to what community members have already spoke to, is I'm wondering, staff, if you guys could provide a list of organizations to the City Council for organizations that we pay membership that exceed $3,000 a year to the Council for review at a later date. Is that something that that would be possible? I don't think it's going to be that many. Mr. Modica, can you do what you counsel on that. If that's something that you want to include in the budget direction, we can do that. Yeah. Just to to from for that that has the membership, the cost and where the fund comes from. Can I suggest that the amount be a little bit higher than that? That could be hundreds. You know, you might have individual memberships for individual employees. I think you're looking at organizations like Organizations of the city belongs to. Yeah. That we pay annually. So not like a one time fund, but something that we're annually paying membership fees. So you're not if I can ask for an exclusion for like, you know, certain professional fees might be paid for if you go to a, you know, if you get a certification or something. So I'd like us to focus on the organizations for like the city. I think that's your intent. Is that is that correct? And we're going to go for the full city. Yeah. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Okay. I think those are my I, I think that, you know, I really applaud the mayor. The budget that was presented to us was a great step in the right direction, including everything from climate work to work on housing and also our small business support. So I think we're in a a good place considering where we thought we might be. So I look forward to the continued work on our police reform, on our community organizations, our housing models, and making sure that that work is not something that's one in one night. It's not something that's achieved in one day, but really is a culture shift for the city and recognizing that it is hard and uncomfortable and that's okay. But I feel good about where we're at tonight, so thank you. Okay. Thank you. Council member. Council. Council member. During the. Thank you, Mary. And I want to thank all the commentary has come forward so far. I think it's a great conversation and some real good suggestions and good ideas out there as well. And I want to thank you for joining me to the B or C. It was a quite a an experience, my first time ever being in that in that committee. And it was quite a quite a learning process. Obviously, it was a very difficult budget this year with COVID 19 and the downturn in the economy and all the other obstacles and challenges that we face. This budget is one that can we can build, could be good. We could not proud, but we can we can look at it as being one that that meets what we need to have worked for this year. In regards to my participation in it, it was eye opening in regards to where we're at and where we need to be. There's most of the things that I'm really pleased with is that we're really looking at institutionalizing some of those money that I think are very important for us to do, such as those that are going to be with the Office of Equity, the movement of some of the programs into the city manager's office and making them structural. There are some friendlies that are here at this budget right now that we're hearing that I am certainly in favor of. I want to thank customer Richard. So for bringing forward the Spanish translation issue to the forefront. It's something that, again, that I think it should be institutionalized and should be present at all of it. It is something that is very important and that we've seen during this process that there is a lot of interest out there from Spanish speakers to participate. And we are in the political process and it's very important that we provide this kind of service to them as well and making sure that everybody's voice is heard. I also want to encourage the staff to look at the possibility of a full time staff person to do that. It's not it's not easy. Translating translation services is a very difficult thing to do and learn. And it's it's one that requires a very special skill that is not easily required and requires a lot of work get into it. And obviously, as we've heard, not all translation services are are the best, but they certainly try to give credit for it for making that effort. There's the other friendly that that I heard and they want to support is the friendly put together by councilmember Mongo in regards to streets. She's absolutely correct. And when I look at my street in the seventh District that we had some of the worst out there and they've been that way for a long time. And so the damage done to vehicles, both both personal and city, are tremendous. And it's because we are we defer maintenance of the streets to another year in the year. And as we continue to do so, they deteriorate even more. So we do have some bad streets. And I would look at it, I respect they were streets first because that's where the damage is being created. Now, there is a concern about 70% of the budget being moved towards that. I would be I would leave that up to the two staff to work that out in regards it doesn't need to be 70% to deal with the worst streets. That's something that they would have to pencil out. And also in regards to the continuing efforts of riot of re instituting the re lifeguard program and with the EMS. So certainly very supportive of that. And and I'm hoping that we can make that can help that continue. One last thing is that there was another motion apparently with that councilmember Vice Mayor Andrews for 4.5%. And the two days in the cannabis issue, there's something there that I think we really do need to look at it. I don't know Councilmember Austin carousel we'll see was concerned about that $400 $400,000 difference that it would create if we were to hold off on 2.5% tax increase to study it further. And I think it would behoove us to look at that. I think we should give the industry an opportunity to look at their possibilities of what the difference will make in being open an additional 2 hours, as opposed to what was the recommendation of one additional hour or so. I think we need to look at that seriously. And and nobody likes taxes. Nobody likes to increase taxes. I certainly don't. But, you know, if it's going to help us balance our budget, so be it. However, let's do it because we need to and not because we think that we have to. Again, it was quite an experience working on the BRC. I want to thank member also for leadership of the DLC and of course my colleague on their up to the price of your customer price for also being a member of that. And I've learned quite a bit this year on what's going on and they are hoping that we can learn about the budget tonight and let's get this behind us and move forward with the city and advancing, really making the city of Lomita great city that it is. Thank you very much. Thank you. Customary Ringo. Next up is council member Zendejas. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you very much to our Budget Oversight Committee chair Austin. For all the hard work that you put in on the budget and all the great recommendations as well as from the mayor and the and our city staff. I. I do have a couple questions for you, but I also wanted to say thank you to Councilmember. Richardson. For talking about, you know, the need for our Spanish speaking translations and needed on a on a every every week basis, at least for City Hall. I think that's very important. And I also at the same note, I also wanted to thank our city staff, Tom and Becky, who have been continuously working with me on the translation portion. And we've been working on it for weeks and we continue to work at it. We have also realized that one of the hardest things to do, while we're not seeing each. Other, we're not. Face to face, is that when somebody was translating and they're right next to you, they can easily tap on your shoulder and ask you to stop speaking so that they can translate for you. So we. Found that that's a. Problem. And I know that thanks to Tom and Becky for both working with me and trying to address those issues and smooth that out a. Little bit more. So I thank you for that. I also wanted to ask the city staff, I, I said, as you know, I seconded the motion for Vice Mayor Andrews. And I want you to know, with those 2 hours that we that we are expanding for the cannabis industry, our businesses. Is that a way to offset the 4000 that is needed, 400,000 that it's needed? So the the original proposal was a 1% tax, which generated over $800,000. The revised back proposal is a half cent tax, so cutting it in half and then trying to make up the rest of the dollars through the the two hour extension going up to 11 p.m.. So Grace, can you tell us the value of that of those two together? Yeah. So the BBC has already recommended going to half a percent and then the extension of the 2 hours. And so from the original proposed budget of generating 800,000 in revenue, the Bossi recommendation generates 600 an estimated 600,000 of revenue. So it was a hit to revenues of 200,000, which is in the current proposal, balanced out from that point. If we saw the 2 hours extension, it's already included in the number and included in the BBC recommendations that are all accounted for in terms of usage and sources. If we go back down and don't increase any of the tax at all, so we don't increase the 0.5%, an additional 400,000 would need to be identified. Thank you for explaining that, Ms.. Hoon. I also wanted to say thank you very much for all everyone that has been able to participate in this conversation. I know that everyone before me has said some great stuff about the budget. I am. This is my first time, so I was pretty excited to go through this process and I know it has been hard work, but I'm really glad that we are coming to to this point and that we're considering everybody's input. So that's very important. Another question that I had is. In regards to work Councilmember Mango said regarding the of the helicopter is it is that and this is probably. This question is probably for a. Fire chief. Would that purchase affect any of our engines and fire engines. If it's been a. We'll answer that. Yes. Thank you, Chief. And as he is coming to to the mike, I also wanted to know if one if that purchase would affect our fire engines and also would it affect the Carl Moyer grant that is pending to receive? From. Thank you for the question. As far as the actual purchase, are you talking about the 1.9 that we're giving back or what purchase are you talking about exactly? The one for the. Helicopter that we were talking. Well, the motion that our friendly that counsel Mango had had said earlier. And so it's curious, the ending of that purchase was going to be affecting any of our engines. Fire engines. Yeah. That wouldn't impact fire in any way. Oh, came. Thank you. Thank you, Chief, for addressing that. Okay. Thank you, Councilmember. Our next topic, Councilmember Supernova. Thank you, Mayor. I'd also like to commend our committee chair, Austin Vice-Chair Price and member Turanga for just a fantastic job, in particular for Chair Austin. First time out, just really hit it out of the park. So congratulations on that. I'd like to follow up on Councilor Mungo's friendly on repairing the worst the worst streets. That really got my attention. And I think at least one of those streets goes from the fourth District to the fifth District. So we would certainly share in that. But my question is for fire in particular, just because I've been studying it and the grants available to fire. And I think Mary's and somebody touched on it. But so we have a Carl Moyer grant for I believe it's for the purchase of new engine companies. What if we delayed or canceled an order on one of those engine companies? Would we potentially lose that grant money? Is Councilman Supernova. To my understanding, there is a time limit on that grant and I would have financial management speak to that more closely, but I believe it's an 18 month performance period. This is Sandra. And yes, we are at the end of the time period for the Grand Prix delayed any of the vehicles and those vehicles we delayed, we would lose. So would there be a possibility to make an exception for the apparatus, those bigger apparatus? Would that be for this friendly amendment if if it's going to cost us money to delay this? Obviously, we wouldn't want to do that. Also, I think if the chief could maybe speak to just maintenance in general. Is there anything you can tell us on the maintenance cost of of older apparatus? There's there's got to be a break even point to where you're better off to buy new. If there's anything you can enlighten us about on that, I'd appreciate it. The issue with having the older apparatus is that the the equipment becomes outdated. It becomes more difficult to get the repairs taken care of. It becomes more difficult to locate the the actual parts and equipment. And the repairs seem to be coming up quite a bit more often. So at a certain point, it is more cost effective to replace rather than repair. Councilmember. This is Tom. If I can provide a little bit of clarity, because this is a complex area. The the fire fleet purchases are on the agenda tonight. And they would be separate from any budget discussion you're talking about because of the size of the fleet purchases and our fiscal difficulties. In the past, we hadn't been able to fully fund the fleet capital replacement for our pumpers. And so what you have in front of you tonight is both a committee grant, that's item number 17, and number 18 is the lease purchase of two fire ladder trucks and ten fire pumpers. So that would be one action. The motion on the floor, the friendly being considered is for our other vehicles, which is about 63% of our vehicles are our police type vehicles. Those would be we have about 800 and and we get the number 823 vehicles that we fund through the general fund. So about 62 and a half percent are police. And then the others are things like sweepers and code enforcement and and our public works vehicles, those types of things. So that is would be what you were delaying and extending the fleet replacement by a year. Okay. So thank you, Mr. City Manager. So what you're saying is the friendly here stands alone to address those issues and the new at the purchase of the new fire apparatus is a separate item. Correct. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Okay. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I do have a question regarding the recommendation that was made by Councilwoman Mongeau. Regarding our. Infrastructure. And I think it's important to clarify this for the public. So I know that our. Sales tax measure. Had a capital improvement project that identified the projects that would be. Focused the focus. Of that measure money for a period of time. If we were to adopt a Worst Streets program, how would that impact the infrastructure plan that we've already put out and advertise to the community as the streets they can look forward to having repaired in the coming years? So I'll take a first crack at that and turn it over to Eric if I missed anything. So if you're adding new money, it should not affect the map that has been put out already. We could always use more money to complete everything that's on the map and accelerate it, but you could add new projects and new dollars. The worst Streets approach would be a little bit different than the pavement management plan that we funded. We tend to look at how much money, what is the need for replacement and typically the worst streets cost the most to repair, which is why they're in the worst condition. So that is certainly a direction we can take it. Would we have not been able to focus money on the worst streets? We've been basically using the pavement management plan to inform street decisions. Got it. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I appreciate Mr. Motorcars clarification on my friendly. I think that I often forget that I talk in budget speak and that when we outlined the general fund capital improvement and sorry capital purchase budget that the leases and other things would would be exempt from that because those are different strategies. I just also wanted to add in 2018, we as a council made a commitment to focus infrastructure money on the streets that were the worst. And unfortunately, our public works director at the time did not take our direction. And at that time that the specific motion was that on a go forward basis, the city shall make citywide investments in streets, alleys and sidewalks based on need. And we did that. We made millions of dollars of investments in the worst alleys in the city, but we didn't follow through with that on the streets. And like Councilman Price said, it would not impact anything we've promised to the community thus far. It's new money and I think moving the black eyes of our city. And we all saw what a huge impact it was to remove all the dirt alleys, to remove the next worst alleys and the next worst streets. Most of those streets span multiple districts. And so you're really getting a huge investment. I'm also, to Mr. Frangos point, an alley in the seventh District may cost more than an alley in the ninth district, and that's because of the composition of the alley and what they were made of at the era in which the alley investments were made. And so we as a council discussed that policy. And and so this is nothing new. And I hope that Councilmember Austin will consider adopting it, having heard so much support from my colleagues. And furthermore, I just want to say once again. There's a lot of priorities here and a lot of things that we've come together on. And I'm really proud to be a member of this council and the great impacts that we're able to make this year. So congratulations to everyone should this pass. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. Real quick, I have a question for city staff just on the standards. Whenever we replace our fleet, disregarding our fire fleet, do we have any standards for what cars were purchasing? Yes, we absolutely do. So one of the things that we do when we buy new vehicles is we always look first to see if we can use an EV vehicle. So every replacement actually helps us with our climate goals. John Groce can give us more information. Yes, we are just about to buy 50 hybrids for the police department everywhere and replace them when it becomes available. And I will not only blame the police, but we reduce our maintenance costs and. Awesome. I can't hear you any more. But that was the perfect answer. My my second question is for the materials. I recall talking about the new road material and there being option to use rubber and recycled tires. And I'm wondering if that's a standard that we that we have right now to use for green. Street repair products. Eric Lopez, if you can address that, please. Eric, can you hear us? We'll try to get the answer to that question, Councilmember. So I do know that we do use recycled content. Just not sure exactly how much and what product. But we do wherever we can, try to use some of the tires and put back into our asphalt. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman's in Dallas. Fair. I also wanted to comment on Stacey Mungo's council member Mungo's comment earlier in regards to the street and the alleys and being from a district who has one of the I want to say very, very bad streets and very bad alleys, not only because we're in downtown, but because of the usage. I remember that when I got elected, I said, you know, one of the first things that I want to work on is on fixing our streets. And then I realized, you know, the whole process that it takes to do that and how long the wait is for it to be able to fix certain streets. So I am extremely supportive of being able to fix the streets in a most need basis. And I think that that that's a really good move for us to go into. Another question that I had, again, maybe mishear and you can help me with this again, I'm back into that. I'm going back into the cannabis tax and the 2 hours of operation that are behind those 2 hours of operation be bringing in, in addition to ours, to what they're doing right now to the city. So we also have a jay here who can linger on it. But I'll jump in first to say that, you know, the additional hours of operations could potentially generate more sales. It's not clear right now or the extension of the hours if they will generate the same average amount of sales that. An hour a day. An hour of open hours right now. And there is some data that shows that at different points of the day, there are different. Levels of sales. So just extending hours. Of operation doesn't automatically mean the same level of average sales. However it is, there is an assumption that extending the hours will generate some additional sales. We're just not quite sure exactly if it's at the same pace. So at the moment, we're projecting for each hour. For the 2 hours that the boss has recommended, for each hour, a 100,000 of sales being generated. That answer your question, councilwoman. Yes. You know, and one of the things that I was looking at here in my notes is that, you know, previously we were looking at extending that just one hour, which would mean more or less that it would probably generate. And like you said, we're not certain, but we were projecting that it would bring in $1.6 million more. And so I'm thinking, you know, with the 2 hours, it would probably double that that amount. And so I was thinking that it would be a really good, you know, starting point for us. But with going ahead and and asking for for us to delay this and bring a study forward, I think would be the best thing to do, only because that way right now we have uncertainties and that we may be able to have more data in our hands to be able to move forward on this. So thank you. Thank you for that. No problem. And Councilman, I just want to clarify. That at the moment. While it is still an estimate and an assumption at this point, until we get data each hour of additional hours, we are projecting. 100,000. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes council comment on this item going back to Councilmember Austin. So, Councilman, we have your motion and second by councilman, which was to adopt these recommendations. Thank you, Mayor. And then also in the elements. Go ahead. I want to. So not amused, councilman. And so and then we also have out there were some friendlies or requests that were also made to that. And so I don't know if you and you want to go through those and then find out what what Councilman Austin's decision on on taking those in. Sure we can do that. So now. And I may need some additional clarifications is a motion or a. Friendly to. Continue to extend the business hours for cannabis businesses by 2 hours per the Bossi recommendations. But not. To increase cannabis business license tax until an economic impact. Study can be conducted and. Evaluated. That was a friendly by Councilmember Andrews, and the comment here was. That we still need to find if this friendly work is. Excepted, we still need to find an additional 400,000 if we wanted to offset it within. The item itself. And then we have a council member state. This motion to use 70%. Of the general fund contributions. For Fleet Capital and F 21 to. Fund street and alleys based on the worst streets and alleys. With 80% going to streets. And 20% going. To alleys. And that's the note. That we have here. And then. The third from Councilwoman Pierce to request city manager to report. Back to city council in a memo on any city. Annual membership. Fees for organizations that exceed. $11 or worse. And I believe that's all. The what officially requested. To be. Is there any clarification on those. Items. That each of the councilmember want to correct or decrease? GRACE This is Tom. I'd like for the record, I think we had two from Councilmember Richardson. One was to do an exploration about housing possession and using some of the reconciliation dollars for creating a position that could help coordinate housing. And also, the council, just so we captured in the motion to make language access available at council meetings upon request or not upon request, and for staff to look at different motion or ways to fund language access or provide language access. And then the only one that I have down from that list was just two for four back from staff to the Council on memberships and information back. So I have that written down here also as just I'm not sure if that's part of the motion, but certainly part of the requests of what's coming out of the out of the discussions. Let me go to go back to Councilman Austin. We can take those individual want. So why don't we why don't we go take this council? Thank you. So, Mr. Mayor, and to more council colleagues, I want to thank you all for your your very thoughtful input and suggestions, the the friendly amendments as well. I'll take them from the top. The one that is glaring is the the the cannabis tax, retail tax. And I've heard from enough council colleagues to understand that there's some unsteadiness to move forward with that. But there is except there is a everybody seems to be okay with extending the hours and and studying that. I would ask and I would accept this amendment, but I would ask that this issue come back at midyear for review . And and we would we should have some some data and a better idea as to how this is working at that time. Again, this is a budget that is an unconventional this we have have not faced these type of challenges in many, many years. And so I would I think we need to have some flexibility to to to look at this. And I would just say that to the the cannabis industry out there, they are doing pretty, pretty well and are exceeding our expectations in terms of generating revenue here in the city. We are asking a lot are several of our departments all close to 5000 employees. Everybody is taking sacrifices and in impacts as a result of this budget. And I think we need to come together. And so with that, I would accept the friendly amendment with the condition that we come back to review the the tax at midyear . Secondly, in terms of Councilmember Richardson's recommendations, understanding that there is some money in the the reconciliation process. Housing is an important issue. I'm open to accepting that, as well as the recommendation or amendment friendly amendment for language access. And then as it relates to the Fleet Front Fund, I do understand that there's this is a this is a bold move. We as a city council have made a lot of major commitments to our residents, and we have a lot of needs in terms of residential streets. And so to councilman goes a friendly amendment. I do support that and I am making note of seems to be there needs to be seems to be some consensus around we're streets but I do understand that there is a measure a plan already in this should supplement and be on top of whatever that measure a plan is . And so I do not think one year is going to to hurt our fleet operations drastically. And I certainly hope not. And so I'm willing to accept these amendments and move forward with the vote. Amendments then are accepted and then we will we do have a motion any second. So let's go ahead and do a roll call vote. Mr. Mayor, can we get a little bit of clarity on just the I heard use the measure a plan to to fund streets if we can get a little more clarity on that just so we're. I know we already have a measure, a plan for for residential streets. This makes the. Clarity. The clarity, I think, is that this is not going to affect our measured rate plan that measure moving forward. This is on top. On top. Yeah. So you would be adding streets on top of this. Are you still adding the worst streets or are you using a different method methodology to to add in? Or is it divide by nine? I'm sorry, we just need that clarification. I know of a couple of worst streets in eighth district that I'd like to get paid for. I think. Yeah, I think what I have heard is it is the measure rate plan is intact. That does not change. Separate of that for the additional streets, it's off of worst streets as set by staff. And there is a system the way staff has identified those. And that's what we would look to is the the professional. That's what I heard. At least that would come from staff CPI. The pavement management plan, right. CPI. So we would look at the the pavement management plan, the PMP, we would identify those worst streets. And then honestly, that amount of money could go to one street. And I don't think that's your intent. So then we would look at the worst streets and try to get that geographically spread as is. Am I headed in the right direction? Yes. That's how I understand it. I understood. Thank you. Great. Rock cover, please. District one. I a district two. I. District three. I. District four. II. District five. I. District six. Okay. District seven. By. District eight. By District nine. All right. Motion carries.

Recommendation to approve that a section of Marine Stadium Park be named the “Conductor Larry Curtis Concert Park”. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_09072021_21-0873

Thank you. Our final item of the item of the evening. Item number 32.22, please. Item 22 Communication from Councilman Super Knoll, Chair of Government Personnel and Election Oversight Committee. Recommendation to approve that section of Marine Stadium Park. Be named the the conductor. Larry Curtis. Concert Park District three. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. Okay. I am so excited about this item. So we're ending the meeting on some positivity here. I'm so glad to see this item come before the city council. At each step in this process, there has been great support to remember Larry Curtis for the beautiful marks he has left on this city over 700 nights in our city. Filling our parks with music and fun and community is something we should recognize and highlight for future generations of Long Beach residents. The muni band is an amazing part of our city's past, present and future, and I cannot wait to attend the concert as the new conductor. Larry Curtis Concert Park. Thank you to all the residents who made this a reality and to Councilman Supernova, who chaired the committee. That was the final approval that we needed for this item and everyone who voted on our survey. We appreciate your amazing support for Larry and the MI band. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Super now. Thank you. Glad to carry the message forward from the committee. And thanks to Councilman Price for doing a great job in supporting this item. Thank you. Great item. Great job to the committee. Look forward to supporting it. Public one we have one person for public comment, this Dennis Houlihan who we have. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I'm Dennis Houlihan. I live in District three, and I am proudly represented by Councilwoman Susie Price. And probably were. It's true. That's true. But yeah, I wanted to thank all of you collectively and individually, on behalf of the friends of the Long Beach Municipal Band, my colleagues Kay Cofield and Laura Espino, we've all worked behind the scenes, learned from Susie and have helped to bring this to where it is right now today. And it's an exciting time. I had the privilege of addressing you on July 6th when the public sessions for the Council re-opened and enthusiastically supported this idea. And you all voted unanimously. Heartwarming and much appreciated. I want you to do the same thing tonight, please. You're on a roll with unanimous vote, and this is certainly worth that. Since July 6th, so much has happened. It's been extraordinarily active and exciting. The Department of Parks, Recreation, Marine interviewed candidates and selected an outstanding new conductor. And against all odds, we put together a two week season for the band. This was an amazing miracle to get the people, get it together and make it happen. And for those of you who attended one of those concerts, you could see all the people sitting there with their families on the blankets, having a great time, enjoying the music. But summer came back thanks to your confidence and your investment in this, and it was really gratifying to see that. So I want to publicly thank Councilman Super and I thank you for what you did behind the scenes. Councilwoman, the price for your leadership, your guide to your patience with all of this and your vision that we could all share the naming of the park in Larry's honor. Extraordinary. Along with that, we had some wonderful partners at the Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine with Brett Dennis and with Gladys Kizer. We all worked together. It was really cool to see all the gear smashing. You helped make that happen. So I stand here today asking for your vote. And on behalf of Larry's widow, Linda Curtis, his son Kurt Curtis, the whole Curtis family, they are honored beyond imagination. It's extraordinary. And. On behalf of the family and all of us who love that matter and love what it represents and the joy for the families of Long Beach. Thank you. And please vote unanimously. Let's not break the roll and appreciate your patience and enthusiastic support. Thank you. Thank you. Members, please cast your vote. Vice mayor. This has been a wonderful education tonight to watch back in time to watch the process working. I'm humbled. I'm so happy to live in Long Beach and I respect everybody's patience with a wide variety of topics. More people should come and observe. You guys doing your thing? It's heartwarming. It's been a wonderful education. And thank you. Okay. Motion carries. Thank you. I believe that satisfied engender we have closing public comment. You have two speakers, Dave Shukla and Katie Cart Clark. They is Katie here? Okay. So, Dave, I think you're the only one. You're up. Good evening.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Seattle Preschool Program; approving an Implementation Plan as required by Ordinance 124509 and Resolution 31527; amending the tuition model in the Action Plan adopted by Ordinance 124509; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_04062015_CB 118363

The Report of the Education and Governance Committee Agenda Item number two Council Bill 118363 relating to the Seattle Preschool Program, approving an implementation plan as required by ordinance 124509 and Resolution three one 5 to 7. Amending the tuition model in the action plan adopted by Ordinance 124509 and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts. The committee recommends the best the bill pass as amended. Thank you very much. This is the culmination of about two and a half years of work where we've been working on implementing high quality preschool in Seattle and the first classrooms will open this next September. I remember very much at the very beginning when we were working on the Families and Education Levy renewal in 2011. We realized then that we should invest much, much earlier, even before kindergarten, with our three and four year olds. And so we set on this journey. We took a study mission, and several of you went with us to the East Coast, to Boston and New Jersey. In Washington, D.C., we read the literature. We brought researchers here who sat with us at the committee table, and we engage the community parents, preschool teachers, the school district, active participant with us, preschool providers, a long list. Hundreds of people that we talked to and and engaged with over the last couple of years about what could Seattle do to make sure that every child entered kindergarten ready to learn and have a successful education path. And last November, the voters of Seattle, 69.2% of them said, yes, we want to invest in our children. We do live in a great city. And Councilmember Clark, you're going to miss doing this kind of work because we actually move the needle here to make a difference for our kids. So this legislation adopts the implementation plan, all the specific details about what we need to do to get ready in September and for the next four years to run this pilot project. And then we'll be back probably in year three to figure out how do we make this permanent? How do we fund it going forward? Special thanks to Holly Miller and her team. They're sitting back here from the city's Department of Education and early learning lots and lots of hours that you all put in. And we deeply appreciate that work from you. Questions or comments? Just just one more. Member of Bancroft. Council, President Burgess, I really want to thank you for your leadership on this. It's been really it's been impressive for me to watch how thoroughly how deeply you have dived into this. And I really want to also say thank you, Holly Miller, and your team. For me, it's been great to participate and to learn what you have had to teach us. And I'm very enthused not only about the opportunity that every child in the city of Seattle is going to have to be ready to learn. We're ramping up on a program, which is a good way to do this. And I also want to acknowledge the fact that we had many teachers and administrators here suggesting to us that what the teachers need to be successful are to have the mentors, the coaches. And that is something that everybody has said over and over again. I'm very supportive of that. And again, Council President Burgess, thanks for your leadership. And I'm all in. Yeah, thanks. Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. HARRELL Lakota High. O'BRIEN All right. RASMUSSEN All right. So want back shot, all right. CLARKE Hi, Gordon and President. Burgess Hi. Nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Thank you. Please read items three, four, five and six. Agenda items three through six. Appointments 51 through 54. Appointments of William Chen, Saadia, Hamid, Ruth Kgi and Jonathan Pranab as members, families and Education Levy Oversight Committee for terms of confirmation to December 31st, 2018, the committee recommends all appointments be confirmed.

Adopt resolution directing the Director of Development Services to submit the ordinance amendments to the California Coastal Commission for a finding of conformance with the Certified Local Coastal Program; Accept the Categorical Exemption CE-13-118; and

LongBeachCC_06102014_14-0400

Thank you. Go to the first resolution. So moved that moved and seconded a any comments or questions from council members? Any public comment saying none members cast your votes on the second resolution. There's a comment. Oh, I'm sorry. I did not see that. Please come forward. Identify yourself. I need to. Goodman I work for a company called Bulletin Displays, located at 3127 South Street in Long Beach. Honorable mayor and Council Members and staff. I sent this letter to each of you today and I'd like to go ahead and read it, please. As one of the only two local billboard companies located in Long Beach, California. We are writing to you in opposition of this ordinance. Bulletin displays is located at 3127 East South Street, Long Beach, California. As a local billboard company, we have not proliferated the surface streets, residential or commercial with our billboards at the detriment of the city . Over many rewrites, this ordinance continues to favor those companies who have overbuilt within the city or who have challenged this ordinance. The ordinance does achieve most of your objectives, the most important being the takedown of billboards on surface streets located in residential areas, mixed use areas and planned development areas. But the Council has also given good direction to staff through many hearings to create a level playing field that allows companies who haven't proliferated the surface streets with billboards or have taken down all their legal non-conforming billboards to write a development agreement. This allows the city to generate additional revenue based on the criteria in the ordinance. These two options. Diaz Being development agreements and leasing city property create competition among the billboard companies and the city is the benefactor from increased revenues. I have met numerous times with Amy Boda and staff when I was working with CBS Outdoor and now bulletin displays. Over the years, the industry has worked openly with staff to help craft an ordinance that is both fair and workable for the city of Long Beach and the billboard industry. After my most recent meeting with staff on February 13th, 2014 to discuss the section on development agreements and the definition of infeasible staff has returned with a more restrictive ordinance. The information that we discussed and the concerns that we raised were turned around and used against us. The intention of the development agreement and the language that defines and feasible could be achieved by bulletin displays. One staff had this information. They used it to add a section in the ordinance that mandated a trade ratio takedown. Based on our circumstances, bulletin displays met the word infeasible, met the definition of infeasible aspect of the ordinance. Now only to find another hurdle that doesn't make sense. In the staff report paragraph cited below, staff states they believe these new provisions reflect the direction and desire of the City Council in specifically addressing freeway oriented signs. I again assert that this paragraph below was added to the report and to the Development Agreement section based on staff's meeting with bulletin displays and staff's realization that bulletin displays may have an opportunity to build new. Billboards, which Patterson have to ask you to conclude. In conclusion, as Amy stated, the development agreement was added to the ordinance to allow for a competitive billboard situation within the city. Then what staff does is they go ahead and they add a 1 to 1 ratio of takedowns for development agreements based upon the word infeasible. I mean, I'm sure you understand where. You're out here well over the 3 minutes now. So I'm sorry then. Really, nothing I can do. All right. We will enforce that with everybody. Sorry. All right. All right. Thank you very much. Any questions? Okay. Is this on the resolution to direct the direct directing to development? The Director of Development Services. Members, cast your vote. Motion carries okay and final resolution is on the M.P. in charge of schedule. Our our entertaining motion.

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes relating to housing affordability proposed as part of the 2014-2015 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment process.

SeattleCityCouncil_10122015_CB 118471

Agenda Item seven Council Bill 118471. Relating to land Houston Zoning Amending the Seattle Comprehensive Plan to incorporate changes relating to housing affordability proposed as part of the 2014 2015 Comprehensive Plan Annual Amendment Process. The committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilmember O'Brien. So now this is the first of three that are direct, direct amendments to the comprehensive plan. The scope of this particular council bill is adding language to the about around housing affordability to the comprehensive plan. So there's a series of amendments we make essentially establishing that it's a priority for the city to work on affordable housing. Thank you. Questions or comments? Please call the rule on the passage of the bill. Sir, want back shot? I got him. I Harrill, i Muqata. I O'Brien II Okamoto Rasmussen and President Burgess. Nine In favor nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Please read item eight.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the City Light Department; declaring certain real property rights surplus to utility needs; authorizing the General Manager and Chief Executive Officer to execute an agreement for the City to grant an easement for access purposes over a portion of the City’s fee-owned transmission corridor at 14355 Linden Avenue North in Seattle, Washington, and to accept the release of an easement at said address; accepting payment for the true and full value of the easement being granted from Rise Properties (Woodland Pointe) Limited Partnership; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_01112016_CB 118513

You'll be signing at that point? Yes. Are you ready for the energy report? The report? The Energy Committee Agenda Item six cancel 118 513 relating to the satellite department declaring certain real property rights surplus to utility needs, authorizing the general manager and chief executive officer to execute an agreement for the city to grant an easement for access purposes over a portion of the city's FT own transmission corridor at 14 355 Linden Avenue North in Seattle, Washington. And to accept the release of an easement of said address accepting payment for the true and full value of the easement, beginning rent being granted from res properties, limited partnership and ratifying confirming certain prior acts. The committee recommends the bill pass. Councilmember Swan. Thank you, Bruno. This council will authorize the city to execute an easement agreement under some power lines and city light will be paid for this easement. And the energy committee recommends that we pass. Okay. Thank you for that. Just bear with me here. So this is a bill. And look at my notes here. So it's I move to pass council bill 118513. Is there a second it's been moved in second. That council bill 118513 pass. Will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill burgess. Gonzalez herbold Jonathan Suarez I O'BRIEN So I beg your president Harrell. I. Nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passes the chair will sign it. Please read council bill 118563 into the record and you may read the short version if you'd like.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, find that the area to be vacated is not needed for present or prospective public use; and, adopt resolution ordering the vacation of the alley north of Spring Street between Elm Avenue to the east and Long Beach Boulevard to the west. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_04112017_17-0254

Okay. We're going back to the hearing. Item number one. Report from Public Works recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing. Find that the area to be vacated is not needed for present or prospective public use and adopt a resolution ordering the vacation of the alley north of Spring Street between Elm Avenue to the east and Long Beach Boulevard to the West Seventh District. Okay, great. We're going to go ahead and I'm going to go ahead and have Sast first to the presentation and then we'll go back to staff comment in the public. So, Mr. Modica. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We'll have Sean Comey, the deputy director of Public Works, give the staff report. Q Good evening, Honorable Mayor Council. This item moves. Forward of vacation of the alley north of Spring Street between Elm Avenue and Long Beach Boulevard. The recommended actions tonight are to conduct a public hearing, make a finding that the alley is not needed for public use, and adopt the resolution ordering vacation of the alley. Just a real quick summary of the actions that preceded tonight's vacation include a general plan consistency finding by the Planning Commission on December 15th and notice of intent to vacate that was brought before the City Council on March 7th. With that, I'm available to answer any questions. Okay, there is a motion and a second I would go ahead and have any public comments first on this item. Please come forward. Put it in Mayor Council members. My name is Pedro Blanco. I'm with Current Design. We've been assisting the Salvation Army on this project for a few years. We really are very thankful of the assistance that we have from staff and really appreciate your recommendation for approval. Thank you. Thank you. Brisard. I keep referring to the city website for the latest homeless count since it has not been posted to date. I was unable to look at that record, but I couldn't help but wonder with this alley just sitting there and being that the homeless are considered part of our citizen, public and creative cities who are are looking to be more progressive in their assistance toward the homeless. Some are using alleys to create seat slates, safe sleep ways they patios lounging areas. Harvey Milk has a park that now has an outdoor office. And I'm wondering for the homeless, could we not find some creative use? Where were these people who have been asked now to leave the corridors of the city while we build another civic center? And they've been removed, some of them now wandering who God knows where. Only God knows where these people are. And I wonder if anybody spoke for that. And is it too late to say maybe we can take another look at this alley being that the homeless are part of the citizens, some of them job used to hold jobs. Some of them are taxpayers whose taxes purchase parks and and help rehabilitate many of our facilities. Maybe we could put outdoor showers there. Could the homeless feel better enfranchised or helped if they knew that? Over on Elm Street there's a shower every day. Free, free shower. And then maybe somebody can set up a confession, stand where they can get free food in the alley that can be used for public use. Why are we continuing to act like the homeless are not part of our public when we're making these types of decisions? These types. Now we borrow $40,000,000,000 million to rebuild this city. But that vacant lot over there is vacant. It empty and free. And what do we do? Just put a gate up there and close it off. There are volunteers right now who are waiting to work for the homeless, who live right in that area, where if you would provide an atmosphere and a place for them to serve every day, you have free people, free employees who will do it for free. Why would you do this and not consider? Hmm. Can the homeless use that alley? How can you not think about that? Thank you. See no other public comment. I'm going to go ahead and close the hearing as they come back to the council and Councilman Ringa. Thank you. This alley has been determined by the my staff has all of the practical uses and it is part of the project for the Salvation Army. So I request my staff, my council to support this motion. Thank you. Councilman Mongo. Some great projects. Thank you for bringing it. Okay. Seeing no other comment from the council. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your vote. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. And next up, we have more of our business. So we're going to turn over to item number 16. I'm sorry. Item number 11.

A proclamation celebrating Denver afterschool programs and the 2015 Annual National Lights on Afterschool Day. A proclamation celebrating Denver afterschool programs and the 2015 Annual National Lights on Afterschool Day.

DenverCityCouncil_10192015_15-0758

So I did forget to announce that. Kudos to the airport. All right. Proclamations. We have two this evening. We'll start with Proclamation 758 sponsored by Councilman Lopez. Will you please read Proclamation 758. Thank you, Mr. President. I will. Proclamation number 758 Series of 2015 Celebrating Denver Afterschool Programs and the 2015 Annual Nights I'm Sorry National Lights On After School Day. Whereas the Denver City Council recognizes that after school programs make a lifelong difference for kids and their parents. And. WHEREAS, Denver is home to over 93,000 school age youth, producing a significant need for afterschool programs to support their academic, social and physical development. Those engaged in high quality afterschool programs outpace their peers in academic growth, have better school attendance, and have better behavior in school while staying on track to graduate high school. And. Whereas, high quality afterschool programs provide students with access to academic support, music, arts, sports, leadership, development, conflict resolution and more. Building many important 21st century skills that inspire increased confidence, making connections to future education and career opportunities. And. Whereas, the demand for after school programs far outweighs the availability for every one student enrolled in a quality after school program, there are two students just waiting to get in, and national studies show parents with regular after school care for their children missed eight more days of work per year than their peers whose children are in regular school after regular afterschool programs. Revealing the importance of these programs and supporting working families the economic strength of our great city. And. Whereas, The Denver Afterschool Alliance, a collaboration among the city and county of Denver, Denver Public Schools and many of Denver's funding and community based organizations helps improve program quality and increase afterschool access for all of Denver's youth. And. WHEREAS, The Denver Afterschool Alliance provides tools and resources to help providers improve program quality and measure outcomes, creates a long term collaborative, collaborative plan addressing the need for high quality afterschool programs across Denver and maps programs citywide, addressing gaps in availability and helping parents fight the right or find the right program excuse me for their child. And. Whereas, every $1 invested in afterschool programs saves $9 by reducing crime and welfare costs, improving kids performance at school, and increasing kids earning potential. Whereas the Denver City Council pledges to support afterschool programs so that Denver's children and families benefit from quality afterschool programs that help close the achievement gap and prepare young people to compete and succeed. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Council, the city and county of Denver, Section one, that the Denver City Council recognizes the outstanding leadership of the Denver Afterschool Alliance for their innovated afterschool programs for Denver children and recognizes the 2015 National Lights on Afterschool Day. Thursday, October 22nd, 2015. In Section two that the clerk of the city and county of Denver shall a test and a a seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation and transmit it to the Office of Children's Affairs. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Your motion to. Adopt. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council proclamation number 758 2015 be adopted. It has been moved and seconded. Comments. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. This is just a great program. Eight years ago, I traveled with MAXINE Quintana and leaders from our Denver Public Schools, inner city to Washington, D.C., to make sure that we fight for funding for this program and actually to grow the program now. It was excellent then, but it is even more impressive now. And when I hear about this program, I think other colleagues on this Dias have had this experience of reading this proclamation. And I'm just glad that we're able to do it and bring it back home. It's great to see this kind of success. And I just am I can't emphasize more just how important that return on investment is. $1 saves nine. And far too long and far too much. In this city, we seem to be too focused on correcting adult behavior rather than creating amazing children and not having to build jails, but instead build schools. So until we get to that day, I think we're going to take your lead and these great kids who are here dressed in orange. And especially the kid at the Broncos hat. I think we really have a great thing going. Mr. President, thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilman Brooks? Yeah, I think, Mr. President and Madam Secretary, please. I mean, to this this proclamation has a sponsor. Councilman Lopez, you've you've been on a roll two weeks in a row. Four excellent, excellent proclamations. I feel like we need to do a proclamation to you. But I want to just just talk real quickly about the just the importance of public investment and private investment. Public private partnerships into afterschool programs, I think is incredibly important. I grew up as a latchkey kid, so I grew up in these programs. And my professional career started leading these programs. And so as I look in, I see the the youth leaders and folks here, I want to thank you for your investment into these young people. And there's an ROI that you cannot count from a fiscal perspective. And it's a changed life. You can't count that. And that's what so many adults did for me. And that's what I got a chance to do for for so many young people. And now those young people are 25 and 35 and they have kids and and they are now leading in this city. And I just hope that the young adults who are leading here can one day see these young kids who are in a city council meeting. For goodness sakes, I'm so sorry. You you can see their lives in the next five, ten years and see them as transformed. And so we need more and more of this all throughout our community. And we can never stop investing in our young people. You want to know what Denver looks like? I tell people this all the time. You don't know what Denver looks like. You look at these orange shirts because that's our future and that's where we need to be investing in, too. So I proudly support this, and I would proudly support any budget amendment to put more money into afterschool programs. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman Clark. Thank. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you, Councilman Lopez, for bringing this up, this proclamation. I'm very excited to support this tonight. There is no better investment than we can that we can make in the future of our city that investing right here and all of you see the future of our city, future city council people. Although after tonight, you might think this is a little boring for what you want to do. Future mayors, future leaders of our city. And I love that on your shirts that says after school matters because I matter. So if you'll indulge me for just a second, I'm gonna count to three. And all of you out there in those shirts, I want you to yell as loud as you can. I matter on three. You think you can help me out? That I can't hear you? Can you help me out of that? That's more like it. One, two, three. Thank you all for being here. You are the future of our city, and it's fantastic whenever we can do anything to support you. So when you guys need something, you call us, okay? Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Clark. There's no better way than. And on that note, Madam Secretary, roll call. Lopez I knew Ortega I assessment I black brooks I matter. Clark, i Espinosa. Flinn, i gilmore i cashman. I can eat. Mr. President, I. Well, interestingly enough, Councilman Lopez, we were waiting. Got it. Madam Secretary, please call the voting. Announce the results. 3939. 785 has been 758. Excuse me. Has been a Dr. Catherine Lopez. Don't suppose there's someone in the audience you like to invite to the podium to receive the proclamation? Yes, I do. There's a couple of great people. First is MAXINE Quintana with the Denver Office of Children Affairs and she has a guest, too. I want to welcome to the microphone. It's Arabi, Mohammed. Welcome. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Thank you guys are for letting us be here tonight and for this wonderful proclamation again and just getting to bring our young people here in city council chambers to see what you guys do as the leaders of our city everyday. So thank you. I'm not going to speak long. I really want to give Aubrey a chance to say a few words. But in my role not only as the director of Out-of-School Time Initiatives for the Office of Children's Affairs and as a member of the staff team for the Denver Afterschool Alliance, you guys all have additional information about the Denver Afterschool Alliance in your packets. I just want to reiterate again the importance and the need for afterschool programing. And again, as Councilman Lopez said in the proclamation, for every one child in a program, there are at least two waiting to get in. I want to thank City Council for the support that we as a city already provide for afterschool programing through our dedicated funding for Measure two A and the marijuana tax revenue funds that we get in our office. That again goes right back out the door to serve program during the after school hours. And while again it's meeting some need, it's still not meeting enough. And so we in the Office of Children's Affairs and the Denver Afterschool Alliance are continuing to leverage our resources and to bring more stakeholders to the table so that we can ensure that every child in every neighborhood in Denver has an after school program that they can benefit from. So I want to introduce Aubrey. Hello. Hello. My name is. I have a moment. After school programs have made a very amazing impact in my life, especially at the Bridge Project and Boys and Girls Club after school at the Bridge Project and Boys and Girls Club give you a safe place to complete homework and to be able to experience new opportunities. At the Bridge Project I have experienced being able to work with kids that have different abilities than me. I have also experience being able to speak out on my voice and say my opinions and thoughts throughout the public. I've also been able to speak at the voice of educator and education and prove to the educators that Davis Elementary School should stay open at the Boys and Girls Club. I have experience being able to run for Youth of the Year, which is a program that you have to explain what the club means to you and why you go to Boys and Girls Club. I have also experience being able to attend Easter Parade, which is which is a program that you get to create your own Easter and walk down the red carpet after school programs, give us kids opportunities to have a chance to experience new things and to be able to meet new people . Afterschool programs also give us kids a chance to make strong relationships with kids and stuff. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez, for bringing that forward. And thank you all for coming. I can't imagine you want to stay. So thank you all so much. All right. We've got one more proclamation. And what do you know? Sponsored by Councilman Lopez 779 We read please read proclamation 779. Oh. Councilman Brooks, you got your wish, man. Council Proclamation 758 series of 2015. Well, I know. I'm sorry. Sorry. Scott Shire Council Bill. Our Council Proclamation 779 six of 2015 proclaiming the week of October 19, 2015 to October 23rd, 2015, as Choose to be great week in Denver, Colorado.