Datasets:

huuuyeah

/

meetingbank

like 8

Recommendation to receive and file a presentation on the Century Villages at Cabrillo 2017 Social Impact Report.

LongBeachCC_09122017_17-0749

Gets motion carries. Thank you. 18, please. 18 is communication from Council member Urunga. Recommendation to receive and file presentation on the Century Villages at Cabrillo 2017. So Social Impact Report. Thank you, Councilmember Younger. Thank you, Vice Mayor. The Villages, the Cabrillo is a wonderful nonprofit organization that provides housing for 2000 individuals there and then the 900 of which plus are veterans. So I'd like to invite members of the association to come up and make a presentation and to cover a little bit more about what they do. And it's in the seventh District and they'll welcome. Come on forward. You have you have the floor. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Kimberly Wee. I am the director of residential services at Century Villages that Cabrillo. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here to present our 2017 Social Impact Report. As you can see, it looks wonderful. And this is our sixth iteration, and you've probably seen each, each and every one of them. But I wanted to just take a few moments to go through it with you. Of course, I can't go through the entire report, but I want to call your attention to a couple key areas . And really I'll walk you through the process and give due credit to all of our wonderful partners that help make this wonderful report possible every year. So this is truly a collaborative process at the Villages that Cabrillo, we have more than 20 partner agencies that contribute to this report by providing data, photos, clients, stories and their time to make sure that this comes together. This is a ten month process, and we work really hard to make sure that we can give you a really good, succinct, but really vibrant picture of what happens at the villages that Cabrillo and all of this successes. So as the councilman mentioned, in 2016, century villages at Cabrillo provided housing and services to more than 2000 individuals, including 980 US veterans. We provide these services with the help of all of our partner agencies and 283 staff throughout the year. In addition to the staff people, we have over nine with 995 volunteers and interns that help contribute their time to the villages at Cabrillo. That equates to about 30000 hours of in-kind services that are provided to our residents. And all of this support and all of this data that's in this report really is to show you that all of the work that the staff does in all of the work that the residents do to stay housed is a really a collaborative process. And it requires a collective impact, the collective impact model that century villages that Cabrillo follows. So we are proud to show, to present this report to you and show you that we have achieved all of our goals in many ways. Again, I can't go through the entire report with you, but I hope you will take a moment to go through and and look at the successes. I think one of the things that I like to pull out, especially as my role as director of residential services, is out of the 742 adults that were permanently housed on our campus, 99% of them stayed housed after six months, and 91% of them were still housed a year after coming off the streets. That's a huge accomplishment that we credit our partners for. We credit the staff, and most importantly, we credit the resiliency and the hard work of our residents and our community. While that number can seem like a very small number and a report, it really represents a lot of hard work on everybody's part. There's also a few new concepts in Social Impact Report this year. It's our civics guiding principle, as I said, is collective impact. We've updated that a little bit, and one of the key pieces that we've worked really hard to include is the community's voice and so which we have worked very hard to have authentically engage the community and our residents in our decision making processes on site. And as you can see on pages eight and nine in the spread, we really we really engage the residents in focus groups on really what what safety means to them and how we can create a safe environment for them to live and with respect and dignity. So the feature story really represents the three focus groups that we did with staff and residents across all of our programs to make sure that we really understood what they need. And several themes that emerged from that is that safety is relative. They do feel a lot safer than they did when they were on the streets, that they need to feel connected to their community, to feel safe, that everyone needs to work together to make the community safe. And most importantly, what we found is that the residents. We're ready to jump right in there and do what they needed to do to make our community feel safe. And we've we've worked with those concepts and we've expanded on them in our monthly town hall meetings and our community watch initiative and our Pathways to Health Initiative. So we are really taking heart all of the recommendations that come from our residents. And as soon as our next building opens, we will be having at least 1500 people on any given day there. And to say that the majority of those residents feel safe and respected, it makes century villages at Cabrillo and all of our partners proud. So on behalf of Century Villages and Gabriel and our villages, that Cabrillo Collaborative Partners, I want to thank you for taking the time to look through our report. Thank you. Council meeting, wrangling. Final comments. Mr. D'Andrea Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Staff Thank you, Kim. I just wanted to share a few thoughts as we've shared many a time, the magic of what we do out in West Long Beach doesn't reside in any one organization, but it really reflects the rich fabric of organizations public and private, big and small, that have come together and banded together around a common goal of of ending homelessness. This report that you had before you really celebrates what was achieved out in West Long Beach over the past year. And the city is a really big player in that in a lot of ways is the is the ultimate backbone to the work that we all do. That support comes in many different forms, shapes and sizes and from many departments across the city, whether it's capital support from housing and neighborhood services, rental subsidy, support from the housing authority, supportive service funding from Health and Human Services, general support from planning or building public works. The city manager's office there. The city really should be incredibly proud of what's been accomplished out of Long Beach. It's been 20 years since 1997 was when that property was conveyed to our our nonprofit organization. And so next year, we're actually going to be celebrating our 20th anniversary and we'll be looking forward to sharing that with you . And so much has been accomplished. Clearly, we have lots of work to do, as we all know. And reading the papers and and participating in, you know, council meetings and many community meetings around the city, we're encouraged by some of what's happening. We have a wonderful new development called Anchor Place that'll be coming online here within hopefully about a month or so, providing homes to 120 formerly homeless households, including veterans and families. We've just updated our master plan that will hopefully shape development at the villages over the next 15 to 20 years. We have lots left to do there and then I think our work in West Long Beach has really served as a springboard for our work throughout the rest of the city. We're excited about the beacon that we just celebrated the groundbreaking for a few weeks back. We have another project. We're working very closely in Council District one called Beechwood, a really nice renovation of A and all HUD property. So like like many communities around the state, Long Beach clearly has has challenges. We're encouraged by the leadership of the council, the mayor and the staff in terms of the the Affordable Workforce Housing Study that was recently published. And we look forward to continuing to play a role with the city and helping make a difference. Thank you. Thank you. Any closing comments? Yes. I want to thank the members of the Villages DiCaprio team, Renee Castro, Steve Coleman. And there is a step rather wonderful work they do. It's a wonderful project to have in West Palm Beach. And and it's the holistic approach that you use in making sure that your residents receive all the services that they need to keep them on their feet and keep them striving and and and being a good citizens for the Syrian army. So I wanted to commend you and thank you for your work. Thank you. Thank you. So we have a few comments from the council. I'll just say this is once again another great social impact report. You had a few people behind the dais breaking it down as soon as it was handed out. So continue this good work. And, you know, and just, you know, switching hats to my AG folks, I mean, you guys are leading the way on cap and trade. People are still trying to figure it out. And here we are in Long Beach, the century villages. Cambria has been successful twice. And while while communities are still figuring out how to get their fair share. Long Beach, Southern California. Although we make up 65% of disadvantaged communities, we only receive 30% of the of the cap and trade funding. So you're doing something right and it's a model that other communities can pay attention to. And so continue the good work. We have a few speakers here. Next is Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I want to echo the comments of the vice mayor and Councilman Aranda. This is really impressive. I can't wait to actually be able to read it and pay attention to it. So thank you very much. You know, I was reflecting and I was just talking to Jack. He's going to reach out to you because I think it would be really worthwhile for my community to have you guys come and do a presentation at one of our community. Meetings and educate them because we talk about you a lot and we reference you a lot. But the great work that you're doing every day, I think a lot of the residents don't know about. They often will post things on social media that points to other cities. You know, why don't we try this or why don't we do that? And I have to go back and say we are actually doing that right now, and I want them to your website so that they can see things. But I think it would be worthwhile to have you do a presentation if, well, obviously our district would want one. But even citywide, I think it's really important and I know that you have taken the time to give tours of your facilities to staff of council members. I know that my team and I would like to come and do one soon. We've heard nothing but amazing things. The work that you do and the products that you provide in terms of sustainable, long term support and a life changing infrastructure is really to be commended. So thank you very much for everything that you do and addressing an issue that's really complex and presenting a lot of public policy challenges to cities all around the nation. You're helping us really address some of the long term sustainable tools that we all should be mindful of. So thank you very much. I appreciate you being here tonight. I thank my colleague for bringing this forward and educating us and reminding us of the great work that you do. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Pearce. I yes, I also, of course, would like to echo a lot of the same comments. And I think what makes you guys so unique is that you are that hub for partnership. You know, that you have so many organizations at the villages that are working on a holistic approach to a population that really, when they have the support, thrives. And it's an honor to see this in Long Beach and I, my first year in office has been a exciting year in office and frustrating year and trying to get my hands around the homelessness challenge, the mental health challenge and all the resources needed and all the things have to fall into place to make magic happen. And that is why the Villages experience is so unique and so amazing for us to look to as a model and to learn from. And so I want to thank you guys for being a resource to me and my staff for the tours that we've been able to take and understanding everything that goes on and anything that we can do, as you guys know, thinking outside the box around resources and dollars, and how are we as a city saying, let's invest in this model, whether it's at your location or other locations where we can really capitalize on the success that you guys have have laid out. And I want to say congratulations also for being forthright and honest and doing surveys and relaying that information in these surveys around how residents feel and what you guys are doing to address that. And so just congratulations on on being really thoughtful and thorough. Thanks. Thank you. Councilmember Gonzalez. Yes. I, too, want to say thank you for all the work that you do. The Social Impact Report. I tell my residents that it gives us a really good snapshot of who are serving in the city of Long Beach and not just to the cost benefits, but the people that we're serving. You know, we see here single mothers, single fathers with children. We can never even imagine children being out on the streets. But unfortunately they are and they have been in our city. And so we're serving those individuals needs. And we couldn't thank you enough for all the resources you provide. Very excited about Beacon and very excited about Beechwood. Two other fantastic projects. Thank you again. All right, so any public comment on this item? Now be a time. Come forward. Please come forward. You have 3 minutes. All right. Thank you. Please give your name and you have 3 minutes. Oh, can I get going first so I can get a light on, but I can't. It's like he wants to rush. Hey, you did that last time the mayor was in New York. Don't hassle me this time, anyway. Give an honor to Jesus. I mean, I hear what everybody's saying, and that's good with villages of L.A., Mr. Andrew. All right, I hear that's cool. You know everything. But then you talk all this good, comfy stuff. I asked last time, what happened to the 50 million? 25 million? You pass 25 and then the homeless ever heard of this stuff? So I hear all this nice talk and I see no action because I see money bleeding from this piece every week. Bleeding. I hear the people blaming gentrification is the rich white folks, but it ain't the rich white folks. Because I see a man whose parents is illegals. He's always bragging on that. I see a vice mayor who I don't see doing anything for black folks. Straight up, man. I'm beyond the jokes. I see another black guy, they told me Muslims are Christians. Heads, offices, brothers. Yeah. You, Al, you say that by the elevator. Don't try to. Address the chair, please. I'm addressing you. And the chair is the chair. Thank you. Anyway, I'm doing stuff. Then we got. Oh, Karl Marx. Always eaten up at first. Just keep it focused right here on the because. I'm focused on the whole lot because this is what we deal with communism. I don't like this comment. I don't think that's on subject. I think you're off. Communism is a subject you try to change the government from. The Great White time is too ism. So this is subject. That's what I'm saying. And so all this all this mumbo jumbo and stuff you talking, you cannot keep it real. You on a socialist agenda. The man that was mayor, he took money from conservatives and turned. Indeed, if he failed Castro, which I miss, Mongo stopped me from saying that. Mr. Mayor, this topic is off topic, but, you know, every priest is. You actually. You don't have. To shoot nobody up. So you can turn around, walk away, whatever. You ain't running nothing. So let's try to be more secure. In Jesus name. There is justice. And there will be justice. So change your ways up. And as far as you Republicans are up here. When Republicans start going unanimous with them every time. I'm serious. We went off topic list. I know this is on top. Okay, I'm back on topic. Thank you. It's a nice thing, but get it right or we're getting rid of you and I'm especially being a bum watching you. I'm especially why she stood for the union for black people. That's what you do. Hey, well, you know. All right, these people, you didn't prosecute to prosecute. This, right? That's enough, so you better get rid of it. Thank you for remaining. You know. Right. So, yeah, we're done. So let's move forward. So saying no further is any further public comment. You guys tell the same non members. Please cast your vote. Trump. Donald Trump. That's what I'm saying. I'm coming back. Catch my reprise, which in case. Thank you. We will move politely and delightfully on to item number 19.

AN ORDINANCE relating to redevelopment at the Yesler Terrace Master Planned Community; amending Section 23.75.160 of the Seattle Municipal Code; and replacing Exhibit C, Tree Protection Plan, of Ordinance 123962.

SeattleCityCouncil_08022021_CB 120108

Report of the Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee Agenda Item three Council Bill 120108 relating to the redevelopment of the Split Terrace Masterplan community. Amending Sections 23.70 5.163 of the Seattle Municipal Code. Replacing Exhibit C Tree Protection Plan of Ordinance 123962. The committee recommends that the bill pass as amended. Thank you, Madam Court consumer Strauss. You are the chair of the committee. I want to hand it over to you to walk us through this item. Thank you. Council President. Colleagues, as I said this morning and at previous council briefings, this legislation amends the tree protection plan element of the master plan to allow for the redevelopment of vacant passes. The vacant parcels are planned to be redeveloped to expand medical uses associated with Harborview Hospital, which is adjacent to the property and to construct an extended stay hotel which will also support patients and families at Harborview. Having myself spent multiple days in a row at Harborview Hospital, I can tell you that it was made easier because my family lives in the city. We are a regional hospital and having more extended stay opportunities across the street is going to be really a benefit for our entire region. This legislation does enable that development by allowing for the removal of two trees while increasing protections for other trees at in the yes or terrorist property. After working with the Seattle Housing Authority and touring the site, I successfully proposed an amendment to the legislation to increase the replacement requirement for the removed trees from a 1 to 1 replacement to a 3 to 1 replacement. Also appreciative of Councilmember Peterson bringing forward an amendment to put parameters around where replacement trees can be planted to ensure we get the most public benefit for the benefit of the Seattle Housing Authority residents. And with that Council president, I moved to pass Council Bill 120108 as amended, if that is appropriate at this time. An emotion is necessary since it went through the committee process and we already have a committee recommendation, but I appreciate that. Are there any additional comments on the bill? I'm not seeing any hands raised and there's more stress. Is there anything else you'd like to add? Nothing at this time. Just thankful to get these projects moving and to save and increase the amount of tree canopy there. Thanks so much. With that being said, will the clerk please call the roll on the passage of the bill? Honest, I. Lewis. I. Morales. Yes. Muscular, i. Peterson. I so want. Yes. Strauss Yes. Herbold. Yes. In Council President Gonzalez, I back in favor and unopposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read item four into the record? Agenda item for resolution 32010. Identify and propose comprehensive plan amendments to be considered for possible adoption in 2022 and requesting the Office of Planning and Community Development and the Seattle Planning Commission Review and make recommendations about proposed amendments.

Recommendation to direct City Manager to work with all appropriate departments to review and report back within 90 days parks roadway and parking lot maintenance and bring back to Council what proposals are necessary to streamline and fund such maintenance on an equal basis with our non-park roadways and parking lots.

LongBeachCC_04202021_21-0336

Thank you. Item 11. Communication from Councilwoman Mongeau, Councilwoman Zendejas Councilmember Your Urunga recommendation directs city manager to review and report back within 90 days on parks, roadway and parking lot maintenance. Councilwoman. Thank you. I was trying to text. Motion to the Q. Thank you for everyone who has contributed to this item. Our community has really reached out related to some challenges that we have found in understanding how. Potholes that are not on residential and commercial corridors, residential streets, commercial corridors or the other types of public streets that we have actually get filled. We've been working on a particular pothole for months, and sometimes these potholes get reported through the garbage out hundreds of times and still no resolution. And that's just not acceptable. I know that interior roads and our park facilities and our our parking lots often have some of the worst potholes in the city. And while I'm not looking to pull resources from one area to another, I think it's important for there to be a united method in which people can communicate with the city about a pothole and the need to repair it. Because what's happening is a pothole reported at a small size left unrepaired for months on end, actually grows to a size where the cost of repairing that pothole has grown exponentially. So we really need to figure out how to pull together a united pothole program. I think that's kind of the theme of my two items tonight, which is understanding that within our city we do a lot of great things, but sometimes they're broken up into different departments and this is one of those times. And so I'd like the city manager to look at that and come back and. He's already committed to filling the pothole issue that we have. That's been an ongoing issue, but that issues like this should not be bounced around from public works to Parks and Rec for months on end, with residents feeling totally disenfranchized and frustrated. So I appreciate everyone's support on this important item. Thank you. Councilmember Zendejas. I just wanted to say thank you to Councilmember Mongo for bringing this item forward, and I just wanted to second her motion. Thank you. Councilmember Ringo. Thank you for bringing this forward. Very important topic for. All of us. Thank you. Thank you. Roll call vote, please. There's no public comments. District one. District I. District two. I'm District three. District four. District four. District five. Eye and super unable to attend unmute his sister. Finally admitted super surprising I. Am very hands up thank you confirmed district. Said she could also vote by thumbs up. I. District seven. By District eight. I. District nine. Thumbs up. Ocean carries.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Ordinance No. ORD-21-0020 extending for twelve (12) months interim regulations (moratorium) in accordance with Chapter 21.50 of the Long Beach Municipal Code on the issuance of building, construction, occupancy permits, or other entitlements for new stand-alone residential construction along transportation corridors in areas that are designated by the 2019 General Plan Land Use Element update as the neighborhood-serving corridors or centers placetype on Willow Street, west of the I-710 freeway to the City terminus; and Santa Fe Avenue, between Pacific Coast Highway on the south and Wardlow Road on the north, in the west Long Beach area of the City; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_06142022_22-0646

Thank you. Hearing 21, please. Yeah. Report from Development Services recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and extend for one year. A previously adopted urgency ordinance relating to the temporary limitation on the issuance of building or construction permits for new residential standalone construction along commercial and transportation corridors in West Long Beach. Read the first time and later the next regular meeting of City Council for final reading and declare the urgency thereof and declaring this ordinance shall take effect immediately and request City Manager to continue working with economic development to develop a plan to conduct a market study along the Santa Fe Avenue and Willow Street Corridor District seven. And there are two votes required for this item. Thank you. City Manager. Yes. I'd like to introduce our acting. Planning manager, Allison Spindler. She will do a presentation. On this item. Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. The item before you today is a presentation on the extension of a moratorium for new construction of residential housing units on major corridors in West Long Beach. A bit of background on the moratorium. A year ago, the Council originally enacted a moratorium for new standalone residential development along Willow Street and Santa Fe Ave in West Long Beach. This was because the existing zoning code regulations for the West Willow and Santa Fe corridors predate adoption of the general plan land use element and do not allow for mixed use development. That would be consistent with the adopted land use element, which designates the aforementioned corridors as neighborhoods serving. You can see said corridors on the maps shown in blue. The moratorium was set to expire June 15th and SAFF is recommending that it be extended to allow for the requisite zoning code update and related economic study to be completed . As mentioned, staff is still working on the requisite technical work to ensure new zoning districts not only implement the land development place type guidelines, but also reflect community priorities and are informed by market research on the area. Community outreach to date, including a May 14th Virtual Open House, is being incorporated into the zoning proposal. Moving forward, staff from the Economic Development Department will begin outreach and data collection next month for economic empowerment zones in key areas of the city, including West Palm Beach. The zoning code districts are also being developed with community feedback reflected in the drafts, with the goal of preparing the zones for adoption by the end of the year . Therefore, staff is requesting an extension of the urgency ordinance to ensure the zoning and economic study work is completed. The municipal code requires an urgency ordinance extension to be a full year, but again, it's anticipated the new zones will come back at the end of 22 2022. With that staff request, the one year extension of the moratorium on the issuance of building permits and entitlements for new residential standalone construction and the project area are available to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you. That concludes the staff report as any public comment on item 21. There are three public comment speakers Gilbert Oliveira, Robert Bachman and Sand. I can say thank you. Please come forward. What? Robert Bachmann. I'm real. You know, I represent Mr. Real. I'm an attorney. Basically, Mr.. I purchased property back in June of 2020 and waited about six months to start the development process on property in this area. At the time of the first moratorium he firewall he had, it was about six months after he purchased the property . It took him time to develop a plan. And I understand the intent of the what's going on as far as a mixed use and that type of thing. He developed two duplexes and it's about a 6500 square foot property. It was an ugly parking lot and he spent quite a bit of money on the property and obtaining the necessary permits. He was well into the permitting process, including soils and architectural and civil and everything else that had to be done. He was refining his final architectural plans and the first moratorium, which was a year ago. And now we're asking for an extension with the financial situations that are in position. That would be another three quarter percent increase tomorrow in the financing cost through the Federal Reserve. It would be, you know, a great hardship for someone like him. And I don't know how many others there are in this city that had started to develop prior to the first moratorium. And we're not told anything about it. And I just it's it's his position. Well, of course, I believe the moratorium is probably going to pass, but if it could be finished within 90 to 180 days and made sure that it's at the end of the year and no longer than that, I think another year is way too long and the 90 days would even be better because then you've had 15 months and I don't know how long it takes to develop a study like this, but certainly it could have been done, I would think well within a year, which would be right now. So basically that's the situation. And we're asking if rather than getting into an adversarial situation, that the one year extension be reduced to 90 days, 280 days maximum. Thank you. I just want to say that I don't know if there's a theory for all of my fault, but I got mislead by the by the start. When I first look into the property, I was told that the property was on four apartments or a commercial property either way, and that the city wanted maximize units because the city was in need of low income housing or apartment units. So I bought the property under the information that I received from the city. You know, I spent money on blueprints, architectural drawings, soil reports. I, you know, I spent a lot of money on the property and I don't think it's fair for it not is not fair for me because I follow all the guidelines that the city gave me to follow. And I think I should be compensated for all the money that I spent on my property. I even included building permits. I mean, a blank check. You know, I was almost ready to pull the permit when when the moratorium came along. You know. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Speaking as a property owner from the Santa Fe. I'm in the Watson area. Um, what we're finding, what a lot of these zoning, um, projects, uh, whether it's, you know, those new plan, there's, I know there's a zone in one that happened right now in the central area where I live in is there's not enough public, uh , response occurring. Um, you played was pretty good people. It was pretty good. But in other parts of the city, there's literally none zero the public response occurring. You know, you have trusted partners and nonprofits who are engaging as consultants, but little to no community feedback. And I do not think one year is is enough time. I think I think 2 to 3 years is enough time. Um, we're finding that there's a lot of concentration of capital moving into these areas that are major commercial corridor, as if this was not the west side of Long Beach. Uh, this would be a major corridor that has hundreds of millions of capital investment going into it. And I think that a lot of people, both minor, uh, and on the larger end, are very much aware of this. They're very much aware of what the Caltrans and infrastructure projects are looking like on the state side. And they're trying to, uh, catch that, you know, when investing into these areas. I think anyone buying in the COVID period is very clearly aware of that. And it's unfortunate that we don't necessarily have an inclusionary housing element connected to any of these recent developments, which is why the moratorium exists in the first place, to kind of slow down this this rash stampede, you know, all a scramble of Africa or something to invest into these areas right before all the big boys start coming in. So I think and I'm speaking as someone that owns in the area, I think that this should be maintained, it should be pushed further. And we should really involve a conversation about what this small business look like with these types of commercial corridors. How are we protecting them? And what are the the the housing protections really for for low income people? Because people can say that low income is the emphasis of them. But, you know, then if it's a new residential one, it's going to be market rate and market rate, you know, as we know today, is not appropriate to what the average per income of a per capita income is in these zip codes. So I hope that we can extend this further and really slow down over, you know, development of these areas. Uh, because with SB nine, you know, we can't really control what comes into these, into our communities. So thank you. Thank you. I think that concludes public comment. So now we'll take you back behind the wheel. Councilmember Iran activates marin and i want to thank the gentleman who came up in spokane to speak on this item. It's important that we get those perspectives as well in terms of what's going on here with this moratorium. Basically, the moratorium is to look at all the corridor, not just one site or two is to look at the sites from Pacific Coast Highway to Wardlow, from the border to the river. There's a lot of properties there that need to be revisited. The land use element that is currently in place does not address a lot of issues that we have with mixed use. And there are some properties there that are non-conforming that create other types of issues that are not neighborhood saving properties. So I want to ask Steph, excuse me about, you know, how if we can address the gentleman's concerns regarding his current position and the effects of the moratorium, is there something that we can work with him with? Is there something that maybe staff can address or meet with him separately to address those specific issues? Councilmember. I'm glad to exchange information with the attorney for that individual and meet with them this week or next. So we're glad that those discussions I can't commit that we can resolve this issue necessarily, but we're glad to have those further discussions. And then, as Alison explained in her presentation, it's a municipal code reference to a year. But our our expectation and commitment is to have this work done by December 31st. So we'll continue to meet with you and your staff and provide monthly updates to that. And I appreciate that. I think I appreciate staff for having taken this on. It's a very important item for the West Palm Beach area. We need to get some more activity out there. We need to activate those two streets. They are major corridors in West Palm Beach that need to be developed and activated in more of a way to be more neighborhood serving. So I really appreciate the work you've been doing there, and I also appreciate the fact that we're going to be having these community input meetings where we're going to have people come and and address the commission or at least the issues that they feel are important in those two corridors, so that we can come up with a plan that would be amenable not only to those developers or landowners who are interested in developing those properties. But also to the community in regards to what goes on those properties that our community serving, some neighborhood serving I'm sorry. So with that that all my comments of vice mayor. Thank you. That satisfies council comment members. Please cast your vote. Motion is carried eight zero. We do need a second vote for this item. Great. Members, please cast your vote. Motion carries eight zero.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the use of eviction records; regulating the use of eviction history in residential housing; prohibiting landlords from considering evictions related to COVID-19 during and after the civil emergency; amending the title of Chapter 14.09 and Sections 14.09.005, 14.09.010, 14.09.020, and 14.09.030 of, and adding a new Section 14.09.026 to, the Seattle Municipal Code; declaring an emergency; and establishing an immediate effective date; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_05112020_CB 119787

The bill passes and the chair will sign it and I'll ask that the quick fix my signature to the legislation committee reports will the first please read under item one the short title into the record. Agenda Item one Council Vote 119 787 relating to the use of eviction records, regulating the use of eviction history in residential housing , prohibiting landlords from considering evictions related to COVID 19 during and after the civil emergency. Thank you, Madam Corporate Council members. If you are not speaking and you're on the call, please double check to make sure that you are muted so that we don't hear ambient noise in the background. So I'm going to go ahead and move to pass Council Bill 119787. Is there a second second bucket? It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilmember Morales, you're the sponsor of this bill, and I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to you for for remarks. Thank you. Good afternoon, colleagues. We've all been talking for weeks and weeks now about the crisis that is COVID 19. And we know that hundreds of thousands of Washingtonians have filed for unemployment. A growing number can't afford the basics like food or rent. And many tens of thousands of them are right here in Seattle. And we know that the specter of this crisis, one that none of us could have predicted, shouldn't haunt people for the rest of their lives. And so this legislation would do two things to make sure that that doesn't happen. The first is that it bars landlords from denying housing to tenants who faced an eviction during the mayor's emergency and for six months following that. I do want to be clear that this excludes evictions that would result from the threat to the health or safety of neighbors, the landlord or tenant or landlords, household members. So we've had several people call in expressing concern about that and want to make sure that that is those kinds of evictions are excluded. The second thing is that it provides cause for order of limited dissemination, which would hide an eviction from a tenants. Screening from tenant screening companies. And that's something that we know is important to keep people from losing housing options, especially due to the economic shock of the mass unemployment that we have. We know that when the moratoriums and people will still be out of work, this isn't going to get better overnight. And so what we're really trying to do here is just make sure that we are protecting people long term until people are able to get back on their feet. And we know that, you know, these evictions and unlawful detainers can follow people around. It might be cleared from your from your credit report for seven years, but all a screening company has to do is look that up in the Superior Court website and can still be found. So this is really an attempt to make sure that we are protecting folks who are in financial crisis during this episode and make sure that they have that protection long term. I'm happy to answer questions. So Councilmember MOralists, I know that you have an amendment that you'd like for us to consider, so I'd like to go ahead and ask that you put your amendment on the table and then consider the amendment and and then we can open it up for dialog on the bill as amended. Okay. So I move to amend council bill 119787 as presented on Amendment one on the agenda. Is it her second? Second? It's been moved and seconded to amend. The bill is presented on Amendment one. Councilmember Morales. Please feel free to address the amendment. Sure. So this is really just cleans up the title of this bill. So it makes the original language of the section title more accurate and conforms the new texts regarding well, I'm sorry, that's amendment two. So the First Amendment is really just a technical amendment to clean up the language. Great. Are there any questions or comments on Amendment One, which has just been described by Councilmember Morales as a technical clean up amendment? Be seen and hearing none will please call the role on the adoption of Amendment One. Strauss. I. Herbal I. Whereas. Do. Whereas I'm like, Lewis I. Moralities I. Vinciquerra. I. Peterson. I. The launch. President Gonzales. I. Nine in favor none oppose. The motion carries an amendment is adopted. Customer What else? I know you have a Second Amendment, so I'm going to go ahead and put it over to you to make that motion. Okay, I move that we are sorry that we amend council bill 11987119787 as presented on Amendment two on the agenda. Is there a second? Okay. It's been moved and seconded to amend the bill as presented on an amendment to Councilmember Morales as sponsor of the amendment. Please feel free to address it. So this amendment adds a rebuttal presumption in favor of a tenant. If a landlord does see the eviction information and takes an adverse action against the tenant as a result of that information. Colleagues. Any questions or comments on Amendment two? It looks like there are no questions or comments. So I will ask that the clerk please call the roll on adoption of Amendment two. Strauss. I. Purple. I was. Juarez. I. Luis Morales. I. Keller. I. PETERSON No. So what I. President Gonzalez. I. Eight in favor. One opposed. Thank you so much. The motion carries and the amendment is adopted. I believe that is the end of the amendments that I'm aware of. So now would be a good time, colleagues, if there were any comments on the bill as amended. Now is the time to make those comments a state council member. So what floor is yours? Thank you, President Gonzalez. I'm happy to support this legislation from Councilman Morales and happy to have co-sponsored it. Background checks are set up to be extremely unfair to renters, as we heard from some renters in the public comments. For example, if you're taken to eviction, good and fairly and the judge rules that there is no reason to evict you. Maybe it was blatant discrimination. Maybe there was no just cause. Regardless, it still gets included in your rental history as having been taken to eviction court, and it can become extremely difficult to get housing as a result. And it follows you throughout your life. Renters can appeal. You have these false evictions removed from their rental history, but must do so with each and every background check company. Ideally, King County Court would refuse to give out eviction records to background check companies unless those evictions were approved by the judge. But the city does not control King County Court, so this legislation instructs landlords that they must not use eviction records during this emergency against renters. They shouldn't anyway, because evictions are being prohibited during this emergency. But as I said, the background records exist whether the code makes the rent or not. Obviously there will be difficulties with enforcement, and ultimately what Seattle needs is a portable background check methodology so renters can correct all those eviction records and their background check, and then future landlords are required to use that background check. But in the meantime, I'm happy to vote yes on this emergency legislation. I think he comes why wasn't I see Councilmember Strauss and again if for anybody else who wants to speak of you cannot raise your hand, I'll put you in the queue. Councilmember Strauss Resource. Thank you. Council President. I'll just take this opportunity once again to reiterate my strong support for increasing the amount of rental assistance that we can provide people in our community. Because when we're able to invest in rental assistance, we're able to keep people in place and keep everyone in the economic chain made for. And so, again, just reiterating, I will be voting for this legislation and that we also need to follow up with additional rental assistance. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Strauss, for that important reminder. We've, of course, added already added some millions of dollars for rental assistance and certainly not implying that that is going to meet the scale of the need. But we will continue to make sure that we're advocating for those dollars. Excellent point. Okay. Councilman Peterson is next in the queue and I haven't seen anybody else raise your hand. So if you want to, now's the time. PETERSON Thank you. I'd like to thank the sponsor of this bill, Councilmember Morales, and for the hard work of our staff and council central staff. I believe it's important to point out to the general public this bill has very good intentions. It was just that it was introduced only seven days ago. I believe that's not enough time to consider all the ramifications of this legislation. It would also be in effect for what's really an unknown period of time, because we don't know when the mayor will end her emergency declaration. So I'm proud to join my co-counsel colleagues on several a couple of eviction prevention measures, the winter eviction moratorium. And then recently last week just last week the to restrict to allow the extra defense for six months after the mayors eviction moratorium ends. And that's an important point. So the legislation we passed last week was for six months after the mayors eviction moratorium ends. This legislation before us, however, would be six months after the emergency declaration. We do not know when the emergency declaration will end. It's possible that it could go on for more than a year. The reason is that it's likely that the mayor will keep that in place longer than her eviction moratorium, because the emergency declaration will enable us to get reimbursed by the federal government for a longer period of time. So I'm uncomfortable also in invoking the City Charter's legislative emergency clause, where it says it's necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety. I think there's this is something that we could do in the next couple of weeks or more if we thought it through even further and had more data about what the situation is going to be for tenants, for the relief packages and when the emergency declaration will actually end. But again, I want to thank I want to thank my colleague for introducing this and for her staff being available to answer our questions. Thank you. I think because we're Rich Peterson. Next up is Councilmember Herbold and then Councilmember Lewis. Thank you. I want to also join my colleagues on the council in thanking Councilmember Morales for bringing forward this piece of legislation. I think it's really important to realize that the use of eviction history as an indicator of good tenancy is is controversial . But under normal circumstances, it is premised on the belief of how tenants behave under normal or non-pandemic conditions. But as we all have recognized here in the context of the current emergency, tenants are facing unprecedented circumstances, and how they balance their financial obligations in these unprecedented times are not a good indicator of whether or not they are going to be a good tenant. There are some some comment on behalf of public testimony earlier, questioning whether or not this legislation had received the OPM. A lot of permanent review. I'm happy to report that it has. And I find that the analysis, without divulging the analysis, is is reassuring on our ability to to move this forward , this legislation forward. I also want to recognize that there were some amendments that were being considered earlier on that would have been sort of cleanup amendments unrelated to the to the crisis and that the the amendment sponsors agreed to withdraw those. You know, really housekeeping cleanup amendments, because those amendments themselves were not related to the COVID 19 crisis. And then finally, I think it's really important to understand in practice how these orders of limited to some dissemination actually work. And that's why this bill itself has two parts. It on one hand notifies the courts what we hope they will they will do when there are requests for limited dissemination orders. That is, the ability of of eviction records to show up on people's tenant screening reports. And this has as a sort of a fallback the prohibition on the part of landlords in using this information. And the reason why that so necessary is because the the practice of courts in making decisions around limited dissemination orders has really been inconsistent. And there hasn't been an appellate case on this. So courts aren't consistent on it. And specifically, it's important to recognize that the entire right to ask for a limit dissemination order and the obligation of the courts to consider it is is a discretionary decision on the part of the judges. And so that's why I think this piece of legislation hangs well together with its two parts as well as in in. In coordination with the legislation that we are going to be hearing next, as well as the tenants rights legislation we passed last week. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Herbold. Next is Councilmember Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. So I'm just going to start my comments by saying I will be voting for this legislation today. And I want to thank Councilmember Morales for bringing this forward. You know, I think it is important that renters who are going to be coming out of this COVID 19 crisis not be in a position where having an otherwise good record as a tenant is blemished by something that may or may not happen with their ability to pay rent during this period and a possible eviction proceeding being brought. So I think it is important legislation and I do look forward to voting for it. I wanted to just take a moment to more use my comments to just do a like a broader call to action to landlords and tenant rights advocates alike who tuned into this today. And I appreciate their public comments. I just want to say that, you know, our council remains committed, as Councilmember Strauss indicated a little earlier in our session, to providing robust, comprehensive and expansive rent support that will ultimately let tenants stay in place, that will make landlords whole and let them pay their bills and pay their mortgages. We are committed to realizing that, and as Council President Gonzales indicated earlier, we have invested millions of dollars above and beyond what we had budgeted for initially in rental assistance and support Congress. According to my conversations with our congressional delegation, is considering potentially another round of federal stimulus and federal investment. I would just like to shout out to all the landlords and tenants who have called in to do advocacy on this. Make sure that you are reaching out to your member of Congress, to your senators, to push to make sure that wide scale rent relief or some kind of direct payment plan to people is part of that next level of federal relief. All of us recognize that that is ultimately what we need to do to get through this. But in the meantime, there need to be certain protections to make sure that renters are not unduly burdened by things that happen during this event of Great Depression level proportions. And these are not regulations or hindrances that we as a council are enacting. Ideally, we're doing it in response to an unprecedented since the time of the 1930s levels of unemployment and insecurity. So join me in making sure that we are going to Congress and saying, you know, we need a large scale relief in this next package that should be coming out later this spring to make sure that renters and landlords alike get the support that they need to get through this. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis colleagues. Any other comments or questions on the bill? Okay. Seen none comes more or less as as we usually practice here on council. The prime sponsor of the bill usually gets the last word. So the floor is yours. Thank you. Thanks, everyone. I want to thank you, Councilmember Lewis. I think your last remarks are really important for all of us to remember. This is an unprecedented crisis. We are we are seeing a levels of unemployment as a scale of crisis that we haven't seen in a couple of generations now. So we know that more rental assistance is important. As Councilmember Lewis said, there is a lot of federal action that's needed. Our own representative Joe Paul, is also advocating for payment protection, paycheck protection for all workers so that they can cover their bills. So we do need to keep advocating at every jurisdictional level to make sure that every city, state and federal government is doing all that they can to keep our community safe. I do want to also say that as Councilmember Herbold mentioned, we had a discussion about a few different kinds of amendments. You know, the idea of excluding small landlords is something that we talked about. But, you know, what we're really doing here is trying to protect people from being evicted and having that stain on their record. And when when you've lost your job, when you really just can't afford rent, it doesn't matter if your landlord is, you know , your roommate in a single family home and you're just renting a room from them. Or if your landlord is a big, you know, property management company, the fact is that you don't have money to pay rent. And so you deserve that same protection regardless of the size of ownership of your of your landlord. So so I want to thank our colleagues for the conversations we've been having over the last few weeks. I appreciate your feedback and your willingness to to talk through these your concerns with us and appreciate your support. Now, as we do, as we take one more step to make sure that renters in the city are protected. Thank you. I thank you so much, Councilmember Morales, for those remarks. I think that concludes debate on this particular item. So I'm going to go ahead and ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended. Councilmember Strauss. I. Councilmember Herbold. I. Councilmember Juarez. I. Councilmember Lewis. I. Councilmember Morales. I. Council member Macheda I. Councilmember Peterson. No. Council members are the ones I. Council President Gonzalez. High. Eight in favor one opposed. I think you out of work. 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. Thank you. Okay, folks, we're going to go ahead and move along. Items of business today. So will the clerk please read the item to into the record? Clerk. Madam Clerk, you might be on mute. Agenda item to council bill 119788 an ordinance relating to residential rental agreements allowing residential tenants to pay rent in installments when the tenant is unable to timely pay rent. Declaring an emergency and establishing an immediate effective date all by a vote of the City Council.

Recommendation to Approve Agreement Appointing Michael H. Roush as Interim City Attorney for a Term of No More Than 960 Hours at a Salary of $113.94 Hourly. (Human Resources 2510)

AlamedaCC_12182018_2018-6294

Recommendation to approve agreement appointing Michael H. Ross in terms of the attorney for a term of no more than 960 hours at a salary of $113 a 90%. And unfortunately, I won't be able to support that. That's why I pulled it. That we have a motion to approve. I move. Their second. Offsetting. All those in favor. I. All those opposed. I oppose. Others abstain. I'm sorry. I would like a little discussion. Let's have discussion. All right. And then I have. Yes. So did you want to make some comments? I made a point of order. That motion goes down. Correct. Because we had a motion. We voted. There were two. A yes and a no and silence. So we haven't finished counting votes. We have. So I'm happy to. Okay, so I'll go to our clerk. City clerk, do you want to tell us where we are in regards to the last motion when we had a request to have some discussion during the vote? I think that the people who didn't make a vote yet wanted to have discussion prior to this. The motion failed then? Or is that just like back to where we're discussion discussing the motion? I think it's up to you guys because you didn't have a full voting motion to reconsider. We need to have it. It would have to be something. So I'm okay acting as though the motion failed because. That's right. I'll go ahead with that. But then could we have a motion to reconsider that then? If you want to move it so moved. All right, I'll second that. All those in favor. Okay. All right. So now let's get back to being clear about this motion. Okay. I'm happy to explain it. To reconsider the same thing. Yes. Okay. Yes. That's what he had asked for my motion. That's the one we're reconsidering. Okay. I just wanna make sure you understand where we are. Frank, I'm not. You're confused. So his motion had already know his version had already failed. Yeah. And then I think the vice mayor and I may both be continue. We do it. Now. He made a motion. His motion failed then and we were in the middle of my motion when she asked though she would want to make comments. And then he, uh. I was. I would like to. Situation. Do you want to reconsider? Frank's. Okay, so then. Now we're back on Frank's Ocean. At the beginning. Okay. So, are you making a motion for reconsideration? I will second the vice mayors motion. I thought we already did that. Yeah, we're actually on the motion and we can discuss. We're clear. When you made your emotions, I assumed it was the most recent motion, not the original motion. So go ahead. I just would like some discussion, I think. You know, I guess my concern and we've we've discussed this is an issue of making sure that we have continued legal counsel as we transition into the new council and that we don't have an absence of a city attorney. And I think that that's a primary concern, at least for me. If the mayor could elaborate on her concerns. I would appreciate hearing them. So I'm not. Can I take a recess to ask you about? I can say on the record publicly. Okay. So I'm going to take a short recess and ask our legal counsel what I can say on the record. While I appreciate the concept of continuity. My first concern when hiring any employee has always been their ability to do their job at serving our city. And I have concerns in regards to that. And to me that has to be the primary focus when I'm hiring any employee for our city. And I would say especially a city attorney. Member. Did you want to speak first now? Yes. So I will be voting to support the the acting or Mr. Roush as the acting city attorney until we hire a new city attorney. I have differed with him recently on his advice to the Open Government Commission on a noticing item having to do with cannabis. But I don't expect to always agree with our city attorney, but I do expect a clear and open line of communication for as long as he is our if he is our acting. And I felt that I had that. And anyway, I also well, I won't go beyond that. But anyway, that's it. Thank you, though, for the motion to reconsider and I'm happy to offer. I also disagreed with the advice and there are been other issues that I've that where I've disagreed. Any other comments from council? So the motion to recommend to approve the agreement appointing Michael Roush is the motion that I will now call the question on. All those in favor. I, I oppose and I oppose. Motion carries for two one. Thank you. Now we are on. To J. Final passage of ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code by amending various provisions of Article 17 cannabis businesses of Chapter seven business, occupation industry including but not limited to a modified the definition of use centers as a sensitive use, including specifically excluding certain uses, martial arts, combat sports, cultural or similar education and physical fitness, and to modify the definition of cannabis business owner to conform with state law and see make any other conforming amendments. All right. So we have three public speakers. I would like to go ahead and call them at this time. I don share it. Irina Chen and then Marc Hersman. Yes. And you each get up to 3 minutes.

A RESOLUTION adopting revised financial policies for the Cumulative Reserve Subfund of the General Fund by amending Exhibit A of Resolution 31083.

SeattleCityCouncil_11192018_Res 31848

The motion carries and resolutions adopt and cha will sign it. And let's go to items 24 through 29. Ten items 24 through 29, Resolution 318 48 Adopting revised financial policies for the cumulative reserve sub fund of the General Fund, the committee recommends a resolution be adopted. Cancel 119 376 relating to the taxation of sweetened beverages. The committee recommends the bill pass cancel 119406 relating to the School Safety, Traffic and Pedestrian Improvement Fund. The committee recommends the bill pass cancel 119405 relating to business licenses, taxes, tax certifications and business license as committee recommends a bill passed. Cancel 119378 2 billion to the Neighborhood Matching Fund Program. The committee recommends the bill pass and Council Bill 119 375 relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation. The committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you very much. We'll take these one at a time. We have the resolution revising our financial policies on seven and he comments on that. Those in favor of adopting the resolution please vote i. I. Those oppose vote no. The motion carries. The resolution is adopted. The chair will sign it. Nexus accounts will 119376. Any comments on that council bill please call the role on the passage of the bill. Gonzalez I Herbold I Johnson Suarez Mascara O'Brien Salon I bakeshop President Harrell I nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. Please call the roll call on the passage of Council Bill 119406. Gonzalez I Herbold II Johnson Suarez Macheda O'Brien II Sergeant Bagshaw, High President Harrell I nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. Please read the rule on council 119405. Gonzalez I Herbold I Johnson Suarez Mosquera I O'Brien II Sergeant I Bagshaw President Harrell I nine in favor and unopposed. The bill passed and chair of the Senate. Please call the roll on council 2119378. Gonzalez I herbold i. Johnson Suarez Mosquera I. O'Brien Sergeant Beg President Harrell I nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and share of Senate. Please read the roll call on the passage of Council Bill 119375. Gonzalez Herbold I. Johnson Suarez Mosquera I. O'Brien Hi Sergeant Bagshaw i. President Harrell I. Nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passes and the chair will sign it. Let's take the resolution 30 by itself, so go ahead and read that into the record.

Recommendation to receive and file the application of Binny Shah, dba Prince Market and Deli, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) License at 6401 Cherry Avenue; and, determine the application serves the Public Convenience and Necessity; submit a Public Notice of Protest to ABC; and, direct City Manager to withdraw the protest if a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is granted. (District 9)

LongBeachCC_12152020_20-1247

Thank you. And now we're going to take item 17 from content. Item 17 support to a recommendation to receive and file the application of Prince Market and Deli for an original application of an ABC license at 640123 Avenue determined the application serves the public convenience and necessity. Submit a protest to ABC and directly to manager to withdraw the protest if a conditional use permit is granted. District nine. Vice Mayor Richardson. Yes. Thank you. So with respect to this this license, I'm I'm not supportive of moving forward. And I want to talk with staff about our options. I mean, it's an area that that has an overconcentration of this specific type license. We've done a lot of work, particularly with this operator, around the alcohol abatement ordinance. And so the community is is very sensitive now to the issue of they've communicated with our office that they they are the grant neighborhood is not supportive of moving forward. We also know that it is within 600 feet of a church and within 150 feet of residences. So my question for staff is what our options here are, because I know they have beer and wine currently and I'm okay with status quo. But elevating this to an off sale hard alcohol license is troublesome. What options do we have to protect these and and keep the operation as it is? I can have the police department respond. Honorable Mayor and City Council. Item 17 is an application for a Type 21 off sale General ABC license for a convenience store. This license will authorize the furnishing of beer, wine and distilled spirits to patrons for consumption off the premises. Where saw the police department has conducted our investigation and does not anticipate any adverse impact to the issuance of this license. However, a conditional use. Permit is required for this location. As a result, the police department recommends that a conditional use by a conditional public notice or protest be submitted until the conditional use permit is granted, at which time the protest would be withdrawn. That concludes my report. But to answer the question. Well, if you can then get the question again, sorry. I guess the question is I want the store to not receive the part alcohol license. But what motion should I make not to do that? In order to do it. It would. So the public convenience would be necessary. Public convenience necessary would be required for the establishment. So I believe it would it would be a vote to make a motion for a vote to to deny the application by the council. So far in this in this particular case. This fella, as you mentioned. Councilmember, has a take 20 license for off beer, wine and sales packaging. They, however, are grandfathered in to sell single servings of alcohol for consumption off premises. The condition for this type 21 would be that they would lose that that form or condition that they have that they were allowed to sell the single serving. So there's a number of. Conditions that would be on this new license with the type 21, one of which would be that they would no longer be able to sell the single serve servings of alcohol, which they're currently grandfathered into. DO. Okay. I think I understand what you're saying. So so I understand what I need to do with my motion. So I do not think that we should exchange the condition to no longer sell single singles in exchange for expanding license include up part alcohol. So my motion is that is to deny the application and and claim that this does not serve the public convenience and necessity based on high crime, overconcentration of light of licenses, residences within 100 feet and a church within 600 feet. And so that would be my motion. Okay. Can I get a second on that motion, please? If someone can queue up on a second for the motion, please. Okay. Councilman sorrow. Is there any public comment? There's no public comment for this item. We'll call that, please. Councilwoman sandy has i. Councilwoman ellen. I. Councilman Price. I. Councilman Sabrina. Hi. Councilwoman Mongo. I. Councilwoman Sara. I. Councilmember Whitaker. Hi. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. All right. Bush and Kerry. Okay. That concludes all the campaign items. We will now go to general public comment. And Madam Kirk, I'll let you take it away and go to the public comment. Thank you.

AN ORDINANCE relating to taxation; imposing a payroll expense tax on persons engaging in business in Seattle; adding a new Chapter 5.38 to the Seattle Municipal Code; and amending Sections 5.30.010, 5.30.060, 5.55.010, 5.55.040, 5.55.060, 5.55.150, 5.55.165, 5.55.220, 5.55.230, and 6.208.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_07062020_CB 119810

Agenda Item three Capital 119110 relating to taxation, imposing a payroll tax on persons, engaging in business in Seattle. Adding a new Chapter 5.38 The Elements. The Code Committee recommends the City Council pass the bill as amended with the desire to report the council members together. Herbert Gonzalez. Luis Morales. So what sense drop in favor and Councilmember Suarez and Peterson opposed. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. For those of you watching and listening in on our conversation. I'm going to try to sort of put this into regular folk parlance, since there's a lot of just Robert's Rules of Order and Procedure in place. Item three and item four are both the, I believe, item for what we're going to hear. Yes. Item or are both items related to related to the Jumpstart Seattle proposal that would impose a payroll tax on certain businesses in the city of Seattle. So this is a really important conversation. We've been working really hard under the leadership of Councilmember Mesquita and others on looking at the Jumpstart Seattle proposal, really trying to be one of the co-sponsor sponsors of that bill and excited to be able to kick off the conversation. So again, for those of you watching, item three and four are related to jumpstart Seattle proposals, which are the payroll tax considerations. So without further ado, I'm going to go ahead and hand it over to Councilmember Mosqueda, who, as chair of the committee, is going to address this item. And I believe there are several amendments that we will work through this afternoon. One brought by Councilmember Mosqueda, another by Councilmember Lewis. It will require a suspension of the rules and then we will be able to close out debate on agenda item three and take a vote. So with that being said, I was hoping to be able to set out a little bit of a road map for or both you colleagues and those watching on the TV, just to orient us all in this zoom world that we find ourselves in as to what the order of business is going to be. So, first of all, hear from Councilor Mosqueda. She has an amendment to make will then hear from Councilmember Lewis, who also has an amendment that will require a suspension of the rules. Then we will open up the doors after taking votes on each of those amendments, will open up the discussion and debate the bill as amended, and then we will do a final roll call. So with that being said, Councilmember Mosqueda, the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam President. And if it pleases the President, I have a few opening comments and then I'll make the motion to bring forward the amendment. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam President. I come to colleagues. We're in the midst of a public health pandemic and an economic crisis. And jumpstart is part of the remedy. This is the antidote or part of the antidote needed to respond to the public health crisis of COVID and the economic instability that COVID has exposed in our local economy. Jumpstart is part of the solution needed to deeply invest in affordable housing, equitable development, and a more resilient economy. Jumpstart injects resources into the social safety net, harmed by decades of underfunding in housing, health services, support for our most vulnerable community members. Jumpstart, reinvest in our families and invest in our neighbors. And invest in local shops and our local economy. And it will help Seattle survive the crisis of COVID and emerge stronger and more equitable every day. Each of our officers is responding to calls and emails. We see people in community every day concerned that they cannot pay for groceries for their young children. They cannot put food on the table because they don't have a job. We've heard concerns from business owners that they didn't get a penny from the federal government, especially among black owned business owners who were disproportionately excluded from getting federal assistance. We've heard concern from shops about their inability to pay vendors because there were no revenues in April and May, and they need to be able to have assurances that they can have money in hand so that they can pay staff and start hiring people again so that they can pay rent and open their shops again. We heard concerns repeatedly from members of this council who've been leaders on fighting for immigrants and refugees, that immigrants and refugees were intentionally left out of the federal support when these are essential workers and they help our economy run. We've heard concerns about the fiscal cliff that we will be presenting itself next year in our budget if we do not have revenue in hand to back. So emergency funds. We're talking about the cliff that can make it quite likely that libraries would close, the parks are closed, that there will be problems with accessing childcare, core government services, that without additional revenue we will not have enough funds to backfill emergency funds. And we've heard the ongoing concern about the lack of affordable housing, the lack of supportive housing that help get folks on on their feet and get them safely. House on the road to recovery and resiliency for our entire community. This is the promise of Jumpstart to invest in our community, invest in housing, childcare, invest in small businesses, support immigrants and refugees, support working families. This is not only the remedy for the emergency that has COVID, but it helps us correct an upside down tax code . Without jumpstart, we're facing a crisis of an unprecedented scale, and it's not going to end anytime soon. And we know in Washington state we are not alone. 1.2 million workers have already filed for unemployment insurance and the numbers continue to grow, especially with uncertainty as we see the numbers of COVID cases continue to grow. In the midst of this crisis. Large companies are continuing to do well. They're still paying three figure salaries in some cases and in some cases even as high as a half a million dollars a year. So we're asking them for this Jumpstart proposal to contribute, contribute a small percentage of those profits to saving our local economy, investing in neighbors and families so that they can, in turn, invest in our local economy and we can come out stronger. We know one thing for sure based on the last ten years and actually data across the country, we cannot drive our way out of this recession. Data from the Great Recession showed us that in the cities and in the states that tried an austerity budget, it did not work. It actually made economies weaker. So we know one thing. We can't stop our way out, but we can grow our way out of the recession. We know an all cuts budget is not a solution and cuts just siphon even more of the critical programs that consumers and families and small businesses depend on in order to weather this storm. Increasing investments is needed in services and infrastructure. That's what keeps people working. That's what creates jobs and injects more money back into our communities. That's what jumpstart our economy when we avoid an all cuts austerity budget. Our economy can rebound faster, which is good for businesses and workers, but also when we do it through the lens of Jumpstart has proposed. It doesn't mean going back to business as usual. It means investing in a more resilient and a more equitable economy. I'm excited about the bill in front of us today. Jumpstart Seattle will promote health, create jobs, and save our local economy. And it's not just the right thing to do. It's the economically sound thing to do in the midst of a pandemic. Housing insecurity isn't just a moral crisis. It's a public health crisis. Expanding nutrition services and vouchers will help struggling people put food on the table and make sure that they can access groceries. It's not just good for families. That's good for the local economy. That's also good for the health of our of our local population. This is about making sure that people can put money in their pockets, which will then in turn send in local businesses that will allow people to stay healthy. They housed and be stable. We are trying to write, sign up or up and down tax code and when we do it, everyone benefits from the public investment, not just some people. These twin health and economic crises have had and will continue to have an outsized impact on communities of color, especially among black, indigenous and the Latino community. Direct assistance to local businesses, especially for the nine out of ten black owned businesses that applied for less than $20,000 in city funds didn't get a penny because they were distributed through traditional lending institutions that have a long history, a long racist history of racist lending practices. And we can change that. We can change that by providing direct assistance to thousands, thousands of undocumented families, thousands of the small businesses, owners and workers right here in our city. And we can help make sure that people who were left out of these federal funds get access to what Seattle is doing right now. This is our way to jump start the economy. I want to thank folks who have been testifying not just in the last three months, but for years, people who have been calling for us to invest, invest in our whole community, working families, small businesses, our neighbors. We want to make sure that our ice cream shop and our local coffee shops can survive. Yes, but we also want to make sure that people stop getting pushed out of the city, especially black and brown communities. We want to make sure that we're investing in affordable housing. We want to make sure we're doing this to equitable development initiatives. And we want to make sure that when people get a job back, it's a good job, that they are able to have sustainability and they're able to go back to work and have access to childcare. That's what this bill contemplates. This bill provides certainty, predictability and stability for families, for children, for immigrants, for small businesses, because it's baked into the fabric of this legislation. This has been an ongoing conversation for many time for for much of the time that I've been on council, going back two years. It's also been the ongoing conversation for the last four or five months. Again, thank you, Councilmember Morales, for introducing your legislation at the beginning of the year. I want to thank Council for all of your feedback and input on the legislation, as I mentioned this morning during council briefing. Each one of you have your fingerprints on this legislation. Thank you to Reverend Amachree for the work that she did in the halls of Olympia. We built on those proposals, both the original proposal from Sawant and Morales and from the proposal from Representative Macri. And we did this by calling people together. We didn't just you know, we didn't start from scratch. We did this by pulling people together and helping to make sure that more people had the chance to weigh in on legislation that was being considered in Olympia and make it work for Seattle. So thank you, council colleagues. Thank you to the sponsors of Jumpstart. Thank you again, as I mentioned to Councilmember Morales and support for your ongoing work on this and for our dialog that we've had over the last three months, because that dialog I think has improved the legislation in front of us and without all of the community that has been calling on us to right side up or upside down tax system, I don't think that we would be here today. And I want to make sure that folks know that this is just the beginning. We have the most regressive tax system in the entire country. And as we try to find remedies to the COVID crisis, both the economic crisis and the public health crisis, this is one remedy in a much larger, larger scale conversation about right sizing our tax system. Council President. I would like to go ahead and move council to a119810 as presented to include version three of Amendment one that I distributed recently. Thank you so much. Councilmember Mesquita So is there a second on that motion? Second. It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment One. Councilmember must get you're recognized in order to address the amendment. Thank you very much, Council President colleagues. This amendment is distributed with our colleague, council member Lewis as well. I want to thank Councilmember Lewis for his feedback on this legislation, along with a handful of other council members who've been asking about how do we address creating certain conditions that would be appropriate for nonprofit health care entities. As I mentioned this morning, Councilmember Peterson, thank you for your feedback as we thought about nonprofit entities in the health care sector. Appreciate your the ongoing conversations we've had there. You know, at the onset, I want to say I'm concerned about any exemptions. The amendment in front of us, however, is carefully crafted to respond to some of the issues that we've heard, for example, from DHS, the International Community Health Services. Today, the person who called in was expressing the unanticipated consequences or cost specific issues, specifically due to COVID that are affecting certain sectors of the nonprofit health care sector. And we wanted to carefully respond to those concerns that were brought up. The legislation in front of us was carefully crafted based on some feedback. I want to thank folks that SEIU Health Care 1199 Northwest folks from Kaiser, from Fred Hutch and from Seattle Children's for their feedback as we tried to think about a carefully crafted amendment . And also again note that while nonprofit hospitals generally are considered charities by the Internal Revenue Service, many nonprofit hospital systems have in all revenues in the billions, with chief operators earning seven or eight figure salaries. And in many ways their peers are large corporations. So the proposal in front of you attempts to find an equitable solution to rebuilding our economy in a way that does not further subsidize profit driven health care providers and prioritize community needs. Instead, with the amendment in front of you suggest that Seattle's economic recovery plan is built around jump start. We should address nonprofit health care providers accordingly and make sure that certain organizations continue to provide resources and make sure that there are contributions coming in. This amendment in front of us contemplates payments, building needs on salaries over 400,000. And I'm hoping that this carefully crafted scope amendment helps meet some of the needs of the community. Again, I'm thinking it's a little for your co-sponsorship. Thank you so much, Councilmember Mosqueda. Are there any other comments on Amendment One? I see a couple of hands. I lost track of which one went up first. So I'm going to call on Councilmember Lewis first and then on Councilmember Herbold. Thank you, Madam President. My remarks will be fairly brief. I do just want to express my gratitude at being able to co-sponsor this amendment with Councilmember Mosquito. Again, I want to thank Councilmember Skater for her leadership and guiding through this important legislation and also making sure that we could develop a very specific and timely exemption for a lot of our nonprofit health care partners who are really on the front lines of helping the region and even the nation. In the case of some of our research focused nonprofit providers in responding to the ongoing COVID public health emergency. I think that this exemption does a good job of recognizing that work, recognizing the added burden and the added costs that those organizations are assuming to really combat the the expansion of COVID. And as we've seen recently, too, it does look like, as we discussed this morning, we are in for a very long fight still on COVID 19. It does not seem to be abating as quickly as we thought it would. And we know that we're going to need to make sure that those nonprofit partners stay strong, that they can stay in the fight, and that we continue to be good partners with them in helping them confront this. I think this amendment was a long way towards doing that. I look forward to voting in favor of it. And similarly, want to thank our partners at SEIU 1199 and our partners at the nonprofits themselves, at Kaiser Permanente, at Children's, at Fred Hutchison four for their work in helping make sure we can shape something that is responsive to the moment. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Lewis, Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I have a comment first and then a question about the amendment. So as I understand this amendment, it would exempt salary, expense, taxation at nonprofit health care providers and research orgs, but not at nonprofit service providers, including nonprofit service providers who are not health care providers who have been on the frontlines of responding to coronavirus over the past months, such as a nonprofit, affordable housing operator, shelters, food delivery, childcare providers and more. Last week, there was such an amendment proposed to more broadly impact nonprofit providers. And despite the heroic efforts of the folks who work at these nonprofit providers, large and small, we have not I have not heard from this group of providers acting, asking to be exempted despite the extraordinary expense that they have been incurring and despite the expectation that they will continue to meet a heightened need for the rest of this year and into next. So I'm just really concerned that we are basically saying one kind of work, one kind of nonprofit work, it should be exempt . And the broader nonprofit provider community has not made the argument that they should be exempt. And and I think there's an equity impact of this amendment. We know that larger nonprofits, health care, nonprofits in particular, including hospitals and research institutions, are more likely to be led by white people and men, while small smaller organizations, including many service providers, are more likely to be led by women and people of color. I'm concerned that the effect of this amendment would just unfortunately impact the organizations that are led by women and people of color. While organizations more likely to be white and male, that would their their organizations would receive an exemption. And my my question about the amendment itself relates specifically to clause C in the definition of a nonprofit health care entity. And central staff has declined to to answer questions about this particular section and has encouraged us to direct questions back to to the sponsor. And specifically, the question is, is what is a predominantly. Capitated provider. Provider group. Capitated. Capitated provider. Group. I'm just trying to get a sense of what type of organization is meant to be targeted or by this language because as I understand, C would broaden the exemption to a type of provider that I'm not quite understanding the. The description of that type of a provider. Okay. Which one of the sponsors would like to take that one up? I would defer to Councilmember Lewis. Councilmember, would you like to take this? Yeah. So Councilmember Herbold, that's a good question. And in particular, to section C of the exemption, that is a rather odd phrase. And I'm saying that as a lawyer who would not encountered that particular phrase. And so kind of working with stakeholders on this. My understanding is the only provider in King County that that particular phrase would apply to is Kaiser Permanente based on their kind of group health, their cooperative HMO status. That is like more unique and more it's a more unique and surgical term for the unique area that Kaiser Permanente falls into as a cooperative provider. And that language was worked on in consultation with SEIU 1199 and other stakeholders who verified that that indeed is is the provider that would be included based on that language. Thank you. Elsa morales plays. You are on mute. There you go. I see. So council member will thank you for the. Points that you're raising. I had a. Question about that phrasing. As well, but I think for me the bigger issue is that. Part of the appeal of this entire package for. Me is. That because it. Sets the taxation rates specifically for higher income earners. For higher earners, in my mind, it sort of eliminates the need for. A series of. Exemptions. Particularly non-profits, since, you know, I think when most of us think about a nonprofit. It is folks who are, as Councilmember Humble said. Lower wage workers, you know, folks who don't have a lot. Of access to. Benefits and and sort of the the things that come with with the standard corporation. But we also know that health care, in particular, most health care providers, even if there are nonprofit, still, you know, can generate significant revenue. Nonprofit is a. Is a tax status. It's not a business plan. You know, the CEO of. Providence, I think, makes something. Like $10. Million or so. So I would be voting no on this amendment. And I think that. The the language that is already. In the bill. Is structured in such. A way that it protects. Organizations who do have lower wage workers in their. Midst, including health care providers, so that those folks aren't put in jeopardy. When bargaining. Comes time for. Bargaining, for example. But the folks. Who are making higher wages can be. Included in and. So that we don't lose revenue for three. Years with this amendment. So. Thank you for bringing it. Just want to signal. That I will not be supporting this amendment. Thank you, Councilman Morales. Any other questions or comments on Amendment One? Okay. I will close out debate before we call the vote on this. I will also not be supporting this particular amendment. I find it unfortunately inconsistent with my positions on things like Medicare for All, for example, which really which really center us on butting up with the realities that the health care industry is a for profit industry. That's part of the problem with how health care is delivered across the country. And and so for me, I feel like it's really important for us to acknowledge that the tiers have been set in and jump start Seattle in such a way to inherently distribute equity among organizations that may not be paying out in these golden parachutes to their CEOs and and others. You know, massive amounts of money. And so, you know, it morale was brought up the point that the CEO of Providence is making just millions and millions of dollars in salary. I think that's true for a lot of other health care organizations in the city of Seattle that have IRS tax exempt status, but are nonetheless, you know, making quite a bit of money on top of that. We know that the federal government has done a significant bailout and continues to express interest in continuing to do more significant bailout of the health care industry, where many of these organizations that are currently within the city of Seattle, like Providence and others who technically have nonprofit status, stand to likely get millions and millions of more dollars that we don't have control over how they will allocate those dollars between health care delivery service models and executive pay roles . And so I feel really uncomfortable voting in favor of this amendment at this point, not knowing more about those particular details. And in light of, you know, my, my, my deep and profound belief that that as a system, our health care system is designed to be to be for profit and not for the full and maximum benefit of the people who desperately need health care services in our city. So I will be unfortunately not able to support this particular amendment. Any anything else before we close out the debate from the sponsors? Oh. Councilmember Peterson. Yes. I think the council president just wanted to provide some additional context for this amendment. As I understand it, there was a discussion about exempting nonprofits last week, and then there was a discussion about health care providers during COVID. So just for I believe this amendment, correct me if I'm wrong, Councilor Mosquito, but I believe this amendment is just for the initial three years and the sunset clause has been removed from the from the, the overall ordinance. So this will be really focused on those providing health care during COVID. I think it includes Seattle Children's, it includes the Hutch, includes Cancer Care Alliance. I think would be exempt from this or this exemption would would help those organizations. So I'm just. I think that this compromise was put together carefully by Council of Escada and I'll be supporting it. Great. Thank you so much. Okay. Looks like we can go ahead and close out debate on Amendment one. So I am going to ask that the clerk please call the roll on the passage excuse me, on the adoption of Amendment one. Herbold Nay. Whereas. Yes. Lewis. Yes. Morales. No. Mesquita. I. Peterson. I. So what. They. Strauss. I. President Gonzalez, then five in favor, four opposed. I thank you so much. The motion carries in a 5 to 4 vote and Amendment One is adopted. I understand that Councilmember Lewis has another amendment, Amendment two. So we're going to go ahead and move to that potential amendment. So, Councilmember Lewis, you will first need to request suspension of the rules for Amendment two. So I'm going to hand it over to you to walk us to make that motion. Thank you, Madam President. And I do so move to suspend the council rules to consider Amendment two that was not distributed by 12 noon. And when asked if there's a second. Second. Okay, folks. Okay. Thank you so much. So this is a suspension of council rules to consider Amendment two that was not distributed by a noon. There has been a second. Will the clerk please call the roll on the suspension of the council rule? Purple. I. Juarez. I wish I were, Alice. I. Let's get a. I. Peterson. I want. No. Strauss, I. President Gonzalez I eight in favor one opposed. Thank you so much. It's been that suspension of the roles has been granted, so the role is suspended. Councilmember Lewis, you may now proceed with moving first, making the motion for us to debate and consider your proposed amendment to say yes. I moved to amend Council Bill 11 nine 810 as presented on Amendment two, recently distributed. There are second. At. It has been moved and seconded to adopt amendment to Councilmember Lewis. You are the prime sponsor of this amendment, so you are recognized in order to address Amendment two? Yes. Thank you, Madam President. So I do think that it is still important to at least have a discussion today about the reinstitution of some kind of sunset clause to reaffirm the commitment of this Council to eventually transitioning to regional revenue options as an alternative to maintaining our own payroll tax in perpetuity. I did not particularly care for a ten year sunset clause. I thought that was too soon. I thought that it also could put in jeopardy some of the investments that we are proposing to make under this legislation that will probably entail and require accumulation over a longer period of time and possibly entering into certain bonding or capital commitments. So this proposal would create a 20 year sunset clause. The hope would be that in that time we would be able to transition as a state in a region to some regional alternative tax. I have full faith and confidence in the future. Seattle City Council 20 years from now to re extend, renew or expand on this tax in the event that such regional sources of revenue do not exist at that time. I think that that timeline acknowledges and you know, I mean, we had we had Tim Heineman call in and comment earlier to comment on this legislation, you know , making it clear that there are a lot of folks in the state that are still opposed to a conversation around progressive revenue. So I understand that is a heavy lift to get that out of Olympia. But my hope is that on a 20 year timeline, that's more realistic than a ten year one. It won't put in jeopardy the investments that we are making now, nor undercut the urgency of this proposal. And so I would move that we institute this compromise sunset as enumerated out in the amendment. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Any questions or comments on a proposed amendment to. Councilmember Sawant, you are recognized. Thank you. I oppose this amendment because this amendment attempts to bring back a sunset clause, even though the city council's budget committee on Wednesday voted for my amendment to eliminate the sunset clause. 20 years may sound like a long time to politicians who are not doing the hard work of building grassroots movements, giving their blood, sweat and tears to build for social justice. 20 years may sound like a long time for people who are not struggling to get by, but for any of us who have been on the grassroots fighting and I don't just mean our generations, I'm talking about people in Seattle who have fought for decades for bringing about an end to regressive taxation. I think they will know that these are hollow words that, you know, that of our Councilmember Lewis to say that 20 years from now, I hope something will be done regionally. Why? Because something was done in the last 20 years and in the 20 years before that. Is that what your hope is based on the fact that nothing was done by regional and state political officials at the same time, that they gave handout after handout to big corporations and executives like Boeing executives? This is extremely problematic and furthermore, completely tone deaf. To bring this amendment at the last second when the public can't speak out against this particular amendment. But, you know but the public has spoken the movement has spoken very clearly against any kind of sunset clause. And it's particularly egregious that this amendment will if this amendment goes through, it would make sure that the tax is automatically repealed, not that there would be any conditions placed on it, even, which would somewhat mitigate. I would I would never support a sunset tax period on progressive revenues, but there is no mitigating aspect about this amendment at all. And as far as what needs to be sunsetted, why not those sales taxes that are so burdensome to working class people, and particularly heat hit black and brown communities and immigrant communities of color? Why not the property taxes that make it difficult for working class and middle class homeowners to keep their homes? Why not a sunset clause on taxes, on struggling small businesses? I just am really stunned that despite all the rhetoric that we have heard, that the sunset clause is back again and that the sunset clause is only being proposed to one of the only taxes that working people do not have to pay, that small businesses do not have to pay. The fact that politicians will go to such lengths to undemocratically sneak through a sunset clause shows which side they are really on. Clearly, the council is going to vote yes on the Amazon tax today because our movement has gathered 30,000 signatures to put this on the ballot. And that represents a real a real threat, not an imaginary or abstract, but a real threat to big business. And that is why this is going through. And the establishment knows that they have no other choice but the fact that this amendment is being brought forward for a sunset clause. It shows what that shows the lengths to which the establishment politicians will go through. I absolutely pledge that if this amendment passes, then we will, in our movement, do everything in our power to make sure that we fight against the establishment. But I will also say that putting this this kind of sunset clause in such a progressive law as the rare progressive laws that we are able to win, that basically is saying that, you know, you hardworking people, you thousands who who spend all your weekends and all your waking hours aside from your work and your family to build this movement, you're going to have to do it in another 20 years. Another generation will have to come and fight the same battles over and over again. And I think this also illustrates why this system ultimately cannot be reformed. And we need substantive, fundamental change to our society. Thank you, Councilmember Swann. Any other comments? I see Councilmember Herbold and colleagues. If anyone else has any comments, please feel free to indicate Councilmember Strauss have you in the queue. Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you. So I just want to say that although I recognized in past meetings that there was an importance for a sunset clause and its potential to bring useful pressure to bear on other jurisdictions as a as a as a way to encourage legislators and state and business stakeholders to work towards progressive revenue, specifically a regional progressive revenue source. I really feel like last week in committee we we settled this issue because we amended the tax legislation with language that is much clearer about council's intent to repeal this tax that the new progressive regional or state taxes enacted that would provide a similar level of funding to Seattle as we do under this bill. So again, I felt like we sort of resolved this this issue in our in our committee meeting. The amendment we passed in committee, I think, better addresses and settles the circumstances under which the council would support ending this specific tax. And I don't believe that a 20 year sunset clause provides any additional pressure that is not already better addressed through the amendment passed last week in committee. Thank you. John. Thank you, Councilmember Herbold, for those comments. Councilmember Strauss, the floor is yours. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Council Member Lewis for bringing this amendment forward. Last week I did vote for a sunset clause due to my hesitance regarding the level playing field language. I did think that ten years was too much too short, because in particular, there are aspects of this bill that are tied to 20 year funding segments, especially regarding permanent supportive housing. I do believe that a future council will benefit from evaluating this tax in 20 years to understand if it needs to be raised, lowered or otherwise adjusted to fit the times. I'm supporting a 20 year sunset rather than the ten year sunset because the 20 year sunset is associated with the spending plan that we will be that we've already discussed and will be voting on. While jump start Seattle is different than property tax and sales tax levies which are put to the ballot, they also have renewals which are sunset clauses under a different name. So there are sunset clauses in these sales tax and property tax levies that are put forward to voters. And while these taxes, the Jumpstart proposal is different than the levy, we have mirrored the process for Jumpstart Seattle in creating rates and services rendered to our city and our community. So and that has been a 20 year segment. So I think if nothing else, in 20 years we will need to reassess the rates and create a new spending plan to be associated with the proposal. And sunset could just be as easily worded as a renewal. This amendment fits into the narrowly tailored nature of this bill, and I appreciate the work being put forward on this. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Strauss. Any other comments or questions on the bill? Excuse me, on the agenda item president. If I may. Yes, Councilmember Suarez, please. Thank you. Just briefly, I will be supporting this. And, you know, I don't really want to get into a tit for tat about whose side I'm on trying to approach this with common sense. And I agree with Councilmember Lewis. And my understanding is if we have a 20 year sunset further out of funds, that is the less volatile it is, which gives us a 20 year window, if you will, to plan. And hopefully within 20 years when I'm 80, this state will have progressive taxes in place, not only on income, but certainly hopefully on the tax that the city will probably pass today. So with that, I'll be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Suarez perhaps the only tit for tat that i'll get into is to say that I will only be 63 years old in 20 years. Oh, thanks. You're welcome. Any time. Councilmember Mosquito, please. Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, I had a lot of concerns with the initial ten year proposals that I did included in our draft bill because of some of the feedback that we received from people who were working on legislation as well. I think the points that have been made with concerns are very well taken. I have been clear that in my main concern with the ten year sunset as it was proposed, was that it could potentially unintentionally limit our ability to do permanent supportive housing, which requires, in many cases a 20 year funding commitment because this is at least 20 years, and it will, I hope, be considered a renewal, but more importantly, that there will be more the level action that is taken and get us to a more equitable tax proposal. I'll support a 20 year, but that is, I think, the minimum, given that this is needed funding for from the point of housing. I appreciate that it is that length of time. So thank you. Thank you so much, councilmember mosqueda. Any other questions or comments on this proposed amendment? Councilmember Swartz's. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify something. Clarify on something that Strauss just said and just paraphrasing what he said. He said that he supports this sunset clause because he wants a future council to reconsider this tax to see if it should be raised, lowered or kept the same. That sounds very reasonable, but let's be clear. The amendment does not say raised or lowered or kept the same. It just says, quote, No business shall or a payroll expense tax for payroll expenses after December 31st, 2040. Unquote. So this is a straight up removing of the tax in 20 years, and all the faith is going to be put on that future council as if there's so much evidence that councils will do the right things. I just want to make make clear that what was said was not something that's in the amendment, actually. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. So what I see, Councilmember Strauss's hand has gone up. So, Councilmember Strauss, you are recognized. Are there any colleagues again? Anyone else who wants to speak? Please let me know. Thank you, Council President and thank you, Councilmember Swan. I appreciate your comments there. I would say that that is the same language that is used in the Seattle Transportation Benefit District Tax, which is levied here at the city of Seattle. And while it does not necessarily state that it needs to be reviewed, it also we are bringing it up this week to be renewed. So I appreciate your thoughts and I appreciate your work on this on this bill. Thank you, Councilmember. Thanks so much. Any other comments on Amendment two? And of course, Councilmember Lewis will have the last word on this bill excuse me, on this amendment. Okay. Thank you so much to everyone for the conversation. I just want to sort of signal that unfortunately, I will not be able to support this amendment either, in large part because of the reasons that Councilmember Robles articulated in her statement as well. And so I just wanted to, again, appreciate the sentiment with which this is brought forward and then really just provide a little bit of clarification to the general public. Any council member at any time in any council at any time can you can introduce legislation to either repeal, amend or modify any any ordinances that we've passed in in the past. And so while I appreciate the significance of this sunset, I still think that, you know, whether this amendment passes or not, future councils will not have their hands tied one way or the other as it relates to future policy considerations on this revenue proposal or any other revenue proposal, frankly. So with that being said, I'm going to hand it back over to Councilmember Lewis, who can close out debate if he wishes, and then I will call the roll, have the clerk call the roll on this amendment. Thank you, Madam President. I'll be brief and in closing it out. Definitely appreciate the critical feedback from folks in regards to the overall concept of having a sunset clause. I do still think it's important that we have another opportunity to weigh in on it at this hearing and look forward to voting on it. The only thing that I would say is that I actually am, and maybe it's because I'm only going to be 50 years old in 20 years that that I actually am optimistic that we are going to be in a position to get progressive revenue from Olympia on a regional basis. I think that we saw sort of a initial glimpse of that with Senator Wynne successful attempt at getting us a progressive real estate excise tax. You know, I've been engaged in a lot of conversations with stakeholders about getting. State and. Local capital gains tax, which remains a passion of mine and something I will be introducing legislation here at the council to consider. But I do think that it's important that we continue to think of ourselves as a regional partner. And I think that this amendment signals and centers that idea that we are committed to working together with the county and the state to come up with comprehensive revenue proposals that do make sure that we are also scaling our benefit across borders, make sure that we are being responsive and spreading the burden, quite frankly, to across the rest of the county and the rest of the state. Do I think it's going to happen fast now? Which is why I wouldn't wouldn't support a ten year sunset. And I'm now I'm proposing a 20 year sunset. So I think that that, unfortunately, probably more closely matches the timeline of what we're dealing with here. And I look forward to giving us an opportunity to do we on this one more time. And I would just ask that we call the question. So much, Councilmember Lewis. With that being said, I would ask the clerk, please call the roll on adoption of Amendment two. Herbold. Ned Suarez? Yes. Lewis. Yes. Morales? No. Let's get a. I. PETERSON Right. So what? Nay Strauss. I. President Gonzalez. Now. Five in favor, four opposed. Okay. That motion carries an amendment to is adopted. Are there any if for there. Her comments on the bill as amended. And again, this is this is that the next vote will be on the passage of the bill as amended. So are there any additional comments on the bill as amended? I see. Councilmember Lewis and I know that Councilmember Suarez also wanted to make a comment and she will let me know at what point she would like to do that. So, Councilmember Lewis, you. Thank you so much, Madam President. I really appreciate the opportunity to have co-sponsored this legislation, along with council members Muscat, Gonzalez, Herbold and Strauss. I really do think that we can't wait any longer, echoing my comments from earlier. To have true progressive revenue to confront head on the situation that we are facing here today on so many different fronts. You know, I think it's it's first, I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the process that Council Member Muscat undertook this spring under really difficult circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic, in the middle of a lot of budget uncertainty, and was able to cobble together a coalition of of labor, of small business owners, of nonprofits, of service providers, really to unite all of us in our common cause that the massive, inequitable struggles that we are facing will not yield until we have some kind of significant progressive revenue package in front of us that will rise to the ambitions and the scope of our problems. And this package really does get there. You know, I'm committed to a regional approach, as I talked earlier during our discussion of the sunset clause. But we can't wait for Olympia to act to provide this relief. We can't wait for Olympia to act to provide this relief. When we saw last week and, you know, this this would have been bigger news, I think, in other times. But we saw last week that there was an increase in King County of people entering homelessness, and that increase was exceeding the rate of exit. We saw thousands of our neighbors who are unemployed due to the COVID crisis are in a situation where. While they were rent burdened before they are now increasingly rent insecure beyond where they were prior to the to this new and completely unprecedented emergency in my life experience and the experience of many of my friends. And we really are in a position where the cavalry is not going to come over the hill. I mean, it doesn't look like there's going to be a special session of the legislature this year. It doesn't look like there's going to be bold action from the legislature to fill this void. We have a complete abdication of any kind of duty or responsibility from our federal executive. While we have lots of allies in Congress who have been fighting very valiantly to get us the resources that we need, federal leadership from the president has been completely absent. We need to step in and. We need to raise this revenue. I, I appreciate that this follows on the model of House Bill 2907, the council member or our House member, then State Representative Nicole Macri, submitted in the last legislative session of only targeting positions, only taxing positions at large, very large and successful corporations that make over a certain amount of money. I really appreciate that we made a couple of surgical exemptions to make sure that this tax does not fall on folks that are on the front line of the current public health issue that we're facing with COVID 19. And I'm also just very appreciative that there is going to be a massive multiplier effect of this. I mean, we are passing this revenue package to bill. We are passing this revenue package to build housing, to support people, to stay in their housing, to make these investments at a truly unprecedented scale and rise to the level of challenge that we're facing. As the chair of the Select Committee on Homelessness Strategies and Investments, I can say unequivocally that this is going to help us move towards our goal of meeting our on righting the wrong of our long time shortfall in permanent supportive housing and making sure we are in a position to meet that obligation. So with that, I want to turn it over, proud to to vote for this today. And I'm going to again want to thank all the co-sponsors, and particularly Councilmember Skinner, for her leadership in guiding us through this. Thank you, Councilmember Lewis. Next up in the queue is Councilmember Suarez and for those of you on video zoom, please do raise your hand and let me know if you'd like to make some remarks. Councilmember Words. Thank you. Council President Um, I want to again thank Council or Budget Chair Councilman Ms.. Data for our long conversations and discussions and even today's discussions that you and I had offline and all the experience and enthusiasm you have brought to City Council. I appreciate the effort that went into this the phone calls, the emails, the meetings to create a proposal for us to move forward. I know how much work was dedicated to this effort now and back in the fall of 2017, along with Councilmember Gonzalez, Councilmember Stewart and Councilmember Herbert, as I stated at the Budget Committee last week . I do support a progressive revenue tax. I do support a tax on corporations. I have supported a countywide regional approach and also a statewide approach to a progressive tax solution. However, Judy, I can't support this proposal. I support the merits, though, not the procedural process. As was stated earlier, that we all know our city is facing the pandemic and economic recession that this country has never seen the likes of in civil unrest due to racism. Again, as I shared last week, this is a trifecta that is unprecedented because we're in the midst of this pandemic fueled economic recession with no end in sight. I have concerns about not putting this proposal. In. Front of the voters. Councilmember Lewis, a short note to you. To some of us, the Calvary is not a welcome sight. I just want to point out that no economist, no politician, no public policy, academic or expert can forecast when these challenges will end. We don't know the depth, the length of the duration of this pandemic fueled recession. There's currently no jobs bill or stimulus package for growth while we face historic unemployment levels. And that concerns me. We don't know what the economic landscape looks like as we impose this tax again from city council. I like what Portland did in May of 2020. Portland voters approved an income and a business tax for homelessness services to pass with nearly 60% of the vote. But the sunset clause for 2030 Oregon's unemployment rate is about 14% and Seattle's is 16%. As I have participated in, observed and shared, Seattle has a well-established Democratic tradition of giving voters the final say. Again, as I shared in the last 15 years, the voters have approved over 11 city city levies from library to housing to education to transportation to park. Daily voters have also supported over six county wide levies for vets, human services, homelessness, seniors, children in parks and Seattle voters have supported two multi-billion dollar regional levies for transportation. As you all know, in 2006, the voters approved a small local payroll tax on businesses as part of bridging the gap transportation ballot measure. And again, that tax was repealed by council in 2009 due to the 2008 recession. I share this not as a compare and contrast lecture between levies and taxes, but to the testament that Seattle voters are smart, caring and generous. I trust their civic judgment and voice. Again, nobody is against taxing corporations or a progressive tax. It's how we get there. At the end of the day, I trust the voters of Seattle to tax corporations so we can truly re-imagine the new economy and not be faced with another difficult choice to repeal this tax, as we did in 2008. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Juarez, are there any other comments from my colleagues? Councilmember Morales, please. Oh. Okay. Thank you, colleagues. I'm, I will admit, very frustrated about the two amendments that just got added to this bill. But I don't want that to. Take away from the historic nature of what we are about. To pass here. We know that today the city takes a crucial. Step to embrace. Equity and reject. Corporate. Influence over our tax. Policies. Today, the Seattle City Council is boldly leading to create a more equitable way to finance public services. And we challenge elected. Officials at the state level. To join us in choosing investment over austerity. By passing this proposal, we will shift some of the burden from individual households to. The wealthiest corporations in the city. Next week, we'll finalize the plan for how we invest. We'll provide significant. Relief for renters. Small businesses. For immigrants and others impacted by the COVID crisis. And this this structural change will also allow us to rethink our social spending so we can improve our population health, improve community conditions, and begin. To reverse. Intergenerational. Poverty in the city. Exactly six months ago today, I was sworn in to begin serving the people of District two. I will say my first six months have been a little extra. To say the least. And I want to thank my staff for their. Unwavering commitment to keep. Our office accountable to our black and brown neighbors. If this council is going to act on anti-racist principles, we. Can't just talk to black led organizations when. We're talking about police. We have to partner with Bipoc communities in everything we do taxation, zoning, utilities, parks, education, green economies and community development. That's how we demonstrate. That Black Lives Matter. For Alexis Charla Leticia Farmer Darcel Touch. Devin Silver Nail my staff. Exactly six months into our. First term in office. We're voting on major legislation that will improve the lives of our neighbors. And your work has helped to get us here. So I want to. Thank you for that. I'm excited to vote yes today on behalf of the people of District two. And I want to thank our colleagues for. Supporting this legislation. Thank you, Councilmember Morales. Councilmember Salant. Thank you. Today's vote to pass an Amazon tax in Seattle is a historic victory for working people. This victory was hard fought and it was hard won by a movement that wouldn't give up and that faced down a seemingly endless series of obstacles from the shameful attempts of corporate Democrats in the state legislature to pass a ban on municipal big business taxes to unfounded delays in the city council to a pandemic and lockdown which prevented signature gathering during relentless attacks in the corporate media in Seattle and nationally. We are winning because of the determination of workers and socialists to smash all obstacles and to find a path to victory. Congratulations to the Grassroots Jacks Amazon campaign led by the coalition that included my organization, Socialist Alternative and many progressive organizations and unions. Today's vote comes eight months after working people roundly defeated Amazon in the elections and two years after Amazon and the Chamber of Commerce bullied City Council with the majority of the Council shamefully repealing the 2018 Amazon tax. Now, Jeff Bezos and his billionaire friends are wishing they could call a do over and have the modest 2018 tax back because this new tax on Seattle's wealthiest businesses is four times larger and every penny is needed and far more, in fact, to stop the racist gentrification, sky high rents and homelessness in the city with a massive expansion of publicly owned affordable housing and jobs. This Amazon tax is a housing and jobs bill. It's no accident. This comes in the midst of the historic Black Lives Matter rebellion. The legitimacy of the status quo has been utterly smashed by the protest movement, the pandemic and the deepening crisis of capitalism. In Seattle, Amazon was widely taken up at the Justice for George Floyd protests, where we gathered 20,000 signatures in 20 days. Now that total is over 30,000 signatures. The Amazon tax is perhaps the biggest progressive win in Seattle since socialists and labor unions led the way on the $15 minimum wage, which passed first here and then was won in cities and states around the country. We hope that once again, we can inspire working people and yield nationally and globally in this crucial fight against the billionaire class, which is attempting to force working people to pay for the current crisis of capitalism with massive budget cuts. Our rallying cry nationally must be no austerity. That's big business, not working people. The Amazon tax shows working people do not need to play defense. We can and should go on the offensive and win big. We must reject all the pathetic attempts of corporate media who, after years of attacking the idea of taxing big business and those fighting for it now desperately want to spin a narrative to discourage working class struggle and empowerment. Let's be real. The Amazon tax had nothing to do with the quote unquote, savvy of establishment politicians. It had everything to do with the self-organization of working people. Specifically, it has been the thread of the movement's ballot initiative that has pressured the city establishment to act. Amazon filed the ballot measure after a series of actual grassroots Democratic action conferences where hundreds of people, indeed by now thousands discussed and voted. We did not win everything we wanted, and I strongly oppose the insertion of a sunset clause. But while I disagree with other council members on watering down the legislation, I want to acknowledge their support and votes for the passage of this Amazon tax. I want to thank Councilmember Mosquito for her work. I want to thank Councilman Morales for her support of the strong Amazon tax proposal we put forward together in solidarity with the movement. We must build on our momentum. The movement to tax Amazon and big business to fund housing and essential services is needed everywhere, and we must actively spread it. Here in Seattle, we will need to immediately take this energy toward winning the release of all arrested protesters without charges. To defund Seattle police by at least 50%. To stop the sweeps of our homeless neighbors and to fund tiny house villages. And to when at least a thousand quality, affordable homes in the Central District for black working families. The struggle for black liberation will also mean campaigning for elected community oversight boats with full powers over the police, including hiring and firing policies and procedures. Our movement was clear eyed about naming the real force, pulling the strings. Amazon Many argue that we should not, quote unquote, antagonize big business and instead try to broker a deal. But we know that our power comes from working people getting organized, not from any negotiations with the elite. For those watching from outside Seattle, don't let anyone tell you in your fight to tax big business in your city that you are being divisive because class struggle is what gets the goods. The private for profit housing market has utterly failed working people, not just here and now, but everywhere and always because capitalism is completely incapable of meeting the most basic needs of working people. Internationally, the working class needs to take the top 500 corporations into democratic public ownership run by workers in the interests of human need and the environment, not billionaires. Greed. I have a message for Jeff Bezos and his class. If you attempt again to overturn the Amazon tax, working people will go all out in the thousands to defeat you. And we will not stop there because, you see, we are fighting for far more than the stacks. We are preparing the ground for a different kind of society. And if you, Jeff Bezos, want to drive that process forward by lashing out against us in our modest demands, then so be it, because we are coming for you and your rotten system. We are coming to dismantle this deeply oppressive, racist, sexist, violent, morally bankrupt system of capitalism, this police state. We cannot and will not stop until we overthrow it and replace it with a world based instead on solidarity, genuine democracy and equality. A socialist world. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. So on any other comments I see. Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you so much. I want to I can just lots of thanks to go around. And I want to thank Councilmember Swann for leading the grassroots effort. And I want to also thank Councilmember Mosqueda for proposing a structure that was different from the 2018 Employee Hours Tax or the 2020 Amazon tax, which would have been a flat tax to employers for each employee, regardless of their pay. Because this new proposal was narrow and taxed taxes only the largest businesses paying the highest salaries, which I believe is drive most driving our city's affordability crisis. It's made it possible for me to vote to enact this version of the measure rather than voting to put it on the ballot. As I had said I was considering voting to do when we were looking at a model that looked more like the employee hours tax or. Councilmember. Salons, Amazon tax. So I really I only say this to say that I think there's lots of of banks to go around and lots of credit to to be to be shared. And again, this this model represents the same tax structure that the business community was poised to support when it was proposed at the state legislature. And I hope that their their position on our tax is is consistent with the position that they had taken on state legislation that would have allowed for a regional tax. We've talked a lot about our cities and states upside down tax code, where Seattle residents are struggling on the smallest incomes and they pay six times more in taxes as a percent of their income than our wealthiest residents. This helps us raise more funds for crucial investments without further burdening Seattle residents struggling on the smallest incomes. With this revenue, we can invest in COVID relief, rental assistance, affordable housing. We can help Seattle workers who have lost jobs or hours due to the public health emergency. And we can help immigrant and refugee households that may be ineligible for federal relief programs, people who are living unsheltered in the black and brown communities that have been most impacted by COVID 19. We can and must make investments in Seattle's residents that are in line with their values, and that will help speed our community's recovery. And again, we'll finally take a step towards addressing our upside down tax code. Thank you. So that. Thank you. Councilmember Herbold. Are there any other comments from my colleagues? Councilmember Strauss, please. And then Councilmember Peterson, Councilmember. The council president just wants to thank everyone for all of their work on this bill. It is a well-tailored proposal even Danny West wrote this week, and even critics are straining to come up with political arguments against it. The important aspects of this bill are that it addresses gaps that other levels of government have not provided. I've heard from residents and small businesses alike that the need for child care. Food access. Funding for immigrants and refugees who have not received. Support from other levels of government. And importantly, the small business stimulus are really critical aspects of this bill. The proper sideboards that allow this solution to scale to a county wide, region wide, and if the state is able to do so, a statewide solution. This bill and many definitions were derived from the state legislature, and I know there will be important rule making during the implementation phase of Jumpstart. I really want to thank everyone who has led in this effort and especially to Councilmember Mosqueda, for spending hours upon hours on the phone with me and my team. I can't thank you enough for all of your work, and that's to all the sponsors and everyone who has worked on many different iterations of a similar proposal over the years. Thank you. Council President. Thank you. Councilmember Straus. Councilmember Peterson. Thank you. Council President So today it appears that a majority of our city council will vote to approve this new tax on large Seattle Employers Council Bill 119810. This new tax will be in addition to the business and occupation taxes, property taxes and business license fees paid by Seattle employers. I want to thank and commend our budget chair, Councilmember Mesquita. As a masterful legislator, she put together a more targeted proposal and worked in an open and collaborative way with many of us here on the city council and those in the community to incorporate various ideas to improve her already thoughtful tax and spend package. And I appreciate why many of my colleagues are going to vote yes today. I'd like to thank the thousands of District four constituents who took the time to provide input on this. And after much consideration and consultation with my constituents, my strong concerns remain. I represent a city council district that has a variety of views on issues that makes many votes difficult. I hear passionate pleas from all sides of complex issues. So later today, I'll post a longer statement on my blog explaining my vote. For now, just present a quick summary because I'm not planning to change my vote from our Budget Committee just a few days ago. Please note that later this month they will likely vote in favor of the short term COVID relief bill from Councilmember Mosqueda. That's the upcoming Council bill 119812, which will tap our City Government's Emergency Fund and revenue stabilization fund at amounts higher than proposed by our Mayor. I've consistently voted in favor of relief packages and regulatory changes to help those impacted most by the COVID crisis. The tax and spend packages before us today, however, are long term policies that require additional considerations. As I've mentioned before, I'm concerned that this is it penalizes only Seattle employers. It's not a regional solution. I'm concerned that companies providing tens of thousands of jobs to our residents may leave the city, and the small businesses that support the large employers could also be negatively impacted. I'm concerned that it does not exempt all nonprofits. No, I appreciate the amendment today for the health care providers. I'm concerned the spending plan. We're in a position now to enact the new tax without knowing the full details of how we would spend the money. Because the version of the spending plan in front of us today, Council Bill 119811 has removed many of the key details that the previous more detailed version of the spending plan was better and more targeted and more specific. I'm concerned this is a situation where taxing first, asking questions later. As Councilmember Suarez noted, this does not give voters a choice. The tax before us today is four times larger than the head tax. The previous city council reversed just two years ago sending a large tax and spending proposal to the November ballot for voters to decide would have been consistent with other large tax measures and would provide more time to see whether the economy is recovering. Whether our state government can pass a better statewide or regional measure for revenue. Unfortunately, that idea was rejected at our Budget Committee last week. I feel that we could also do a better job looking for savings in our existing budget. I see common ground and points of unity emerging and how we look at our police budget. The large salaries there are also in other city departments, as noted in the recent investigation by Forbes magazine published on June 23rd. The lessons learned as we dove into the police budget. Salaries could be applied to other city departments so that we expand social services, not government salaries. To me, that's not austerity, it's sustainability. I will look forward to joining my colleagues and pushing our governor and state legislature to pass progressive tax tools that our region can use. I support progressive taxes. We need progressive taxes. I supported HB 2907. We need our state government to act for the sake of our city. I hope my concerns are just concerns and will not actually occur. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the mayor to create a sustainable tax and spend path as part of our fall budget discussions for our 2021 budget. I hope the public today sees not division or dispute among the council members, but rather debate and discussion. I believe this whole process has really made our city council stronger. Again, I think Councilor Mesquita, for our hard work on this and congratulate her on what appears to be a success successful effort today. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Peterson So I think that concludes comments from everyone. And so as usual, we will end comment with hearing from the prime sponsor who is Councilmember Skate. I just wanted to chime in really quickly and say how much I appreciated the opportunity to reengage on this conversation. Of course, for those of us who are on the city council and to those 18, we still understand and and believe how difficult it was to not just pass that the former iteration of a tax on big business, but then to unfortunately have to repeal that law. I really do appreciate, Councilman Ross, get getting your process here and your and your staff's willingness to want to give a big shots per week in your office, who I know has been spending countless number of hours on the phone and in Zoom calls, I'm sure, with many shareholders throughout the city and and really want to appreciate the the hard work that you and your staff have put in on on this important proposal. I think this is a smart approach. I think that it is an important approach. And I think that there is probably no other time like the present, where we have a triple crisis on our hands. For us to not only consider this, but to take swift action, we are, at the end of the day, a nine member body that was elected by, in some cases, districts, and for Councilmember Mosqueda and I citywide. And we were elected to make tough decisions, to dig into the policy work, to identify significant policy issues and to identify potential solutions to those issues. That's part of the reason why I think now at this point, given this triple crisis, I do think that the political winds have significantly changed across the city. I think that our constituents across the city want us to take action now as opposed to punting to a ballot issue. And so I feel more than comfortable showing up today in in this council meeting to vote yes on jump start for Seattle and to to be proud of the fact that I am one of the co-sponsors of this of this proposal. And I just want to commend everybody for the hard work that they've been doing, all of the folks on the outside who've been emailing us and antagonists on social media about why they think this is important. And and all the calls that we have received in support of this bill is really important. And again, part of the record that shows to me that that that our constituents expect us to take action as their elected representatives on the city council. And I'm going to be very proud to be able to cast a yes vote in favor of of this of Jumpstart Seattle and the next piece of legislation we will be considering. So with that being said, I'm going to go ahead and close out debate by asking Councilmember Mesquita to give closing remarks before we call the roll. Thank you. Council president, council colleagues, city in Seattle. This is a huge win. Thank you so very much for your ongoing feedback. As we have together crafted a proposal to respond to the crisis that is COVID, to invest in our local community, to invest in historic amounts of funding for our community, who been affected by displacement, and to make sure that those who are the most vulnerable in this public health crisis have the care that they need. This is about caring for Seattle now and into the future. We together are making history. I want to thank all of you for your comments, your feedback and again, your amendments. Over the last few weeks, especially last week, as we crafted the base of this proposal, we put together a piece of legislation that I am incredibly proud of and incredibly proud that the city of Seattle is leading yet again here today. We've balanced labor protections with affordable housing priorities. We're figuring out how to meet urgent needs due to COVID 19. Invest in housing and homelessness. And we haven't shied away from some really from some really tough decisions. With your vote today, we will be dealing with the problem presented and exposed by COVID. We are rolling up our sleeves. We are doing the work. And we are leading by passing Jump Start Seattle. None of us, none of the council members, none of the voters in Seattle, no one expected to come into 2020 with the issues that we are dealing with right now. COVID presenting a massive public health, deadly pandemic across the country. The type of depression that we will soon be facing is no longer going to be considered a recession in the near future. And we we must shift our priorities, shift to make sure that we're investing in those who are the most vulnerable and those who've been historically left out so that we do not have an austerity budget in front of us. Jumpstart Seattle provides that alternative to make sure that we have the funding needed to respond immediately to the COVID crisis and to make sure that there is not an austerity budget that lands in our lap this fall. More importantly, it invests in the long term funding that we need for affordable housing to invest in home, to shelter those who are living unsheltered and homeless in Seattle, and to make sure that we have a resilient community. Again, thank you to Councilmember Morales for her work on the Equitable Development Initiative work. We will be having conversations in the long run about EPA and the spend plan, but that is a core component that you see reflected there. Thanks again to Councilmember Sawant for all the work that she has been bringing to council over the last years on pushing for progressive revenue. And we will continue the conversations in the next week about Green New Deal investments and making sure that we have affordable housing that's geographically located across Seattle to specifically address historic disinvestment and displacement from communities of color and the needs of housing. Today. With your support, though, we are passing progressive revenue in the city of Seattle. We are coming together and supporting our city and supporting our most vulnerable. We have taken the lead from communities of color, from neighborhood and small businesses, from those who are fighting for food access, those who are rallying together to support small businesses, those who are supporting health care workers and immigrants and refugees together. Today we are leading like we have in the past. We are taking direction from community, just like you have in past. Council passed $15 minimum wage and secure scheduling and. And thankfully those issues ripple throughout our country and I am hoping the same will happen today. We are leading like we did on the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights and the hotel worker protections. Which city after city has continued to call us to say. How did you do it? How was it done? I want to echo the comments that were made before to other cities that are looking to pass progressive revenue and recognize that the city of Seattle and Washington State has ground to make up for given. We are in the most regressive city and state in the country in terms of our tax code. But we're hoping today that we continue to show that leadership across the country and legislating solutions for our communities, providing immediate relief and support to those who've been left out, responding to this moment of crisis and investing in areas that have had historic disinvestment and division. We are acting at the local level as a good partner, a good partner with the state and the county as we find and push for additional progressive revenue solutions and implementing this effort today to right size our upside down tax system. This is a small component of that larger solution Jumpstart Seattle, reinvest in our families, our neighborhoods and our local community. And this is how we emerge stronger and more equitable after this crisis. I have a few thank you, but I want to provide. And then I will stop, I promise. I want to thank Council Central South Band Leader Tom Michael, all the community throughout Rateliff, early morning late night weekend who have been sending messages and emails and making sure that all of the council members ideas were vetted and drafted. The piece of legislation in front of us reflects those amendments from Council colleagues to make sure that our values and our priorities are included. And we would not be able to have a piece of legislation that reflected these priorities without all of your work in the legislative branch. So thank you for all of your work, and I do hope that you hear our appreciation and also are able to get some rest soon. I want to thank Paddy Wagon. I want to thank Patty and Pearson for their patience as we work together to provide the agendas for our meetings that were ongoing and for all of the thought that you provided to us from the Legislative Department. Thanks to the city clerk's office, Monica, Amelia and Jody, without you, we would be out of order all the time. So thank you for helping us with the various amendments and the legislative process. And thanks to Danna, Stephanie and Joseph and the communication team for putting in the extra work to make sure that the Jumpstart plan, including the detailed spend plan that we will be voting on next, was easily digestible and was clearly understood by the public so that we didn't hear the same type of criticism we heard in the past. There is a detailed spend plan that not only has the ordinance that we're voting on today, but will be followed up with a resolution much like we have in previous efforts related to levees, to be even more specific about where to go. So thank you for that. Thanks to our I.T. department and Eric and Sun for all you are doing to help keeping these for all you are doing to help us keep working remotely and for making sure that all the public can continue to call and testify. And thank you to everybody who's continued to testify, which I'll get to in a second. Thank you, counsel, colleagues, especially all of those who've spoken today, talking about the historic moment that we're in. I just want to underscore how incredibly important it is for us to take away the historic win that is today by voting on Jump Start Seattle. And thanks again to I think I mentioned this earlier. But Councilmember Morales, for the earlier iterations of the bill that you introduced and council to represent a for her bill as well. I think we have carefully pulled from each of these pieces to make sure that we are advancing strong legislation today. And as the council president said, a huge thank you to my team. I know that your work, as has been recognized by every council member and the staff, but thank you thank you to several chief of staff for your leadership on this effort. And thank you to my incredible team, Aaron House, Buddy Cuevas, Aretha Butterfield, each who reached out to specific constituencies and got feedback from folks and worked on various amendments. I count the president, I know I am going long, but I would be remiss if I didn't say thank you to the council. The committee, sorry, a handful of organizations, if you might be so kind, to allow me a few more minutes to the faith organization. Thank you. Folks like this Action Network, the ultimate Mennonite Church, Interfaith Task Force on Homelessness Justice Council, and the Church Council of Greater Seattle to Food Access Organizations, Food and Water Action North North Helpline and to Operations that lunch to local businesses and Transit to Mobility Organizations. Cafe, Road and Station and Cafe Bicycle Club. Thank you to the community resilience organizations such as Bird Bar, Place, Child Care Resources and MSP Neighborhood House Lifelong Aides and Queen and Help Line. Along with Somali youth organization, progressive organizations like Civic Ventures and Policy Center, Fuel, Puget Sound Stage Poverty Action Park for Recovery, and who does not act to shut down action for retirement? Retirement? Pizarro Labor organizations SEIU 6775 1190 9925. AIDS and Protect 17 MLK Labor The Laborers, Painters, Iron Workers, U S.W. 21 and the Washington Nightlife Music Association also want to thank immigrant refugee organizations like Catholic Unite. And our motto is One America and Housing and Homelessness Organization Campus Housing, Low Income Housing Institute, the UCLA Brown Reid Housing Alliance, Youth Care, Nightwatch Housing Development Consortium, Lake City Partners. Plymouth Housing. The Coalition on Homelessness and Real Change, just to name a few. And thank you finally to Seattleites who are struggling, whether unemployed or underemployed, whether you've experienced the increase in workload or balancing childcare and working and pitching, whether your business is closed or just reopening, whether you're missing hugs or have lost loved ones . I know you're wrapping your head around this policy right now, and it's a loss. It is a huge win. And I know you must need to focus on making sure that your family is making ends meet. We are here in the meantime, working on this policy, Jumpstart Seattle, to make sure that communities across Seattle can continue to have access to core services, core protections like housing and food, and that we're investing in the long term so that we are creating a more united, a more resilient and more equitable Seattle as we recover from this COVID crisis. Thank you, council colleagues. Looking forward to voting on jump start Seattle with all of you. And well, thank you once again for making this all possible. Great. Thank you so much. That closes out our debate. So I am now going to ask that the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill as amended Herbold. Guy Juarez? No. Lewis, I. Morales. I must get. A. I. PETERSON No. So what. I. Strauss. I. President Gonzalez, I. Seven in favor. Two opposed the bill passes as amended and the chair will sign it. And I'd ask that the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Okay. Item four I think this is our last agenda item on today's agenda. So I'd ask that the clerk please read item four into the record.

Recommendation to Provide Input to Avery & Associates Regarding the Recruitment Brochure for the City Manager Recruitment. (Human Resources 2510)

AlamedaCC_07212015_2015-1864

Recommendation to provide input to Avery and Associates regarding the recruitment brochure for the city manager. Recruitment. Hello, Madam Mayor. Members of the City Council. My name is Robin Young. I'm a senior analyst with the Human Resources Department. As you are aware, you have engaged to Avery and Associates, a consulting firm, to head up your city manager recruitment. I have with me here Paul Chmura, who is leading this effort and who would like to review the brochure for yourself without further delay . Oh. You. Very much. Good evening. Good evening. Mayor. Council members. Thank you for allowing us to take the other item ahead of yours. Appreciate that. Oh, absolutely. Real important, as well as interesting discussions about challenges where all all the communities are facing on housing. But, you know, thank you very much. I wanted to just return to you after having had a chance to individually meet or speak with each of you to solicit your input on the ideal candidate profile for your city manager. So incorporating. All of the. Central themes we I put together a preliminary draft of the job announcement. Staff was kind enough to work with me and ensure that the most of the facts were accurate. And tonight. I wanted to check with you to see your thoughts on the job announcement. And if there were any changes or edits that you would like to see. And then thereafter, to open up the recruitment so that we can try and find you a new city manager by year's end. Right. Comments from council or as I know, we don't have any speaker tips on this one. Correct. All right. Comments from Council. I liked it. I thought. I thought it did a good job of talking about our historical character. Reputation? I like the friendly and sophisticated island community, but, you know, talking about our attributes, great schools, family friendly beaches, successful historic movie theater, retail stores, ample recreational opportunities and abundant parks and playgrounds. But also the very next paragraph talks about the development that we're embarking on in Alameda Point and the characteristics we would like to see in a city manager to lead us through that, that process. And I like the photographs. It's I think there's a lot to choose from in Alameda when you're looking at photographs, but I think it was a nice representative sample. The other member comments. All right. So I have a few. When you describe our city as the second paragraph. Okay. In the middle of city of Alameda, best places to live. It has a high median family income. My understanding our median income is 75,000. So I'm not sure what that's based on. In regards to high, I really don't even know what that means. But I think very I would say that we are a socio economically diverse community. Well educated populace. Again, I don't know what that's based upon, but I think we I would like to describe the diversity as socio in the diversity of our community I think should be represented. And we can go over that language later. But I don't think this captures our diverse community. And with that, of course, comes. I would be hoping that we have we end up selecting a manager that recognizes the diversity of our community and supports the diversity of our community and wants to work with us to provide a higher quality of life and a be aware of quality of life for our the the diverse needs of the community members. So that's why that connects to. The the application then attributes. Mm hmm. Absolutely. All right. Any other comments? And this was just for feedback. It's my understanding. We don't need to take a vote on this. Just a question. Yes. When is it actually going to start? The recruitment was intended to start after you approved the brochure. You're not. Meeting, apparently, next. Month. So we were hoping we might be able to get approval this evening, initiate the recruitment, have a filing period close in early September, and have candidates presented to you by early October. I'm all for moving forward expeditiously. But can you just maybe do a read back of how you would incorporate the mayors? I mean, she's right. We are an ethnically diverse community. The. You know, we could debate about high median family income, but maybe there's a way to kind of. Right. Incorporate all of that. There is room and we can certainly speak to the diversity of the community. We can take out the comment about the high family, high median income. And I think. The what I would emphasize is that. Because. This is more of a marketing brochure as opposed to an all encompassing description of what exactly each of you might want. You know, I tried to. Under communicate. Rather than overcommunicate just to it to ensure that we we did make it more of a brief statement and try and attract the. Diversity of candidates that you would all look for. I think the other change I would. Try and make, given the mayor's input, is under the ideal candidate profile. Perhaps the next the last paragraph we can talk about someone who recognizes and appreciates a diverse community and can add, you know, positive benefits for the. Betterment party unity. Unfortunately, because that may not we might we might not be a good fit for certain candidates. We are I think, you know, we are a we are a diverse community. We are different from a lot of communities in the United States. Sure. So I think it is important to put that there. You know, initially so personally, I'm concerned about the comments that I think make it appear that, you know, the median income and then the well-educated populace, I don't think that really speaks to us. We are diverse in regards to education as well as income. But really, I think what we are is socioeconomically racially, racially. Sexual orientation, however you want to come up with that, really describes the diversity. And I think that's our richness as opposed to the attributes that are focused on here. However you want to describe that. I'm going to jump in and say, remember, we are casting our net wide. I think the we will be best served as a council making this very significant decision for our city if we have as wide a candidate pool to select from as possible. There is nothing wrong with saying we are a well-educated populace. We are, you know, right next to UC Berkeley. I think, you know, some of us up here on the dais have degrees from the University of California. So there's I mean, there's nothing to be ashamed of in our our capabilities. I and I don't think it's an either or proposition. So, yes, the cultural diversity and I you know, we should remember, too, we're in the San Francisco Bay area. I mean, some of that almost goes without saying, but nothing wrong with speaking to our rich cultural diversity. But I don't think we need to be ashamed of a have a good education. After all, we tout one of our selling points. I mean, any realtor will tell you is that we have a good school system in our students go on to good colleges, which. Is another point which is there. The next paragraph. Speaks We don't need to take. Your family first. We don't need to take out well educated populace. I'm okay. With that. I don't think it's based on fact, but I mean, it's up to you. That's my opinion. I don't know where the rest of you stand. We have people at cross. I'd like to see the process get going as quickly as possible. I don't think I don't think people are going to read this. So I think it's going to go out. I really don't. I think people are going to understand there's a city manager job opening in Alameda. They're going to Google it. They're going to look. They're going to talk to you. And you're going to go to your contacts because you have a we hired you because you have a lot of contacts. I don't want to spend any more time tonight on this. Go ahead and put in the diversity comment. Go ahead and put in that. We are in the San Francisco Bay area. It's cutting edge or whatever it is and get the recruiting going. That's my opinion. I second that. So we do. Have the. We do have a speaker. But you do? Yes. Sorry. So it's 1030. So to consider the remaining items six e ordinance of part time sick leave, six F Ordinance of sunshine and any nominations. Ten A We would require a motion with four votes to pass. Three Have a motion. All right. All right. Well, we do not have a motion. So. So move a second. All right. All those in favor. I know. All those opposed? No. Oppose. So, yes, the motion. To. The motion fails. Two in favor, three opposed. So we will just finish up this item. Thank you. And then we have speakers. Kara Goldstein. Yes. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, man. A man. That happened a little quickly. We have an ordinance that is actually fairly urgent because it's a requirement from state law. That's six, which you haven't heard yet. That is an item that we need that we need to we need to decide tonight. I wish we'd known about that being a change. Then we do. Six. Do we have a motion to entertain? Six. Only I'll make that motion. I'll second that. All those in favor. I think you opposed none. Okay. So we'll be hearing six after this item. Carol, you may proceed. Thank you. Hi, Carol Gladstone, resident. I just. Wanted to. Back up the. Mayor a little. Bit on the earnings. I just happened to have the summary for Alameda 2013 earnings. According to Transparent California, our total population of 74,818 people. The median earnings for full time year round employed residents. Is. $61,378. That I wouldn't say is high income. And and I agree, we're not Piedmont. And I. Don't think we should be made. To look like we are. Thank you. Any other comments. On. Amor de SAC? A Thank you. I actually like the brochure as it is. For example, you know, when you look like I showed before, when you look at the median income of homeowners and in the city and remember, homeowners are half the households. It's $113,000, man. That's not chump change. The median income for renters is $51,700. You know, that's certainly low. So I like the the the inclusion of the education because to me, what all of these speak to is a need to get the prospects, to send them a clear message as to what kind of city they're coming to . They're coming to a city with high expectations because they themselves have high expectations for themselves and because they are high. The residents here are well-educated. When you look at the data and I've looked at the data, so I like the way I like it the way it is. I'm not you know, I'm not going to get into a wordsmithing battle, but I just want to say, great. So do you have a are opposed to adding information about being. Diverse, somehow speaking to the diversity of our community. Well, I don't. But what I would suggest is perhaps somewhere that we should make data available so that the people clearly understand the parameters of diversity, whether it's along the income score or any other. So. I can give you the data, too. It's not a big deal. I'm not a mayor. Okay, so. So somehow if you can, you know, make sure that people can reference basic census data so that they can make conclusions for themselves. I think diversity is a fine catchall, but I don't want to send the wrong message that, you know, we're as diverse as, say, the city of Gustin in Merced County. You know, so, you know, diversity and whatever topics that we use, there has to be some semblance of the parameters. I'm fine with that, and I think somehow we can still convey that the details. Any other comments? Member Ashcraft. Oh, I was just going to say I agree with Councilmember de SAC and the vice mayor. And I also think Mr. Chmura has shown himself to be quite a bit of wordsmith. If you could throw in the cultural diversity somewhere. I have confidence that he can do that. But otherwise, yeah. Let's just get this train out of the station. Any other comments? Thank you. All right, then we can move on to the motion. This is just reckless with. This information being shared. Okay. Thank you. So now we can move on to six E. Thank you. Introduction of ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code by deleting Section 20 5-2.4 concerning the accrual of sick leave by certain part time employees.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.98 to temporarily prohibit No-Fault Notices and Evictions through December 31, 2019, for residential real property built prior to January 1, 2005, declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_11122019_19-1135

With item the the the ordinance with the time certain believe it's 20. The 20. 22, 22. Communication from city attorney recommendation declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code to temporarily prohibit no fault notices and evictions through December 31st, 2019, declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately citywide. Okay. Thank you very much. We have a motion and a second. Councilman Pierce. I don't have any additional comments. I fully support what's in front of us and urge my council colleagues to do the same. Thank you. Vice Mayor Andrews. I'm told you supported him. We can move on with it. Councilman Austin. I support. Ready to vote. Thank you. Before we go to a vote, we we have extensive speakers lists. As you know, the council voted on this unanimously the last time. And so I think folks would like to vote. But if you'd like to speak. Open it up for public comment. I would just let people know what the process is on these emergency declarations and ordinances. The council will vote as soon as the council votes. Per the occurrence conversation with the city attorney, then of course, I will sign the ordinance. I'll take a quick break. I will sign the ordinance quickly. Of course, I'm not going to veto the ordinance. And then it will go into effect immediately. So that's the plan right now. And so I want to make sure that we the quicker we do this, the quicker I'm going to sign it just right outside. All right. So if you have if you want to speak to this item that passed unanimously, you're welcome to do so. I'm going to call you up every one minute, Larry Goodhue. Kenneth West. MC Women. Alicia Flores. Gary Shelton. Please come forward if you want to speak. Janet Foster and control anyone from that group. No. Okay. Moving on. Cafe item. Ross, please. Please. First. Thank you for having me, Mayor. Council Member of Staff. My name is Kenneth West McCrimmon. I live in District three. I mean, I was an active duty soldier. I have been in the reserve component since 2014. I go to Cal State University, Long Beach on vocational rehabilitation. Due to my disability in 2016, someone hit me with their vehicle when I was on my motorcycle. I have a broken body. That's the short explanation. I also have a traumatic brain injury, a broken neck, and my injuries from active duty were exacerbated. A year ago, my family and I notified our landlord about the need for a service dog with a doctor's note from my provider. Just recently, the owner of our building actually saw the dog and verbally informed us that we could not have a dog. I informed him that he was a service dog and that the management company was aware of the dog living in our address. A couple of days later we were issued a 60 day notice with no reason why. After speaking. I'm going to let you finish up. At this location. Time's up. After speaking to the management company, they said it was because of the demeanor of the dog. Our 60 day notice is December 31st. And to expect any family, especially a disabled family with 214 year old teenage girls and one year of son and a wife who is also disabled, that's unreasonable. I think you should thank you for your service. Thank you very much. I was only supposed to speak. With the U.S. forward because Gary Shelton can speak. He is? Nope. Okay. So if I'm going to speak, please come forward. Is Janet Foster speaking or in control? No, please. Alicia. Good afternoon, everyone. Mr. Van Dam. Nice to see you again, Mr. De. Thank you for everything you've done, Robert. See you again. My name is Alicia Flores. And the reason I'm here is because the advocate in me and I stand today here before you, just like many hundreds, if not thousands of people who have been a victim and affected by the city ordinance that came into effect on August 1st of this year, 2019, where a lot of people were evicted of their homes. And we were told that our rent was going to be skyrocketed from $650 to 1500 dollars. And if we didn't like it, tough move. There are so many homeless. There are several agencies fighting against homelessness, but yet landlords are creating more homelessness. And there are two buildings that. Had the same landlord. Those people we are curious and would like to know what's going to be done about it. People sleeping on the streets. Thank you very much for sauce. Thank you. It's a fun exhibition. You're okay. Please come for you. Janet Right. Kathy. Kathy. Got you. Great. Hi. God bless you. My name is Kathy ETIM. And again, I've spoken a few times here. Everyone knows me. I'm a street minister here. I'm an advocate for those who are elderly, disabled and homeless. And I thank you so much for already passing this. And I know you're going to sign it, and I thank God for that. It is an answer to prayer. I would just want to make a few points is that even after we do this, what happens next? What's going to happen to the people? The rent is still going to be hard for them to pay. They're in limited incomes. They're homeless, they're elderly. They have like I said, minimum income, rent control is definitely needed in this town. I can remember that I lived in Lancaster. My rent for mobile home park was $250. My rent here now is 600 for a studio apartment and my rent has not been rent raised in seven years. I thank God for people like my manager and owner. God bless you. Thank you very much. Stephen Moore, since you're a Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach Branch resident of the Second District, a city is made of people and people who need safe homes in order to live. This ordinance is necessary to preserve the basic standard of living for the majority of the people in the city who are renters. Please vote for this moratorium to support your constituents and their families and to demonstrate that you believe that housing is a human right. Additionally, send a message to the corporate donor class of this city and their lapdog, Mike Murchison, that their day of gouging, days of gouging people for rent in the city, for substandard housing are over . Our next speakers are Rosalba and Myra. Vilma or Jennifer going to speak? Anybody from that group? No one person to be seen forward. Is Antonio Zavala going to speak? It's okay. His way is way more. Can I speak? Yeah. Brando. Velasquez, please come forward, everyone. Just as a reminder, it's the second vote of of a unanimous vote last time. So I think council is ready to vote so that I understand if folks want to speak, come forward. Please come forward. Who's speaking. In. My office? Okay. Please come forward. Mirror my nursing when I'm noticed. Good evening and welcome to La La Nina. And here to ask you that, I will let you know that I'm hoping that this will pass. And is here. Then, in the problem of Ontario's Ontario, Canada, said, look, I mean, I'm actually a multilateral and that is Canadian. I'm still having problems with my landlord and they're still trying to evict me just because of the issues that I told you that I had. Imogen Solomon think you've broken with her hand. And all I have left is 14 days before I. Come under the entertainment. That thing only her condition says, is capacity. That is. As I told you before, I have a son who has six different disabilities. He will this year. China's Vivien Leigh. And I lived in this place for 18 years. Naomi Barasa, who still considers Hinduism. Solomon You know, in this year, Chinese, I don't know. Neither I don't feel is fair that they're doing this specially because they haven't fixed the unit in 18 years. You've been there L.A. you percent. I painted last year. Yeah, really? To me. Apartamento. I fixed my whole apartment problem. I think I'm. Still having the issue with rats and not just. LA in the LA. I'm asking you for help. You think he has. Is resolved here? Stephen Lester. No, no, it will. We're going to speak. No. Okay. Vilma Silva. No. Jennifer Milan. Are you speaking for Jennifer? Is Antonia. Please come for Antonio. You'll be next. Oh. Fishing with the sea. Go ahead, Antonio. Your next. But. And you want to transmit very fluid. It doesn't. And this is. When I started this. Good afternoon. My name is Antonia Ibn Ghafoor. Yet. And more in one more oratorio that is on a horse, Yanis, which I am Historia. So then Apartamento lady, sit on my way, you know, get me number to say going to go study homeless. The nicest person for you about a month and I know sinners so bad is one of those years festivals pharmacy going up again going to see dentist. Which is going to yes I'm here to in support of moratorium for. For the for this item. And I know you've already heard my. Sorry, I just leave it up. I live in District nine, and I don't want to become one more homeless person. Thank you for helping us in keeping our homes around this upcoming holidays. Thank you for your help and assistance. Jennifer. Hi. My name is Jennifer. Me and I live in Salem is with my family and I'm here to ask for your support to pass any eviction moratorium. We've lived in our building for ten years and I received eviction notices. I have been evicted before with my family in 2010 and it was a difficult time. The families and I are very distressed for having to look for a new home, especially during this time. We shouldn't be looking for a new home, especially during the holidays are no time of the year. I ask for your support on this moratorium. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for doing this. Is when actually when. Your next. Move. Is. Brenda. Brenda. Perfect. And then the next speaker is Alman. Selah here? Let's not speak. Is Dora? No. Go here. The Speaker of the House for Dora Maryville. Yes. No. Joshua Smith speaking. Joshua, come on. A swing, please. Hi. Yeah. Wayne from Second District. And it sounds like you guys are kind of on board with it. It's a good thing that you're doing because it's not the good landlords that are going to be doing this. It's the the the investors and the speculators who don't care. And they're going to make homeless people. The city is going to have to deal with. So hopefully we'll have a unanimous vote in favor of this. Thank you. Thank you very much for the. Good evening, council members and Mayor. My name is Brenda. I'm a resident of the First District and I live in 10th Street and Alimentos. I've been there for 39 years. I feel very emotional because this moratorium will protect me and my two girls. Milagros four and Genesis five. Housing has been hard for me and I hope that, yes, as you have acted on this emergency temporarily to protect families, we need to we need long term solutions, more tenants protection. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're not. Not just concealing numbers, Dorothy. No. So you're not leader of the. I could be one, not the Long Beach implicit as Helen Mirren waving. So Lady got up again, though I familiarize some yourself out of this the moratorium your leader the lacking many than scintilla responsibility ourselves Sabra Costello's difficulties problems then with the hint the person as Wayne asked Trevor honey Lucienne Parakeet Damian why don't you the landlords compromise Tito's marathon rispetto mucho they use our references and who hadn't? Is it your kind of country with a military base that your state is on the style compromise? So come on, Mr. Representante, please. Let's be on record. The most familiar is noise Prozac euthanasia is a specialist battery, surveillance, theo sequels, etc. It was that. Yeah. Values correlated to the guard. Don't they reveal ascendant or miss terrorists? No. Vamos. I can be another necesitamos citizen commentary la mort instead of Ethiopia. No, they promise that they campagna see no connection is whose death was illusory from the rage of fundamental para la vida. The devido to that personas could be be more sinister to that many symbols, then it would mean that opportunities that was going to give me that equal. Respeto is also said part of this to calm you down. They don't say Ms. youneedto congregation is no same with community leaders aimlessly chocolates. You only say you must presume Nando but unless it completely to spit out of the richest woman was done with that most solo so Muslim Pueblo near the. Good evening council members my name is Dorothy no go and I'm a leader of I call I live in Long Beach in District nine. I'm here in support of my friends and family and in favor of this item. As a leader of the community, I feel a responsibility to let you know the painful difficulties and problems that our people face. They are good people who have worked hard to be good citizens. Many of those who are facing evictions are not elderly, who have contributed to this, contributed to this city for many years. As council members, you have the responsibility to support those who need you. We ask you to think about our families, those with special needs parents, grandparents, uncles and children. We don't want them to feel uncertain as to whether they will have a place to call home. Stop making changes, but changes by making mistakes. We need to grow and fellow feeling and grow in love with actions. Our home is a fundamental need right for all, and we all deserve better places to live. I'm proud to be part of this change. We're not alone. We are a united people. And. Somebody tell me how long it's been. Joshua Right. And then after Joshua is is Marie Lopez going to speak? Now Jordan is Jordan going to speak? Jordan confirmed in last month that the battle is not about the Lopez speaking. No. Oh, yes. Yes. And Laura and Laura munoz. Yes or no? Okay. Just. And those are the last speaker. So please line up in that order and continue. Go ahead and bring up one. I'm not Gonzalez. I'm going to this kooky, same person. I told you you are so looking over the atlas can also look at Key in all of this and get them in and protect Hong Kong and control the rain. Tacoma in. Los Angeles. Good evening, council members. I want to thank you for passing this moratorium and I ask it for it not to stop here, but also to keep going and game control and rent control in the. Meantime, which has graciously as bedrock. Is steaming. And once again, thank you very much. And I hope you're well. Because I think you, Dr. Smith. Hi, my name is Joshua Smith and the communications director with Housing is a human right, the Housing Advocacy Division of the AIDS Health Care Foundation. I'm also the communications director with the Rental Affordability Act campaign, which you'll be hearing more about in the coming year. I want to applaud you on behalf of HIV and HHR counsel in advance of voting unanimously to pass the eviction moratorium. I'm kind of just taking this opportunity to let everyone in the room know and also counsel know that due to the state of emergency currently under effect from the attorney general and Governor Newsom. The entire state of. California currently has vacancy control on every single rental unit, so it is illegal to charge more than 10% in between units currently throughout the entire state of California. So if you are looking for an apartment right now, you should make sure that it's not 10% more than the one that than the folks who were just paying for it. That's that's currently true. Now, more evictions that are no fault are currently illegal. Now, tell the whole state thanks. Thank you very much, Jordan. Hi there. Jordan Winn, second district resident member of the S.O.S. Board of Long Beach and the Everyone in Campaign. I know you all are about to pass us, and I'm very grateful for that. I just wanted to speak a little bit about what happens next. Actions speak louder than words, and as 1482 does come into effect, it is going to be up to the cities to enforce that state policy. We don't want to see the courts backlogged with people who don't know their rights, who are facing more than 10% rent increases by landlords who think they can sneak in by. So we need to make sure that we're able to enforce those laws. And secondly, pushing this further from protecting tenants is a great first step. But now we can move into helping get more affordable housing into the city, get more supportive housing into the city, and help both our people who are facing homelessness and people who are currently experiencing it by adding a funding mechanism of some sort to the city. So thank you so much. Please pass this unanimously and I thank you for your time. Thank you, Novato. Hello. Council and mayor. My name is not Roberta Lopez. I'm the new project. Director at Libra. And happy to be here. And, you know, thank you so much for your support. Council members who I've talked to. I appreciate you for. Standing strong with tenants here in the city. And I appreciate your leadership right, as we. Keep people home for the holidays. But what's next? Right. Next year is a new year. And as 1482 comes into play, we're going to need. A strong. Mechanism that will enforce this new law. And thank you for your support and continue supporting tenants here in the city of Long Beach. Thank you. Last week was warming up. When I'm not just in your room. Garcia Good evening, Mr. Roberto. You know this whole stuff. It's not fair game. You know. Ryan, I said, look, I lost families. That the families really nosotros. Because it's really not Jose cos. Those, those houses belong to our. Product losses. Those families focused on this aloha loyal. We end up with girl evicted and. Palermo's seniors are miserable. They know when they're going. To go to sleep underneath the freeway overpasses with our children. I went up a wrote and thought, well, I'm. Very. Poor. Those who are. In this for the kids and the young. Fatherless, but principalmente the parallel meuhedet. And mainly for the women. Yourself. And those worked. For in the man in the. Morning la tuna sandwich and minimal rent that. You make a minimum wage to be able to pay the rent. In those schools that is inevitably. Evicted during the holidays. Well, let's do this. And then I see in those promotional pierogi what they must do. When you listen to vote, we all vote for you. You know who's talking. And if not in so house. That we be evicted. Let's be located talking to and. Asking you to use your heart. As destiny. Nikos Tambien. You have children also. Being sent in a transit house as a commuter commuters is dumping something too. But I just like you think about your children during the holidays. Because your Lisbon did not. Bless each one of you. At the back of the courtroom. It evening, mayor and council. My name is Maria. And in a time when everyone's living in fear, I say I'm undocumented, unafraid and unapologetic. On the day DOCA has gone to the Supreme Court. 25 years in Long Beach. And now I'm the director of Community Organizing for Housing, Long Beach and the Long Beach Tenants Union. This is a no brainer. Like you've all said it. But more or less, it's intended for us to continue talking. Right? Continue talking about the real impacts of displacement. Continue talking about what tenant protections really look like. And how we can support communities. Self-determination to really create vibrant communities. I want to finish off again to remind you all that housing is a human right. The net debt. Better than net. That's. Then head on that. Thank you so much for your. Thank you very much. Okay. We have we have a motion in a second on the floor. Please go ahead, members, and cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. We're going to. We need it. I like I said before, I know normally we would do this within ten days. I'm going to just very quickly, we take a one minute recess and it has to be very fast. One where we need the votes. We need the emergency vote, which just occurred now. We need to vote. On the substance. And okay, let's do that to the second vote. Then when I would public comment was all conclusive in one once. We're not doing that. So please motion in a second, please. Ocean carries. Okay. Thank you. We're good. Thank you. We're going to be working this very fast. I'm going to just go right outside of the lobby, sign the ordinance, and we're going to come back. We're going to recess for literally one minute. We have a very long agenda. Okay. We're going to call the council meeting back to order in just, just a minute. So if I can have everyone that's going to remain here for the council. We're going to come back to order in just a minute. Okay. I'm going to have we're going to go back into the council meeting. Madam Clerk, can I get the roll call, please? Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman Price Councilmember. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor. Andrew's Councilmember. Urunga. Councilman. Your Compton member Richardson. Mayor Garcia.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Human Rights Code; broadening coverage of unfair practices to include domestic workers and hiring entities; extending protections to domestic workers and extending obligations to hiring entities; amending Sections 14.04.020 and 14.04.030 of the Seattle Municipal Code (SMC); and adding a new Section 14.04.230 to the SMC.

SeattleCityCouncil_09172018_CB 119351

The reported Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Commission that in six Kasapa 119 351 relate to the Human Rights Code, broadening coverage of unfair practices to include domestic workers in hiring entities, extending protections to domestic workers workers, and extending obligations to hiring entities. Amending Sections 14.0 4.0 20 and point zero 30 zero. Mr. Code and adding a new section 14.0 4.2 30 of the USMCA. The committee recommends the bill passed as amended. Councilmember Herbold, appreciate it. So I want to thank everybody who's joined us here again today to talk about the need for this bill. I was first approached about this legislation by Councilmember Mosquito during the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights deliberations. You've all shared with us your heartbreaking stories of sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace. And I'm honored to play play this small part in addressing this horrible problem in your workplaces and in the workplaces of your coworkers. This legislation is designed to help protect domestic workers from the forms of abuse that we've heard about today and to ensure that when it does happen, that you are able to bring these claims to the Office of Civil Rights, the in particular, their legislation extends the recourse available to the Office of Civil Rights to include domestic workers who are identified as independent contractors. Domestic workers who are considered employees already have the protection. The legislation amends the Fair Employment Practices Section 14.04 of the Municipal Code to add a section reflecting that the chapter covers domestic services and amends the declaration of policy and the definition sections. The amendment to the Declaration of Policy section states that the chapter applies to hiring entities, domestic workers and employees. The definitions section adds in the definition of hiring entity and domestic worker and adds in those terms and domestic service to the existing definitions as applicable. Lastly, the Municipal Code also adds that if an individual or household contracts with a separate hiring entity, that hiring entity is solely liable for any violations of the chapter unless the individual or household interferes with any rights established. This provision ensures that the correct entity will be held liable if the chapter is violated. One amendment to the bill that I would like to to move forward. I moved to amend Council Bill 11 9351 by adding a new Section five entitled Sections one, two, three and four of the ordinance six shall take effect on July 1st, 2019. Second. Thank you. The the amendment to the bill accomplishes a couple of different things. The legislation that I referred to earlier to council councilmember Mosquitoes, Domestic Workers Bill of Rights legislation goes into effect on July 1st, 2019. This allows for a implementation that will be led by members of the workers board. It's going to be important to also include discussion around this element. In addition, the there are some there are some funding issues associated with this legislation. There's a fiscal note that the implementation of this legislation, education and outreach, is about $75,000. And that's something that I'm hoping that will take up in the budget. So there's both sort of a bureaucratic and technical reason for aligning the implementation date, but there's also an important fiscal reason for it. So we have first an amendment before we speak to the base. Legislation in council member Herbold amended the Section five, which is basically sections one, two, three and four. The ordinance today, the effective date. And I assume implicit in that is the re numbering and the remaining sections accordingly. Correct that amendment. So just on the amendment, any questions on the amendment? I'm just on the amendment. All those in favor of the amendment. Please vote I. I oppose. The ayes have it. So we have now base legislation. There's been a minute. Councilmember skater, would you like to speak to it? Thank you, Mr. President. I do want to start with a huge appreciation, a note of appreciation for Councilmember Horrible. She's taken this incredible component of the policy and made sure that it was expedited, that we had the full stakeholders at the table for conversations, that we work with the domestic workers and the hiring entities to make sure that this critical component was part of the Domestic Workers Bill of Rights. You called that a small part of the solution. But in essence, this is the backbone of the domestic worker protections that I think many domestic workers wanted to see. Every single story, yes. Included stories about wage theft, included stories about the need for rest breaks and meal breaks, protection from having documents withheld, the desire to have a table so there could be ongoing negotiation. But every single story included an element of harassment, intimidation and retaliation. And what you've been able to pass today really completes this puzzle. I just want to say thank you for your steadfast leadership, also for taking a critical look at what legislation or what words we needed to have in this component of the legislation so that we could align the implementation of midyear next year so that the domestic workers board can think through the outreach plan, which is going to be critical with Office of Labor Standards and the Office of Civil Rights to work directly with our community partners, many of whom are here today, so we can do the outreach needed so that we can avoid confusion and not knowing which policies apply at which time , and also making sure that the department really thinks through rulemaking with the stakeholders at the table, as you heard, and the national vice president for the United Farm Workers, Eric Nicholson, say these policies, the reason that we need these policies today is because domestic workers and farm workers were intentionally left out of national, state and local labor protections, left out for racist and sexist reasons. I wish we could implement these yesterday. I wish we can implement them tomorrow. But I think through the legislation that you've created, the ability for us to make sure that stakeholders are at the table, we will implement these in 2019 with the thoughtful, proactive approach that the stakeholders have been able to bring to the table. So for me, this is a huge component that would not have been possible without your leadership. Council Member Herbold Thank you. And without the leadership of the direct lives experience from the lives that you've heard have been impacted without this legislation. So mill grass has been a level what is that, a kick or nosotros? Grass there's been a level versus a is eagerness to pursue courage. Communities encouraged by law to take DNA. And in this day in the moment though and so and so be a great supporter. Thank you so much for all of your courage that you showed today and every day of your life. This is possible because of your work and your words. Thank you. Kathryn Skeeter. Would anyone like to say some closing words? And then, if not, Councilmember Herbert would like to close the discussion. I just want to give some additional thanks. So just echoing councilman mosquitoes words about your lived experiences, you are truly the best advocates for your cause. And thank you so much again for the courage and humbling us all with sharing your stories. In addition to thanking Councilmember Skated for her, for her leadership and her giving me this opportunity to take to play a role in this policy. I also want to thank a couple other folks. I want to thank Lauren often from the Office of Civil Rights. I want to thank Asha, then cut to Ramon. I get that one of these days from council central staff, I want to thank Shannon Perez Darby from my office and Central Perk from Councilmember Muscat, his office and the many, many advocates that have been working on this legislation. Very good. Thank you very much. Okay. Please call the role on the passage of the amended bill. Badger Gonzalez be herbold i. Johnson Macheda. I. O'Brien Somewhat. President Harrell. High. Eight in favor and. Unopposed bill passed in Cheryl Senate. Who? The three item seven through 11.

AN ORDINANCE granting ARE-SEATTLE NO. 33, LLC a permit to construct, maintain, and operate below-grade private utility lines under and across Roy Street, west of 8th Avenue North, and Dexter Avenue North, north of Mercer Street, for a 15-year term, renewable for one successive 15-year term; specifying the conditions under which this permit is granted; and providing for the acceptance of the permit and conditions.

SeattleCityCouncil_08092021_CB 120135

Agenda Item 13 Council Bill 120135 Granting our Seattle number 33 LLC a permit to construct, maintain and operate below grade private utility lines under a prosperous street. The committee recommends that the bill pass. Thank you. As chair of the committee, I'll provide the committee report. Council 120135 would grant final approval for a term permit to build, operate and maintain private utility tunnels under city streets for a district energy system in South Lake Union. The tunnels would collect waste heat from Seattle Public Utilities Wastewater System and deliver it to buildings on three blocks planned and under development. The tunnels would run below Dexter Avenue, North and Royce Street. Conceptual approval for the district energy system was granted already under Resolution 31980 in December 2020. The Seattle Department of Transportation has negotiated the provisions of the term permit consistent with the conditions of Resolution 31980. Today's Council Bill 120135 would grant approval for an initial 15 year term, which can be renewed. Our committee voted unanimously to recommend approval. Are there any comments on this bill? Okay. Well, the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill. Bluest Eye. Alice. Yes. Must gather. I want. Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbold. US quartet. I. Counselor. President. Pro Tem Peterson. High eight. In favor and unopposed. Thank you. The bill passes and the chair will sign it with the clerk, please, and fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf. Will the clerk please read item 14 into the records? Agenda Item 14 Council Bill 120136. They came in the alley and walked 21 years of Sarah aid bills second edition founded by Bell Street seven, Robert Blanchard Street and Eighth Avenue in Salt Lake Union and accepting a property use and development agreement on the petition of ACORN Development LLC, the committee recommends that the bill pass.

AN ORDINANCE revising the appointment process for the districting committee; and amending Ordinance 5327, Section 1, as amended, and K.C.C. 1.22.010.

KingCountyCC_10062020_2020-0298

Thank you. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to a motion 2020 299. We will expedite that to full council next Tuesday and place it on consent. It takes us to item ten. Our final agenda item for today is a motion that would revise the appointment process for the District and Committee, which redraws the County Council district boundaries every ten years informed by the annual the decimal census. Patrick Hamacher, the director of Council Initiatives, is here to provide this report. Mr. Hamacher, the screen is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and council members. Good afternoon. Patrick Hamacher, Council Staff. The materials for this item are at the end of your packet and they begin on page 163. The county charter, as you noted in. Your introduction. Requires that the district for the offices of County Council member be redrawn every ten years. The next time they need to be redrawn is by the end of 2021. So coming up prior to 2008 and the passage of Initiative 26, the office was actually a partizan office. So council members would run as as a representative of their political parties. Council Initiative 26 made the offices nonpartizan. However, the code has never been updated to remove the partizan references from the code section pertaining to redistricting and actually calls for PARTIZAN appointments to the District and Commission to fully understand what the district doing process requires. You actually need to reference state law, the county charter and county code. And so just by way of background, a quickly go through that state law and the charter. And now on the bottom of page one, 63 state law and the charter both require require a district due process every ten years. RTW 29 876 actually lays out criteria that any district team process must meet and the highlights of those districts district requirements are laid out on the bottom there. I'll go over them very quickly. The population in each district must be as equal as possible. Districts must be as compact as possible. Districts must be geographic. Must be a geographical contiguous area. Population data cannot be used to favor or disfavor one racial group. Population data must be not used to favor or disfavor one political party. And to the extent possible, districts should use existing natural boundaries and preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest. So those are the criteria laid out in state law. And largely what that does in Washington state is prevent some of the kind of crazy, crazily drawn, gerrymandered districts that you might see, particularly with congressional districts and other states. The district can process also has criteria laid out in the county charter. So I've now moved on to page 164. On the top of the page there, Section 650 of the county charter lays out the criteria of the district being process, and it requires a district in committee to be appointed every ten years. The next one, as we noted, coming up at the beginning of 2021. The council under this process appoints four members, and those four members appoint the fifth member who serves as chair of the district being committee. The committee also needs to select what the charter calls a district master. In this case, think of it as a person or firm that actually is responsible for drawing the maps and coming up with coming up with a district to report which which approves the new districts. And the work must be complete by December 31st of the year, the committee begins. So in this case, it would need to be completed by December 31st of next year. Finally, the part that is covered by this ordinance, Section 122 of the King County Code places additional criteria on the membership and the appointment process for the district in committee. There are two key provisions there. Each council member may nominate someone from the council members political party and the county council shall appoint two Republican and two Democratic nominees to the committee. So those two provisions are essentially the bulk of what's in Section 122 of the code, and both would be changed by the proposed ordinance as before the before the committee now just four years. And because it's a relatively straightforward matter, I've actually included towards the bottom of page 164, I've included how each section would look as affected by this ordinance. And so the first section would be amended to add a little bit of process around the appointment process, and it would include new language that it would see by December 1st, December 1st of the December preceding a district in committee process. So that's a little clunky, but it's because of how it's drawn. So it would be this December by written notice to the chair of the council. Each council member may nominate a person to serve on the district committee. So what gets removed there is of the council members political party and that the chair of the council show cause to be introduced or introduce a motion for consideration and action by the Council that appoints the District Committee as described in the next section. So that would be the process where the Council would appoint the four members that are the council appointees. Those four members would then go on to appoint the remaining member. The moving to now, page 165, the second section of KCC 122 would be amended to remove, as it's shown there, the requirement that two appointees from each of the Democratic and Republican Party parties be nominated and instead replace that language with language cover that states. In appointing the members of the committee, the Council should consider equity and attempt to represent the demographic, geographic and political diversity of the county, and also that appointees to the committee should have a history of civic or community engagement and have the necessary background and skill to actively participate in the district due process. So those are the bulk of the changes. Those are all of the changes actually that would be made by this ordinance. And it would bring the. Remaining section or the King County Code in compliance with the Charter as it was amended by Initiative 26. So taken together in the last section of this staff report, I just want to cover what the new process for districting would look like if this ordinance were passed. So step one, by December of this year, each of the County Council members may nominate by, in writing to the chair of the council, someone to serve on the committee. The Council chair would then introduce or caused to be introduced a motion appointing four four members of the committee. The charter lays out that those members must be appointed by the end of January of next year. So sometime between December and the end of January, you would need to appoint the four members. Those four members will then vote to pick the fifth member of the District Committee who would serve as chair. By April, the committee, the district committee should appoint the district master. And by the if for some reason the District Committee can't appoint the District Master by April one. The Council is then charged with selecting someone by the end of May. Hopefully that wouldn't come into play, but it's at least in the code structure, a section of the charter. And then by December 31, the District D.M. submits a plan to the committee. The committee must then adopt the plan with or without amendment within 15 days. So technically, this process could trickle over into the very early part of 2022 if the district master does not submit the plan until the very end of 2021, and that once the plan is approved by the committee and submitted to the clerk, the those become the new council districts. So in terms of the election schedule, these would probably not be the council districts until the 2023 council elections, unless somehow the district committee completed its work incredibly quickly, in other words, before the open enrollment or the registration period for the 2021 elections. Which seems incredibly unlikely considering the work they would have to do. That concludes my staff report. Mr. Chair. Leonard Cohen from our legal counsel, it makes sense from the prosecutor's office, did a lot of help in helping to prepare this ordinance. So I just want to recognize their work as well, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Hamacher. Questions, colleagues. Councilmember Balducci for a motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, of adoption of proposed ordinance number 2020 DASH 0298 with a do pass recommendation. Councilmember Bell Duties Moved Adoption of Motion 2020 298 with the due pass recommendation. Discussion. Let me speak to it. Councilmember Banducci. Mr. Harker covered this really pretty well, but just for the purposes of those following law, this comes forward because we do every ten years adopt district boundaries for the districts within the Kane County Council. And ten years ago our charter had been changed to remove reference to these positions as being partizan, Democrat or Republican. But it wasn't fully implemented yet. Half of the council had switched over to nonpartisan, but there were still members on the council who were nominally Democrats and Republicans. And so the last charter commissioner and chair of the last District Commission retained this language around appointing two Democrats and two Republicans. But we are fully nonpartisan now, as is the rest of all of the elected officials in acting, as are the rest of all the elected officials in King County. So this proposal thinks our ordinance and our process with our charter, and because the only requirements to be appointed in the ordinance prior to this change were that two of them be Democrats and two of them be Republicans. We have added some some language that is flexible enough that we can select people who are good and who bring a variety of backgrounds, experience, etc.. But, you know, also tell us a little bit about qualifications. So I urge your support and will be as we get through budget and all the other budgets that Councilmember Caldwell's was laying out today, we will also be starting to stand up our redistricting committees. Thank you. See no further questions. And would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Belushi. Hi. Councilmember DEMBOSKY. Hi. Councilmember Dunn. I. Councilmember calls I council member Lambert high council member of the growth I. Councilmember one right there. I. Councilman Rizal. I. Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the vote is 19 zero noes. Thank you. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation to motion 2020 298. We will expedite that to full council next Tuesday and put it on consent. That concludes the action items in today's agenda. I want to make sure that we haven't lost any votes due to technical difficulties. Madam Clerk, do you have all votes recorded? Yes, Mr. Chair. All votes have been recorded. All right, with all votes recorded and knowing of no other business to come before the council, I want to thank everyone who has participated in today's council meeting and we are adjourned. Thank you, everyone.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and State of Colorado, Department of Higher Education, by the State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education for the Use and Benefit of the Community College of Denver for the administration of the WORKNOW program for construction-related careers. Approves an intergovernmental agreement with Community College of Denver (CCD) for $564,000 and for one year to administer the WORKNOW program, a collaborative workforce development initiative to recruit, support and train residents in construction and construction-related careers, citywide (OEDEV-2018). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 2-25-19. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 11-28-18.

DenverCityCouncil_02042019_18-1421

12 eyes, one abstention. Council Resolution 1528 has been adopted. Guzman-Lopez okay, if we go to Councilwoman Kennedy for a comment and then I'll come to you for the bill you want. Yes, the bill. Okay. So, Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Councilwoman, can you go ahead with your comment? Thank you so much, Mr. President. One more good news, bill today, which is a contribution from the city and county of Denver to the Work Now program. And this is a program that really came from a very robust set of community conversations, probably going back at least three years now as big construction projects were coming to Northeast Denver in particular. A number of residents came forward and said that it was really important for them to have local hiring in some of these big construction projects being done by the state or the city. And the real desire was not just to require that local residents could work on these projects, but that we have a much better way of connecting folks to those jobs. It's one thing to require to hire locally. It's another thing to have a place that screens folks, refers them to the employers and gets them ready to go. And we have a hard working team here within the city, but I think the realization from the community was that it was important that we really have this live outside the city so that it could serve all different projects, maybe state projects, maybe private industry projects. And so what came from that project was this work now collaborative that really brought together construction companies and associations and community members, and they have had huge success. My colleague, Councilwoman Ortega, spent a lot of time in the early phases of thinking about this partnership as well. And I think she's going to I asked if she could do the numbers because she's got the numbers in front of her. And I don't. But I just this is a big investment from our city. It's a half million dollars. And it's something that I think really has been a dream from the community for a long time. We had a recession the last time we got close to doing this kind of construction hiring. And all of a sudden there were a lot of out of work construction workers. So we stopped training. And that brought us to today where we have an aging construction workforce and a shortage. So in some ways, I feel like this contract, as small as it seems, that a half million dollars is kind of like a ten year in the making vision of how to really train workers on the big projects that we build. So I just want to thank the Community College of Denver for allowing their team to be so active in the community. And with government working on something like this, it's really out of the box. It's not a classroom project and I love that our community college was so willing to do this. And to Katrina word in particular, who really brought this vision to a reality. So and I'll I'll just, you know, with enthusiasm, it's on consent. We're not going to pull it out. But I'm really excited to see this bill moving forward. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Quinn. Each Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. So to all of what Councilwoman Canete just said, I want to say ditto, but I want to acknowledge Marcus, who is in the audience tonight, who has been working diligently on this project since he got here to his work with the city, as well as Tony, his his cohort at OED, who has helped sit down with us through many meetings to make sure that we actually had language in our office, language in the contracts that is now setting goals for hiring for apprentices, making sure that we are training people in these livable wage jobs that has a career path and exciting to learn. A presentation was given to us last week at our Business Committee talking about how many people are in this pipeline right now, and the numbers keep growing as we all keep talking about it and advertising this program. But we have over 700 people right now in this work now program, various stages. So we've got some that are working with some of our pre-employment organizations to get people job ready. We have a number of people that are in the apprenticeship programs before they're ready to go work on the job site. And we have a number of them that are also working on the job sites. And, you know, the beauty of this is that it's creating our trained workforce that will be here in place for the many bond projects that we have that will be built out over a period of time. We have seen a number of applications that have come forward before this body from the River Rail Ilitch site to the Denver Bronco parking lot. I could go on and on. Testing them, but those create potential opportunities as well that will ensure that these very workers who are getting trained will have a pipeline of job opportunities for them to plug into. So again, I want to echo praises for Katrina work and the folks at Community College of Denver who really stood up this Work Now program that is not only being used on the I-70 project, but it's being used at National Western. We were going to be utilizing it on the Convention Center and all the other big fun projects. So I just want to say thanks to our team within the city for really the dedication and commitment and the the ironic part about all of this is this is a program that the city had done historically. But, you know, over time we saw a decline in in construction projects in our city. And as we're ramping up with well in excess of $6 billion worth of construction projects, it's important that we create the opportunity for other people in our community to benefit from the not only the construction projects, but the wealth that's being built around our community that needs to trickle down to our communities as well. Thank you, Mr. President.

Order for a hearing to review Rental Unit Conditions, Standards, and Inspections in the City of Boston. On motion of Councilors Breadon and Edwards , Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilor Bok as a co-sponsor.

BostonCC_09292021_2021-1024

Thank you. Docket 1024. Councilors Braden and Edwards offered the following a lot of for a hearing to review rental unit conditions, standards and inspections in the city of Boston. Thank you. The Chair recognizes the district councilor from Brighton, Councilor Liz Braden. You have the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to suspend Rule 12 and add Councilor Baucus, a third original co-sponsor of Docket zero 1 to 4, please. Councilor Brayton seeks suspension of Rule 12 and the adoption of Councilor Baucus original co-sponsor. Seeing no objection, Councilor Brock is hereby added. Please proceed, Councilor Braden. Thank you and thank you to my colleagues, Councilor Edwards and Bach, for their partnership on this issue. This hearing order is to invite the Inspection Services Department to review and the enforcement to a municipal code covering inspection and re-inspection of rental units and rental dwelling unit standards. We have just concluded the annual rituals around in September, the rental lease renewal turnover cycle and colloquially called Alston Christmas. And I've heard from a significant number of Alston Brighton tenants about rental unit conditions and questionable compliance with city regulations. We must review the city's current property registration and inspection practices, and my concern is not so much with the inspection and registration of exempted property owner occupied units, but particularly with larger corporate and absentee landlords who have become chronic offenders, allowing violations to pile up and having the means to pay off a fine after a fine without actually improving living conditions in their units. Under current rental unit registration practices, larger multi property owners have not are not required to disclose information of all individuals and entities with business ownership interests. The public does not have any meaningful way or convenient access to rental unit registration registry information, making it difficult to hold chronic offenders accountable. This conversation will be an opportunity to check in with ESD on the tools and resources that they need to implement better solutions to effectively rein in bad actors and to take advantage of the current. And they take advantage of the current system in order to improve living conditions. And we really need to use the system to improve living conditions for renters across our city. Thank you. Thank you very much. The chair now recognizes the first original co-sponsor, Councilor Lydia Edwards. Councilor Edwards, the floor is yours. Thank you very much, Mr. President. This has been one of the most consistent conversations I've had since I've joined this body, and that is where working with Estee to figure out that the laws that we have on the books are actually getting enforced. And I remember and many of the budget hearings, we often ask, Do you have the Resources Council? Flynn asked, Do you have the Resources Council clarity? Do you have the resources to enforce the new laws? And I think this is just a check in about that, especially as we're in the middle of a transition and we're dealing with more and increased rental units. But we also are wondering if they're really complying with the law. I think we recently just had a wonderful conversation or introduced a hearing order for making sure that property owners are being held accountable. We want to make sure that their rental renters are actually being seen and being tenants that we even know where they exist. I think at the end of the day, one of the best things we can do is have a robust list of all the rental units, know the conditions of them in the city of Boston, so that when we go to push new policy, we're able to add one email or one mass mailing, genuinely get to all the tenants and landlords at one time. And having worked at the Office of Housing Stability, oftentimes that was the way in which we used this list. It wasn't just assess fines. It was honestly to communicate. There is a pandemic. There's a new law about how you need to file your notice to quit. All of these different things are more efficient if we have a role. Best list that is up to date. And honestly, I think the ability for ESD or any of the city department to check in and get to all of the all of the excuse me, the apartments in the city is also been a growing not so much concern, but something we still continue to work on. We're still trying to actually get through the first level, I think, of inspecting all of the units in the city of Boston. So we're excited to just not criticize, not throw under the bus, but really figure out honestly, how are we going to do this together as a team? Thank you. Thank you very much. The chair now recognizes the third original co-sponsor, the district council from Beacon Hill. Councilor Bach, the floor is yours. Thank you so much, Councilor O'Malley. And I'm really proud and pleased to be joining Councilor Brayton and Edwards on this. I think thinking about last week's filing, in this week's filing and sort of taking that two track effort, because on the one hand, I think we would get more problematic property owners attention if we enacted what we talked about last week, which is an increase in municipal fines. But in the meantime, we've got you know, we want to pursue that, but we also want to use the tools that we have to hand now. And I think that, you know, I came from a Problem Properties Taskforce meeting this morning in Mission Hill. And I just think that again and again we run into the issue of, okay, in theory, there's this thing on the books, but has I followed up? Where are we? And I think a lot of the housing inspection materials specifically are still kept on paper in a way that can make it really hard to to have that bird's eye view that helps us get at the bad actors. And and I think we just have to all recognize that it's you know, there's been a lot of conversation about how tenants get squeezed by rent rates. And that's very true and real and real pressure. But also, like tenants get squeezed when, you know, there's lots of hidden fees. They're having to spend a ton of their time to harass their landlord to get a basic thing that's supposed to come as part of their apartment. You know, they're living with the stress, like, you know, the bad health conditions of a substandard unit. So there's a lot of ways that the power imbalance of a landlord tenant relationship can affect the lives of the majority of Bostonians who do rent besides besides just rent. And I think that it gives our our responsible, good landlords in the city. You know, it frustrates them to no end. I know as well, I'm on the property task force call with a number of them in Mission Hill. And I think that, you know, everybody in the community loses when we've got landlords who feel like they can just ignore these complaints and these real, real quality of life issues for Bostonians and and not have it go anywhere. So really looking forward to this hearing and hoping that we can figure out how together we use our existing regulations to escalate things more effectively and solve more of these problems. So just again, want to thank Councilors Edwards and Creighton for their partnership on this. Thank you, Councilor Buck. The chair now recognizes the district council from South Boston. Councilor Flynn, the floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. President. And please add my name. I just want to say thank you to the Makers for sponsoring this important hearing. I think Councilor Edwards said it best, as we also need to make sure we have the inspectors that will actually go out and do the work and inspect the properties, including Airbnbs. These are a lot of quality of life issues, but I think it's upon us as a city council during the budget process. We just can't we shouldn't accept any more from department heads that they have the necessary funding in their budget. We have to push back a little bit on that. No city department wants to come down here and say they have all the necessary funds to do their job because that's not accurate. We need to be more aggressive as a body, myself included, in pushing back in and saying, No, you don't have enough money to do inspections and that you need more money and to do this job right, we have to make sure the money is in the budget so these inspectors, as inspection inspectors, can go around and do their job, whether it's checking on tenants or doing Airbnb related issues. But at the budget process, process it's critical that we fund. These programs and services. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Counselor Flynn. Would any Madam Clerk, please I. Counselor Ed Flynn as a co-sponsor. Any further discussion on docket 1024? Would any councilors wish to add their name? Madam Kirklees at Councilor Arroyo. Councilor Baker. Councilor Campbell. Councilor Side B George. Councilor Flaherty. Councilor me here. Please add the Chair's name to Councilor Wolf and docket 1024 will be referred to the Committee on Housing and Community Development. I'd now like to invite Councilor Campbell to please take over the dais. And as she comes up, Madam Clerk, would you please read docket 1025.1025?

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance amending the City Retail Sales Tax Article, Article II, Chapter 53 of the Revised Municipal Code and the City Use Tax Article, Article III, Chapter 53 of the Revised Municipal Code to exempt the passthrough of the federal excise tax imposed on trucks, trailers, and tractors from taxation. Amends Chapter 53 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code (DRMC) to exempt federal excise tax from being included in the taxable purchase price for heavy trucks and trailers. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-27-19. Amended 9-16-19 to clarify that “use” tax is under Article III of Chapter 53 of the D.R.M.C.

DenverCityCouncil_09162019_19-0863

hearing once that goes from the Landmark Preservation Commission tomorrow. But that process needs to happen first. So if anyone has any questions, please feel free to contact my office. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. And, Councilman Sawyer, will you please put Bill 863 on the floor? I move that council bill 19 dash 0863 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. Councilwoman Black, your motion to amend. Thank you, Mr. President. I move to amend Council Bill 19. Dash 863 in the following. Particulars on page 197, strike article two and replace with Article three. Thank you. Has that been. We need a motion in the second, or did we get it, Madam Secretary, alone? We haven't. All right. It's been moved and seconded. Comments by members of council. Councilman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. The purpose. Of this amendment. Is to clarify. That use tax is under Article three of Chapter. 53 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code. All right. So nobody else in the queue at the comment. Madam Secretary, roll call on the amendment. Black. I said about that. I swear. I. Gillmor, i. Herndon, i. I. Cashman I. Coinage I. Ortega, I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer, I. Torres, I. Mr. President. I. I'm secretary. Please cause of voting announced the results. 1339. As council 863 has been amended. Councilwoman Sawyer We now need a motion to order published as amended. I move that council bill 19 dash 0863 be ordered published as amended. Thank you. Comments by members of council. I don't think we need to go through this again. We'll just vote. Secretary roll call. Black Eye. CdeBaca. Eye for an. Eye. Gilmore. Eye. Herndon Eye. Haynes Cashman. High Carnage. Ortega Y. Sandoval Eye. Sawyer Eye. Torres Eye. Mr. President, I am. I'm secretary. Please close voting. Announce the results. 3939 is comfortable. 863 has been ordered published as amended. Final reading will be on September 23rd. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and Councilman Sawyer, will you please for Council Bill 874 on the floor.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation; authorizing the acceptance of a gift of a timber pavilion structure from the Seattle Parks Foundation to be installed in Occidental Square Park for public use.

SeattleCityCouncil_03112019_CB 119466

Agenda item three Cancel 119 466 relating to the Department of Parks and Recreation, authorizing the acceptance of a gift of a timber pavilion structure from the Seattle Parks Foundation to be installed in Occidentale Square Park for public use. Committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you. So as you heard, council bill 119466 authorizes the acceptance of a gift of a timber pavilion structure from SEAL Parks Foundation to be installed in Occidentale Square Park for public use. Sale Parks Foundation will be making the timber pavilion and making the timber pavilion a gift to million dollar value to the city of Seattle and the Seattle Department of Parks and Rec. The timber pavilion will replace the current kiosk building and function as an information and concierge station for Park and Pioneer Square visitors. A large grass roof will I love this sit gracefully above the structure and extend into the park, providing opportunities for play, performance and classes in a beautiful covered space , the new pavilion will provide for enhanced park activation. The SEAL Parks Foundation is working in partnership with the Alliance for Pioneer Square and I believe Friends of the Waterfront. So with that, are there any comments? All right. Please call on the passage of the bill. Sergeant Major Gonzalez. Herbold. Hi. Johnson O'Brien. Hi. President. Whereas I seven and favorite nine oppose the bill passes and the chair will sign. So let's play. We have four appointments. You want to read items four through seven to the record.

AN ORDINANCE relating to surveillance technology implementation; authorizing approval of uses and accepting the surveillance impact report for the Seattle Police Department’s use of Computer-Aided Dispatch technology.

SeattleCityCouncil_04192021_CB 120027

Agenda Item 12 Council Bill 120027 An ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation authorizing approval of uses and accepting the Surveillance Impact Report for the Seattle Police Department's use of computer aided dispatch technology. The committee recommends the bill pass as amended. Thank you so much, Casper Petersen, back to you to walk us through this. Thank you, counselor. President, colleagues, this is the fourth of the five bills and this deals with the computer aided dispatch technology and its basic use in terms of the 911 dispatch and very important to how the police department operates in dispatch as calls. So we did ask questions during committee and we got the answers we needed to move ahead and we did amended as well. Thank you. Thank. Thanks so much. Any additional comments on this bill? Hearing no additional comments on the bill will occur. He's called the roll on the passage of the bill. Her bold s. Whereas i. Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Mascara. I. Peterson. I. Silent. Yes. Council President Gonzalez, I know you didn't favor not opposed. Thank you so much. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Item 13 Will the clerk read item 13 into the recurring agenda?

A MOTION creating the legislative branch equity and social justice team and adopting its mission statement.

KingCountyCC_09192018_2018-0282

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. This legislation would create the Legislative Branch Equity and Social Justice team and adopt its mission statement. And Andrew Kim is going to present the basics on this as well. Thank you. Mr.. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, Andrew, can we counsel send your staff the staff report for this item begins on page 45 of your packet by way of background. In 2012, a legislative branch, equity and social justice team was convened consisting of representatives from all legislative branch agencies, council member offices and Legislative Central Staff to provide input on the annual legislative branch ESG Work Plan. The ESG Work Plan was a vehicle that was introduced through the Council adopted ESG ordinance in 2010. Since 2012, with the exception of the current biennium, the Council has adopted either an annual or by a biennial legislative branch, ESG or plan by motion. Attachment two to the staff report on page 496 includes a copy of the 2015 2016 Legislative Branch ESG Work Plan. Since convening in 2012, the Legislative Branch ESG team has broadened its scope of work by facilitating lunch learners lunch and learns, providing a safe venue for legislative branch employees to discuss and engage in conversations related to ESG . Being a liaison to the county's ESG Inter Branch team and leading the efforts to take action on the commitments that were identified in the work plan. Since its first meeting, the team has not had any funding for its activities. However, for 2018, the team received a $6,800 grant from the Office of ESG to fund ESG related training and learning events such as the recent ESG Professional Development Training Session and the sexual harassment training session. The proposed motion before you would establish the legislative branch ESG team that would include representatives from all legislative branch independent agencies, the Flood Control District Council member offices and legislative central staff. The motion would also adopt the team's mission statement to establish the team's organizational structure and identify its scope of work that includes drafting a work plan. The. The proposed motion would also ensure a safe environment for all team members to fully participate in all our team activities without repercussion or concern of impacting their primary legislative branch responsibilities. And that concludes my remarks, Mr. Chair. All right. Very good. Councilman, who would like to start off the presentation from the dais on this item? No. One Council member, McDermott, would like to put it before us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of Adoption of 2018 to 8222. You are the prime on it, and would you like to speak briefly to it beyond Andrew's remarks? Yeah, I'm Andrew. Some of the legislation itself, we've had a historic ESG group within the legislative branch, and I think this is a very good step in codifying, putting into code practice and the work that we know is ongoing. Very good. Other remarks, Councilmember Gossett and Councilman Raquel Wells. Thank you. Ms.. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Adding on to Councilmember Mike Darling is that I think that this ordinance or allow us encourage us facilitators are doing a better job of developing clear goals for our legislative branch, equity and social justice team. And also it having a potential a plan, even a more effective role in a larger King County government ESG team, because they're going to be asked to be a little more clear and crisp on what it is that we see. Equity and social justice efforts being in relationship to development of legislative policy are government wide policies that move forward. Our commitment to making considerations around equity and social justice and the development of all major public policies in our government. So I look forward to us paying that kind of paying better attention and giving better focus and guidelines for the development of this team. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Councilmember Cole Wells. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I strongly support this. I'm really pleased with all that's been going on way before I arrived here, and I've enjoyed the events that have been sponsored by our legislative team. But I'm just curious, Andrew, maybe you can help. You mentioned a grant. Would there are there budget implications for this legislation if it were to be approved? There are no direct budget implications. The Office of the Council appropriated funds to the Office of Equity and Social Justice, and they've had those funds available for other departments and agencies to apply to advance some ESG related topics. And the the legislative branch applied or the ESG team, the current ESG team applied for that grant and received that grant just for this year. Just so just for this year. But the next biennium, would we need to apply for another grant depending on what happens in the budget? Or would we be able to just include something in the budget? There's been any discussion on that there? There hasn't been any discussion. The Office of ESG. May we initiate such a grant program again for next biennium? We would have to see the their budget proposal to see if those funds are included in the executive proposed. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right, Councilmember Gossett. Thank you. I thought that was a good question by way of example. And the guy that runs this professor at the University of California at Berkeley, John Power, has done really excellent writing on equity and social justice and how to make it work and various governments across the country. We would like to try to get the authorization from the County Council to bring him up as a speaker. So that by itself probably costs five or $7,000. So it's the only source for that the SJ office offices of the County Government as a whole budget or can we use some county funds to bring special speakers just for our legislative staff? Councilman. So there's currently no budget in place for the GSA team. But should the council want such a speaker to come for the next biennium? You're definitely open to include a line item in the Council's or the legislative branch as budget two to be used for the term by Mr. Powell. I thank you. Marco. How do we call the rule on this one? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Bertucci. Councilmember done. Councilmember Gossett II. Councilmember Caldwell, Councilmember Lambert. Hi. Councilmember McDermott, Councilmember of the girl. Councilmember one right there. Mr. Chair. Right, Mr. Chair, the vote is nine eyes, no nos. Okay. Why don't we expedite that and have it on the regular calendar since it kind of goes with the other one? All right, colleagues, that's all I have for today. I know you're disappointed and a little bit overly market. Do you think that our motion approving the minutes, despite the lack of a quorum since no quorum call was made, is appropriate, will stand. Yes, Mr. Cherri. All right. Very good reminder to you all that because the committee stand down, are meetings moved to Monday morning? The next meeting is scheduled for October 1st, preliminarily at 9:30 a.m. here in chambers on Monday. That's on Monday, yeah. Depending on the volume of the agenda and what your schedules are, we may look at adjusting start time, but my

A RESOLUTION identifying proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to be considered for possible adoption in 2022 and requesting that the Office of Planning and Community Development and the Seattle Planning Commission review and make recommendations about proposed amendments.

SeattleCityCouncil_08022021_Res 32010

Agenda item for resolution 32010. Identify and propose comprehensive plan amendments to be considered for possible adoption in 2022 and requesting the Office of Planning and Community Development and the Seattle Planning Commission Review and make recommendations about proposed amendments. The Committee recommends that the resolution be adopted. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk, because my address when I handed back over to you as this is an item related to your committee. I think it comes President. This is the annual comprehensive plan docket setting resolution, which sets the docket of comprehensive plan amendments that will be considered next year in 2022. This resolution provides predict predictability and transparency to the public and requests that OK'd in the Seattle Planning Commission review and make recommendations on the comprehensive plan amendments that Council intends to consider next year. I hope this year amendments can be submitted for by for council consideration by members of the public or by council members. The Land Use and Neighborhoods Committee and central staff consider amendments based on criteria the Council has set has previously set by resolution, and this year Council's central staff, the Office of Planning and Community Development and Seattle Planning Commission. We're all in agreement on the recommendations for docket ing of within this resolution. Two amendments are added to the docket by this resolution. An amendment from Council Member Lewis to remove an arterial street designation from West Florencia Street between Third Avenue North been in for background and reference. We cannot put traffic calming measures on arterial streets. And if anyone's driven on West Orange here, we know that this street needs. Traffic calming and it's a very narrow street. We also have an amendment from myself that would add language to the comprehensive plan to encourage the living. Putting a lid on freeways to reconnect communities and create new open space and buildable land. There are six other amendments proposed and were deemed as not meeting the criteria for docking. One of these is James Gracey. You did call in and spoke up about your project, a project that I think has great merit. Unfortunately, the comprehensive plan is not the correct vehicle for your reasons, since it is a single property. The proper reasoning process for a one piece of property is the contract rezoning process. This resolution that we are considering today is separate from the annual comprehensive plan amendment process, which we will be taking up in in September. So for reference, we set this resolution for what we will consider in September of 2022. What we are taking up in September of this year, in 2021 was taken up a year ago by resolution in August, July of 2020. So instead, these docketed proposals will be studied in the months to come and again considered in the 2022 round of amendments. Council President Checking with you. Do I need to move to adopt or we are good to go. Those are my that is the committee report on this bill. Great. Thank you so much. Colleagues, any other excuse me, any other comments on this resolution? I have not seen any hands raised. Oh, there we go. Councilmember Hubble, please. All right. I tried to do it electronically, and it's not going as an option. My apologies. I wanted to mention a couple items that are included in this. Moving forward is a longstanding request from some members of the South Park community about the the South Park status as an urban village and the request for a report to council as described in some resolutions associated with that may take years ago. So I really appreciate that this amendment was included. Also want to speak to the fact that I'm pleased that the the amendment related to impact fees is is included. And then lastly, well, there's actually two more. Two more points as it relates to a transportation element that hasn't moved forward, because I think it's considered it wasn't considered because it was a repeat I repeat amendment. And that is specifically the event, the amendment in the transportation element of the comp plan to minimize damage from heavy vehicles . Just want to note that this is really an ongoing issue as it relates to the condition of the streets, specifically around areas where we have increased the use of transit and and also in areas where other types of long, large vehicle street vehicles are using the streets are just calling out the streets around Westwood Village as well as many in South Park. And so just want to flag my my interest in finding some way to work on this issue moving forward. And then lastly, member Strauss, thank you for staying request not move forward regarding an amendment for a proposed housing project in District one. I think we all agree that the vision for this property aligns with many other city goals related to neighborhood access, building, community wealth and combating displacement. I know OPC has stated that they are interested in working collaboratively with the property owner to identify other potential options for the site. And as Councilmember Strauss mentioned, a contract rezoning is one approach, another another approach that OPC has identified. Is the recent legislation passed that allows for affordable housing on religious property? The proponents of this of this compliant amendment have expressed an interest in building housing that is affordable to under 50% AMI and object states that under the religious property zoning legislation, the current zoning potentially would allow for 30 affordable housing units. And conceivably, this is a more expedient path forward since this Council Bill 12 0081 has already been passed. Conceivably, this might be a more expedient approach to meeting these goals rather than a commitment amendment. So looking forward to discussing the efforts and how to move forward with the project components. Thank you. Also. Thank you so much, Councilmember Herbold, Councilman Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to speak briefly to uplift the the hard work of all of the neighbors in the Florencia corridor who have been organizing for years to get some kind of action in this stretch to provide the necessary safety, security and placemaking that that neighborhood would like to do in this war on Shia in the Florencia area, but are currently unable to because of the designation as an arterial. I just wanted to say to everyone, if you're if you folks are listening up there in Florencia who've been organizing around this, we have heard, yeah, this is one more hurdle that that has passed to get some necessary changes in this corridor and have really appreciated working with you. I just wish that this could be happening faster. I definitely want to thank Councilmember Strauss for his leadership and making the time and carving out the space for consideration of this important change and look forward to moving it another step. Thank you so much, Councilor Lewis. Okay. Any other hands? If not, I'm going to let Strauss have the last word. Thank you. Council President, Council member Lewis. In terms of her role, that had great remarks. Well said. And colleagues, this process here is one example of why I have such strict parameters around the Land Use Committee about knowledge of intent, amendments and legislation. Because, as Councilmember Lewis pointed out, for us to make simple changes on the street requires your advance notice before we can even take it to the plant, before we can actually make changes. So thank you, colleagues, for indulging me in my early request for early notice. Thank you. Council President. Thank you so much. All right. Well, the clerk, please call the roll on the adoption of the resolution. Harris I. Lewis Yes. Morales Yes. Macheda. I. Peterson. I so want. Yes. Strauss. Yes. Herbals. Yes. In Council President Gonzalez, I, I'm in favor and and opposed. The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please to fix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Moving now to the report of the Public Safety and Human Services Committee. Will the clerk please read item five into the record? The report is the Public Safety and Human Services Committee Agenda Item five Resolution 32011 approving the 2021 to 2026 revision to the Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. The Committee recommends that the resolution be adopted as amended.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3145 West 31st Avenue in West Highland. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from U-SU-B to U-SU-B1 (allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 3145 West 31st Avenue in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-22-21.

DenverCityCouncil_08162021_21-0689

Councilmember Cashman, will you please put Council Bill six, eight, nine on the floor for final passage? Yes, Council President. I move the council bill 21 689 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for Council Bill 689 is open. May we please have the staff report? And I see we have. It's in here. Go ahead, please. Good evening, everyone. My name is Ed Senate Finance and I'm with CPD. Before you today, we have 30, 31, 45 West 31st Avenue, where the applicant is seeking to rezone a single unit zoned district to a single unit zone district that allows for an accessory dwelling unit. So the site itself is located in Council District on Amanda Sandoval's district in the sorry, in the West Highland neighborhood. So the site itself is just under 8000 square feet. It's a single unit, residential, and they're looking to do an accessory dwelling unit. The site is surrounded by several single unit zone districts. So to the west and to the east, its US hub, which is a single unit, stone district to the north you see a US-EU, a one which is a single unit zone district that allows for an accessory dwelling unit into the south and see us through a. And close proximity. You can see um, x three, which is a mixed use up to three stories. The land use is a single unit residential and as you can see it's predominately single unit and two unit uses in in the vicinity. And the site itself is in the upper left corner. It's a one story home. And as you can see, it's predominately 1 to 2 stories in the neighborhood. It went before the planning board in June. It was approved unanimously and it's before you today. And as a present there no comments have been received for this application. Whenever we're looking at a rezoning case, the Denver zoning code has specific review criteria that I will analyze right now. The first one is consistency with adopted plans, and we're really focusing on two plans, which is comprehensive plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver, L.A. and Transportation Plan of 2019. There are several strategies found in a staff report that this application is consistent with and I will jump into a blueprint. Denver, Brooklyn and Denver classifies this area as urban. And when we look at the future place type, it's classified as low residential, which is predominantly single and two unit uses and accessory dwelling units . 80 use are appropriate and 31st Avenue is a local street, which is primaries are primarily served by residential uses. Blueprint also has a policy in the Langston built form housing policy, which talks about having housing choice through the expansion of accessory dwelling units in all residential areas. And this application is consistent with other review criteria found in the staff report. Therefore, CPD recommends approval based on all findings of the review criteria. Having met and I am available for questions as well as the applicant's representative is on as well. All right. Thank you, Edson. We're going to go ahead and. We have one individual signed up to speak this evening and it's on the virtual platform. And so we'll go ahead and move to our speaker. And it's Jesse. Paris. December 20, 23. I am in favor of the rezoning tonight. I support the accessory dwelling units. When I ran for city council at large in 2019 and 2021, I still continue to support them. We need alternative housing solutions and methods throughout the city. So I support assisted dying units in all this, not just District one. So I'm in favor of this sometimes. Good job, Amanda said of you. Got this. All right. Thank you. Questions for members of Council on Council Bill 689. All right. Seen no questions by members of council. And just wanted to double check. All right. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 689. Council Member Sandoval. Thank you, Mr. President. This map amendment may create another sorry. This matter amendment meets all the criteria. Patty has been very communicative with our office. She reached out a while ago, and I know that my aide, Councilwoman or Naomi, has met with the West Highland Neighborhood Association to see if they would like a legislative rezoning. So we don't have to have these one off rezonings as we're seen. With that, I would ask that everyone support this map amendment this evening. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. And seeing that this does meet the zoning code, the rezoning criteria, I'm happy to support it as well. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 689. Hines. I. We might have to call in Councilman Hines again, council secretary. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres. I black. I see tobacco. Clark I. Saw when. I. Herndon. I cashmere. I can teach. I. Ortega. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 Eyes. 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?

Recommendation to Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement with HdL Coren & Cone in an Amount Not to Exceed $135,000 for Review and Analysis of Property Tax Revenues. (Finance 2410)

AlamedaCC_11152016_2016-3507

In an amount not to exceed 135,000 for review and analysis of property tax revenues. Nebraska. Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I just wanted a little more information about this. What? So this is a steady hello, Ms.. Adair, who's our finance director? Um, uh, this is a study looking into. Well, you can probably tell us that we're capturing all of the property tax. We should, because it's the largest source of the general fund. Is that that correct? So, hello, council members. Madame Mayor Allen, our dear finance director. This particular contract actually provides us with so hd all corn and corn. And what they provide is they assist us with projections of the property taxes. They review the taxes that are assessed by the county in making sure that the city receives its fair share, whether it's for specific properties or things such as equipment and things like that, that is not necessarily secured by, let's say, a single family home. So they look into those and make sure it does come to the city if it's within the city. City limits, if you wish. They also provide us with on the annual basis with a report that breaks down things like general fund related properties and revenues, as well as what used to be a redevelopment agency, currently a successor agency, do still provide us all the information that relates to it. It assists us to also figure out how much money is going to come in in order to pay successor agency obligations. They provide updates. They also provide us with things like This is what we expect next year's assessments will be or what they expect. The CPI increase would be, so they assist cities with that information as well. So it's a variety of services. One of the things that they do is they do sometimes audits. And actually, I guess I would say fortunately for Alameda, within the prior period that they were under the contract, we only had twice that they actually had to go in and do certain corrections. So usually it happens at extra charge outside of regular agreements, but we've only got it twice and the dollar amounts were very minimal. So when you say corrections, does that mean that we. And too much tax. Usually that we didn't get enough or somebody was paying it to another entity, let's say outside of city of Alameda. Let's say it would have may have been Oakland. So they would make sure and recapture those to make sure that she'll comes to the city. So I'm a couple questions. So we've used this firm to do this kind of work in the past. That's correct. And is the compensation structure always the same? Because what caught my eye is that this is a five year contract. Five year. Five years, and we're paying $18,250 per year, plus 25% of the net revenues recovered by the consultant. Is that. That's correct. As and as I mentioned, we only had a twice where they actually had to come in and recover certain property taxes on our behalf within the last five years prior to that. So in I believe the amount was all we received about like $800. So it was very. So it's not likely. It's yes, I mean. I mean. It's possible. But and that's why we have them, because we cannot look at every single property and that's kind of their job. They actually get County Assessor's maps and everything like that and they look whether it's actually paid correctly, whether the appropriate addresses are applied correctly. And then my one request is, can we get an update, say, on an annual basis of what the results of their their review were? I'm sure you. Do. And I think it can probably just be a consent calendar item even. But I would just like to have that. In my city manager just mentioned, we do do it as a part of a budget update. In general, we can incorporate that. But generally when we look at the property taxes for the budget, that's one of the sources that we'll. Rely on other than what we know internally as well within our own, I would say, economy. And so a lot of the information they provide ends up in the budget, in projections and assessing us. And we can do more in the budget about what the long term strategy is from the consultants point of view. I was just more interested in on a year yearly basis, what is it that they were able to uncover? Oh, okay. Like the recovery part? Yeah. Yeah. Can you confirm that there's a cap? I understand there's a cap not to exceed 135,000 overall. That's correct. So the expectation is, as you've mentioned, it's about over a little over $18,000 per year and plus any recoveries. So what we were trying to do is figure out $18,000, how much would that be and give a little bit of buffer in case would you have recoveries that we have to make a payment? So I don't necessarily expect it to be that high and it's obviously limited to a five year period. In addition to that, they do have in year three and four and five a CPI increase for their fees. Actually, $18,000 stayed pretty much consistent with the prior. Five year contract. It actually has increased. So this would be, I think, reasonable that it's, you know, increased and it's increased by California CPI, not even Bay Area CPI, which normally is lower. Thank you. Any other questions. Dear? Thank you. Do we have a motion? I move that we accept the recommendation to authorize the city manager to execute a five year agreement with HDR. Corrine and Cohn. Remember De Sock seconded all this in favor. My motion carries unanimously. Thank you. The next item that was pulled is five F and I pulled that because I wanted to give Alameda point an opportunity actually to share with the public.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 10.51, regulating the operation of electrically motorized boards in business districts in the City of Long Beach, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03012016_16-0202

Thank you. Next item, please. Item 13. Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to Declare Ordinance Amending the Long Beach Municipal Code Relating to relating. Regulating the operation of electrically motorized boards in business districts. Read the first time and lead over for the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading Citywide. Councilmember Price. Thank you. I want to ask my colleagues to support this item. This is an issue of pedestrian safety in only the designated corridors that have been identified. And actually, I think we may add on to those tonight through the course of our discussions. But this is a really important safety issue for those business corridors that want to be pedestrian friendly and offer alternate areas for people on bike, skateboards and hoverboards to move in. It's just not safe to have them on the same sidewalks as the pedestrians. So I urge your support on this item. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. I want to thank Councilwoman Price for bringing this forward and for the language from our city attorney. I do have a couple questions. There are a few areas listed. It does say business improvement districts, but it does not include, when you look at the details, Pine Avenue. Can we include that into this first? Reading the mayor or members of Council Councilmember Gonzales The answer is no. Unless we take it back and do a new first reading next week. What we could do is adopt it tonight and then do an amendment to this ordinance and add any streets or areas. And we could bring that back in a couple of weeks to add the Pine Avenue. If you have specific locations on Pine Avenue you'd like to add. But adding it tonight would I would bring it back as a new first reading next week. So it's the council's discretion on how would you like to handle that. Well, what would be I mean, what would be the I mean, we would just delay we're delaying it anyway. Well, no. If you move forward this evening with first reading as written, it would come back as second reading next week. And then within a week or two after that, we could bring back an amendment to this ordinance, adding the exact location or any of the other locations that council may want to add to this. So you could move forward this evening as is, and we will bring it back and we can talk to your staff and get the location and bring back an amendment to this ordinance right away. Okay. Can you do that, if that's okay with our motion of. I'm sorry? Yes, absolutely. Okay. Great. Thank you. And then I have another just quick question. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. City attorney and Councilman Pryce. I just know a lot of our Point Avenue residents are in downtown. Residents have been very concerned with skateboards. And, of course, this would add to that as well. And so we want to make sure that that's covered. So I appreciate that and look forward to that. My second question, though, is there have been some other like verbiage of of hoverboards, but I've even seen two wheels, self-balancing. Would that have any? I think there was something else. It was called an electronic scooter. So I don't know if that language specifically would need to be in that amendment later on just to ensure that people all know that we're covering the same thing. Yes, we've looked at the state legislation and there is a specific exemption for the Segway type vehicles. And that was asked that we include that exemption for Segways for the downtown specifically, but in other areas and also for those type of emblems that would or are used by mobility impaired folks that need assistance. Those would be allowed under this ordinance. But we believe that the definition meets the hoverboard description and we would. Yes. Based on the state. Perfect. Great. Thank you to answer my questions. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. I'll be supporting this. I just have a question. As I just scan this ordinance, I see a number of areas called out. What are these areas? Many members of the council. These areas are identical to the existing ordinance where it is posted for these skateboards. And so these are the areas that are currently existing in our code that and as we just discussed with the councilperson for the First District. These obviously could be expanded to include other areas if the city council would desire to amend this at a future date. Well well, I just noticed that some of the new bids aren't represented, but I'm actually okay. Our business district hasn't asked for this. I'm okay with it as as it is. So it did. So to be clear, because our business district has Jordan High School right at the heart of it. And I wouldn't want to give any kids any tickets if a kid is riding down with a hoverboard down Atlantic in the Uptown Business District because it's not called out. That kid is not subject to this, am I correct? That is correct. They're not prohibited in that area. Thanks. Israeli public comment on this item. Please come forward. Don. Don are speaking again. I just want to reinforce what Councilmember Gonzales said. Pine Avenue is a very key business district. And so everything from eighth Street on down to Ocean Boulevard, actually Shoreline Drive, even the entire length of Pine Avenue should be included in there. I can understand why all the other business districts, but not Pine Avenue. So please, please do include that. Thank you. Who are these guys? Now you have to identify yourself for the record. Hello. My name is Kiana. I live in the third district. Second Street is a great place to walk around and shop and eat. But when people ride skateboards, invite bikes, it makes it unsafe for walkers, same as for the hoverboards. Please support this item and vote for it. I want to thank the smart and Pretty. Councilwoman Third District. For bringing this item. Thank you. Did your mom write that? Yeah. Do you want to say anything? Say something? No, she didn't write it. Oh, you guys are. You guys are so cute. And the other public comment. This is what happens when working moms don't have childcare. And excuse me, I know she didn't want it because they didn't talk long enough. And they didn't. And and that'll be all. There are no further questions. Larry, could you clear Cassie address. I'm not a skater, dude or into that world, but I've seen on the news, as most people have, some of these hoverboards exploding, catching the fire. I don't know if. What we're exploring here. What if you're covering those? I would certainly want to include in there any prohibitions. Bringing them into any public building. And or on public transit if they're subject to being exploding or catching fire, so forth. I think it's you've got to put the foot on the neck of that instantly and so forth. So if these if that type of device has would have a potential for exploding or catching fire, then it should be banned from the appropriate city office and all city facilities, I should think, and certainly on any Long Beach transit busses. Thank you. Public comment. CNN, please cast your votes. And then, Madam Clerk, please read the next item, please. Motion carries in. That concludes our regular today.

AN ORDINANCE creating the Ruth Woo emerging leaders fellowship program; and adding a new section to K.C.C. chapter 3.12.

KingCountyCC_09062017_2017-0301

Thank you very much. Those are the minutes of our special meeting on page three. Others in favor please say I, i, others opposed. Nay, the minutes are passed. Okay. So that takes us down now to proposed ordinance 2017 0301 and item number five, the ordinance creating the route through Emergency Leadership Program. And so this is sponsored by councilmembers Dombrowski, McDermott and Heidi Puppy. Chuck, would you begin? Thank you, Madam Chair. Heidi Papa, our council staff. The staff report begins on page seven of your packet proposed ordinance 2017 0301 would create a new fellowship program and King County Government to honor the late Ruth Woo for her dedication to public service. To provide some background on Mrs. Woo. She was born on November 28th, 1926, in Kalispell, Montana. To Tom and Ricki Oya. Her father, Tom Oyer, worked on railroad gangs in Montana. After her father died, the family moved to Seattle, where the mother worked as a seamstress and later to an Oregon farm. In 1941, World War Two began and led to the internment of Japanese-Americans. In 1942, Mrs. Wu's family was banished first to the Tool Lake internment camps in California, then to Camp Mini Doka in the Idaho desert. She she graduated from Hunt High School while interned at Camp Minnetonka. After camp she married Hiroyoshi excuse me, only Yama, whom died in 1960. They had two children, Teresa and Janice. In 1975, she married Benjamin Woo, an architect and influential leader in the Seattle Asian community and a father of five. Mr. who died in 2008. In the late 1950s, Mrs. Woo worked as secretary for the city of Seattle Mayor Gordon Clinton. After working as a secretary, she moved to Olympia to work as a receptionist for then Governor Dan Evans. When Governor Dan Evans ran for a third term in 1971, Mrs. Miller offered to campaign for him. Mrs. who managed her first political campaign for Mr. James Oliver in 1975, whom she had met while working at the governor's office while he was running for state Supreme Court Justice. Shortly thereafter, Mrs. who managed Mr. Douglas Stewart's campaign for City of Seattle city attorney. She eventually held a succession of administrative professional positions for elected officials. Mrs. Will passed away on July 13, 2016, in Seattle, Washington. At the age of 89, Mrs. Woo was well known in the Asian-American community with a talent for organizing political campaigns. Mrs. Moon was created credited with shaping the careers of a cadre of notables from both political parties, including former Governor Gary Locke and former King County executive Ron Semmes. The fellowship program that would be created by proposed ordinance 2017 0301 to honor Mrs. Wu would award one person who has demonstrated a commitment to public service a full time paid term limited to a temporary position in King County government. For a term of one year, the fellow would be an employee of the Department of Executive Services, Human Resources Management Division or h.r. D The fellow would be assigned to work in various county agencies for periods of 3 to 4 months at a time, working on projects such as following a piece of legislation through the legislative process, preparing briefings and assisting with outreach and executive branch policy administration. Each agency would reimburse h.r for the cost of the fellow for the period assigned to that particular agency. A selection committee will convene annually to review the applicants of the for the fellowship program and to recommend an applicant to be appointed as the fellow to h.r. The members of the selection. A committee will be appointed by the county executive and the chair of the Council. Council staff and Council's legal counsel has identified technical corrections to the proposed ordinance for Council consideration, which includes the striking amendment in a title amendment starting on page 15 of your packet. The striking amendment S1 would insert the new section of the fellowship program in Chapter 3.12 of the King County Code instead of Title two. The title Amendment one would confirm to the effects of this striking amendment. Executive staff in the Office of Labor Relations recommends that as the Fellowship Work Program is developed, an ongoing dialog regarding the program should commence with the labor unions that represent the employees of King County. Madam Chair, that concludes my staff report. We have three of Mrs. Woo's friends in the audience this morning. It's Ms.. Dolores in Bangor. Ms.. Joan, Yoshi, Tommy and Mr. Frank Rae. Thank you. Can I ask you a question on line 23 on the S1? What is that? On the word most. I've never seen us do that. I think it's just a citation since it's not capitalized and because it was a particular issue, speech issue in a quote. So that is there is a quotation and then with the persons of M. Since it's not capitalized, I would presume and we can it's just different. I never seen that before. Okay. So with the three friends want to come up to the table if you like to make any comments, would you like to come on these microphones? You have to pull very close to your mouth and it's the bottom line. And please introduce yourselves for the record. Good morning, Madam Chairman, and members of the Council. My name is Josh Utomi. I'm Dolores Bonga. Hey, would you like to make any comments about this? I guess Ruth Wu had a extensive network. Everybody shaking their heads so could tell. Everybody has touched with her. Been touched with her at some point or another. She always was great about trying to find young people to fill positions that she would hear about how she found that out. And none of us really knew. And then she on her campaign, she always looked to have young people be involved. And I believe, although she never articulated it this way, that it was her way of introducing young people to public service and government service. And she was very successful over the a lot of us are in those positions because of that. So I urge you to pass this legislation today. Thank you. Do you want to make another comment? Yes, please. I want to. Thank all of you for taking this magnificent step. We were thinking of a way to memorialize Ruth's life, and we could think of nothing better than to help young people become part of government. The beauty of this bill as well is that this fellow will be able to go to three different departments and I'm hoping their finance and budget and policy and operations, because then that individual will be able to, as Ruth did, influence many, many others to join government and to be a contributing member. This also fits in beautifully with your equity and social justice legislation, and we're very, very thankful for your doing this. Thank you. I think I have a clue. I want to use tricks. I met Ruth in December 2011 and she called me because she'd been watching me on TV and she wanted to give me some information. And it was one of the most pleasant meetings of meeting somebody knew. And her expertize, her kindness, the kinds of things she said and how much she knew, she'd been watching a lot of television. So I was really impressed with her ability just to see and know so much. So I, too, along with everybody else, will miss her a lot. And I appreciated her phone calls. So this was framed by two members of the committee. Do either of you want to say anything with it? Okay. McDermott. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. The staff report outlined Ruth's political work, but Ruth also ran the licensing agency in Rainier Valley. And I was actually home from college. Grew up here in Seattle, was the women's college in Spokane, and home for a college break when someone else who had done some political mentoring of me told me I needed to go meet. Did I know Ruth Wu well? No, I didn't know Ruth. Well, you need to meet Ruth. I'm going to call her and tell you to come in. You need to go by the licensing agency, introduce yourself and have coffee. I didn't quite understand why at the time. Only later did I understand how important and valuable that coffee, that time with Ruth would be. And Ruth was somebody who did, in her small way, mentor me and in much larger and more direct ways, mentor so many other people. And like Mr. Banga said, really invited and prompted many people to think about a career in involvement, whether it was a queer or not involvement in public service that they wouldn't otherwise have done. In addition to the people already introduced, they see that Judge alum Dean LAMB has joined us and I suspect you here for this item , not for something else in our agenda. Ruth Ruth's reach is deep, and this is a way of continuing that legacy, of introducing people, involving people in the public process, in government. And I think it's much the way Ruth would have done it herself. Thank you. Councilmember Dvorsky. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Want to echo Councilmember McDermott's remarks and really thank former Councilmember Salonga. And Joan Yosh, tell me, former deputy county executive, I think that was your title here in Lake administration for really bringing this forward. I think it's apropos of Ruth that it was this is a community based and community driven proposal. And that was what Ruth Wu and then her husband were all about, community based and community activism. And I think it's important I want to emphasize in here that Ruth was bipartisan and she may have been more Republican. The Democrat. I don't really know. I don't know that a lot of people knew she worked for Republicans and Democrats, but I think her driving force was inclusion and opportunity and making sure that those who were not always easily in the system or had access to the system or put into places and opportunities and connected with folks so that they would have those opportunities. And that's the goal of this program. As much as it's a tribute to Ruth, well, it really is about making King County more responsive and a better government to serve the diverse community of King County that we have today at 2.1 million people. We don't just go around making tributes to folks. That's a secondary benefit. And I think it's something that Ruth would appreciate and never like credit. She didn't want attention. I think she skipped an event that was set up to honor her one time. Right. But many times, yeah. And so she might be a little reluctant to have her name on this, but I have no doubt that she would be supportive of the thrust and goals of the program, and that is to bring rising stars into the government, train them up and ensure that we get the benefit of their service here to the county and that the county is able to better serve their communities in a reciprocal way. So I'm pretty excited about this. I hope that at some point it will succeed and its success will generate more positions, that the fellowships will be on be grow beyond just one. And I really want to thank Dolores and Joan for bringing this really good idea forward and then your advocacy for it. So thank you. Thank you. Okay, so which one of you would like to be okay? Oh, sorry. That's a member of our right there. Thank you very much. I had the privilege of first meeting Ruth when I was chair of the Transportation Committee of the State Senate. And I had not a lot of knowledge about some agents, and I was one of my colleagues in State House. Gary Locke said, Yeah, I had to meet Ruth to understand and appreciate some agents because we had legislation before us to eliminate some agents. And of course, Ruth took a keen interest in that issue, and I first got to know her through that process. And then when I became a member of the King County Council, the added privilege of getting to know Ben and Ben was an incredible partner, friend and mentor to everybody as well. And. Ruth, Ruth Seattle is very long, but Ben did his work as well. He did and should not be forgotten. I think it's nice to point out how nice she was, but she was tough. Certainly there was a certain state representative who thought it was his turn to become to the King County Council. And there was another person in the community that he thought he should be on the King County Council when a vacancy occurred not that long ago. And and she made it very clear her who her choice was. And her choice was eventually appointed to the King County Council. So, Ruth, as a person who not only was kind and a mentor, but she was a tough political person who understood which fit the district best, in this case, the South Seattle district. And she, as a person who has a great legacy and so many people in so many places, and this is a great continuation of her endearment to so many people by helping others. Thank you. Thank you. I like how she reached out. You know, it was it was really important that she would always take the time to reach out. Councilmember Would you like to put this before us? Councilman McDermott, would you like to put this before us? I'd move that. We give a do pass recommendation. To ordinance 2017 3001, the Ruth Ruth Fellowship. Okay, so before us, we have 2017 301 before us and I'll go down to the other. Would you councilmember or like you strike. That's one striking. In my look at a strike has gotten on page 15 others in favor of striker one please say I right those opposed nay and council member making. The title amendment. Okay and title amendment number one impeach 19 all those in favor title them one please. They I I you're now on the underlying as amended. Any comment? You got them. Okay. Would you please call for the votes? Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilmember Dombrowski. I. Councilmember Dunn. Hi. Councilmember Gossett. Councilmember Caldwell's council member McDermott. High Council member of the Grove. Councilmember Yvonne. Right, member I. Madam Chair. Councilmember Ritchie. Madam Chair, the vote is five eyes. No nos. Great. I don't think we'll put it on the consent count because I'm assuming people want to speak on it. So we'll just put it on the regular course. And thank you so much. And Madam Chair, would it be possible to expedite it? To expedite it? Okay. We can expedite it. Nope, nope, nope, nope. I guess we have scheduling. Sorry. Sorry. Thank you. Very much. Good thing they have staff that knows how to do arm signals. Okay, we're good. All right, so it'll be on the regular course. Thank you so much for being with us today. Thank you. All right. So now we will move on to item number seven, which is 2017, briefing 172.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute a Vehicle Donation Agreement with the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, to accept the donation of a 2016 Ford Transit Van to be used as a Mobile Studio. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04052016_16-0292

Okay. Next item, please. Report from Library Services recommendation to execute a vehicle donation agreement with the Long Beach Public Library Foundation to accept the donation of a 2016 Ford Transit van to be used as a mobile studio city wide. Okay. Councilman Richardson. Sounds like a lot of fun to look forward to seeing the movie studio. Councilman Mongo excited to add the asset to our city, a set of great resources for our community. There's a motion in a second. I know we have some council members. Is there any public comment? No public comment. Councilman Gonzales. I'm also very, very excited that the Library Foundation and the city can work together to bring library services to, you know, all parts of the city. It's very exciting, especially so learning that these kids will be involved in steam. So very exciting. Thank you. Councilman Durango. Glad to add this to our library assets and being library month. Good job. Okay. Members. Bruce Gordon Castro votes. Motion carries.

Recommendation to receive and file the application of Pizzanista, LLC, dba Pizzanista!, for an original application of an Alcoholic Beverage Control License, at 1837 East 7th Street. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_11032015_15-1120

Report from police recommendation to receive and file the application of pizza Mr. for an original application of an ABC license at 1837 East Seventh Street. District to. Vice Mayor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And you also have the set of recommendations or requested conditions for this item as well. And I'd like to welcome the pizza Mr. to the historic East Seventh Street and make this motion to receive and file. Thank you as any public comment on this item. Seeing none. Let me just add also a welcome. I think from what I understand, we have some very good operators coming to this location with successor and another location. And it's really it's really also a great location on Seventh Street. And I think it's going to be a great a great change. And so congrats to the second district really is getting a great new business in this one. So please cast your votes. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Motion carries. Thank you. Next item, please. Report from Public Works recommendation to execute a Fourth Amendment to contract with concrete construction for concrete repairs and related improvements, increasing the contract amount by an additional $5 million citywide.

Recommendation to Accept the Work of McGuire and Hester for Cross Alameda Trail - Jean Sweeney Open Space Park, No. P.W. 05-16-11. (Recreation and Parks 280)

AlamedaCC_04172018_2018-5374

Is a recommendation to accept the work of McGuire and Hastert for cross me to trade Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. And I am sorry the speaker's public. Okay. So we pull items when the public wants someone a member of the public wants to speak on it. We have. Okay. So we have two speakers, Dorothy Freeman. So you come on up and then. And Joe. But it has ceded time to her, so she gets up to 6 minutes. And then behind her is Brian Maguire. And those are the two speakers on the side of. Good evening. I'm Dorothy Freeman, representing. The Jean Sweeney. Open Space Park Fund. We hope you enjoy this short video of the first section of the future. Four mile cross Alameda Bike Trail with the adjacent walking and jogging paths. Construction was managed by our REC, our recreation and Parks Manager Director Amy Aldridge and built by Alameda McGuire and Hester Construction Company. Due to administrative errors. Due to administrative errors, not our city's. This trail almost didn't happen. Mayor Spencer, Director Aldridge, Jim Sweeney and myself traveled to Los Angeles to appeal to the Caltrans Board of Commissioners to allow an extension. On the due date. For the grant. Needed for construction. The appeal of a successful and construction started last summer. It has taken the effort of many of us to get to this phase place today. First, of course, was Jane Sweeney's vision of the park. Then, many citizens who attended meetings to give their input into the details for the park helped complete the design along the way. Many city councils, including this one, have always supported the park and the trails. We thank. Many recreation. And park commissioners by Clark. Alameda for. Their input. Planning Board Commissioner Christopher Koster and place works for their design work and many who donated time and money to make the park special. And our Recreation and Parks Director Amy. Wooldridge. And her staff, who have often jumped hurdles and walked through minefields to make so many things happen during each step. Along the way. Recreation and Parks has been working since 2013. On this. Very large project. Finally, we would like to thank. McGuire. And. Hester for their work. In building this phase of the project. They have been a good neighbor. Also donating funds. To feed. The volunteers who came out last fall to clean up the south side of the park. A bit more patience is required by all those who just want to come out and use the new trails. We anticipate by late summer or early fall, after 20 years of anticipation, the park will finally be open. Open. The trails will be use the picnic grounds for families to enjoy. Outdoor gatherings will be fired up and the East playgrounds will be ready for young family members to enjoy. Board members Tim Sweeney, who for some reason didn't make it here tonight. Former council member Doug Hahn and myself applaud this first major step and anticipate the others to come. Thank you very much. Brian Maguire. I didn't realize I would. Dorothy was such an accomplished drone pilot. That's pretty impressive stuff. You're right. Why do you do freelance for the military or CIA or anything? It's pretty good. So I think the video speaks for itself. It's pretty exciting to see that this path is done. $3 million, I think, worth of active transportation grants or so. And what is a two thirds of a mile? Maybe, maybe a little more. And it's done. It's ready today, but we're not going to open it for another six months or so, probably. Which I think is unfortunate. I think it's nice that this is there's an agenda item on this. I was going to do a stirring up and non agenda, but this way you can give feedback if you're so inclined. It would be really nice to, at a minimum, open these gates and let people start using this path when there's not active construction going on. Like, you know, after four or 5 p.m. and on the weekends while there's, you know, lots of sunlight from now for the next few months. It would be a shame for us to miss out on basically an entire spring and summer season of long evenings and nice weather. So if there's any way you can give direction and explore the opportunity of opening the path as much as possible now so that people can start using it, people can start getting out of their cars, people can start walking their dogs, taking advantage of what's there now. I think a lot of people are chomping at the bit to get at this. So we hope that you would consider accelerating the opportunity to open the gate instead of waiting until construction was done. We think we understand the argument that has been made that there's active construction going on. But we think if this was 3600 feet of road for passenger vehicles, that was complete and ready to alleviate congestion on the island or access to amenities that there would not be any hesitation in getting this open immediately. And we don't think people walking and jogging and biking should be forced to essentially wait till the sun goes down at 5 p.m. in the fall and the night start getting cold. Days and nights start getting colder and sort of lose an entire, you know, season an entire year. While it might be a minor inconvenience for the construction efforts, but I think it's really not that big a deal to open the gate when they're not driving. It doesn't look like they're driving a lot of earthmovers back and forth and heavy equipment maybe during the day, maybe during construction, during the week. But I think there's a lot of time that this path could provide a lot of use to the community now, and we should start getting the benefits of it. Thank you. Thank you. That completes our speakers on this item council. Did you want to make any comments? We have vice mayor, is. There somebody from staff who could comment? On the speakers question. I'd be happy to comment. Amy Wooldridge, Recreation Parks Director. A few things. One is that which was indicated in the staff report and in Bryan alluded to, is that we have during the day we have have equipment that's actually going back and forth across the trail and it was not included in the bid that they needed to provide product protection and safety crossing and all that that you would have if you had a street in future phases. That will be part of the requirement as an existing condition that they'll have to get get equipment safely across the path wall and and while pedestrians and bicyclists and such are using it. The other issue is because we weren't we we started to anticipate and realize that we weren't going to be able to time them correctly. We have the remainder. We can't just we would require two things. So it's it's possible. But here's what we require require additional funding for temporary fencing along both sides of the trail, all the way along the trail, and to secure around the existing construction zone, because we would have theft issues which we already have with the gates up. We already have people coming in and partying and leaving beer bottles. You know, we've already had theft problems of different materials on site, so we would have to fence all of that off. In addition, we haven't finished cleaning the rest of the site. As Dorothy mentioned, we had about 80 volunteers come. It was fantastic. Do a big cleanup. There's more hypodermic needles out there. There's more trash out there. We now have piles of bay mud. That's not. You actually could see it on the video that needs to get off hold and we need to figure that out before we open the park. So there's a lot of logistical issues. It's actually not a safe place yet for kids to run around. There's things that they could find that are simply not safe and are safety hazard. Member Ashcraft. Thank you. Director Wooldridge I also got a little envious looking at the the video. It's lovely. It's really impressive what has been accomplished thus far and congratulations to everyone involved. I do. I would be interested in at least if we could get an estimate of what that fencing would cost and what I would envision. I understand the when there's ongoing construction, I don't think the juxtaposition of bicycles and earthmovers is a good one, but they don't do the work on the weekend. And if there was a way that we could secure the the construction equipment, I will bet you that if we were to do another volunteer work day, you'd have a great turnout of people to help with the cleanup. And I think that one of the benefits of at least on the weekend, getting the use going would be those eyes on the street that, you know, more people out there doing positive, constructive things mean less opportunity for people doing nefarious things. So I know there's a lot of a lot of balls to juggle, but I would certainly appreciate if staff could just do a little looking into what it might be feasible. Maybe it's yes, maybe it's no, but maybe if we could give it a try. Appreciate it. Thank you. Did any of the cast members want to speak at this time? Ninette, I do want to follow up in regards to I want to thank Dorothy Freeman for the video. And I wanted to share when she spoke about going down to L.A., that that actually was pretty much against all odds. They really do not like to give extensions. And it really did take a huge effort. I do want to commend Amy Roberts and her preparation and the work and then the team that went down. Jim Sweeney, Joe Woodard and Dorothy Freeman. I did participate with this thing was organized. So when we went down, we had work to do and then we were in fact persuasive. So thank you very, very much, because you all may not know you go down to L.A. and then there's this big room and they really do have all these roles. They monitor projects for the entire state, and they're so afraid that if they give us a concession, then every project they're trying to push through with deadlines, they'll be asked to give concessions, too. So that really. Was a. Heavy lift. So thank you very much. Vice Mayor Actually, I. Do have a couple comments. One thing is, if in future instances we're looking at doing the bike lanes, if we could look at what the additional costs would be or at least consider it when we're looking at these bids to have the crossings or to have use and what it would take, whether it's the fencing or whatever else, if we could at least have that option in the beginning to look at. I know I would appreciate it. I don't know about the rest of the council, but at least it would put the numbers out there for people to consider. And I think to Councilmember Ashcroft's point, I think it's, you know, if there's an opportunity for folks to go out and volunteer again to do another clean up, if that's something that we could get in the works, I think we should definitely talk to Bike Walk Alameda because they probably have an interest in in expediting things as well. And I would also encourage you to reach out to the Jean Sweeney Foundation group that has been really leading this charge. And I'm confident so I would also be interested in both the issues that she raised. But I do appreciate Ms.. Aldridge's comments that in the future phases she is planning to do that. So mavrodi like the move approval of the item. Second. Although I push and thank you unanimously I was five C. Five H. Recommendation to approve the implementing regulations governing a request for proposal process for allocating limited privilege to apply for a cannabis business permit and the request for proposals. If you have speakers on the speakers. So it would have been. Oh. Okay. Okay. Do we have a present? We probably don't. So we have eight speakers on this staff. Did you want to introduce the item. Getting the mayor and city council? I'm Bill's butler with the Community Development Department. At our last meeting, the city council asked staff to come back and refine the RFP. That we presented the request for proposal that we presented to have objective scoring to increase the size of the selection panel and consider changes to the selection panel and to further decide to find site control. And that's what we've done. If you have other questions. Yeah. Mayor Member Ashcroft, if I may. Yeah, I really I was just telling Ms.. Art that sometimes I have time to e-mail my questions ahead of time, but it's been kind of a busy week or two and I didn't in so really my question. But I understand we also have speakers, but my question is on exhibit three. That's the evaluation criteria. Mm hmm. And the so the question is, are the scores for each category and for those who maybe aren't following along, you know, statement of qualifications, verifiable, detailed description of persons and type of resources, including financial, committed to employment, etc.. It's exhibit three are the scores for each category because these this is evaluation criteria made by a panel. Right. And you've selected you've described in the report. Good report, by the way, how the panel is who who is represented on the panel. So are the scores for each category, the average score of the members of the selection panel? Or does the panel collectively agree on each numerical score for each item? So the score is going to be the average score. Okay. And they're not going to collectively agree on the score. Right. So you just they submit their their list and your average amount, correct. Okay. That was all I had. Thank you. And by the way, beautiful necklace. Thank you, Brody. Thank you, madam. I had a quick question. So I had met with one of the folks that's interested in the lab, and they mentioned there's a July 1st deadline for the state regarding testing labs. And it looks like this proposal has. Announcement of selected proposals in letters issued on July nine. So can you kind of just fill us in on on how that might interplay with the state deadline? Well when we came to you on. RFP. We had asked because of the deadlines of the state that we not include testing labs in the RFP process. But what the council indicated is it want it to be fair and include them in in the process. So as a result of that, they're going to be delayed if they want to come into Alameda based on the process. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. Did you have one more question? Thank you. On the panel, you have one of the categories, Representative Health. And I notice that you have our director of the Mastic Senior Center, Jackie Krauss. So can you just explain that the health background or health connection there? Well, the city doesn't really have health individuals. And so she is covering that because she interacts with seniors on a daily basis and knows a lot about their concern. I thought that might be a thank you. All right. I'm going to go ahead and call the speakers at this time. Okay. And Rich Moskowitz, Chris Bailey, and then Brian Brownlee. Mayor council members. My name is Rich Moskowitz. I speak to you tonight on the eve of moving forward with this RFP process. And I want you to take a moment to start with why this process is of such importance to myself and the three members of the group I represent, Alameda Cannabis Times. We as a group hold the belief that in order to show respect for our neighbors who did not want cannabis here, that the businesses that the process yield are the best businesses for Alameda, that we ensure that not only are they successful, but they actually become a foundation of our community. They do not alter the fabric of our community, but they enhance the fabric of our community. And we honestly believe that only if these businesses initially that you choose that the panel chooses are successful in that way. Are we showing respect for that 30? 2% or so of people that we like to refer to in those numbers who were probably not in favor of this process. This being said, I'd like to also thank city staff for their accessibility and for all the work and progress made since last month in creating a more equitable RFP process. I have spent some time advocating for a citizen inclusion in the name of having deep background information available to the panel and players in this 50 plus year nontraditional business. And therefore, that information about those players has not been available. Tonight, I'm here to speak specifically about three points in the regulations in front of you. First point is that about the selection panel and the current makeup as it's progressed over the last month. The second aspect is one specific line in that about information gathering, and then the last point is about the upgraded oral part of the process. So currently we've moved the process from a three person selection panel to a six person selection panel, of which five members are voting members. Well, I think that's fantastic. I'm a little bit concerned that in section F, number one, the five voting members are spoken to about what department they come from. And in the terms of sports, there is one panelist from a city department to be to be named in the future. So it seems a little bit like a sports metaphor. We have these five people making decisions, but we are only speaking to four of them and one department to be named in the future seems a little bit odd, and that is section F number I. On the regulation in front of you, I also see really quickly that my lights on, I believe I was seated three extra minutes. I don't know. Think that was Chris Ballard. She's here in the audience and put that on the forms. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. So moving forward, I'd like to speak to a little bit about the background. It has been my benefit over the last three decades of my life to not only have been in charge of running several businesses, but also founding several businesses. Through that process, I have purchased millions of dollars of goods and services through the RFP process, and I fully understand the RFP process for business, if not government. So towards that end, I'd like to simply say that in business the processes are designed to get a 360 degree view. A people who will be providing services or goods to you and to make sure that those businesses and individuals are aligned with the organization's goals. Typically we shorthand this is due diligence. Now Section F, letter C specifically uses the line the panelist shall refrain from conducting outside research. And that greatly concerns me because the RFP process, the process of due diligence, is designed so that we can get the most information available. In my background, this has typically been that you put out a process, you whittle it down. At that point, you invite people in, in the case of sales, a dog and pony show, as we refer to them, you will sit down and at that point you reach out to your own personal networks, business and associates so that you can get. A true view of what is being told to you. So again, item F, number C, I'm a bit concerned that states that the panelists enact a challenge refrain from conducting any outside research. That does seem to me to be counter to the goal. Lastly, to move forward, the oral interview process is now as written in the regulation. It states that all the questions will be the same to all people, whereas I love that that is a base level of fairness from the beginning. Again, due diligence states that it's I find it very odd to say the least. And the reason why is in the oral part of the process, you really want to delve down to a level of granularity that will inform the panel members.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and adopt resolution continuing the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area assessment levy for the period of October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022; and, authorize City Manager, or designee, to extend the agreement with the Bixby Knolls Business Improvement Association for a one-year term. (Districts 7,8)

LongBeachCC_11092021_21-1164

Catherine Mango. The motion is carried. Thank you. And there actually is another hearing that which is the Peabody for which, you know, to think. Is also listed here. Item 42 is the report from Economic Development Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing in Adobe resolution continues on the Bixby Node Parking and Business Improvement Area Assessment Levy for the period October 1st, 2021 through September three, 2022, and authorize City Manager to extend the agreement for a one year term District seven and eight. And we have one public comment on it. Thank you. Well, we will go ahead and hear the staff report and then do the public comment again. Eric Romero. A mayor and members of the city council. This public hearing is for the annual renewal of the contract with the Bixby North Business Improvement Association for the management of the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area and the renewal of the annual levy on merchants in the Business Improvement District. City Council shall hear consider all protests from area businesses against the assessment program or boundaries of the area as proposed in the annual report. This concludes my staff report. Thank you. And I do have a member of the public, Mr. Kennedy. Oh. He didn't want to speak on this item. He did or he didn't. He did not. He began this item. Okay. That's okay. Thank you. Then we consider also to have any comments or support. Okay, we have a motion in a second. Please cast your vote. The motion is carried. Thank you. That concludes all the hearings we have for for the council meeting. Madam Clerk, if you want to do general public comment and then we will move on to the business, the agenda.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Cooperation Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Urban Renewal Authority for the Fox Park Urban Redevelopment Area to establish, among other matters, the parameters for tax increment financing with incremental sales and property taxes. Approves a cooperation agreement with the Denver Urban Renewal Authority for the Fox Park Urban Redevelopment Area to establish, among other matters, the parameters for tax increment financing with incremental sales and property taxes in Council District 9. 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 11-9-21.

DenverCityCouncil_11292021_21-1352

I am so sorry. That's all I was getting there. We're headed there right now. So would you please put Councilwoman Ortega Council Bill 21, Dash 1352, back on the floor for final passage? Yes. Madam President, I move that council bill 1352 be placed on final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of Council on Council Bill 21. Dash 1352. Seen no comments by members of Council. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 21. Dash 1352. CDEBACA No clerk. Eye for an. Eye. Herndon Hines. All right. Cashman. I cringe. Ortega, I. Sandoval. I saw you. I. Torres. I. But I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results.

AN ORDINANCE relating to City Finances; creating and changing the names of funds in the City Treasury; amending Ordinance 126161, which authorized an interfund loan; amending Ordinance 126237, which adopted the 2021 Budget, including the 2021-2026 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to various departments and budget control levels, and from various funds in the Budget; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_07122021_CB 120117

Agenda item four taxable 120117 relating to city finances, creating and changing the names of funds in the city treasury. Thank you so much. I moved to pass Council Bill 120117. Is there a second second? It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill. Councilor Mosquito, you are the sponsor of this bill, so I'm going to hand it over to you to address this item. Thank you very much. Council President. Colleagues, thank you for considering this legislation. This legislation is related to last year's passed legislation, ordinance 126161, which created the 2021 LTG Taxable Bond Fund and authorized an interim loan to support spending on the West Seattle Bridge in anticipation of the 2021 bond proceeds. This was before the 2021 adopted budget was presented and before the decision between whether or not to repair or replace the West Seattle Bridge. The 2021 adopted budget anticipated additional taxable bond sales for the Overlook Walk and Aquarium Expansion Progress projects, and directed those proceeds to the same fund. Now Finance and Administrative Services Department has since determined that we can sell non taxable bonds for the West Seattle Bridge repair, but that those bond proceeds will need to be held in a separate fund from the taxable bonds. This legislation does just that, this legislation accordingly. This legislation accordingly offers several technical corrections to the bond funds associated with the West Seattle Bridge repair work. And I hope the council will consider this message today. Thank you so much. Thank you. Councilmember Mosqueda, are there any additional comments on the bill? Looking for hands. Oh, Councilmember Herbold, please. Thank you so much. Just very quickly, I want to thank Chair Mascara for her quick action on this. Appreciate that. This is being referred directly to full council and technical teams is very welcome to address the needs associated. With the bond fund requirements. Thanks again. All right. Any additional comments on this particular piece of legislation for other hands raised? I am not seeing any additional hands raised. Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Sergeant. Yes. Strauss. Yes. For both. Yes. Whereas I. Lewis. Yes. Morales. Yes. Let's get to. I. Peterson. High. Council president Gonzalez I 19 favor and oppose. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read item five into the record?

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.63 prohibiting the use of single-use food and beverage containers made of expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam, rigid polystyrene #6, and non-recyclable and non-compostable material for prepared food distribution, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04172018_18-0352

Okay. Thank you. We are hearing Adam 34. Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.63. Regulating the use of single use food and beverage containers made of expanded polystyrene foam for prepared food distribution in the city of Long Beach Red for the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting for Final Reading Citywide . Thank you. There's a motion and a and a second to Councilwoman Gonzalez. Do you want to do a staff reporter? Okay. So, Mr. West, Craig Beck, our director of public works, will walk us through what this was when a previous previously went to the council and what it's turned into tonight. So many members, the city council. Thank you for the opportunity. We are here in partnership with the city attorney's office. City Attorney's Office has been working closely to implement the changes and the recommendations that Council adopted when this was before you the first time. What we would like to do is just run through a very quick PowerPoint just to remind everybody what we're talking about this evening. What is part of the ordinance and how we're moving forward? And then staff will be available for comments. I'm going to ask Deacon Mokonyane to run through that for you this evening. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Members of the council. I'm going to take just a few minutes to give us a recap of what we're doing and how we're moving forward. So just to refresh everybody's memory, we are looking at banning expanded polystyrene and other non-recyclable plastics for a number of reasons three reasons primarily litter prevention, protecting public health and for waste reduction. So as a result of this and as of discussions at the October meeting where the city council directed us to come back with an ordinance, we have identified the materials that would be banned. As you see up here and again, there are non-recyclable food and beverage containers that are plastic. So here's some examples of some environmentally acceptable alternatives. We listen to stakeholder input. As you may recall, we had a lot of stakeholder workshops and one of the things that came up was don't replace expanded polystyrene with another form of litter. Replace it with something that is definitely recyclable or reusable. And here's some examples of of those types of items right here. There's a number of them out there. And the city council approved an approach on that evening, and they asked us to phase in this this ban. And so I'm going to go very quickly over the different phases of the ban. Phase one would be three months after adoption, and it covers this city departments and city facilities and city sponsored and permitted events. Phase two would be six months after that or nine months after adoption, and it identifies food establishments that sell food and or beverage to go for to go for onsite consumption in restaurants, over 100 seats or franchised grocery stores, food stands, delis, food trucks, coffee shops, etc.. Phase three, which would be nine months later or 18 months after adoption, would capture all of the rest of the small food providers. And they were defined by the city council as being 100 people or less, seating 400 people or less. Also, during phase three, there is a retail sale ban of polystyrene ice chests, polystyrene bean bags and crafts, and also a provision that utensils and straws will be offered at food service locations only upon request for take takeaway items . Along with this, there are opportunities for exemptions if a business can show that they have undue hardship for it. The Director of Public Works has the authority to provide exemptions as needed. So what I did briefly touch on our education plan we have there are two paths for the education plan regarding this plan. One is for businesses who are affected by the ordinance, and one is for residents to support the goals of litter abatement, waste reduction and environmental health. With regard to businesses, we have hired the CAP Agency to assist us with outreach and we are developing a campaign to support businesses in their efforts to comply with the ordinance. Environmental Services Bureau and Department of Public Works is prepared to upload a website as soon as the City Council may approve this ordinance. We're ready to upload the Web site to that offers initial compliance recommendations. And like I said, that's ready to go. We could do that tomorrow if that were the case. With regard to the public, we have hired a marketing group called We the Creative to assist us in developing a bring your own campaign. So not only will this bring your own campaign continue to reduce waste and litter, it will also hopefully result in businesses saving money by not needing as many to go containers. So just to be clear, a bring your own campaign would be encouraging people that go out to eat to bring their own Tupperware and containers so that if they have leftovers, they can just put it in their mature in their containers and take it home. We were also asked to look at economic incentives. We've been working with different departments to develop these, and one being economic development incentives for businesses to purchase compliant products before the required ordinance timeline. So there will be one time reimbursements made available. We're finalizing this and we will also offer opt in kits for businesses to self-promote their participation. So in other words, if you show that you are an early complainer, perhaps you'll get some sort of poster or some sort of decals for your window. You'll get some social media promotion and some promotion by the city for being a good partner. And hopefully that will drive up some interest in your business with a free advertising for you. We also have opportunities for bulk purchasing. There's a cooperative purchasing situation already established by Greentown or Los Altos. It's a free co-op open to all food service providers, and participants receive 25% discounts on our products, and that would be acceptable in this bill. Finally, compliance is an issue. We have integrated enforcement into our current city operations. We will be creating an Environmental Services Bureau Web forum for the public to report violations. We will have an education and compliance integrated into food facility inspections. Our health department, when they do their annual inspections, will be including a part of their inspection as checking to see if appropriate to go materials are being used. The enforcement structure would be based on administrative citation procedure, and there will be a process, again, a procedure for temporary exemptions due to undue hardship. I'd like to take a moment to thank all of the departments involved in the development and upcoming implementation of this program. It was an effort with many different departments and bureaus, including Parks, Recreation and Marine Development Services, the Office of Sustainability, Special Events, the City Attorney, Business Licensing, Economic Development. And I would be remiss if I didn't call out specifically the Health Department, Environmental Health Bureau that was so supportive and will be critical in the implementation of this program down the road. That's the end of my presentation right here for questions. Thank you. Gonzalez. Yes, actually, if I if we can take it to the public, that would be great. Sure. Public comment. Please come forward on the item by Steve Marion and I will make sure you please say your name for for the record before we Steve Marion. I would like to thank you all for for being here. City council members, staff and being here at this hour. Thank you for your time. I guess you can see green. Green, green. Green. Can you imagine which way I feel? But the gray hair comes from worrying about whether will implement these kind of decisions. And Councilwoman Gonzalez, thank you for these. And I love the color of your blouse. Mr. Silver, now, please say hi to the best secretary in the law. Meet Unified School District when you get home this evening. And now on to more serious business. We have a chance to lead in this decision. It sounds like you've already decided, but I'm not very politically savvy, so please bear with me. I think we have a choice and a chance to join in the leadership of 110 other cities out of 482 in California and more nationwide, and nine nine counties out of 58 in leading in this effort polystyrene from articles that I read and I'm not a scientist takes from 500 years to maybe never as far as decompose here it means it's always there it's all over the sand and in the ocean. Fish and birds eat it and feed it to their young. And it's not nutritional. And if the fish die, it's simple. We die. We are at a crossroads. We, as a people need to enact legislation that will decrease production of polystyrene. That's the key to decrease the production. Since the last meeting, I believe that I've seen costs of alternative sources of takeout containers go down because more cities are getting on board and more companies are already changing so that they're producing other containers that are more biodegradable. If we do, they will be. If we do follow this path, there will be less sales, less production, healthier oceans, healthier people, healthier planet. So please vote to help humanity to thrive by enacting this ordinance. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Charles Moore, Mayor Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson, an ordinance proposer Gonzalez and members of the city council. Plastic pollution is no longer a peripheral issue, and that's visible in the fact that this Earth Day is dedicated to plastic pollution. The issue that I began to raise attention for 21 years ago. At that time, I felt that it was becoming ubiquitous. This material that doesn't degrade, that defeats natural decay. Only we humans make things that nature can't digest. And plastic is the main object that we make that nature can't digest. But there was a lot of pushback back then, the idea that it was ubiquitous, that it was going to be a problem, that there was reasons to worry about plastic. We're pushed aside. That's no longer the case. We now have evidence that it's in our salt and our water, in the food that we eat, in our environment, and that it has serious consequences for the future as much as production is anticipated to double in the near future. Now there are reasons why maybe a guy from Long Beach got into this. In my recent article in the Business Journal, I made the statement that Long Beach may be the most polluted city in the United States. By this material, we have the effluent of the Los Angeles River and the San Gabriel River servicing upwards of 15 million people, delivering their throwaways to our ocean and beaches. And maybe that's why I got into this. Maybe I saw it before other people saw it. I saw it in the middle of the ocean before other people realized what was going on. Now that term ubiquitous is getting no pushback. It's proven it is everywhere. It's in the air we breathe now. So we need to take steps to eliminate this threat. And eliminating Styrofoam is a step in that direction. Now, I collected some plastic from the gyre, sent it to China. They invited me to their first plastic conference at the mouth of the Yangtze River, which is the dirtiest river in China. That's the parallel to Long Beach. So I'm now going to China to do the very same thing or raise that awareness that you now are acting on. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. And thank you for your decades of work to this issue. So thank you very much. Next Speaker Hi. My name's Chef Paul Buchanan. I'm a resident of District three. I am a food service business owner. Thank you all for the hard work on this. It was very comprehensive, the outline and the ordinance, so thank you for reading that. That was excellent. I support the ban wholeheartedly. We need less plastic pollution. Plastic straws should be next, please. And McDonald says billions and billions serve. Now, those are the billions and billions and billions of straws that are out there. More plastic pollution for us to consider getting rid of. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. Good evening. Mayor Garcia and city council members. I am. Certainly one of the co-founders. Of the Long Beach Environmental Alliance. And I have John here showing pictures of of litter, especially Styrofoam that we picked up during. Our beach cleanups. So I want to ask you all, do you value our lives, the lives of those that we love? Are you willing to fight for them? You are all sitting here in. A position where. You can make a difference. I am here. Today to use my voice for those who can't. The environment. You all have the voice to vote to ban the polystyrene. My organization, like I said before, we host beach cleanups, Alamitos Beach and Sun. And but that's just a start. Every piece of plastic made on Earth still exists today. Most of the plastic in the ocean comes from. Items we use every day. Most is single use plastic like Styrofoam. Plates, cups, plastic utensils. Straws. Etc. Plastic particles. Are found inside animals and throughout the ocean. The ocean is food chain. From shrimp, mussels, fish. I have. I may have mentioned some of your favorite food. Turtles to. Whales. We all. So we respect small businesses here in Long Beach. My solution for them and I forgot what his name over there is, is to. Educate their consumers, to bring you reusable items, to enable. Businesses to avoid constant purchasing of disposable items that end up in our environment. If pollution does not end up in our environment, will end up in the landfill, which when plastic when plastic mixed with organic matter, it creates methane gas, which is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. So the methane gas stays in our atmosphere a lot longer, and this contributes to climate change. If you decide to keep the polystyrene, you are promoting and accepting a wasteful. Bully. Culture. Resources are way too valuable to be thrown away, so please make the right decision. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is John Kendrick. I'm one of the co-founders of the Long Beach Farming Alliance. And we have walked from all the way from the L.A. River down to the San Gabriel River. And we see this every day. This is every day. This is not after a storm. When you walk down to a shoreline village on the rocks, look down at the rocks. This is the same trash we see every day. It used to be a time you saw those only after a storm. Now we see this on a daily, you know, 65 days a year. Also to this year, they were down to the deepest part of the ocean with a submersible. And they came back up with samples from every death and every living creature had plastic in a system, which means we have terminated a whole food chain. There is no safe place, no more the ocean where there is no plastic anymore. And then we talk about being a tourism city. What do you think people will say when they see this stuff on the beach? They take pictures and send it back home and their families. This hurts tourism, which hurts jobs. And then to our children, they've got to play in this stuff. What does it do to them? I think it's time we start to practice what we preach and actually clean up our city. Because a captain said won't be harbor in the city is now one big trash can. We are the worst. I've heard it more than once and I see it every day. And I would like to ask you to go down there and walk every day for a whole week and tell you what you see down there and take pictures of it. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Kobe Sky. I'm very proud to chair the Sustainable City Commission and I just wanted to speak in support of this item. First, I wanted to express my appreciation for the Council and Deacon Marconi and and his staff for developing what really is an excellent ordinance. Because of the great discussion that you all had in October, I think there were a lot of improvements made to the original, original proposal, including a phased in approach, education, having exemptions for businesses that might be impacted with an undue burden, having utensils and straws only provided upon request, which is a win win solution that improves the environment but also reduces costs for businesses in going beyond just Styrofoam, looking at the impact of the materials themselves and focusing on products that are recyclable and compostable, which will mean that we're improving the environment and making it easier for the city and for our businesses to comply with state environmental mandates and to improve our environment. I just want to say that I support the ordinance as is with no amendments. I think that as previously discussed, we are in a crisis due to plastics impacting the environment and it is a particular burden on the city of Long Beach. And all the more reason for us to be leaders in developing an ordinance that I think will be a model for other jurisdictions to adopt. Stopping these plastics at the source and reducing that pollution is the most effective way to reduce the impact on our beaches. And so I ask for your support for the ordinance, and I appreciate all the work that's gone into it so far. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Hello, Gabrielle Weekes. The chair this year called for the region. So we have members in everybody's district and really not much new. This is the same topic we've had discussed here at the city council by many, many times. I know DEKA has been working very hard looking at other cities ordinances and how they phrased it, and it passed unanimously last time. I'm hoping nothing has changed. We can move forward with this so we can really brag about being a green city. And I thank Diego and his staff. I know that they've been working on this very hard. And I think that, you know, this is not new territory in a lot of other cities have done it, a lot of counties. And so we can do this. And I ask for your yes vote. Thank you. Thank you very much, Nick. Speaker Council members. Honorable Mayor My name is Katie Allen. As you may recall from past meetings, I'm the executive director of Al Goleta. So that organization that Charles Moore founded and our organization has been working to prevent ocean plastic pollution since 1997, after Charles sparked what we call the Great Plastics Awakening. Since inception, we've been working around the world. So we've interacted with so many different people, so many different communities. And what we're seeing is a global movement happening. And we now know that it's ubiquitous. It's throughout all environments. It's not just the marine environment anymore. It's in our tap water, it's in our bottled water, it's in our food, our air. It's in our bodies. Over the past two and a half years, our organization has worked with local high school students to collect plastic pollution samples from our water, seafloor and our shoreline of East San Pedro Bay. Sample after sample expanded polystyrene has been identified as the most common type of microplastics by count since the last time I spoke at this podium. Our team of students have analyzed 60 more peninsula samples. Our data shows an average of 208 pieces of expanded polystyrene per ten liters of sand. We're literally changing the composition of our beaches and our water. In 2028, our waters will be a venue for the Summer Olympics. The world will be swimming and sailing in our plastic mess. We have less. Than ten years to transition into a plastic, smart city. And if we cannot make it through this transition between. Before. 2028, the world will have some tough questions for us. If we're going to put our. City on a global stage, we better make sure it's clean and safe. I believe this ordinance has been identified as one of the most important action items to implement. Immediate. In order to reduce the amount of plastics in our local environment, phasing out polystyrene will be a huge leap forward in our. Transition. Towards a plastic, smart city. And I wholeheartedly urge you to move this ordinance forward tonight. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Hi. My name is Janine Rodriguez. I'm a marine biologist from Cal State Long Beach. And I just prepared a little something that I'd like to say. So I first became aware of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch while reading an article assigned during a class I took while attending Cal State Long Beach. The article went on to describe the increasing amounts of plastics found in our oceans, specifically the Pacific Ocean, where the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is located, and how the pollution is affecting marine life. This article had such a great impact on me that I cheat, that I changed my course of study from molecular cell biology to marine biology so that I could further enhance my knowledge about marine, about marine life, and how to become more involved and truly do something to prevent plastic pollution such as Styrofoam. One One way I've been able to be involved is by conducting research, specifically hormone and proteomic analysis, all of which was completed in the I Do research lab at Cal State, Long Beach and on lantern fish that were collected from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch during the six week, six week long expedition done by how Goleta in 2014 results in a nutshell, of course, showed that there was indeed disrupted hormone regulation and essential proteins were either over under express compared to organisms that were considered to be from our control groups or control sites. Another experience I was fortunate to be a part of was ugliest experience ship this last fall here as a group, we created a trial that were that we could attach to the back end of kayaks and could collect microplastics at the surface of any body of water. It went across these these, these the. So these, of course, are only a few of the many ways one can get involved involved with. And it is and it is critical that we do become more and more involved in such activities in order to help preserve our oceans, because our oceans have provided and do so much for us, that it's time that we do the same for it. So thank. You. Thank you very much. Next speaker, gary mayor and council members. My name was mike murchison. I know i'm not the fan favorite in here tonight on this subject matter, but I want to point out a couple of things that are fact driven. Number one, you don't have Councilman D Andrews is here with us this evening. He's ill. And I know that he's very supportive of small restaurants. Number two, I provided a legal transcript of the October proceedings where the council had a very lengthy discussion on the. It was a very healthy discussion. I do remember very vividly, as I'm sure some of you do, that the very end of that discussion was the discussion having to do with the phase three. That Phase three had to do with our small restaurants in Long Beach, the vibrant community of small restaurants that we all depend upon in our community. And the decision reached that night by this dais was that you would wait, do a study before determining the outcome of moving forward with phase three. You're okay with phase one and phase two. I'm okay with phase one in phase two, but I am concerned that we follow through on what we stated back then in October. That was very clear when we reviewed the transcript that the council was supportive of a friendly motion. In fact, the maker of the motion, the original motion was supportive of that friendly. That said, let's do a study to determine, based on the data provided from phase one to phase two, how do we move forward with phase three on our small restaurants? I think that's very important for you all to recall that that's not something you can just kind of wipe out and just say, let's just move forward. There are small restaurants that are not here tonight because they're running a restaurant. They can't be represented here tonight. I'm here for them to try to have you folks take a step back and say, look, let's look at the data. There's no harm in looking at the data to determine what the impact is from phase one and phase two. I'm hoping that your city attorney will jump in on this conversation. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name's Schnapp Christensen, community member. And I just want to thank you for all for bringing this proposal forth, and especially Dr. Charles Moore and Gabrielle Weeks and Kirby Skyfire for your endless commitment to banning plastic and protecting our environment. And I guess I haven't heard any other Indigenous people get up, so I guess I'll speak to that perspective that, you know, the earth is sacred. And I have read Dr. Moore's book and I'm big fan of your work, and he also I'm a founder of Protect Beach Wetlands. So we've got a youth group that's really been committed to cleaning up some of the trash on the highways, along the wetlands in Los Cerritos in an effort to get to know the land better. And we go out maybe every every second, Sunday of the month, every second and fourth Sunday. We've been collecting trash in giant ten gallon bags. And there's so much plastic and Styrofoam along the highways, we fill up usually like five or six bags. And so we just really need to get rid of this in in our environment. And from what I know, it's already part becoming part of our molecular structure. So, you know, it's it's like in everything we eat in the fish, in the ocean and the garbage patch is like twice the size of Texas and it's just sitting there waiting to come ashore. So anything you guys do to get rid of plastic, I don't think the small restaurant business is going to suffer that much. There's plenty of alternatives in terms of other materials you can use. I'm very familiar with Kirsten Bowman and she uses bamboo containers or she is this continues to take home that are like cardboard. And, you know, they're pretty durable. Even if you get like a big juicy burger or whatever, it doesn't even leak through. So, you know, we need to get rid of the Styrofoam and the plastic. And thank you very much for your support on that. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Elizabeth LAMB and I'm here on behalf of the Low Street as wetlands land trust, as advocates for those Rita's wetlands. We realize that that goal cannot be attained as long as there continues to be an unending stream of these polluting and harmful polystyrene products in our local wetlands. Not only are these products unsightly, but can harm wildlife when they are accidentally ingested, or they can impede the ability of animals to forage. Furthermore, as responsible stewards of not only our local wetlands, but of the global environment, we are concerned about the consequence of polystyrene products circulating around the planet, never completely breaking down and making their way into the oceans and the food chain. It is unfair to risk the well-being of our children and our children's children and future generations by allowing this to continue. We wholeheartedly support the ban on polystyrene products, and I did want to mention the Speaker before talking about the hardship on small businesses. I remember that meeting as well. And I thought that the council very. Thoughtfully stretched out the implementation phase, which I thought made a lot of sense. And the other thing that really struck me was you querying. Your staff about other. Municipalities that had done this and the topic of San Francisco coming up. And from their unbiased perspective, there hadn't been any big problems because. This is a pretty. Easy issue to get your head around and to implement. It's merely swapping out a polluting and toxic product for something that's more sustainable. And I really do think about what this ocean will look. Like and what this world will. Look like five, ten, 2000 years. And the oceans. Full of. Plastic. Just seems so terrible to me. And this seems like, quite honestly, a small step to make things better. So thank you so much for your time. And your attention. Thank you. Next speaker Dave. Shukla. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Mayor Garcia, thank you for your leadership on this issue. As someone who grew up at the mouth of the San Gabriel River, this is something that would be very welcome, very much support the measure. As you know, toxicity is an issue across many different forms of product and attribution. Some of the other issues associated with it are going to be issues for us. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. All right. Hello. My name is Seamus Ennis. I'm with the Long Beach chapter of the Surfrider Foundation. Hey, guys. Thanks for having us. Good job. City council and staff, we really appreciate the effort and the time that you put into this. When I joined the Surfrider Foundation in 1999, it was kind of on the radar. But by 26, we started sending residents along. We started sending thousands of postcards to you, the mayor and the city council. And so you've been aware of this position from lots of our residents for many, many years. And so we then the city itself has been working on it for about 13 years, and now we're looking at the implementation schedule of about 18 months. So we think that's pretty modest. You know, we think 18 months isn't too fast because we already been working on it for 13 years. So the Long Beach chapter, Surfrider Foundation fully supports this ordinance as written, and we think you should just go ahead, go forward with it. And the final point is, we think it's pretty business friendly as well, because we've looked at a lot of restaurants that have already transitioned over from Styrofoam to other products. And it's been modest changes from a few percentage points up to about equal. And we have 40, at least 40 ocean friendly restaurants that we've already awarded and given them attaboys. And it has been no big deal for them and their customers actually appreciate it. So we think you can do it with the 18 month schedule as written is fine and it's not it doesn't hurt businesses at all. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, everybody. Mayor, city council members. My name is Michael Doshi. Thank you so much for having me here this evening. Over the years, I've been a volunteer with five Gyres Institute, a member of Heal the Bay Speakers Bureau up in Santa monica, the rise of plastics manager for Los Angeles's Surfrider chapter. And right now I am a staff member with Al Goleta, Marine Research and Education as their education coordinator and project manager, also on the global plastic pollution movement. I am known as the Gnarly Beach Cleaner and my mission is to spread awareness of plastic pollution through fun and positivity. So what I'm really here to do tonight is to let you guys know that you're the best looking group of council members I've ever seen at any council meeting I've ever spoken to. And that's not much just talking about how good you look. I can just see the intelligence radiating out of your bodies. All right? And I can see your intelligence when it comes to dealing with plastic pollution. And I can see that you're smart enough to know that even if you're not down at the beach or in the ocean seeing what's going on, you know it's happening. You know that it's an issue. I like to look at single use plastic pollution as this big tree, this big rotting tree that's decimating the local population by dropping the single use plastic fruit all over the place, US activists, US organizations that are working to fight plastic pollution. We're that small ax that is trying to chop that tree down. What we need you to be is that sharpening stone to help our ax chop it down. And that's what we're trying to do on a global movement here. So with that said, I think it's a smart decision to be the change makers, to be that stone that can help inspire the youth, inspire people to continue to want to make changes here in the state of California, and hopefully translate that to other places in the country and around the world. You have an opportunity right now that might not be presented to you again, so why not take it and be leaders in regards to the small businesses? That's exactly why your hardship clause exists. And I read through the draft of previous ordinances and I saw that. And there's organizations such as Surfrider that has the Ocean Friendly Restaurants program, and they have done the work and they have done the research to work with small businesses to make sure that they don't even need to apply for that hardship clause. So utilize the research and the tools that are already out there and exist. Thank you so much for your time. I hope I can make you stoked. I hope I can make you smile and I hope to see you soon. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and members of the council. My name is Rob Northup and I'm the director of the Don't Waste Long Beach Coalition. And first of all, I'd just like to say thank you to Councilwoman Gonzales for bringing this forward. We've all heard the debates. You guys all know the facts behind this stuff. We've been talking about this for almost ten years now within this city in terms of trying to push forward with constant revisits and studies and delays and the like. So we know the facts. We've already heard from everybody here. We've heard from a restaurant owner who said, let's move forward with this thing. So what I'm here to do is just ask you all to please move forward with this stuff. Because I do recall also at that last October hearing where another excuse that came forward was if we you know, we need to study this stuff. And if we did this here, it still won't have any impact because other cities are going to continue to have this and haven't banned it. So we'll still see Styrofoam on our beaches. And while that may be true, that's not an excuse to not move forward with this. Particular thing, right? I think things change when individuals are in this case, cities and councils like you are. Move forward with courage and leadership to actually move this thing and changing, doing what we can to change our little corner of the universe and making sure that we're making life a little bit easier and a little more environmentally free for everybody else that's here. Right. So again, I ask that you all move forward with this tonight, as is there's also, again, extending the 12 month phase in 18 months for businesses in a hardship clause. So we've done the study, we've done the analysis. And let's move forward tonight. Thank you very much. Thank you, Max Baker. Good evening, city mayor and council members. My name's Jennifer Granholm. I actually migrated down from Los. Angeles just for this meeting. I came down because I considered. Long Beach as a pinnacle of. Progress with a green room and sustainability. And just as this previous speaker said, I'm not. Going to harp on that actual. Notion too much at this point in time, because I think it's been abundantly. Clear how everybody feels more. So it's regardless of where you started. The reason I'm coming up to the podium is to ask you a question about what brought you. Here to the city council. What made you want to be a leader? What brought you to want to. Make a change in. The world? I think we all actually have. More in common. Than we think. That we do. If we take a look, regardless of what your status is, you. Have a desire to protect your loved ones or protect your family to provide to progress. I think it's all about a balance. And regardless of this one or any of. The other policies that come up on the floor, just take that into consideration. Whenever you have another environmental thing that's coming up on the floor, particularly about small cells or whatever it is, that's it. Thanks so much. And we have a last four speakers and then we're close. We're close. Okay. We have we're going to last five speakers and closing the speakers list next speaker. Good evening, mayor and council. I am Melissa Bean Hyson and I'm here last minute on prepared remarks on behalf of my sister Julie Darrell, who is a small business owner in Long Beach. She has been working for about a year trying to promote awareness about single, single use plastics and how to avoid them. And I've just seen the first Sunday of every month at the Alamitos Bay Farmers Market. The community has really responded positively. They are. They laugh about, you know, taking your own containers to restaurants, but they do it. And it's every straw that isn't used or every piece of Styrofoam that isn't used is just one way that we are moving forward to the community to keep Long Beach Green or to move it towards being green. My five year old nephew is having a hard time not picking up trash. So we're working on that. But if we can get him in the right direction and kind. Of real bad in a little bit, then I think a. Yes vote in this area would also help the city move. Forward. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker Evening there. Members of the city council. My name is Mark Coleman. I live in the peninsula. I'm here tonight on behalf of the Peninsula Neighborhood Group Association. So for many of us neighborhood associations, this is a huge issue. And I think I'm the only neighborhood association here. I'm not sure, but certainly in Belmont Heights, Belmont Shore and the Peninsula and our board six months ago notified Council Woman Price that we wanted her to support this ordinance. The beach. Those of you who have independence, the beach know it's ground zero for plastics, pollution and the documentation by our Goleta Marine Research has documented the depth of pollution. It's extensive. When and if the city really wants to use that beach for any purpose other than as something to pass by on the boardwalk, it will take major efforts just to clean up the plastic out of the sand. We cannot go any further like this. Every day that beach is inundated with plastics from the L.A. River and the San Gabriel Channel. We need your help. The city needs your help to pass this ordinance. Let's be at the forefront. We thank you for your support. Excellent report from staff that really is going to move this forward. Not just this issue, but the whole issue of bringing containers, eliminating any containers whatsoever. So we eliminate trash, which is a major problem. Thank you all so much. Please pass the ordinance. Thank you, Mark. Next speaker, please. Anna Christensen, protect the Long Beach. Slow, serious wetlands, obviously in support of this ordinance. I do want to direct everybody's attention to the screen behind you. However, council apparently regulating the use of sin. If you look at the board here. So that's a real challenge. And and speaking of which, since plastic comes from oil, I think one of the great benefits of this project will be to ah to maybe be forgiven for the sin of continuing to drill for oil which Long Beach does. So we can regulate our own sinning by not producing more plastic or using more plastic. Styrofoam made from oil means that if we use less Styrofoam, if we consume less Styrofoam as a city and as a community, then we will not be making more in our oil refineries to the west. So it's a it's a step. And it's also really kind of surreal to have everyone on the same page as environmentalists in Long Beach, which we all were before. Beach Oil Mineral Partners Divided US. So sad, but still on a positive note. Let's regulate that use of sin. Okay. Thank you. And our last two speakers control. And Cantrell. Good evening, counsel and honorable mayor. I have gotten used to bringing my own flask for water and kicking the plastic bottle habit. I take my own reusable bags to the grocery store instead of using plastic or paper bags, and I am sure that I and many other people can get used to bringing our own reusable takeout utensils to a restaurant. Habits are hard to change, but we can do it. And I don't think that this is going to cause the small restaurants to lose any business if they don't provide a Styrofoam takeout container. I've trained all my family now to say no straws when we go into a restaurant. And I think I can train them to take, take, take out. And I hope that you will pass this tonight as is and not extend it any further. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. My name is Sona Coffey and I'm a resident of the fourth District and also serve as your vice chair on the Sustainable City Commission. Pardon my grand. Entrance on the thing, but thank you for. Letting me speak here tonight. I will add my voice in support of adoption of this ordinance. I know there's a lot of supporters tonight, and there was also some concern about protecting small business. And I do want to. Help the public. Relies on the groups realize I know our Surfrider member mentioned we have 40 businesses and small businesses that are certified under our ocean friendly restaurant program. The city has a green business certification program. Small businesses are doing this already. They're making that switch voluntarily. I think what this ordinance will do is really help solidify the city's stance on this issue and really help us become take that next step in becoming stewards of our environment here. I know many of you believe that we have that responsibility and I do as well. So thank you for bringing this forward. And I encourage your vote and support tonight. Thank you so much. Thank you, everyone that spoke. I'm going to turn this over to Councilman Gonzalez. Yes. So I want to thank you just for being so patient with tonight, but also for the incredible showing of support for this item. I've only been on this item for two years, and I want to thank my chief of staff, Corey, for being very involved in this and my office. We had a ton of interns who also were at Cal State Long Beach and really turned to more environmentally or environmental majors because of this, because they were so fascinated. So I want to thank you all again. We should give you a big round of applause. You've been at it for so long. And we have a representation of, of course, community advocates, people in the food industry. Captain Moore, who's here, who's been doing this for many decades, academic institutions who've been a part of this. So let's give all of you a big round of applause, because I really appreciate the support of that. And I'd like to thank my co-sponsors on here, Councilwoman Pierce and Councilmember Urunga, who joined me on this item. And I appreciate their support in this as well. And I want to thank everybody for coming out tonight. I know these nights are never easy, but I really appreciate it. And as many of you know, this material is one of the most prolific materials found on our beaches. I think we haven't said it enough. Right. Our beaches, waterways and our streets. I'm now a member of the Master Plan Committee for the L.A. River. And that was the one thing that all of the 710 cities talked about. The very first thing was pollution. And it absolutely was brought to my attention multiple times that Styrofoam was one of those main polluters, not just here in the city of Long Beach, but along the 710 corridor, which we know is a is a big deal for many people. And because we know it's nearly impossible to recycle, it ends up spending over 500 years in our streets. So unfortunately, long before any of us will, we'll see that biodegrade. The ordinance before us is actually very generous, and I want to thank my council colleagues from last meeting back in December of 2016, actually, when we proposed a few things, we talked about moving the phase plan from 12 months to 18 months, and that was proposed by Councilman Price. And I appreciate that the polystyrene ice chests as proposed by Councilwoman Mongeau and I appreciate that. And then the recommendation to include as a voluntary option for straws by Council Member Pier. So I really appreciate those as we implemented those in the ordinance. My team and I, as many of you know, we've been working on this for nearly two years, but the city of Long Beach has been working on this for nearly 13 years. We have studied this, I would say, ad nauseum, and I hate to say that, but we absolutely have been studying this quite some time. In addition to the great work that our city staff did, obviously there was a categorical exemption report, and that includes a technical documentation of an environmental analysis, which in essence is another study. And it also includes a lot of information about Long Beach specifically and the impacts that we're seeing because of single use. It also validates a lot of the questions that we've had here about what it's actually doing to our waterways and what it's doing to our streets and litter and pollution. But I also would like to thank there's a ton of people, but our public works department, Environmental Services, DeKoe and Craig Beck. We really appreciate your work in this. I know we went through this similarly with the plastic bag ban, although this is a bit different, you all did a tremendous job of going to our business community . You talked to many of our community advocates that you've already known. So we appreciate that. And Amy Weber from the city attorney's office, thank you for your support and help in this and getting the language just right. And Mike Mays as well. And what I'll say is we have a lot of groups here, as I mentioned, a lot of good knowledge here from very many decades that have provided good information. And I think this is very fair. Three months for city facilities and city sponsored events, nine months for large businesses and 18 months for small businesses. Less than 100 employees. My office personally reached out to every single business improvement district district. We talked to the Business Journal as well and talked about that everyone from Naples to Coba, which is an assortment of many business improvement districts, to include downtown and Bixby Knolls. If I wasn't personally there, my chief of staff was there talking to them about the specifics of this ordinance. So they understood and I would say that, you know, a lot of them will welcome this. A lot of them, as we've mentioned, and I am one that does not cook, if you can believe that I have two jobs and my three kids. So I eat out a lot. And so I'm noticing and I'm seeing a lot of the businesses that I would have seen have Styrofoam maybe two years ago that don't have Styrofoam anymore. And I'm really proud of these businesses for taking the leap to do that. And we want to make sure that they're recognized. So in that, I will say I hope we do not delay this. We don't, I believe, need another study. We've studied this quite some time, quite a bit. We have a lot of great people that we've been working with that have ventured, you know, on this great item with us. And I think delaying this would just be a disservice to our community. We know many of our communities, we've invested in the Long Beach Clean team, we've invested in the Aquarium for Wildlife Restoration and expansion. MLB must program. A lot of these initiatives are what are the truly the values of Long Beach, and I hope we can continue that by solidifying this ordinance tonight. And then lastly, a few other people I must thank as well, Sierra Club, Surfrider Foundation, don't waste Long Beach with the Teamsters 396 as well. I'll Goleta Marine Research heal the bay Long Beach and Bar. A mental alliance. And so many of you that have been by our side to help us in the Long Beach Area Peace Network as well. So thank you. I will leave it there. And I really ask for my colleagues support. Thank you so much. Catherine Pierce. Thank you. I think my colleague, Councilmember Gonzales kind of said. The majority of what we need to hear tonight, that we've been here for 13 years with a lot of hours, a lot of sweat equity and a lot of process. Sometimes local government and bureaucracy, we get called out for not doing enough process, for not having everybody at the table, for not hearing all the voices. And this was not a dog and pony show of process. This was real. Engagement with small businesses, with big businesses. With DART, the people that make a lot of these products to small restauranteurs that might not have understood some of the benefits of going this route. And so I want to say that tonight, not only am I proud for everybody that's in the audience that's been working on this, like Surfrider Sierra Club residents, but I'm really proud of the city for taking the time and I'm proud of my colleague for saying, yes, we could try to push something through very quickly, but instead let's do a phased approach. And as she recapped. For us, that last meeting that we had really did take apart from everybody, and it felt like we were all on that same page. And so I'm honored tonight to be here with everybody. And I like to always share with folks know, my first action of being a rabble rouser was not on a picket line. It was actually picking up trash door to door when I was in fourth grade. Going door to door to my. Neighbors and collecting cans and trying to do recycling. And my mom was like, recycle what? You know, she could not. Comprehend that I now had five bags of of cans. In our yard that I needed her to drive to take me to go recycle. And so from that being. My very first activism to being a part of this council where we are really taking the actions necessary, it's a proud day. And I hope that everybody can walk away tonight feeling proud and like we've put forth our best effort. So, again, congratulations. Councilmember Gonzalez, for your great leadership. Thank you. Thank you. I know we have some folks cued up to speak. I want to just I wanted to speak after the makers of the motion on this issue tonight. And I want to just say a few things. The first is I strongly support the ordinance as presented by staff. I supported this since the conversation started by Councilwoman Gonzales, and I really want to thank her for her leadership on this issue. And I want to say a few things that I think are important to note. So in 2011, when I was on the council, I just got on the council and at the time we had an ordinance, a ban, single use, plastic bags. And when we did that in 2011, there's a lot of the same similar type of conversation. In fact, a lot of you that are here on this issue, we're also here on the conversation on the single use plastic bag issue. And it was difficult and we implemented a lot of this of of the similar kinds of measure to support small businesses and the phased in approach. And some things happened which were significant. The first is we saw an immediate reduction of plastic bags and the single use bags and the litter that they created all across the city and our beaches. And that was reported pretty heavily through the work of city staff. So there was an immediate impact to the city. The second thing that happened, more importantly, was Long Beach became one of the largest cities in the state of California to actually ban single use plastic bags, which led then the state legislature just two years later banning single use plastic bags up and down across the state of California. And so it is important for big cities to take initiative on issues that affect the environment so deeply, which is why I believe it's so important for Long Beach to do the same thing on on this issue. But we now have a state that moved forward on an ordinance at Long Beach, led on when it came to single use plastic bags. And on this issue, we can't expect as a community to ask our neighbors to not put their runoff and their pollution into the river if we're not willing to step up ourselves and eliminate from our own community the single source of pollution that we have in our river and into our coastline, which is polystyrene and Styrofoam products. It is it is causing incredible damage to our coastline. It's causing incredible damage to marine life here. And I know that. Yes, it is. I understand that it is a burden to some small businesses. I think that is a reality that that I think is true. But it is also true that there is no single, larger polluter and cause of devastation to our marine life and to our ecosystem in the San Pedro Bay than polystyrene. And so I'm hopeful that we move forward on this in a in a way that is strong and send a signal to the other. Is that this is a direction that they need to go as well in order to truly clean the San Pedro Bay. We have to lead for the other cities north of us to do the same thing and hopefully for the state of California to do the same thing. And that's how we get our local beaches here in the community clean. And so I think for for a city that has led on issues around solar and LEDs, conversion, multimodal transit, urban farming, plastic bags, I think this is a natural step in that process. And I want to uplift not just the work of staff, but the work of the sustainable the Sustainable City Commission. And I think it's important for us also to understand that the work that the Commission has done on this issue has been extensive. They've been discussing this issue for years, and I'm really proud of them. A couple of those members of those that have been involved are here, including one member of our council, and that was also a member of that group. And so I think that we owe that commission, but also the community to move forward and to ban Styrofoam in Long Beach. So thank you very much. And with that, let me turn it over to the speakers that are cued up, starting with Councilwoman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. So a few things. First of all, I support this item very much, and I think the credit really needs to go first and foremost to those who came before us on this body who really laid these efforts, the foundation for these efforts. I remember talking with Councilwoman Lowenthal and Councilman O'Donnell when they were on this council with me about this item. And I know that Councilwoman Lowenthal was really working on this item and developing it. And we we had a lot of conversations about it. And as someone who represents the coastline and the bay, I think this is definitely a step in the right direction, although there's a lot more work to be done. So I do support the item. I will say, though, that when the item came forward in October, we had a very healthy and robust discussion involving the roll out as it related to our small businesses. And I think that a little bit of that has been lost in tonight's discussion. Jack and I Jack Cunningham is my chief of staff. That that meeting I don't know how many of you guys were there that night, but it was a very long meeting and the motions that went back and forth were very complicated. So Jack and I had a chance to watch the video the day after the meeting and circle back with the city attorney. Just to get clarification on what we had actually voted on. And because it was important for us to message to our residents and our business community what it is that we had voted on. We sent out an email after council meeting to our constituents, letting them know what has been voted on. And for that clarification, we reached out to the city attorney. I've also had the chance to read the transcripts of that night. This morning in preparation for tonight, because I don't believe that the staff report adequately addresses what was passed. And I know Amy Webber from the city attorney's office is here so she can step in and correct me if she thinks I'm wrong on any of this. But we've also talked with Charlie Parker on this. So I think I think we're accurate on this, the intent of the. Okay, so noticing tonight, there's a major gap in attendance by members of the small business community who were present in October. And I know for a fact the reason for that is because assurances were made to them by me and others that what we voted on in October involved us reviewing a study or a reporter data and being able to tweak it and modify it before we rolled out Phase three, that specifically what we had approved. And I think that that's what they relied on. So when we got calls from people saying, do we have to show up to council, we thought there was going to be an opportunity to modify or tweak before it rolled out to us. We said absolutely. That's absolutely what was agreed to. That's absolutely what we we committed to. And that was what was voted on. And I didn't hear that tonight. So I want to make sure, to the extent that it's clarified and I don't know if I need a friendly, I would refer to the maker of the motion on this, because I think the intent should be clear. And if a friendly is necessary or a substitute motion is necessary, I'm happy to make it. But the intent of the legislation that we passed in October was to give the council some data, some analysis of impacts before Phase three began so that we could have the opportunity to make changes if we needed to, for the small business rollout, specifically the motion that was made. By me was my friendly is specifically saying before we roll out the implementation of the small business portion, we as a body together would receive information on the data so that we could move forward with that implementation phase. Because you are right, if a TFF comes back and outlines the study, a council member may want to put it on the agenda, may not want to put it on the agenda. It may get lost in the mix. I wanted to actually come back so that we can hear the data and we can report to our small businesses that this is the data your rollout is about to start, and it's based on this great positive data. The city attorney then clarified, So if I can understand the friendly correct, then the 18 months wouldn't be a hard date. You wouldn't determine that date until you receive the study? I said yes. Then the vice mayor asked Councilwoman Gonzales, Do you need to respond to the friendly councilwoman? Gonzales said, Sure, that's fine. We can do a study session, but I would really advise this council to stick to the 18 months. I really would do that. The city attorney then asked for clarification and said, I'm sorry. I didn't hear the acceptance. I heard that the 18 month stayed in. Councilwoman Gonzalez hesitantly said, You're making me do it again. Yes. So the city attorney then said, and I didn't hear, is it the study session? Now that's the study session. And Vice Mayor Richardson said a report at council, she just referred to it as a study session. Councilwoman Gonzales said, and I agree with it can be a meeting, a study session, just some sort of a report back to council. And then Councilwoman Gonzales said an opportunity for us to review that. So I want to make sure that what we're voting on tonight allows phase one and phase to be implemented in the timeline that we've we've outlined. I think that's great. Phase three should not be implemented until we have a report back and an opportunity to make adjustments. We may not want to make any adjustments at all, but we may want to make a few tweaks here and there that make the rollout of this easier for our small businesses. I completely understand that sometimes we make hard decisions and the businesses feel it's going to be an impact on them. They feel they're going to lose businesses business. They feel that they're they might lose customers. We hear it all the time from small business owners who don't like legislation that we are going to be forcing upon them . I understand that sometimes those fears are founded, sometimes they're unfounded. What I'm trying to do is soften the blow for a lot of these small businesses who are genuinely concerned about what the rollout will impact them, in what ways it may not impact them at all and may impact them in positive ways. But the goal of this is for us to work collaboratively to identify possible changes to the roll out that we can make before Phase three is implemented. So I don't know if that's the understanding of the maker of this motion or if that needs to come in the form of an amendment or if it needs to come in the form of a substitute motion. But I'm just putting it out there and I look forward to hearing from my colleagues. I will also say just because I think I have a duty to because Councilman Andrews reached out to me and asked me to read this letter into the record I am currently sick from this is from Councilman Andrews. I am currently sick from severe allergies and unable to participate in tonight's meeting. And I feel that a small delay on this item is reasonable to ask to make sure my constituents interests are represented, to best represent my constituents, and to make sure this ordinance is done in the best way we can. Please postpone the first reading of this ordinance regarding polystyrene to the May 1st council meeting. I understand this email comes at the last minute, but I wasn't expecting until this morning to be able. I was expecting until this morning to be able to participate this evening. I do know that he had some health issues early this morning and so it prevented him from being here tonight. Again, I look forward to hearing from my colleagues on both of those issues. One, whether we postpone for Councilman Andrews at Councilman Andrew's request, and if we don't, whether or not the intent of the legislation we passed in October is included in what we're passing tonight, because I think that will determine whether or not I will be making a substitute. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman. Let me have Councilwoman Gonzalez maybe respond to the councilman's questions. Yes. So I would have to clarify the motion, because from what I understand and we've spoken to the city attorney as well as that the ordinance would move through and 18 months would be included. However, there would be, as a study simultaneously included with that. And we asked for a variety of things applicable to all small food establishments 18 months after City Council adopts. Yeah. So applicable after. After adopts the ordinance. We we basically included everything. We also included bean bags, crafts, straws upon request. We also looked at big belly type trash cans. So just to clarify this, because I'm from I'm then I'm in the understanding that it was in everything we have in this ordinance is going to be moving forward tonight. And that was the discussion I believe we had back in when we we had the previous meeting, but that the study would would simultaneously go forward. Is that correct? The way the ordinance is currently drafted, where the staff report is drafted, that is correct. So if you move forward tonight, clearly the ordinance that is passed would have a provision that allows for the roll out for the small businesses in an 18 month period. But there would be a study session sometime before then. And obviously, as with any ordinance the council passes, you have the ability to amend anything that you pass tonight. So if a year down the road after you have some good solid data on the larger businesses and you have a study session and you feel that it's not appropriate for whatever reason to impose those same criteria on the smaller businesses. You could simply amend any ordinance you'd adopted tonight. Okay, but the ordinance does include the 18 months act for small businesses. It currently does, yes. Okay. As long as we're clear with that, I'm good with that. Of course, more information will never hurt. Of course, I think we have all the studies we need, but absolutely, if we need to do some more studies prior to that so we can have more information to go forward, I'd be happy to do that as well. But thank you for the clarification. I hope that clears it up with my council colleague, but I'd like to move forward tonight with the motion on the floor. Okay. Thank you. Council member, you ring up. Thank you, Mayor. And I want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this forward. I was one of the cosigners back in October on this because I thought it was very important. I was the one, I think, that brought up the the Great Pacific Garbage Patch back and that that that meeting because I had seen the, the film a few months before at the Coastal Commission and it was very compelling story to see all the plastic out there in the deep ocean, if I can also make a pitch . I also have a license plate that will tell my loyalty to help protect our oceans. But anyway, I diverge. One of the other things that happened since that last meeting in October, the Coastal Commission also adopted a motion to ban plastic straws in the oceans. So we are. We are. I definitely support this motion. I support the the ordinance that we're putting forward today. I don't think we need to change it much. Inclusion of a study is part of that. So I think that we're moving in the right direction. And when we are able to change how the behavior of our of our restaurant attending people which are bringing in their own plastic containers or plastic bags or other items for them to take home, I think we're making a hell of a lot of progress in that direction. And I think it would it would only help our communities and it would only help our earth. And I think that it's a great opportunity to make a change in our world. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Cipriano, I'm going to defer to Councilwoman Pryce because it's her motion. But I think the point here that is so important for us is that we adhere to what took place in our last meeting. And it was very clear from the transcript that we asked for feedback prior to this. And it's interesting because that I was part of that whole piece, that discussion, I guess a lot of us were, because it lasted a long time, but it came before the utensils piece. So I don't think we can cherry pick what we decided on at the last meeting. We have to incorporate it all. So that's my point. Thank you. Best move, Richardson. Just want to I just want to be clear, because it seems like there's two accounts of what happened at the last meeting. I want to hear from the city attorney. What is what is before us in terms of the 18 months and the the study session? Vice Mayor Richardson, what is before you tonight and I apologize. I was not here when this came for the first time when you gave staff direction. So I can't really comment on the and I have not read the transcript, as Councilwoman Pryce just did. So I haven't looked at them closely. But what's on the agenda tonight is, as it has previously been described, it's basically as far as the small businesses go, it would require the small businesses to comply after an 18 month roll out period. It would. Require. The larger businesses to comply sooner than that. It would require that there be a study session at some point in time. Before. The 18 months. And I was just talking with Mr. Beck and he indicated that that study session would definitely take place before the 18 months kick in, and it would if council wanted to change course at that time. Assuming you pass the ordinance tonight, you would have to amend the ordinance to make changes to it. So if you were dealing with small the small businesses, you could amend it to delete that requirement, extend it out further. Or do anything else that was reasonable. Thank you. That's consistent with what I remember. There was a lot of debate and, you know, both sides came together. I think we got a unanimous vote. And I think it was sort of, you know, we were concurrently evaluate as we were going. And then when the 18 month kicked in, there was a study session. Any given Tuesday, you can amend or place it on the agenda to amend the ordinance. So there wasn't a a stop or two, so to speak. There was a deadline for staff to present a study session on the findings before that third phase, third phase commenced. That's what I understood. That's what I understood. And I think that's what's presented today. So I'm I'm sticking with staff's recommendation and the motion on the floor. And I think that I mean, that honors what we did in the past. You know, there's a lot of negotiation that took place, but I thought we did a good job that night. So that's what I'm gonna support tonight. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Brice. So if I can just jump back in for a second if one possible solution and it isn't clear from the staff report, but if you wanted to make sure that that study session took place without amending the ordinance that's before you, you could set a time certain tonight as part of a motion to have that study session . I mean, you could pick a date, but it could be no later than three months before the 18 month period would kick in or whatever date would be appropriate to give you enough time to later amend the ordinance if it was necessary to do that. And that way we'll all be assured. No question we're going to have a study session will be at a time certain. So let me let me go and go back to Councilman Pryce now has the floor. So, Councilman Pryce, thank you. And that's exactly what I was going to suggest, is that we have a time certain or a date certain. I do want to check with Amy Webber, who's here, because I know that she hasn't had a chance to review the transcripts in our correspondence with Charlie in October. If you can clarify really what the intent of the pass I mean, this is what happens when we make sausage. It's really hard to identify the individual ingredients. So if Ms.. Webber, if you can please tell us what your legal interpretation of what we approve that night was in terms of our intent. My understanding of what what was approved that night. And I do have a copy of the. Transcript that you and Mr. Murchison have referred to. Is, as Mike stated earlier, that that that the study session or the the the study was intended to occur concurrently and but that the Council was to be informed. Prior to. The effectiveness of the 18 month phase. In period. For small businesses. I would also note that in the transcript, the city attorney on the night of the event said, I'm not sure if your friendly is necessary. You can get the study back on any Tuesday and do an. Amendment to the ordinance or change. The implementation date of Phase three at that time. You could do that on any Tuesday. So I think the intent all along was that once you had the information, whether it was earlier or later or on a precise date, the council would be able to make any changes that they felt were necessary. To the. Ordinance. And that's and that's great. And that's my understanding of what we passed as well. I will say I don't believe the staff report clarifies that in terms of the study session preceding the implementation of Phase three and as having the opportunity to opine on the roll out of Phase three. But that's fine. We're clarifying it now. So what I would request, and this really would be up to the maker of the motion if she, she and the second are okay with it. Is that the and also it's not a really. Yes, we're having a study session but the the point of the study session is to study the impacts and the implementation of phase one and phase two. So we would be getting a report back of what the impacts, the benefits and all and such were. So my my hope would be that two months before the implementation of phase three, so that would be six months from the passage of this ordinance, we would receive no later than 16 months. We would receive information regarding the the rollout and what's been successful opportunities for improvement, recommendations for future implementation that will give us as a council about two months to make tweaks, if we want to, to any of the policies, procedures, incentives, etc.. So I don't know if that's okay with my council colleagues. Yes. And just so we're clear, October 2019, if I'm getting my math correctly, is about 18 months. So that would be based on what Councilmember Price mentioned would take us to about August of 2019. Do you want we can select a date now if we'd like to. We have August 6th, 13th, 20th. I'm I'm going to put it all out there. I don't want any confusion going forward. And I appreciate the clarification. And just so we know, just so I'm clear as well, you want to talk about the successes and that's just the whole ordinance. Not specific just for small business. It's for the whole ordinance and how the impacts are. Okay, perfect. We won't have implemented it on small businesses, but there might be lessons learned that we can't deploy. Perfect. So can we say I'm just going to pick lucky number 13, August 13th, 2019. Is that okay? It can be lucky. We can do the second, second week of August, second, Tuesday, August, me and Roberto's birthday that week next. Well, happy. Birthday. You're going to have to be okay. So why don't we just clarify, Mr. Mayor, if we can, to say, August 2019 and let us come back. That's in the middle of budget as well. So we'd like a chance either August? I think that's correct. Thank you. Okay. So I think that that hopefully clarifies that issue. Moving on to Councilmember Super now, just one last point, and this was back to that discussion in the past was who conducts the study are data gathering? There was a little we didn't want to put this all on city staff if it was too much of a burden . So can we just add to that will make that decision moving forward also so it makes sense in terms of of of who's actually collecting the data. And I would imagine that we would just we would do that study like we do every study. And oftentimes we contract we would contract that work out or we would work with our internal folks. And if we need additional support, we do that. Is that right, Mr. Modica? Yeah, that's correct. We would see what we could provide if we needed consultant expert experience on that or if we need budget. So we would have to come back and say, here's what we can do with what we've got or we'd need more money. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. There is a motion to second on the floor. Members, please. Gwen Casher votes. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. We're going to do quickly, we're going to do item 26 and then we're doing the rest of the public comment here. Item 26 Important.

Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code, Including Article VIII (Sunshine Ordinance) of Chapter II (Administration) to Clarify Enforcement Provisions and Provide for Other Updates and Enhancements to the Sunshine Ordinance. (City Attorney 10023040) [Not heard on July 20, 2021]

AlamedaCC_09072021_2021-1101

In the last round of Sunshine Ordinance updates, we met with the Council to talk about various modifications. The most most of the modifications that the Council directed us to return to were changes to the remedies provision of the Sunshine Ordinance. And with respect to the remedies provision, the Council expressed interest in having us maintain the recommendation role of the Open Government Commission, but to return with the Open Government Commission's recommendation of keeping matters as much status quo as possible when a Commission decision has been rendered. We have met with the Open Government Commission throughout the last year on this topic, and that one major difference between our recommendation and the recommendation of the Sunshine Commission is or the Open Government Commission is, that we recommend that it would be an encouragement but not a mandate, so that city Garden City business can move forward as appropriate. Aside from that, the rest of the changes are minor and in the staff report itself, and we're happy to answer your questions. Thank you, Mr. Shen. Mr. Li, I can tell you in muted. Did you want to add anything? Can you hear me? Just fine? Yeah, just fine. I guess it's just a video. I have nothing to add. I just wanted to make sure you can hear me. All right. Thank you. And, Madam Cook, do we have public speakers on this item? We have one so far. Okay, Counsel, do we have any clarifying questions for Mr. Lay or Mr. Sheehan before we take our public comment? Should we take our public speaker first? Okay, let's do that. Madam Kirk, would you introduce our public speaker, please? We now have two, but the first one is Carmen Reid. All right. Good evening, Speaker Reid. Good evening, Madame Air and City Council Members. I would just like to bring attention to the penalties section in the Sunshine Ordinance. It's to dash 93.8 subsection D, and it states that a person who makes more than two complaints in a in a in a calendar year by the commission is 20. So if if a person who makes more than two complaints in in one year a 12 month period by the commission to which is determined by the commission to be unfounded shall be prohibited from making a complaint for five years. So I find this particularly concerning and this penalty seems rather harsh and unnecessary, especially because the LGC has not traditionally heard many complaints. And if our community wants a more open government, I recommend amending that clause to represent a more fair process instead of discouraging community involvement with the penalty that prohibits engagement. And I would also like to let you know that in San Francisco, the Sunshine Task Force, which is relatively equivalent or similar to the Open Government Commission in Alameda, they do not have a penalty clause like that at all. So it's something just to point out that they do not discourage public involvement. And perhaps we should also follow their lead. Thank you. Thank you. When we finish our public speakers, I'm going to ask the city attorney's office to comment on what exactly is before us this evening. And we have another public speaker. Yes, Jay Garfinkel. Good evening, Speaker Garfinkel. Good evening. I would second Commissioner Read's recommendation. My concern with the Open Government Commission and the Sunshine Ordinance is that while it made sense back around 2011, 2013, when the Sunshine Ordinance was created, it was aimed solely at enforcing the Brown Act. Since that time, we've all become aware of many issues that could use some more sunshine, but they are not related to posting of agendas. For instance, recently there was an error in an agenda and city staff went and changed what had originally been published. That's, um. That's uncalled for. Also, there are frequent additions to the agenda after its initial posting, and in the form, of course, it's finance. Now there is a number of people may submit correspondence over the ensuing two weeks and there's no notification given of the changes, the additions of the correspondence. There are any number of other items that need more openness and transparency. And I would suggest that we do what was what the Council did back in 2000, 11, 12, 13, whatever it was, create excuse me, create a citizens task force, just like you did for the police reform process. The difference I would make here is that I would have this meeting open to the public. I see no reason for secrecy. When discussing transparency, for instance, the ad hoc committee issue needs to be cleaned up. Most of what I've seen happening over the two years that the Sunshine Ordinance has been under scrutiny has been housekeeping. It's been items that restrict transparency. It makes the sunshine or the audit into the Open Government Commission almost useless. All it does is make sure that that agendas are published. Come on. That's not transparency. Yes, it should be done just as is required by the Brown Act. But there are a lot of things that go on in City Hall that the public is simply not aware of. And I think that a committee should be established to find out what the public wants to know and create a mechanism for doing that. Thank you. Thank you. Any further public speakers, Madam Clerk? Joshua. I'll tarea Gualtieri Altieri MEP. Yes. Yes. Good evening. Speaker off here. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is my name is Josh Schulz here. I'm the community relations manager at the Housing Authority of the city of Alameda. And I want to thank everyone for their time. And today I'm announcing the opening of the housing voucher waitlist for both our housing. Project and Mr. Altieri. We're really excited to hear about that. I'm thinking you are probably not speaking about the Open Government Commission and the ordinance amending the Sunshine Ordinance. Yes, that's correct. If you could hang on really briefly for Matt to finish this item and the clerk will see that you were called on in oral communications, which is very shortly. All right. Thank you. It's very important, very important information you have to share. And we look forward to hearing from you at that time under oral communications. Thank you. Thank you. And to I have and I might add, Mr. Asteria has been a member of my vaccine task force and doing great work. Any further public speakers, Madam Clerk? And there's John. Lay. It really is you, Madam Clerk. No additional speakers. Okay. With that, I'm going to close public comment on item six. E continued from July 20th. I did want to ask for a little bit of clarification. As I understand it, there are specific provisions we are looking at this evening with regard to the comments of the first speaker about a penalty section. A person who makes two complaints in 12 months is that Mr. Lay. Mr. Shin, help us understand, if you will. I'm happy to, Madam Mayor. We do not propose any changes to that subdivision of the code. It is a carryover from, I believe, the original or near original, the Sunshine Ordinance. And I believe the intent there was to. Limit the amount of time that complaints complainants if they file unfounded complaints to limit the amount of work that the city's commissions and staff would end up doing with respect to unfounded complaints. We do not make any proposals in this particular round of ordinance changes before you tonight. Thank you. He went to Mr. Lay. No other than that, the I'm not. Sure that the Open Government Commission which had. An opportunity to properly that that issue as well. Thank you. All right. So and then the other one was I was going to ask the clerk. Madam Clerk, could you just tell me a little bit? There was some reference to correspondence may be added, may come in after the original agenda is published. Can you tell us how you handle that? Yes, gladly. So any additional correspondence that comes in, we attach to the agenda item and then as it's updated, if it it's continuing over days, that new new information is coming in. We basically put the date that it was updated and keep adding the most current new additions on the top so people don't have to scroll all the way to the bottom and then it can see it quickly and understand what's been added. And would you say that you often find that correspondence is coming in right up until the time of the council meeting? Yes, ma'am. All right. Thank you for those clarifications. Okay. Council motion discussion. Where are you? Calls over her. Eric Spencer. Thank you, Mayor. So I would like to know if it's possible to have the commission review that penalty that was raised during the public comments of a key member not being allowed to come back for five to file any complaint for five years. I think that's a pretty I don't know what that was based on, but I think in a court of law, you would not see that. And I think it's pretty extreme. So I would like to know the procedure of how to get us to look at to look at that again. And in regards to what I think is being proposed tonight under 2-9, 3.8 penalty subsection A, I have concerns in regards to the use shall. There's two places where it's used here. And tell us if you would tell us again where are you in this is. It's penalties is the name of the stats. So exhibit one the subcommittee's proposal. I'm looking at. Exhibit are you looking at? Exhibit one? Exhibit two. Exhibit two. Same as the newly installed commission proposal. Yeah. So that's. Yeah. Sorry. So that's what I was looking at. Sure. I think the same language might be in both. I'm not sure which one we're supposed to be looking at. That's okay. Which. And your section was two point. 92-93.8 in the title is penalties. Yes. A. Okay. Okay. So. That's third and actually fourth and fifth sentences I believe use the term shall where you have. If I'm reading this correctly, the Open Government Commission is making a decision that they think a decision needs to be reviewed. And then they're saying that such a. Let me see where the sentence is now. Mr. Shannon has his hand up. Council Member Maybe I could be of assistance in, in the fourth exhibit, which is the staff's draft ordinance. You're probably looking at 2-9, 3.8. And in the beginning the red line shows that the original body, the originating body, i.e. the City Council, will be required to consider the Commission's recommendation with the use of the word shall. I believe that's where you're directing us. Okay. So tell me which exhibit you think that. Is in the fourth exhibit. So in the audience. The audience is one minus. Instead of a third. It would be the third exhibit, isn't it? The audience minus the third. Okay. We don't have a fourth exhibit. The fourth item after staff report is updated correspondence. Oh, you know, if you the online version has correspondence as a third and audience is the fourth. And so depending, I guess on where you look in the third or the fourth exhibit. Okay. So what's called Ordnance Stash Sunshine, is that what you're referring to? Yes, I believe that's where Councilmember Spencer is directing us to where her concern is that the originating body shall consider the commission's recommendation. Okay. The original. Okay. Okay. Is that where you are? Councilmember Harry Spencer. It's the same language I think is very similar. But my concern is that I think it needs to be may consider the recommendation. I don't I have concerns about the commission dictating to council that we must consider their recommendation because in the interim as the in the interim, then they also suggest or say that council should keep the status quo. And so I don't understand in this correctly, you have a decision made by council, which we did while I was mayor in regards to cannabis. And there was the issue raised which I look to the city attorney and I asked if they thought the notice was sufficient. The city attorney says yes, and then we proceed with making a decision. However, in the meantime, then there's a change at council and it comes back. But I think if I'm reading this correctly, it would be that the council would have to follow the lead of the Open Government Commission and essentially void that decision, relook at it and then make a decision. So I think that this needs to be may consider, but I don't think it's appropriate if I'm interpreting it correctly or commission to be dictating to council what they have to do. I think not to make a suggestion. Okay. I'm going to ask I'm reading it a little differently, but I'm going to ask the attorneys. Mr. Shay. Mr. Lay, there's this language. The originating body shall be construed as the Commission's recommendation and render a final decision on whether to accept or reject the Commission's recommendation in whole or in part. But it would tell us a little bit about those 2 to 3 sentences. Really? Sure. Madam Mayor, Councilmember Spencer, we're happy to help. So in the example that Councilmember Spencer provided, the commission, for instance, would render a decision at the council. Decision enacting an ordinance is unlawful. Under this proposed language, the Council will be required to consider that recommendation, and it does not automatically mean that the Council's previous decision was void . But you would have to agenda. Is it as soon as possible to consider the Commission's recommendation at that new council meeting? You may accept or reject the Commission's recommendation upon a majority vote, but you would be required to agenda as it and take action on the Commission's recommendation. If you changed it to May, then you may or may not consider the recommendation at your pleasure. To us, both of those are lawful approaches, and we would certainly take the Council's lead on which approach you prefer. Thank you. Any other councilmember, Harry Spencer, did you want to add anything to that or further questions? Yes, thank you. And then it continues on the subsection B of penalties, where, again, the city clerk manager, city attorney, as appropriate, shall promptly consider the commission's recommendation for counsel. I. So, again, I have concerns of the use shall throughout this section. And I really think that it's up to the council at that point, whatever council it is, to decide if they want to revisit an issue or not, and they can consider the Open Government Commission's recommendation. But I have serious concerns of the use of the word shall in both in both of those subsections. And I actually I think briefly, I think the city charter is very clear who has the power, the ultimate power. And I think it truly is council and not the commissioners, unless, in fact, there's a vote by the people to give that authority to the Open Government Commission. And I would question, I think, honestly, giving them power over words, telling us any time of the shall I think is a problem. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. The attorneys. Anybody want to? Weigh in on that. Madam Chair, we as you as you probably are well aware and Councilmember Spencer, we've had many meetings with the commission where the commission would have preferred to go much further than this. And at the end, this was compromised. We attempted to seek the maximum amount of compromise possible, given how far the commission was interested in going. If the Council wish to change the both shows, to me there are certainly no legal problems whatsoever and we can easily do it tonight. So if I'm understanding correctly, this pertains to public information. When there has been a complaint brought in, the commission finds that some there was some violation of providing public information. So may recommend to the city the steps necessary to cure or correct the violation city clerk, city manager and or a city attorney as appropriate to properly consider the Commission's recommendation and inform the Council of their final decision. Do we need another sentence that talks about what the what the Council then does with it? Not necessarily. Because on on the issue of public information, typically that's an administrative action. It's not the council doesn't typically take action on administrative actions. And so that's why we left this sentence in the cities, administrators versus the previous action where it's Brown Act violations, for example, when the council adopts an ordinance and that's why we included the council, the originating body, which includes the council. That's why the difference. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Other accounts from her. Spencer. Thank you. And thank you for asking that follow up question. So my concern would be what happens in our to open government makes a recommendation and then there's a time period before it comes to council. What happens to the council's decision that was made and now they're questioning the public access to the meeting? Does that decision continue moving forward or is it stalled? Mr. Chen. Yes. So the language provides that the city should be encouraged to maintain the status quo. So it will depend on the situation, largely the council by operation of law. The original council action is effective and so I'll give maybe a clear example. So for example, the council directed staff to lobby for a particular bill and there was only a month left before the session was going to end in that scenario. And if the staff do not lobby the council, the action will be nullified. In that scenario, it is more likely that staff would proceed, notwithstanding a commission decision, until the council reverses staff in a different scenario. Let's say the council directed staff to plant 1000 trees and it's going to take three years to plant those trees. Another two months delay would make no difference whatsoever. So in that scenario, I would imagine that staff would delay the planting of those thousand trees and then give the council the final say. Thank you. Other council members. Think. Okay. Do I have a councilwoman outside? I think can't go up. I think I simply wanted to thank all versions of the Open Government Commission that have given this consideration and city attorney Shen and staff, especially Mr. Lei, for their, I would say, very incredible hard work at trying to find a compromise that gets us to a place that provides some accountability at a certain point in time. May just allows the Open Government Commission to become even further a body that makes rulings but doesn't have that doesn't necessarily have impact on the way in which we do business. And I think that this language, with all the changes that have gone into it through the various public meetings, meets that compromise very admirably. It gives the city the flexibility whereby the harm from a finding is reduced, but also does give the public the ability to know that if if a finding of violation is found and there is the time to be here, that that it will be reheard and that that be cured at that point in time. So I'm ready to support it. So are you making a motion? Yes, sir. I will move approval of the of the ordinance as proposed by staff tonight. Okay. Do we have a second to that motion? And we'll continue with discussion. Vice mayor of L.A. We've got a second. I'll second if we can have time to discuss. Absolutely. Okay. We've had a motion by council in Oxford, seconded by Vice Mayor Vella. I think I saw Councilor it. Yes, I can go up. Is that correct? So what kind? Council member defect next, please. Okay. Well, thank you very much to the members of the public who have been involved in this, as well as the Open Government Commission members and our city staff. I, for one, would really like to hash this out even more. I'm not convinced of the language that we're seeing before us. The two areas of my concern let me focus on the first one, and we just had a brief conversation about that. It has to do with maintaining the status quo pending final review by the commission. So under this certain situation, as discussed by City Attorney Evenson and as asked by Councilmember Herrera Spencer if the city council makes a decision. That the Open Government subsequently finds troubling with regard to Brown Act or noticing or whatever under the current language that Lang the the decision of the city council. Should or should not move forward, depending on kind of the the immediacy of the issue as kind of outlined by city attorney even Chen. So if it's something as time sensitive of, say, you have to do something with regard to state legislation in those situations. Even if the Open Government Commission found something troubling with a council decision in those situations, the proposed language would allow the City Council to go ahead and move forward, even if the Open Government Commission found something troubling about that. In other scenarios, maybe there are some things that are kind of long distance in time. At that point in time, staff might defer to the to the Open Government Commission to delay a final decision. So here's here's the way that I see it. I think city staff needs to when they're putting together staff reports and agenda items, they need to factor in the the possibility that the Open Government Commission might have some questions with regard to how certain items are are noticed or gone through our Sunshine Act or or even the Brown Brown Act, the Sunshine Ordinance that is. So our city staff needs to kind of vet within before putting forward an agenda item. They need to do that kind of internal risk assessment and that should be done. I mean, if we're at a certain point where the Open Government Commission does find something that is troubling, I mean. Do we really want to move that forward, even if it's a time sensitive issue? Um, so I, I think in those situations, if the open government finds something troubling about something, then the City Council should revisit it and hold off on on finalizing its decision. So it should not be or should encourage the status quo, but it should be a must encourage the status quo. I think that's a critical part of giving our open government process effectiveness or or power, so to speak. So so I don't agree with that. The use of should encourage the status quo in cases where the Oakland government found something troubling with regard to the council decision. I think in cases where open government finds something that is troubling, the council should review that and hold off on on their decision, on executing their decision until having discussed it further. So that's less my viewpoint on that. The second point that I do want to talk about, what I'm concerned about is the idea that a person can't come back for five years. You know, I don't think that the situation in our open government is such that it's been so troubling where someone has just kind of mucked up the gears of the open government process. I don't think we've come to that situation. So I'm not convinced that that we have the reasons why we should impose such a drastic penalty at the end of the day. You know, if people want to come to city council, if people want to go to the Open Government Commission, that's their right. You know, if the Open Government Commissions don't like what they say or if they find them, you know, always raising things out there, just kind of mock up the gears. Well well, then the local government commission, I'm sure will will will act accordingly in their deliberations and their decision making. But I don't think we should be so heavy handed as to say, okay, well, if you have two things that are troubling and they don't pass muster. Well, now now you're you're, you know, put in the box for five years. I don't think that's fair. I don't think that's democratic. So, you know, let's let's let's let the people have their say, whether it's with the city council or with the commission. And council every day. I just want to remind you what Mr. Lay reminded us, that this issue may well come back before the Open Government Commission. We heard Councilmember Herrera Spencer ask that that happen, but right now it hasn't been vetted by the Open Government Commission and it since it's in the center, I propose that an earlier iteration of their body came up with it should be up to that body to reconsider. But I think that's what you're saying in not so few words, maybe. And that may very well be I'm just reiterating that that is just very drastic. But I think my key point is really the first point. I do think, you know, I agree. I was one of the first person to have concerns about the null and void power, because I just don't think the Open Government Commission has the power to declare things null and void. I don't think the charter gives them that power. So I, I'm going to have to say on that one to the Open Government Commission and to the public, I'm going have to say on that one, I'm going to have to go a staff. But on the matter of, you know, when when Open Government Commission challenges a council decision, I think those decisions should put be put in abeyance. They must be put in abeyance and it should not be should be put in abeyance. So that's where I am landing. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman, that's why. Did I see your hand going up again? No. Okay. Vice mayor of L.A. Yeah, I, you know. I'm going to be moving forward with the recommendations. I think that there have been several lively conversations with the GC. I do just want to put out there that I think we've had the ordinance in place for a decade, I think, or we're coming up on a decade. And you know, there may be a number of things that that, you know, looking back, we may want to change. This dog Sea and Sunshine Ordinance came about from large scale community conversation. And I think that there have been some proposals and differences of opinion about what may or may not be within the kind of the confines of the city charter. And certainly I think that if our constituents are interested in seeing certain things change and there's proposals to take action, whether it be through amending the charter or looking at different alternatives, I'm sure that we will have a robust community conversation on that. And I think that looking back after having this in place for for a number of years, this is a good time to do that, to say, is this working? Is this not working? But in the meantime, I think that there's been a tremendous amount of effort that has been put into the language before us tonight. And I'm prepared to support it. And I know I want to thank all of the volunteers who have served on the LGC over the years that this this item in particular has been discussed at length and proposals have been put forward. I know that there's been a substantial amount of time put into this and that, you know, there might not always have been agreement. But certainly I think everybody came from a place of wanting to have a better ordinance before the city and something that will make sure that we are being as open and transparent as possible. But I do want to encourage, you know, as the council, the city staff, the community, if we want to have a forum for a larger discussion on what open government really means, I think that, you know, we should have that and we can look at the different provisions and what the different options are. But that's not agenda tonight. And so I don't want to get into the specifics of what could or could not be proposed. And I want to thank everybody for their work on this. Thank you. Okay. With that, I think we've all been heard from maybe we have a roll cover, please. Sorry. Councilmember de thug? No. Herrera Spencer. They're not quite. High. Vela. Mayor as he Ashcraft. High. Net carries 3 to 2. All right. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thanks. And Mr. Lay, Mr. Shan. All right, so with that, I am going to adjourn the continued July 20, 2021 City Council meeting, and I will open the regular City Council meeting of September seven, 2021.

Recommendation to adopt Plans and Specifications No. RFP PW20-004 and award a contract to GHD, Inc., of Long Beach, CA, for engineering design services for the Artesia Great Boulevard Project, in a total amount not to exceed $2,269,451, and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter the contract, including any necessary amendments; Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group by $7,977,118, offset by Measure R and Proposition C funds from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) (MR315.70); and Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group in the Public Works Department by $7,977,118, offset by a transfer of Metro Measure R and Proposition C funds from the Capital Grants Fund. (District 9)

LongBeachCC_11172020_20-1104

Thank you. Now we're going on to 45, please, from. Recommendation to award a contract to G HD Inc Design Service for Design Services for the Artesia Great Boulevard Project, District nine. Councilman Richardson. Thank you. It's a great project. The artists art is a great boulevard, and I'd like to highlight it. So I've asked staff a short staff presentation. Oh, I'd like to ask Eric Lopez if he can give a quick stop report. Thank you, Tom. Honorable Mayor, members of the city council. This is a project that we have been working on. We're we're seeking authorization to enter into a contract with DHT of Long Beach, California, for our engineering design services so that they can help us design the project, develop the bid package, and get this project ready for construction . The project will implement a series of complete street improvements along a three mile stretch of our T.J. Boulevard. It is a regionally significant east west arterial street that carries high volumes of through traffic, as well as traffic fronts and surrounding neighborhoods and large trip generators. The improvements are comprehensive. This will be a major project that will not only improve pavement, street and sidewalks and but will also improve signals and landscaping and and other initiatives consistent with our different master plans, including the bike master plan. This concludes our staff's report. Not to make your. Thank you. This is a great project. I want to highlight it. $17 million in investment. It's Artesia Boulevard, a major corridor, and it's important for North Harbor. Thank you. Can I get a second, please? Okay. We were talking about customer your income over. District one i. District two i. District three. I. District four. All right. District five. I. District six. I. District seven. District eight. II. District nine. All right. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. Now we're going to hear items 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 61 and 78. These are all funds transfers from council offices. So, Madam Court, please read those items.

Rezones property located at approximately 6756 Archer Dr. from O-1 to G-MU-5 in Council District 5. (NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING) Rezones property located at approximately 6756 Archer Dr. from O-1 to G-MU-5 in Council District 5. 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 1-20-16.

DenverCityCouncil_02292016_16-0039

So. So for all of those reasons, I'll be very proud to support this tonight. I wish. And my guess is the city of Denver is paying in a subsidy for any of the additional costs of that parking, which is why I care. It's great to have more parking than you need. It's just that it's generally the government that's paying for it and it's less that we're not spending in units. So trying to get that match right is challenging, but obviously I'm very supportive in spite of that concern, and I'm glad there's a plan to monitor it closely and be thinking about ways to share with other projects. I think that's very innovative. So so thank you and enthusiastic support tonight. Thank you, Councilwoman Kenney to Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. My comments would be similar. I want to first support this project. And number two, I think it's a national model around, you know, homeless housing to make sure that sites all over the city and not just focused in one area. And I think you guys are serving as a model. I read through some of the letters of support that a community would say, yes, we want an integrated model in our community and which also support is the design elements. I mean, you're not going to know which housing is of different incomes. And so just want to really, you know, give you guys a lot of credit and just say thank you for that because that's what we're looking for in this city, is is a city with diverse incomes, you know, a continuum of housing opportunities all over the city. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to add my comments of support for the project as well, and thank the team of all the players, including the neighborhoods who have been engaged in the conversation for a number of years. The one thing I want to mention that hasn't been said is that there are some great schools in this area and the fact that there are two and three bedroom units and we'll have families of children who will go and will be going to school in this neighborhood. It's it's going to benefit them tremendously. So kudos to all of you for the great work on this one. Thanks. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega in the comments. Council Bill 39. See none. Madam Secretary. Recall Specimen Black by Brooks i clerk by Espinosa. I. Flynn. I. Gilmore I Cashman can eat Lopez. Hi, new Ortega. I Mr. President. Hi. Councilman Flynn. Thank you. We got it. Madam Secretary, please consider the results. 3939. 39 has been placed on final consideration and does pass. All right, we've got one more. And that is Council Bill four zero. Councilman New, would you please put council bill four zero on the floor? Thank you, Mr. President. I move the Council Bill four to be placed upon final exploration and defense. It has been moved. We need a second. Got it. Thank you. A public hearing for Council Bill four zero is now open. May we have a staff court? Theresa may, Sarah with community planning and development. The next rezoning request is at 668 through 670 Inka Street. It is in the Lincoln Park neighborhood in Council District three. One block north of Sixth Avenue. One block east of Santa Fe Drive. Four blocks west of the Denver Health Campus and Speer Boulevard. Property is about 12,500 square feet or about a third of an acre, and there is an existing single family structure on the property. The property owner is requesting the rezoning to redevelop a vacant portion of the property. Existing zoning is an old chapter excuse me, 59, and the requested zoning is urban context rowhouse. Three stories from the eight associated with this zone district allows apartment buildings on certain streets, collectors and arterials, which doesn't apply to this site because the both streets on the site are local streets.

A MOTION relating to deleting the requirement of the executive to provide to the council a monthly report showing vacant positions by department; and rescinding Motion 11154.

KingCountyCC_12062017_2017-0500

Thank you. I'd like to move the minutes of November 29, 2017, as written. It's been moved and is before us. Any comments or changes? All those in favor please signify by saying I. Motion carries item five and six are to ordinance to proposed items. One Motion one ordinance that will be presented together because they both are related to probably my favorite projects of 2017. This was like a New Year's resolution that I'm I'm I'm having a lot of help making come to you before the end of the year. It was a yearlong effort to review all our ongoing reporting requirements and code. So everywhere in the county code that says to somebody that they must report to us to determine which ones are useful and should continue, which ones can be combined or changed in frequency, and which ones are no longer useful and can be eliminated. We briefed the committee on this project in September. We have had a tremendous amount of staff work on this and so I just really want right up front say thank you for that because we're getting to the point where we can now start to update the code, but there are quite a few little technical ins and outs that need to happen in a multiplicity as code update of this sort. So Tara Rose from staff is here to present the staff report. Aaron Osnes is also here. Don't you go ahead and take it away. Excellent. Well, do Madam Chair, members of the committee for the Record, Tara Rose, council staff. And as the chair noted items five and six on today's agenda concern making changes to reporting requirements to council the materials for these two items begin on page 11 of your packet. And Madam Chair, with your permission, I'd like to brief item 6/1 and then circle back to item five. Please. Please do whatever order makes the most sense. Thank you. So then I'll begin on page 12 of your packet and start with some background on the project, just a little refresh. So at the direction of the chair this year, council staff are engaged in a research project reviewing the King County Code to identify required reports to council and focusing on those that are at a regular ongoing frequency. Proviso responses and reporting requirements to other entities such as the Executive were not included in this effort. And as the Chair noted, the committee received a briefing on this project in September. Staff found 119 of these ongoing reporting requirements to council and also identified the enacting legislation for each requirement. And some of these date as far back as the 1970s, reporting requirements generated by state law or in a local agreement are not included in this number. Council analytical staff and other legislative branch staff were consulted about whether these reports generated by code requirements were used in their analytical work, or if they could potentially be eliminated or streamlined through consolidation with other reports or a reduced frequency. And as part of this effort, analysts were encouraged to think about if the reports were used in their analytical work, if the information was easily available elsewhere, or by request, if circumstances had changed relative to when the report requirement was created, and if a reduced frequency would still give sufficient information. Proposed Ordinance 2017 0501 Item six on the agenda is the culmination of this work and would eliminate 28 ongoing reporting requirements, change the frequency of eight combined 13 reporting requirements into five ongoing reports, and make miscellaneous changes to seven. And I'll describe some of those miscellaneous changes in a moment before I go into more details on the changes that would be made by the proposed ordinance. I want to pass out and orient you to a handout. No pause for a second while it's passed out. Council member Mike Bowers on the phone. So if he doesn't already have this, maybe describe what you're talking about. We'll do a first. So this handout is an updated version of attachment three in your packet. There's been an update to the work plan portion of the attachment, which I'll go into later. I will be using this handout 4 to 4 page numbers, and I'll try to be very explicit that when I'm giving page numbers for the packet and the staff report and pages for the attachment, but if I'm being unclear, please, please ask and I will provide any clarity that I can. So as you can see, this updated attachment that was just passed out provides additional background on each reporting requirement and the specific change that would be made by the proposed ordinance. It's sorted by change type, and by that I mean reporting requirements that are eliminated on one list that have a change frequency on another list, etc.. In the September 20th committee of the whole briefing, reporting requirements were assigned an identifier consisting of a number and a letter. And these identifiers have been continued from that briefing. In addition to the changes described in the handout, the proposed ordinance 2017 0501 would make the changes to gendered pronouns and historically gender terms in King County Code titles one through four A And this is to match the changes in proposed Ordinance 2017 0489, which passed the Council this week. The proposed ordinance in front of you today also would make technical corrections to the code suggested by the code adviser, such as updating outdated names to reflect current names, deleting duplicative words or inserting missing words, etc. Examples of these technical corrections and their associated line numbers are provided on page 13 of your packet, so not the handout. So moving ahead to page 14 of your packet. As noted earlier, the proposed ordinance would eliminate 28 ongoing reporting requirements, and the full list of reports proposed for elimination can be found on pages one through seven of the attachments of the Matrix. Some common reasons for elimination are identified in table one in your packet and the staff report portion. Some reasons include that the group responsible for the report is no longer active. The information request in the report is accessible elsewhere or that conditions have changed since the enacting legislation. In addition to eliminating 28 reporting requirements, the proposed ordinance would also change the frequency of eight. In the full list of those items can be found on pages eight and nine of the handout. The Matrix. With one exception, the changes represent reduced frequencies. So for example, semiannual two annual. The exception is related to the county's affirmative action plan, which was identified as Report 18 C on the attachment and current code requires the Executive to transmit the Affirmative Action Plan every five years, and executive staff have requested that this be changed to a four year reporting cycle in order to reflect a federal requirement for the county to apply for certain federal funds. So I want to pause there for a second because I think this is a good example of what we're trying to do here. We have got, for good reasons, a code requirement that says make a report every five years and the federal government saying make a report every four years, which ends up with multiple reports doing the same things in successive years as opposed to just one time every four years. And we all get the same information. This is just sort of the efficiency that you can have when you go in and clean up every now and again. So I think this is a good one. I'm looking over the H.R. people. They're nodding. So that's good things. Moving ahead to the next section of the staff report, which is on page 15 of your packet. Proposed ordinance would combine 13 reporting requirements into five ongoing reports, and the full list of these reporting requirements and their associated change can be found on pages ten through 12 of the attachment handout. And then finally, the proposed ordinance would make miscellaneous changes to seven reporting requirements. And these changes do not fall cleanly into the previously described categories of eliminated change frequency combined. And the full list of these reporting requirements and their associated change can be found on pages 13 through 15 of the attachment. That handout four of these changes concern what I am referring to as one off reporting requirements, and these are things that were inadvertently codified back in the day. So these reports, these were a one time only reports. And according to the King County legislative drafting guide, in general, ordinances that are of a general and permanent nature should be codified. And then those ordinances that are temporary or relate to very specific circumstances are not codified but kept in the clerk's office, for reference. And so three of these one off reporting requirements are more than a decade old. And council staff have raised no issues with eliminating these one off requirements. And then the fourth that I would point out, is more recent and concerns the best starts for kids, youth and Family Homeless Prevention Initiative Implementation Plan. And this plan has already been adopted by council. So additionally, for your reference, a list of reporting requirements that are left unchanged in the proposed ordinance can be found beginning on page 16 of the the handout attachment. Additionally, a small subset of the unchanged reporting requirements have been flagged as potentially in need of further updates, but that required additional research and consultation outside the scope of this project. And these items were placed on a list to be considered for a future work plan, and the work plan can be found beginning on page 28 of the handout. At the beginning of my remarks, I mentioned that this portion of the attachment had been updated. And I just want to point out that item 12 W, which concerns revisiting the Harborview reporting requirements, was added to the workplan. So that is the difference between the attachment that's in your pocket and the attachment that I handed out. Switching gears. I'll now brief propose motion 2017 0500. Unless the chair wishes that I pause for questions. And have any questions here, I'll just state that the side conversation back here was about the vacancy report. And one of the things that you may have mentioned is there's a couple at least in here that were reports that are ongoing reports. They're actually happening. They're valuable reports, but they're only listed in a motion. And so sort of the reverse of what you were just saying about one time reports that shouldn't have been codified. These probably should have been kind of filed since they were in a motion. We don't codify motions. So what we're doing with those and the vacancy report was the one we were talking about back here, is that we're going to codify that and make it at a reasonable free frequency and continue receiving the same information, but quarterly instead of monthly. And now it will be in the right place, written the right way. That is correct, yes. Since that relates to proposed motion 2017 0500. Would you like me to please clean up? Okay. Perfect. Madam Chair. Councilmember D'Ambrosio. Before we say, is this the right time to ask the questions about specific reports? Please chart. Yeah, please do. I'm trying to give you a reference here. All right, so if. You just give me a subject, I might be able to find it quickly. The Special Duties Report. The one that H.R. produces. This is 23 on in the materials, 23 executive boards on the number of employees on special duty assignment. Can you remind me? I think I know what that is, but remind me what a special duty assignment is and the rationale for proposed elimination of this report. I would have to follow up on the specifics in terms of special duty assignments. But this this report is something that the council does receive. However, staff provided feedback that it was unclear what analytical value it provided and that it wasn't used in their analytical work. Hmm. You know, that certainly that's, you know, staff's perspective. And so council members may have different feelings. A generation may be able to help us out here. He looks like he's halfway out of a. I'm going to dove in while Mr.. Issue comes up because i recall working on this report in h.r. And in a department. My understanding is my recollection, i should say, is that this is a way to keep track of how many people are working out of classification and presumably receiving some kind of of out of class pay so that that doesn't become used all the time and result in reclassifications. So there's different ways of getting a reclassification, right? One of them is you look at you don't have the right kinds of staff. You need different kinds of staff. You have for budget, for a different kind of staff that may cost you more. And you have to go through the regular budget approval process and the possibly the FTE approval process to do that. Another way is if you work somebody out of class, intentionally or unintentionally, that then that employee can later on, sometime down the road apply for reclassification through the personnel board and actually get themselves reclassified without any of those approvals. So I imagine that this was a means of keeping an eye on tracking and managing so that reclassifications are intentional and not unintentional. That would be my guess. Mr. Issue Councilmembers John Rich Just after King County Council. Madam Chair, you are correct. This might even go one step further in just being able to keep track of those individuals who have been given that clock, that special duty assignment, so that it isn't an end around a reclassification process either. It allowed the members to understand the different kinds of special duty and just to know what was going on. That information is available in a variety of different forms as well today, and any work that's being done on this, it just wasn't used for analytic purposes. And in the check ins on this, staff have mentioned this has been of minimal additional value. This was also instituted at a time when we didn't have as good of an H.R. system, and that information was a little more difficult to draw it together. So that's all I have on that. The only additional thing I would add is for all of these reports that are recommended for elimination, there were a number of different reasons. One is we're not actually getting this report. It doesn't exist anymore. And that could be for a variety of reasons, including there used to be a committee. We were supposed to get reports about the committee. That committee hasn't existed for 20 years. So, of course, we no longer get reports about that committee. I mean, could be that obvious. There are reports that we are getting that staff advised they don't use for any purpose and or the information is available to them in a more useful format in other ways than an annual or routine report, etc.. And we could possibly either in a systematic way for all of these or for targeted ones that councilmembers have questions about, provide information about the why it's not really. This chart is on eight and a half by one sheet of paper I imagine they're tracking goes quite a bit beyond that and we could probably provide more information if that's helpful. So I appreciate all all of that and I appreciate that there's reports that staff doesn't need, but there's does and I've gone through in a lot of these, it looks like they should be gone and it's good work. There are some that I think are informative to members as we make sure we understand to the best we can kind of what's going on in the government from budget making decisions and operate policy setting things. And this one, it's pretty fresh as a 2011 originating legislation and the report is being done. We have a 2016 version of it. I confess to having not read that, but I think I might go look at it and just just see. It's absolutely fine. I was the special duty thing I had. Maybe it was another thing in mind. So our commitment going into this work was that if a member raises their hand and says, I received this report, I use this report, this report is useful to me. I would like to keep it that we will do so. Also on the seventh, see the lobbyist reporting. That's pretty. Stay 1998 originating legislation doesn't look like it's been done. What's the rationale for eliminating the reporting requirement? That is correct, that the original legislation is from 1998. And so within the ombudsman role is the investigation of alleged violations of the lobbyist disclosure code. And the OMBUD has indicated that while relatively rare, I think they've had three, that they would include that in their their report, the Ombudsman's report on their sort of exercise of functions . Okay. So we won't be losing that information. It would be coming from another place. Correct. On the six E, I'm going backwards here. The School Technical Review Committee reports. Can you help me understand? As someone says, Aaron, often someone who sits on that committee, I tell you, this report is never done. Okay. So why what? Why didn't why do we ask? Why isn't it done? This is supposed to come over as part of the school impact ordinance. It never has. Who's required? What is it? So let's talk a little bit more about the requirement, because there's not a column here that says who the code requires to provide the report and. Required to provide the report. The School Technical Review Committee consists of council staff, deeper staff and PSB staff. We spend a whole day with the school districts going over their plans, making sure that they're, you know, compliant with the requirements of the formula for the school fees and that their student generation rates make sense and meet our for our requirements and their couple of facilities plan makes sense. The thinking at the time was that I believe that wasn't here was that a report would come with the ordinance that implements those plans. At this point, those plans are updated on kind of a peripheral basis. I mean, they're they don't change a whole lot other than just the number of projects in the in the student generation rate. So the report doesn't add a lot of value. What is the concurrency that we're looking at? Other school facilities are required to be concurrent with the county's comprehensive plan for unincorporated areas. Concurrent. I understand. I understand. Transportation, concurrency. I don't understand. Let me get back to Ed, what that phrase means. And I am the last one, Madam Chair, if I may, is just the one above that on the interleukin mitigation program, which is a pretty cool program that we do here. And that's pretty fresh legislation. 2016, are we going to get that information and then another from another source to kind of see how that's working? I sense that Mr. Ricci has stepped up to answer the last question. So first of all, let's yeah, let's let's let's let him do that. And then and then we'll ask for an answer to that question as well. Mr.. Dombroski, to answer your question about concurrency, it is actually the exact same concept as transportation concurrency. Concurrency is a land use term that is used to call for all utility and facility support to be concurrent with the development that is being implemented. And schools have been determined to be one of those base utility or base facilities. So electricity has to be concurrent, water capacity has to be concurrent, transportation has to be controller in schools and other of those types. And so it falls into the same concurrency construct and that it has to be funded within that same six year period. And so with that, is that a predicate to, say, approving certain amount of growth and planning and zoning for certain amount of residential growth, which is also why you had the school impact fees like you acted on earlier this week. I should pay for it. Correct. That is to ensure that it can be concurrent. I see. So if we need to have concurrency in terms of school capacity to make sure that we are not over zoning for growth when we need this data, and then you can answer that later. Okay. I'm just I'm thinking out loud on it. It's kind of an interesting question. Thank you, Mr. Ricci. And on the critical area of mitigation, we Murphy and Lou the Willard reports to the federal government as part of their requirements. Right. So the Clean Water Act program. Yeah, it's not exactly the same reporting requirements as the county, but it's again, an elimination of one report that they would have to do. So what I've what I've captured here, Councilmember, if I may attempt to summarize, is that you would like more information about items five E, six E, seven C and 23 E before we get to final passage on this, would that work for you? I don't need anything more than seven C. That was a helpful answer. Okay. I got a couple other notes here, but those were ones that I would like that I'll get with. Start between now and final. Very good. Thank you. Councilmember Lambert, his question, I think you mentioned and thank you for your hard work on this. So I guess they can go back to working on my book at night rather than reading reports. So they'll be great. There's still going to be 50 plus reports to read. So yeah, no worries there. No worries there. Well, I've been reading more than that and that's a good job. But what does concern me is that as we went through this, we realized that there were regulations to do these reports that just never showed up and that's not okay. So I think that now that we've streamlined it and reduced some of the requirements that we need to list, that is, you know, what are the dates, what is due and when, you know, quarterly there's semiannually and and yearly. But I think we all need an annual list. I know you guys have it in the back, but it doesn't always filter up to the council members. I'd like to have that chart and you know, I may have my staff put reminders on my calendar so I know what report should do when so that we don't get in this place before. I mean, in the future. The other thing is that it's got to be more clear that we asked for information that we we get that information. So that was a little disconcerting as we went through this and as we went through this. And there were many good conversations. So thank you for those. We decided that it could be put in the budget. So there are a couple in here that I definitely want to make sure are in the budget. So I'd like to do an amendment that says in the budget these things will be there because as the last council members are there certain things we make important decisions on? And for example, 9ei have no idea how we would make a decision on nine E, which has with animal control without the information that is there. And we have had voluminous negotiations over the past 12 years on that, and we need to be able to track that. So that's an example of one of the things I'd like to see for sure would be in the budget where. Here it says it could be. I want to make sure that there's about five of these. The not only could be but ah so that's that I'll give you that those. And then on page 34 line 351 and 352, what do you. By nine C what exactly of the ordinance I mentioned. Sorry. Yeah, but what's the other one? Sorry. Can you repeat the number in there? It's page 34 of the ordinance lines 351 and 352 leading governance transition efforts for the urban area consistent with the Growth Management Act. So this is actually one of the code revise or technical corrections. So this this isn't related to the reports ordinance. And I think let me have that example specifically. So this was added to the code by a previous ordinance, but not properly underlined. So this is a technical change to fix that previous ordinance problem. And what where on the website does it say leading governance, transition ordinance for the unincorporated areas consistent with the DMA? We'll have to get back to you. Okay. Just it's only half the county matters. And I think that we have a whole county that matters. So thank you. Okay. With that, won't you go ahead and brief the motion now? Okay. Great. Will do. So propose motion 2017 0500, which is item five on the agenda and is the companion legislation to the proposed ordinance that we've been discussing. Reporting Requirement three, which was also previously mentioned, requires the executive to report monthly on vacant budgeted positions. And that was requested by motion 11154 and was not codified. And so in order to change the frequency from monthly to quarterly, the proposed motion in front of you would rescind motion 11154. And that is because it's addressed in proposed Ordinance 2017 0501, which would codify the reporting requirement, given that it is of a general and permanent nature, as well as change the frequency from its current frequency of monthly to quarterly. And with that, that concludes my remarks on both ordinances. But I'm happy to take questions or to brief the amendments. So it seems like there's some desire to just dig in on a few additional details, some of which have been laid out here today, some of which may come up in between now and final passage. I would like colleagues to try to move these forward maybe without recommendation today, because it would be great to get it done before the end of the year so that the new requirements at least will be known, if not fully codified by the beginning of January and can go into effect then. So I think what we need to do is take up the motion first. We have a series of amendments to make these effective. So we take up the motion, if we could, without recommendation, and then we'll do the amendments to perfect it and then take a vote on moving it out of committee without recommendation. So, Councilmember Lambert, can I ask you to please put in front of us motion number 2017. 500. 500. That's right. Okay, I'm ready. Madam Chair, I'd like to move Ordinance 2017 0500 with a do with our recommendation. Okay. The motions before us. There is a technical amendment one which would update a whereas clause with the correct number of the companion legislation. And I move amendment number one. All right. Any comments or questions on amendment number one? All those in favor please signify by saying i, i. Any opposed amendment one passes and then there is a relevant title amendment to one that I'm sure I'm entitled. Amendment number one. Any comments or questions? All those in favor please signify by saying I want any other amendments to proposed motion 2017 0500. Their motion is to improve it without recommendation. With the clerk. Please, Calderon. Thank you, Madam Chair. Councilmember Dombrowski. Councilmember Dunn. All right. Councilmember Garcia. Councilmember Colwell. Councilmember Lambert. Hi. Councilmember McDermott, Councilmember of the Grove. Councilmember Fine, right there. Hi. Madam Chair. Hi, Madam Chair. The vote is ADA is. Known as Councilmember Gossett Excuse. Thank you very much for your vote. Proposed motion 2017 0500 as amended will move to full council without recommendation. Do we need to expedite these in order to get them on the calendar before the end of the year? And would you support a majority of the objection to that? I have no objection, Madam Chair. Does anyone else on the committee have objection? You're the one who's going to have to cram the agenda through. You're the one who has to join me in sitting through it. Excellent. All right, good. We will expedite that. We will expedite it. No, you are proposed. Next, we have proposed ordinance number 2017 0501, which would implement the the changes to the reporting as discussed today. And I would accept a motion to move that forward without recommendation.

AN ORDINANCE relating to City employment; authorizing the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding for flexibility to respond to the civil emergency declared on March 3, 2020; providing certain benefits and conditions for employees using leave pursuant to the Families First Coronavirus Response Act; temporarily suspending vacation accrual maximums of Seattle Municipal Code 4.34.020; providing for maintenance of medical benefits for unpaid leave; temporarily suspending scheduling change notices to employees required by Seattle Municipal Code 4.20.365; declaring an emergency; and establishing an immediate effective date; all by a 3/4 vote of the Seattle City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_05262020_CB 119795

Agenda Item three Capital 119795 Relations for the employment authorized execution of a memorandum of Understanding for Flexibility to start a civil emergency declared on March three, 2020, providing certain benefits that conditions for employees using relief pursuant to the Families First Coronavirus Response Act. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I will move to pass Council Bill 119795. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded to pass the bill again as sponsor of the bill. I'll address it first and then open it up for any comments. Council Bill 119795 authorizes the execution of a memorandum of understanding between the City and the Coalition regarding flexibility and other supports for the city workforce during the COVID 19 public health crisis . The Memorandum of Understanding would be effective from March 3rd, 2020 through September 1st, 2020, or until the Mayor's Proclamation of civil emergency ends, whichever date is earlier. This memorandum applies only to employees represented by the Coalition. However, the city will use the same approach as presented in the AMA in the Memorandum of Understanding for non represented employees . Key provisions of this Memorandum of Understanding includes the following terms telecommuting and alternative work schedules. New paid leave provisions dictated by the Federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act, revisions to employees, vacation accrual caps and the maintenance of medical benefits of employees on unpaid leave. There are additional details related to the key components of the Memorandum of Understanding in the in the memo that was distributed distributed by Carina Ball last weekend. For those who would like to learn more granular detail about this memorandum of understanding, those details are available to you. Executive estimates that any additional costs incurred due to this legislation would be de minimis and would be paid for by existing appropriations. So no additional appropriations are anticipated as a result of this particular legislation. So again, colleagues, this was a memorandum of understanding that was found to be mutually agreeable among representatives of our city coalition of city unions, as well as the management side, which is the city of Seattle, including the Legislative Department. And we certainly appreciate the ongoing cooperation of our labor partners represented by the coalition of city unions in this period of time. That really requires so many of our essential workers to be responsive and available and flexible to respond to this COVID 19 public health crisis. So I think that this memorandum of understanding is one that we should all support, and it's certainly reflective of the tremendous amount of commitment that our represented staff and all of our staff have towards continuing to serve the public in this moment of crisis and really want to take an opportunity similar to what Councilmember Verbal did this morning, to really thank all of our City of Seattle employees who are essential to ongoing delivery of services to the people of Seattle, and for their agreement to this memorandum of understanding, which will allow us as a city to continue to deliver these critical services, while also making sure that we're taking care of the health and safety of our own employees. So and I would I would encourage all of you colleagues to join me in supporting the passage of this council bill. Are there any comments or questions for my colleagues? All right. Hearing and seeing none. Will the clerk please call the role in the passage of. Lewis, I. Morales, I. Let's get to AI Peterson. I. Strauss I. Suppose. I. President in. I. Seven in favor, none oppose. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. And I ask the clerk, please fix my signature to the legislation. Okay, folks, we are at other business. Portion of our agenda. Is there any other further business to come before the council?

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, consider the applicant’s appeal, and find the proposed vacation of 117.62 feet of an east/west alley located east of Daisy Avenue and south of Willow Street, behind 520 West Willow Street, not in conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and uphold the Planning Commission’s determination of nonconformance; or Receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, consider the applicant’s appeal, and find the proposed vacation of 117.62 feet of an east/west alley located east of Daisy Avenue and south of Willow Street, behind 520 West Willow Street, in conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and overturn the Planning Commission’s determination of nonconformance, and approve Categorical Exemption No. 14-007. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_02142017_17-0078

So all five motions have been adopted, right? City clerk. Thank you. Thank you. Congratulations, everyone. Thank you. So we're going to go ahead and move on to hearing number two. And Madam Clerk, would you please go ahead and deliver the oath for number two? Item to require that all those who wish to speak on this item, please raise your right hand. Please stand up and raise your right hand, please. Mm. You and each of you do solemnly state that the testimony you may give in that cause now and pending before this body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. Thank you. Thank you. Item number two, please. Item two is a report from Development Services. Recommendation two received supporting documentation into the record, concluded the public hearing. Consider the applicant's appeal and find the proposed vacations of 11 7.62 feet of an east west alley located east of Daisy Avenue and south of Willow Street, behind Fy20 West Willow Street. Not in conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the city's general plan and uphold the Planning Commission's determinations of non conformance or overturn the Planning Commission's determination of non conformance and approve categorical exemption. Number of 14 Dash 007, District seven. Thank you, Mr. West. Deputy City manager Nita Dempsey will introduce the item. Thank you, vice mayor. Members of the Council Planning Bureau. Manager Linda Taylor will provide the staff report. Good evening once again, vice mayor, members of the Council. I'd like to give a brief overview of this presentation because it is an early abandonment. We do have a graphic presentation that I think will aid in in presenting the the specifics of this project. This this item is an appeal of an alley general plan. Conformity. Determination. And just for purposes of orientation, this is a vicinity map that shows the location of the alley, which is highlighted in red. It is located at five, the property at 520 West Willow. So Willow Street is there to the north and Magnolia Avenue is the property to the west of the property. Again, the the alley that's being requested for a general plan, conformity determination is highlighted in red. That adjacent parking lot to the south serves the building at 520 west Willow. All of these properties are under one ownership of the appellant. The request is to vacate a 117 feet segment of the alley and the zoning of the property of the alley itself and the adjacent park. The parking lot is p. However, the property on the frontage of Willow is actually zoned community oriented, commercial or automobile oriented community commercial. The reason that we are here for this council action is that state law requires that before the city disposes of any property or abandons any public right of way it has to, the Planning Commission is required to make a determination that the the abandonment conforms to the city's general plan, specifically to the land use element and to the mobility element. And that determination goes before a public hearing of the planning commission. And in this case, that determination was heard by the Planning Commission. And what we're here tonight is to have the planning, the city council consider that finding of a determination of conformity or non-conformity. I would just point out that this is just the first step of the process. If the council makes a decision regarding the conformity of this, this particular item, it would need to come back to the city council for an actual abandonment through a formal public hearing. So this is just one step. Once the conformity determination is made, it would then come back to the Council for an action on the actual abandonment. So I'd like to just give you the history of the project. The Planning Commission heard this item and on December 1st, 2016, and at that time, staff recommended that the Planning Commission make a finding of conformity after having reviewed the circulation element and the land use element. Staff found the the requested determination to be in conformance with the general plan. However, after the public testimony and the Planning Commission's deliberation, they found the abandonment not to be in conformance, and they directed staff to come back to the Planning Commission with a determination of non conformance at the January 5th Planning Commission hearing. The staff brought back the finding of of nonconforming determination and the Planning Commission adopted that finding on a vote of 5 to 1. Again, just to give you a little bit of context here, if you can see there south of Willow, you can see that if you look west of the property, the subject abandonment on the left , traveling west. You can see that the alley goes immediately south of Willow. And on this segment, you can see the proposed abandonment. The abandonment would only have been in one segment on the westerly side of that property. The alley would continue to be an open and public alley on the eastern portion. And that eastern portion does travel south. So that portion of the alley would remain open and available for public use. The reason I wanted to show this slide is that you can see that the alley is not continuous throughout that neighborhood. You can see on the block immediately east of the site, there is no alley. There is an alley on the block adjacent to that. And then again, just west of Cedar. There is no alley. So it's a very disjointed configuration for some properties. Have an alley and some do not. Next slide. So on. After the Planning Commission action on this item within the ten day appeal period, the property owner did file an appeal requesting that this item be heard by the City Council to reconsider and to make a determination of conformance performance inconsistent with the general plan. The applicants contended that the Planning Commission improperly characterized the subject properties having the same condition as the surrounding properties, and they felt that the the subject alley did not have the same characteristics of the surrounding property. And they also felt that the Planning Commission didn't recognize the safety issue of having to cross the alley to access the parking lot for that for their building. Next slide. So we've talked about the the alley and the vicinity. I think you can get a good picture of that. I'd like to just conclude the presentation by summarizing the recommendation. The recommendation of the Planning Commission is that the City Council find that the proposed vacation of the alley is not in conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the general plan. However, because staff felt that the City Council should have an alternative recommendation, considering staff's initial recommendation that the alley is in conformance, we are presenting the City Council with two alternatives. One is to uphold the Planning Commission's determination that the alley abandonment is not in conformance, but also to consider that the alley is in conformance so staff is available. This concludes our presentation where available to answer any questions you might have, and we also have public works staff available as needed, if any questions come up regarding the abandonment specifically. And Vice Mayor Richardson, if I. Might add, before we conclude, there are findings that accompany each for and against this particular project. So regardless of how council votes, they would also be voting to adopt appropriate findings either for or against this alley vacation. And they are in your packet. Thank you. So we will hear from the applicant and then we'll have public comment. Hello. Good evening. I thank you for hearing me tonight, Linda. Wonderful job, as always. Thank you. Pablo, do you have my presentation? There we go. How do I have a clicker? Just say next. Just say next. Year. Yeah. It'd be fun. Next. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Which which button is it? All right, great. So real quick, just to talk about Westlund and who we are and what we do. Western real estate group is a Long Beach based family real estate company. We've been in Long Beach for 40 plus years. We have we are a company that has about 10,000, what we call 10,000 doors. That includes about 8000 or 7000, give or take, apartment units in Southern California and Nevada. And we've also got about a million square feet of commercial shopping centers and strip centers. We do development as well. As you can see, we've developed this nice building. We've developed some other buildings around Southern California, and and we continue to seek development projects. When we moved out of North Long Beach in 2014, we had 60 employees. We redeveloped this 1940s building here on the corner of Daisy and Willow. Improved it to its original and restored it to its original beauty, I guess you can say. And we moved in with 60 employees. Today, we have about 90 employees working out of that office. We're also in the same building. We're housing the Long Beach Beer Lab, which is coming in as a brewery next door to us. And so this is a pretty well used the building. Next. Got it. So as Linda spoke, the Planning Department originally found positive findings for this allocation. Went before the Planning Commission a few weeks ago, a few months ago at this point. And it's important to kind of note what they said in their positive findings, and I'll read them really quickly, even though they're in front of you. All elements of the general plan were considered and staff finds this vacation to be in conformance with all applicable elements. The land use elements, land use element, which is a key element as the existing parcels develop with a parking lot associated with an existing commercial building, vacation of the alley would conform to the land use element and they spoke about the mobility element as the second element that's necessary to get the abandonment. It is the alley abandonment would therefore not prove detrimental to the movement of people and goods through the area. When the Planning Commission seemed to get stuck on some issues that were not addressed at the Planning Commission hearing. But it's important to note that when the Planning Department went back and found those negative findings, the Planning Commission ordered them to. They didn't actually change their findings, really what they did or they they what they did was found that the Planning Commission determined that it wasn't in conformance but didn't actually change the results of their findings , which is interesting, I think. But the planning commission seemed to get. Caught up on three main issues, it seemed to us anyways, from what they from kind of where it went. Trash pickup, fairness and cyclists. And I'll get into all three of those issues and kind of address what the Planning Commission had a problem with. And and maybe that helps you guys look at what we're doing here. And this time I brought a laser pointer. So as you can see, this is our this is our office building is right here. The alley that we're trying to abandon is right behind our building. And this is our parking lot. This is an old aerial view, obviously now. And many of you are aware we have a very large solar project that covers our parking lot. The trash enclosure here on the corner is actually designed to open up to the north south alleyway. And in fact, right now, when the trash comes and picks up, it does come from the south or north. I guess that is. I'm confused. It goes north and then east and it picks up. That can pick up the trash right here on this corner. So abandon this alley won't affect trash at all. The trash enclosure was designed that way. The fairness issue. They talked a lot about why would it be that we'd be able to vacate this alley and not the other alleys and not some of the other alleys like our neighboring properties? And they said, hey, this building looks like all the other buildings out there. What would be the what would be the value of abandoning this particular piece? It's really important to note, and we highlighted in yellow, as you can see, all around every there's a bunch of alleys on this corridor and every one of the buildings on the corridor has what you're seeing is a yellow highlight. That yellow highlight is the buffer zone between the door and the parking lot of the or the door and the alley, basically. So, for example, the Bank of America, you come out, they're exit door that you walk into a parking lot, not an alley, and then pass the parking lot into an alley, save a lot of time to react to fast moving vehicles. Our neighbor next door has about 20 feet between his door and the alleyway. And across here, you can kind of see all of those. They've got these parking lots right by their back doors. Ours doesn't have that condition, as you'll see on the next slide. This is a picture of the back of our building, which is actually our main entrance. That's the main entrance to our office where we have 90 employees. We have obviously tenants, customers coming in, paying rent, etc., all the time. This is there's constantly people traversing back and forth along this alleyway or from the alley to the parking lot. And this picture down here is actually a picture. The picture of down here is taken from the door itself. So you can see there's a very small sidewalk between the door and the alleyway. And cars speed through this alley to go from daisy to Magnolia or magnolia to Daisy, and it creates a significant hazard in our view. You can read more of the slides that I mean, you guys have access to this. I just want to summarize. I know it's late and nobody wants to get to their Valentine's dates. Before it's too late. Cyclists, as I'm getting I'm getting there. Apologize the cyclist issue, which was an odd one to us because in our view, they mentioned that they've noticed that cyclists use this alley to get from Magnolia to Daisy. But as you are all aware, the general plan, the city of Long Beach has been a you guys have adopted a general plan that tries to maximize cycling. And in fact, you've created or are creating the Daisy Lane bike corridor here, which is meant to be the connecting piece between downtown or part of the connecting piece between the downtown and North Long Beach through Daisy. So the idea here, there are going to be some dedicated bike lanes on this, in fact. And you're also adding, interestingly enough, just to accommodate this bike traffic, a new traffic signal right here. And that's going to be happening, as I understand it, within the next 12 months. It's already been approved. That Signalized intersection right there. We'll do a couple of things. One is it'll actually completely moot the point of having to go back from one magnolia to daisy and vice versa. And it will also slow down traffic on Willow Lane. The reason why this is so important is because as bikes are coming back and forth on Daisy Avenue and cars are speeding along this alleyway where our building kind of ends, this is big pictures, a bit deceiving, but the building actually ends literally at the corner of the alley and the street. So cars flying by here really quickly are not paying attention because they have to now come out of the alley, turn right and turn left. To go through the alleyway are actually increasing the hazard to cyclists that are going to be traveling on this Daisy Avenue. And then in conclusion, this was an interesting one, and I'm going to read it for you as well, because I think it's important. We did have one vote on the planning commission that went our way, and this is what he said. I've also walked past this alley. The truth is that the traffic enters that alley pretty fast sometimes and it does have somewhat of a blind spot and it can be dangerous to people walking along the alley. I've experienced it firsthand myself. From my own personal experience, I can see the potential for someone being struck by a vehicle while walking on that side of the alley. I think that anybody who's been in this building and many of you have, as we've we've chaired the North Long Beach Boys Improvement District meetings there and we've done other community events, etc.. It's obvious that there is a hazard here. And I think that closing down this alley is going to hopefully save some lives. That concludes my presentation. Thank you, sir. So is there any public comment on this hearing? Hello. Council people. Vice Mayor. My name is Levi Freed. I'm the founder and owner of the Long Beach Beer Lab, and we're one of the tenants at Westland. We are. From what I understand, the first ABM license in Long Beach, and we're very proud of that. We want to establish ourselves as a community brewery and a community structure. And I think that abandoning the alleyways is going to help our business in many different ways. One is my employees and myself. We park in the alley and we use this alley all the time. And I've seen firsthand how unsafe people drive through this alley trying to cut the traffic on Willow and there. So they're using the alleys as a thruway. So I've I've witnessed firsthand people driving past very fast. Second of all is I get a lot of deliveries being a manufacturing facility. When my trucks park back there, you could see traffic build up with people trying to cut through that alley while I'm trying to unload goods from what I'm told is they we they will be able to use the parking lot to do a full U-turn and drop the delivery goods off without having to cause any disturbances to the to Westland and the business and to people just trying to use it as a shortcut to get from Magnolia to Daisy. And lastly, when I'm thinking about the future, when we want to hold community functions that are beer related, to have people walking from the brewery to the alley to the parking lot where I would hold such festivities would become a tactical nightmare, if you will. If there are cars speeding past that alleyway where my patrons would come and and try to have a good time. So I am in support of this effort. And if you have any questions, I'm available as well. Thank you, sir. Thank you. No further public comment. This hearing is closed and we will take it back behind the rail. Councilmember Ringa. Thank you, Mayor. I want to, first of all, thank Mr. Greenspan for being here and presenting his appeal. I also want to thank staff for the for the great work they've done on this. They've had to do it twice, apparently at once, finding a positive result, and then secondly, going back and doing it again. But I want to can you put up a slide? I think with four four of the staff presentation with the map, actually, that shows Willow and Magnolia and Daisy in the building with only the red stripe that has the. There's the vacation that's there. And the reason I want that put up is because you could see it more on an invisible perspective that the only vacation basically is is a safety issue, maybe. Yeah. That right there is a is a an issue of safety. One of the major issues there is that that alley is used as a traffic right away when Willow is congested between the corner right there of Magnolia and Willow, when people are see that there's traffic backed up and Magnolia, they figure they make a left, make a quick turn through the through the alley right there and go to Daisy and then make a right and then continue on through the alley all the way up to Golden, which is a fairly long distance and creates traffic issues further on down for other businesses down that line because traffic traffic seems to race down there. I've seen it myself. The quote there that was presented by a planning commissioner of go is absolutely correct. I mean, the the exit to that building is right onto to the alley. And if you have cars coming presently real fast through there, there is an issue of public safety there. Also, the other aspect of it is that there is going to be a back path going through Daisy and there's going to be a traffic light put right there on Daisy and Willow, which is going to mitigate many of the traffic issues that are presented that are there now with people coming through the alley. That will be hopefully mitigated because of the fact that there is a vacation there and people will be now used to going down to Willow and the traffic battling bike lane will be unimpeded with any traffic coming across that portion of the alley to go continue on to the bike path through through Daisy all the way up to North Long Beach. So there were some the neighborhood concerns about that. And I want to thank Mr. Greenspan again for doing his diligence. He went to there's two associations in that area. Wrigley, the Wrigley Association and the Wrigley Area Neighborhood Alliance. One, he went to both of those meetings. So those neighborhood associations and nobody actually complained anything about it. But there was one that might have been concerned about the safety to the bicyclists, but with the understanding that there's going to be a traffic stop there, that concern went away because now people can just continue on into Daisy and not worry about any traffic coming out of that, that alleyway. So having said all that, I think that what I will have to do is now make a make a motion. And that motion would be to receive the supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, consider the applicant's appeal and find a proposed vacation of 117.62 feet of an east west alley allocated east of. Located east of Daisy Avenue and south of Willow Street, behind 520 west Willow Street. In conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the city's general plan, and overturn the Planning Commission's determination of nonperformance and approved categorical exemption number 14 007. And I ask for my colleagues support of that motion. So that has been moved and seconded. Councilman Austin in comments. Any City Council deliberation, seeing none. Members, please cast your vote. Hi. Hi. Oh, hi. And he opposed saying none. This motion is approved. Thank you. Moving right along. Congratulations. Moving right along. All right. Was. Okay. We're going to do item. There's a request to do item 18 that will go to 1618.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the hearing, and approve the hearing officer’s recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application MJ21701212 submitted by EZ Greens, LLC, for a medical marijuana business located at 1355 West Willow Street. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_10172017_17-0935

Motion case. Thank you. Let's have hearing number three. Please report from. Financial management recommendation received supporting documentation into. The record. Conclude the hearing and approve the hearing officer's recommendation to uphold the denial of the business license application submitted by easy greens for a medical marijuana. Business located. At 135 five West Willow Street, District seven. Thank you. And I believe another oath is required to administer the oath. Witnesses, please stand. 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. Thank you, Mr. Modica. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. The staff presentation will again be given by Brett Jaquez, our business services officer. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. Before your recommendation to uphold the hearing officer's determination to deny the business license application, NJ 21701212. Submitted by Easy Greens LLC for Medical Marijuana Business located at 1355 West Rose Street in Council District seven. In addition to the counsel order, you have been provided the hearing officer's recommended recommendation and findings, the appeal hearing packet and the city's brief in support of its argument. To write some background on this item on February 21st, 2017, Easy Greens LLC submitted an application to operate a medical marijuana dispensary at 1355 West Grove Street on May 31st, 2017. The Department of Financial Management denied the business license application due to the proposed business location being within an area zoned exclusively for residential use, which is in violation of the Long Beach Municipal Code. Section 5.90.030. On June 8th, 2017, Easy Greens LLC filed an appeal of the business license application denial. And on July 18, 2017, the City Council referred the appeal hearing to a hearing officer on August ten, 2017. The appeal hearing was held and the presiding hearing officer assigned by the city clerk's office was Elio Palacios. On August 29, 2017, the hearing officer recommended that the denial of the business license application submitted by E-Z Green's LLC be upheld due to the proposed business location being in an area zoned exclusively for residential use, which is in violation of Long Beach Municipal Code Section 5.90.03. It is requested that the City Council accept the hearing officer's recommendation to deny this business license application. That concludes my report. And staff are available to answer any questions Council may have. Thank you. And Mr. City Attorney, do we need to ask for the appellant on this? Okay. Is there is the appellant present? Okay, please come forward. You have a reasonable amount of time to make your case. Let's just cue up 10 minutes here. I probably need that long. Okay, well, let's queue up five. Okay. Mr. Vice Mayor and City Council, thank you for giving me a chance to speak. Be a being that we applied for this this medical marijuana license. It is. It's currently zoned on is on the map. It is zoned residential. But that's that was our point of contention, why we appeal this process to begin with. My father purchased this property back on August 8th, 1980, from Mobile Oil Corporation. It was it was an existing gas station at the time. My father at that point converted it from a gas station to a convenience store dairy market, which is which is how it's been operated since that time. So for the past 37 years, it's been operated clearly as not a residential use. We we so since during that time we've had a beer and beer and wine license from state of California. And during that whole time and basically the zoning I believe we believe to be amid something made a mistake with the zoning not back in 2013. We we I think we realized that it was not zoned and we attempted to preliminarily change the zoning on this property. My father contacted various business owners along the the block that we were located on. Some of them did agree to for us to go ahead with the zone change and we would all split the cost. And then early 2014, we were approached as personally, we were approached by 7-Eleven to to purchase this building from us, along with the license, the beer and wine license. So at that time, my father tried to rush the process, going because the 7-Eleven was not going to purchase it, being zoned incorrectly. But at that time, my father, we met with Monica mendoza, who was at the was a planner at the time. And we had she and my father met with Linda, to whom was also in in the works for the city in planning. And at that time, they told us that the the zone change was already going to be part of this citywide general plan change. That's still hasn't occurred from 2014 til now. We were under the understanding that that process would have taken between six months to a year. And here we are three and a half years later and still has not been done. And I understand that there's a bunch of little hiccups that go along the way with that. But as a direct result of this this thing, we haven't been able to we were denied for this application, as well as not being able to sell our business and the building property to 7-Eleven. We've been we've definitely been harmed by this through the slow process. This is taken. And we're hoping to get this the zone change done, if possible, prior to this general planning, because we don't even know when that's going to happen. We'd like to apply for if we're not going to be able to open a dispensary, we'd like to still be in this in the medical marijuana business. But if the zoning is not changed by the time, you know, we'd like to do the cultivation side if possible. We're exploring that as well at least. But if that's yeah, that's that's basically we just want to get this thing done. This process is, you know, started from 2013 and like I said, it's been a commercial use since 1980 at least, at least. And I'm sure mobile operator discussed that as a gas station for 20 years before that. So that's all that saying. Thank you. So this time we'll get a public comment. Is there any public comment on the side of. Very good. Upfront. I don't know this specific location, but I would offer this suggestion to this city. There will be obviously a number of people that will always want to come down and we're going to try to do this. And in any neighborhood, they are problematic. Here would be my suggestion. If you feel that you have no alternative in some locations, this is what and this is what. In the final analysis you should you should do is take the top two or the next to the top floor of the Long Beach Police Department. Clear it out, rent out space, and then have a lottery. And people can apply for one of those places to operate a marijuana establishment there. And there's ample parking in the garage there for them to do that period. And that saves a considerable amount of time. It's there. They can go buy a lottery basis and for each district they will have a certain you'll work it out with a certain number of lottery spaces will be opened for each district. And then you go to the downtown, to the police department and do your stuff. The city then gets at least some revenue from it to offset the damage that will flow from being forced to sell it. Thank you. Thank you. So say no further. Is this public comment coming forward? Thank you. Is there any other public comment on this item? Okay. This is our last speaker. Thank you, Shirley Bassey. With regards to the denial of this license, I believe that it is in the overall best interests of the city being the medical marijuana and the regular kind. There is no difference between the two. It's all marijuana. It's it's all doing the same thing. So we have saved some toddlers. We have saved some met middle school high school children from walking by that business and getting a contact high. We've saved the necessity of the residents to have to explain to their children, what's that smell? Mommy, Daddy, what is that? We have saved a generation that live in that area from the necessity of getting that much more closer because marijuana is a gateway drug. We've saved that many children from being that one step close to the use of opiate drugs. Heroin. We saved them. Cigarets are now in front of us. They are in some of our houses, even though we've required now smoke free zones in restaurants and other public places. Because years later. Through cancer and death. And all kind of malfeasance in our human body. We have say we are now having to answer that question. But with with marijuana, we're going down the same road. And some of us years later. Are going to hear your children say, I don't care if you do put medical in front of it, Mommy. They offered me a joint and then they said, Well, why don't you try a primo. That's marijuana kid dipped in cocaine. And then they offered that to me. Dad. And while you voted, it was illegal. You said, Mommy, that you said you voted it right, Mommy. You're going to have to answer that in the generations ahead. As your children? Some of them. Who voted. I don't care if you are selling it legally now. You're going to have to answer your children and your children's children. Mark my words, some of you will weep for this decision. When you know, deep in your heart, forget what they have allowed you to do here in your heart of hearts, you are entertaining this not because you have a medicinal necessity. You're entertaining it because it is now the trendy thing to do. When you don't want to deal with the stresses of life and the many of us who are either Catholic or Protestant. I'll finish later. Thank you. So we closed public comment, but I see one additional speaker. Is this one or is this too one? This is one. So I leave that there. Well, you see something? Got it, Roberto. Well, you got something to say to me. Merry Christmas. You ain't got to say nothing to me. All right, so you have 3 minutes and time starts now. Well, I think you give an honor to Jesus. I don't. I disagree with her because I saw a documentary on the History Channel. Nixon was giving out marijuana, medical marijuana in 73 and everything. So. And I got glaucoma, I found out in 2011. And that's the first thing the doctor said to me is marijuana has no side effect. The team along the left hand approach that I take and the Santa press makes my eyes twitch so no one is all right. You know, I use all of them. But the thing is, is marijuana back in the days was the peace pipe, not the regular tobacco marijuana. And and the Native Americans wanted the indigenous holiday and everything. They were here last week. If we had they maybe they need to smoke marijuana because when we got finished and I got kicked out, everybody remembers. Right. And this is has to do with marijuana. When they got finished, the natives, you know we used to smoke piece pipe of cool but see when we got out there I was with the white lady and the white man and Fred that was over there and the police escort is to a car because it was a little commotion. They were following us, La Raza people. So what time we get out there? I'm in the back seat. They don't see me like this has to do. I'm getting to it. They say. You know. Yeah, now, come on. It's not a warning. I'm talking about marijuana. Why it needs to be. Now, come on. Don't do that. Because you got to hear this. We need marijuana because I would like to smoke marijuana with them and they would have peace, not jail. The ones who was here last week and if we had back in Long Beach and I could smoke a doobie with them, maybe they wouldn't be trying to beat us up and kill us. Okay. So the thing is, is Uncle Jerry would like that, but they don't. So the thing is, as far as them, what they did, they caught us and they try to reach in to take those phone and assaulted us. And then I went to police tell them it took too long to get there. So as vice mayor, before I leave, I want to ask you this. I want to make sure I wanted to make sure that step doesn't happen again because, hey, we come here to talk, not to fight, but if we got to be our own police, I'll do that and I'll go get some brothers a hand with that . But I don't want to do that because I don't feel like going to jail. And that's why we got the police. We got good police here. I remember when crack was all up in Long Beach. That was such a good job that this is a very safe city now. So just I just tell the police what's up and let me handle this because they handle this in Long Beach and hey, remember, next time they come with this indigenous stuff, when we get out there, I ain't having no more of that bull crap because the brother ain't having it. I'm gonna get some brothers down here. We're going to handle this. That's the last thing I'm saying. So, you know, hey, tell that man to handle his all that stuff. Hey, I ain't going down Long Beach. Thank you. And we didn't see Frances come forward. Francis, you have your 3 minutes. I am Francis, Emily Dawson Harris and I reside in District one and I wholeheartedly support this surge and this matter. I felt that the hearing officer's recommendation is sound and is and should be about the denial of the business license. I'm also staying on the subject matter. I kind of was listening to the appellant and I just was wondering about a point of clarification because I kind of got a inclination that there's a possibility that he realizes there's a probability that the license may be denied. And I'm kind of concerned about the matter about still having a business or something there. And I don't know if there's a separate business license that has to be got for. I'm kind of wondering what's going to happen with this denied? What's going to happen with the facility? Because I think that needs to be made clear as to what's actually going to happen with this location. Thank you very much and I appreciate it. Thank you. Public comment is close. We'll take it back behind the wheel. Councilmember Durango. Thank you, vice mayor. I know. I know. That little stretch of land between the river, the 17 freeway and Santa Fe as well. This property lies around the corner of Easy and Little Street, and it has been a dairy for town that I've been in Long Beach. But I wasn't sure. I wasn't aware about the early history that it was a gas station. So that's that's enlightening. We were saying that has been very difficult for Mr. Wayne and his son in their property is that they have made efforts to sell that property and make it something else and convert that use into something much more not only useful for the community but profitable for them. Of course, during the course of my being on the city council, it was revealed at that location it's what they call a legal non-conforming use, which complicates matters in terms of properties that are that are designated as such. So I want to ask our planet, our department service people, if they could please give a definition of legal or performing use so that we can proceed with with how we move forward with the time of the sale here. Kerry. I will respond to that. Thank you. Good evening, Honorable City Council, and thank you for your question, Councilmember Miranda. The legal, legal nonconforming use is one that was approved, legally permitted during a certain time, and then subsequently the codes changed. So, for example, for this particular property, it was zoned commercial back in the forties and fifties and sometime prior to 1979 it was zoned residential. And the existing development on the site, which was permitted legally at the time, remains legal, non-conforming and status, even though the underlying the zoning is are one which is residential and now only allows for residential uses. And and that that presents a quandary because it is a legal non-conforming use. Yet it was resolved to be residential and and so Mr. Wang feels that he's been treated unfairly and I don't blame him for that because he's not. Now at this point when he was trying to sell the property to 7-Eleven because 11 does sell wine and beer, he could no longer be that type of service. He could no longer be there. So he's of in a in a quite a quandary here in terms of what was he going to do with that property. It's not about marijuana. It's about his property and what he can do with it at this point. And it's a shame that that he was unable to at least be able to consider another use for that property. But then the law is a law. We did pass a measure m m it was the definitions are very clear in terms of where you could put some dispensaries and some growth. And being that this is in a place where there's a residential very nearby, he can't they can't convert that property into that. Also, when he did his application, there were a maximum of 23 points to achieve in the application. And he didn't he didn't get the 23 points. So he was deemed eligible to continue in the lottery. So at this point, it appears that Mr. Wang is not able to apply for a medical marijuana dispensary or apply for 7-Eleven or apply for any other use, which is a shame. So at this point I would like to direct staff of the audit services and Mr. Kaiser to please meet with the Wangs, talk to them, give them some ideas as to what would be a very usable, well appropriate use of that property that may be able to give them some relief and and give them an opportunity to stay along because it's been a long time for 30 plus years, they've become a part of the community. They also own the car wash down the street on the corner of Santa Fe and and well, so they they are very familiar with Long Beach. They're very familiar to the people who are who live in the West Palm Beach area. And I think that they deserve a fair shake. So, Mr. Warwick, is that possible that we can be able to work with the banks and this mayor, councilmembers, vice mayor, councilmembers, certainly will have an economic development department meet with the Wangs, talk about zoning, what opportunities that exist. Absolutely. Okay. All right. And again, you know, this this is a parallel situations where I did meet with planning a building during this period of time. We were talking about 711 and how the land you sell that was coming in. And we're looking at changing some of those those those rules. And that is one of the stretches right there that is very complicated because of that corner and plus the other properties that are to the west of him, where there's a church, there's a laundromat, there's a restaurant, and there's a a playground and a library. So it's very mixed and it's very a talk about nonconforming. I don't know what that street is in terms of where there's residential, whether it's commercial or what. It's very unclear. So we as we move forward, we're probably touching a little button here that they should at least wear this item. But it's it's something that we really need to clarify and get clear and territory that stretch land so that Mr. Wang and his son can can have an appropriate use of that property. So having said all of that, I recommend that we go ahead and accept the the recommendation of the of the administrative judge and move forward . I hope my colleagues will as well. Thank you. Thank you. And that motion has been moved and seconded. Councilman Art and any remarks? No, I think Councilman Urunga made the case and I support his motion. Thank you. Those are remarks. So members to. Catch a vote. Gonzales motion case. Thank you. So that concludes our hearings. So I just want to clarify the order of the meeting this evening. So right now we have just a few people queued up for public comment. Just five names we will take up public comment next.

Recommendation to adopt resolution amending the Water Salary Resolution establishing the salary for the Electrical and Instrumentation Supervisor classification and adjusting the salary range for the Water Utility Supervisor I-II; and

LongBeachCC_04232019_19-0395

Motion carries. Item number 30 Please. Report from Human Resources Recommendation to adopt resolution amending the water salary resolution and adopt a resolution amending the city salary resolution citywide. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Can we get a brief staff report on this? Dana Anderson. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. The salary resolution creates certain offices in positions of employment in the city and fixes the amount of compensation by incorporating the city's personnel ordinance, civil service rules and regulations and applicable labor abuse. As a result of the completion of the media cover confer process with the Long Beach Supervisors Employees Association regarding the creation and changes to classifications, staff requests that the Council adopt the attached salary resolution amendments which reflect the following changes establish the salary range for the new Electrical and Instrumentation Supervisor classification in the Water Supply Resolution, which will provide direct oversight to the new Electrical and Instrumentation Technician Classification. Increase the salary range of the water utility supervisor one in the salary in the water salary resolution from range 582 640 and level two from range 622 660 to align the salary commensurate with adjustments authorized for subordinate job classifications in the water department. In addition, increase the salary range of the gas maintenance supervisor one from range 580 to 564 and level two from 6 to 622 630 in the city salary resolution also to align the salary commensurate with adjustments authorized for subordinate job classification in the Energy Resources Department. The City and Long Beach Supervisors Employees Association have reached a tentative agreement to the new classification and salary range adjustments and it is staff's request that Council adopt both the city and water salary resolution amendments. I am available to answer any questions you may have. Okay. Thank you for that staff report or any questions from council here and not any public comment. Great. Please cast your votes. Motion carries.

AN ORDINANCE establishing the terms and conditions for members of the Labor Standards Advisory Commission; amending Section 3.14.934 of the Seattle Municipal Code; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_03282016_CB 118649

The report of the Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Committee agenda item for Constable 118 649 Establishing the terms and conditions for members of the Labor Standards Advisory Commission. Amending Section 3.14 point 934 admissible code and ratifying confirmed research and prior acts. The committee recommends the bill pass. Council Member Herbold. Thank you. So the Labor Standards Advisory Commission was created with the Office of Labor Standards the same time that we enacted the legislation creating that office in 2014. At the time, the ordinance did not include terms of appointment or cause for renewal. We've only just realized that because we are now in the process of creating and implementing this Commission. And the amendments that were made to the enabling legislation include initial terms of odd number positions for one year and the even number positions for two years. Commission members can serve up to two consecutive terms, and the appointing authority may remove members for two or more consecutive absences without cause. The amendment has a ratify and confirm clause in order to appoint commission members immediately to help with legislation that's in the works. We've talked about the fact that a council member wars has brought to my attention the work that she's been doing with some of the neighborhood business districts and the need to augment the work of the Labor Standards Advisory Commission. And we've confirmed that the ability to create subcommittees is not limited or nor does it have to be explicitly allowed by this legislation so that work can move forward as well as creating the commission with with your vote today. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Herbold, are there any further comments, Councilmember Suarez. Yes, I have a few comments to make and I will not go over 2 minutes. Mr. President, I think you've been unfair because of the whole district thing, but I'll let that go. First of all, I want to thank Councilmember Herbold and the members of her committee, Councilmembers Sawant and Gonzalez, for their work on forming this commission and labor standards. I had an opportunity to go back and watch last week's public meeting, and I actually I learned a lot not only about the business piece, but also, of course, meeting with the workers and the unions as well. I support this legislation and its commitment to address wages, working conditions, safety and health and health of workers. I support the Commission being tasked with recommending ways to achieve workplace equity for women, communities of color, immigrants and refugees and vulnerable workers. With the fast paced growth in our region, we need to ensure workers are protected now and into the future. Our region is proving to be a leader in the nation in creating better conditions for workers, and there's more work to do. My District five includes several diverse business districts, including Northgate Mall, Thorton Place, Aurora, Lake City Business District districts, which include hundreds of small businesses which collectively employ thousands of workers. Ensuring workers in these locations are treated fairly, that policies are applied consistently and transparently is critical to that end. Therefore, I would like to encourage that the Commission hear not only from large business associations, but also from the many small business owners who make up the businesses and businesses in our neighborhoods. I have met with many businesses in my district with Neighborhood Chamber of Commerce, and they would like their voices to be heard as we go through this process. That included retail, restaurants, janitors, grocery stores in the hospitality industry. My concern is that we be heard in a constructive and transparent way. I would like to suggest that the Commission create a subcommittee to ensure neighborhood chambers, neighborhood business districts are included and ensure small businesses concerns are heard. The Lake City Chamber has over 206 members. The Aurora Merchants Association has over 500 members. Northgate Mall and Thornton Place has well over 130 stores employing anywhere between 1502 thousand employees. And for that, again, I want to thank Councilmember Herbert for her willingness to discuss these issues with me and entertain the prospect of a subcommittee to address some of the issues regarding small businesses. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Any other comments? If not, please call the role on the passage of the Bill Johnson. Whereas I O'Brien i so on. Bianca Gonzalez i. Herbold i. President Harrell. I. Eight In favor and. Unopposed bill passes and the chair will sign it. Report of the Energy and Environment Committee.

Recommendation to receive and file a report on travel to Dallas, Texas for the U.S. Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting.

LongBeachCC_07012014_14-0503

Item for communication. Premier Bob Foster Recommendation to receive and file a report on travel to Dallas, Texas for the United States Conference of Mayors Annual Annual Meeting. Okay. Members, just real quickly, I attended the which would be my last conference of Mayors June 20th and 24th in Dallas to participate in their 82nd annual meeting. I served as a panelist on the Environmental Committee on June 20th and as chair of the Mayors Business Council on the following morning and presided over the plenary session at breakfast and also attended the Executive Board meeting, which I'm a member and I would entertain a motion to approve some old wooden seconded any member of the public to suggest council item number four and the Council discussion members cast your votes an item for. Motion carries seven zero. Thank you members to just go to item 24.

A RESOLUTION endorsing community principles for green jobs, requesting that the Interdepartmental Team on Workforce Entry and Employment Pathways incorporate strategies to advance green careers for people of color and other marginalized or under-represented groups, supporting sustainable entrepreneurship and economic cooperative models.

SeattleCityCouncil_10032016_Res 31712

And item 35 Resolution 31712 Endorsing Community Principles for Green Jobs, requesting that the interdepartmental team on workforce entry and Employment Pathways incorporate strategies to advance green careers for people of color and other marginalized or under represented groups supporting sustainable entrepreneurship and economic cooperative models. Committee recommends that the resolution be adopted. Council Member O'Brien Thank you. I'm going to start by thanking the folks who stuck around through Agenda 35 and have been working on this for over a year. It's great to be here today. I am saddened that Councilmember Herbold is not here because she did a lot of work on bringing this legislation and deserves a lot of the credit, too. But I will do my best to speak on her behalf, in my behalf. I want to highlight well, first, let me just say that that is critically important, that we make sure that careers are available in the environmental field or in green careers for everyone in our community. And we currently have a system that doesn't allow that to happen. A couple of data points I want to read that came to me in the process of this legislation. There's a study out of University of Michigan that talked about something called the Green Ceiling, and it's a ceiling that keeps certain people from entering the environmental field or when they do enter green jobs, they're not they're not able to progress. One data point shows that people of color hold no more than 16% of positions in environmental organizations, agencies and foundations, and that once hired in environmental organizations, ethnic minorities are concentrated in the lower ranks, with less than 12% of the leadership positions held by people of color. What this does is it paints a picture of an ecosystem, if you will, a job system where we have very disproportional outcomes and we have white people able to access jobs and achieve higher ranks at a much higher rate than people of color can. And people in our community have done a lot of work around this and highlighted this is a priority and brought to our attention some of the challenges we have we heard about in comment today and in committee. Oftentimes to get jobs in these careers, you need to have experience. And how do you get experience when you don't have a job? What happens oftentimes is people who are able, financially capable of taking a free job, an unpaid internship, can work for free to build up their resume so they have access. But of course, there's a lot of people that don't have the financial support to take unpaid internships. They need to support themselves. And so what this resolution does is it calls upon the city to do a number of things to address these concerns. And hopefully, with the result being that we can make sure that everyone in our community has access to these green careers. The first thing it does, it asks the city to create a green job definition consistent with community principles outlined in the resolution. And I think it's powerful. So I want to read it here. A green job is one that preserves or enhances environmental health, as well as the economic and social well-being of people in communities, centers, communities most negatively impacted by climate change, and pays a living wage while providing career pathways. The resolution also calls upon an inter-departmental team to create an inventory of internships, apprenticeships and entry level jobs offered by the city of Seattle that meet the definition described above. Also, ask the city for examples of opportunities to create more local green jobs from our existing environmental investments. We make investments throughout the city, and those jobs and those investments should leverage the exact types of jobs we're hoping to create with pathways. Finally, this resolution expresses support for supporting sustainable entrepreneurship and encourages economic cooperative models of creating jobs not just at the city of Seattle, but partners in businesses throughout the city and throughout the region . This was one of the highlights in the equity environment agenda that community members presented to us last fall and last spring, I should say, in the Council, and adopted the principles of those that agenda in August. This is a great step forward. It reflects a lot of really hard work on behalf of community members who who really want access to these green jobs. And we will all benefit when we create that access. There's still a lot of work to do, but it's a great step forward. Thank you. Councilmember Brian May for the comments. Councilmember Johnson. I just want to highlight one of the things that we spent a lot of time talking about last year on the campaign trail, and that's the and equity in terms of life expectancy in this city. It was really powerful to see that called out in the resolution today where a neighborhood that I represent, Lowell Hurst, an individual that grows up in that neighborhood, has a life expectancy of 30. Teen years, 13 years longer than someone who lives in South Park or Georgetown. I think that that is a credible statistic and reinforces, I think, the need for us to make sure that we're very equitably distributing resources throughout the city in terms of infrastructure and in terms of the continued support for the work that we are doing as a community to create more green jobs, green stormwater infrastructure and more investments to make it easier for folks to get around and live in our city. Thank you, Councilmember Johnson. I'd like to just say that, number one, the word pathways is very powerful, because when you think about a pathway, they just don't occur generically. There's usually an absence of a pathway in order for a pathway to. To get constructive takes. It's a fight takes it takes work, takes energy. And so this work that both the community has done really come and go with coming up with some really smart policy solutions in an area where there is action and whether that action is environmental sustainability or not relying on fossil fuels or even STEM education , wherever there's opportunity, you are fighting for a pathway which becomes very, very powerful. So it's absolutely my honor to support this legislation and thanks for presenting it. Councilmember O'Brien. Any further comments? Those in favor of adopting the resolution vote i. I. Those oppose vote no. The motion carries the resolutions adopted and the chair will gladly signage. Okay. We got through all 35 agenda items. Is there any further business to come before the council? I'm looking my colleague on my left. Yes, thank you. I would like to be excused on December 5th. And we're going to second that. Okay. This moves in second to the councilmember backstab excuse from December 5th. All those in favor say I. I oppose. The ayes have it. Any further business from any other my colleagues? Well, that will stand adjourned. Everyone, have a great day.

Recommendation to amend the City's pest/weed management policy to eliminate the use of products or materials that contain glyphosate(s), including weed abatement sprays such as "Roundup" and "Ranger Pro." Direct City Manager to seek alternative organic products for weed and pest abatement for use by City staff in parks, medians and other areas.

LongBeachCC_08212018_18-0740

I'm an I motion case. ET tu. Kate. Next item is 26. Item 26 is a communication from Council Member Tauranga case membership in the case of the Mango encampment Austin recommendation to amend the city's pest wait management policy to eliminate the use weird abatement sprays such as Roundup and Ranger Pro. Thank you. Customer. Thank you. Mayor On March 28th in 2017, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment personally noticed that with glyphosate about pronouncing it right would be added to the list of carcinogens known to the state of California to cause cancer per Proposition 65. On August 10th, 2018, a state court in San Francisco ruled that Monsanto Products Roundup and Ranger Pro were not adequately labeled to detail potential negative health impacts. I want to thank my colleagues for standing up to this very important item. I also want to thank out of them with the director of the Parks Recreation Marine Department for his leadership on this item from the moment that I brought it up to him. There is a lot of research that supports the city's efforts to stop using products containing glyphosate, including the popular Weed Killers Roundup and Ranger Pro. I'm pleased to see the recent memo from the city manager and a24 from memo from Mr. Mullet that highlights the immediate halt of using these products in our parks. I think it's time to have a conversation about establishing a way to stop the use of this very carcinogenic product across our city. Reducing our community's exposure to these types of products that contain carcinogens is important and something I'm sure many of my colleagues will support. I would like to amend my motion to request a report back from the city manager in 90 days to explore alternatives to glyphosate. Liberal seat products and the costs associated with its implementation. And I want to thank you. Councilwoman, go. I would like to thank the park advocates that have worked on this with me over the last 6 to 8 months, and that I only offer some additional opportunities and discussions for consideration with Parks and Rec director. Perhaps we don't need to mow every week and that in an alternative we would be able to use some of that savings for the elimination of pesticides and then perhaps supplement some of the. Why could I keep thinking the word pond is pond. Pond swims pond. I call it a marsh swims pond maintenance that is so detrimental he needed. There are so many areas in the parks and rec system that need additional maintenance. And so if we could no less than perhaps that would be an opportunity to beef up a lot of the other areas. I mean, I think that the people that really know where those areas are are the people that are boots on the ground every day in our parks. And I know that most of our team works on a daily basis with Harley, and so I look forward to working with him and hearing his recommendations. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Hi cluelessly. Here I am, the Secretary of Carp and I'm a President of the East Side Voice and most recently a member of a group that is forming called the Friends of Eldorado Park East. A couple of months ago, a small group of residents got together to look at the deteriorating conditions in Eldorado Park. The section north of spring. We contacted the fifth District Council. Office, and we got a very positive response from Councilwoman Mongo. She had already conceived of an idea to form groups at each park, to create a partnership with those that want to be involved and to monitor the parks. We want to thank Councilwoman Mango for providing the opportunity for us to be part of the solution. The top two issues in our list and our list was about three pages long, was inadequate watering, which I think you pretty much dealt with tonight in the budget and the unhealthy foliage, grass, trees and ponds, very possibly a result of the prolonged use of poisons for weed abatement to keep the grass from growing where it was not wanted and to keep the weeds down. And what we see them doing is loading up the truck with Roundup and then driving down the road and and hosing it along the road edges and also around the trees. And it's pretty excessive use of poison. And this is a big issue with the environmentalists. We want to thank our new parks director for immediately getting engaged on this, as well as our mayor for boldly stepping up and suggesting that we could have a ban on glass effect across our city. But I know that to make that happen requires members of our council to get involved. And in the spirit of being part of the solution, we could possibly get rid of all herbicides. If we do that, what's the downside? The kids have to play on grass with a few dandelions. You know, there is there is a little bit of milkweed that perhaps the butterflies could feed on. And I'm a big fan of industrial engineering. And if you really feel that there's going to be a problem here with cost, I would suggest that we do as a time study. Does it really take more money and longer to use a weed whacker or to spread mulch along the roadway? If we need to cut labor in the contract and it's based on a time study, can we change the most schedule which Councilwoman Mango just brought up? Can we go from every week to perhaps two times a month? Grass cut short gets sunburned and the water evaporates faster than it would with longer grass. I think the kids will be happier to play on longer grass with a few dandelions. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Kerry Sharp. And again, I want to also thank the council. People of four council members had also put this ahead of the agenda tonight. Also to thank Mr. Mongeau for jumping on board on this right away and supporting the removal of Roundup from our parks. It's such a great start too, but I also want to make sure that we urge to complete them the whole city wide ban, because I agree with Councilwoman Price. I think our media and say a lot about how we look also and when we're killing the grass with Roundup on our medians, it's turning into dirt. And I have to tell you, looked a little bit the other day, I was following one of the mowers on the median off of Bellflower, and it looked a little bit like pig pen from from Snoopy because there was nothing but a bunch of dirt behind the mower. And I don't know, I thought it was kind of funny. But it also does go to show that we are doing something to our grasses that are wrong, which is, of course the roundup. Also most of Monsanto's lawsuits. And of course, we know that they have them. And Monsanto's lawsuits are because of prior knowledge. And we have to keep that in mind that now we have prior knowledge of what this stuff does. It's out there, it's on the news every single day. And we have to do something about it to make sure that we are addressing the fact that we could also be held culpable if we already have prior knowledge. And you also have to know that Monsanto didn't just send a couple of people to progressive fight this precedent setting judicial issue. They sent their A-Team. They sent a lot of lawyers to make sure to fight this down. And they still lost. They were still found culpable to the tune of $289 million. And one of the biggest problems with Roundup and I'll be really quick, is that it was it's a wind carrying chemical. So when you think that you're only spraying one tiny little spot, it actually can get airborne and it can waft on to other and other surfaces and stick to them. And if a child touches a tree that we didn't think we were spraying and ends up with that on their hands, that's a secondary surface touch and we really don't want that to happen to our pets are trees, our flowers are waterfowl or our people. And thank you again for all of your hard work on this issue. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Anna Kristensen for the Protect, the Long Beach Low Cerritos Wetlands Coalition and Carp is a member organization. And I want to I want to say here that I didn't think this would happen. I mean, it just happened. And that and I look at the council members that are endorsing this, and I just want to thank you so much, because when I went to a Parks and Rec meeting with and Cantrell over a year ago, Parks and Rec was very polite, but they were just going to do a study. And then when the study found out that it was a little more expensive to use an organic pesticide and then round up, it seemed to be over. Case closed. And I just want to give a big shout out to Ann Cantrell tonight. You know, she's been active on this issue for a very long time, as well as others. And I know that she doesn't get, I think, the recognition and support she deserves because she is a community activist and she goes where where people don't really want to talk about it. So still in Eldorado Park when Roundup, we spray on the little wetlands out there. She came in with photographs. Right. And so I just she her name is bad and she can't be here tonight. And so I want to thank and and I want to thank the council. And I hope that people support this measure also that it extends to our wetlands. And SYMMES Pond seems to be on everybody's mind lately, including the neighbors, because the pond is totally dried out. Now, I think there's an issue there that they said they were cutting some kind of a budget for Sam's Pond. But I don't I think you need to spend a little more money out there and a Long Beach property in the wetlands. And I'll tell you, one of the problems is with the trees. They where they do tend to take over and they're very expensive to dig out and do it the right way. And even someone who doesn't want to use Roundup was was considering using some kind of herbicide in the wetlands simply because of the Tully thing. So if we can boated, if we can find money, I think we can get community support, we can build two boats were already talking about it getting some volunteers are excited about doing that and thriving that Native American tradition. So anyway, as a community, I think this is a great moment. I think I'm just very grateful. I'm grateful to the mayor for understanding like, you know, we don't we don't need poisons, you know. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And our last speaker on the side of that. All right. And yes, mine will bring it down for smaller people. My name is Ramon from District five. I am. I know that this thing's going to pass. I just wanted. To honor our lost in Darryl Supernova. And Roberto. You're wrong, guy for bringing this forward. I appreciate that. If Mongo is involved with that, I appreciate that too. As well as the director in the. Complete park staff. You guys are doing a great job. I. But in working with Marie, I actually arranged a meeting. This thing is a lot simpler, I think, than what a lot of people think. As far as the suggestion goes, there's been a demonstration and there's been some instruction given to the park staff. I arranged a meeting with with the park staff and the city of Long Beach. L.A. Unified School District and the EPA. They have some even equipment. That can be used if you don't want to do that. You know, the chemical thing, there's also an equipment. Option and. Also. A. Neat little program that they have. It's free and. It can not only deal with. Roundup and these things, but all the other pesticides. It's a pretty cool deal and I hope that everything works. I mean, I know when I was talking to Marie, she was very optimistic in at least looking into this and trying it out and making sure this thing works. But she didn't. Want to step in. And step on anybody that was coming in because she was getting ready to leave. Two years ago, I provided. The city during a budget meeting. A petition for about 3000 people. Plus to get. The water. Get the parks 100%. What they need. At the time, it. Was only about 36%. Of what they were watering. One of the reasons why, as I understand it, that Roundup was put in was because they wanted to get water to the tree roots. And that's just one of the reasons. And so by removing the the the grass, they would be able to water the trees down there. And so now that we've got 100% watering, maybe some of the organic things may not be needed. I know a lot of people there's been a lot the cities, their school districts, there's a lot of. Municipalities that. Have removed Roundup. From their thing. So there's plenty of options that are available. So I just wanted to say thanks to all of you and I'm hitting the road. You guys have a great day. I got to go for a road run. Thanks, buddy. Thank you. With that, please cast your votes. I mean, I can't remember Andrews washing cars. Thank you. Then last. Thank you. The last. The last item that was asked to be moved up is 1121. And then after 21, we'll go to the regular agenda from starting with public comment down to all the regular items.

A RESOLUTION ratifying the 2017 update to the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed, or Water Resource Inventory Area 8, Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan.

SeattleCityCouncil_02202018_Res 31799

The report of the Civil Rights, Utilities, Economic Development and Arts Committee Agenda Item for resolution 31799. A Resolution Ratifying the 2017 update to the Lake Washington Cedar Sammamish Watershed or Water Resource Inventory Area eight Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan. The committee recommends a full council adopt the resolution. HERBOLD Thank you. This resolution ratifies the 2017 update to the Water Resource Inventory Area eight Conservation Plan, otherwise known as WYRE eight. Two decades ago, the Federal Government listed the Puget Sound Chinook salmon as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, prompting local governments in the Lake Washington Cedar Sammamish watershed to initiate a coordinated watershed scale partnership to recover salmon under an Interlocal agreement. Implementation of salmon recovery actions in Wairoa is guided by the Wairoa eight Chinook Salmon Conservation Plan, which was originally completed in 2005 and ratified by each of the local government partners. The Weare eight Salmon Recovery Council will receive regular briefings during the update process and approved the new ten year update to the Wairoa eight plan in September 2017. Very good. Any further comments? Those in favor of adopting the resolution please vote i. I. Those opposed vote no. The motion carries the resolutions adopted. The chair will sign it. Please read the next agenda item.

A bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at a special municipal election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2015, the question of whether the City shall be authorized to issue bonds or other financial obligations for the purpose of financing the following tourism related projects: the National Western Center and improvements to the Colorado Convention Center; and in connection therewith to eliminate the expiration date of the lodger’s tax and the auto rental tax at a rate equal to 1.75%; providing the form of the ballot question; providing for other details in connection therewith; and ratifying action previously taken. (FINANCE & SERVICES) Refers a question to the November 2015 ballot to seek authorization for the City to issue bonds or other financial obligations to finance tourism related projects for the National Western Center Campus and improvements to the Colorado Convention Center and to eliminatie the expiration date for portions of the lodger’s tax and the auto rental tax. This bill must pas

DenverCityCouncil_06222015_15-0379

At 1212 eyes one abstention four two is ordered published. All right, one down, six more to go. If I were to go next. One 379. Councilwoman Monteiro, what would you like for us to do with this? I just wanted to call 379 out. Which. Talks about National Westerns Center in the Colorado Convention Center. I just had some questions. Go right ahead. Certainly, I would like someone from both the Colorado Convention Center and also from National Western and possibly the city to be able to come up and explain to the voters exactly what this council bill does. All right, Kelly, you coming on the. Mm hmm. Just do it. Mm hmm. They went to grab Kerry Kennedy, so. Good evening. Mr. President. Members of council. I'm Carrie Kennedy on the City CFO. I apologize. I was just out in the hallway congratulating folks on your last vote, but happy to take questions on the referral of the ordinance for the National Western Center. Come from Ontario. Go ahead. Repeat your question. Thank you. So what do we have before us this evening? What does this proposal do? This is a good time to explain to people watching television. And then the next one, the next question that I would like to ask too is from National Western Stock Show, how much you generate every month and I mean every year in terms of national Western and the revenue. Also, the same question to visit. Well, whoever is doing the Colorado Convention Center and then I would like the question answered, how did you reach this conclusion and why was this method why are we looking at this method in front of us today in regard to financing for the future? Okay. Thank you, Councilman, and thank you to all of you who've helped bring this proposal as far along as it is today. Really appreciate all your great efforts. This is a proposal to submit a proposal to Denver voters in November to finance the redevelopment of the National Western Center and also to finance improvements at the Colorado Convention Center. It is an authorization by Denver voters to allow the city to issue 778 up to $778 million in debt. To finance these two proposals and the source of funds to service that debt. Are. Denver's tourism taxes. So the reason the city has the opportunity to make these new investments in tourism related assets is because the Colorado Convention Center is now 25 years old and is being paid off. I think you all just did a recognition tonight that the convention center is 25 years old. This gives the city of Denver an opportunity to move forward with some new tourism related assets. I'll let Kelly lead talk about the evolution of the proposal, the net to redevelop the National Western Center, because it really is a much larger proposal than just the National Western Stock Show. It's a redevelopment of the entire campus that includes new connections between Elyria, Globeville and Swansea and neighborhoods to support the redevelopment of North Denver. It includes opening up the river over a mile of the South Platte. So there are park amenities and bike amenities and access to the river, a lot like the wonderful amenities that we see today at Confluence Park. This development will create the opportunity for Colorado State University to come on to the National Western Center campus to provide agribusiness and agro science research, veterinary medicine, and also involves the redevelopment of the buildings that are up there that currently housed the National Western Stock Show for a 365 day a year active campus . That brings new events, new opportunities for tourism, and also allows our National Western Stock Show to remain in Denver, to remain competitive, to remain the Super Bowl of stock shows, as it has been here in our city for the last hundred years, for the next hundred years. So significant improvements, the total redevelopment costs over the next ten years for the National Western Center are projected to be $856 million, of which the city of Denver will contribute 673 million. Again, the primary source of that are our tourism taxes, taxes that people pay when they stay in hotels and when they rent cars here in our city. Those are the taxes that are currently in place today supporting the Colorado Convention Center. So there is no tax increase. There are no new taxes. But we do need to ask the voters to leave a portion of those taxes in place because a portion of them would expire when the convention center pays off. So it's in essence leaving in place the taxes that are there today in order to finance this development project. We also include in this package just over $100 million for improvements to the Colorado Convention Center. And I'll let Richard Schaaf talk about that proposal. You heard a lot tonight about the convention center. But in order for Colorado's convention center to remain competitive and to continue to attract the conferences and compete nationally with other convention centers, there are some enhancements, some improvements technology, some flexible space amenities that need to be added in our convention center. And so this goes to the voters as a package to authorize the debt and leave the taxes that are in place today to support that debt in order to pay for the redevelopment of the National. Boston Center complex and everything I talked about included in that proposal and the Colorado Convention Center improvements. Happy to take questions. Councilman Terry was. Or someone else you want? Yeah. I'm waiting for whoever wants to go next. Richard Scharf. Yes. Thank you. Richard Scharf, president and CEO of Visit Denver. Yes. As Karie mentioned, what we did at the same time, the mayor felt that we should look at all of our facilities that are generating probably nearly three quarters of $1,000,000,000 a year in economic impact. Take a look at all of those at same time and see what our needs are. The Strategic Advisory Group SAG did this study in 2013 into 2014, made some recommendations at the National Western Stock Show complex, and also gave did an analysis of our convention center facilities. I will tell you this. We have a beautiful facility. It was designed by meeting planners, but what they found out is that we need to remain competitive. And if you think about it, we had Kurgan Hall in 1969 and in 1990, just 21 years later, we built the Colorado Convention Center. 15 years later, we expanded it. And right now, another, you know, 10 to 15 years, we're looking at just making some enhancements with some additional meeting space, flexible meeting space. If we do this, the study suggested that we could generate another hundred million dollars economic impact a year and also protect ourselves from losing business, because, as you all know, it's very competitive. In fact, there's 18 other expansions and enhancements out of the top 25 cities in the country right now. So we are just really doing our best to continue to generate the kind of economic impact that we know we can can generate for the future. So again, the recommendations, a lot around enhancements, some additional meeting space, flexible meeting space technology would really put us in shape for the next 25 years. Okay. Any questions? Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and ask a representative from National Western to please come up. Yes. Hello, Mr. President. Members of council. I'm Paul Andrews, the president and CEO of your. National Western Stock. Show here in Denver. What you have before you is a necessity to save the National Western Stock Show. We are at a point in history where for 109 years, we've proudly. Been at the confluence of I-70 and Brighton Boulevard. We've worked diligently with the mayor and his staff to put together a master plan that is efficient and will allow the National Western Stock Show to thrive and grow. But it's much more than that. What you have in front of you. Is the National Western Center is a global opportunity to bring in the world's leaders in agriculture year round to Denver, Colorado, increase the economic impact from around 100 million a year to $200 million per year, and put us on the stage internationally as the leader in agricultural education. Become some sort of a genesis for how to feed the world. The the world. As we enter 9 billion inhabitants. Where is that research going to be done? It's going to be done in Denver, Colorado, at the National Western Center. So for the National Western Stock Show. It's a necessity. But for the city of Denver, this is an opportunity that only. Comes once in a lifetime. And it's before us here today. Thank you. Thank you. Kelly, if you can. Speak to how all of this proposal was organized and how how we reached the conclusion that we're here tonight in terms of having it go to the voters. It was was not an overnight kind of decision. And I think it's just important for my client to hear that. Sure. Thank you. Councilwoman Monteiro, members of council. You know, this has been really, you know, two years in the making. You know, when the mayor announced the creation of the North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative, which is really about three historic neighborhoods, Globeville area, Swansea, that are very disconnected from the rest of the city, have seen no infrastructure investment for over three decades. And the National Western Center project is one of those six projects. And from the get go, this has been about strategically aligning the planning and the implementation of these projects. So we've been very deliberate over the course of the last couple of years as part of the planning that the neighborhood plans went first , Globeville was approved first than Elyria. Swansea followed, and then the National Western Center was approved by council unanimously in March of this year. And those that plan was informed by the neighborhood plans, because a big part of this is is not only making sure the stock show is here for another hundred years, and it lays out a much bolder vision about what this place could be. One of the things that came out of this effort, I'm convinced, is the work we've all done together led to a partnership with the state of Colorado through House Bill 1344. That was bipartisan support went through the legislature this year. The state now is a partner in this venture to the tune of $250 million to accelerate the development of Colorado State University on this campus, just like the State participated in accelerate the development of the new medical center at the Anschutz Medical Campus. We have an opportunity here to combine all these different funds and create a world class facility that will, again, as Paul mentioned, solve some of the world's biggest food issues. Senator Jerry Sonnenberg described it as positioning Colorado as the Silicon Valley of AG. And and so the the question before the voters of Denver will be, who do you want to support an extension of this visitor's tax to make continued investments in our tourism infrastructure at the Convention Center in the National Western. And then also a part of that is now the state as a partner in this venture. And we've also got an application into the state for what's called a Regional Tourism Act application to the tune of about 117 million. All these pieces come together, along with a substantial investment by the National Western to the tune of 50 million in cash that they will have to raise on an investment from CSU. So all these pieces are coming together over the course of the conversation we've had together the last couple of years. And I think what's most important is we always have started and finish our conversations about how does this impact reconnecting these neighborhoods. And so for a big part of this first investment in redeveloping the site is connecting the neighborhoods, Globeville or Swansea, back to the city. So we've got a lot obviously a lot of work ahead of us still to move the plan forward over the eight phases over the next ten years. But this is the next really big step to go to the voters of Denver and ask for their support towards this effort. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you. Kelly, would you mind coming back up, please? Can you tell us what the timeline obligations are if the RTA funding is approved by when we have to generate a certain percentage of dollars? I heard 200 million. I'm assuming that is where we're looking at more of the build out of some of these new buildings on the campus. So can you speak to that? Sure. You really I mean, so phasing the timing of how the project kind of rolls out is a really, really important conversation. In the in the master plan and in the application, we talk about the eight phases over approximately a decade. And one of the key drivers in that is that the stock show can't just close down for the next decade while we rebuild it or there's no place to relocate them while we rebuild the site. So the phasing was intentional about making sure the stock show could stay in place. So that was one consideration. The second consideration ties back to the RTA is that once you're awarded an award from the state, a clock starts to tick in terms of getting the project started within five years and then ultimately finishing within ten. So there. And that's really focused on getting the facilities in place that are going to drive the new tourism increment to the site. So obviously we have a ton of work to do on the infrastructure side. So some of the first work that will come out in front of us is the infrastructure, the two bridges connecting the site to Washington Street, which do not exist today. Moving rail off the river that will allow us to free up and a mile of the South Platte River and reclaim and create 12 acres of new open space along the river. A new consolidating the rail, create a new national western drive to connect the site. So there's a lot of work we have to do in the early years to set the site up for success. And then the vertical development we'll we'll follow specific to your question about the 200. So I think you're referring to the the dollars that we still have to fill to meet our obligations. Is that what you're referring to? Richard Sharp had mentioned, I think it's who referred to the 200 million that we would see. Oh, you're referring to Paul. So right now. So that's an economic development question. Right. So right now it's about 100 million or so in economic impact that the stock show has on our economy. The build out of this plan essentially doubles that economic impact to the site because you're now able to have more events on the site . I mean, right now the site is very inflexible. It's really very limited in what you can do this the new facilities really allow for true flexibility, year round use of the facilities for the stock show. It allows them to grow the number of breeds during the 16 day show. It allows for a significant growth in the equestrian or horse business on site and really positions this facility as a perennial player in the large horse shows. That's going to drive nearly a million additional visitors to the site just on the tourism side around it, kind of equestrian related events. And then there's a whole nother conversation we'll have about the agribusiness and agro science jobs that will start to emerge in and around this campus to make it the the kind of perennial place to study ag related issues. So the, you know, this is with the commitment of finishing this project really sets the stage for a long term sustainable model for both the stock show and the site to generate substantial economic impact, both to the city of Denver and to the entire front range. So, Kelly, what I was trying to understand was if the 200 million that we anticipate seeing annually is at full buildout with all the new buildings on the site, or is it just with what the 800 million will buy with the approval of the. Really good question. So I think, you know, obviously, to maximize the the the economic impact you got, it got to see the whole build out. But I will tell you, in the RTA, our first two, which are really addressed, the first couple of phases and builds the livestock center, the new livestock center and the equestrian center, those are considered really the key drivers of the new tourism increment. So those are early deliverables. As part of our initial build out, we've got to meet those requirements under the state. So you're going to start to see improvements in the economic impact of this campus of the center as a result of those two buildings while we continue towards the full buildout. Okay. And then I just wanted to ask Kent Rice if you could talk a little bit about the anticipated future of the Coliseum, knowing that at the end of the day, when the new facility is built on the north side of 87. Indeed that the Coliseum will no longer be utilized for the stock show and the rodeo. So what is the vision in the future for the Coliseum and the 30 acres of land that we. Can't rise here? Executive Director, arts and venues for the city. And we manage the Denver Coliseum. So I'm going to answer your question by first answering one you didn't ask, which is always risky. But the good news is the Coliseum has a near term future that I think is quite bright, which is probably for seven, eight, nine years we'll be operating it as the Coliseum. So in the neighborhood it will still be there. We hope to have more events because we're going to continue to do some capital improvement. As for what happens when there is a new arena built and that's one of the big exciting opportunities in the whole plan for the National Western Center is to have a. Fully functioning 21st century. Arena, which the Coliseum, regrettably, is not. It's a beautiful building, but it's it's from the last century. What will happen with that 30 acre site is to be determined. Councilman Ortega we don't know the answer to that yet. So it could be adaptive reuse for a variety of things. But our main near-term planning is around how to keep it functioning for the next 7 to 8 years. And if we do have I don't know if the request is the right word, but there has been anticipation that the building remains because of historic value. Can you speak to that? Only that I've heard the same requests, that people have a lot of affection for the building, as do I. But we haven't really address what will be done with the site. All right. Thank you. You're welcome. I have no further questions. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Monteiro. Thank you. I have one last question for David Broadwell. Can you just talk about should this past this evening what the election cycle would be when that happens, where voters could potentially see this on the ballot? Yes. Just like the last question. You were debating the last ordinance before. This is simply a way to get it on the ballot for the November 3rd election because it involves bond. The debt inevitably requires the approval of the voters, both the element of the measure that that incurs the debt as well as extending the expiring taxes . Those are both things that are triggered under TABOR in terms of needing voter approval and that will and that will occur on November 3rd. In terms of the voters giving a thumbs up or thumbs down that we actually. Every year there's some time over the summer when we meet our statutory deadlines for getting things on the ballot. We're moving these two things forward tonight, but there's plenty of time in terms of between now and September to to get the measures on. One more question. So, Mr. Broadwell, essentially what's before us tonight is to either approve or disapprove this going forward so they can it appear on the ballot? That's right. Okay. Thank you. Thank thank you. Come from Ontario. So that was not called out. Any other questions or comments on 379? All right, Madam Secretary, you ante up the next one, which I believe was 381 column by three council members. And I'm pretty sure these are four beyond comment. So we are. Yes, I believe this is going to be a vote count from Ontario. I believe you have this called out for an amendment, correct? Yes. Okay. So that will need to go first. Councilwoman Ortega, I believe, wanted to call it out as well for a courtesy, is that correct? Yes. Okay. And then, Councilwoman Fox, you were just for you. I'm sorry. We spent a lot of time talking about the stock show measure that would be sent to the people. Did I miss the vote? It was not called out for a vote. Right. Oh, okay. Thank you. Thank you. So you want me to place this on the ballot? Three one. Come to my apartment, make sure. Did you want 379 called out because you did not only count. Oh, I didn't know. I didn't want it called out. I thought it was okay. No, it was not got him. So we are going to start with 381 so we'll do the amendment first will be new needed on the floor to be ordered published. So Councilman Ortega, would you please put 381 on the floor to please. Mr. President, I move that council bill 381 be ordered published. All right. It has been moved in, second in. And now, Councilman Monteiro, we need a motion to amend.

A RESOLUTION calling for research, engagement and presentation of information to the Mayor and City Council on the Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) program prior to considering renewal of the program in 2023.

SeattleCityCouncil_09202021_Res 32017

Agenda item 13 Resolution 32017 Calling for research, engagement and presentation of information to the Mayor and City Council on my multifamily tax exemption program. Prior to considering renewal of the program in 2023, it can be recommended if resolution be adopted as amended. Thanks so much of Indiana. Back over to Councilmember Mosquito to walk us through this resolution. Thank you very much, council president. This resolution does exactly what it says in the title. Make sure that we have additional research engagement and that we have presentation from the mayor's office to city council. As we. Consider major changes that we'd like to see for the multi-family tax exemption program by the year 2023. This resolution is a companion piece to the MFT extension legislation that we just passed and it calls for monitoring and reporting back to council. On how the. Executive plans to ensure that the program extension is going. Well, that we get feedback and engagement. From stakeholders, that we've included labor partners and housing stakeholders, so that we are all set up to weigh policy priorities and potential tradeoffs as we take on the Comprehensive Program Review in 2023. I want to thank Councilmember Herbold. For her work to enhance our report back requirements in the resolution here in front of us and know that there will be much more conversations to come about making sure that those MFC programs excuse me that the MFC program pencils out in terms of creation of additional affording affordable. Housing units and the additional. Language that was included in committee will help us make those calculations. Thanks so much, colleagues. I hope you will consider voting yes for this bill resolution. Okay. Thank you so much. Are there any comments on the resignation of some members, please? Thank you. Are there problems with the IMF fee program? It gives a tax exemption in exchange for affordable rents for 12 years. The problem is that most of the quote unquote affordable rent under this program are not really very affordable. And because it is a voluntary program for property owners, they only sign up or when their property tax exemption is greater than the discount on rent. In other words, the city could make the housing more affordable by simply collecting the taxes and using them for rent vouchers. Well, my office supports continuing the program because there are going to be thousands of people in Seattle who depend on it for their housing. And I'll be voting. Yes. Thank you. Oh, thank you, Councilor Arslan. Are there any additional comments because memorable, please. Thank you. I just want to add, in response to recording, stopped recognition, recording in progress. Okay, hold on. We had a little bit of a glitch in the system. About that glitch. I think we're still recording. Okay. Go ahead. Nothing happened. For those of you who are watching and if it may have cut out that we were in transition, go ahead, Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. Just want to highlight that one of the items that the what's before us right now is, I believe, is the resolution that sets out how we are going to make a determination of whether or not to to make changes to the program, end it or extend it, as is. And one of the specific elements in the called out in the resolution is is precisely the issue that Councilmember Swann raised. Is this to analyze this question of whether or not it would reduce the cost to the city instead of providing the tax exemption, take the dollars associated with it, the the tax exemption, the forgone taxes that the city does not collect and use some portion of those dollars to buy down the units. And we the question is whether or not we might be able to buy even greater rent affordability with an approach like that. So we want to flag that. That is one of the specific elements for for a study that's called out in this resolution. Thank you so much. Are there any additional comments on the bill that's in any other hands raised? So with that being said, we'll look at these called roll on the adoption of the resolution. So what? Yes. Strauss Yes. HERBOLD Yes. SUAREZ Yes. LEWIS Yes. Morales Yes. Let's get to I. PETERSON Hi. President Gonzalez. I line in favor and unopposed. The resolution is adopted and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Well, the clerk please read the short title of item 14 into the record.

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with the appropriate departments to report back on potential incentives and strategies to expand access to quality urgent care in neighborhoods with limited access to an acute care facility in Long Beach.

LongBeachCC_04092019_19-0301

Thank you very much. Okay. Next, we're going to move to item 21:00, please. Regarding item 20, report is communications from Councilmember Richardson, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilwoman Mango and Council Member Oranga recommendation to require city manager to report back on potential incentives and strategies to to expand access to quality urgent care in neighborhoods with limited access to an acute care facility in Long Beach. Thank you. Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So this request is pretty simple. It's to explore incentives to increase access to acute or urgent care facilities in our community. So 40% of patients who visit hospital emergency rooms have lower level emergencies, resulting in overcrowding expand extensive wait times often, often encountered in our emergency rooms. Urgent care centers provide rapid secondary intervention for non-life threatening injuries and ailments. Urgent care facilities offer intervention for low, lower acuity patients such as allergic reactions, nausea, wounds, lacerations, sprains and so forth. They are affordable. They often offer a minimal hours of operation, often have shorter wait times, making them a convenient alternative for medical attention. And looking at the map that's on the screen that was prepared by our. It shows sort of the crosses are the urgent care facilities already exist in our city or around our city and the ages of hospitals. So we actually have a lot of you know, we have a lot of urgent care facilities and hospitals in Long Beach. But what it shows here, where those red circles are, is, you know, where we don't have sort of immediate access to urgent care facilities, kind of really clustered in four key areas of town. So so north Long Beach. So the eighth and ninth Council District, the seventh and the first on the west side, much of the fifth District, and then sort of down between two and three those areas. So urgent care facilities a lot of times like to locate right next to a hospital so they can direct somebody right across the street. You don't want to wait. You can go across streets, urgent care. So sometimes, you know, it may so we may need to take a look at other strategies or other incentives to get them to locate maybe in some of these other areas. I mean, there are a lot closer. And the idea is simply if it's within walking distance or short drive or a bus ride, maybe folks won't immediately go to the emergency room. So so we just want to make sure that we're we're taking a look at some strategies as we look at, you know, the different development opportunities in these areas, the different land use and zoning opportunities in these areas that we figure out how to intentionally pursue some of these uses in some of these areas. So that's that's the proposal here. And we have a great opportunity here. Thanks a. Lot. Thank you. Councilman Guzman ends up. Yes. I think this is timely, especially after our discussion about community hospital. And I just think, Councilmember Richardson, for bringing this forward and providing more light on access to health care, which I think is the overarching idea. So thank you very much. And I look forward to this. Yes, thank you. Councilman. Yes. I want to thank Councilmember Richardson for bringing this forward. There was a lot of this conversation with Community Hospital as Councilmember Gonzalez brought up. And I always have felt like community hospital was such a second district's resource. And and through the whole process, it really talked about that. But recognizing that really we only have services in our downtown for Second District residents, that is close. One of the other conversations that we've talked with our health department about was the need for other venues of mental health support outside of a hospital and outside of psychiatric . So just as we're coming back, I would love to to understand some of the mental health support systems that are resources that might also be in play when we think about acute care. So thank you so much for bringing this forward. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? My name is and I can say success for president. I think it's a great way to, you know, bring access to more urgent care facilities here in Long Beach would include, you know, maybe purchasing back Pacific Hospital from the current nursing college that runs it. That was an urgent care facility that bordered that was in the the sixth District in the Wrigley neighborhood, that border, the 7/7 District, which a lot of it would cut significantly. A lot of the travel time. That ambulance is coming from the west side of Long Beach where most likely they're going into St Mary's or to Memorial . It would cut significantly the workload also, you know, just a more investigation into the practices of a lot of the ambulances and ambulance companies in Long Beach. A lot of them push out patients into Norwalk, specifically into Downey. And that also works into putting a lot of patients into life threatening situations because of the financial incentives of pushing out Medicaid and Medicare and Medicare clients out of the city. Just a thought. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. You know, public comment on this now. It was a pretty scratchy vote. Council member Mango Vice Mayor Andrews motion and. Thank you. Next, we move into item 21, please, with the item.

Recommendation to adopt resolution approving the 2016-2019 Memorandum of Understanding with the Long Beach Supervisors Employees Association. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06132017_17-0458

Thank you. I do remember this. Item was a report from Human Resources recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the 2016 through 2019 MCU with the Long Beach Supervisors Employees Association Citywide. Thank you, Lisa. Have a quick update on this. Vice Mayor, council members are really. Happy to. Report on this memo. You, Alex Vasquez and Ken Walker. So Alex, our H.R. director. Honorable Vice Mayor and members of City Council. Since October 2016, city management has met with representatives of the Long Beach Supervisors Employees Association to discuss their initial and new terms following the bargaining instructions from the City Council. Tentative agreements have been reached with LPC. The proposed merger with LBC and the City Council resolution to approve the memo. You are included with the Council letter. The proposed MRU is for a three year term from July 2016 through September 2019, with the following major provisions. General wage increase of 2% effective October 1st, 2016. A 2% within the pay period of council adoption of the MRU and the final 2% on October 1st of 2018. These compensation provisions are consistent with recent agreements reached with the IAM. Other major provisions of the IMO. You include the elimination of floor warden skill pay and increase in health care, cost sharing with employees and an economic crisis. Re opener you have before you a resolution to approve the merger between the city and the Long Beach Supervisor Employees Association. This concludes my brief staff report. Thank you. As any public comment on this item. Seeing numbers, please cast your vote.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ HE22-017 for Long Beach Recovery Act Black-Serving Mental Health Services, and award contracts as-needed to the 27 agencies for Black-serving mental health services, in a total annual aggregate amount of $1,000,000 for a period of one year, with the option to renew for four additional one-year periods, at the discretion of the City Manager; and, authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contracts, including any necessary subsequent amendments. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04192022_22-0443

Item 24 is a report from Health and Human Services Financial Management. Recommendation to adopt specification for Long Beach Recovery Act. Black serving mental health services and a work contract as needed to 27 Agency for Black Serving Mental Health Services in a total annual aggregated amount of 1 million CDI. There's a motion in a second council in Austin. I think. I fully support this. Investment. Richardson. Thank you. Just want to congratulate Gwen Manning and Alana and everyone who worked really, really hard on this grant. This was the only agency in California to receive $1,000,000 to help support black serving, help mental health services. And so there's going to be a lot of great work and we're going to be leading in this effort. Thanks so much. Thank you very much. Any public comment on this? If there are any members of the public, they would like to speak on item 24 in person. Please line up at the podium in the zoom. Please use the raise hand feature or dial star nine now. Seen none. That concludes public comment. Thank you. We're going to go back and do it in 21 and then we'll go back to 25. Or covert, please. A roll call. Vote. District one. District two. I did it. Three. District four by district five. By. District six. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. District nine. Yes. The motion is carried. Nine zero.

Summary title: Related to the Rent Review, Rent Stabilization and Limitations on Evictions Ordinance Consider: 1) A Resolution Adopting Policy Concerning Capital Improvement Plans (CIP), and 2) An Appropriation of Funds. Adoption of Resolution Adopting Policy Concerning Capital Improvement Plans; AND Appropriation of $300,000 from the General Fund to Fund a Rent Program Fee Study and to Cover the Cost to Administer the Rent-Related Programs through June 30, 2016. (City Manager 2110) [The Public Hearing was held on February 16, 2016 and the Council discussion was continued to March 1, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. Therefore, there will be no additional public comment.]

AlamedaCC_03012016_2016-2625

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor and members of the city council. I'm Debi Potter. I'm the community development director for the city of Alameda. And as has been noted, this item before you and this meeting this evening is a continuation from the February 16th meeting. At that meeting, the agenda recommendations called for an introduction on first reading of a rent stabilization rent review and limitations on eviction ordinance, adoption of a resolution governing the program and policies of the capital improvement plan and an appropriation of $300,000 from the General Fund to conduct a study and fund the rent program through June 30th of this year. And embedded in that last recommendation was a request for direction from the Council about how to pay for for the administration of the ordinance. On the 16th, the Council did introduce an ordinance on first reading. And second reading of that ordinance is scheduled for later this evening. And for purposes of this meeting, I will be presenting on the Capital Improvement Plan Resolution and the program fee. As you know, one of the provisions in the ordinance for a no fault eviction is for substantial rehabilitation and staff. And the ordinance does capture that concept of preparation of a capital improvement plan when a property owner is undertaking substantial rehabilitation. And the ordinance contemplates that the city will adopt an ordinance will adopt a resolution excuse me, a resolution that contains the requirements of the capital improvement plan. And that the purpose of the capital improvement plan for substantial rehabilitation is to encourage housing providers to reinvest in their rental property. It ensures that providers get a fair return on investment, and it also provides tenants with relocation benefits if they are required to move as part of the substantial rehabilitation. Hmm. Did it? The Capital improvement plan as contained in the resolution requires that before you increase rent or you terminate tenancies in connection with a substantial rehabilitation project, you must prepare a capital improvement plan and capital improvements as they are defined. For purposes of a capital improvement plan is that they must add material value or prolong the useful life of the property. They would not include routine repairs or maintenance. The cost of the proposed capital improvements must be more than eight times the amount of the monthly rent, times the number of rental units to be improved. And as we've said, the plan must be approved by the city before undertaking any rent increases or terminations of tenancies. Under the proposed capital improvement plan. If a tenant decides to permanently relocate rather than pay the increased rent, they would be eligible for relocation benefits, relocation assistance. And those benefits would be the ones that are outlined in the ordinance, which are tied to the length of tenancy and then and can be exchanged for time versus money. So it's the same provisions for relocation benefits that are contained in the ordinance. And then if the tenant wants to stay and pay the increased rent but needs to be relocated during the construction, the improvement plan policy provides that the housing provider must relocate the tenant to a vacant unit on site while the work is being done, or if there is no onsite vacant unit, then the tenant would be permanently relocated with the payment of relocation assistance. So that is an overview of the proposed capital improvement plan. And before I move on to a presentation on the program fees, I do want to note that staff is recommending one slight revision to the proposed policy. So it's on page one, the resolution. So Exhibit A of the resolution is the policy. So on page one, on number two, capital improvement. Wait a minute. You're way ahead of me. Okay. Where is this? Yes. So on the resolution and there is a page A-1, which is exhibit A to the resolution. It comes up as page to honor the resolution. But. Okay. But at the bottom of the page, it's printed A-1. And then number two is called Capital Improvement. And so what staff is proposing. Yeah. Page one. That's the page numbering system they have. So a capital improvement. And what we want to insert is a capital improvement comma. For purposes of the capital improvement plan policy, comma shall be any improvement to the rental unit. And then it goes on with the definition. And the reason that we're asking for this additional phrase to be added is because we want to ensure that the policy is consistent with the definitions in the Ordinance of Capital Improvement and Capital Improvement Plan. So by making it clear that the capital improvement as defined in the capital improvement plan, then we are making sure that we are consistent with the definitions in the ordinance. Okay. So you were planning to talk about capital improvement plan now and then continue to talk about all three the other issues. Now, without feedback from us. I was going to present on the capital improvement plan, then the program fee. But if the Council would prefer to take questions on the capital improvement plan before we move on. I'd like to do that. I'd like to address this issue because the motion could pose to this issue by itself also that. That's correct. Yeah. So that's what I would suggest. All right. So then Amber Ashcroft. What I just want to say is, Porter, can we get this in print form? I mean, rather than you reading us some delineation because that's the language you just read to us is not here, is it? No, it's not. And why is that? We don't have a hard copy in front of us is my question. Because. Well, I apologize for that. The the the desire to make it to make sure that the language was consistent was with the ordinance definitions, was determined on Friday. So I apologize that that we didn't turn it around for the council in writing. But if I understood correctly, it's just a one, it's a capital improvement comma as defined by what was it's eight words. Yeah. So it's. Just. Okay. And where in paragraph two. Capital improvement. Yes, a capital improvement comma. Okay. So it would be a capital improvement comma for purposes of the capital improvement plan policy comma. Which is what this document is. So it's just pertaining to this then. That was the only change in. Okay. Well, I, you know, not wanted to be too nit picky, but we get emails from the city clerk's office all the time and it's really easy and electronically document it just added and it gets downloaded next time we refresh. So I think I have that added text. Thank you. All right. Member, only. A couple of questions, but just a point of information management. We. Viewing our comments on this at this point to. Clarifying questions, calm both her clarifying questions. Right. And then she could sit down and we can have our deliberation or we can just go ahead and have it with her standing there. I don't have a problem with it. I guess. Well, two quick questions. So under nine nine, be relocation assistance for the work associated with a capital. Improvements cannot be accomplished reasonably and safely with the rent a page. Mr. Audi A4. A4. It okay paragraph so. 99. So who determines if the work can or cannot be accomplished reasonably and safely? And the reason I ask that is, you know, roofing is one of the options where you can have a capital improvement and pass it on. But I can't imagine that, you know, majority of the times that a tenant would have to vacate in order to have a roof done. But if the landlord, you know, says you have to, I mean, who gets to make that call? Is that the city? Is that some hearing officer? Is that the landlord? I mean, there's because there's a lot of wiggle room there. So the it would be the program administrator. And are we providing guidance? Yes. So the administrator with factors and then a housing provider must relocate the tenant to a vacant unit. If there's no vacant unit, then they get permanently relocated. But presumably the existing unit, when repaired, will be vacant. So is there any provision where a tenant that wants to stay and pay the rent increase can move back when the repairs are done? So the provision is that they if they would be temporary, they would be able to be temporarily relocated. If there was a vacant unit on site, if there was no vacant unit on site, they would be permanently relocated with relocation benefits. And if there was a desire to come back to that unit, they could certainly do that. But that's not spelled out in the plan now. I mean, that's a big concern of mine that, you know. We're going to have tenants being mass evicted for these capital improvements and then maybe they're perfectly willing and happy to pay the additional rent of the improved unit and happy to be in an improved unit with, you know , better heating, better kitchens, you know, not a leaky roof, no pests, whatever, whatever, whatever. But they're not going to have an opportunity to do that. So I think that's a big chunk that's missing from this plan. And then the other question I had is that I didn't see and maybe I didn't, you know, read it close enough , but I didn't see that there was any time limit on these improvements. I mean, because they're there two months. Are there six months? In terms of the amount of time it takes to undertake the repairs. I mean, what's how are we going to judge what's reasonable? So once again, the program administrator would take in the capital improvement plan. They would render the judgments or the decisions about how much, you know, what's the appropriate rent increase based on the cost and the amortization, the interest rate, that kind of thing, whether or not permanent or temporary relocation was required based on the proposed improvements and the length of time that would be reasonable for undertaking the improvements. Those are all the kinds of factors that the program administrator would look at when determining what an approved capital improvement plan would look like. Because I guess what I'd like to see in that is some provision where a tenant whose unit is being substantially rehabbed can have an opportunity to move back in. When those rehab and those rehab work is done, that rehab work is done, and it's not an excessive amount of time. I mean, we may have to quibble with, you know, how the relocation is handled, you know, because, you know, they're not they're technically relocating temporarily, but they're not relocating permanently. And I think that's kind of a big chunk that's missing. And I think it's a huge loophole that could be used to, you know, produce mass evictions. And that's, you know, that's kind of counterproductive to what we're trying to do here today. And I hope that I'm going quickly into my comments. They're going to be really brief, and I'll listen to the rest of my colleagues. You know, I've heard from landlords that they want to make sure that this is an easy to understand process. I'm sure tenants would prefer that as well, although I haven't heard that. And I'm really concerned that, you know, there's no standards in working. You're kind of asking us to take a leap of faith on how these things are going to be approved and the time length and how long people are going to be out of their houses. That's kind of where, you know, I stand on that one. And the other member. Ashcroft. So for clarification, we're still at Ms.. Potter's presentation asking clarifying questions, and then we'll come back to council deliberation. And I would prefer that just because I think we get the continuity of the of the report and some of the questions might be answered. I've heard from members of the public that they would they would like us to let staff while we. Were finished with these things and we were into questions. Yeah. Yes. I feel we're doing okay. Yes. On the capital. On the capital improvement plan portion of the presentation. Yes. We were going to bifurcate the two issues so that we could finish one before we start the next. Well, there are two separate votes. Right? Right. So that was what we had agreed upon. Vice Mayor. My comment and I think Mr. already raises some good points and that's one of my reasons for of. Standing that this the termination of tenancy and relocation should be a mediated process because every case is different and you could have a large flat top 1960s building that when the roof is opened up, there's substantially more work that is needed than was anticipated. And to have all that sit in a hearing officer or program administrator at the city level, I think is a is a daunting task. And and if a tenant really does want to come back in, I think working out that temporary lodging for the tenant while the work is being done, I think depends on the case and depends on the relationship between the landlord and tenant. That's why I strongly believe in a mediated rather than a mandated approach. Or for this, I do think it's necessary to have a capital improvement plan if you're going to give no cause termination of tenancy so that it's real. Because the problem was that people were being turned out and there were no permits taken. It was like, Well, yeah, I'll do it. But the eviction notices went up and I think there is some sort of protection in, in our limiting. Limiting people to this particular activity by presenting a real plan that says that, yes, we are going to do this. We have our permits in place, we have tentative contracts, whatever, whatever those might be. But as far as the movements of the tenants, I think that's best mediated. So staff the recommendation from staff to have the approval of the capital improvement plan be done by the program administrator was because there are technical aspects to the review and approval of the plan so that the expertize to to understand that the the reasonable cost of the proposed improvements to imputing the interest rate to the amortization over the 15 years to understanding whether or not it makes sense that tenants be relocated. Those are kind of more technical questions. So staff felt it was probably more appropriate to have the CIP process be handled by staff versus the rack who might not have that technical expertize. But there is definitely a process where it will be done case by case each. Property owner who wants to come in and propose a capital improvement plan, that that owners plan will be evaluated on its merits and on its merits alone, so that decisions would be made on a case by case basis. A lunch spot you want to finish, right? Are you finished? I said my piece. Okay. All right. I remember. Did you? That's my right hand. Thank you. Um. So, um. To Ms.. Potter. And I understand what the vice mayor is proposing. I would also be reluctant to have these items decided by the rack. I know we're starting a training program and that sort of thing, but I still I think we need to just see how well that body functions going forward. But what about, um, a mediator is we're going to use a mediator for some aspects of this. What about having these items go to a mediator instead who presumably would be informed of the technical aspects that need to be applied? I you know, it could be a mediator. I think that we've been just proposing that it go to a staff person who would have the technical expertize. But if the council felt like there was something else that a mediator brought to the table in addition to the analysis of the technical documents, then we would you know, we could we could contract for that for that service. I don't think that that's I mean, that's certainly a possibility. So remember day soccer. Remember Africa for you? Finished for the moment. Okay. Because then I'm going to rotate. Yeah. We may go back over to thug. Quick question on page a-1 item number for you reference, prime rate plus, I imagine you mean plus one percentage point. So. I think the issue there is if the interest rate that someone. It's for a project. Is above the prime rate. What you're saying is that. Only that portion that's mathematically within the prime rate. Is subject to being recovered by rent, is that what you're saying? Well, we're proposing that. The prime rate plus one, and we essentially contacted a couple of commercial banks to understand what the interest rate was for, you know, loan renovation loans. And that's that's how we arrived at this formula. Why a? Why don't you just say the interest rate that the person has. Done so well for for 70 central? For example, if you ask the owner of that building, he'll tell you that he his interest rates on his balloon loan is like 10%. And I don't know that we really want to reward, you know, business decisions that might not necessarily make sense for the tenants and that kind of thing . I think we felt like we should go and see if you go to a a standard commercial bank who does construction loans on multifamily property as a routine part of doing business, that that might be a good interest rate to use and that we might not want to encourage really high interest rates that are going to drive up the rents that you're going to have to charge to recover your cost. And then people aren't going to be able to continue to live there. So you think? That a landlord. Seeking renovations. That are perhaps in the million dollars is purposely going to go after higher interest rates? No, I'm just saying that it could happen. And that is the case that happened with 470 Central, which there was a proposal to evict all of the tenants to do substantial rehab. And he was proposing a doubling of rent because of the the financing that he had arranged for himself. And. You know, maybe maybe that's not an appropriate financing structure and to undertake your substantial rehabilitation. So I think we were just looking for, well, kind of standard business. Maybe number four should be rewritten to capture various possibilities as opposed to having this one. It just seems a little too. Thank you. All right. Mayor Brody? No, I mean. Well, if you wanted to. Go ahead, I'll go after. You. Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So I'm kind of intrigued by the comments and that the vice mayor added, because I think he's right. These are probably all going to be unique, almost one off circumstances. And if we did, at least for the relocation and maybe just for the relocation at the tenant wants to come back and we can have some type of of mediation, you know, after a staff report or even semi-private mediation, because I'm not sure these are issues that should be now resolved out in like a public hearing, like the rec. I'm not sure if the rec can handle something like this, but, you know, some type of mediation on these particular this is kind of a small, smaller subset of all of the tenant protections we're trying to enact. So, you know, I'm kind of intrigued by that idea. And then if it you know, if it works and if our ordinance if we pass it, you know, has some struggles around the eviction area, you know, we at least have a model to look at and say whether or not that might work or not, because I was a little bit intrigued by it at the last meeting, not quite ready to vote for it. But, you know, I think this might be a good, good opportunity to I don't want to say experiment, but at least have kind of a trial or a pilot of that. And, you know, especially if somebody wants to come back, you know, if they want to come back, then there's a lot of issues like, you know, if you go off for six weeks and maybe your rent is the same, you know, maybe all you need is moving and maybe you don't need relocation and moving back. You know, if your rent is higher, you know, maybe there's some negotiation or some mediation. I mean, if you're in is lower or if you find a hotel and that's lower. I mean, there's a lot of, you know, combinations you can have to deal with that interim period. So, I mean, I think that's kind of an intriguing idea. So your what your if I can just rephrase back, what you're proposing is potentially a mediator who would handle the capital improvement plan for any particular project. And one of the things that they would be able to mediate would be the temporary relocation. Right. I mean, if a tenant wanted to leave. Okay, fine, cut the check it out. Go forward. But if they wanted to come back, you know, have, you know, whatever type and maybe not have a mandated relocation because the reality, you know what, if, you know, they just hypothetically they find a place that's cheaper, you know, and the total cost of that place to live temporarily plus the cost of moving is actually less than they would have paid. I mean, granted, that's probably not likely, but it's possible, you know, then, you know, maybe they shouldn't have any relocation, but, you know, if they can if it's only two weeks and then they could put up in a hotel room and it could still come back, I mean, that might be something the landlords are willing to do. And plus, like I said, it gives us kind of an opportunity to try this out and pilot this idea of mediating evictions. Can I go ahead? Go ahead. You want to jump in? I'll go ahead and let you jump in because. No, I have I have general comments. Where. General, go ahead. We'll come back. All right. So I appreciate that, vice mayor. All right. Thank you. First of all, when I look at this, I see a housing provider being used instead of landlord, and I would prefer reuse in or to be consistent that everyone's okay with that in regards to staff versus semi-private mediator and actually some of these other things, can I ask staff, where did you find this? This is something that you were able to look at other other cities to see what they're doing or. The basic outlines of the city. Yes, we did look at the city of Los Angeles, city of Berkeley, other jurisdictions that have capital improvement plans for substantial rehabilitation. And do they have a staff person? Yes, they they typically have a hearing officer, which is a staff person. It's a little bit different than our model, which is where you have a contract hearing officer. Right. If you're not going to agree with with the decision. Most cities with rent control have staff hiring officers. So when I say so, I would think it would require some sort of expertize. Does this go through the planning department then? Well, it would go it would go through the program administrator, whoever ultimately ends up administering the ordinance and the program, which I'm hoping would be the housing authority, and then they would hire staff with this expertize. So the whomever is doing this would have to get permits through our planning department? That's correct. So why wouldn't this somehow connect to our planning department? Well, it would that the permits would be the basis on which you would understand valuation and the length of time and that kind of thing. So there would be coordination. The staff would already be getting the expertize from the staff, the current staff that issues the permits then. Is that is there more expertize than that needed in regards to the repairs or but sort of expertize is needed for a hearing officer versus a mediator. Well, the here I believe that a mediator or a hearing officer could have the same skill sets. But essentially you want someone that is familiar with, you know, someone you know, familiar with construction and and the, you know, bidding process and what reasonable bids look like. And when a property owner is telling you this is how long it takes to do the improvements, you want to know that they have a good sense of that idea, that they understand kind of imputing the interest rate to come up with the value to calculate the allowable rent increase. Okay. But that's to me a separate issue, the monetary part versus the part of how much time it takes to do the job. And I would actually think that that's going to be our planning department, that they're very familiar with what happens here in the city and how long it takes to do these different jobs. That is true that the staff has familiarity. They don't typically weigh in or opine about the length of time if it takes one contract or six weeks to do something and another four weeks. You know, we don't really weigh in on on that, but they definitely have that knowledge. Okay. So I don't I would think that there's some way to work with those people that already have that expertize, because I would not want to count on someone who's. Whomever a mediator is to just look at this like they look at all cities. And we have people here in our city, in our planning department, that are very familiar with the type of work, how much time it takes, that that sort of thing. So I'm not sure how how this really works. Let me finish. Sorry. Okay. And then in regards to the interest rate and what you charge. I actually think it needs to be based on the real number of whatever the loan is that the average being financed from the. Interest rate changes all the time. So the idea was to pick a formula so that if, you know, today this might be 3% in a year, it might be 6%. So the idea is to. But when they finance it, they're going to be getting, I think, a loan that has a set interest rate or or it would say that it's always going to be prime plus one or whatnot, whatever that is for. Then I would think that that's the information that gets plugged into this formula because that's the real number. And I actually think that the landlord would be trying to get it financed at the best rate that they could. And whatever that number is, is the number. And then in regards to nine A, if a tenant notifies the landlord, they want to pay a higher rent. Now that is language in here. So what a lot of staff thinks happens then. Because it sounds so. So that is an option. The tenant can advise the housing provider, the landlord, within 30 days that they plan to remain in the unit and pay the increase. Right. So so in regards to what member already was saying, does the staff connect this? You have your tenant that does want to stay. They want to accept the higher rent. Right. So as as this is drafted now, if they have notified the the landlord that they want to stay and pay the higher rent if they need to be relocated, that temporary relocation is available to them only in the event that there's a vacant unit on site that they can be temporarily relocated to. And then they would move back into their renovated unit and they would pay the higher rent and they would go. They would go forward. If there's no vacant unit as this is drafted, they would be permanently relocated. Okay. So, so I would think that they should be there. So I don't know what the solution is, but I would think they should be able to come back. Just because a landlord doesn't does not have another unit available, right. Then they will eventually have that unit available. And if the tenant is agreeable to paying the increased rent, then I would think that that's reasonable that they should have. Right? So one should do the right of first. So one criterion could be when evaluating the capital improvement plan is to hash out what that temporary relocation would look like, whether it was a vacant unit or being put up in a hotel, or if you can, you know, take a little bit of money and stay on your friend's house if it's, you know, a couple of weeks, that kind of thing. And probably right up to some Saturday, if it's going to take more than a certain number of days then. And can I be clear that you're suggesting that that the landlord is responsible for relocating the tenant if there's no unit available? Are you just suggesting they have the right to come back if they're willing to pay the increased? So I was speaking about having them come back. However, I think this does include relocation assistance if they're not able to house them. Isn't that in here? Yes. If they are, then here if there is not any any temporary relocation solution, then the proposal says that you would be permanently. The guidance says you would be permanently relocated and you would get relocation as. To the same formula that reflected the oil. That's that's what's in here already. I mean, in the real world, you know, for example, if you have mold remediation in the landlord responsible for putting up the tenant in some temporary lodging and, you know, the tenant does not have use of the premises which they have a valid lease for. So they get compensated for loss of use. And then the landlord usually pays for some type of a temporary relocation. I mean, that's what happens in the real world when there's situations like this, like mold remediation, where it's just not the fault of the tenant at all. Right. And then, I mean, there's is precedent for doing this, right. And often often you're moved into a vacant unit that might not have the mold or you're put up in a hotel. That's correct. So I'm a swimmer. Damn, that's what I wanted to circle back. Well, I mean, you wouldn't. I'm. I'm thinking you're. You're suggesting that not only do they get relocation assistance that could be close to eight, $10,000, they get the relocation assistance and they have. No one or they just want to. Be closer to. One or the other. Okay. Correct. You. So under this ordinance, they are they would receive the relocation assistance. If there's no unit available and they are permanently relocated. Correct. However, as member already was speaking about what if you have this tenant that wants to pay the higher rent, they you know, they don't have there's not another unit available for them. What happens to that? And my preference would be that we do have an some sort of ability to have that same tenant return. But but I would say the caveat would be that the repairs could be done in six months versus a year. I don't know. That doesn't make sense. Yes. I think this maybe ties back into what the vice mayor was raising, that this is this it's hard to speculate because every situation is going to be a little different. So maybe this really is I would favor this going in cases and I don't think every one will be like that. But in cases where people might want to come back and circumstances might be different, it might be even more of a negotiation, if you will, with a mediator or an arbitrator. But I would caution one thing about the length of repairs. We happen to be homeowners of an old house, and it would be really difficult even going in signing a contract with a contractor. You always have to realize that there are things the suppliers you need might not come in on time. There's some delay for weather. And so I think we are we don't want to be tying our property owners hands inordinately. And that's why I agree with the mayor and Councilmember Desai on this interest rate. I mean, rather than some set formula and based on what the property owner at 470 Central did, and I know we all want to cast him as the boogie man, but we also have a policy that we want to see our old and decaying buildings improved. And if it takes a loan with the less than favorable interest rate to do that, why are we. Why are we penalizing that that building owner for doing that? So as long as you could show the documentation, I don't see why we need to have a set formula in here that's a little too cookie cutter. But I should be vice mayor, and. I'll clarify my point. My point is that I wanted two things I wanted termination of tenancies and evictions is subject to mediation. And second, if you're going to do an eviction to do substantial renovation, you have to prove it. And I think we can strip the rest away and still accomplish the protections that both sides need, though. And that's why I had that position of of and I strongly believe in in the mediation process. And I think at the point that I'm hearing, which I think is a good point, is a private mediation before it goes to the rack. I think is is time and money well spent. But the ordinance doesn't contemplate that. The ordinance looks at termination of tenancies and evictions as formulaic and mandated. So I think that's a problem. And that's why I voted no on the first time. That's why we're voting no on it again the second time. But I do I do think there's a place for mediation on the tenant landlord relationship there, and I'd strip this thing down the capital improvement land to subject to proof. Do you have do you have permits? Do you have your financing? And the rest is as do it. And we're going to watch until you get it done. And no landlord is going to want to have their units empty while they're renovating the building. They want to do it as fast as they can in the real world so that they can start getting the revenue back. So I'm thinking we're we're building this monster here. It's going to be impossible to administrate and it's going to hurt more people than it helps. So member so I can. Just weigh in on the rate. And one of the premises for me on this whole thing is to try to treat everyone equally, though, as much as possible. And, you know, I. You know, there's a comment about penalizing the landlord, but then you're also penalizing the tenant. If the landlord has bad credit and or was only able to get financing, you know, at ten, 12, 15% or whatever it turns out to be. So I. Maybe there's some middle ground, but. And I just hate to hear the word penalize being thrown around like this is a penalty. Well, then let's say let's not use the word penalty. Well, I guess it's just this is an interest rate that we're talking about imposing. I actually want to circle back to the vice mayor. So did you weigh in on this issue on the interest rate? I think it should be the real rate because whatever the bank will not lend at favorable rates on a building that's crappy. And that's correct. That that. Penalized the tenant for. That. Well, no one tantalizes the tenant. It is. But nobody. Is to bring the building up to. No more than the landlord's being penalized. It's the same when someone is, you know, the landlord will be paying it. The tenant will be going to use those words, throw those words around. We could throw them around on boats. I don't think we are using the word penalty. Sorry, that's not use that word penalty. This is this is the interest rate that's being imposed. By the mayor. So were you sort of. Yeah. Member Did you want to any more. I mean, nothing more than I already said. Okay. So in regards to the interest rate, you know, what I'm hearing is that we would have to agree on principles and have this thing circle back again like we did before that. So should we look at that, for instance, the interest rate? Is there consensus that we would impose the actual interest rate? All I'm saying in terms of the interest rate is that I just felt that the way that number four is read, it's really hard and fast that it's going to be prime plus 1%. So if the interest rate is roughly 2 to 2 or 3% and well, and probably for a construction loan, that's not going to be that low. But let's just hypothetically say, if the interest rate if the prime rate was 7%, then. And the interest rate that would be subject to number four would be 8%. All I'm saying is that and that's the formula by which every you know, all the different possible reimbursements would be done. But in the real world. Every property is different. And while there is the prime rate for purposes that people know, at least you know, what is the rate? The ultimate rate is subject to a variety of on the ground conditions and market factors. That's that. Instead of seven plus one, the real interest rate turns out to be maybe 8.5%. And then it's just that increment, which is a reasonable difference, is not captured in this. I think the reason why you created this is because of the situation where for 70 came in saying, you know, there they have a 10% rate . I don't know if that if if that's true or not. I mean, I'm not sure what the what the going rates are for construction loans, for major rehabilitation loans. But, you know, I think I mean, if I had to look at 30 year mortgages, they must be going at around, what, 5% right now or so somewhere around there, or maybe even lower than that, -4.7. So. All I'm asking for is just a little bit more flexibility. That's all I'm hearing that the council consensus is that when we come back with the policy, we would reflect the actual rate that's been approved as part of the submittal for the work. That's I think that's the consensus. So we'll actually sell. So here's my point, though. My point, though, is just in case someone does come up with this phony, which I don't I really don't practically see that happening. I don't I don't see. Someone actually these projects penciling out with, you know, a 15% interest rate. And then without doubling the rent, I believe that project will be upside down. That's correct. Okay. All right. I mean that everyone is acting in good faith. Yeah. Yeah. Landlords and tenants. That's really where we've been. I mean, isn't this along the same lines as documenting the actual construction work? Rehabilitations just document. Just because someone comes in and tells you something, you don't have to do it. But but, you know, we require documentation. And I also agree with I think it was the vice mayor, but maybe it is. Councilmember Brody said that these are the sorts of cases that are more appropriately handled in a semi-private setting of a mediation or an arbitration rather than in the rack. I think some sensitive situations like this and if, you know, if we were to consider when we talk about evictions, there might be some circumstances also, but we're not there right now. And the proposal is to have this handled by staff, whether it's mediation or or a staff who's trained. And I think we're really looking to accomplish three things with the capital improvement plan, and that is to understand the cost of the capital improvement. And then it rises to the level of eight times the rent, times the number of units, and that it is not repair and maintenance, but it's really to prolong the useful life, to set the proper rent increase that reflects the amortized cost of the investment and then to to determine the the relocation, whether it's permanent or temporary . So those are really the three things that are intended to be achieved by the plan. And I don't know for us from staff, it feels like four pages is pretty, pretty succinct. But we can, you know, we that really is what we're trying to achieve with the policy. Are those three key things, a mechanism for approving the work, for setting the the allowable rent increase and for resolving what the the relocation should look like. So in regards to proceeding tonight. Am I hearing that this needs to come back with corrections and that it would be a semi-private mediator? Or is that something that staff would have as part of an administrative regulation? Does that need to be reflected here? It's it's actually not reflect. I mean, it's the fact what's reflected here is that this would be handled by staff. But what? But who that staff is is not specified. And I think from our perspective, we would leave it to the program administrator to determine that the best qualified staff to handle this based on training and expertize . But I'm hearing that the Council is very interested in somebody who is trained and versed in mediation, and that can be part of what is looked for in that skill set for the staff person. I think we're estimating when we looked at the program fees, perhaps 15 ships a year, maybe, you know, it's and we'll you know , we'll see. But that gives us time to to really think about the kinds of skills and put something together where, you know, somebody somebody has the capacity to do this as well as other things. Vice mayor. I think I understand that the and the way I break the two down is the CFP. The actual work that's being done, the valuation is, is a technical exercise. It's, it's, it's formulas. It's measuring against, against, against interest rates, against cost, etc.. But the relocation side of it to me is, is a negotiation if we can separate those. To somehow in this and describe it better, at least it might be understandable. And Brody. Thank you. But just just a mediation on the relocation at the tenant wants to come back and how the temporary relocation would or would not be done. They want to leave. You know, we have a formula. Write the check. Leave if they want to come back, willing to pay the rent, then that would be something to mediate. But not mediating the interest rate and. No, no, no. No, no, no. That's the formula. And I. And I. And I. I understand the distinction that's being requested. I'm not sure that it needs to be two separate people. There could be one person that could work with the tenant and the the owner to to get to the conclusion on everything. But I understand and I'm hearing that the desire on the part of the council to have that mediated. All right. Any other comments on on the side on this part, the CFP. And we kind of have a recap on what we think. I'm happy to do that if I'm that. Yes. So we will make that we will insert the eight words that I mentioned earlier as part of the definition of of a capital improvement. We are going to go back and have language on the interest rate being the actual rate of the loan that is secured. Or the one on that. For me. 4 to 1 on that. Okay. And we are going to talk a little bit more on some guidance about whether or not the work that's being proposed actually triggers the need for relocation. So we will we can beef up that. We are going to talk about temporary relocation that we are going to have a process for discussing options for temporary relocation beyond just a vacant unit on site. And that that would be that would be negotiated or discussed. We are going to look at a cap on the temporary relocation so that, you know, six months, eight months, if the work takes longer, then it's going to be a permanent relocation with a payment of of the relocation fees. So those were the items that that I had noted that the council would like to see when this comes back. All right. You make comments member. And is a question as far as timeline, when do you anticipate can move back? So I think that we would come back on April 5th and I would note that. Well, so the moratorium right now, I think the ordinance also says that you cannot evict, terminate for substantial rehabilitation until the CIP is adopted. So I believe that there won't be kind of any gap in coverage so that there wouldn't be evictions for a substantial rehabilitation without the CIP in place. So if we come back on the fifth, I think that would be timely and a resolution is effective immediately. Okay. Because the ordinance would be it takes 30 days to become effective. Right. So this would become effective immediately. So then that that would work. And then the part about substituting the word landlord instead of housing provider. I believe we actually did that on one of the versions. So we. Okay. Thank you very much. Any other comments from Council on this part? Are we sure about the timing on that? Because that the moratorium is extended, we're extending it to. But I believe the ordinance says that there aren't of. Those things in the words. Yeah, it's in the or it's in the ordinance it's in the ordinance itself says that there there is you can't evict for substantial we have until the council has adopted the CIP. Yeah. That there. Yes. Okay. Okay. So then we can move on to the second part of this agenda item appropriation of thank you. And we appreciate the direction provided this evening program fee. So how to pay for the ordinance and the ordinance does need to be funded. I mean, this discussion we just had on the cap was a good example or an illustration of a component of the ordinance that will need to be enforced. It needs to be funded and staffed to be successful. And staff's proposed funding mechanism is a program fee. We are proposing that a program be imposed on all housing providers, landlords on a per unit basis, and that one half of the fee can be passed on to the tenant and not calculated as part of the rent increase . The 5% that would trigger the mandatory notification to the rack. We have been working closely, city staff has been working closely with housing authority staff to come up with with an estimated budget of what it would take to administer the ordinance as it stands at first reading. The Housing Authority staff has been handling all of the public education and questions around the moratorium since November, so they have a good sense of the kinds of questions and what's involved they have put together. There were several flow charts that were in the staff report about how they think the process, the ordinance would be administered. They've come up with an estimated cost of 1.9 million annually, which is $129 a unit. However, by law, we are required to do a study to determine what the program fee would be. So we are not requesting that the council approve a program fee this evening, but that we get direction regarding the Council's willingness or desire to fund this program through a program fee. And then we'll come back at before July 1st with the actual results of the fee study. And we thought I showed this slide on the 16th. I'll just go quickly. But just if you assume a 50 unit property in Alameda with the average rent just over 2100 a month, and if we look at program fees for cities in the Bay Area, sampling of cities with rent control and add in the business license, you would see at 129 units a fee. Alameda is kind of in the bottom half of of the cities with business licenses as well as program fees. So we feel like we would still be competitive as a place to to conduct, you know, business as a rental property owner. And then if the council is interested in where we sit just with our business license, you can also see once again, assuming a 50 unit property with an average rent of 20 $100, we are also in the bottom half just with our business license fee. So this these two slides are just kind of to show you that even if we were to adopt a program fee, we would still be kind of in the middle of the pack relative to the cost of conducting rental property and still residential rental property business in the city of Alameda. So what would the program fee be used for? It's you know, the biggest part of the fee is to administer the program. And that would range from scheduling and conducting rack hearings to coordinating all of the public education, to verifying that evictions are being done pursuant to the ordinance dealing with the CIP data collection for the binding hearing process. This fee. Presumes that we would contract out with hearing officers because that's not a full you know, there's not going to be hearings to justify a full time staff. The city attorney office would have a role to play because it would provide legal advice. When questions came up, if we were sued or we looked to enforce our ordinance, we would look to the city attorney's office to carry out those activities. And then staff's proposal is that the fee be part of the annual business license billing. So the finance department would also have to bill for and collect the program fee, manage the database, you know, do collections, that kind of thing. So those are the components of the fee. And so as I mentioned tonight, we are we are tonight asking for an appropriation of funds in the amount of $300,000, $50,000 to conduct the fee study that would we would provide to the consultant all of the data that's been prepared to date. A consultant would work with us on the fee study. We would come back before July one because we're proposing that if the fee is adopted, it would be effective July one and run on the fiscal year and then an appropriation, the balance of the 300,000 that we're requesting to be appropriated. This is me this evening would be to fund the program through June 30th of this year. So that that is a request that we're looking for this evening. If later on tonight the council approves the ordinance on second reading, we are going to we will have an ordinance in 30 days and we're going to need a way to implement it. So we are going to need the appropriation for the general fund. So. All right. Member Ashcroft. I'm thank you, Madam Mayor. So, um, on the. The anticipated expenses, the one area where I would like to see some comparison done is on this. I think it was three full time equivalent equivalents in the legal staff. And I'm assuming you're meaning three full time equivalent attorneys as opposed to paralegals, or are. These two attorneys and one paralegal? So I would I would like to see a comparison of what it would cost us to outsource some of that work to a firm that does specialize in this area and also anticipated litigation. I mean, we probably may get some, but not every day, all day. And so do we really need an attorney sitting there waiting to defend, or is that something that we could outsource to a a specialist? Because bear in mind, we pay we pay benefits when we hire people full time. And so we have to factor that into the costs. So I'd like to see a comparison of the two methods of staffing. Did you have any other comments? Remember Ashcroft vice mayor? I think I'd like to hear what the city attorney says, and then I'll make a comment. Madame Mayor, may I respond to the council members Ashcroft's comments? Councilmember Ashcroft, We're thinking that this is a very conservative estimate of three full time FTE ees, and we're looking at that from a dollar perspective, not a body perspective. I think that your instincts are correct and that the city attorney, if she were here, would tell you that her intent would be to hire outside counsel as needed in the initial stages to see how this program works. If we determine at a later time that there is a need for full time hired staff. We would make that determination. And then there would be a job allocation, a job slot. That would come to you, and we would do that. So hopefully those costs will be less. But as a conservative matter, we wanted to make sure that we had enough money to see the program through until the program fee was adopted. Okay. So if I understand correctly, you are contemplating outside counsel at the outset. Yes. And we and we get the three full time PhDs because we figure one would be an advice counsel to help educate landlords and tenants on the program supported by a paralegal and one litigator specializing in this area. That sounds reasonable. Remember? So procedurally, you know, are we being asked to. Approve. This $300,000 appropriation before the second reading? Yes. Okay. I mean, you could you could come with that or. I'm sorry, but we don't know for sure. And the reality is we don't know for sure it's going to pass. If it didn't pass them. Which is appropriate. Okay, great. Okay. All right. And it's just a continuation of the meeting from the 16th. Okay. Vice Mayor. I think the reality is the $300,000 between now and June, we have to do the study and this has to be administered between now and then. So I think we should appropriate the money. We can always if it's not all spent or if something radical changes, we can always re re distribute them this appropriate. What's the right word. To put it back? Unencumbered. Unencumbered. So I have no problem with that. And I think this budget is is conservative as it should be. Although I can anticipate. Problems that would make this realistic. And I see that. Legal fees because this is a legal entanglement are 25% of the entire budget. And to me that seems. Reasonable, given what we've constructed here. Brody So thank you for allowing me that clarifying question. This is just kind of my general comments, and I think it's fair that this is allocated equally between the landlord and the tenant. Hopefully when the fee study comes out, you know, we'll see that there may be some classes of tenancies that don't cost as much. For example, single family residents that are not subject to cost. The Hopkins are not going to ever go through the, you know, the hearing process or the finding the. Binding hearing price. That's correct. So, I mean, I think there's some justification to say that the fee on those might be less. And if we ever adopt something like a model lease that may calm tensions, then, you know, in theory, that may be a situation where the fees might be less. So hopefully when that study is completed, you know, we're given different options. Remember Daisuke. I'm of the opinion that the city of Alameda should. It, find the money with it within its own budget to run this program. So I don't support a study. I think we should make decisions that look into our own reserves or budgets and. You know, I fundamentally I just think it's unfair that that that you're sticking this to especially the smaller mom and pop landlords. And I mean it's it's just seems unfair that and not only have this draconian project and then well here's the bill like I can't support the study on which is predicated any fees. All right. So in regards to the B study, are they going to come back? They'll come back with what they estimate the cost will be. And then what will they look at? What is the proportion in it? I also have concerns about how much of this should. Who should bear the costs of this. And I would like to see. I actually think the arbitration, if it goes beyond rack, should be somehow shared between the parties that require that next level. I think that we want to encourage settlement Iraq and that that would that would actually encourage meaningful participation at Iraq. And so so will they be looking at things, you know, things that may increase the cost? Because I think if the two parties don't have that, I'm going to call skin in the game and then everyone goes on to arbitration, then the costs will be extremely it could be extremely expensive. So I think at least I would like to see the parties pay at least 25% if they go on to that next level. I'm concerned about unlimited use of arbitration beyond Iraq because I really want the focus to be on meaningful participation in Iraq. Yes. If I just can clarify the fees, not going to tell us who's going to pay fees. Going to the fee study is going to tell us how much. Okay. But if they're assuming. Our decision to decide so. Then they must be making some assumptions of how many cases are going on to arbitration. And I see that as a what could be a very big cost. So we assume 20 cases, which is $90,000, but we can certainly look at both. And that's why when we did the math, the fee was really the same for the the exempt and the nonexempt units because the 90,000 was a very small percentage. But we can certainly when we get the fee study, if the counsel is asking us to look at pain, you know, a pain for a portion of the hearing officer process and or looking at a different fee, we can certainly do that. When we come back with the analysis from the fee study, from the policy perspective. And how many cases go to rack currently as you come up with the 20 cases that go to arbitration? Well, that's the number. Just trying to make an educated guess. Okay. Okay. So and it's 50,000 for that study. And then when it circles back, we would be able to see how to allocate the money. And I would agree that at least some of the money should come from the general fund, because I really think that this is not simply a landlord tenant issue. I think this is a community issue, and I think that is why we've gotten here at a council. And if it's a community issue, then at least some of it should come from the general fund, I would think. Yes. So we will have another opportunity to discuss who, if at all, should be paying for program fees or helping to underwrite this this the costs of these. Yes, we it is useful for staff to get a sense at the council about whether it should be a fee that's required to be paid by the property owner with an opportunity to pass through a portion of the cost. I hear some direction about it, potentially some of the general fund. We will look at all of that. It's helpful to have a sense not. Knowing to interrupt you. I would say on this point, I think it's fair to say there is not consensus of the council. So you should look at the whole range. So it will. Yes. And then I believe somewhere in these materials you look at what other jurisdictions charge for program fees, is that correct? Right. We showed a slide on that. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Member desk. Of course, I have my qualms with the fees, but I'm just going to ask a question about the fees. The way that is structured is that it's it'll be potentially split $65 by the landowner landlord and $65 by the tenant. And. Can the tenant write the check to City Hall instead of having once a year, instead of having the landlord have to pick it up so that it doesn't get included into the roll, into the rent. Because we want to keep the rent as low as possible and that the tenant understands that this is a program run by the city by making that annual payment. And that's something else I'd like you to look at. You can look at that and bring that back. But then Brody like to move on comments. Like to move approval of appropriation of 300,000 from the general fund to fund a rent program piece, study, and cover the cost to administer the rent related programs through June 30th, 2016, should they be passed? It was. Did you say the 50,000? Well, the 300 includes the 15. In the training. I'd like to, if I could offer an alternative approach of bifurcating the $50,000 fee study and the $250,000 to fund the program. We could do two separate motions. We could do to separate motions. Break it up. I prefer to keep it at one, but, you know, it's whatever emotion gets a second rate. Okay, well. That'll be our second emotion. Who's. It's mine. Yours. So I'm. Sorry. Councilmember Otis. So? So we have a motion and a second. And I do want to speak to it. When a council member suggests bifurcation of an issue like this, we have traditionally separated issue. So then a council member can vote yes on one and no on the other and not have to vote no on both. I would prefer that we have two separate motions. We have a motion on the table. In favor of that so that we can separate them. Thank you. Oh, he's in favor of separating. There's three of us would appreciate that. So. Okay, so. I call the question. One. Friendly and then. I'll move the 250,000. Second. Okay. All those in favor. I, I I'll move the 50,000 for the few second. Although some favor. I oppose. One. Or two one. So they both passed. One was unanimous, the other was 41. So thank you very much, Council. I appreciate that. And I mean, look back at our agenda. That was the final item on the regular city council meeting at February 16th. So I will now adjourn that meeting and we will take a we will start, you know, 7 p.m. with our regular city council meeting. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. For listening. You can do this well. One. Good evening. Pop. Hello, everyone. Okay. Sorry. All right. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to our regular city council meeting. 10 minutes after seven, we're starting. And we have representatives from Alamitos Boys and Girls Club that are going to come up to the podium and lead us on the pledge. A. Yeah. Yeah. Back here, behind the podium. Horrible. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America into the republic for which we stand, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty for all. Thank you very much. And later this evening, they'll be receiving a proclamation. All right. All right. Roll call. Council member states. Up here, here, here, here they are, Spencer. Here, five present agenda changes. Six RD Which is? Which item is that? The Wetlands Mitigation Bank. The Council referral regarding possible wetlands mitigation bank at Alameda Point is going to be continued to March 15th. That will not be heard this evening. Were there any other agenda changes?

Adopt resolution establishing the Southeast Area Specific Plan, pursuant to Sections 65450-65458 of the California Government Code;

LongBeachCC_09192017_17-0805

Motion case item number three adopt resolution establishing the Southeast area specific plan pursuant to sections 65450. Dash 65458 of the California Government Code. And my motion includes adding language to sea set the Sea Set plan to require that the general plan land use element update be completed within five years. And if it is not completed within that time period that the Department of Development Services would be required to return the Sea Set Plan to the Planning Commission for Adjustment. Can I get a motion in a second, please? I'm sorry. One more. And what this is was a very long sentence and that the sea set plan likewise be amended to require that all new buildings being developed within the planned boundaries be constructed to lead LEED Silver Standards. That's the motion. It's the motion in a second. Okay. Members, please cast your votes. Motion carries next item.

Adoption of Resolution Preliminarily Approving the Annual Report Declaring the City's Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments and Providing for Notice of Public Hearing on June 16, 2020 - Island City Landscaping and Lighting District 84-2 (Various Locations). (Public Works 275)

AlamedaCC_04222020_2020-7860

O.D.. I vla I may or as the Ashcroft Zacarias. Bye bye bye. Okay, great. Thank you. All right, then we come to five G and Councilmember de SAG. Is this one where you're recusing? Yes. Okay. Yes, I will be. Thank you. All right. So do we need to let him step away for a moment? Yeah. There you go. This is not as simple as it sounds these days. Okay. Okay. Councilmember Odie. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I make this request almost every year, but I'm hoping that in the future, if our staff knows that it's given council member is, you know, recused from a certain portion of this, that they would split this into two resolutions. I think our council's done a good job of reaching unanimous decision during this crisis. And I think we've we've assisted, you know, some of our colleagues to come along by, you know, either changing the wording or splitting up the question to allow them to be able to support things and work in a collaborative manner. And, you know, I can't speak for my colleague because he recused himself, but I mean, there may be something on here he wants to support. And, you know, I think that if we can give him the opportunity to in the future, that would be helpful. All right. And would you also like to make a motion? Yes. I'll move approval of the item. All right. I have a second. Second vice mayor knocks way his second. So could we have a roll call vote, please? Any discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing. Now we have the roll call, please. I see. And not quite. I can't. Councilmember Odie. Hi, Vella. I may or as the Ashcroft high now carries by for as one top rate. And then can we retrieve Mr. Days? Lock him back in. Right. All right. All right. Places, everyone. Okay, so then we move to the last consent calendar item that was close at five K. Mr. Day. Thank you. Just quickly, I didn't support this one. This was on the regular. So and I will continue to hold the same position. All right. Thank you. Any further discussion? Do I have a motion to read? And this is approval of an ordinance approving a development agreement signed between the City of Alameda and Boat Works, LLC, governing the Boat Works Project for Real Property, located at 2229 to 2235 Clinton Avenue.

Approves the rezoning of 12 South Garfield Street from PUD #583 to G-RH-3 in Council District 10. (LAND USE TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE) Approves the rezoning of 12 South Garfield Street from PUD #583 with waivers to G-RH-3 in Council District 10. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 3-25-14.

DenverCityCouncil_05052014_14-0199

Thank you, Madam President. I know the Council Bill 199 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you very much. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Council Bill 199 is open and will open with the staff report. Madam President, Councilor David Jaspers with Community Planning and Development with a MAP amendment to change the zoning at 12 South Garfield Street. This is in Council District Number ten in the Cherry Creek neighborhood in specific Cherry Creek East. If we zoom into the lot here, it's a vacant lot on the southeast corner of Ellsworth Avenue and Garfield Street. First Avenue, just a block to the north called Rado Boulevard is just a few blocks to the east of this location. Here's a quick snapshot looking towards the southeast on the lot. It is just over 12,000 square feet in size. No structures on it, of course. The property owner, Mag Builders, Representatives Mike and Kim Molnar are here tonight and we're looking to rezone this lot from the existing pretty number 583 to grh3 as the general urban neighborhood context row house with three stories as the maximum height. The existing PD 583 was approved back in 2005. Very specific PWD either allowed a four unit rowhouse, essentially one structure, four units. The G RH three would allow two duplexes. Still four units. Just two structures. It's surrounded by pods. There is g, rh three in the neighborhood as well as being adjacent to the southeast. It is generally rowhouses and townhouses all around this property. The nearest single family is on the block on the Jacksons street facing. There's a on the row house and surrounding it. I have a few visuals here to give you an idea of the scale and context generally 2 to 3 stories in the heights, looking to the northwest and south. And this is just across the alley to the east on the Jackson Street side of the block. Planning board unanimously approved this in March. Went from bloody off in March. And we're here tonight for the public hearing typical public outreach process. The Cherry Creek East Association did provide a letter of support, as well as an adjacent property owner, sending an email letter of support for approving this rezoning. We looked at the review criteria and focused on the consistency of adopted plans. There's multiple strategies in the plan that show this is consistent with a composite plan. 2000 Blueprint Denver. The land use concept is urban residential. It is an area of stability, but it is a vacant lot. The streets are designated as local streets, which are appropriate for residential uses. More recently, the Cherry Creek Area Plan gives us a little more detail in the Cherry Creek East section of that plan. There's a three story building height maximum. It has a specific recommendation to rezone old pods when possible and to respect the existing scale. The neighborhood, the G RH three would do all three of those recommendations. So we do find consistency with adopted plans. As I mentioned, there is a grade three in the neighborhood with similar building forms, so there is uniformity of district regulations . Filling in the vacant lot helps further public health, safety and welfare. Improving the walkability neighborhood. The changing, changing conditions. There's a adopted plan that does recommend redevelopment of the area, and it is consistent with neighborhood context. The zone district purpose intent of the zoning code. With that, CPD does recommend approval based on meeting all the review criteria. Thank you, Mr. Jaspers. Appreciate that. I'm going to call up Michael Moylan. Do we do that on purpose? Good evening, Madam President and Council. I am the representative mag of the property and mag builders. I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Moyle. Sorry it gave you such a shock. SACU. Yeah. Germans say Ku Klux Klan movement. Advocate for working poor and homeless people. We support the zoning change for a couple of reasons. Although not required by law. When these units are made available and because they're under that ceiling of 29 where they have to include affordable housing, we decided that that is not acceptable and that at every turn we, the poor or the homeless, must come together and enroll folks into this process. But even if it's three units. How about consider us have one? Because one more or less makes us one more greater of a city. And so we don't want you to be limited by the law, but to speak about a more moral authority of how we have to reach out and help those that got caught up and need to help. Help. And so as we go through this process, we would like to encourage you to consider the opportunities that may be available for you to assist in this process so that we can lighten up the load, take a lot of politics out of this deal, and just go on and do the right thing for the right reason, because this really ain't all this and we can make this happen. But we've got to start working from the bottom up because I'm not a leader, I'm just a shipbuilder. And we got holes in this boat and this boat is sinking and we're all on it together. And only when we come together can we rebuild a boat. A ship where we can put a leader in front of this thing and hopefully we can sail on home with it. And then the true idea of what home is can maybe come to fruition, because maybe that's a place where just a lot of love overflowing. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sekou. Questions from counsel. Do I have any questions? And seeing none. I know there's one councilman. Never. Thank you. I just had a question that may be on everybody's mind is how did you manage to find a vacant lot in Cherry Creek? I mean, are there more than one, really? Okay. Did you did you want that answer to that? A rhetorical councilwoman Robb is nodding. There is more. Answer in comment. All right. Go right ahead. Oh, well, I was going to wait to my comments, but yes, there are vacant lots, some some of them old pads that haven't been developed. I'm sure there's probably an opportunity there for you, Councilman Nevett. And amazingly, the district with the boom that we've seen in higher buildings, in the commercial buildings, there are a number of new row and single family houses going up. If you drive around over there, sort of surprises me. Wow. Okay. With that, close the public hearing and ask for comments. Councilwoman Robb. Well, you are quick. I didn't even click in yet. I knew I. Was. Well, I will be supporting this tonight as the letters in the packet indicate. This has been vetted with the neighborhood. There were concerns about drainage and landscaping in meg builders worked with the neighborhood on this. And then my my side note is as many of my colleagues know, they're in Cherry Creek East, which is just east of the mall rather than north of the ball. There are a number of puddles because a previous plan had a long list of design guidelines. In fact, a separate document was created, but they were never really passed by planning board. So the neighborhood advocated for Pwds to make sure that design guidelines were met. Those design guidelines are still really important to the neighborhood, but as you can see, you have a project here going from four units to four units and you can see the awkwardness of a pad that is so specific it tells how the units are to be attached. So in this case, it's good news. They were able to move into 2014 zoning based on our 2010 new zoning code and I'm will be supporting it. Thank you, Councilman Robb and I don't see any other comment. So, Madam Secretary, roll call. Rob. Hi. Brooks Hi. Brown Hi. But I can eat lemon. Lopez All right. Monteiro Nevett, I. Madam President, hi. And Secretary close voting, not the results tonight. Ten Eyes. The zoning is passed. On Monday, May 12th, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 365, naming the city on building. Located at 2855 Tremont Place, the Elba M Wedgeworth Municipal Building on June 2nd, 2014. Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 304, changing the zoning classification of 2000 East 28th Avenue and a required public hearing on Council Bill 305. Changing the Zoning Classification for 3600 East Alameda Avenue 319 South Garfield Street, 301 South Garfield Street and 314 South Monroe Street. Any protests against Council Bill three or four are Council Bill 305 must be filed with the Council offices no later than noon on Tuesday, May 27th, 2014. Seeing no other business for this body. This meeting is adjourned to tomorrow. Denver 82 New York City. Your source Denver eight on TV and online to stay connected to your community. Your city. Your source.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to amend Contract No. 34597 with Falcon Fuels, of Paramount, CA, and Contract No. 34598 with Merrimac Energy Group, of Long Beach, CA, for the purchase and delivery of petroleum fuels, to increase the aggregate contract amount by $2,300,000, for a revised aggregate contract amount not to exceed $13,600,000, and extend the term of the contract to October 31, 2022. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04192022_22-0435

District eight. District nine. I. The motion is carried. Nine. Zero. Thank you, Madam. 20. Item 20 Report from Financial Management Recommendation to authorize City Manager to amend contracts for the purchase and delivery of petroleum fuels for a revised aggregated amount not to exceed 13.6 million and extend the term of the contract to October 31st, 2022. City by City Motion in a second. Any public comment on this item. At their any members of the public they would like to speak on item 20. Please line up at the podium in the zoom. Please use the raise hand feature in Dagestan. I now. We have one member in person. Your time begins now. Thank you. My name is Dave Shukla. I'm a resident of the third district. And I'd just like to say that for a town that sells so much oil, how is it that we have to purchase our own refined petroleum fuel products? I mean, we've got refineries ringing around us on at least one side. But more generally, I mean, you know, Friday's Earth Day, right. I'd love to hear why why item 18 was withdrawn. I mean, we've got money to pay for fuel. We've got grant money to pay for other things. But apparently we can't schedule things. It's hard to make sense of how these agendas get thrown together and then chunked up in the meeting and just kind of at will punched back together on the the the city archive. But it should be said, you know, oil run town, you can't make it in fuel. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Thank you, Councilman Allen. Yes, I thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to add, you know, I can't wait until petroleum contracts are no longer necessary. And I know that we have staff working on that to make sure that's a sometime in the future a reality. But we're not there yet. So I support the contract amendment while we put out a competitive, competitive invitation to bid. Coulson was in the house. Going the comments of Councilwoman Allen. And also would like to see if staff could. Maybe you can answer this right now. Maybe not. But what our local air district quality regulations require and whether they'll and whether it's through this item, we can or don't meet that standard, if that makes sense. Councilwoman. We do have Dan Berlant back from our Fleet Services. He may be able to answer that question regarding the air quality standards. Dan. Thank you. Yes, Mayor Garcia, Councilwoman, we meet all the local standards. There are different ones depending on the type of vehicle that's in question. But we meet or exceed all those standards with what we operate. Thank you. There's a motion in the second. Please roll call vote. District one and district two I visit three. I. District four i. District five. District five. District six, i. District seven. I. District eight. I. District nine. I. The motion is. Clear moment I. Received. Thank you. The motions carry nine zero.

AN ORDINANCE relating to City employment, commonly referred to as the Second Quarter 2017 Employment Ordinance; establishing new titles and/or salaries; designating positions as exempt from Civil Service status; returning positions to Civil Service status; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts; all by a 2/3 vote of the City Council.

SeattleCityCouncil_08072017_CB 119019

Bill passed and sure will sign it. Please read the next agenda. Item 3.2 The Affordable Housing Neighborhoods and Finance Committee Agenda Item three Council Bill 1190 19 relate to city employment, commonly referred to the second quarter 2017 Employment Ordinance establishing new title center salaries designated positions as exempt from Civil Service Status, Returning positions and Civil Service Status and ratifying confirmed research in prior acts, all by a two thirds vote of the City Council Committee recommends the bill pass. Thank you, Councilman Burgess. Thank you. Each quarter we get an ordinance that moves positions from the civil service off the civil service rules, makes them exempt from civil service rules and procedures, and then sometimes that adds positions back. This particular ordinance moves five positions off of the civil service status, and it returns one position to civil service status. Thank you, councilmembers. Any further questions? Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Suarez O'Brian Bagshaw Burgess Gonzales Herbold Johnson President Harrell. Right. Aden favor and unopposed. Bill pass the chair will sign it please read the next agenda item. Agenda item four Accountable 1190 20 Relating to city employment adopting in 2017 citywide position list. The committee recommends the bill pass.

AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance 125471, which conditioned the Seattle Department of Transportation’s 2018 grant applications.

SeattleCityCouncil_06252018_CB 119292

Go past and sure sign it. Please read it and add a number ten. Agenda item ten Council Bill going to a 1982 amending ordinance 1 to 5 471 which condition the Seattle Department of Transportation 2018 Grant Applications. The committee recommends the bill pass. Council Member Brian. This legislation would add the corridor between Market Street and Ballard and the University of Washington 45th. The corridor is currently served by the Route 44 Metro Bus. This is one of the proposed rapid ride upgrade corridors, and the Department of Transportation would like to apply for grant funding for some of those upgrades in future years. We would like to apply this year to do upgrades in future years. Previous action by the City Council restricts grant applications for our site to only projects that are on our grant application list. And this project was not previously on that. So we are amending that list to add this project so that they can go forward and apply for a grant. Very good. Any further comments? Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Macheda O'Brien. Hi, Juan Gonzalez Johnson Suarez. President Herald. Hi. Eight In favor and unopposed. The bill passed and chair will was it please read agenda items number 11 through 15. I'm going to call for individual votes on these appointments, but please read them all into the record and let Councilmember O'Brien do his thing.

A bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 48 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code by adding Article IX entitled Fee on Disposable Bags. A bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 48 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code by adding Article IX entitled Fee on Disposable Plastic or Paper Bags and amending Chapter 24 by adding conforming amendments. The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 1-6-20. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-3-19.

DenverCityCouncil_12162019_19-1176

Madam Secretary, please close the voting, announce the results. 1212 Eyes Accountable. 1289 has been published. All right. That brings us set last to our final courtesy hearing of the evening. Councilwoman Torres, will you please vote count about 1176 on the floor. I move that council bill 19 dash 1176 be ordered published. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The courtesy public hearing for council bill 1176 is open. We have one, two, three, four, five, six people signed up to speak on this item. So if you have come to speak on this, this is the bill on the fee on disposable bags. If you have signed up to speak for this, I will ask you to come up to this empty front bench right by the microphone. And then when I call your name, step up to the podium. First up is Nolan Gaul. We? Hi. My name is known call. I a third grader, a student at Ashley Elementary. I want to be. I want plastic bags not to be a part of America. My sisters also sea turtles. And now they're dying from plastic bags. Sea turtles eat plastic bags thinking they are jellyfish. Plastic bag from Colorado travel to the oceans with big storms and winds. Please ban plastic bags in Denver to show the world we care about our sea life and oceans. We want sea turtles to exist for a long, long time. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Randy Moorman. Good evening, Mr. President, and members of Denver City Council. My name is Randy Moorman and I am the community campaigns director at Echo Cycle and the vice president of Recycle Colorado. I'm here to speak in favor of Bill 19, Dash 1176 on establishing fees for disposable plastic and paper bags. We have a plastics pollution problem and virtually all the plastic ever created. About 8.3 billion tons still exists on planet Earth today. 315 million tons are produced annually, and that amount is projected to quadruple within 30 years. Only 9% of plastic ever produced is recycled. The rest persists somewhere in landfills or as litter in our environment. The problem is that plastic never completely goes away. Plastics always break down when exposed to the elements, but they never completely go away. They simply get smaller and smaller. And the toxic chemical additives used to give them their desirable characteristics are released into the environment. Getting into our water, soil and ultimately in the food we eat. Both paper and plastic bags have negative environmental impacts. Plastic bags are made from nonrenewable. Natural gas, are more easily littered, will not biodegrade and pose a threat to wildlife and ecosystems. Americans currently throw away 100 billion plastic bags every year or 300 bags per person. We use these bags for just an average of 12 minutes, but they continue to persist in our environment. Paper bags, however, also have negative impacts. They require more water to produce, consume more energy during transport and contribute to deforestation. Reusable bags help us reduce these environmental impacts throughout the life of the bag. Denver residents pay for the litter and pollution caused by disposal bags to their tax dollars, paying for litter, cleanup on our streets, at our parks and open space and along our rivers. Disposable bags, clog sorting equipment and contaminate materials at recycling centers and local composting facilities, adding to processing costs and reducing the value of outputs. Placing a fee on the use of any disposable bag, paper or plastic sends a clear message that one type of bag is not better than the other, and that the larger problem is the use of single use disposable packaging. Bag fees are a proven strategy to significantly reduce the use of all disposable bags in other cities. 300 cities across the country have some sort of ordinance regulating disposable bags. A dozen of those cities are now here in Colorado. Disposable bag use in the city of Boulder decreased by 68% within the first year of its disposable bag fee. Similarly, Washington, D.C., salary reduction of over 60%. The bag fee is an important and impactful first step toward reducing plastic pollution and climate change. And therefore, I encourage you to support this bill. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Next up, Duane Gal. My name is Dwayne Gall. I've been a resident of Denver for 50 years, and plastic bags have always been one of my concerns. You've heard previously testimony from my grandson. His generation is going to be impacted by plastic and the use of plastic more than my generation. I would like to share an experience I recently had. I just returned from India a few weeks ago and in India they have been planning plastic bags in some of their states for over 20 years. There is a huge push now within India and legislation is being passed to ban single use plastic in the entire country. We saw many posters and other promotions advocating this. We had many purchases we bought in India from various sources of the smallest vendor to the bigger stores. We never received a plastic bag. We received some very creative cloth bags, other kinds of materials. So it's very inspiring to me to say that of a country like India, with all the struggles they have in their economy and their society can ban plastic bags, that certainly Denver ought to be able to come up with a plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Mohammad Khan. Good evening, counsel. My name is Muhammad Khan, I I'm president of Council nine and I work downtown as a Denver resident and a workforce member of Denver. I think we have a plastic problem. You. The problem with plastic is it never goes away. It will break down to smaller and smaller elements and exist as microplastics which exist in our water and our food and even in our body. Plastic impacts wildlife and ecosystems. Plastic bags are made from nonrenewable natural gas, and they cause a litter problem which a city residents pay for. On my way here from Capitol Hill, I saw four plastic bags flying in the air. Paper bags are not a good solution either. They are also meant for single use. And as Brandy said already, we average you each person use on average one bag every day. Having a fee is important and impactful for a step towards reducing plastic pollution and climate change. And Boulder is an example for us. Some people might believe that having this fee would not be a good suggestion. I can assure you at my company we started a program where we where we went to zero waste in two years just by providing activities where people were rewarded for good behaviors like reusing their bags. Please support Councilwoman Black's back fee ordinance as a key first step towards climate change that we have talked about a lot. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Chairman Sekou. James the Ku Klux Klan movement. Self-defense. Come on. Yo. Are you kidding me? I expect more creativity than charging people for plastic bags so they can get them. I'm gonna give you a living example. In the last election. What we did as candidates who were poor is that we went to our constituency and told them, give me, give us all your plastic bags sitting in your house. They said, What are you going to do if we put our campaign material in the bags tied to their door and used it? It had no value. We got the bags for free. The poor people had to be creative in what we do. Yeah. That requires creativity. Not sitting up here trying to figure out another way how to pass on taxes to poor people. Now, we had to charge for the bags. We can't afford to buy no bed. Well, we take the bad guys, bus it, and then we put it inside another bag. So that other bag is used to carry the groceries home. Especially now those who can't be walking around with these heavy bags on the books trying to get home. So this is definitely an act for the privilege and not the poor. And that's what we need to be up there. To think about other folks other than your own class interests. So I suggest you think about this. So you think about it and be creative. Learn how to take a lemon and turn it into lemonade. Because even if you pass this. What you gonna do with the bags? It's already here that you get out of town. And the corporations who give you the money to run to do this mess. No, no, no. The platter is us, is the people. And what we do with the resources that we're getting and the technology that we got because it is about the bags. And we need to put a fee on the bags that we need to put up big on city council so that we can eliminate government so we don't have them and then will pay you not to get up there. Because this is straight up bullshit. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Pierce. Jesse Pierce represented for Denver Homicide Low Black Star Action, more for self defense, positive action to Movement for Social Change as well as the Universal African People's Organization and Unity Party. Colorado. And I'll be your next mayor in 2023. We are in favor of this, despite the fact that it is going to affect so-called minorities and poor people of color and marginalized and poor communities. We have a crisis, as we already know about the housing, but we're being told we have a crisis with this climate change. Now, my question is, the planet goes under, we're still on the bottom. So how is this benefiting poor people, how this is benefiting black people, houses benefiting so-called people of color, minorities in the city? We are going to we already have enough taxes. We're paying we're paying for sales tax. We're paying for other taxes. We are not seeing any kind of benefit from these sales tax. We are and I can't even afford to live in the city. So you want to taxes some more, maha some plastic bags. My question is, is this going to pertain to oh, shoot, this is going to pertain to all grocery stores, all food chains, all places where you get plastic bags. This is Wal Mart. This is Target such as Walgreens, such as all Safeway, King Soopers, all these places. Is this going to be applied to every single development department store where you get these plastic bags and then are you going to replace these plastic bags with the green sustainable bags which are for reuse? You can use them multiple times. Those are the questions I had. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers on this item. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Flint. Thank you. I have I have some questions for our city attorney and. I already set her up for them. So this will be a sort of a back and forth colloquy. I know that the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that the bag fee in the Aspen case was a fee and not a tax in the city of Chicago. They just went out and went ahead and called it a tax. Knowing going into this that it is already been decided that it's a fee. I'm not going to argue that it's a tax, but I am still troubled by my own thought process. He's saying that this really is a tax because it's unlike any other fee tabor exempt that we have. And so I just had some questions for Christian Crawford, our counsel, to maybe walk me through the reasoning behind the Aspen decision, because when we charge every person in the checkout line, whether they're poor or rich, they charge they pay the same $0.10 we're paying that. The customer is not paying that to us. So it's not our fee. They're paying it to the store and then the store remits 60% of it to us. That's exactly how they do sales tax. That's exactly how the gas tax works. I. So why why what was the court's reasoning for saying this is not a tax? I guess what I was working up to and I didn't I didn't get to the committee and and and so but my thinking was that if we put this on the ballot, if we made a referral and said, can we charge a ten cent tax per bag in the city or county of Denver that would be overwhelmingly approved. And and almost all of my thoughts that this is a tax would be would be addressed. Kirsten, could you walk us through the court's reasoning in Aspen? Sure. Kirsten Crawford, Legislative counsel, I think backing up one step for everyone's benefit. As you know, in 1992, when Tabor passed, it became really important to understand the distinction between a fee and a tax, because taxes under TABOR require voter approval and fees do not. There is not only the case that Councilman Flynn is referring to that comes from the Supreme Court out of the city of Aspen. But there's also just a plethora of cases that talk about the difference between a regulatory charge and a tax. And taxes are imposed to defray the ordinary expenses of businesses, of business, of the government versus a regulatory fee has to be relate reasonably related to the to the program, not specifically limited to services that the government provides, but a regulatory program. So the cost of administering the program and here the predominant purpose and that's the language out of the city of Aspen case. The predominant purpose of this fee is to alter the behavior in the nature of sustainability and protecting the environment. And so in the case that you're referring to, the city of Aspen adopted a 20% waste reduction fee that was imposed by grocers charge to the customer. And the purpose there, when the Supreme Court analyzed it, was to change the behavior of how race reduction occurred in the city of Aspen. If you compare the case to our proposed ordinance, there are some similarities and we have limited and enumerated the purposes for what our portion of the fee can be used for, which is as a general proposition to reduce the use of single use plastics. Mm hmm. Do we require the retailers to account for because the ordinance sets up rules and a structure for the retailers. They may only use their 40% of the fee for certain things, and they must be related to the reusable bag program and customer education and setting up their systems for collecting in order. Do we have systems in place to ensure that Walgreen's and King Soopers and Safeway and Target and all the other entities that were mentioned are using this fee for that purpose and not for their bottom line profit. And since that's a little bit more policy oriented, I didn't. Warn you about that one, but. That's okay. That's okay. I'm happy to take a stab at it, but I wonder if that would be maybe better suited for the sponsors or even solid ways to answer how. Councilwoman Black We have met with the Department of Finance and so solid waste will be managing the program and they'll work with the Department of Finance to establish the rules and determine how we enforce that. Randy Moorman, who is here from Ego Cycle, talked about the BOULDERS program, which has been very, very effective and we'll learn a lot from how they've been managing it for six years now. Mm hmm. Okay. Charlotte. Do you have anything to add? I'm just curious how the retailers who retain 40% of this revenue will be held accountable for how they use it? Yeah. Charlotte Pit Solid Waste Management. My understanding is once the bill passed, will have the ability to do some rulemaking and put in some processes to look at how we audit that. I don't have an answer for you today, though, but. Will we'll learn. From some of the other communities and put something in place. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank Councilwoman Black for bringing this forward. This is really important. I think it's critical for our habitability and. We're still in questions. We will have time for comments. And maybe that was a fancy dressed question, but just to make sure. I apologize. I am getting ahead of myself. Okay. All right. We'll get back to you. Thank you, Gotham. And. All right. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for Council Bill 1176 is closed. Comments by members of Council Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I I'm not sure if I supposed to give my, like, real comments tonight because we're actually voting on it next week. Tonight, we're just moving it forward. We're publishing it. So I'll have some abbreviated comments. But I had a couple of things I wanted to share with you. This is from a report from the United Nations. It says it's estimated that between 1 to 5 trillion plastic bags are consumed worldwide each year. 5 trillion is almost 10 million plastic bags per minute. If tied together, all these plastic bags could be wrapped around the world seven times every hour. So while I love it that people repurpose their bags and reuse their bags, we are not repurposing 1 trillion or 5 trillion bags. And so the goal is to reduce the use of the bags. Another fun fact I wanted to share with you is that in 2018, the term single use was Collier's dictionary word of the year. Because worldwide we're starting to recognize the dangers of all the single use packaging and plastics in our planet. And Randy had some great statistics there. They don't go away. Everything that was ever produced is still here on our planet, and much of it is getting smaller and smaller, and it actually becomes more and more dangerous the smaller it gets. To answer some of the questions asked by some of our speakers. It does apply to all retailers. In fact, they are supporting the bill. So it applies to your 7-Eleven, your convenience store target, J.C. Penney's. It does not apply to restaurants. They are all in support of it. It's been a very collaborative effort. Randy, thank you again. He helped me a lot and I drove him crazy. Debbie Ortega had a bill similar in 2013 and she's really kept the flame alive. And a lot of us here are supporting this tonight. I call it a bring your own bag ordinance. Some cities like Chicago or now Washington, D.C., called Skip the Bag Ordinance. Either one is okay, but the goal is to reduce the use. In Denver alone, about 200 million bags are used each year, and that's just in Denver. But based on what we've learned from other cities, we expect that that will decline by 70%, which is just a really big victory. And we will have fewer bags contaminating our compost, contaminating our recycling facilities where they jam machinery and cause costly delays and break the machinery. And we'll have less litter in our world and we will have less of those microparticles that are now being found everywhere. There was just a story on the news that they are have been found in icebergs in the Arctic and they're not sure how they got there. If they came in the air, they're not sure how they got there. But it's a it's a dangerous problem for our world. And the only way we're going to solve it is to reduce the use of single use plastics. And so this is just a first step. Thank you for everyone who supported it. I really, really appreciate it. And I'm excited to see how it turns out in Charlotte. I'm really excited to be working with you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines, did you have some comment? I have a couple of questions. Is now the right time? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I do want to again thank Councilwoman Black this time in the in the appropriate period. There's a lot of work that you've done on this on this bill. I think there's you know, it's one thing to accomplish something that is difficult. There is something even harder. The next step beyond that is to make it look easy. And I want to quote the Westword, who's actually quoting us. And and in the Westword, they said that in committee, the biggest argument that was there was a disagreement, a kerfuffle, so to speak, between president, clerk and I about whether dog poop bags are compostable. If we get to committee and the biggest issue is whether dog all dog poop bags are compostable, then Councilwoman Black, you've done a lot of work to make it easy. Easy for us to vote. So the vote is quite easy for me. So thank you for all your hard work. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to thank Councilwoman Black for her work in helping to bring this forward. Lots of meetings with people across the city have taken place. But the one thing I want to mention that has not been said, and I think it's important to mention, is that the money that will be collected by the city of Denver will be used not only for education, but to buy reusable bags and to get them distributed across the city so that people who don't already have them and most people already have multiple reusable bags because we pick them up everywhere at various events and in functions that are held where they're given away for free. But these will be free reusable bags that will be distributed more, make sure they're distributed through the schools and to our senior centers and to places where people may not have already picked them up. And so there should be no reason. And since 2013, one of the things we have done in my office is use part of my budget to purchase reusable bags. We distribute them at the mayor's cabinet, in the city meetings and other community meetings that I attend on a regular basis. So we have been doing that, making sure that there's no reason for people not to have more than one, you know, of their own reusable bag that they can take to the grocery store. Or other places. So thank you, Councilwoman Black, for all of your efforts in moving the needle on this. I know Councilwoman Gilmore and Councilman Clark have been part of the the meetings that we have had with different industry stakeholders and community leaders. And so I'm excited that we really have unanimous support across the board to move this forward. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Gilmore. Dog poop. Thank you. Councilman Clark, I want to thank Councilwoman BLOCK and Councilwoman Ortega and Councilman Clark for your partnership. Councilwoman Black and I started this journey early this year on going on tours to A-1 Organics, to the Denver and Arapahoe Facility as well. And really, this is just the beginning for us as a city. There's a big push for us to reduce our use of single use plastics throughout the entire city and county of Denver. And so this is one step. And the other thing that I think is important to know is that this goes into effect July 1st, 2020. So there is going to be an outreach and engagement and a media campaign along with it so that we make sure that all of our constituents know that this is coming and can prepare and maybe start to make some of those behavior changes right now. So thank you. Thank you, President Clark. Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. See no other comments I will just end with and because I know we have this on final reading next week, so I have some more to say then. But I just want to also say thank you to Councilman Black for your awesome leadership on this. Councilman Ortega for spearheading this and keep your eyes on the prize comes from Gilmore for letting me come on as a co-sponsor with all of you for those very excited about it. And I want to thank all our speakers for coming, but Nolan is still back there. I just want to say you're awesome. You're rock star. We need more third graders showing up and telling us what to do. And your voice is changing the world tonight. And I know you're going to continue to change the world with that voice. Some things are worth staying up past your bedtime for, and this is one of them. So thank you very much. And I just want to thank I heard multiple people say, including Councilwoman Gilmore just said it again, this is just the beginning and I'm excited for everything that's to come. So with that, we are. Madam Secretary, I think we're ready to vote. Roll Call. Black Eye CdeBaca I think I go more I Herndon. I. Hands. Hi. Cashmere. All right. Kenny Ortega. Hi. Sawyer Torres. Hi, Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close voting. Announce results. 1212 hours comes Bill 1176 has been published. Seen no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to extend the deferral of payment for business license taxes and fees and the Street Sweeping Relief Program through June 30, 2021, to establish a citywide COVID-19 Relief Payment Plan Program for individuals and businesses, and coordinate accounts receivable collections in conjunction with the COVID-19 Relief Payment Plan Program beginning April 1, 2021 for Parking Citations and July 1, 2021 for most business-related and general fees, including health and fire fees. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03092021_21-0197

All right. Motion carries. Item 14, please. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to extend the deferral of payment for business license, taxes and fees and the street sweeping relief program through June 30th, 2021, to establish a citywide COVID 19 Relief Payment Plan Program citywide. Thank you. There's a motion any second by Vice Mayor Richardson and second by Councilmember Ringo. I don't see any public comment on item 14, so we'll. Probably. District one. By. District to. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. I. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. II. District nine. My motion carries.

Recommendation to adopt resolution to approve 14 repaving/resurfacing projects proposed to receive Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Act funding totaling approximately $8,000,000 for Fiscal Year 2020: 4th Street between Cerritos Avenue and Almond Avenue; Temple Avenue between 4th Street and 7th Street; Ximeno Avenue between 4th Street and 10th Street; 10th Street between Temple Avenue and Obispo Avenue; Bellflower Boulevard between Garford Street and Stearns Street; Ximeno Avenue between 15th Street and Pacific Coast Highway; Cherry Avenue between Wardlow Road and Bixby Road; San Antonio Drive between Long Beach Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue; Lomina Avenue between Adderley Drive and Rosebay Street; Pageantry Street between Lomina Avenue and Rosebay Street; Pageantry Court between North-West End to Pageantry Street; Pavo Street between Lomina Avenue and Rosebay Street; Linden Avenue between 20th Street and Hill Street, and, Myrtle Avenue between Harding Street and Artesia Boulevard. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04162019_19-0359

Are you a yes. This motion carries. Item 17. Report from Public Works. Recommendation to adopt a resolution to approve 14 repaving resurfacing projects proposed to receive Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account Fund Account Act funds funding totaling approximately 8 million for fiscal year 2020 citywide. There's a motion in a second. Is there anything you want to add, Mr. Beck, to this? Mr. Beck is not there. So Mr. Pappas or Diego. Very. We're available to answer any questions. For the country. Okay. Any public comment on this item? Seeing none. Yeah. One, one, one. Commenter. Good. You since 1970. Sorry. Could you excuse the address? I have. My comments have been engendered by. Talking to the city traffic. Engineer. Over. The last few weeks. Relative to what we're experiencing, the city is experiencing at PCH and second, in trying to move traffic through areas. That are going through. Re pavement, which is what's going to happen here. And also we're experiencing up and down Long Beach Boulevard and many other places because of the. Blue line tobacco and have come up with this and. This. Thought. What we could do. Sir, it's amazing. Is have Mayor Garcia, we will get a Caltrans uniform for him. And with the approval of the residents of the various different areas where this is going to take place, he could flag, he could stand at the intersection. And hold up traffic, let it go depending upon what the need for. And I think we could make an arrangement with the U.S. Justice Department that for every hour he would spend there, they would take every full day he would be one of the intersections, whether it be a PCH in second or any other area in the city where he would be doing that. They would give him if he's to be there for the full 8 hours, they would take one hour off his pending prison sentence, which he will start serving at this juncture, based upon what the U.S. Justice Department tells me will probably be a little under six months, six years away. So that's something to consider. I mean, thank you. Councilman Price, if she's going to give me parole advice when I'm up for parole and can. Visit me on. The. Job training, I'm going to do I'm going to join a union. I run out. I'm ready to go. IBEW Local 11 Let's see what else? What are we waiting on? So yeah, those.

Amends Chapter 59-2 to assure continuation of certain building and bulk plane limitations when land subject to Former Chapter 59 zoning is mapped next to lower-density "protected districts" under the Denver Zoning Code. (LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE) Amends Chapter 59-2 to assure continuation of certain building and bulk plane limitations when land subject to Former Chapter 59 zoning is mapped next to lower-density "protected districts" under the Denver Zoning Code. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS AFTER PUBLICATION. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 9-17-13.

DenverCityCouncil_01132014_13-0589

Announce the results. 13 Eyes. 13 Eyes Council. The council bill does pass. Now we are going to the next hearing. Councilman Herndon, will you please put Council Bill 589 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Madam President. I move the council to 589 be placed upon final consideration and you pass. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Council Bill 589 is open. This is a bill for an ordinance amending Section 59 to Denver Revised Municipal Code by adding Subsection C relating to former Chapter 59 controlled districts. May we have the staff report? Ms.. AXELROD Good evening, Tina. Axel Ref for Community Planning and Development here to present the staff report and recommendation for Council Bill 589. Just for a point of clarification and correction, the bill will add new subsection C through H to the Denver Revised Municipal Code, Section 59, Dash two oh, which is in the body of your ordinance more clearly with that briefly summarized where we are in the process for this amendment, the purpose and what the amendment does to briefly take you through your review criteria and make our recommendation. This amendment to the Denver Revised Municipal Code has gone through planning board hearing with a recommendation for approval unanimously. Nine zero. It's been through Lady Liberty and a first reading and is here before you tonight with all the appropriate notifications to registered neighborhood organizations and city council officers. What is this amendment all about? Simply, it's to ensure that all residential zone districts in the city of Denver that were considered to have certain protections under our zoning rules continue and in fact, have those protections. And this really has arisen out of the fact, pretty uniquely that Denver has two zoning codes. It's got former Chapter 59 and it's got Denver zoning code. So what happens is how well they play together when they're next to each other, when you have as shown in this picture, you have land under former Chapter 59 zone. For example, arm you 20 with waivers next to land zoned under the other code, Denver zoning code, perhaps a single unit or two unit sound district. The issue arises when your arm you toe. All you have in front of you is the old code to look at, to understand what you need to do. And it never really speaks to the fact that there are zone districts nearby that should be protected because you, as you see, for example, didn't exist under the old code. You'll never find it there. So our question is circled in the bottom there is how do we get development in that arm? You 22 recognize that there are zone districts nearby that need to be protected. So that's what we're trying to do with this amendment. Before I get into the details, just where does this arise? Is it a problem? Is it citywide? We stumbled upon this in doing plan review for certain projects in Northwest Denver. First, that this this issue arises with mapping all the new code lands next to each other. What this map shows is wherever you see red, the yellow immediately next to it should be protected. And the read is old code zone properties that used to be controlled and we never had an issue when we were just operating under one code. But now that we have two codes, we want to make sure the yellow, which is new code residential zone districts are protected next to the old code red. So you can see it's throughout the city and pockets. And so this is something that we definitely want to address through this amendment because it does raise issues in every council district. So what are the types of protections we're looking to assure continue? Again, these are nothing new. These protections have always existed. We just have to make that link between the two codes. For example, building height, limit symbol controls. We have a maximum 75 feet of height for buildings when they're located 150 feet within a protected district. We have increased setbacks in some instances where there's development in a mixed use zone district next to a residential or single unit or two unit zone. We have lots of limitations in the code, not much, but a good handful on specific uses when those uses are established in close proximity, proximity or next door to a residential zone. Some examples are given on the screen, such as limits on drive thru facilities operating hours into the evening when those facilities are located right next to residential zones. So to the point, this text amendment is to section 59 to 2 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code. Your screenshot there shows where and then in the muni code library this section is found. This is not an amendment to either of our two zoning codes. It's to the rules in the one place where we talk about how the two codes should relate to each other. Again, this is adding new subsections. You have your ordinance draft in your package. The next two slides simply summarize and verbatim shows those new subsections. You have review criteria for justifying a change like this that this is found in the City Charter for adoption of new zoning related ordinance that are not part of the zoning code. Your three criteria are you need to find that the change is consistent with the city's adopted comprehensive plan, that it furthers public health, safety and general welfare and results in uniformity of regulations. Very quickly, as detailed in the staff report, staff has found that the amendment is consistent with the plans. We need to assure that our zoning code remains flexible and accommodates a variety of land uses, also encourages that quality infill development while respecting existing character and intensity of development nearby. This does just continue the status quo of what we all thought we were doing when we kept two zoning codes in place, which is to keep the restrictions on former Chapter 59 lands the same so that this amendment will assure that we don't unintentionally provide some loopholes that we didn't think were there. It does further the public general welfare by assuring the continuation of those protections and will result in uniformity of zone district regulations regardless of what zoning code you're operating under with that CPD staff, which who initiated this amendment recommends approval. And I'm happy to answer any further questions you may have. Thank you, Gina. We have two speakers signed up, Joel Noble and Keith Pryor. I'd like to call Joel Noble to this podium. Before I begin, I think Keith Pryor meant to sign up for the rezoning on 3099 Arapahoe and got the wrong number. Madam Secretary, does he need to sign up? I can change his card. All right. Thank you very much. Go ahead, Mr. Noble. Thank you for letting us know. I'm Joel Noble, 2705 Stout Street, president of Curtis Park Neighbors. In your staff report, you have a letter from Curtis Park neighbors supporting this. This is very technical, but it's very important. Right now, we have loopholes, as Tina Axelrod said, that someone who has properties zoned to the old zoning code where the old zoning code says you can't do certain things when you're adjacent to a residential district, can look next door at a residential district. But the residential districts in the new zoning code and see what residential district that one doesn't count. And it could drive drive a truck right through that. So it's interesting that this oversight didn't get noticed for a few years until the upturn in the market and development started. And our our friends in Jefferson Park ran into it with someone who saw that loophole with regard to protected districts. Staff was very quick to say, you know, we have a loophole here. We should fix it to propose that. And I just want to communicate to council what a delight it is to work with staff. Because when I decided to be, you know, a little detail oriented and say, you know, okay, I'm going to look through the code and find some other things that might be there that we should do. At the same time, staff said, Great, you know, rather than saying, no, we're the experts, you know, leave it, leave it to us. They said, That's great. Let's see if we can find even more. And they did. They found the biggest one, which is the residential, all the different ways that residential zoning districts are called out in the old code that, of course, don't refer to the new code. So I felt this has been a little bit of a collaboration and I appreciate the ability to go to planning board meetings and go to hearings and and fix this so it works the way we intended. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Noble. And thank you for your wonderful volunteering effort efforts. That is, it concludes our speakers call on council for questions. Councilwoman Ortega. I have a question about how this proposed change would impact the use of regulating plans. And is that a tool that the Zoning and Planning Office is still using of financing the zone changes? To answer your first question, since we didn't have a regulating plan in the old code, this amendment doesn't speak to regulating plans at all , and there's no effect on their use, voluntary or mandatory in the new code. Okay. So is that a tool that the department is using with the new code? Yes. Okay. I just have not seen any come through recently. Do we have any expected to be coming through with. They do not go to city council for final action. It's after zoning entitlement is in place. So it's all administrative when we do use them. Well, I know in some of the zoning that we've had there referred to. Yes. Thank you for. And I continue to be concerned that there really is no tool to ensure that the things that are in the regulating plan, in fact, can be enforced. Because if somebody can get zoning approval. Mm hmm. Contingent on a regulating plan being worked out with the neighborhood, and they turn around and sell the land to somebody else who wasn't party to that agreement. That next person developing that project does not have to adhere to that regulating plan because there's nothing any place that really holds either the city's feet to the fire or the landowners feet to the fire to ensure those things get done. And I think when we talk about loopholes, that's one that I know neighborhoods have expressed as a big concern to us, even though it's not directly on point. I can respond to. I was going to say, was there a question in that Councilwoman Ortega's question. Was if regulating plans were being utilized, and I was just expressing my concern about them. So. All right. Does it sound like there's a question? Okay. Thank you. Thanks. I have no further questions or comments. Okay. Councilwoman. Councilman Levitt. Thank you, Madam President. I'm a little reluctant to ask detailed questions because I didn't go to committee when this was presented. But I think I have a question that can be fairly simply answered. So the the the old code made accommodations for protected districts but was blind to the protected districts in the new code. And presumably it goes the other way around that the new code obviously makes accommodations for protected districts but didn't recognize the protect protected districts in the old code. They pretended they didn't exist. Actually, we caught it going in that direction. Okay. So the new code recognizes the protected district and the old code is just the old code, not protecting, not accommodating the protected districts in the new code. So now that they do lose protections. TRUMP So do they behave? There's no trumping because you're either under one code or the other. There's no conflict there. If you're in my diagram, the old code arm 20, you only look at the old code, plus this DMC 59, dash two for your rules. Got it. So if you are under the old code and you're now the scales have fallen from your eyes and you're now recognizing the protected district next door, you protect it with the regulations written in the old code, correct? Not the regulations written in the new code. Correct. Got it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilman Nevett. Councilwoman Robb. Okay. I was wasn't committee in that series of questions just sort of got me. So how does someone figure out there? They're an army of 20. Under the old code. How do they know to look at section 59, dash two? Well, that's a bit of a challenge, certainly, but they're still rules. And in the DRC that apply to lands retaining all code that leads you to know what you need to do. When you look on the Sony map and CRM, U20. It tells you, first of all, that the firm form of Chapter 59 code was kind of placed in amber and frozen in time on June 25th, 2010. And those are your rules. That's what it says, first off. And then it's then it goes into more detail. We've just added a few more things they need to look at. So there is you know, we we do rely on staff. And our our best. Public outreach in terms of our website on what what your zoning and what you need to look at. This amendment has been, you know, quite, quite a bit discussed and heads up across CPD. And I'm working with the zoning administrator to assure that if this gets adopted, it will go into effect this week and we will immediately send out a copy of the ordinance to all reviewers and all CPD. So they have already been prepared. I've met with every single review group who does development review, residential and nonresidential, and so they know this is coming possibly. So we're going to do our best to assure that at the front counter and in development review. At the very least, we we know what the rules are and that we're able to point people, you know, as much ahead of time during concept and pre-op meetings to these provisions. Well, the good news is that I and C is aware of it for alerted neighborhoods. And it's important that our officers. Yes. Be aware enough. So if someone comes in initially, we can say you better check it. Yes. So that, you know, this obviously is available through the city clerk's office as soon as adopted. But I'm happy to include you on the heads up email all your aides as well. Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. And seeing no other questions, I'm going to close the hearing on Council eight 589 and asked for comments by members of Council Councilwoman Robb. Oh, am I still up? Well, no, for comments. You're calling it first because it's a lady issue. I didn't know if you had a comment or not. It's just this is a needed change. I support it. Okay. Very well done. Councilman Shepherd. A woman Shepherd. Madam President. So, District one was the guinea pig for this. See, in the old code versus the new code and how they interact together. And I do really think CPD for quickly identifying the fact that, you know, this cannot continue and for taking the initiative to bring it forward as a, as a standalone amendment and bring it forward in front of the omnibus text, amend text amendments that we'll be considering here in the next few months. You know, it's been a few months since this happened in my district, but, you know, essentially the conflict was around bulk plans for a developer who wanted to develop under old code but was right next to protected zone districts. I'm not going to go into any more details because I'm not sure if I'm even clear at this point what unfolded there. But quite frankly, it was a big mess and there were appeals to the Board of adjustment. And, you know, there was a lot of anger on the part of the neighborhood for us not having noticed this. There was multiple rounds of mediation with the developer. Of course, the developer didn't want to sort of go with the intent of things. It was a big, hairy mess, quite frankly. And a lot of people became very angry. And, you know, I would really like to avoid all of that going forward. And I'm sure all of you who are struggling with the challenges and opportunities of infill development in your neighborhoods, trust me, you don't want to have to add this one to your plate as well. So I really encourage all of you to support this. It's it's good policy. It makes sense. And thank you, CPD. And so Jefferson Park, I hope someone is watching this and I know I'll see you tomorrow night, but you won. Thank you, Councilwoman Shephard. Councilman Brooks. Thank you, Madam President. Talk about getting down into the weeds. I really appreciate CPD for for locating this and understanding what's going on. You know, I wanted to just give a shout out to my man, John Noble, who is our resident expert in District eight. And thank you for giving your time to work on something like this. We really appreciate it. And we lean on him in District K. Thank you. Yeah, I can see why. Okay. I see no other comments. So, Madam Secretary, let's do that roll call thing. Rob Shepherd. Brooks Brown. I thought I heard in Kennett Lemon by Lopez Montero. I. Never i. Ortega, i. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 12 eyes. 12 eyes. The bill does pass. Councilman Herndon, we're going to our next hearing. Will you please put council bill 862 on the floor for final passage?

Recommendation to request Climate Action and Environmental Committee to work with appropriate City staff, the Infrastructure Funding Alliance, Southern California Edison, labor organizations, and other stakeholders to be identified to better understand the potential regional and local impacts of the proposed “Freedom Villages” project and consider the formation of an Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District, and forward recommendations to the Ports, Transportation, and Infrastructure Committee; and Request Ports, Transportation, and Infrastructure Committee to review the recommendations of the Climate Action and Environmental Committee, working with appropriate City staff, the Infrastructure Funding Alliance, Southern California Edison, labor organizations, and other stakeholders to be identified, and forward recommendations to the City Council.

LongBeachCC_03082022_22-0257

Thank you. Let's move on to item number 16. He's retired. Communication from Councilwoman Allen, Councilwoman in the House Councilmember Urunga. Recommendation to request Climate Action and Environmental Committee to work with appropriate city staff, the Infrastructure Funding Alliance, Southern California Edison labor organizations and other stakeholders to be identified to understand the potential regional and local impacts of the proposed Freedom Villages project and consider the formation of an enhanced infrastructure finance district and forward recommendations to the Port's Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Great. So I have a motion by Councilmember Allen, seconded by Raga. Councilmember Alvin, please. Sorry, George. Yes. Can I request that we do the public comments first before I make my comments? Absolutely. Thank you for. If there are any members of the public, they would like to speak on this item. Please use the race hand feature or dial star nine. Shukla. Your time begins now. Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Thank you. And thank you, Councilman Allen, for this commitment to deliberative democracy. I very much appreciate it. The staff report that accompanied this item was a bit confusing, not completely clear on what an e f IED is. Moreover, what freedom villages are. Or how they're related to arena numbers or. Everything else, including existing state legislation, SB 671 on clean air freight corridors, but more specifically the place I'm guessing it's down Queensway Avenue where where this electricity passing is. There's you know, there's only so many things you can do with it, but physically, logically or actually not through it, physically, logically as well as procedurally, you know, you're either going to overload it doing anything with anyone. And then you have too many physical risks and maybe too many mental risks. You're going to right size it and either control it yourself or let someone else do it for you, or you're going to limit it severely and most likely keep the status quo, which I know seems like what? But it's not. It's not clear. There's a major conference right now. I'm sitting on a city council zoom, but there's a major conference in Arizona happening right now. Largest one that's ever happened in the country. It's on solar and wind together. People are rapidly realizing that you can use clean energy to meet all of your energy needs. And that's a very, very good thing to hear when you've got Vladimir Putin invading not just Ukraine, but a whole bunch of other countries around oil and gas pipeline wrote. But specific to our ports and goods movement. There's a lot in how we do things that could be more efficient and better run for the people who live here, the people who work here, the people who should be enjoying, frankly, the social product and social benefits of their labor. I've been in this town long enough to see things like a tax on container traffic, to fund some of the pollution caused by these shipping companies, viciously, violently outfought outspend and neutered. And I wonder, frankly, what this is. Thank you. That concludes public comment. The. Councilmember Price. I mean, Ellen. Yes. Thank you so much. I want to first, I just say thank you to Councilman Van de Hoff and council member Urania for joining me on this item. They represent the areas where this project is proposed and their residents are currently most impacted by harbor by the harbor goods movement. I want to make sure that all my colleagues know that Marc Garneau, chair of the Infrastructure Funding Alliance, is on the zoom and he's available to answer any technical questions that you may have tonight. As we discussed this agenda item back in 2021. My office was approached by the Infrastructure Funding Alliance with the Freedom Villages proposal. I know that the Teamsters, UAW, let's see, IBEW, meet council are on board with this project. And I also know that the proposers have reached out to ILWU as well. This project has the potential to greatly reduce local diesel and other emissions in the port area and also reduce our overall GHG emissions as well. I met with harbor staff and my my team facilitated a high level meeting between harbor staff and the proposers and city and harbor staff were generally supportive but without specific council direction to devote time and resources to studying the proposal. Staff just could not get into detail to fully understand all the implications. So I asked them to reach out to the other council offices and the mayor's office as well to share the proposal. And now is the right time for the City Council to discuss sending the conversation into our committee. The proposal at a high level is a good, future oriented project. I understand that the proposed financing mechanism needs further analysis and discussion. The Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District would require the city and other government agencies future tax dollars to support this. Therefore, the right first formal step is for the Council to direct staff at City and Harbor, to direct staff at the city and harbor to work with proposers and other stakeholders to fully that the pros and cons of the project. This process is designed to guarantee that additional information and analysis of the specifics of the specifics of the project will be discussed. So at minimum, three more public meetings should take place before any decision is made on the project. This would ensure that transparency and we also have opportunities for civic engagement. The Climate Action and Environmental Committee will discuss the project from an environmental standpoint, including the value of reducing emissions sooner than later for both our cap and local health benefits to all of our frontline communities. Then the Port Transportation and Infrastructure Committee would add their perspective. And finally, staff would then bring recommendations from the committee process back to full city council. So I look forward to starting this process. So we and the public can learn more about this proposal and the impact that it may have. Thank you very much. Okay. Council member Yolanda. Thank you. Acting mayor of. And I want to thank Councilmember Allard for bringing this forward and being so explicit in explaining what the project actually has. I was able to I, too, was approached last year about this project, and I, I was I had an opportunity to read the white paper that the committee put to put forward the the second year, the infrastructure funding alliance. And I see that Jan Perry, former councilmember in L.A., is also present on this council, may have additional input. We have any questions, any any study. I mean, in the past, I have always been reluctant to approve a go forward studies because it. Use of time that that management can use for other projects. But this one, because of the potential impact it has in our environment, has a lower quality of life, especially in my district in the West Long Beach area. It's very important. We need to explore ways that we can have good movement that doesn't is not as invasive into the communities as every president we have. We know that we have an issue with air quality, with goods movement, with impact traffic. And so anything we can move forward to alleviate that and ameliorated would be greatly beneficial. And I totally agree that we should study this further. I mean, it's new technology. It's it's something that we should investigate and look into. But of course, I'm doing it with the caveat that I'm concerned that if if this comes forward, that there are going to be jobs lost, I would have a difficult time approving a project that that while it to clean the air and an imagery of traffic, that it would be at the cost of people losing their jobs or losing their homes and having other unexpected consequences happen with that. So looking forward to studying this and looking forward to a report that might come back to us that we could better evaluate what impacts cumulative in other ways a project like this would have on our city. So thank you again, Kathryn Rather for bringing this forward. Thanks. Next, we have our councilmembers. And they are. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. And thank you very much, Councilwoman Allen, for bringing this item forward and for inviting me to sign on. This is a very, very important item. The fight for climate adaptation change is being led by our youth, and I find it our responsibility as leaders to support this movement and our youth to the best of our ability. We have begun for some time now, moving in the direction of reducing emissions and prioritizing clean energy. We have committed to addressing the issue of climate change, and this item adds to the motion of curbing our waste into action. This item seeks to discuss the development of an enhanced infrastructure financing district and of technology that uses carbon free electric transportation to help innovative the disproportionate environmental and health impacts placed on our most geographically vulnerable populations. Our residents throughout the city, but especially in the districts closest to the port and the 710 freeway, are both forced to be endured and live with the long term health consequences from these environmental injustice. And this is why it is critically important that we begin these processes of changing that into making it a reality. I hope that the report we receive will incorporate the length of approximate cost for the implementation of this project so as to more holistically discuss our next steps, as well as the degree of impact these projects may have of awesome. So on our on our truck drivers and like Councilmember, I said, will there be a loss of jobs? That's also very concerning. That's why I think it's very important that the community meetings that Councilwoman Allen referred to take place in order to really have true transparency with moving forward with this action. So thank you again, Councilwoman Allen, for bringing this item forward. Thank you. Council member Sorrell. Next. Thank you. I thank you, Councilwoman Allen, for bringing this item forward, as well as the co-sponsors of the bill. You know, I'm always supportive of ideas and ways that we can explore how to move towards kind of green, cleaner and greener goods movement, especially in a way that it can benefit, you know, the surrounding community that's just always been greatly impacted because they're also impacted by other impacts such as the corridor. Right, the freeway corridor as well. But one of the things that I am interested in learning more, which is what this item is proposing to do, and I'm so I understand the general approach in looking at new technology and ways that we can fund it, which is needed as we're trying to transition to zero emissions. So but one of the things that I would like to ask that we can include is how does it also help us meet our Long Beach Climate Action and adaptation plan, where there are lines there that also help us address those goals so that we're making sure that we're not only working towards kind of this process of figuring out how to address climate change at the harbor and as well as surrounding community, but overall as a region and a city as well. So thank you very much. It's. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I don't see any of the council members queued up to comment or. Maybe don't remember often. Can I. Q I'm sorry, I'm having trouble with the queue. Please. Thank you. I want to. Appreciate my business and the community at large that are interested in helping us solve these really big issues. And I want to thank my colleagues for all of their comments. I think that this is a great step forward, and I look forward to hearing the results. Thank you. Great. Thank you for that. With that. I'm supportive of this as well. I think this is innovative. Do you have questions a little bit regarding the direction on whether or not this was a committee going to a committee or city council? I think that's been clarified. This is been worked on, received by multiple committees. I think it's an innovative idea. Thank you for bringing it forward with that. With no other comments on the table. You know what I did. Q AB just one more time just to if that's okay. Please. Okay. Thank you. Just one quick question. I'm Mark with Mark on the line. I think you on the Zoom call. Mark, could you just briefly talk about the jobs impact on this proposal? And I don't know if staff can free him up to speak. And if not. I see them on here. If you press star nine, you can unmute yourself. There is. Um, first of all, my name is Mark Pichardo, and I'm the chairman of the Infrastructure. Finding Alliance, and I'm trying to turn my video on and it just won't turn on. We don't have a video for non council members. Mr. Fasano. Okay, fair enough. First of all, I'd like to thank the three council persons who have put forward the motion and secondly the comments from the multiple council members on the proposal. And let me just specifically address the issue of jobs and employment. The one of the reasons why Labor is so strongly supportive and we have multiple labor unions in support of this as well as community, environmental and social justice support for the organization. But the labor unions involved see this as an opportunity to develop new technologies, new jobs and new ways where in fact their members can expand employment in. And let me note that the opportunities of the new technologies and our hope is that those new technologies will not only result in building this project, but could lead to in employment opportunities in building these new products. And I don't want to use your your scarce time tonight to describe all of those potential, but I will assure you that the the labor union folks who are involved see the possibility of increased employment opportunities, not reduced ones. And I very I, I took to heart calcium in your NGOs, your request that we specifically bring that information forward and let you have an opportunity to further understand it. And let me add one additional comment. In my career, I was the director executive director of Skog for three plus decades. The Alameda Corridor was a project that I and my staff led and helped create, and it was basically established so that we, in fact, could deal with the the goods movement, environmental and transportation impacts. What we found in our work and and that is, is that the increased movement out of the ports is coming by trucks, not by rail. And the fact that the almost the total increase in movement since the turn of the century has been by trucks moving out of the port. And given the impacts, the environmental impact, as well as the transportation impacts, the logistics industry in our region has not expanded to the extent, full extent that it could. It is our hope and my hope in this project. And let me just note that the basic concept in the proposal was adopted in a Skog plan in 2009. It was not implemented because there was no entity that would enable us to implement it. The reason for for the enhanced infrastructure finance industry legislation came from work of our IFAD working with California Forward in Governor Jerry Brown to in fact put this mechanism in place. It gives us the vehicle to do it. If we're successful, it will not only increase employment opportunities within the area that are clean jobs. That don't adversely impact the community going adversely store owners in the community, but rather find ways to move them efficiently and secondly, enable us to truly take advantage of the supply chain logistics industry to expand employment not only in the Long Beach area, but in the region. So I look forward to further discussions bringing this information forward and enabling the team. And it's led by Jan Perry, who's our executive director, to bring the information forward you requested this evening. And if there's further questions, I'll be more than happy to and answer them. Councilman Allen. Councilwoman Allen. Thank you very much. Mark, now, that was great. All right. That's all right. That's all I have. Still have Councilmember Price. Judah. Sorry. And I had tried to queue earlier. I just wanted to say thank you so much for allowing the community process to be involved in this. I'm really looking forward to getting a briefing at the Port Transportation Infrastructure Committee. And as chair of the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, which Marc just mentioned, I think it's going to be a really fascinating discussion. We've talked about similar topics there. So thank you for bringing the item. Okay. We've had, I think, exhausted comment from the council on this item. Well, how about. District one. I'm District two. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. I. District six. I. District seven. I'm. District eight. I'm. Motion is carried eight zero. Right. So the next item is item number 18.

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_06112019_19-0506

The charter commission. The next one. It's item 34, I believe. 30. Thank you. Communication from Vice Mayor Andrew's Chair, Personnel and Civil Service Committee Recommendation Received Charter Commission Appointments and reappointment. These are commission appointments coming from the the committee. And let me go through this first over to Vice Mayor Andrew says. Yes, thank you very much. At this time, we have two appointees, I think, and that's Mr. Porter Gilbert and Justin Morgan. So could we please, if you like to stand up and say a few words, you can. Let me go ahead and read their we want to read their their bios really quick. And so we have two appointments to see. PCC The first one is is Porter Gilbert again. Porter has been a resident here in Long Beach for now almost 15 years, and is the executive director of the LGBTQ center here in Long Beach and currently oversees the operations, programs and outreach efforts. He serves currently as a commissioner for the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations and has been involved in numerous organizations here locally in the city, including the Fourth Street Business Association, our Everyone Home Advisory Task Force and Advisory Boards for both the Lumbee Trauma Recovery Center and the Cal State University, Long Beach Master of Public Health Program. So congratulations, Porter, for joining this commission and also Mr. Justin Morgan, who is a fourth District resident. Justin Johnson lives in the fourth District and is an educator and teacher at Westerly School, where he teaches math to sixth and eighth graders and is the department head of mathematics . So very smart, Justin. He he's also a member of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the Phi Delta and the Phi Delta and Kappa International Education Academy Academic Honor Society member. And so, Justin, also congratulations on joining the PCC. And with that is your public comment on these two on these still seeing nine? Let me turn this over first. Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. Thank you again to all of our newly appointed commissioners. I did want to take a moment and just say that tonight we are making history in the city of Long Beach where we have the very first non-conforming gender non-conforming commissioner being appointed to our city PCC and to our charter commissions. And so I'm really proud of Porter Goldberg, who I would call a friend who have got to see a start as a volunteer and make his way to this position and educating all of us on how we can be more inclusive and thoughtful in our policymaking. So I'm just really proud of Long Beach today. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Councilmember Warringah. I totally agree in that the Long Beach is one of the most progressive cities in Southern California, in California, and probably in. The United States. Thank you for your service. All you volunteers. Great. Thank you very much. So with that members, I did call public comment. And so members with that, please cast your votes on these two appointments. Of motion carries. Great. And with that, we're going to go ahead and go and take the photos of all the commissioners that are here to please meet us here in the front and the council members to also please meet us in the front. When his service members. Oh, really? Yeah. I got older, man. Good. Thank you so much. Yeah. I know you're not a hugger. You're getting a hug. Thank goodness. Why is it so slow. Down. Again? Thank you very much, Mr. Supernova. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Can we get a picture? Can we get everyone on the right side of move in, please. All right. All right. Want to. Three. You. Oh, wait. Oh. More or less. No more. One more. Okay, we are. Thank you. That we're going to go ahead and take a one minute recess. We're going to get set up for the presentation for Senator elect Gonzalez, who just joined us. And I know. Like I mentioned, she just joined us from her son's graduation. So I know she was rushing. And so thank you for for being here. One minute recess and we will meet when we come back. We will be beginning the presentation. You. You know. No. Okay. Mm hmm. Okay. Oh. But I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting back to order here. So we have folks I know in the back. If they can hear me, just please come back and we'll get this meeting started again. Hmm. Okay. We're going to start in just a minute. If I can have folks take their seat, please. So I'm going to start in just a minute. Madam Court, could you please do that? We're going to call this meeting back to order. If he can please you. The roll call, please. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pierce County Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Suber down here. Councilwoman Mongo. Vice Mayor Andrews. Councilmember Your Honor. Councilman Austin. Councilmember. Mayor Garcia. Thank you. And I'm here as well. We're going to go ahead and begin our presentation tonight. And it's like we do as a tradition here at the city council. We do our farewell presentations to any member of of the council body that is ending their tenure within the city.

AN ORDINANCE relating to the City Light Department; and amending Section 21.49.042 of the Seattle Municipal code to align income eligibility guidelines for the utility-funded Emergency Low-Income Assistance program with other city rate assistance programs and allow year-round program operation.

SeattleCityCouncil_08172015_CB 118479

The Report of the Energy Committee Agenda Item two Council Bill 118479 relating to the City Light Department and amending sections 2.49.042 of the Seattle Municipal Code to align income eligibility eligibility eligibility guidelines for utility funded emergency low income assistance program with other city rate assistance programs and allow year round program operation. The committee recommends a council bill pass. Thank you. Council member so on. Thank you, Brian Burgess. This council bill will change the eligibility requirements for the Emergency Low Income Assistance Program to make them the same as those used by the utility discount program. And that benchmark is earning 70% or less of the state median income. This change would facilitate two purposes. First, it will make processing applications more efficient because there will be only one set of requirements instead of two. And second, it will end up making more people eligible because the new requirements are more inclusive than the old. The committee unanimously recommends passing. Thank you. Questions or comments, Councilmember Beckstrom. Thank you. Councilmember Swan, thanks for working on this. Can you tell me, is this going to be run through Seattle City Light or through Department of Human Services? As of now, through Seattle City Light? And interestingly, sort of in the context of the what you brought up, we've been talking about it, as you know, you and I , about expanding the utility discount program. And one of the points that was made by Seattle City Light is that the more we expand UDP, the less people will be needing this program. So as a matter of fact, the two go hand in hand. Thank you. Thank you. Please call the role on the passage of the bill. Gordon I. Harrow. I. O'Brien, I. Okamoto, I. Rasmussen I want my back shop and President Burgess Aden favored and opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. The report of the Finance and Culture Committee. Please read item three. The Report of the Finance and Culture Committee Agenda Item three Council Bill 118452 authorizing in 2015 acceptance of funding from non city sources authorizing the heads of the Executive Department, Department of Planning and Development, Department of Parks and Recreation, Human Services Department, Seattle Police Department and the Seattle Public Utilities.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute all documents necessary to issue a Right-of-Entry Permit to AECOM, a Delaware Corporation, and/or its agents, for the drilling of soil vapor sampling wells and the installation of temporary vapor testing equipment in the Baker Street Mini Park and the Wrigley Heights Dog Park, consistent with the Cleanup Abatement Order, for a term of one year, with four, one-year renewal options at the discretion of the City Manager, or his designee. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_05122015_15-0413

Item 17. Report from Parks, Recreation and Marine. Recommendation to issue a right of way entry permit to a comm for the drilling of soil vapor sampling wells and the installation of temporary vapor testing equipment in the Baker Street Mini Park and the Wrigley Heights Dog Park consistent with the cleanup abatement order District seven. There's been a motion by Councilmember Urunga and seconded by Councilman Austin. Is there a staff report? Yes. Vice Mayor, we have a quick staff report from Parks Rec and Marine manager Bob Livingston. Thank you, Mr. West. Madam Vice Mayor, members of the Council, the L.A. Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued a clean up and abatement order for a former oil property located in District seven between the L.A. River, Wardlow and Baker Roads and Golden Avenue. There's a map in your packet as part of the clean up an abatement order. Approximately five soil vapor sampling wells have been ordered in areas that are adjacent to the former property or actually into city parks. The Baker Street mini park in the Wrigley Heights Dog Park. Since those wells are not on the subject property, they need to have a right of entry permit in order to conduct the clean up and abatement order. There would not be any noticeable disruption of the Baker mini park, but for safety of the dogs and their humans and also the workers, we would have to close the Wrigley Dog Park on the Friday before Memorial Day and then either two or three days after Memorial Day to do the actual drilling. That concludes our staff report. I'd be happy to answer any questions about the permit. We also have some representatives from Tesoro that owns the property or from AECOM that'll be doing the testing if you have any questions for them on the technical aspects. Thank you, Mr. Livingston. Councilmember Durango. Thank you for the staff report. I want to thank to all who are here tonight for volunteering actually somewhat to do this this study. There's been some reports of some vapors escaping from that property out there. And and they basically got stuck holding the bag. So I want to thank you for that. I want to thank you for taking your leadership in reaching out to the communities and being so accessible to them and answering all their questions. So if there's any questions that the Council may want to ask regarding what the project is and what it involves, I want to thank Brisa for being here this evening to provide those out those answers to those questions. Thank you again. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wish to address the Council on item 17? CNN members cast your vote. Motion carries nine zero.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare ordinances to designate as Historic Landmarks two residential buildings located on a single lot: a single-family house with the address of 1005 Locust Avenue and a residential duplex with the address of 141 and 143 East 10th Street. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_07072020_20-0627

Motion carries. Now we'll move to item 16. Would you please me? The item report from Development Services. Recommendation to request city attorney to prepare ordinances to designate 1005 Locust Avenue and 141143 East 10th Street as historic landmarks District one. Just to go on. You have any comments on this item? It is a day that comes when they have. Hello? Yes, thank you. Vice Mayor. I just wanted to say how excited I am about this item and that it's really it's really important when we make such historic homes and actually put them on the books as a story. This is a beautiful, beautiful place. And I'm so happy to have this district. So thank you. Thank you very much. Do you have a staff report on this item? Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor and members of the city council. We are very delighted to bring this matter to your attention for your review. We are requesting that the city attorney prepare an ordinance to designate the two subject properties as landmark historic designations. With that, Christopher Coons is here to provide additional information. Just briefly, vice mayor, members of the council under the city's Cultural Heritage Ordinance to declare an item, a historic landmark. It can't just be all that it needs to meet certain criteria, either associated with the great work of architecture or associated with persons or events from the city's past. In this case, there is two structures. At 1005 Locust Avenue. The architect that commissioned these works was Horace Austin, who was the first major architect professionally credentialed, an office here in the city of Long Beach. The work was commissioned by Charles Buffon, who was a prominent business person, owner of the bar from retail store, a civic leader, and also mayor from 1921 to 1924. And the house was built in 1905 as an intact example of the Edwardian architectural style. The second structure on the lot, that duplex served as the residence of Walter Porterfield, who was instrumental in bringing telephone service to the city of Long Beach. And it was built in 1901 and is the oldest building, is one of the oldest buildings in the city and one of the last remaining examples of the four square architecture style. There's additional interesting information in your agenda packet if you're interested in local history. And this nomination came from the property owner. It received no opposition and it was approved by the Cultural Heritage Commission on February 25th of this year. Thank you. Fine. We have a person in second in this item. We please take a call. Can we get a seconder on this item? Yes, you I think what I think we were expecting it. Thank you. District one. High district to. District three. I. District four. I. District five. It. District six by District seven II, District eight. District nine. All right. Motion carries.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to draft a resolution providing for a 60-day temporary amnesty program waiving late penalty fees for pet licenses for residents of Community Development Block Grant-designated areas; Request City Attorney to draft a resolution providing for a 60-day temporary waiver on new pet license fees for residents of Community Development Block Grant-designated areas; and Request City Manager to work with City staff to investigate the feasibility of utilizing available funding sources as potential offsets for any loss of revenue resulting from the temporary amnesty program and pet license fee waiver.

LongBeachCC_05242022_22-0600

Okay. We're going to go back to our normal order. Item 20, please. I am 20 is the communication from Councilman Austin recommendation to request a resolution providing for a 60 day temporary amnesty program, waiving late penalty and new pet license fees, and investigate the feasibility of utilizing available funding sources as potential offset for any loss of revenues resulting from the temporary amnesty program and pet license fee waiver. Thank you. So I'll go ahead. Move forward. So the COVID 19 pandemic has brought upon many increased new furry family members for many Long Beach residents. Municipal code currently requires that all cats and dogs older than four months be licensed by the city to ensure local pets are vaccinated against rabies and spayed or neutered. Further pet licensing helps. Our Animal Care Services team more easily reunite lost pets with their owners, creating better outcomes for animals and their families as the 4th of July approaches. Residents should expect an uptick in lost pets and be prepared if their owners become or their own pets become lost. However, for residents in CDBG designated areas, costs associated with pet licensing and license renewal can act as a barrier to registering animals comprised of low to moderate income individuals and families. These federally recognized communities have also been hit hardest by the COVID 19 pandemic to remove financial hurdles and promote increased pet licensing in our most vulnerable communities . I'm proposing a 60 day amnesty program for late license renewal fees and a waiver of new pet license fees in all CDBG zones. And I think this is pretty straightforward. I would ask that my colleagues support me on this item and support our communities. Councilmember Urunga. I support the. Motion and applauded. The second did no further comment behind the council dais. Are there any public comment on this item? No public comment. Wow. We're going to go ahead and take a vote. Members, please vote. The motion is carried. Like how this meeting is moving right along. Item 24, please.

A proclamation proclaiming November 16, 2018 as a day to remember and condemn the lynching, by burning, of sixteen-year-old, African American, Preston "John" Porter, Jr. on November 16, 1900 and to acknowledge the city of Denver's complicity in his torturous death.

DenverCityCouncil_11052018_18-1294

Thank you. And thank you for bringing that forward. Councilwoman Black, we have one other proclamation this evening. Councilman Brooks, will you please read Proclamation 1294? Yes, Mr. President. And before I read it, I just want to just state that I know we do proclamations a lot and they've just become, you know, common habit. And but even the proclamation we just read, there's important lives at stake in this proclamation that I'm about to read is probably one of the toughest that I've ever read. And I just want to just let folks know that. Just warn you that it's pretty graphic and that folks have experience, much like we did the indigenous day of indigenous people day that in this city there has been extreme atrocities and we as a city have been complicit to it. And so here's another one. Proclamation 1294 This is a proclamation proclaiming November 16th as 2018 as a day to remember and condemn the lynching by burning of a 16 year old boy. African-American Preston John Porter Jr on November 16. On November 16, 1900. And to acknowledge the city of Denver's complicity in his torturous death. Whereas the city and county of Denver recognizes Preston Porter Jr. Short life was ended by racial terrorism and a miscarriage of justice. Justice involving brutal violence at the hands of a white mob and a criminal justice system that failed him. Acknowledging his lynching calls for a process of truth and reconciliation and the continued struggle for justice. And. Whereas, Preston Porter, Jr, a railroad worker from Lawrence, Kansas, was arrested on suspicion and accused of the rape and murder of Luis Frost near Limon, Colorado. Preston was held in Denver City in a Denver City jail, along with his father and brother for four days. During much of the time, he was tortured in order to coerce a confession. No trial took place, furthering the miscarriage of justice. And. WHEREAS, it's widely known that Preston would be lynched if he were to return to Lyman. The Topeka, Kansas Daily Capital on Tuesday, November 13, 1900. Three days prior to the lynching reported, the sheriff declares his intention to take Porter back to Lincoln County. And although it is certain that he will be Lynch and probably burned upon his arrival there. Whereas Preston Porter Jr was sent by train from Denver to Hugo, Colorado, the county seat of Lincoln County for trial. Although he would never arrived there, he was forcibly taken from the train just outside of Lyman at Lake Station by an angry mob from the Lyman area, as well as people from Denver and Colorado Springs who had traveled there to watch the lynching in Lyman Preston Porter Jr was Lynch by being chained to a steel rail, then burned to death. With the first match being struck by the father of Luis for us. And. Whereas, The City and county of Denver designates November 1628 as the day in which the injustice done to Preston Porter Jr can be fully acknowledged and his death be more, whereas it can be acknowledged that an injustice. Was also done to Luis for us because the absence of due process of law and honest police work, her murderer was not confirmed and found guilty of the crimes against her. And. Whereas, PRESTON WHEREAS This Proclamation represents an important step in the journey towards reconciliation, where wrongs can be admitted and the painful absence of justice can be acknowledged. Reconciliation requires complete, complete truths. And Preston Porter Jr's death reveals the bitter truth that Denver had an active role in facilitating racial violence and injustice and prior to now has done little to acknowledge its complicity. Now, therefore, let it be proclaimed by the city and county of Denver. Section one to the Council of the City and County of Denver proclaims November 16, 2018, as a day to remember and condemn the lynching by the burning of 16 year old African-American Preston John Porter Jr. And November 16th, at November 16th, 1900. And to acknowledge the city of Denver's complicity of his death, Section two that the clerk in the city and county of Denver shall attacks in affix a seal of city encounter, deliver the proclamation and be transmitted to Equal Justice Initiative. In Montgomery, Alabama, two representatives of Preston Porter's Jr's family. Thank you. Councilman Brooks, your motion to adopt. Yeah. Move that proclamation to four. Be adopted. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of Council Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. This is definitely one of the hardest proclamations that I have read and. You know, I just want to say first that Councilman Cashman through Judy Ohman, brought this forward to the city and county of Denver, and I was happy to read it. But as I read it and talk about Preston. I got to also talk about Emmett Till, and I also have to talk about the thousands of other lynched bodies, black bodies all over our country, the unnamed bodies all over our country. And I've been we as a as an office have been putting this together all week long. And. There's just a great deal of responsibility. And even reading this. Because. We are proclaiming today that Preston John be remembered and he be remembered well. And as an African-American serving as an elected official here, I realized that I stand on his body, on his shoulders and what he suffered and the violence he suffered because of the color of his skin. See, the thing about Emmett Till and and Preston John is that they didn't commit any crime. And the only crime that they commit committed is being black. And for that. We should feel a lot of shame. A lot of people want to talk about equity in this day and age, but you can't have equity without real reconciliation and an acknowledgment of. The tragedies, the terrorism. That has existed in our own city. And so this was an effort in this proclamation to admit that. And as a part of the leadership of this city say that was wrong. And we cast that down and we're going a different direction and we're acknowledging. That Preston John Porter should have been dealt with differently. And I hope that by giving this proclamation to his family, there will be some bit of redemption. And so I thank you. I think all the folks who are working in this field and brought this forward to us to be able to read it in front of this council in the record as as proof. The government does change that. We can change that reconciliation is possible and that we can denounce hate in our community. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Brooks, Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank my friend Judy Allman for bringing this difficult topic before city council. And thank Councilman Brooks for doing the digging into this topic so deeply and doing such a indepth, fine job on that proclamation. All I wanted to add, coincidentally, my granddaughter is a 14 year old white American, goes to a private school. And coincidentally, this week, her entire eighth grade class is on a civil rights pilgrimage in the Deep South. They'll go from Selma to Montgomery. They'll walk the Edmund Pettus Bridge. They'll go to the National Memorial of Peace and Justice, which is the official name for the Lynching Museum in Montgomery, Alabama. They'll go to the Ebenezer Ammi Baptist Church. And I just think it's it's so important. I wish I'd have been able to make that that journey. And I wish every child in our country could make that journey is simply because, as has been said so many times, if we don't face the past, if we don't learn from our mistakes of the past intimately, then we are doomed to repeat them. And this is a part of our past. We can't even give a chance to let slip by into the present. So thank you again, Councilman. Thank you, Miss Allman. And thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Brooks, for bringing this proclamation. Forward. I'm glad that. I will put this on the record. I'm glad it's going to be in the written history in word of the city. So. Thank you for bringing it forward. I think you know someone who. Represents a district that a lot of Mexicanos. We understand. We stand in solidarity. In this state, we've seen the hanging and the execution and the lynching of our African-American brothers and sisters, our indigenous brothers and sisters. Our Mexican brothers and sisters are full of folks who stood up for labor and fought for wages and fought for fair working places, men and women. And very little has been done to acknowledge not just the city, but this the states. Complacency with it. And I'm glad that at least. This proclamation has has. And we'll continue to be on our record in this city if it is passed. And I just have to say that it is much more than just discussion. We hear a lot about discussion about how we in social justice and its action. It's a proclamation like this. It's every day where we work and make sure that folks are represented and represented well and we stand up for the humanity. I think this is you know, I don't want to know how. This isn't the past. There's still African-American and Mexican people and women who are being killed. There's still folks in this country who are being shot and murdered in our streets just because of the color of their skin. Because they're black. We have to do more. This is an a very important proclamation, I believe, Councilman Brooks, because it doesn't just recognize something that's in our past, but something that we can correct today. And we can correct today in our governance, we can correct today in our society by standing up for people who are oppressed. Who are being murdered in the streets of their own city. Who are being murdered in synagogues. Right. So this is something that is definitely. A yes vote in my book and in a city who? Quite frankly, still has a neighborhood named after. One of our mayors who joined the KKK. My police chief. In Denver, who was a Klansman. And those pictures of them rolling down and file masses in Larimer. This isn't something that's just so far removed. This is something that we have to correct. So thank you, Councilman Brooks, for for bringing this forward. I wholeheartedly in solidarity stand with you on this proclamation. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. And thank you, Councilman Cashman and Councilman Brooks, for bringing this forward. Madam Secretary, Raquel Brooks. A black. Eye. Espinosa. Flynn All right. Gilmore, i. Herndon, I. Cashman. Kenny Lopez. I knew. Ortega. I assessment i. Mr. President. All right. I'm secretary. Please close voting. Announce the results. 3939 as proclamation 1294 has been adopted. Councilman Brooks, is there someone you'd like to bring up? Yeah. You know, we have two individuals in the audience. I want to bring up. Penny Goodman is with the Episcopal Church of Colorado and is a member of the Race Task Force, as well as the Episcopal Peace Fellowship. So come on up. And then Elizabeth Epps is the founder and co-founder of the Denver Justice Project and Colorado Freedom Fund, in which she was established and helps bail out poor folks out of jail. Go ahead, Penny. Okay. Mr. President, are we permitted call response at city council? I'm sorry. Call and response. So if I said if I asked you to repeat after me. Are we allowed to do that? Is that permissible? I will check with our attorney. No one has ever asked me that question before. Yeah, it seems like a resounding yes there. No. So seeing. Seeing. No objection. Okay. No, seriously. So I'm going to say something and then I'll say it with me. Kirsten? Kirsten Crawford Legislative Counsel I think that's fine. We don't respond to questions, but it's fine to do this exercise. Okay. Thank you. So it is our duty to fight for our freedom. And for our freedom. Freedom, it is our duty to win. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. And support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains. We have nothing to lose. Thank you for for giving us that. And it was given to us by a woman name, Assata Shakur. And as I turn this over to my sister, I mentor an elder community leader I want to mention. So this shirt of mine. I would have brought you all each one. But I know there's ethical rules, gifts, rules. I had a chance to take the tour last week to be in Montgomery, Alabama, to visit the Legacy Museum. I get shaky, even saying it, and to visit the memorial, you need to do it when you can. As you walk all through these aisles, the Alabama section is deep. The Mississippi rows are long. He spent a lot of time walking through the Carolina markers with name after name of black woman and brown woman and men who were lynched in the South. But sure enough, you get to Colorado. And I want it to be the case that Colorado wasn't there, but Colorado is. And there's two names. And one of them is the young man we have a chance to honor tonight. I think, Judy, I think all of you I think Mr. Cashman. And I want to remind you, when we think about a proclamation and we think about the words of Assata Shakur, that our proclamation is empty, if in a hundred years our great grandchildren are here doing something similar for some other offense. So words matter. This proclamation matters. And I really appreciate this opportunity to honor young Mr. Porter. On behalf of the Colorado Community Remembrance Project. And those who have been have suffered. Lynching at the hands of vigilante groups, especially president john. Ford Jr. I'd like to thank the City of Denver for recognizing November 16, 2018 on President Border Day. It is a paramount importance that the victims of lynching be brought to the attention of the people of this city, of this state, and of this nation. We have too long been unaware of and or ignored those who have suffered in this tortured manner. I'm a long time resident of the Denver metro area, and in spite. Of. Learning a lot and studying a lot about lynching in the South. I am woefully ignorant of the lynchings it took place in my beloved state. Also, I'm a mother and I'm a grandmother. And as such, I have been long, painfully aware of how African-Americans can be killed and injured by those who have sworn to protect and deserve . We have a new form of lynching. At hand? No. And unless we are. Aware. Of our horrendous past, we are bound to. Repeat and continue these acts into the future. Maybe by beginning with the support of our local officials, we can begin the long journey toward awareness. Then, maybe some day, these horrible practices will become a thing of the past. Thank you for becoming a part of this cause. Thank you both so much. Thank you for being here. Thank you, Brooke. Right. Hard to move on from that, but we have some business we need to get to. So resolutions. Madam Secretary, please read the resolution titles.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare resolution to support fair and free union elections for Starbucks workers in Long Beach.

LongBeachCC_05172022_22-0571

Thank you. We're going to go ahead and go back now to item 29. Communication from Councilwoman Allen, Councilwoman and has Vice Mayor Richardson recommendation to request city attorney to prepare a resolution to support fair and free union elections for Starbucks workers in Long Beach. Councilman Allen. Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I want to start by clarifying that we submitted this item on Friday prior prior to the vote totals being announced. And the Starbucks and Belmont Shore is still in the process now are preparing a union election. And we want to support them and we want to support all the workers across our great city. So now to get now to the to the good part, I want to say congratulations to the Starbucks at Seventh and Redondo on their unanimous ballot last Friday. Just great job. I know that we have Mads and Taylor here and some others are here. So thank you for being here tonight. I just want to say that your courage in defying an international corporation who has already deployed harmful and possible illegal union busting tactics is commendable. Our community and our council stand up for workers and for local protections. And your example will hopefully inspire workers across the city and across the region. I just want to say thank you to Vice Mayor Richardson and Councilwoman Zendejas for joining me on this item. I know both of you have always supported a worker empowerment. I also want to challenge our entire council to support the fundamental rights of workers to organize. With the unanimous vote on this item. I'm happy when we get to support people empowering themselves, empowering their families, and empowering their communities. And I am definitely personally energized by all the work that's been done by the organizers and this item. I submitted covers, but everything I submitted covers most of my thoughts. And. But it doesn't start here. A union is a tool by which workers can directly hold their distant corporate leaders accountable for good working conditions, equitable pay and treatment. And it directly is a tool of democracy and the empowerment of people locally. So to the brave Starbucks workers from Long Beach and Lakewood in the audience tonight, thank you for your courage and thank you for your example. Thank you, Councilwoman. Vice Mayor Richardson. Sure. Thank you. That was beautifully said, Councilwoman. I agree. I think all work has dignity and something I believe. You know, I've seen what it's like to have, you know, a parent, you know, raising a household parent with a good union job while still seeing what it's like to have a parent who works fast food. My mom worked at Arby's when I was in high school, and it's a big difference. And the reality is, you know, that job my mom had earlier in life as a welder on the assembly line, that job, those exist to the same sort to the same extent. You know, my mom had a GED when she got that job. And so there is a shift into service based work. That's the majority of our workforce now. And for someone, you know, we think of these Starbucks jobs as, hey, these are just college students are going to work here for a few months or work through a summer. It's just not the reality. You know, folks are baristas for for, you know, quite some time until they find a better circumstance or some people do it because they love it. But if you believe that all work has dignity and you believe that we have fundamental rights of organizing and this is a no brainer, this is you know, when you're down in your economy, one of the things that's always worked is being able to form a union and advocate for yourself, particularly in a downturn in the environment of an economy. And that's what this is really about. So I'm proud of those workers for stepping up. I know that there was, you know, a lot of controversy and pressure, but you stepped up and you advocate it for yourself and you have improved the profession and the industry because of your courage and leadership. And so I personally just want to say thank you. There's a Starbucks in every council district in Long Beach. And I'll tell you, you know, I like independent coffee, but I like it to be the coffee. But when you open up a Starbucks and I know those are good union jobs, I'm going to support that Starbucks as well. So you actually help Starbucks as well by taking this step. And so thank you so much. And I encourage and I vote. Thank you, Councilwoman Sato. Yes. I want to just thank Councilwoman Allen for uplifting our Starbucks workers who've been is the firs who are really the trailblazer in forming a union at Starbucks. You know, as a former labor organizer, I can certainly attest to how scary and how much courage and faith it takes to know that not only do your coworkers, you have to have your coworkers support, but the public support, too. And so this is a great item to show that the council also stand with them and they stand for work and that we stand for workers. Right. And the ability for everyone to have a safe working condition or condition, equitable treatment and fair pay. So I ask and I agree with Vice Mayor Richards and I have a Starbucks. No way. They don't have a Starbucks in my district anymore. Yeah, it's in the council district seven now, but there is one that does happen in my district. I do hope that it leads. They follow the path as well. So thank you. That's great. Thank you. Councilman Austin. Thank you so much. Certainly support this. This is a very easy item to get behind. For the last three decades or more, I've committed my my work, my professional work, but also my activism to organizing and supporting collective bargaining. And so in this particular day and age, Starbucks and other industries are now going to be unionized because people recognize the importance of having collective strength and a collective voice in a democratic process. And so I am very, very elated for the workers at Starbucks. I salute you, the brave individuals who stepped forth to do this. And I believe that you'll see a bold wave of support and other organizing efforts happening throughout Southern California as a result of the work that's happening here at our Starbucks here in Long Beach. So congratulations and certainly support this. I support, you know, fair elections and the opportunity for workers to organize without interference or reprisal or any sort of coercion from from from management. Thank you. Thank you. Come to me, Ringo. Thank you. And thank you, Councilmember Allen, for bringing this forward. And congratulations to the store workers at the store in Redondo and Seventh. I had an. Opportunity to meet with them before they. Took the vote. Certainly I was there to encourage them and thank them for their courage. It's not easy to take that type of a chance while you're still employed. We know what the ramifications have been in the past and that certainly is a bold. Move on their part. There now appears to be a groundswell of other stores trying to get that kind of union representation. And I wish them all well. And with my new Starbucks in my new seventh District, I am certainly hopeful that they will also follow suit. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate all the comments tonight. And this item. I especially like the comment by Councilwoman Allen and Councilman Austin regarding a free, fair and just election process and free from any retaliation or retribution. I've been public employee union member for over 20 years. My mother retired as a 40 year member, as a union employed with L.A. Unified School District. And I think the process should always be fair. It should not be interfered with, and people should have a right to advocate for better conditions. So thank you for bringing this item and for the update regarding the Belmont Shore location. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I'm sorry customers that they have said. Did you have your are you queued through the system? Okay. Just just cue on the on the phone system if you can, ideally. But that's okay. Go ahead. Councilman's in the house and then Councilman Mongo. Thank you, Mayor. I just also want to lend my congratulations to the Starbucks workers. So very proud of you. I really do believe that it is essential for us as city leaders to unite and work to ensure that folks are guaranteed safe working conditions and a living wage. Equitable pay and treatment should no longer be an exception, but rather the standard for everyone. I applaud all the brave workers who have united to have United in this effort. And in their workplace to make sure that they give them better and better working conditions. I strongly support this item and I strongly support all workers who wish to uphold their right to unionize. So I'm with all of my colleagues here today to say congratulations and keep up the good work. I know that that particular Starbucks has a special place in my heart because I used to live right around the corner from it. And I'm really, really hoping that the three Starbucks that are in my district will follow suit. That will be a very good day for me. So thank you very much. And congratulations again. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I want to echo the comments of my colleagues, especially about a fair and just election process. And then I also just want to shed some light on a particular but already gives that may not be of real value to a majority of Starbucks employees, but I hope that should they move forward with the unionization, that they don't just advocate for the needs of the many, but the few that work there as well. As an older mom, I've been in many support groups with moms who have tried to get pregnant. And one of the things that they talk about is the extreme, the high costs of the in-vitro fertilization process. And a lot of the costs are out of reach for families. And so moms have chosen to go back to work at Starbucks part time because Starbucks gives a very, very robust and supportive mother program for IVF and they pay for it. For those moms that I know, that's not typically something unions really push for because there are so few women that it is a value to. But I know that to the women who have had that opportunity, it's just something that I hope that the employees keep in mind as they move forward, that that there are very unique benefits that they've received through the years. And I hope they continue to advocate for those unique benefits in addition to or not at the risk of the bigger picture. Thank you. Thank you. Before I call public comment, let me just go ahead and just add first. I think, you know, I think the election that just happened obviously here in Long Beach in Lakewood are just incredible testament. Most importantly and almost completely fully to all the workers at these stores and the workers that are organizing across across the country. There's no question that the organizing that's happened has, I think, just been very inspiring to the community for certainly has been to me just to witness how the organizing happened, the backup and support they got from so many members of the community and really being able to also share kind of the experiences that led the workers to really demand the dignity in the workplace and benefits and fair pay and the conversation that's happening across the country, particularly around Starbucks and so many other large corporations in the country. I'll also just add as a reminder that if we want to continue to improve any workplace, the best way to do so is to form a union. If you want to make sure that you move forward rights at the workplace, whether they're for LGBTQ people, whether they're for women, whether they're for for folks of all ages. The best way to do so is for the workers to form a union. And so any time you have an organized workforce in place, you almost always have a more just workplace for those that are there. And so a huge congratulations to the workers. I look forward to this being an inspiration. The work that the workers have have started across the city and more broadly across the country. And I just want to congratulate them as well. And if there's any public comment, we'll take that as well. If there are any members of the public that would like to speak on item 29 and person, please line up at the podium. 30 members of the public that would like to speak in Zoom. Please use the raise hand feature or dial star nine. In person. You have 3 minutes. Bay District six resident I appreciate the comments of the Council, Mayor. With respect to unionization, efforts for Starbucks and the fight for workers is a fight for all. I think we all can recognize that for the most part. However, I would be remiss if, as both as a taxpayer in the city and as a worker in this city, that I couldn't use this very odd opportunity to reference the ongoing workers fights with the city of Lumberton itself. I'm speaking specifically towards the court case of the black city workers. What Medina or Twine represent representing them? I mean, it's kind of odd the idea that, you know, we're in support of workers in the private sector, but not in support of workers in the public sector. Black city workers are for those that are watching. You know, they have a class action lawsuit against the city of Long Beach right now. You know, I'm related to one of those people connected in that lawsuit right now. And so, you know, there's the L.A. Times wrote an exposé about this just last year. And this is an ongoing lawsuit I'm sure everyone in this room is very familiar with. And, you know, just as much as we want you guys to come out and support in the private sector the efforts of unionization and that work, we also want to see the support going on with the fact that black workers in the city have been under, looked at, overlooked in promotion efforts and haven't been allowed to rise in the ranks as their white counterparts. You know, 58% are sorry. 65% of all black city workers and the city of Long Beach make under $60,000. There's there's there are price unions that are racial, not just gender rights, but racial. And until it's reflective of more positivity, relation to black advancement in the city, I mean, it's, it's, it's highly hypocritical to hear from the city as a whole. And so I just hope that we can do better for, you know, workers in the private sector. And I hope that we can do better for black workers here in the public sector. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. Hi there. My name's Tyler. I'm the lead organizer from the legal location and a resident here in Long Beach. I, first of all, want to thank you all for your kind words around this resolution. It means a lot to me as somebody who has had to face an extreme amount of union busting in my store while also supporting little Long Beach location. I really need the to pass. This has to go. We need it because it needs to stand as the shining example, both for Lakewood, for when we start organizing other stores, as well as every other store in the rest of the state, as well as the rest of the country. Starbucks has spent an uncanny amount of money hiring littler Mendelson, an absolutely terrible lawyer firm with a long history of union busting. And they have sidestepped the law as many times as they've been possible and have been met, obviously, with the resistance to that. However, the company has refused to obviously sign the fair and free election principles that we very, very need them to sign. It is integral. So again, thank you for your kind words, but this fight needs to go as big as we can make it as well. So passing this is integral. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, honorable mayor and City Council. I'm Natalie Gonzalez, president of the Long Beach City Employees Union. I am a local Long Beach, 1930 and District two resident. I want to thank Councilwoman Allen and Vice Mayor Rex Richardson and Councilwoman Sun has for championing this resolution and supporting workers rights to organize here in Long Beach and the right to fair and free union elections. Organizing is a very work of democracy. We know that unions play a pivotal role in our communities, economy and in the quality of life for working families. Unions help workers and their communities retain the value of their labor, set boundaries with their employers, and maintain worker protections and safety. Quite frankly, it pays to have a union in your workplace. And so with that, a mighty congratulations to Starbucks Workers United who organize their workplace in the face of an employer who has not hesitated to retaliate against union organizers again and again. And yet they persisted. They succeeded. Their efforts will reverberate through our Long Beach community. I want to wish Starbucks workers united good luck in negotiating your first contract. It is a grueling process, and so I encourage you to stay vigilant and to fight for every inch Long Beach City leadership and your city employees stand behind you. I am excited that Long Beach City Council supports our workers so strongly. It matters. I, for one, look forward to the same kind of energy as we enter our union contract negotiations next year. But for now, this moment is for the workers. Congratulations. Starbucks workers throughout Long Beach and the surrounding communities to the amazing baristas fighting the good fight. Keep it up. Keep going. And we're with you in solidarity. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. Once again, good evening, mayor garcia. Members of the council. Rob no tough policy director, los angeles county federation of labor. And I'm here to speak on behalf of President Ron Herrera. When we just say that Long Beach is a union town and nobody who works full time should have to live in poverty or close to it. And that's what today is really about. When we talk about these brave baristas like Tyler and everybody else that he works with, they should be commended for what they're doing because it's a historic and heroic effort that they're really taking part on. And let me explain why. When we talk about baristas and we talk about service sector workers in general, the public oftentimes abides by allowing, assuming that they should be receiving low wages, barely above minimum wage. And despite this body really fighting to raise the minimum wage several years ago, which should be obviously commended, it's still not enough . And what Tyler and their coworkers are doing is to make sure that they are really making forcing all of us to really challenge and rethink norms about why shouldn't a barista be able to have a living wage job? Why shouldn't they be able to have life saving benefits? And why shouldn't they be able to have a dignified job? So again, we applaud them for challenging norms because they're making us think beyond this. And it doesn't just start with Starbucks, but it actually moves beyond to Amazon workers and to other workers in our service sectors who we vitally depend on. As everybody here said, all work has dignity. So why shouldn't they receive dignified wages and a dignified lifestyle on the job? So with that said, the work is still going to be challenging. I appreciate everybody, everybody's support for a fair and free election, but we're already seeing a lot of dirty tactics being played by Starbucks, where they're offering new raises and benefits to the nonunion sites and saying, we can't do that for our union sites. It's already happening. So we would as we venture into the next grueling part of this, which is actually securing a real contract, that's where the rubber is going to hit the road. And we look forward to the support of this body because when we talk about equity and we talk about trying to transform society, it all begins in the workplace. If you want to see immigrants rights, join a union negotiating or collective bargaining agreement, if you want to see racial justice, join a union, negotiate it in the workplace , and negotiate a collective bargaining agreement in your workplace. It all comes full circle in the workplace. So we appreciate everybody's support. We urge you all, obviously, to vote yes on this item and to the workers at Starbucks. Welcome to Union Town. Thank you. Before we take a vote, we just need one minute because we've lost audio or the connection with our three members that are calling in. Is that right? Yes. Our team is working right now to establish a connection. I believe people can hear us in the zoom. I'm not sure if we can hear them. Mary, can you still. I think we need to reestablish the audio connection if we can. Justin So we're going to reestablish the connection, then we'll go to the vote as soon as we get that established. Can any of the council women hear or speak right now? Not yet. Okay. So I'm just being I'm being told that the reconnection might take a minute or two. And so per the attorney, we actually have to pause until we get the connection on the audio. Is that correct? That is correct. Under the new. Rules for three, maybe 361, we were required to suspend the meeting until it's. Restored. Okay. So we'll go ahead and suspend the meeting till it's restored. And maybe, maybe what we'll do is we'll just take a two minute recess, apologize, everyone, but we'll take the vote as soon as it's restored. All right, Mary. When you think about the. If any other council women can hear us, can you please acknowledge? Yes, I can hear you. Thank you, Mary. Thank you. I think that we have restored the connection. Is that right? Okay. We're going to go ahead and restart the meeting. We've restored connection. And so with that, I'm calling the meeting back to order. I believe we first need to do a roll call of the meeting and then we'll go into the roll call of the vote. Madam Clerk councilman's in Dallas. I sent Councilwoman Allen a present. Councilman Price. And then councilman super now. Councilwoman Mango. Here. Councilwoman Sara present. Councilmember Durango. Present. Councilman Austin. Your Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Yeah. Thank you. And now we will take the vote, which will also be a roll call. District one, district two I. District three. I. District four. District five. By. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. By District nine. I. Motion is carried. Eight zero. Thank you. Now we're moving on to item 22, which is the charter committee recommendation.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2520 Wewatta Way and 2901 Broadway in Five Points. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from C-MX-16, DO-7 and C-MX-8, DO-7 to C-MX-8, DO-7 and C-MX-16, DO-7 (aligns urban center zoning with surrounding districts), located at 2520 Wewatta Way and 2901 North Broadway Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 7-21-20.

DenverCityCouncil_08312020_20-0708

I'm hoping that Council Bill 0708 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 20 Dash 0708 is open. May we have the staff report, please? Certainly. Thank you, Madam President. And good evening, city Council. I'm Fran Schaffer, presenting an amendment application for 2521 way and 2901 Broadway rezoning from CMH 807 and CMCs 1607 to CMI 1607. And CMCs eight. Deo seven. The subject properties are located in Council District nine within the Five Points neighborhood. Again, this request is for Cemex eight and Cemex 16, which is urban center neighborhood context mixed use eight and 16 stories of maximum height. Both of these include design overlay seven. The subject properties are currently vacant on the east, with the multi-unit residential project under construction on the West. The total area to be zoned is approximately 20000 to 27000 square feet and the request is to align the zone lots with the recently reconfigured ownership parcels. First, it is analysis. This is a net down zoning, with more area being rezoning to an eight story district versus a 16 story district and the vacant property at 2901 Broadway is real adjacent and has underwent a consent review plan with development services. Impacts to the project based on real proximity will be evaluated as part of the site development plan process. The current zoning on the subject property is BMX eight and CMH 16 with the don't have an overlay zoning to the southwest and east is generally I be you are to which is happy industrial with the port use overlay while the zoning to the north is residential mixed use in the form of army 30 with flavors and conditions. Concurrent with this rezoning, CPD also amended the De Nada Market Design Standards and guidelines. This DSG was approved in 2008 and as you can see in the screenshot, the boundary was not inclusive of the entirety of the subject. Property is an area to be resolved. CPD presented these amendments at a virtual public hearing on July 22nd and received final approval and signature from the CPD executive director and city attorney prior to today's public hearing. Current land users on the site, as they previously mentioned, are vacant and multi-unit residential under construction. Transportation land use is in the form of commercial and commuter rail exist on the southern and eastern edges of the subject site, while industrial and multi-unit residential uses are found to the north and the west. These photos give you a sense of building performance scale in the area with the subject properties on the top left, in the bottom right. The other photos depict the multi-unit residential projects across the waterway. This list comparison table shows the design standard differences between the proposed down districts. As you can see, they are the same except for maximum height in stories and feet. Also, the inclusion of the D7 overlay includes more stringent built to transparency and ground for activation requirements and greater detail. And those standards can be found in the staff report. Speaking to the process. Information on the rest of this application was sent in late November when board voted unanimously to move the application forward at their July 15 meeting. As I previously stated, staff amended the general market design standards and guidelines, and they were adopted on August 17. Notice that tonight's public hearing was set on August 10th and the property was properly noticed as a present. Staff has received two letters of support from nearby red registered neighborhood organizations, and no letters of opposition were received. Now moving on to the criteria. These are the three plans that impact the subject property. The proposed rezoning is consistent with many of the comprehensive plan 2040 strategies, which are organized by a vision element. This rezoning would allow for mixed use development near downtown, which is consistent with the equitable, affordable and inclusive goals and strategies. Similarly, the retaining of the seven overlay will require enhanced building forms and intensity consistent with the desire for an urban, walkable and mixed use community, fitting into many strategies and goals within the strong and authentic neighborhoods. Vision element. Lastly, the land use patterns mentioned are related to a number of strategies in the environmentally resilient element, and therefore staff finds the request to be consistent with Plan 2040. Moving to Blueprint Denver The subject property is mapped as part of the Urban Center Neighborhood context. This context is described as having a high mixed abuses with good street activation, and buildings in this context are usually multistory with a high degree of coverage. So the proposed zone district and overlay allow for a mix of uses and more stringent building forms that contribute to constructive activation. Proposed presenting to an urban center. Neighborhood context is appropriate and consistent with blueprints. Context Map. Future places. MAP designates such a property as high residential area, aspirational characteristics of high residential areas and an urban center neighborhood context include having prevalent commercial uses and tall buildings with high coverage. Consistent with this guidance, the proposed districts and design overlay provide for a mix of uses stringent building firm standards that create active street level presence and or waterway as a local or a designated street. If it does connect to Argo Street, which is classified as a mixed use collector, the street type supports a varied mix of uses , including retail, office, residential and restaurants. Again in the proposed zone districts with the D7 overlay will for mixed residential and commercial uses at an intensity and orientation consistent with the street type designations. Moving to the growth area strategy subject property map is again a high residential area within an urban center neighborhood context. These areas are anticipated to see 15% of new housing growth and 5% of new employment growth by 2040. Of the employment growth in this kind of an area has been determined to be most appropriate. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with a blueprint of this growth strategy. The third plan is the River North Plan, which was adopted by City Council in 2003. The designated area has residential mixed use and includes specific recommendations for this area, including facilitating the redevelopment of the market area into an exciting mixed use community. The plan recommends residential mixed use zoning, commercial mixed use zoning or a combination of both. The proposed zone districts are consistent with the recommendations of this plan. By allowing residential office and retail uses in a pedestrian friendly form the design and build to requirements of the zone districts in conjunction with the River North Design Overlay would ensure an urban form compatible with new pedestrian oriented development. The proposed rezoning meets the next two criteria, as it will result in the uniform application of zoned district building, form, use and design regulations while also furthering public health, safety and welfare. This will be achieved primarily through the implementation of adopted plans and facilitating density near services and amenities that are close to downtown. Recent physical changes within close proximity to the subject site, including three new apartment buildings in the immediate area and the completion of the reconstruction of Boulevard serve to justify this rezoning. The character of River North and Tanaka Market in particular is rapidly changing, and the rezoning request is justified to recognize the changing conditions. Additionally, the application of supplemental zoning regulations in the form of design overlay seven submitted justifying. Overall, the proposed MAP amendment is consistent with the neighborhood context, district purpose and intent statements for the Max eight, BMX 16 and the design overlay district. CPD recommends approval based on planning. All review criteria have been met. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Brandon. Council has not received any written testimony on Council Bill 708 and tonight we have nine speakers signed up and our first speaker is Megan Turner. All right. It looks like it's going to be Chase Hill. Good evening. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead, Chase. City of members. Thank you for your time. I'll go to the first five or so slides and hand it over to Meghan on a Chase Hill. My address is 2924. Wind up through Denver, Colorado. Two, two, one, one. I am the owner of these parcels in my company. I guess I should say that first foremost, I am going through attachment number 12 that was attached to the agenda. The title of that is Applicant Materials City Council Rezoning Presentation Final. So if you can go along with me, that would be great. I'll try to provide enough color for those of you. So my company, Cyber Solution Advisors was founded in 1995 and we've been active a track record of success in Denver since 27. Multiple projects of fruition across this land in our group market. On slide three shows an overlay of the original back in 2007. For those who can't see, it is found by South River on the North Wright Boulevard on the east, and then downtown to the south. But it's all from Boulevard Brewer. The address of the two parcels, again at 25, 20, right of way, 20 901 North Broadway. Slide four just show you can see it just shows the site plans for these two phases 25, 23, waterways and construction. Now, that's the eight story. It is topped out. And we took both parcels through Rigzone in the summer of 2017, so four years ago, three years ago, and successfully resumed those properties back in 17. Subsequently, we discovered that the we had to do it all after we rezoning. We did a lot line adjustment and we found out that the zone district boundaries do not move with the change in the zone lot boundaries. We tried to handle this administratively, but the only option to have the zone district boundaries marry up with the zone lines is to go through its own process. So some of you were on council back in 2017 and you might remember these reasons. So we did for our site developed permit and building permit on the West. And if I could run away back in 2017 side of open plan is approving 1219 building permits and August 2018 two years ago it was approved in February 2019 and then we broke ground in spring of 2019. And again, that property is now topped out. The next slide. Shows what we're really actually doing, which is taking the green line, which is the current zone white line. And we're marrying it up with the yellow line, which is the zone district boundary is a net reduction in billable area of 62,000 square feet of up and down zone. Thank you. That's the time that we have allotted chase. And we do have Megan Turner signed up to speak as well. And so we can go ahead and turn it over to Megan. Hello. Good evening. Thank you, Madam President. My name is Megan Turner. I'm with Cami Horner Associates. My address for the record is 1125 17th Street, Suite 1400 Denver 80202 Thank you, Jace. As part of this application, we reached out to a variety of the registered neighborhood organizations and community groups. Our main goal with the outreach was to understand the feedback and provide input from the community as we share the development concept and the design ideas for these parcels. We also wanted to share the sequence and timeline that Chase had mentioned with those groups and those discussions. We have since received four letters of support for the applications before you today. I know Brandon have noted two, but we'll make sure that city staff has all four of those on record as well. With those conversations in mind, we thought it would be valuable to share with you some of the key design elements of the project . So if you're looking at the attachment, Slide seven goes through some of those. So open space and a pickleball. Court were key design considerations. From the public input, the development team has decided to make that amenity public. Additionally, the street level activation along Tanaka Street and Waterway is lined with public uses of retail and restaurant space, consistent with both the design guidelines and activation and transparency goals. Local art will also thoughtfully be incorporated into both projects. The dam for building will also have large scale pieces by local muralists and the spaces are intended to be used to showcase some of the local artwork, as you may see alongside the state of play in the art galleries there. Additionally, we appreciate the feedback shared by Councilwoman Ortega when we reached out on another project regarding the proximity to the adjacent rail brand and noted that that would be something of a view through that process, which we are already well through and we've reviewed the information and made sure to incorporate the best practices into the project design . In summary, we wanted to share some notes as we wrap up our Alcan portion here starting in 2016 and concluding the summer of 2017. Both the Dam three and Dam four sites for rezone to support the CMC and CMC's 16 zone districts with the initial alignment. The Dam three project is under construction now of course, topping out in the final ESDP processing and building permit for the M4 is currently under review. One thing that we wanted to reinforce tonight is that the zone changes being discussed here are consistent with the original intent, but as own changes back from 2017, the net effect of the applications before you result in a reduction in buildable area of over 60,000 square feet. In wrap up, we appreciate the opportunity to be with you all tonight, as well as the hours and time of dozens of valuable thoughts shared by the community. Thank you, Madam President and Council, for your time and consideration. Thank you. Next up, we have Nola Miguel. Go ahead, Nola. Okay. Sorry, I thought I got kicked up there. Good evening, councilmembers. I just have to say congratulations on an open space really quick. Which means congratulations on that. I wanted to do public comment tonight because ongoing we feel disappointed about the lack of equity being evaluated in any and all of these reasons especially. There's a lot of them happening in our market right now. And what we're talking about at this site is over 300 units, not a single one of them affordable. It seems like that even though this is being presented as the technicality, this is a need that the developer has and a chance for the city to chime in and apply. Blueprint Denver You know, since Blueprint Denver. Granted, we're looking for these inclusive and diverse communities and just not seeing it here. The city has invested a large amounts of money in Bright Boulevard in the 30th in Lake Station and all the infrastructure around that. And we should get something back. We should be getting affordable housing as part of this. We had a meeting, the global response, a development committee had a meeting August 11th. We had five different groups represented, and not a single one of them is supporting this project. We wrote a letter out to council and that didn't get to CPD but were in opposition because of the lack of affordability and that there's no clear benefit to the community in this project. We didn't. The Pickleball court is not a benefit to Globeville neighbors, especially when it's going to be an exclusive thing just meant for the people that can live in those market rate units. Their reasoning for not having affordability is that it doesn't pencil out and that there's no precedent for that. And right now, they nobody else has to do it. So we're just going to keep developing and keep developing market rate units with no affordable units, because that's the precedent that this is setting. So how can how can we shift this? There's several other rezonings coming up. We were also really disappointed not to get any follow up from from the developer. We had a call with them where we suggested a community benefits agreement. We suggested equitable development, affordable development. Even several different types of retail were discussed. And, you know, that wasn't followed up on it at all. So we were disappointed by that as well. And that's it for tonight. Thank you. Nola, thank you for the public record. Would you please reintroduce yourself in your address, please? Sure. My name is Nola Miguel. I'm with the Gas Coalition. My address is 4930 Vallejo Street. Thank you. We have up next, Matt Vince's team. Hello. I'm Matt Barnes. Justine. I'm the director of the Pop. Art. Collective. We're the registered neighborhood organization in the Ballpark District. This project borders the area that. Oh, my address is 2127 Larimer Street resident. And business owner. In addition to. Working with the ballpark collective. And this. Project Borders Ballpark District and Rhino District in the Five Points neighborhood. We met with the project design team and we felt the project. Was in line with our goals to. Protect, improve the safety, health, welfare and quality of life in. The neighborhood. And is in line with other projects and our board. From our perspective, we. Supported it and so. I'm not going to go to the three fourths for 3 minutes, I guess. All right. Great. Thank you, Matt. Up next, Alfonso Espino. We'll get Alfonzo. You unmuted here. Little City Council. My name, for the record is on Point Ospina. I am a member of the GC Coalition and my address is 4716 Gaillard Street and Radio 216. I'm here as a member of my coalition and globally responsive, which is right outside and borders the Five Points neighborhood where this proposed rezoning development is. And I am here to suggest city council and urge and challenge City Council to change the narrative of development, to actually focus on adopting equitable practices when it comes to development. As my colleagues in the College Food Coalition have already pointed out, there is no affordability in the units that are being proposed here. And there was very staunch opposition and a lot of questions posed to the developer, and we are very disappointed that we wouldn't even get an answer back. No follow up. So so that shows that there was actually no community input, despite the fact that we may not be inside of five points on that call that night on August 11th, that was reference to there was a five points. I know. And they are also an agreement that we should reject this proposed rezoning. And I would also just like to say that earlier today or earlier in the presentation, this project is being cited as complying with Blueprint Denver. And I would just like to say that that is false. That is incorrect. And that is a very big stretch, as is outlined in Blueprint Denver on page three. This rezoning request would actually fail to improve access to opportunity in terms of creating more equitable access to quality of life, amenities, health and quality education. And it absolutely fails to address reducing vulnerability to displacement for the surrounding populations and would actually, in fact increase displacement pressures in the surrounding areas. The developer's proposal fails to expand housing diversity, which blueprint Denver correctly points out as important in order to enable more inclusive and actually diverse communities. We do not need more of the homogenous housing stock that has been proposed in the bill and Rachel for the past decade that is has been targeted and has only successfully attracted middle to upper class white individuals. And if the city wants to finally change the narrative on equity, if it finally wants to do something for those that have been left behind when it comes to development, then put a message out tonight and let the developers know that Denver needs to move towards affordability and they need to move away from suggesting that our development should only be concerned about its profits. Thank you. Thank you, Alfonso. Up next, we have Vanessa Quintanilla. And then in the meantime of us getting Vanessa promoted to panelists, we also had Angela Garcia and Gail LaRue, who were signed up. And so I know that we have a couple just phone numbers in the attendees. So if that is either one of you, Angela Garcia or Gail. LaRue, please raise your hand. And up next, we have Vanessa Quinton of. I mean, my name is Vanessa, but I'm a resident of District nine. My address is that's one East 31st Avenue. I'm also the president of the of Reclaim the Eastside R.A., which represents the five points. I submitted a letter of opposition on behalf of Reclaim the items of this project, because the proposed projects intends to accelerate involuntary displacement by creating homogeneous high income communities and cultivating a culture of exclusion with its retail proposition. It has been demonstrated that Marc housing creates forces to displace low income residents and our neighbors of color. It has also been demonstrated that this area's retail market rate rental properties caters to homogenous population as coincidentally white and affluent, and excludes the rest of us who are brown, black and poor. Therefore, creating this culture of exclusion, right policing based off of culture and who belongs unknowing, our state is experiencing a housing crisis. It is absurd to continue this trend of approving market rate rents without thought or consideration for the Democrats regarding the poor. Please do something for us. The developers and those among the project's supporters are willfully ignorant to racial and economic equity and willfully blind to the humanity of the poor to participate in support of this project on alignment of documents while void of equity in the vision for a Denver inclusive of all people, including those of us with less means and darker skin, is absolutely appalling. This project does not enhance our lives, create a healthy community, or increase opportunities for all people, especially, again, those who are marginalized by oppressive policies and decisions by elected officials. Therefore, I call upon Denver City Council to deny this zoning change and please find the moral courage to actually begin serving the poor. Thank you. You're your. Thank you, Vanessa. That wraps up our public speakers tonight. And sorry, we had one more. Jesse Paris. Hi, Jesse. Go ahead. Hey, don't forget about me. Never. Never. I reside in District eight, Christopher and his district, and I'm represented for Denver Homicide Low Black Star Action Movement for self-defense by their backs to commemorate for social change, as well as the party of Colorado. Now, I know in the Universe African People Organization. The newspapers have summed up everything that I was going to say. This is not inclusive. This is not equality. Especially who you want to build housing that is not affordable. Any of the units are not affordable. That is not what we need right now. We have a housing crisis. We are on the verge of having upwards of 200,000 people on the streets. So for you to sit up here and pass this resounding tonight is appalling. Absurd. I suggest this. Not pass. This. Even though it meets the so-called criteria on paper, it is not inclusive. It does not include the community. Jesus is correct in their violence that they are being excluded from this. It's appalling that the owner did not reach out to his position and I would add shoot tonight to not approve this. If you have any kind of morality, any kind of sense of character, you will not pass the story. Thank you. Thank you, Jesse. That concludes our speakers questions from members of council. Councilwoman Black Actually, I think Gail LaRue is still in queue. I'm trying to. See. Which one her name is showing up. Okay. We can go ahead. We haven't closed the. Hearing yet. On 1/2. I'm trying to get her to see what her name says. If we could have her just raise her hand in the attendees. I don't know how they do that if they're on the phone. I do. We see anybody? There's a problem, Martinez. No. I'm asking staff to look, but we might need to just go ahead and move along. Thank you for for bringing me, councilwoman. And so questions from members of council Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam President. I have some questions for Nate Lucero, our zoning attorney. All right. Go ahead, Nate. Go ahead, Councilwoman. We've got Nate off mute. He's ready to go. Hi, Nate. So a lot of the speakers talked about the need for affordable housing. And I think everyone here. Agrees that we do have a need for affordable housing. But can you tell us a little bit about the criteria we have for a rezoning and if affordable housing is one of those criteria? Good evening. Members of Council. Nate Lucero, assistant city attorney. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. There is no requirement for affordable housing within the zoning criteria. And from a legal perspective, any city or county cannot require affordable housing through zoning, as it would be in violation of the rent control statute and the Telluride case. So, no, there is there is no zoning criterion that specifically addresses affordable housing. So under state law, if we were going to require that in order to approve this rezoning, we would be violating state law. Um, I guess I would, I would say if you, if council were to use the lack of affordable housing as a basis of denial for the rezoning, it would not be consistent with state law. And you may be subjecting yourself to a challenge if that were to happen. All right. And then can you remind all of us a few years ago, Councilman, can each and the mayor's office led an effort to institute a linkage fee on all new development, and that was to go into affordable housing fund. Can you remind us a little bit about that and then if this developer would be required to pay into that fund? Yeah, I am not the affordable housing expert, but what I can say about that is that all developments that are going to build housing and I think even in for a commercial development, those developers are required to pay into the linkage fee. So I hope that answers your question. If not, maybe there's someone else on the phone that could better answer that question. I don't know who else is on on this call, but I guess the developer could talk about how much they. If they're planning on paying the linkage fee or building units. And I think we learned that they're planning on paying the fee and how much that would be. If they're still in the meeting. We should be able to get either CHACE Hill or Megan Turner. If you wouldn't mind raising your hand. Then you have me. In. There you go. Mm hmm. Go ahead. Taste it. All. Yes, this this this project would be subject to the affordable linkage fee, and it's estimated about $480,000 on the phase four. And if I could, I'd like to quickly just say that we respectfully like to respond to the no follow up, no input from Noel, and just say that we very much see this as an ongoing discussion. Our conversation with other stations within the day have dealt more with scenario six, which is a block away. The letter that they since we've today had the 3225 ten Argo address, which is the M6. So we saw the denial in that letter being more in relation to that rezoning, which is a clear up zone, whereas this is an administrative law and we are very much planning to continue the dialog with them on the up zone down the road and we are not at all ignoring them and we have much more substance to have at them related to that. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. So I have several questions for a community planning and development paper and. Can you explain to me? This is almost four acres. It's just right under four acres. How come this didn't go? I know. For the large development review process. It's technically five acres. But how come this site was this site even thought about going through the large development review process? Thank you for the question. And it was not. I am having trouble pulling up the staff report right now. But first to produce analysis. The actual area to be down here is 27,000 square feet so far under the five acre plaza and everything again. So on your staff report, it says the area of the property is 3.91 acres. Is that not true? So 2520. We want to weigh in. 2901 Broadway. The summary of the rezoning request. If you go down to. The area of the property, it's 170,000 square feet. I just. I just found the staff report. You're correct. So that is the total land area of the properties. But the actual area to be zoned is 27,000 square feet. And where do you see court? Where does that. Where is that in the stuff? I believe it's once again, I have to go back. No problem. It's hard with it in virtual. So I'm I'm confused. If you go to the staff report and you go to page one and you put summary of rezoning request and you go to bullet point five, the northwest area of 13,730 square feet. Currently zoned axiom x 16 would be reason to see x eight. Is that true? Yes, that's correct, sir. When looking at those reports, those post descriptions of the actual property area to be resolved. Okay. And then concurrently, this southeast area of 13,278 square feet would be reserved from Cemex. Hate to seem 12. So we're we're we're adding entitlement from 8 to 16. No, you are adding some entitlement from 8 to 16, but you're down spending more from 16 to 8. So the difference is like 13,736 and then 13,278. That's why I'm not understanding how you get those numbers. Yes. So if you add those numbers up, they equal 27,000 square feet. That is the actual area to be zoned, more of which is being down zoned to CMC's eight. 500 square feet. Oh, my God. I thought you were talking about, like, way more. No, you're talking about 500 square feet. So you're taking one apple to another apple and it's 500 square feet different. Just so we're clear, right? That's correct, yes. Okay. So in your packet, I only see two letters of support from the for the ballpark collective R.A. and then the Reno art district and Meg in reference to other letters. There's something missing from the staff report. I believe so. I was only sent two letters. Maybe it was if there might be half an hour, including the other two, but we can figure that out. Okay. So, Megan, can we get Megan or. I can't remember his name. Sorry. No, his last name. So Chase will either get Megan Turner or Chase Hell back in. Hi there. I'm back on here now. And yes, that is correct. We did receive four letters of support. So I can pull up those names and we can be sure that those are in the staff report records. Did you send those to Denver City Council and the planner? We did, but those did come in late, so we realized that it might not have made it into the stack or in time. When did you get them? I will follow up on the. Exact dates those groups, though, were right now ESG, the ballpark collective. And you can so we'll make sure that you have all of those. So that's 3%. So you have the RINO art district. You do the Rhino West, the rhino. Our district is a ballpark collective and you can wear the four letters of support that we have received. Okay. And as ever again electronically. Right now, you do have dates on those. 1/2, I can get those dates. And while you're looking at those dates, I have a couple more questions. You talked a lot about community and you talked a lot about community feedback. Do you have a website that's collecting community feedback? Do you have confirmation of said community feedback that they wanted a pickleball court? We do not have a website for this particular project. We did reach out to all the registered neighborhood organizations. There were ten groups that we had reached out to. We scheduled several meetings, several of which we didn't have follow up with, which did orchestrate those letters of support for the project. We tried to make sure to incorporate that feedback into the design as best as we could. You can have like hard documentation from communities saying that they want a pickleball court. Like we're going in reasoning processes when you say you have community feedback. I would hope that you have documentation that backs up that says specifically from this community that they would like a pickleball court. Do you have that? So what we can. Do is we can chat. About the pickleball court specifically that was referenced as amenity that could be used by others during different times of the day. It could be used as an educational facility in chief. And then you can maybe speak to that a little bit better and have the dates for the letters of support. Yes, Ballpark Collective was August 3rd, right now was December 2019. Eastbay was August 21st and you can was today 831. Okay. And for the pickleball court, how is it decided that that's a community benefit? I'd really I'd like to understand that a little bit more for sure. So that was an amenity that is in place. And what we had. Decided originally in the design concept, it was a resident amenity. However, through the discussions, we realized that there was a need within the neighborhood and that need could be shared and that facility made public and have the opportunity to share that facility with the folks within the community. Okay. And then when in one last question, you talked about active street use as being community benefit, but how is it a community benefit when it's required? It's a requirement. You have a design overlay that actually designing overlay seven. Actually, within that design overlay, it's required to have a certain amount of active street use. Explain how that's a community benefit when it's actually in a requirement. Yeah. Thank you for the question. So we do go above and beyond the actual requirement. And a couple other parts of this, too, is that we do know that both the retail and the restaurant facilities. Would be used. By the community. And there's a couple of things I think that Chase might be able to touch on as well with some of that input. But just for just for clarity, for the record, for the requirement, correct? You're not you don't have to go above and beyond. You can choose to. But it's a requirement just to be clear. Correct. It is a requirement that we have chosen to go above and beyond. Okay. Those are all my questions. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. My first question is for Mr. Hill. If you can send yourself. So how many times did you meet with the various neighborhood groups? Yes. Thank you for the question. Councilman Ortega with the River North, our district on three occasions and we met with the ECB twice and the other ones once. The other ones meaning. The other ones you can we had a call with GSA. We talked about that within the ballpark once. Obviously, it's tough. It's challenging environment to sit down and meet the people. So as more calls and emails and so a lot of a lot of immunity to provider above and beyond what's required based on direct conversations with primarily for our district who's the primary target of that scenario. But other well, our our our plans have changed. We have done we've you know, we included local art, a mural in a garage, things like that. Most conversations Councilman Ortega that we had related to DeMarco six 3225 an hour ago, which you'll be seeing come across your counter soon, that's more substantial. Upsell. The most conversation we had there focused on that one because we're going from one square industrial to 12 storey mixed use, whereas this was obviously, you know, a net reduction in 62,000 square feet. Technically, two separate projects. So I think not not fair to bring that one into this conversation, given that it's a separate project. Correct. But in an effort to be efficient with these various organizations times, we know it's time to discuss both at the same time because they're going through the reason at the same time. So so let me just ask, in your conversations with any of the groups, did the issue of a community benefit agreement come up? And what were some of those suggestions that were recommended to include in the project? Yes, great question. So we have to date signed two agreements with Harris, three agreeing with Harris, the one down the road a block away would be the fourth agreement, if you're referring specifically to a formal housing agreement. That conversation certainly did come up not just with other organizations. So, you know, we tried to be on the leading edge of what a private, non subsidized developer or project can do in a city. So we signed three voluntary agreements, two on evidence in Kendrick, LAX, District one down the road. And we're working on a fourth one, which is agreements that we will sign. So help me understand, are those directly tied to this project? No, they're not. What I'm trying to what I guess my point is, when we're when we're up zoning a property and we're asking for more than what the base and it's allowed for, we clearly want to want to give something in exchange. And usually that takes the form of a host agreement as well as a development agreement and an agreement which we sign the good neighbor agreement and a developer agreement and a host agreement that our rezoning efforts on this particular zone, because it is an administrative law line adjustment order to try to get the zone district boundaries to marry up on a net reduction of 60,000 buildable square feet. Those conversations have happened, led to a host agreement here, as they have on the other projects. But you could technically build whatever you wanted to build with the zoning that was already on the property. Correct. That's right. But going to the SDP press, even though he resumed the properties in 2017, just a few months ago, going through the building permit process of this phase four on the right hand side, on the east side, that's when the connect came up that your zone district boundaries don't line up with through zone lines and the building protocol. And so we thought we could handle that administratively. We couldn't. So one of these products is already built and topped out. The other one. Is that the just to be clear is that the difference between the 500 feet. Well, and it's actually just to clarify that earlier, it's a thousand men, not 500, but exactly 1000 square feet, not 500. And keep in mind that over half and it's in my presentation on the screen, over half of the land that we're up, zoning from 8 to 16 is covered by Denver water wastewater and Denver water easement area at all. So the difference, we're actually down zoning a couple square feet of 6 to 8 and all technically up zoning 6000 square feet from 8 to 16. So it's a more substantial down zone than we might have made clear. So I want to move on to Nola McGill for just a minute. Are you still around? If we can. You find yourself. We'll need to get her back and the panelists here. So just give us a moment up here. We've got her. Go ahead, Miguel. Go ahead, Councilman. No. Can you tell me if you can? Is part of the GDS coalition and were they part of the letter that was submitted to us that came in today? No, they weren't part of that letter. And you'd have to ask Armando Piana about that. I'm not sure. They were they weren't part of the call either. Okay. And as you can do, they have a large membership as well? Some of the other groups. I, I honestly, I haven't heard from them for a while. I'm not really sure how many people are in that group. The groups that were part of our letter were Global First, which is very active grouping Globeville right now, the Elyria, Swansea Neighborhood Association and the D.C. Coalition, EADS and Partners, and then the Community Building Network was also part of that. Okay. And so did you guys present anything specific as far as a specific CBA? To the development team when you guys met and talked to them. We really didn't get into those details. I think there was a lot of frustration that that came off at first. And by the time by the end of the call, we started talking about some of those things and hope, hoping that there would be follow up or next steps with some of our suggestions. Oh. How many. Letters? How many meetings did you all have with the developer? Just that one. It's just one call. Okay. Yeah. And we're still. We're still very much actively. I'm sorry, Mr.. Mr.. Here. I'll get back to you in just a minute. I'm specifically putting my questions to Ms.. Ms.. McGill. No, that was all I had for you. I do want to get back to you, Mr. Hill, with my final question. And I can't remember if it was you or Megan Turner who talked about that. You guys are going to look at best practices because you are within a close proximity to rail. And I just wanted to get an idea of what some of those ideas entail. But I can speak to that. To addressing the truly addressing the public health and safety of the community that's going to be placed to be sent to those rail lines. Yes, certainly, Councilwoman Ortega, some of those considerations that we have in mind is. We're citing of the building as the first part of that. Step. What we've done and what you can see with the demand. For site development plan approach is we are offset from our southern property line about 35 feet. So we've got horizontal separation there as well as the first five levels of the structure are not occupied. You'll see the structured parking and that's where we've got the local muralists work on the rear. Of the building. Some of those. Considerations as well as the architectural design and approach with that help with some of those best practices and the proximity to rail. Like some of the other things, we. Don't get to that level of detail. And given that when you check off the box that you're within a close proximity to rail, that's the first point that CPD is supposed to be having the conversation with people coming in asking for rezonings, and then obviously it's built into the design in the development review process. So I just wanted. To. Know, you know, as far as the thinking how, how much you all had had really been looking at that. So I appreciate that you're even that's even on your radar. Yes. Thank you. Those are all my questions for right now. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Brandon, maybe you can address this. As I looked over the staff report on presentation earlier before the meeting. It struck me that this appears to be a rezoning that is simply rearranging the entitlement areas to align them with the property line or there's actually the zone lot boundaries that. Correct. Yes, Councilman, that is correct. This is a rezoning to align the ownership parcels with the actual rezoning boundary. Is this mine? Yes. Okay. So we resolve this or council did in 2017 excuse me, in 2017. And the boundaries were sort of a zag the way I see it on the map. And but the zone lot boundary is straight. So what we're being asked to do is just flip them. And the result is it's a net loss of about that's somewhat a little loss in density allowable because the 16 storey area will move to a smaller footprint and the eight story area will move to a slightly larger footprint . Correct. But that's exactly correct. Okay. So I have a question that boggles my mind that because of an issue I had in my district about five years ago. Why don't we just change the zone lot boundary and not go through this brain damage? That's a great question. I'm not sure if the developer wants to speak to why they chose this path. It seems they chose it because during the site development plan review, somebody in an agency of the city said, Oh, this doesn't match the zone. Like you have to go through a rezoning. I'm wondering, did anybody and maybe the developer can answer. Didn't anybody say, Well, why don't we just rearranges our lot boundary to match the zoning? Yes. Councilman Flynn, great question. And you are correct. We will, through the step process on phase four, that there is no other process, administrative or otherwise, that we could go through to have these zone district boundaries map the zone lot line. So, yes, it's frustrating. It has been four months on it. Well, into design, we're in for a building permit and we were told this is our only recourse or only option. So. Okay. So you're following the agency's advice on how to how to fix this this zig zag and the boundary. Yes, sir. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. That's all. Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Madam President, I. I want to give Mr. Hill a whack at the old pickleball question, so to speak, there. There's a pickleball association in Denver. I don't know its exact name, but several the officers are in District ten and there's a lot of opposition to Pickleball because it's noisy. And I tried to do some Googling to figure out exactly what the excuse me, searching on the Internet, using some search engine, didn't want to drop the name necessarily. But, you know, to figure out what the exact decibel. Level is. For pickleball. But I know that that we have a lot of opposition in our neighborhoods because of the proximity of pickleball courts, existing pickleball courts to residences. And so I just want to make sure like. If if they're going to be co-located with, you know, 16 stories of residents that I. Did you ask the community? And they said, that's what we want and we don't care about the noise. Or I guess I'm I'm just trying to this is one way to help me understand the neighborhood engagement. And this this just doesn't add up to me so far, but please help me out it. Yeah. You think you can sometimes. So the pickleball court, first of all, it came up in meeting with with our district that they have some kind of activated greenspace, just landscaping. We try to do a tennis court with the basketball. We just don't have the size. So it's a pick up of a basketball goal. The good news is in your district where there's high density everywhere, the only neighbor we have is the rail lines we have known on the east as a dog park on the west just eastward project. But to the south is nothing but the airline to the airport. So we don't have any media neighbors other than our own. And our first residential level is 50 feet above the Super Bowl. We removed since it was going to be a kind of affinity for the residents. Obviously, it's open to the public. We've talked to you can about their ability to use it during school hours to take students to their reading. That's a fantastic idea it's the most you can and river north art district specifically voice support of a portable court and expressed interest in. So my next question is to Mr. Shaver. I am trying to recollect in my mind and you are way better at zoning than I am, at least I hope, because because I could use some, some additional studying the idea of moving and it fits from one plot to another. Is that like a benefits transfer or something like that? I know that we've we've considered that in some of the urban you know, the urban core, where if, say, there's a church and they're zoned for 12 storeys, they could take the that unused zoning and give that to another plot for them to to have additional height. Is that am I making any. Sense at all? I think so. To answer your question, that that is called a transfer of development rights. The issue at hand here is solely to align the ownership parcels with the zone, and that is some sort of a tricky Denver zoning thing that we use this thing called zoning laws and they don't align with the ownership for assessor parcels . So that is what. The. Rezoning is for. If that makes sense. I don't know if you have another question about the transfer of development rights, but that's another thing. But it's not applicable to this case. I say. Well, I know where I was going, but the question is, why hasn't that why wasn't that used here? But you're saying that's not applicable. So that's that's a pretty good reason why. And then the. I'd like to miss Miguel, you're still up in the analyst section. I have a question for you as well about. Arnaud's. Are you familiar with Eastbay? Do you interact with them in your or. No. Two The two Arnaud's interact. We occasionally get an email from them, but usually not. We don't necessarily like touch base about something like this. Because they're the and I use that same Internet search engine that will remain nameless and found who they are. They're a very responsive global business association. So it seems a little different, I guess, if there are nano. There are nano. But it seems a little interesting to reach out to a business association to to get guidance on residential housing. But but I figure maybe I mean, if there are nano, we have you know, maybe there's a good reason for that. So you don't interact with them much. I'm here and there. I mean, there are big business association. You know, they've they've had some of the big ones in the area. Like, you know, Pepsi and Coca-Cola. I'm not there. They're big business association. They reached out to us about our food program recently. Little things like that. Okay. I guess the last question that I have would just just be to open it up for any any one who might be in the audience, who is part of GBA, because it I believe it was mentioned that they submitted their letter of support on August 21st. So ten days ago. And I'm just curious as to because it didn't make it into our our packet, just wanted to chat with them. All right. I'm not seeing anyone raise their hands. And if you are on the phone, you can use Star nine to raise your hand. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Not seen anybody there. So we will move on to Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. So I have a question. Is Navy service still on the line? We can. Get him back in here. Oh, there we go. Go ahead. Vinnie, how are you? I'm well, thank you. How are you? Good. So isn't it true that it's common and it's not like common? Common. But I have it in northwest Denver, where zone lock and zone lock boundaries and zone parcels don't match up. That does happen. Yes. And so when you amend the zone, like don't you have to get set to match the boundary of who the owner is that you usually get a sign off and the other people within the zone, that boundary. It's called a zone amendment. You know what I'm talking about? Yes. If you go through the zone amendment process in our ward, there is more than one owner or more than one or within one zone lot. And then all the owners within that zone lot have to sign off on the zone law amendment. However, if you have multiple zone laws within a single parcel, it may not work the same way. The city does try to get folks to to have their parcel boundaries align with their zone boundaries. I'm not sure. Is that answering your question or is there more? And so basically so I have like four right now that I'm working on in Council District one. So I have a zone my boundary and I have three property owners within that zone, my boundary. And when property owner wants to have entitlements, but he can't because the other properties have certain entitlement. So, so their, their houses are taking up some of his entitlements or trying to go through the zoning amendment process. It's I'm I'm seriously confused on why we're going through a rezoning process instead of sending them through the zone amendment process like all my constituents are sent through. Okay. And I'm not sure the details of the site development plan that was submitted, but it could be and maybe the applicant can answer this better. But it could be that they were trying to develop part of one of these parcels to the zone lot or the zone district standards for one zone district that they didn't have in town for. Yeah. Oh, it was, it was it made more sense to, to change. Just while zoning for those sections of the of the zone might. Go to swap the zoning for the for the zone lot because they're not necessarily they couldn't go to this amendment because they couldn't come in agreement with the other parcel owners. It's super confusing. Like there's no boundaries and then there's the parcels. But just to be clear, all the people, all the owners in the boundary who own parcels have to sign off on it. Correct. If you want to go through the zone amendment process, just so I'm clear. Yeah, that's correct. But here I think the same owner owns both parcels. Or both script. That's why I'm confused on why we're using rezoning to fix that. Like. I sure I share the confusion. Mr. Hill, we would really like you to hold up chiming in. We are in the middle of a legal hearing and we will call on you, sir. Go ahead, Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. So, Brandon, do you have that? As you say, I'll quit using acronyms. Do you have the site development plan where it calls out for this process to be fixed through the rezoning process? In your experience, have you seen this before? This is the first time I've seen one of these come through, and I was not privy to any of the conversations that happened between planning services and development services to come to the conclusion to go through this process. Okay. Because I've seen I've been watching these earnings for a long time and I have been studying this one, and I can't find any other examples of something like this before. I know Zuma amendments, so I'm not part like boundary amendments to match the parcel. You know what I'm saying? I'm so sorry. Geeking out on zoning, but I've never in my time since 2010 have seen a rezoning to fix that. So thank you, Madam President. No further questions. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Can you hear me? Go ahead now. You can. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to ask a question of Mr. Hill about the Elyria. Swansea, a global business association. My former profit was is a member of their group. And if that letter was sent within the last ten days, I don't recall getting. Any information. Regarding a vote that took place on this development. Can you explain to me a little bit about how that letter of support was secured? Go ahead, Mr. Hill. Thank you. Yes, we had a meeting with them back in early July, and they they sent a letter of approval on August 21st. We did. You and Brandon, all four signed letters for. We sat down with them at their office. Used to be to create a plan. Now it's proximate to that. And we sat down with. There were four other four scba members in the room and there were another three or four on a zoom call. And we walked through our projects and I can't speak to how they're on another approval process. And it's a phone. Is it a board that decides? I'm not sure. But they did issue a letter of support. That's concerning. Thank you very much for that information. And for our colleagues in CPD and counsel, NOLA mentioned a letter that they sent that had five organizations on it. And Vanessa Quintana that spoke tonight represented a sixth organization. And so just to make sure it's on the record, I will dig. Through my emails and make. Sure that it was sent direct, that it gets sent directly to council members and CPD to get uploaded, so that it is reflected that it was six individual organizations that wrote letters of opposition to this project. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam President. I have a question. I'm not sure if it's for Brandon or maybe the property owner, but if this doesn't pass, can the development still move forward as planned? I would defer to Chase for that question if he's available. Yes, to that question. So again, we're we have basically asked if you prepare for building, the drawings are complete and cannoli. Councilman Black, we will be in a very tough spot. We've been working on this done for four years and only recently was a slot lighting issue raised by the city. This is an administrative cleanup and it's a significant reduction in built area. And we also have support of CPD in many of the major arteries in the area. So this would be very troublesome. And I can't tell you today what our next steps would be if this law is not approved. But we would be left in a very bad spot. To say the least. So were you misled by the city? That got you to the point you are today. I mean, it's really, you know, a net zero. Gain or loss for a you. Right. You're just it's just technical. And so now why is it here this very kind of heated political issue? Did. Did the city not give you good advice at some point along the line, or how did we get to this point? No, councilman asked. I don't want apply to be ever deceived or led astray by anyone at CPD or anybody else in the city. What happened was and shame on me to a certain extent, but I did not realize that when you give a lot one adjustment in your zone change. I had no idea that there's a zone district boundaries separate from the zone laws that don't move with them. So when we submitted for our building permit, it was a comet and it was the initial round of comments, but it was a comment that surfaced. Didn't come up on August three, but it came up a few months ago on August four. And that was the first in this whole conversation, this whole confusion surfaced. And I very much share Councilman Sandoval's confusion. And so I was unaware that these are two different things that married up. The city flagged it right away through the process, but it was after after the first zone, after fully permitting the tiling, the first phase. And then it was a second project where it surfaced. And and that was back in March, I want to say. And then we started the reasoning process and it was slowed down because that's where we are now. So without throwing anyone under the bus, it does sound like you. Weren't given as much information as you should have been given. Thus. Sarah, I wish we had been given this information when we submitted for permit on the first days and it never came up. But we did it. And, and then it came up on the second and I might have a different view or believe it was. And maybe it got past the first review in the second, but it was brought to our attention four months ago and we were flabbergasted, to be honest. We were not aware that we had this issue. And Councilwoman Nate Lucero also has his hand raised. I think he would like to chime in if you're okay. Hearing from Nate. I would be great. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President, and thank you, Councilwoman Black. So if looking at the staff report and what is what is occurring with the staff and it's clear that the zone law amendment would not solve the problem and address the needs for these two parcels. A zone law amendment. You would still have you would still have two different zone districts on the same zone lot. So it wouldn't it wouldn't help solve the problem that that the developer is currently facing. Does that make sense? I mean, if you look at. Page five of the staff report. It kind of shows you the conundrum. And I think this may have been the page that Councilman Flynn was referring to earlier. Okay. But but, Nate, is it the city's fault that they are in this conundrum or is it their fault? I, I don't know that it's anyone's fault. I would say that it could have been an oversight, maybe on the part of the developer and the city that the zone district boundaries were a little funky for this for these two properties. But it's certainly an issue that I think the developer and the city are working to address so that the zone districts mountains match the zone lot boundaries. Okay. But the bottom line is that there is considerably less. Area that can be developed. According to something I'm reading right now, there's 62,000 square feet, a net reduction in buildable area. Is that your understanding to. Is that what's provided in the staff report? This is in the report from the director. But Brandon, you were talking about this earlier. And if you think about it that way, it's actually not an up zoning, right. If you look at the big picture of it. Yes. I'm not certain what the net buildable area reduction is, but as far as just land area, more of this land is going to be down, zoned, zoned. All right. Thank you. Right. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Torres. Madam President. I just want to be clear what I'm hearing. Chase, a question for you. Have you already started building something on either of the lots? Yes. The Story project is top down and midway through construction. The 16 story. We were hoping to break ground around this time now, but it's been delayed for four or five months on account of rezoning. So we have not started building on the second phase, but the first. Phase has topped out. So were you not planning to build on. That triangular section that's. Being zoned from 8 to 16? So the majority of that time U.S. that we are up zoning is the Denver wastewater and Denver water easement area we cannot build over that never intended to. There's a small section of our garage that does encroach outside of that. So we do have some building on this side, which is why we couldn't move forward with the project. Not a reason. Okay. That was my other question. What did you built your plans for? And it sounds like it was. For the property lines as opposed to the zone. The zone lots? Yes, ma'am. So had you not. There are two separate buildings, right? Yes, ma'am. So had you not noticed. That your zoning was different? So again, we were looking at our zone lot lines, the green line and the. Representation we provided, but without our boundary, property, boundary or zone lots that the zoning carried with the zone lots. But there's actually this other line, this zone district boundary that separate entirely from the zone like and in many cities and there's a one that same in Denver, there's two different things. And so yes, we were designing our building and basing it on the zone lots, not the zone district boundary. Okay. Thank you, Chase. Nate. What fixes this for them if it's not fixing this zoning designation. I. We would have to perhaps evaluate that and speak with the folks in planning services and development services to see if there's some other solution. But but for me, at this point in time, what is what is being requested makes the most sense. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines and then Councilman Ortega. And we're starting our our second round of questions, so go ahead, Councilman Hines. Thank you, Madam President. And these questions are based on quick responses from after I ask the first set of questions. So I think Mr. Rosario, I think you just said this already, but I want to make sure that I understand you. You've previously said the developer and the city are working to address this issue. You're saying. Are you are you saying the developer and city are working to address this issue? Using the process that we're discussing right now is that I just want to make sure that I'm not misunderstanding or making a logical conclusion or jump. That's incorrect. Yeah, that's correct. And the developer came in with the site plan. The city recognized that there would be complications with moving forward, with building permits. And so the city staff recommended this rezoning process. And so that's that's what I mean by the developer and the city are working together. Okay. All right. Thank you. And then, Mr. Hill, if you were zoned for 16 storeys and you built eight. Why if I if I might I mean, not a lot of developers are willing to. Top out at half of their allowable rates. What? Why did you build only eight stories with, in this part, your resume for 16? You're on mute. Yes. Yes. Again, it comes back to the the whole zone lot versus zone district boundary conversation. Not only we did not realize the stupid things and most cities and even most of the time in Denver, that was line up . We didn't really realize that we have 16 sort of zoning on part of the east side. And so that just came to our realization when we went through to the second phase building process. So yes, we could have built twice as tall as we did. No, we didn't because we were going off of the zone, lock zone, not to sound district boundaries. So you might have had you known you might have built 16 stories where you are currently top down at eight. We could have I'm not sure what we would have would have, but we could have. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Thank you. Madam President, I just have one last question, and this is for Mr. Hill. So it was 2017, right, when the the overlay zoning for this area went into place, that sort of uptown, the whole the whole area that included the. In an article market. Correct. Or was that a separate process that you all went to? That separate process. Council nor category. The original target market was be zoned before my time back in 2009 and as a master plan GDP. And then this land was purchased in results. Partizan partizan 16 results. Okay. So you make reference to a number of four and that's that's a project yet to come before us, correct. Sorry, it's confusing. I should clarify. So within these two projects, I keep saying there's one or two, but there's one with the one that's topped out. It's eight stories. That's phase three of the overall development. And then phase four is the six stories that we're in for permanent four. Okay. So you kept talking about you're going to come back to do an up zoning. Yes. That that's that is. Actually a particular parcel. That's actually a block away. We call that the inaugural phase six. So that's a whole different parcel. I didn't have. Our first planning board is October ludy November and it's city council in December. So that's the one we continue to actively dialog and hope to continue at that time. That's enough. I'm from one story industrial 12 story mixed use. Okay. And was that part of parcel that was part of that overlay of zoning that took place? Or was this. So separate altogether? We don't even know. We're under contract on that site. We do not currently own it. Okay. Okay. What? I was kidding. I was just trying to understand if you were looking to make up the difference of what you're losing in zoning on this site by trying to up zone the other side, I mean, understanding there are two completely different separate projects. And I'm the one that asked you not to talk about the two projects, but you've brought that up a couple times, and I just wanted to clarify that point. Yeah. No, we're looking at them entirely independent from one another. We own this land that we're talking about today, both phases at a 33, 25 ton Argo, and that's what the coalition issued a letter against. So we have pulled out of there and we're going to do a lot of things to get community support there. And we we hope to get it, but that'll be a conversation for another day. And today we're just talking about the land that we owned. So I would just strongly encourage that when you get ready to begin that process that, you know, historically, this part of what's known as Rhino has always been part of the Globeville community boundaries. And oftentimes a lot of the development in that area did not necessarily include input from the geese communities. And so I would just ask that you do the same outreach with them as you've done with the other groups that you have met with and secure your support from that. You certainly will. Thank you, Councilwoman and Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Madam President. Just a quick clarification from Mr. Hill. So I'm looking at the slices and we're down zoning one slice from 16 down to eight, and we're zoning one slice from 8 to 16, and it basically cancels each other out. But you said that you weren't sure if you would if this didn't pass today, if you would be moving forward if there's no net loss or no net gain. What would what would prevent you from moving forward? Yes. Counsel, thank you for your question. So we have the building completely design submitted for building permanent. We're effectively through SDP in this zoning issue. The building that is designed goes over the zoning district boundary, within the zoning alignment over the zoning district boundary outside of respondent arteries. And and so we have to you know, we can we have to totally redesign our building, start all over, you know, page one rewrite. And and you have to design a different building that's eight and 16 storeys. And. That makes sense. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Are you good, Councilman? I thank you. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. The public hearing for Council Bill 20, dash zero seven. Did we lose council president? No. Hello? Can you hear me? Hi. Hi. I don't know. Somebody was doing something with the host settings, and so it went down, so. Not sure where we cut off, but I had bang the gavel the public hearing for council bill 20 dash 0708 is closed. Comments by members of Council Council Woman Black. Thank you, Madam President. I am going to support this rezoning. I understand the desires of all of us and of the community members to increase our affordable housing. However, as we all know, having affordable housing is not one of the criteria for approving a rezoning. This does meet the criteria. The owner is complying with the law that the City Council passed a few years ago and they will be paying a linkage fee. Also of note is it's not a net gain in entitlements. It's actually a loss. And I feel very strongly that the reason the developer is in the position they are right now is because they. Didn't get the right kind of advice and the right kind of information that they should have gotten from the city. And they are working at the city's recommendation to try and fix it through a rezoning by bringing it to us, which, of course, is a very political way to resolve the issue, is really to correct an anomaly that we have in this city. So I do think in this situation, this is a rezoning. That the criteria. Does meet and. That we should be supporting. It. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Madam President. Just want to make sure that we understand that when we say something is in alignment with the criteria, we have five different criterion that are much more vague than we would like. In fact, number one is consistency with adopted plans. And we know that the two main plans that we use, Blueprint, Denver and Comprehensive Plan 2040, are very explicit about equity goals. And when we when we have frustration with CPD is because CPD has not figured out how to measure how we achieve equity. But it doesn't mean that our interpretation of a project cannot be inconsistent with a adopted with an adopted plan if it does not meet our our interpretation of an equity goal. And so I believe that it is not consistent with comprehensive plan and blueprint. Denver. Equity Goals. I also believe that in numbers three of the criterion furthering public health, safety and welfare. That is another area where we have a lot of room for interpretation about what is public health, what is safety, what is welfare of a community. We recently declared racism a public health crisis. We understand public health in a very different way in 2020. We talk a lot about social determinants of health, and we know that the affordability overlay just blocks away at 38 simply do not work. And so whether or not this was a mistake on the city's behalf or the developer's behalf, I think it's coming in front of us in 2020 for a reason. And it might be a moment for for the developer to be able to rethink this plan. There are six organizations in this immediate area that are opposed to this change. And as the community representative for this community, I have to stand with our community and encourage my colleagues not to support this change in our district and really listen to what the people in our community are asking for. Whether that's a restart because of a technicality or for a better interpretation of the five criterion. They are asking us to do something, and I hope you all will listen. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Torres. Thank you, Madam President. I was ready to step in for you when we. Lost you for half a second. So just for I. Thank you. Thank you. Turns out I. Turns out I must have gotten demoted. So I. Got promoted. I didn't write about it. All right. Thank you. So my comments on this one, I recognize this is an awkward space and I have a hard time accepting that this is the path. Of least. Resistance for fixing this particular issue. Because what it asks me to do, not having been here when this was resolved last time, but it asks me to judge based on all the things that we typically judge a rezoning on. And I will continue to struggle with comp plan 2020. Vision element of equitable, affordable and inclusive when a plan doesn't demonstrate that. And for that reason. I'll be a no tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Sawyer. Thank you, Madam President. I appreciate Councilwoman Torres's point. I think she makes a really good point. And I have been reading this 119 page staff report all day in between meetings and all other things happening. And I think what is a little bit concerning to me is as I'm reading the staff report, you know. As it's going through the different criteria we're supposed to be looking at uniform uniformity of district regulations and restrictions. It's one sentence. The proposed rezoning will result in the uniform application of zoning district building form. Saying that something is going to do something that it's supposed to do is not a justifying circumstance for doing it. That's a circular argument. That's that is not actually filling out the staff report appropriately. The proposed official MAP Amendment furthering public health, safety and welfare through the implementation of the city's adopted land use plan, is not filling out the staff report and showing us how it is going to further the health, safety and welfare of our community . So I just as I'm as I'm sitting here and I'm going through this, I'm really seeing some pretty big gaps in the work that should have been done to really justify this rezoning. And I am concerned that that is because whether that is because. This was taken for granted. For whatever reason, because it was just a relatively whether they were told by the city that this was relatively straightforward swap kind of a situation or whether it was because there's a lack of understanding from the developer of what needed to be done here, I'm not sure, but I'm concerned either way. And so I think this clearly does not meet the criteria based on what I'm seeing here in the staff report. And so I'll be in tonight as well. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I. Man. This is this is a difficult one as far as we know, as we sit on council. We get all the difficult questions, all the easy ones are already solved before they come to us. And that's why we get paid the million bucks or whatever to try to make calls like this. This. This one's strange to me because it's it's a net downstream, yet there's still controversy. And I'm not sure that I really feel comfortable with the questions that I or the answers to the questions that are asked. It it's a little interesting that we're to this point in the process, which is a long process and is meant to have many steps forward before us. And we're just learning. Tonight or whatever that that the developer could theoretically have done up to 16 storeys in a development where they they're topping out at sea. And but that's not an inability to answer simple questions. That's not going to fly criteria. So and I'm not trying to. That sounds maybe a little more blunt than I should be. But but but the five criteria isn't predicated on the intimacy of wisdom or education, not wisdom. But if the knowledge of this particular plot and what we are considering before us and the ultimate decision that we have to make. I would certainly encourage our applicants to engage with the community surrounding it. I mean, engaging the community is a. Critical. Component of getting something that works for everyone and and ensure we have a symbiotic relationship with residents who live in the city and, um, and preparing for residents that are coming to our city tomorrow. And frankly, we've got hundreds of people living in tents in my district, and they would like homes, too. And and so but I would say sometimes a conversation with neighbors and more than just one attempt can get something that's good for developers and good for community. And and so I'm a little bit frustrated with that. Not sure exactly how that fits into the five criteria either. But but certainly I could be way more comfortable if, if we had more people in support and and fewer people coming to us testifying today saying that it's not not what they want it or that they're frustrated by the process. 300 units with zero affordable is also frustrating, but that, as Councilmember Black drove home, is not something that we can use to judge because of the Telluride decision. I think city attorney also mentioned Telluride. I would encourage all of us, everyone watching and listening and members of council and the media. I know all of us to reach out to our state legislator and to modify the Telluride decision. Until that changes is made, we can't use the housing affordability or lack thereof excuse me, affordable housing or lack thereof, as a as one of the ways that we vote no. So this is really difficult because 300 units is better than no units. And the people living in tents would say any home is better than no home. The people and homes that are they pick out their front window and they see people living in tents. They say the same thing. They would much rather have housing for for for people in the availability of housing than not. So I'm still trying to I'll listen. It looks like at least a couple more my colleagues are are going to make comments. That's how difficult our decisions are, is that I have not totally made up my mind even right now. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Ortega. Q Madam President. Tonight's discussion really reiterates why. We should be getting the level of detail that City Council used to get on rezoning applications, because with this form based zoning, all we're getting is information about the scale of what we're approving. We see no real details on the actual projects that that are going to be built on these sites. And, you know, that's a different conversation, but it comes up over and over and over again. And, you know, some of us have talked about what changes we would want to see made. Working with CPD, we've we've broached that subject with them, but we have made no headway in that in that arena. And I think it's it's time that we really roll up our sleeves and make that happen so that we know exactly what we're voting on. And it ensures that developers have to spend a little bit more money by putting more detail together. And most developers hire attorneys. They're hiring architects who pay attention to that level of detail that they have to bring before us so that when they are filing an application, all those T's have been crossed and the eyes have been dotted so that we're not seeing the kind of mistake that happened with this one tonight. And, you know, I'm not going to place blame or fault anywhere. It's a situation that has has warranted this particular application to land on our maps for us to make a final decision. I am a little disturbed that there was only one conversation with the GSA community whose boundaries this falls within. Clearly, you know, equity issues can be had and there are things that can be done that go that are different from affordable housing, which, again, we all know we can't mandate unless there's local government financing in the project . And I haven't heard that to be the case with this particular project. So I guess, you know. My my concern is that I would I would like to see a situation where, you know, we could we could see that happen in terms of some of the some of the benefits in a communication that I got today that just came through, it said part of the conversation was about allowing wi fi in the coffee shop available to people from the community. From the yes community. Well, that would be available to anybody that's that utilizing that public space. So that's not really considered a benefit per se. But these are conversations that get down to the issues of what blueprint Denver And you know, some of our other plans have spoken to more recently about equity and inclusion, about how we need to move forward as a city. Because if we keep building all market rate housing because we haven't fixed Telluride, all we're doing is continuing to exacerbate the housing challenges that we have in the city. And we need to find a way to get our developer partners in the city to roll up their sleeves and be part of the solution and not add to the challenges and the problems that we have with affordability, knowing that's not one of the issues that we're dealing with here tonight. You know, I'm I'm torn. But I think that in this particular situation. I'm going to support it moving forward. But I just want to say with the next one coming forward, I want to see more homework done and I want to see us really take that mantle and move forward with the changes that need to happen towards that goal. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. So often times we talk about in city council, we talk about precedent and we talk about how the city council president and we can set new standards and we can set new ways. And I really enjoy learning about land use. This one, I am so confused. I have never had the time, I think, to innovate. And it's come to somebodies attention that as rezoning has to fix things. So my concern is about setting precedent. And to my other colleagues, concern is I have heard more about fixing the lot lines and the boundaries than I have any other conversation. And so when we talk about the health, safety and welfare and other adopted plans that are that were used in the presentation to bring forward this application, I didn't hear any of that in the presentation. I didn't talk I didn't ask any questions about affordable housing. I asked about flat line and boundaries and the precedent that this would set for other offers in the future to have come before our body to fix this instead of understanding what their boundaries are and looking extensively at them. So with that, I do understand how this meeting meets the criteria of the what we have set in front of us when we're talking about boundaries and lines. I have never seen one of the boundaries in one thing, one other criteria in the Denver zoning code, and that's what a lot of the letters of support talk about . And they talk about the values of the developer and the values that the developer had with the registered or neighborhood organizations. And to be honest, I have never seen that either. So with that, I'm going to abstain from this one because I just I don't understand it. I just think it's I don't understand it. I've never seen it, and I can't quite figure it out. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Were this to be a from scratch rezoning on a site that was asking where the owner was asking for entitlements from something much less dense to eight and 16 stories. A lot of this discussion would have been much more up to the point, but it seems to me that this rezoning application is more in the way of a correction of an error that occurred three years ago, and an error that, on balance from what I've heard, sounds like it's more on the city's side of the ledger. When we work with applicants to to map these applications out, you know, the applicants don't just come in and plop some application down and the staff says, okay, we'll run with us. They work together and they develop it and they come up with something that they can then bring to us as a coherent whole. It's this sort of reminds me of the movie Animal House after the road trip, when when Otter says to flounder, you messed up. You trusted us. And the the owner probably feels like he's the he's poor flounder sitting there having trusted the process. So this is in the way of correcting an error that's mostly on our side of the ledger. And for that reason, I do believe that it does meet the criteria, met the criteria three years ago. And for that reason, I'll be supporting it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Clark. Thank you, Madam President. I won't reiterate. I think that what my colleagues have said before me better. I think Councilman Flynn took some of the words out of my mouth right here. And and Councilwoman Ortega. And I think that. We we need to. I think. This this whole process of getting to. This clerical fix in this spot is forcing other conversations. That are bubbling that. We need to tackle to come up into this. Conversation. But I think at the end of the day, when we strip down to what are we actually doing in this, it meets the criteria. As Councilman Flynn said, it's correcting an error. And for those reasons, I will be supporting it tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Clark. I will go ahead and chime in. You know, I've had the presentation the entire time and on slide three, it talks about that this is a fix for approximately 27,000 square feet or 0.62 acres. And it's the rezoning to align zone lots with ownership parcels. This is an administrative fix and this should have been fixed internally within CPD. I am. It's mind boggling that we have spent this much time talking about something that should have been fixed internally. But I think that this is very helpful, especially because the developer was here with us and there are huge lack, there's huge gaps in engagement of the community of of being authentic in that engagement and the intentionality around. Is the community really want to pickleball core or is this to sell units? And what is that community benefit? And so I will be a yes on this tonight because this is clearly an administrative fix. But the writing is on the wall for additional rezonings that are coming through. The bar is set much higher for what we want to see. And I know that we can't we can't mandate the affordable housing piece, but there's also those community benefit agreements and how you're working with the community and the neighbors in the area as well. And so I do hope that Mr. Hill and Mr. Turner heard that loud and clear tonight as well from the community, but then also from city council. Madam Secretary, roll call. CDEBACA No. Clark. I. Flynn. I. Herndon. I. Hines. Hi. Can each. I. Ortega. I. Sandoval sent. Sawyer. No. Torres. No. Whack. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close of Iranian announce the results. One abstention, three nays. Eight eyes. Eight Eyes Council Bill 708 has passed. On Monday, September 28, the Council will hold the required public hearing on Council Bill 813, changing the zoning classification for 5560 5101 South Colorado Boulevard, 5197 101 Colorado Boulevard and 98 Harrison Street in Cherry Creek and a required public hearing on Council Bill 815 Changing the Zoning Classification for 50 South Kalama Street 39 South Kalama Street. Ten south of Pan Street and 101 South Santa Fe Drive in Baker. Any protests against council bills? 813 or 815 must be filed with the council offices no later than noon on Monday, September 21st. There being no further business before this body. This meeting is adjourned. Oh.

Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Consent to the Six-Month Extension of the Landing Rights Agreement to Land at Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal By and Between San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority and Tideline Marine Group. (Community Development 227)

AlamedaCC_09032019_2019-7162

Is is my hope so with that motion second all in favor I opposed abstain. The motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay. The next item that was pulled from the consent calendar. Councilmember o.t, you wanted item five j pulled. Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm going to support this, but I just wanted to do it with a caveat of my own. What concerns me here is that we have public facilities that were built with public funds, and it takes a long time for some of these routes to build up and gain a fare back stability. And my concern is that you have private operators come in at lower cost. And my concern is that they don't end up uber rising, for lack of a better term leader, and we end up losing Rita. So I'd like to make sure that when this comes back, next time there's some type of car neutrality agreement or something that that protects the workers that work at these at these organizations. So I am prepared to support it. But next time, if there's not anything like that in there, I would be opposed to approving any more extensions and threat to our public facilities. And just for clarification, I would add that it was noted that the we, the board of directors approved unanimously was afforded nothing, that somebody was absent. This extension agreement encouraged sideline. That's the operator of this small boat. It's almost like a water taxi and the Inland Boatman's Union of the Pacific to come to an agreement during that period of time. And timeline has agreed to this extension and is in ongoing negotiations with IAP and the IAP representative at the WE. The Board meeting described these negotiations as cordial and positive in tone, so I would be looking for good results to come forward to. Hope so, yeah. And of course, what we are trying to do this is. To accommodate a new life science company down at Harvard Bay Business Park that moved to Alameda from south San Francisco and still has a lot of its employees living in south San Francisco. So rather than have them get on the freeway in their cars and, you know, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and all those good things, they arrange this private service and but with the approval of Rita and yes, I think it's there's a good template and I'm hopeful that they're moving forward. So any other comments you do? I have a motion, Councilmember Vela. I do want to clear I do want to make sure that, you know, one of the issues that had come up before is that our staff, I think, had weighed in on this issue before we did before we had actually taken a vote. So I just want to make sure that while I appreciate the inclusion and I think that it needs to be there, that that leaders process is informed by our council direction and that we don't we aren't sending staff to try to inform that ahead of whatever gets decided. Thank you. I do have a motion here for the comments. So moved. Second. Okay. We have a motion from the vice mayor, seconded by Councilmember Vela. All in favor. I opposed abstain. The motion carries unanimously. And then we have one more item. I think it was just one more that was pulled in.

Recommendation to authorize the City of Long Beach to join by signing the Amicus Brief prepared and filed by Cities United for Immigration Action in Texas v. United States.

LongBeachCC_12012015_15-1246

Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Ranga recommendation to join by signing the amicus brief prepared and filed by Cities United for Immigration Action. Council member, Urunga. Thank you. Nice Mary Little and thank you. Got a woman who needs all this. Put her say now to the side as well. I know it sounds cliche and it probably is, but we know that this country is a country of immigrants. We are a nation comprised of people who have come here to break away from repressive governments and dictatorships. We have come who have come simply here to build a better life, a better future for themselves and for their families. As I look around the days at my colleagues, I see immigrants, children of immigrants, naturalized citizens and individuals whose commitment to public service is only surpassed by their love for this country. And as I look out into the audience. I see individuals whose willingness to participate in civic engagement to be here tonight is only surpassed by the knowledge that they had the ability to exercise their right to free speech. To add their voices to the public debate that is present in this item. I commend you and I welcome you. There is a group of individuals, however, who are not as easily encouraged in this debate, engaged in this debate, nor who are as well. Of course, I am speaking about the 4 million people who will be subject to deportation because of their undocumented status. I want to be clear. Without an effective policy towards immigration reform, this debate will continue ad nauseam. In short, this motion request that the City Council enter into an amicus brief to stave off a draconian policy that will result in unintended consequences of deportation of millions of people and what it will have to this economy, to stability of our country, and to the break up of millions of families along the way. There is a better way towards immigration reform. Texas versus the United States is not that path to take. Therefore, I asked my colleagues on the council to please join me and Councilmember Gonzalez and the hundreds of other municipalities and jurisdictions in supporting the amicus brief. Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes. I want to thank everyone who's here tonight gratis at all those photos that are kiko nosotros is the is the no check. Mr. Milagros. Yes, I too want to just reiterate everything that Councilmember Ranga said. I think it's a, I feel very proud to be part of this city because we do invite many of our immigrant families to be a part of the civic participation process, as many of them are here myself, as a daughter of an immigrant mother, very proud to be in a city that is has taken a stance. A few things that we've done. Earlier this year, the Long Beach City Council adopted a federal legislative agenda item that included the following statement. It was a support to support comprehensive immigration reform that will provide a dignified path to United States citizenship, strengthen the nation's workforce and the economy. Secondly, we also led a citywide resolution in support of comprehensive immigration immigration reform this past summer, supported by all of our councilmembers and our mayor. Tonight, hopefully, we can be a part of this amicus brief to basically show not only ourselves here, but many other cities, as well as many other nations as well, that we are certainly part of this process to allow people to be who they are, who are immigrants. But much more than that, people who work very hard in our city and beyond, people who have been here for many years, have paid many taxes, who raise their children here, who go to school and who just want to learn and earn a good living. A few numbers that I wanted to share with people. So as many of us know, we're a very diverse city. We're 40.8% Latino, 29.4% Caucasian, 13% African-American, 12.6% Asian and 1.1% Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander. 86% of children in America born to immigrant parents are U.S. born. 12 121 billion. That's total net business income is generated through immigrant businesses, and 11.8 billion in taxes are paid by Latino and Asian individuals. And I'm sorry, Latino and Asian in the U.S. have 2.1 trillion in purchasing power. Those are pretty stark numbers. And I just wanted to throw those out. I know many of us know the demographics here in the city, but it's really important for us to kind of re relook at this as as we look at this larger immigration reform issue. And so I hope our council colleagues can support us on this. I think it's something that Councilmember Suranga and myself have been very strong in supporting, but also will be the voice continuously throughout for many of you. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. Thanks, Vice Mayor. I just want to chime in and and express my support for this as well. You know, we did at this our at our supported the federal legislative committee. And I think it's only appropriate that we support. I think and was reasonable approach by our president. And so I think we are sort of just restating that commitment that we made it fit large in time and time again. So count on me and support on this and I look forward to seeing the brief. Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you. I, too, want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. I do have a question for our city attorney. I'm wondering, could you enlighten us a little bit about what the legal process would be from here on out in terms of our action and then the broader action of the brief? Certainly, vice mayor, members of the city council, tonight's action would allow the city of Long Beach to sign on an amicus brief in the case of Texas versus the United States. That case involves 26 states challenged DAPA, the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents Program and the the states sued to prevent the implementation of DAPA for on three grounds. One was that DAPA violated procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedural Act. Second, that the states claim that the DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, lacked the authority to implement this program. And third, that the this was DAPA is an abrogation of the president's constitutional duties. And so that case, as Councilman Turanga has indicated, has been ruled on in the Fifth Circuit. And this item tonight would allow us and it's being appealed so that the city of Long Beach would sign on an amicus brief in support of the government's position that the program is consent. The powers were not abrogated and that it is consistent with the authority of the Department of Homeland Security that we anticipate that this case will be heard by the Supreme Court and our amicus brief would be filed in the Supreme Court at some point. And when we're signing on, are we actually augmenting by providing any pleadings as a city, or are we signing on to someone else's pleadings? The latter. The city of Long Beach would not be and our office would not be preparing the amicus briefs. The amicus brief is being prepared and we would sign on as a signatory to their amicus brief. Great. Thank you. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I'll be short. I will support this this item. And we stand with thousands of Long Beach residents who are immigrants and who are of immigrant families. I want to keep those families together. I want to support our president. I think his executive action was was was right. And this council council's already taken a position. And so I think we join with dozens of other cities in signing on to this amicus brief. It's the right thing to do. So thank you. And Councilman Andrews. Yes. Thank you, vice mayor. You know, I think a lot of times I think a lot of people read in the paper about what you like, what you dislike about your president. And I think this time he got it and he got it right, because the fact that no one wants to be separated from their families, you know, I totally, you know, support this item that you brought to the floor. Thank you very much, Mr. Ewing. And. Lena. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Andrews. So any member of the public that wishes to address council on this item. Please come forward. State your name. Very good you. Clark, is the address in full disclosure, when I first read this, my the factory senses kicked in, told me that our mayor was looking forward to taking another junket, this one down to New Orleans where the case will be heard. We are a nation of immigrants. Half of my family were immigrants. Where you came from, what country is irrelevant, period? This, however, is extraordinarily dangerous. Well, you heard today faint echoes of the hosannas that were sung in this chamber. About two months ago, less than two months ago, about legions of people streaming across our borders that would come from different countries, etc., etc.. All right. Separation of families is a bogus issue. They need not be all they have to do. All the government has to do is do what Eisenhower did, and they can escort those families that want to leave. Or be together that are here illegally. Escort them back to the country from where they came to the American consulate. Walked them down to the end of the line. The people that are waiting legally and had them explain why they should be allowed to come in just like. That person up there at the end of the line might want to come up and stand here instead of waiting, period. It is disingenuous to say there's no cost to this. The cost will be enormous. We can't afford to pave our streets. And you want to invite the world in. Because, you know. Once they get here. They will get the checks. And hopefully your vote. It's surprising the number of people, the talent, the fact that they have a Ph.D. but don't understand. And we'll share with our colleagues why what led to the collapse of the Roman Empire and every other civilization since that period of time? You follow the law. Allowing these people in is like allowing somebody to rob a bank and say, Well, he did it for good cause he had to feed his family. He was doing this. It's a the law is they've got to come in a certain way. If they're not here, they're illegal. If they choose to stay, it's their decision to separate themselves. Nobody is forcing them to do that, that the United States government will be more than happy to walk them back to where they came from. And to say otherwise is disingenuous. You have a moral obligation. Your oath of office requires you to reject this. Thank you, Mr. Good. Thank you. Good evening, City Council. My name is Alex Montano. Yes, I. Live in the First District and I'm a community organizer with the Filipino Migrant Center. There are over 20,000 Filipinos in this city and over 4 million Filipinos nationwide. It's estimated that one out of four Filipinos in the U.S. may be undocumented, with the highest concentration of Filipinos living in Southern California. The Filipino Migrant Center has been serving. Filipino immigrant. Workers, youth families in Long Beach and the greater Los Angeles area for the past five years. We've served undocumented immigrants who are victims of human trafficking, survivors of domestic violence, low wage caregivers and hotel housekeepers and struggling youth and families. The Filipino Migrant Center celebrates the collective courage and unwavering fighting spirit of undocumented immigrant communities, community organizations and supporters across the United States who have worked tirelessly to protect the human rights of 11 million. Undocumented. Immigrants and challenge the mass unjust deportations and separation of hardworking immigrant families. We will stand against the continued criminalization of immigrant communities whose only crime is to make difficult sacrifices to put food on their families tables, provide a good education and a better future for their children. We'll continue to challenge narratives of deserving and undeserving immigrants that only aim to divide our communities. The Filipino Migrant Center strongly supports the city of Long Beach, signing on to the amicus brief prepared by Cities United for Immigration Action. Signing on to this brief shows that the City of Long Beach stands with its diverse. Immigrant residents and all those who support President Obama's executive action on. Immigration through DOCA end up as expansion programs. We'd like to thank. Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilman Aranda and all those who are here in support of this. Thank you. Thank you. But that's not just me. None of it. So me on the immigrants. Good night. My name is Elizabeth. I'm a member of the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. I'd be one of your winners that I know of when you. I'm also a resident of the First District. I came here eight years ago. The when you look in memory then. In accordance with Google's promiscuous ethical program that panels beneficiary mutual mutual. And like everyone else, I came here with a lot of dreams of having a better life and looking for. Better educational opportunities for. My children. I have two children who are citizens, so that would mean I would qualify for the DAPA program. See the program. It is cyrano beneficiary of the Machado Trabalhos imagery soil does continue to be the. If this program would exist, it would benefit us. Myself and my husband a lot. We would have better work. And because of better work, we would also have better wages. As a compendium of programs under the moral deportation. Ethan. Air separation, then, is just familiar. Asi como mi familia. I know. Even if I sit down with just family. This. We would also be free of fear of deportation. And just like how we would be free of fear of deportation. We would also want to see this for all the residents of the city of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. Immigrants have had a bad image because of some. Activists you name. I'm introducing myself later on. My name is you. It's Garcia. Okay. Thank you. If we really think about it, immigrants aren't bad at all. We fail to realize that we all come from a line of immigrants, from farming to making products for the U.S. We hope this land grow and prosper and it would harm this country if we got rid of them. I am here to Garcia, a junior at Renaissance High School and a youth organizer with Californians for Justice, a grassroot organization that believes that youth and students are the leaders of the future. I am a mexican American, born and raised here. But my parents were immigrants. They worked hard in this country to keep themselves and our family going and sustained. If we get rid of these people, things won't circulate the same way. Yeah, there will be more job openings. But how many people are actually qualified to do those jobs? Are they willing to do what they do? But why would this matter to me? If immigrants get deported, then I would lose my main support. My best friend, my sister. She is one of the most important people in my life and I'm not ready to see her go. She was there for me since day one. I finally got her back in my life for five years after she moved out when she was 17 or 18. I look up to her and thanks to her I have had my life on track and I do better because I cannot disappoint the person I care most about. I want to help make her life better. She has three kids. Two haven't even started kindergarten yet. And the oldest is in fifth grade. They love her dearly and are always around her, smiling, laughing and caring on her last nerve. But she loves them the same way as these people. Are these people really ready to break up a loving family? I would be dead right now if it wasn't for her. Honestly. This is my story. A story of a little girl who might lose her best friend. Because all the ugly opinions of immigrants because people don't see the impact she has made in people's lives in my life. We need to see each other as humans. Strip the labels off and show love towards one another because no one is illegal. Hello. My name is Sandy Garcia. I'm a junior, a renaissance high school. I know you've organized with Californians for justice. Undocumented immigrants should have a pathway to residency and citizenship. Immigrants have shaped this country in many ways from the beginning. Our ancestors immigrated to this country. Immigrants fought for our independence. And today they helped the economy. My parents were also undocumented immigrants, as well as my aunts and uncles. My mom's worked hard for as long as she's been here. About five years ago, my father abandoned us and was deported back to Mexico. He left my mom as a single mother working minimum wage to support me and both my handicapped brothers. Today, my mother my mother has fought and won for her residency here in the U.S.. She's now learning English to become a full time nurse, and she's inspired me and been there for me through everything and inspired many people to how she's lived her life here. If she had been deported, I don't know where I would be today. I don't know how life would be for myself and for many people. Words can describe the loss of a loved one as I felt when I lost my dad. And I can't imagine how I would be now and how would I be feeling if I lost both of them. But that's the case for many people. They lost both their mother and her father because they're deported. We can't let families be torn apart. That's why undocumented immigrants should be given a pathway towards residency and citizenship. Thank you. Good evening, city council members. My name is Alejandro Campos and I reside in the second district. I have been living in Long Beach since I was two years old, and even though I was born in Mexico, I consider Long Beach, my hometown, and my home. I am Marissa at Long Beach City College Transfer student and a current Cal State Long Beach student. I am also a member of the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. Dacher has affected me in a positive way and has allowed me to work and maintain myself in school. If it wasn't for Dhaka, I wouldn't be able to afford to go to school. It has also allowed me to support my mother financially as best as I can, and aside from the difficulties, it has also allowed me to keep motivated and help others in the same situation. Stay informed and aware that families will benefit from Dhaka and DAPA programs. My mother herself would be one of the many who would benefit from this. She has been a single mother who raised me through the challenges of working multiple, low paying jobs. I believe our parents deserve the opportunity to work legally with without the fear of losing their jobs. Why? While I am thankful for Dhaka, I am aware that there are still millions like my mother who will benefit from the Dakar and double programs and be given the same access that has been granted to me. We should empower and document. We should and undocumented communities as deserving and undeserving as it creates a hostile environment. And it is a human right to live and work without fear and not be targeted because of socioeconomic and legal status. While I'm still here to represent many of the Dhaka many youth, I am here to fight for people like my mother and millions of others like her. Some of our most marginalized communities, like our LBGTQ, hue API and low income communities depend on these programs and they cannot wait and risk their lives any longer. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Good evening, members of the council. My name is S.A. Hernandez. I am a student at Long Beach City College and president of B Student Org at ABC C Coalition for Latino Advancement. Selah is a support group for the undocumented student population at NBCC and we are assisting with their academic goals. I am here tonight not only to share my story, but many of my peers confront. It is important for that council to approve the sign on to a letter because it will benefit both the undocumented and the documented community. These programs will help limit workplace exploitation, discrimination, wage theft and other violations. Because now our community will be protected. When I began working on my current job under the old management, I was asked to provide a copy of my Social Security, California ID and work permit. Because of that, I can present these documents, but some of my coworkers have limited protection and thus increases the chances of work violations and displacement. I have learned in my environmental science class that immigration and first world countries helped keep our population and economy healthy. But these benefits can only be done with programs like DOCA, DAPA and immigration reform. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez and Council Member Muranga for introducing this item. Thank you. Good night, council members. My name is Smiley. Never meets. I has. I had been living in this city for the last 22 years. I have two kids. One is a senior at Cal State Long Beach. The other one is a freshman at UC Santa Barbara. And I am an American but undocumented in the United States. In. I has been involved in this community doing many things to change. The things that were around my kids because I want to see my kids grow in a healthy safety place. And I has been in ball with many organizations, many giving my time volunteer. I never get any payment for that. My job is I'm a caregiver. I'm taking care for elderly people. But at. I'm asking. Many people here say. This country is giving the opportunity to those people who are dreaming and have a better life. I think I deserve that life. For me, it's for me and my family. I need that support. I need to have my documents. Because I'm tired to be living in that way. I want to get a better job. I want to go back to the school. But because I am. And the comment that I had to pay for my units. Like, if a person person pays like a $3, I have to pay almost $300. I can do that. But I need you guys to support this recommendation because it's going to help not only me, all of these families that are here in AG. When they came to this country, I came running for the violence in my country. And I don't want to go back because now is worse. And I came to this country 24 years ago. I think. I deserve that opportunity. And I ask you to give me that opportunity with due support to this recommendation. Thank you. Thank you. Buenas noches. Emmy nominee sister. The lawyer. If only six of these three. Then go the baby in Colombia. Good evening. My name is under the when I'm here from the sixth District and I've been living in Long Beach for ten years. The heaviest one can say Sorry. I said ten, but I meant 15. Sorry. Ginger. Yes, the pie is. For La mesa Galaxy CMC has notable opportunity that at the nitty in a solution is the base. I came to this country with the hope of providing opportunities for my daughters. Unfortunately, I didn't have the privilege of having children born here in the United States. Maybe they're still more defensive. Jackie Sandona, Marine documentarian. Victima. They are also sexual. I see, though. Well, if he's still all. Look at Myanmar. We though they need a key. So my my life has been very difficult here, being the mother of an undocumented daughter, being a victim of sexual violence. My life has been a challenge. Cuando me patrimonio youth. NASA Sanyo yell Yale. Mexico muchos. Buenos. Centimeters are more proximal junk. That panelist premier John Figure. Just like. So my father passed many years ago, and before that he was able to instill many values in me. I learned a lot from him. Part of that was many values where even though I don't benefit from myself, I'm still here and supportive of my community. Which is familias, which are some eagles which does business just like a know if you serve it up. Peckham already had Principal Strachey put me down. Are they? Yes. Established the heat able programmer Thacker Laboratories paid up for a program that is the suit that is literally missing yet those let the program is we need those is charitable amino acid moment on reporter story I keep me company that. So there are many people in our community, there are many families, many neighbors that would benefit from this program. I'm here because one of my daughters is a doc recipient. One of my other daughters is awaiting DAPA. This is the land of my grandchildren. This is a land where they've grown up. This is the city where they were born and raised. And so even though this is not something that that benefits me directly, this is something that I support because I support my community. Eco my principle on so-called liner notes. The hook eloquent, they say, is policy until they need you. As soon as a serious squeeze on the personal commentators. Jonathan Wiener. But can also take some responsibility because the police sega probably sent the UK non-existent racismo. So as Councilwoman Gonzalez mentioned earlier, 86% of children born here are children of immigrants. So there's still a lot of work left to do. We need to support our neighbors and our community to help make this city a better place. That's just Atlantis. Of course, Eskimos will be the Iscariot. About how much of can stay this. A Syrian elsewhere was puzzled by the action, the rescue, the seals crisis at todos atolls. An importer K is selling Contra Newport Pakistan of about those almost hermanos. Communalism was have to skin Romano's. So thankfully, through the many experiences I've been here before, I'm here again just to say thank you. Based off of last week's Thanksgiving, I'm here to say thank you. Thank you for for your support and thank you for moving forward. Which has gracias. E So you must have a hand. Thank you very much. And we will continue to work. When there's no chase. I mean no one Rivera. That is soy miembro devo the. There I go. Here what I iglesia. Psalm Attanasio is the. Gracias. Uh, I lost Miembros. A lunar rover. Poor, poor supporter. That gave up. Rivera. So good evening. My name is One Rivera. I'm an active member of ACO and also an active member of Saint Athanasius Church. I wanted to say thank you to Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez and Councilmember Robert Otunga. Yeah. Totally. Conciliar and all of the council. Uh, you think all those sequels start next to donate your time, your is the thing or being dear to your psyche? I have two children. They're studying it in college. I have 28 years living here. But I mean, we through academy. And it's the. Investors being the Chinese getting lucky. Uh, e. Busy man. City employee movie and also truth cannot support Diana Cuomo's. Standpoint, that guy in Napa. So I worked the entire 28 years that I've been here, and I just wanted to say thank you that I hope that you support this and moving forward with Doc and UPA. But on the reform. A moratorium proposes a crisis because it's a process. It is to the process. And also for a broader immigration reform, continue working for a broader immigration reform. So I just wanted to say thank you to all of you. Thank you very much. Thank you. When I'm not just me, nobody is. Alison Gomez, Ignacio Sal el Consiglio Khalid portable yet is the dapper. Alison. Good evening. My name is Elisa Gomez, and I just wanted to say thank you to the council and to the mayor for supporting this. So, I mean, of I go. People in long. But the glaciers are not done as you. So I'm a member of. I go and I pertain to St Athanasius Church. I live in North Long Beach. Gillespie, Lochaber, Fort Walton. What impressed upon Lisa can also necesitamos tanto. So I just wanted to to ask for your vote to help support this policy. Yeah. You're going mi familia. Tenemos bueno, Cinco and your saki. It's a monster. I had a bit of butter up north and there was some trouble with Staveley for Siempre for me the call us trabajo jag jag immigration. So my family and I have been here for about 25 years and we've worked the entire time and although we've had jobs, they haven't been stable jobs for fear of immigration showing up. Good thing nosotros hermosa basado pronounced momentos melody celeste then grammy hussle baby enter the concert our little thing Grammy Millennium put out a whimper necesitamos necesitamos trabajo L.A.. So we've had a very difficult time here. One of my daughter is a cancer survivor. My son just had his foot amputated. And so we need a more stable job and we need better opportunities. Hi MoMenTos. Marie Dificil. As Kay Cannon said, most basado Yoki sera go animal sacrifice the police. This woman, Linda Bass, gave the animals which are great. They certainly kennels that although better compared to Moscow, nothing more. So I just wanted to say that, you know, although we've had some difficult times here, this is a beautiful country to be in. There's so many beautiful opportunities. But to be able to to to excel and there's so many wonderful things that we have access to. But we need. We need more support. I momentos. Okay. C'est un dificil free. This is a more complete take on this dog. Yes. Gucciardo is the. Gets. Guess it a salary they could get in a car on. Conquistadores personas symbolize us. Con me who? There's there's a lot of concerns that we have with these difficult times, such as the the the law that wants to be that people are trying to pass where it puts those that need those in need, those with special needs at risk. Services, then go then go to more violence bitterly. In Malawi, another amendment is seen that in no way actually not that we're not going. Yes, gucciardo this other las personas adults because one last person is going to say you then not done this offers up, you know, the land. So there's a lot of fear revolving around taking my son, my adult son, into the hospital where he might get medication based off of what I've been hearing. That can basically do away with him. So there's a lot of fear where if we go, even as adults, they can be given medication that would put him at risk . What part of our let's be the start of our list that other corazon. Yes, yes, yes. So with all my heart, I just wanted to say thank you. And I ask for your help. Thank you. Good evening, members of the council. My name is Barry Escort, senior side in. The third district. As a member. Of the Long Beach Community and member of the Long Beach Immigrants Rights Coalition. I have seen. And heard the struggles that many members of the community face concerning their family, their work, their health, and the stress they experience because of their legal status. Programs such as DOCA and DAPA dramatically improve the lives of our community members. In terms of families, it helps prevent the break ins of families and losing loved ones. It also prevents 2 million deportations that occurred during Obama's presidency to reoccur in terms of their work environment. These programs help to prevent mistreatment, discrimination and oppression against members of the community. These programs also help the health and the stress of the members of the community that they face. It helps them achieve less stress and have a better well-being. Instead of focusing on external stressors. In the ESL classes that I help volunteer in, there is a woman that I notice and her name is Ramona and every day she goes to work and she cleans houses. But on Tuesdays and Thursdays she comes in and she takes two busses to get here and is so and persevered to learn English that she willing to take those two busses. And come to these classes for 2. Hours to learn English. Even though she struggles, she continues on. Members such as her are an example of an exemplary member in this community. She demonstrates the strengths that members of this community have despite facing adversities. I would also like to mention that I know some of those believe that this is more of a burden to address . But I would just like to say that if we focus more on fixing this problem and. Leading the continuation of Dhaka in Dhaka to continue. That we can have members of this community focus more on their strengths and the strengths of their community. Instead of worrying about external stressors that they have, the elimination of these stressors will help them better focus on themselves and helping the community. We think council, we think the council and specifically Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez and Councilmember Otunga for passing a resolution in support of comprehensive immigration reform and the expanded Dhaka and DAPA programs. And we hope you can take a step further by approving this letter and demonstrating our city values are undocumented community. Thank you. Hi, my name is Melissa Gomez. And I want. To thank the council and mayor for supporting us the last time. And I am a member of Echo. I just hope that my parents get their papers soon because. I dream of going to high school. And college and graduating. But I can do all of this if my parents get in back to Mexico. My parents are a big part of my life and if something comes to happen to them, well, I just can't imagine my life without them. My parents are a big deal in my life because two, they spent two years in the hospital with me. And what I mean by that is that I am a cancer survivor. My parents need to get the papers soon because I need a bit. They need a better job because we. Could barely manage. Our house rent. And my mom has a dream of. Taking me to Mexico once. Before they die. Thank you. Well, I mean, Maria Reyes it yesterday I keep hearing about this. I consider your little cadre. GARCIA the Ebola resolution, the attack carried out by your side of the aisle. But then last year, the San Antonio. Good evening. My name is Maria Reyes, and I wanted to say thank you to the city council and the mayor for their support on the resolution for DOCA and DAPA. I am a member of ICA and I also belong to Saint Athanasius Church. Must be the you must report for. More then ETA is the police and what are you doing here? So I'm here to ask for your support in favor of this policy, because it would help a lot of us but cannot. Animal documentaries. Yeah. But if hear your story, you know, personally. Yes. Okay. So for instance, it would help a lot of those individuals who are undocumented. As an example, I am one of those individuals. I would then work. You try to throw a handle and me throw I know Metrodome, Obamacare, so you're not taking a lot of commenters. Me Pardon my vocal you are going to throw out are not going into the struggle of Mahayana outside Australia. Yeah. So I just wanted to say that we've been here for 30 years and we've worked. It's a difficult job because they, they do mistreat us very much, mainly because they understand that I don't have my documents, they work us for long hours from three in the morning until 12 p.m.. In North Central a hundred years festival. So I know what on the regular. And I said, what about various quotas, good morale. But I look at the and in the comments I really Byron must be back on Manus you know so Megan these young Americans of course almost all those in the commentators. So they must treat us very much and they pay us very low, very low wages. They force us to work on holidays and pay us as if it were a regular day. They pay us less than they pay those others who do have their documents and they also humiliate us and talk down to us and say that you are the, you know, undocumented people. A portfolio list bureau cannot say you are then, but I will not reforma migratoria para todas las personas cannot the of documentos. But also, you know the land multinationals see who's, you know, they been there and as you see what you see, migration borders, which are most precious. So I just wanted to say and ask for your support in moving forward for immigration reform in general, we need to be able to have the support that we need for the communities, for us to be more self-sufficient and be able to work and support our families without the help from anyone else. Thank you. Buenas noches. Me Nombres Dora Valdez. Good evening. My name is Dora Valdez Quiroz. I realized that Axel Consiglio Yul. Mr. Alcala. Rovere Garcia. So I wanted to say thank you to our city council and our mayor. Garcia whatever percent la resolution the DA by Baca. For the support on the resolution for DOCA and. You're saying miembro de vida iker e Burton Isco. Imogen Griego in Iglesia San Antonio. So I am also a very active member of ICA and I am a member of Saint Anthony Congregation. Pedro Neto Cassian, they were the last letter carrier catamaran in Winter Ale. Both are Bautista Police added DAPA. So I just wanted to ask that you take into account to vote for this DOCA policy. Or general Arizona policy. Qual Is your main career in question in because. One of the main reasons why I've become involved in civic engagement. Is Paquette. I won't get killed on beach. I'd never see that come up. What member states? Those on the different spaces. Because here in the city of Long Beach, there's a lot of diversity, such as yourselves sitting here. Today. So that we're necesitamos bosses, Latinas kill as well as you can think. We need more Latino voices that have pain for their people. You'll be one in the street. On where? Yeah. Mucho mas, Afro-American y. So I come from District nine and there are many African-American individuals. There is no police. They can be very confused. I am very happy to congregate with them. Pork Burger Your Boy. The bear killed on Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary de Hojo. Boil, tap on me hand. And why? Because I know that there was Martin Luther King that said I'm going to fight for my people. Is a solo? No. Did he do it alone? No. Secondarily, when organizations in Esquina in Todos Lugares. He became involved in schools and congregations and any other place he could. Establish being and also turn not. So now most objected to establish a precedent that that's the case, that. It's important for us to come together and unite in support of this policy. End up on your list. But I won't talk. Key person told you that is the Long Beach get to trabajar la policia in cahoon tokenize. So I ask you what what about the the collaboration between the city of Long Beach and the police? Well, I'll be PD and I. Work for them on Lucero Besim was born with Russell that. Get emails soon as you that. Segura Necesitamos do not do that, Segura. So we can start there. But we need a safe community. We need a much safer community. As a trust message. Raytheon receive emails sent so they can do so in document that I put as their beneficiary services center. So about three months ago, I received my my driver's license because based off of HB 60, I finally qualified despite being undocumented. Maybe he made that with our, say, mass killer TV. My first ticket was given within that first month I received my IT. If you go for Korea, you're the one ticket. That first day that I received my driver's license in the mail, I received a ticket. El Policia Criminal the all the Nerazzurri Inter Milan four at sea on parole for a bystander assistant. The police officer that gave me the ticket had had reason, but he was extremely racist. El maitre thor the 13th though Javier comi esposo quando la romantic con me yellow double contrato conmigo more indifferent to Jonathan thi. So he treated me very, very differently. I have experience going with my daughter and my husband, but it was a very different treatment that I received from this individual. Mainly me, though. Joining me, I'm Morgan Isadora, the L'organisme de I Copper Catherine de Comorian. Mr. Tratando. He discriminated against me. I reached out to my organizer with Iko to help support me. You open sea Cairo's Tahrir Square. Look elsewhere the author call me when is the personnel sincerely fit in the you give me family anything get us Abacha you story what are the custom? So I thought what what is it about this driver's license that provoked this treatment to be different without my family even knowing that I was out of my house Wednesday? Mr. Morris, you then me familiar? I see those seem pretty. Elton Plan Pacino Yep. About Mama Cass that. One of the biggest fears that we have is to have a plan in case one of our mom or our father don't come home one day. And it's just the important because your circle has fiestas. As you can also see it almost la familia. Only that. La Esperanza. There's Vanessa. Sue status. No support. And yes, that's the only diva. Get it? What is what is it? Reform that necessary. So given the holidays coming up, there's there's a lot of need for our families to be together and enjoyment from our families being together. So we need to have the support of this DOCA and DAPA policy in order to make that happen. Gracias, todos. Gracias. Asterisk is impressed on this crescendo. Bit on a certain necessity, almost at theend. Yeah. La Comunidad is ASEAN. So thank you very much for listening. And I just wanted to say, you know, what we need is action, the community. Iko, we're here to continue this work. And thank you very much. My name is Debbie Jones, resident of the third district. I'm here to show my support for the brief, and hearing all the people. Has really. Convinced me it's the right thing to do. Thank you. Tony Reyes, Iran GOProud, resident of the seventh District. I want to, first of all, thank Councilmember Gonzalez and Councilmember Rangel for bringing this forward. I totally support it. I also want to thank Councilmember Andrews, Austin and Richardson for expressing their support. And I know the rest of you will do the right thing. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor and Council Members. My name is Itamar two letter and I reside in District seven and I'm here to ask for your support this item. I also want to thank Councilmember Wodonga and Councilmember Gonzalez for bringing this forward. I have been an advocate. I am the co-founder of the Leticia Network, a professional association of educators from across the state who have dedicated their lives to advocating for undocumented students. Creating opportunities for undocumented students in our colleges and universities. And. Every time we see our students. Coming through the doors. Every time we see our students graduating from the university, we know that these individuals have earned the right to be in this country. Many of the citizens that you hear, the immigrant citizens that you've heard tonight, many who are not here, are already contributing to our society. They are already productive members of our society. They are not asking for a handout. They are asking for the same opportunity that was afforded to the many immigrants who have come to this nation over the centuries looking for a better life. That's all they are asking. And you heard it here, story after story. They are here for a better life. They are here to provide better opportunities for their children. So I hope that tonight you will do the right thing and support this agenda item. Thank you. When I'm not sure my number is Rosanne Mosqueda. Good evening. My name is. Rosa. Rosa muscular. Easternmost Aggie. But a simply Carlos cannot support you. So we're here today to ask you to support us. But. But at the end, I don't make her travel who she is. The. Yes, that must be important to me. See who has got to keep that. So that we may have better jobs, so that we can spend more time with. With our daughter. Our little daughter. Forget. I assume I know my far here. You know, you must sit up. And there was a poultry maker per kilo. They bought that on their key, you know, for the most. Well. So about a year ago, my husband passed away and unfortunately, we were unable to see him one last time and be at his funeral because they had deported him. When the relative where their key of love and communion. Yeah what I'm meaning happens a calvary get a son or you're living up with that kid, you know. Yeah, it'll just. If we can, you'll sit up again. The ending. Yeah. Yeah. These are your kids via your Canadian. But they're doing this, Papa. So when my husband was here, he would talk to my daughter every day and. Excuse me. And so since she's so young, she doesn't understand that he's passed on. So she always asks me, like, when are we going to go? When are you going to take me? You know, you can take me to go see him. Visit my mom, but give me these. Just give me the gist of it. But I like this topic. Nothing or papa. But it cannot be in but can move on. Was a very low. Let me go. You're not with him. You don't know whether he'll continue. So she tells me. My daughter tells me. Why does everyone know that I don't have a father? Why does everyone know? Why can't you just take me to go see him? Why don't you just take me? And I tell her, you know, I can't go with you. I can't take. You. He left Peter there for a walk in the supposed Emperor Simeon with the young troublemaker. Poor kid, trabajo mucho years. 3 minutes. The book on me, Nina. Yes, the orientalist affect and the journalist well know may submit given in primitive era, although not my past operation, Freddy said its committee thin analyst Aquila me by me my mum at the end and get you that I could Natalia. So I work many hours and I'm here to ask for your support, to have the opportunity to have a better job. I work many hours and I don't get to spend as much time with my daughter. And as a result, she's been struggling in school. And so she'll tell me that her teachers constantly tell her that she needs to have her mother and her father help her with her homework. But since I work many hours, I can't be there. With this bit I'm just getting a casino support unique. He kept that mostly joke on me. Nina is the must book. I think I must tempo. You're communing yet you bother me Nina. The irony is that La Tumba, the Super Bank is health of urban decay, though. So I just wanted to say thank you very much and that we ask for your support so that we may have that opportunity to get a better job so that I can spend more time with my daughter, and also to have the opportunity to take her to see her father's grave so that she could finally understand where he is. Thank you. Thank you very much. When I notice, I mean, normally I see Scylla but then escalate. ATTANASIO Good evening. My name is Ishola and I pertain to St Anthony's church. Let's talk about this. Qualcomm, silicon is this concerto almost or it's not the most helpful. But as Bonanno said necessity that this. I wanted to say thank you and show gratitude to our city council who's taking the time to listen to all of those of us who made the time to come out today? So most troubled or not, the normal Thelonious Monk cannot play the most. Um, probably myself base. So we are hard working people. We are people without felonies. We are people who are making our country a better place. Qui sera sera. No, no, oportunidad. Your. I said, and you remember you. Music was around when. You couldn't. Make. So I'm here to ask for your support. About a year ago, they murdered one of my sons. Let's talk about the Syria Mutual. Can. So they can know the problem can also put together. In Mexico. I'm delinquency. This school, man. We are glad. Although that is. I.e. Contemporary Metal Sultan. I personally could if you run me. That is. The current Solomon. This could be. Well. So I just wanted to share a little bit about my story. My son, who was murdered and I just wanted to share, first off, that we're people who aren't criminals. Unfortunately, in Mexico, there is a lot of delinquency. And part of my story is that of my son. Of the three that murdered my son, only one remain in captivity with unfortunately. I'm going to speak a little bit tonight about some of the authorities in Mexico, unfortunately, with a little bit of cash. They're able to to release anybody. The school as we know about mental as good as yes can also change so most can stay. His son was killed. And what's yet is the price is right. They must. This cool urban myth, not politics. Romney's will need all of Congress or so a new one. Those are what are the austerity scare. And because, of course as soon as they. Muchas gracias. Those. So I just wanted to say excuse me and thank you again for for taking the time to listen to me and to hear part of my story. Of course, I understand that not all law enforcement is the same. Not all of our officials are the same. But I just wanted to share a little bit of that. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of the City Council. My name is Jessica Quintana and I'm the executive director of Central Asia, where, as you know, we are a community based organization here in the city of Long Beach providing immigrant and integration services for over 15 years. I just want to come today and just acknowledge the championship and the leadership of our city council today. Councilmember Gonzalez, thank you so much. Councilmember Warren. God, thank you. And all the council members here in support of this issue for really taking the courage in protecting your your residents and the students and the families that are here live here in Long Beach. And sending a message and signing this brief on behalf of our city is is really honorable of you all to do this. So I just want to thank you on behalf of our organization, because these are the stories that we hear every single day. And so as a social service agency, you know what? The dollars that we get, we're trying to help families who lost their children, help families who need to get their kids to college, help families with their immigration documentation. So, again, on behalf of our organization, thank you so much. Good evening. My name is June Cow City. I am in District two and I stand here in solidarity with the folks who came up to speak to the undocumented community in Long Beach. And I do I work in the domestic violence field, working with teenagers, doing prevention work and with Southeast Asian youth. And a new challenge that came up recently for me was when talking about healthy families, it's really difficult when some of the youth that I worked with don't have their parents with them because, you know, even they have been victims of deportation for crimes they committed at a young age and didn't even. Realize. They would get deported for even after serving their time. And even. Today, some of the families that I work with in the. Cambodian community have a real fear that ice could come through their door any minute and take them away, despite already serving the time. For the crimes they committed from their younger years. I hope that by supporting. This. Act. All families in Long Beach will no longer have to fear being separated from their families. There's actually going to be a community forum coming up in two weeks on December. 16th to discuss. Deportation in more depth of the Southeast Asian community. And I just hope that for the holidays. That these families. That I work with don't have to fear deportation as well. So thank you. Councilmember Urunga. Thank you. Vice mayor of this ghetto, sir. Me, me, me and those days those giving aid and a lot of this was I a demo. Saric it's an important tip but a lesson that is will get tomorrow but they need to not. But here we are in the demo is somewhere right as you e and I hear that was Nina's it was Nina's Damien that Gregory said portray Damien because we importanti gay you can see where I would like to see sit where there is to get. He said, We're up there. And there is, he said wearily again, the surprise as he passed more than just. For the for the bilingually challenged. I basically just gave the thanks to the community for coming out this evening for the the mothers who brought their children here tonight saying basically that they it's an expression that they are able to come forward before this body to speak their minds. That they can study, that they can learn. And that they can live free in this country. All. Thank you, Councilmember Urunga. And we appreciate all the public testimony that's been heard, I think, from the comments that council members made prior to the public speaking, that there is overwhelming support here among council members. But we are happy to have heard each and every one of your individual stories and and your perspective on why this is important for us to take action. I think you all understand that this council does not have legal authority over this issue. It is, but it is important for us to stand up and make statements, however symbolic they may be, that impact a great percentage of our residents, and that is what this action would be. And so while it may not change laws or move the mountains that stand in the way of families being united and remaining united, at least symbolically, you will know that your council stands with you and stands on the side of humanity. With that council members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Will you remind us what our next item is? Item 22. Thank you. 322 Report from City Manager, Financial Management and Public Works Recommendation to award a contract to all American asphalt for the construction of the shoreline. Drive traffic improvements. For a total contract amount not to exceed $606,000. District two.

AN ORDINANCE relating to fees and charges for permits and activities of the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections, related fees by other departments, and technical corrections; amending Sections 3.58.090, 15.04.074, 22.900B.010, 22.900B.020, 22.900C.010, 22.900D.010, 22.900D.070, 22.900D.090, 22.900D.100, 22.900D.110, 22.900D.140, 22.900D.145, 22.900D.150, 22.900D.160, 22.900E.020, 22.900E.030, 22.900E.040, 22.900E.050, 22.900E.060, 22.900F.010 and 22.900G.015 of the Seattle Municipal Code (SMC); and repealing Section 22.900G.080 of the SMC.

SeattleCityCouncil_11252019_CB 119669

Any comments? Those in favor of placing the kirk file on file please vote i. I opposed vote no. The motion carries and that Kirk file is placed on file to please read item seven through 11. And you could read the short title if you'd like. Agenda item seven through 11 Council Vote 119669. Related to the fees and charges for permits and activities of the Seattle Department of Department of Construction and Inspections Committee recommends recommend Seattle Pass Council Bill 11967. An ordinance relating to the Traffic Code Committee recommends a bill passes amended Council Bill 119 671 related to the Department of Parks and Recreation establishing in 2019 through 2025. Schedule Committee recommends the Bill Pass Council Bill 119 672 relating to the solid waste system of Seattle Public Utilities Committee recommends the bill passed and Council Bill 119 673 Blaine to Contracting and Deafness Committee recommends the bill pass. All right. We're going to start with seven. Any questions or comments? No. Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. Pacheco I want to thank John Gonzalez Herbold II Suarez. Macheda O'Brien. President Harrell. Hi. Nine in favor. Nine opposed to a pass and sure sign it on number eight. Any questions or comments? Please call the rule on the passage of the bill. Chico. I want. I. John Gonzalez. Herbold Hi. Suarez Macheda. Hi. O'Brien Hi. President Harrell. I am favorite unopposed. Bill passed and chair of the Senate. Yeah. 671 So on number nine, are there any question number nine, please call the rule on the passage of the bill. Pacheco I want I beg. Gonzalez Herbal Suarez. Mr. O'Brien. All right. President Harrell. All right. Nine in favor. Nine oppose. This person. Sure. Sign it. I would say that. Confused? Look at my face there. Amelia, cut that one. There were ten. Any questions or comments? Please call the rule on the passage of the bill Pacheco. I want John Gonzalez. Purple Juarez Macheda O'Brien, President Harrell. I. Nine in favor none. Oppose the bill passed and show sign and number 11. Any questions or comments? Please call the roll on the passage of the bill. PACHECO Hi, Sergeant. I beg your. Gonzalez. Herbold Hi, Juarez. Let's get to O'Brien. Hi, President Harrell. Hi. Nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passes. Sure, I'll sign it. The score items 12 through 16.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary for a Supplemental Agreement to Management Agreement No. 21667 with ASM Global, a Pennsylvania joint venture, to complete various capital improvements at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center, at 300 East Ocean Boulevard, in the amount of $1,429,962. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_06212022_22-0701

Yes. Good evening. Vice Mayor and city council decided is for a supplement supplemental agreement with ASM Global to complete various capital improvements to the Long Beach Convention Entertainment Center. These improvements would include improvements to the areas of the Beverly O'Neill Theater, Terrace, Theater, Terrace, Plaza and Promenade, among others. So this is a typical in arrangement with the city and some global to complete capital improvement projects on behalf of the Public Works Department. Right. Pretty straightforward. Any public comment on this item? No public. Comment numbers. Please cast your vote. Councilwoman Sarah. Motion is carried. Thank you. Item 33, please. Item 33 is reported from Economic Development and Public Works recommendation to execute a hotel management agreement with Evolution Hospitality LLC for the reopening and operation of the Queen Mary District one. Councilman Hassouna. Okay, great. Is there a staff report here? Yes. Vice Mayor So this is a very significant item. We've been for months working on a negotiation to bring this item to you to be able to reopen the Queen Mary. It's been a strategic priority of this council is to get the ship back open again and generating revenue so we can put those revenues back into the asset. So we've worked very closely with the port, with the Harbor Commission on this item. They've been part of it, as we've been contemplating, of course, a future transaction where they would would take over this asset. And I'd like Johnny Boy here to kind of walk us through the concept here, how it would work, what some of our obligations are, and also some of the upside revenue projections that we expect to realize from this from this item. Thank you, Johnny. Thank you. As Tom mentioned, this item is a recommendation for hotel management agreement with evolution, hospitality for Operations Queen Mary. I thought a really brief history of management of Queen Mary would be helpful. So as noted here, the Queen Mary was purchased by the city in 1967, opened to the public in 1972, and was operated by the city for five years. Oversight of the ship was in passing the Port of Long Beach in 1978, whereas operated by Rather Corporation, then Disney under long term lease. Disney terminated their agreement in 1992. And in that same year, the Board of Commissioners transferred control back to the city. Under city control, there have been a series of lessees, including USDA, Save the Queen, Jefferson and Urban Commons, all struggling under the long term lease structure and the debt incurred acquiring the lease. In 2020, the Queen Mary was closed due to COVID, and after several notices of default, the lessee ultimately filed for bankruptcy. Upon notification of bankruptcy by the master lessee, the city engaged evolution hospitality under a caretaker agreement to maintain the ship and former leasehold area. This agreement was minimal in scope, was only meant to provide core maintenance and security of the site. Additional. Additionally, evolution provided support for the Public Works Department and Economic Development Department through the ongoing implementation of critical projects previously approved by City Council. Evolution is also work along the fire department, developing an updated emergency response plan for the Queen Mary and implementing repairs. Improvements to the fire life safety systems. Instructed by the city council, the city the city began negotiating with evolution, hospitality for a broader hotel management agreement. Besides extensive experience with Queen Mary and its unique challenges, evolution together with their parent company, Anchorage Hospitality, is the largest hotel operator in the country. Economic Development staff have worked with staff from Public Works, Hybrid Department and the Office of Special Events and filming to develop a more comprehensive hotel management agreement. We also engage consulting services of Kaiser Master Associates to review aspects of the proposed agreement. It's important to note this is a management agreement as opposed to the former lease structure. So the city retains significantly more responsibility for the asset, such as major capital, such as major capital improvements. But the city also is entitled to a majority of net profits generated at the site. We feel we have developed a comprehensive yet flexible agreement and evolution has made concessions which reflect their commitment to the asset and belief in the viability of the Queen Mary as a hotel and attraction. To that end, we have negotiated five major terms and conditions. This agreement is for an initial five year term with two successive one year options at the discretion of the city. Evolution will be responsible for the former Queen Mary leasehold area, including the Queen Mary and adjacent parking. They will operate and manage the Queen Mary hotel attractions, retail, food and beverage parking and ship based special events. The city will reimburse evolution for reimbursable expenses in the course of the reopening and evolution as their base fee will be paid 2.5% of total operating revenue in year one and 2% in year two and beyond. This is a reduction in their standard 3% base fee. He said he will pay evolution $9,000 a month for centralized accounting and marketing support. As a performance incentive. Evolution may earn 10% of earnings before interest depreciation and amortization in excess of 7.5 million. Please note a slight change in this term as described in the written staff report. Instead, Citi would pay evolution based on an undated financials and reconcile against added financials if needed. We've obviously set a performance threshold whereby the city would have the right to terminate the agreement without penalty if certain performance measures are not met. If, though the city decides to terminate the agreement for the sale or lease of the asset or otherwise defaults within the first two years, the city would be required to pay a termination fee, which is calculated based on previous base fee and monthly operations. For reference, a simple calculation based on a second year termination would result in approximately $500,000 termination fee. For the period prior to reopening. The city will pay evolution $25,000 a month and cover documented reimbursable evolution will proceed. We'll provide a reopening budget, setting forth the proposed costs and expenses anticipated to be incurred during this reopening period. This is currently estimated at approximately 1.6 million. Also to safely reopen in limited hotel attraction and visitor services services. Approximately $1 million in improvements are needed for such items as those noted here. Boilers, piggyback repairs, elevators, etc.. All funds received by evolution in the operation of the Queen Mary, including working capital furnished by the city, will be deposited into an operating account. To the extent funds are available in the operating account, evolution shall pay all operating expenses as part of its audit rights. The city will have the right to inspect this operating account at any time. At the end of the fiscal year, evolution will distribute to the city all sums, all sums in the operating account in excess of the working capital requirements. To ensure the ability to pay for eligible operating expenses and in accordance with industry norms. The city will provide $1.5 million in working capital to be placed in the offering account upon execution of the agreement. Please note for accounting purposes, this will be booked as prepaid expense does not affect the city's net position of the City Fund and does not represent any additional compensation or expense other than that already contemplated in the agreement. Its working capital level will be maintained and anticipated to be supported by revenue generated upon reopening of the ship. 4% of total operating revenues shall be allocated and paid monthly to an FINI reserve for replacement substitution and additions to furniture, fixtures and equipment. Any funds remaining in the FFP nine reserve at the end of the fiscal year will be rolled over to the next fiscal year, and upon expiration or term termination of this agreement, evolution shall remit all remaining amounts in the FFP reserve to the city. Evolution will also be required to produce monthly financial reports and annual audited financial reports showing the results of operations of the asset throughout the fiscal year. Evolution will keep full and accurate books of account and other records reflecting the operation of the Queen Mary. And those records will be available to the city and its representatives for examination, audit and inspection. Evolution will provide an annual operating budget and capital budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The capital budget will set forth in reasonable line item detail proposed capital projects and expenditures, including planned FMA opening expenditures. The city will provide approval or disapproval of these budgets within 30 days. City will be responsible for the cost of larger capital improvements to the ship and for restoration and preservation of historic items beyond maintenance of those items. Evolution will continue to engage the services of a historic resource advisor, so evolution can probably maintain and manage historic assets and identify priority projects prior to the hotel's closure in 2020. Evolution How Labor Agreements with Seafarers, International Union and International Brotherhood of Teamsters for All Hourly Associates that totaled approximately 300 staff. Evolution will continue to honor these agreements upon the hotel's reopening. Evolution will also make every effort to provide employment opportunities for those that were previously employed on the ship. Insurance Liability Terms. The proposed agreement have been reviewed by Citi's risk manager. I will note that the indemnity provisions for hotel management agreements per industry norms are unique in that the city retains much of the liability associated with operation of the ship, although this liability is typically covered by insurance. The rationale being that operator fees are relatively low and the owner in this case the city, retain a vast majority of net operating profits. His recommended. The recommended action will result in approximately $2,870,500 in estimated pre-opening and reopening costs in Foyer 22 in the Thailand Area Fund Group. This estimate includes ¥1.6 million, pre-opening costs for staffing and other approved costs. 1 million of pre-opening improvements for priority visitors serving project needed to safely reopen the ship, an 8.5% contingency and reopening service fees. These expenses will be offset to the extent possible by revenue generated from the Queen Mary. Harry Bridges Special Events Park and leases in the vicinity of the former Queen Mary leasehold. Any expense is not offset within the title injury fund group may need to be covered by Title Thailand's Operating Fund. Evolution and staff projections anticipate the ship's operations can fully offset expenses for FY 23, with net revenue to the city approaching $1,000,000. After all costs are settled for FY 24 and beyond, the net revenue projections to the city may exceed $7 million annually. This does not even include revenue generated at Harry Bridges Special Events Park or from leases in the vicinity of the Queen Mary, such as Carnival Island Express helicopters or Catalina Express. This concludes my staff report. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item?

A bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at a special municipal election to be held in conjunction with the state general election of November 18, 2018, a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City and County of Denver concerning the qualifications for lateral hires to the Denver Police Department. Refers a proposed Charter amendment to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at the 11-6-18 election concerning the lateral hiring of police officers for the Denver Police Department. This bill must pass no later than August 27, 2018 to meet the deadlines for the November ballot. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_07092018_18-0694

All right, Madam Secretary, that went on for a little bit. So let me see. We got 59, five, 98, five, 99. Okay, now we're on 694. Councilman Lopez, will you please put 694 on the floor? Thank you, Mr. President. I move the council by 694 series of 2018 published. All right. It has been moved in second it. Councilman, this is Councilman Flynn. Yes, yes. Go ahead. Thing, Mr. President. The this is a bill to refer to the November ballot, a charter amendment regarding recruitment of police officers through lateral transfers from other departments. It's been proposed by the Civil Service Commission, but there have been a couple of errors in the drafting of it. And so we need to ask council to vote no on this and it will be redrafted and refiled next week. One of the errors is that the date of the election was incorrect and so we need to have that. And then there's a section that also needs to be revised and put into a new draft. So this will be refiled, I guess, next week. And so I ask for a no vote on this. All right. See no other comments, Madam Secretary? Roko Flynn. No Gilmore. No Herndon, no Cashman. No Kennedy. Lopez. No New Ortega. No Black. No Clark. No Espinosa. No. Mr. President. No. Did you vote? This was voting in the results. Sorry again, if. We're missing one. Somebody's hanging fire. There we go. All right. 12. No, 66. 94 has been defeated. All right. Next item up is five men. Two. Councilman, will you please put 592 on the floor?

A RESOLUTION concerning Washington Referendum Measure No. 88 (“Referendum 88”), proposing voter approval of Initiative Measure No. 1000, and urging Seattle voters to vote “Approved” on Referendum 88 on the November 5, 2019, general election ballot.

SeattleCityCouncil_10212019_Res 31913

Pass and sure, I'll sign it. Okay. It's provided on our CW for 42 points 178.555. The City Council now consider the adoption of resolution 31913. And at the conclusion of our comments, Council members comments, the Council will hear comments from the members of the public who wish to speak on the resolution, and an approximate equal opportunity will be given to speak to members of the public and will clerk with that admonition, please read agenda item number one into the record. The Report of the City Council. Agenda Item one Resolution 31913 concerning Washington Referendum Measure number 88 Proposing voter approval of initiative Measure number 1000 and urging Seattle voters to vote approved on Referendum 88 on the November 5th, 2019. General election ballot. Can put the matter into the record. I will move to adopt Resolution 31913 to move in second to adopt the resolution will now hear from council members on the resolution. I'll begin the discussion. And if any of the customers I'd like to say a few words, feel free to. On the outset, there's been some confusion regarding Washington state referendum measure 88. That's in front of us too. Now, regarding initiative 1000. For that reason, I want to make it very clear that 31913 this resolution proposes voter approval and urging voters to vote approved on Initiative 1000 that will be found on the ballot in a Washington referendum , measure 88. We are hoping that that word gets out and that there's very clear because when Initiative 200 was initially passed in 1988, I personally believe there were many voters that were confused on what the heck they were voting on during that time. In 1998, I'll say a few words about the resolution and about the the I 1000. I hope to not steal the thunder from some of our greater speakers in the audience, but I would like to sort of lay the groundwork. The groundwork. First of all, with with the support of the voters on the November 5th, 2019 General Election Ballot Initiative, I 1000 would affirm a new law from our Washington state legislature was passed this last past spring that would guarantee equal opportunity and access to public institution and businesses without discrimination based on race or sex or color or ethnicity or national origin or age or sexual orientation or disability or military status. The new law reverses a 20 year old ban on affirmative action policies while ensuring fairness by specifically forbidding quotas and preferential treatment based solely on the listed characteristics. And this law adds accountability by establishing Governance, Commission on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion to monitor the state agencies compliance with this legislation. Last spring, I attended a hearing on AI 1000 and I was very glad to see many of the people in the audience today. And at that public hearing, former Governor Dan Evans, the Republican who created the State Commission on Civil Rights in 1965, testified before the state legislators, and he said the door of opportunity is still just ajar and not fully open. We can do better than that. And I believe that Initiative 1000 is a responsible measure that will help us throw the doors of opportunity wide open. And that's coming from a Republican. So I understand that embracing change for some voters may be hard, but we are faced with, I think. Insurmountable data that reflects an unfair burden on societal inequality. And we can't just rely on good intentions of government or people. We must be very intentional about the decisions and the choices we make as a legislative body according to state data. When I 2000 was passed in 88, 13.3, 1% of expenditures by state agencies and educational institutions went towards certified minority and women owned businesses. However, in fiscal year 2000, that figure 13.31 declined to 3.6 of expenditures. From 1998 to 2019, the number of certified women and minority owned businesses has fallen 45% from 4917 to 2700. This is according to the Office of Minority and Women's Businesses Enterprises. In 2018, Washington veteran unemployment rate was nearly 25% higher than the national average. Washington is only one of eight states that restricted affirmative action. Like I said, good intentions are not enough. So I'm each asking each council member and each voter to really show, I believe, what their true values are so that we can respond to this new data and see the return to justice that we'd like to see. So that I'm asking our council to adopt Resolution 31913 with any of my colleagues like to say. Any remarks on resolution 31913? This would be the time. I can't remember Brian. I think it or it's council president Harrell and thanks for the advocates. It's been in my ten years in office here. The city has had to get creative to figure out how to advance our values, an agenda under the constraints of 1800. And it's great that we're at a point where the legislature has moved to reverse that. Unfortunately, we have to go to the vote for this. But I'm thrilled for the opportunity to be recommending to the voters of Seattle and anyone else listening to us that we should all vote yes on Initiative 1000. Thank you, Kasper O'Brien. Know comments from many of my colleagues. Yes. Yes. Councilmember Waters. You have the floor, ma'am. I'll be brief. Council President. I believe it was passed in 1998. Correct? I stayed. That? Yes, sir. Yeah, but that's okay. You're the only one heard. And that's why. My apologies. This is the time where I enjoy now being 60 years old. And I was in Olympia working for a governor when this went down. And I remember how volatile and how difficult it was. And some of the most racist and vile things were said about those of us affirmative action not being qualified, being led into the door of college and law school. And we didn't belong there. And I had hoped that we would never return to those kind of conversations again. I say this as a person who grew up on the Puyallup Reservation and put myself through college and law school with help from my tribe, but more importantly for other people of color behind me to be a mentor and keep that door open. And there's a reason why this law is focused on and this is why I am so supportive of it is public education and employment is the equalizer in our society to justice. If we don't have that equalizer, if we don't have this world in this country valuing our minds and our integrity into these institutions, then we will never be there because of this. I sit here today. I got into college in law school, not because I was Native American and Latina. I got in there because I was qualified. And the recent issues that we've seen with some people buying their ways through legacy into institutions and going to prison sickens me. We have watched the legacy. The only difference between affirmative action and a legacy of people with Rich is they have it, institutionalize it, and they made it okay. I've watched it my whole life, so I will have one more note before I will get off my soapbox. As some of you know, I don't always talk a lot, but we are one of 21 states in this country where we have a case pending in the United States Supreme Court where we recognize and protect the transgender community. One of 21 states. This case is now pending the United States Supreme Court, to whether or not, if you're LGBTQ and transgender, that whether or not that's a constitutional right to be protected for health care, for education. So only 21 states in our country recognize that. Right. So we are have gone back into time. I feel like it's 1980 again. 1970 again. I feel like this is a time where young folks, particularly people of color, are being told that that their mind and their value in their future isn't being valued, that they belong in these higher institutions. And so as a mother with two daughters, 28 and 25, they've had the blessing and the legacy of me being able to go to law school and have a provide for them. But not everyone does. And so I'm hoping that those of you here today and thank you, and I'm hoping that those who are out there watching support and vote yes and vote to approve Initiative one 1000. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Wise, for those comments. You know, the comments from the dais, from any of my colleagues I want to pressure, but I'll make sure you have the ample opportunity. Okay. Having said that, we will now have and a lot of time for comments from the public either in support of or in opposition to. And I will start with the in support of since we have an overwhelming amount of signatures there, as is our historical practices, we'd like to recognize current or former elected representatives. And in this case, we have an organizer, Mr. Jesse Weinberg, who's the chair and former state representative with Mr. Nathaniel Jackson. I 1000 sponsor or sign a. Please come forward and address some comments. You've identified yourself as being part of a group, so. Well, I'll 5 minutes and thank you, Mr. President. I need to apologize for Mr. Nathaniel Jackson, who is the sponsor, by 1000. He had a medical issue that kept him in Olympia. He lives in Lacey. And so he's not able to be here with us. But he's asked that I present these remarks on behalf of the entire committee. So, first of all, good afternoon, Council President Harrell and all council members. I'm an attorney and former State Representative Jesse Weinberger, chair of the One Washington Equality Campaign Committee, the authors of Initiative 1000 and organizers of the Approved I 1000 campaign. Before I go any further, I want to give honor on behalf of the One Washington Equality Campaign and acknowledge that we are on indigenous land, the unceded ancestral lands of the warmest people, Seattle's host tribe of people that has occupied this land since time immemorial. A people who are still living right here today fighting for federal recognition and bringing to light the dormant tribe's rich heritage. On this land, we come today to urge your passage of Seattle City Council Resolution 31913. We enthusiastically support this resolution, which encourages all Seattle voters to approve our 1000 the Washington State Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Act on Referendum 88. It's really quite fitting that the city of Seattle or for the city of Seattle to make its voice heard on this diversity act, because Seattle symbolizes the birthplace of diversity in our state. Over 170 years ago, one of the first acts of diversity was not by a member of the majority white community seeking to include people of color. It was an act of diversity by Chief South. A native man of color in chief of the majority of the white, Irish and Suquamish tribes. When he extended his hand of welcome to minority white settlers on to the land, which would one day become the city of Seattle. Today's I 1000 is the people's initiative to the Washington State Legislature. But it started over one year ago right here in Seattle. It was drafted in Seattle. And the first people to sign on i 1000 were Seattle residents of all races, ages and cultures at Mount Zion Baptist Church, a movement which started in Seattle, ultimately spread throughout the entire state. And when it was all said and done, more than 395,000 Washington voters had signed a 1000 the most signatures for any initiative to the legislature in Washington state history. We bring you now a peoples representative, which has been thoroughly vetted, unlike Initiative 200, which killed affirmative action for women and people of color in 1998 . I 1000 has been passed by the Washington State Legislature, approved by the King County Council, upheld by the Washington State Courts, endorsed by not only Governor Jay Inslee, but every living former Democrat and Republican. Washington state governor. I 1000 bans discrimination today and creates the state's first Governor's Commission on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion to monitor all discrimination in the future. That's one of the reasons why I 1000 has been endorsed by The Seattle Times, The Stranger, The News Tribune, the Olympian, and the Vancouver Columbia Newspapers. I 1000 replaces I two hundreds old racially blind policy with a new racially conscious policy which was recently upheld by the Federal District Court Judge Alison Burroughs and Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard University. So the courts, state and federal, have spoken. The legislature has spoken. The state's largest county named for Dr. King himself has spoken. So now we're asking the Seattle City Council to speak loudly and proudly. And I 1000 by urging the state's largest city to approve I 1000 on referendum 88. And once I 1000 is law, we will be back to ask the City Council to pass an ordinance requiring every city agency to implement I 1000 because, as we all know, the only thing worse than a bad law. Is a good law that's never implemented. So thank you for allowing public testimony on resolution 31913. We urge your unanimous yes vote. Thank you, Mr. Weinberg. Thank you. Thank you much. We have the Honorable Representative Sharon Tamayo Santos here in our house today. Nice to have you here. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. Council President Harrell and members of the Seattle City Council. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you today in favor of Resolution 31913. My name is Sharon Tony Santos. I am a state representative proudly representing the 37th Legislative District, the most diverse legislative district in the state of Washington . I am here both on behalf of the residents of the 37th District, but as a private citizen as well. I am here because when I was elected 21 years ago, I 200 was also on the ballot. I can tell you that I 200 purported to level the playing field for all persons. I 200 purported to end discrimination. I'm here to tell you that that was a false promise, as both the council president and former Representative Wayne Barry have spoken. The the numbers tell the tale. In 1998 to 2016, I have a little outdated numbers. The state's investments in women in minority owned businesses plummeted 23.3% from 100 from $227 million to $174.6 million. The investments overall increased $1.7 billion to $6.1 billion. I could go on about subpopulations of our Seattleites who are not represented in higher education and employees who have met the glass ceiling. I am wanting to tell you that since this measure was enacted, I have led efforts in the Legislature to repeal i 200, including an up to on signing di voting on I 1000. Mr. Council President, members of the council, I want you to know that every single member of the Seattle delegation voted for I 1000. And so I ask you to to join with us in voting for this resolution and urging the citizens of Seattle to support Referendum 88 and I 1000. Thank you very much. Thank you. Representative Michael Santos, thank you very much. I'm going to go on the other list in opposition to and we'll draw from Mr. David Haines, who will speak in opposition to resolution 31913. Racist disgraces all over the places. This city is the most reverse racist city in America's 21st century. One of my heroes, Martin Luther King Jr said judge a man by the content of his character, not the color of his skin. Yet City Council is financing a racist budget that smudges on data as lives go splatter. In fact, a sponsor of this referendum is in violation of the U.S. Constitution separation of church and state. The church in question had hosted a city council meeting. Who created this ugly racist referendum? Used $1.5 million of church money to finance the petition drive. And now City Council is going to allow them to make that money back by shaking down tax payers, charging social welfare budgets to finance homeless encampments on toxic, unsafe soil at the church. A city council circumvents every first world zoning and soil and environmental law proving they really hate the poor and are okay with subhuman mistreating the homeless and treating the integrity of council for more reelection support at expense of health of homeless and taxpayers fed up with liberals who have imploded our society. Perhaps City Council should create a declaration of solidarity with the oppressed people of Catalonia and come out against the evil empire of Spain. Supporting Referendum 88 is proof Seattle is the most racist city in America and should be boycotted out of principle. Shame on city councils, race baiting and class war hating accommodation of hypocrites. You base their judgments on the past already overthrown, but for the educations of hate who feed off negativity and blame games. Thank you, Mr. Haynes. Now we'll go back to the support of the resolution and we'll hear from Mr. Heywood Evans to be followed by Mr. Eddie Ray. Haywood Evans is not here. I am Eddie Ray Jr, and I'm here in support of the resolution. You know, we talk about what the state has lost in terms of activity and opportunities for people of color and women. And it was like I calculated to be $3 billion that the state representative Santos already has submitted legislation in 2012. Unfortunately, it was never used. Her legislation, substitute Bill 1328 would allow municipalities to restrict bidding to three firms that their firm was doing under $250,000 a year, and the contract was for 30 or 40,000. You would select three and three firms, regardless of color or gender. In those three firms, those small firms would bid for that contract. It could also go another step contracts up to $250,000. Firms is doing under $1,000,000 a year bid terribly for those contracts. Unfortunately, those that law was never used. And after eight, nine years, it could have made a huge difference with a lot of our firms. Now, we also have to look at the fact the economic impact it has right now. The city of Seattle is 4% African-American or a of United States slaves, 4%. And all that has to do with economic inequality. So I'm proud it's here that the city council is intending on supporting this resolution. And I hope that the mayor and everybody else does the same thing. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Wright. Our next two speakers will be Royal Allie Barnes, followed by. Barricade Cairo's. Good afternoon. Your council president and council members. This is a true story. My name is Royal Ali Barnes. Royal Allie Barnes Consultants. In 2016, Washington State was home to 19 squaws, six coons, five Negroes, three Jim Crows, two Redmen and a Chinaman as names on Washington State maps. Academics have said, and I quote, These names were a product of a white supremacist society that sought to naturalize its racist and sexist ideology by inscribing it the ideology into the symbolic fabric of the cultural landscape. Elected officials have since coordinated efforts to scrub these racist references from our natural landscapes. In 2019. Economic and educational opportunity losses have been designed by a similar white supremacist and their collaborators. They have woven new patterns of economic and education inequity into the core fabric of brown and black communities. This must stop. We urge the City Council to shred these oppressive fabrics of economic and education inequities that are currently suffocating our communities. Support Initiative 1000. Thank you, Ms.. Barnes. Mr. President, and this the members of city council, my name is Burkhard Quiroz, and I am the co-chair of a coalition of immigrant and refugee and communities of color. The approval initiative. Affirmative action is necessary, and I argue that discrimination in the past has a profound impact on the future. And the generation of poverty and inequality leave minorities to a disadvantage even when society attitude changes. I argue that diversity is a good for the educational institution and workplace, that decades of discrimination. Discrimination will result in less diversity at school and work, which in turn reinforces poverty and inequality among minorities. The passage of Initiative 1000 Affirmative Action Policy Head Office in which historical and privileged minorities are given preference during hiring or university admission. It's no time to oppose Initiative 1000 affirmative action given the history of slavery and its continued, pervasive racial discrimination. To think otherwise is a selective loss of memory. The continuing failure to significantly reduce the effect of discrimination prevents many from preserving equal opportunity today. Black unemployment, poverty, homelessness are twice that of white workers. That accumulation for blacks is 1/20 of what it is for whites. Similar disparities also for Hispanic racial profiling in the criminal justice system is rampant. To prohibit affirmative action in admission to state college and university has flowed. Affirmative action characterized an unfair preference rather than a justified remedy. It is a travesty of justice. Especially is the age of Donald Trump. When our nation is deeply divided, but there is a better, less divisive way to achieve the goal of opening doors to elite universities to disadvantage students of all races who are no longer shut out of education. And so United is supposed to people associate affirmative action with a preference hiring or admitting African Americans. However, federal affirmative action laws are also in place for women, veterans and people with disability. Furthermore, local government has also also enacted different affirmative action laws. However, while some are, affirmative action is still necessary as it is not, and in fact in fact worsens the racial tension. It is now time for the City of Seattle to concede the passing into the law to create economic and educational opportunity for historically homogenous group of people. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next, these figures, Tony Orange and Khabib Mooney. Tony Orange and Khabib. And then when Dona Hollingsworth age will age will follow that. One, two, three. Sorry I didn't give you much for warning there. Tony. Tony. Khabib. And we know. No. Have. Good afternoon. My name is Tony Orange. As a Seattle stakeholder. And Concerned citizen regarding everyday experiences of African-Americans. In public education. Employment and. Contracting. I come today? To show my strong support for Resolution 31913. Concerning Initiative. 1000. And. Referendum 88. The studies are in. The statistics are clear. 20 years and $3 billion is enough. Now is the time. This is the place. And we are the ones. Last but not least, I want to. Publicly thank. President Harrell and council members for your support of the Public Defenders Association. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Orange. It's KBB. Make sure we're here. We're followed by Winona and then Jodi only. Director of the Indian Services Commission. Good morning, counsel. Thank you very much for hearing our statement. My name is Gabe Monet and I'm the executive director of New Blackout West Theater. I'm here on behalf of my community. The system needs to be repaired. And these are some words from the last poet, and I hope it will touch your ears. For the millions who were shot, hunt, beat to death. Tarred and feathered, bald and old. Castrated, miseducated, segregated for the millions who have been lied to, denied to vampire. I too misguided to a native by the two. So we decided. We decided to get together and change the weather, not just for now, but forever. We decided to love each other. Stop the madness and be real. Sisters and brothers. Greatness is where we're coming from. For the millions who marched, sang praise said Laden lived in and jailed in boycotted, bigoted, spit at curse debt yelled at like blacks not where it's at like we should be satisfied to ride in the back for the millions who know, and those who have always known that no matter what truth crushed to the earth shall rise again. No matter how many bullets and prisons, diseases and deaths, no matter how much liquor and crack, nothing can kill. The fact that we are a divine creation started civilization built the pyramids and the Sphinx taught the world how to pray and think for the millions who are ready to turn this thing around, who are tired of being tired and crawling on the ground. It's time to turn this mess around. And we say for liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Thank you. It could be. Winona will be followed by Jodie and then Sean. Good afternoon. My name is Winona Hollins Hague. I am a former commissioner for African-American affairs for the state of Washington, also former council member for the Health Care Disparities Council. I have for the last. I'm a native of Seattle. And for the last 20 years, I actually have seen and felt the impact of discrimination that I 200 and Tim Iman's initiative brought here to the citizens of Washington State. I being 66 years old now I consider myself one of those older people that I used to think were the older people. And I say that I 1000 prohibits age discrimination and I 1000 in prohibiting age discrimination realizes that some of us may have to go back to work with the current economy as it is. So we are advocating that you look at I 1000 and make sure that you know that it also helps to support the aged people with disabilities and also it prevents gender discrimination, it prohibits the LGBTQ discrimination and it strengthens our veterans. And I'm a former US public health service officer, so I'm always concerned about the way we can do things to help to affirm and create a better opportunity for our veterans. Again, take this opportunity today to say no to the moneys that are coming in with the big sign saying reject all over the place. Say that because you know that that money is foreign money. And those Chinese nationals that are against this are being funded by very highly political foreign entities. We need to take control of this situation ourselves and say we affirm I 1000 because it's the right thing to do and it's the only thing to do. Thank you so much. Thank you, Jody. Shaun Bagby and then Pedro Espinoza. Janine, is this on? Yes. The green light should be on. Is it on? Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Jodi Olney. I work with the Seattle Indian Services Commission. I want to thank Council President Cairo and City Council for bringing this resolution. And what I want to speak about is more of my lived experience, me impacted by 200, the expectation that communities of color and folks who do get into various institutions in the city and in this state have the time and energy to continue to advocate for increased representation, increased access and and to find it. People don't want to violate it. They don't want to get in trouble. They you know, they're well-intentioned. And so I fully support initiative 1000 and and encouraged that this might actually mean that the teeth that have been missing through so many initiatives in the past, so many task forces they set about righting the wrongs and bringing more equity, might actually have the room to do that. I think that individuals get hit up for these, you know, can you give this to your community? Can you quietly tell people that we want people of color in these in these rooms even just to be heard? And I guess they felt important to come and say that because it might be lost on institutions, that this work is expected to come for free in addition to your day job. In addition to school. And it's you're supposed to be tireless and at the end of the day to hear. Sorry. I 200 blocks from doing that. So I just wanted to thank you all for your support. And I hope that Washington State gets some clarity from this and moves us in a positive direction. Thank you, Judy. Thank you. Good afternoon, members of the City Council. My name is Sean Bagby. My preferred pronouns are he and him, and I'm proud to serve as the political director of Membership Development Coordinator for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, IBEW Local 77. We represent over 8400 electrical workers across a majority of Washington state, northern Idaho and northwestern Montana. I also serve as the National Board Member of the Electrical Workers Minority Caucus, and I'm going to speak on behalf of those two hats. Then I will transition to our third hat in a few moments. The negative impacts of EIT 200 are well-documented on my thank you from Council President for setting the groundwork and my other colleagues for speaking on that regard and also speaking about the battle that it took in order to pass. I went to the Washington State Legislature this year on behalf of all of our members, especially our veterans, our they don't like to be called old, but our more seasoned members, our sisters, our people of color, our LGBTQ, AIAA plus community that I urge you all to move forward and pass this resolution. Seattle is a world class city. I was fortunate to be born and raised here in Seattle right off of 26 and John in the old Central District. And Seattle is not dying and is a world class city. And it's up to us to make sure that it continues that to be that going forward, not just for us , but for our children and our children's children. I just got those two hats down for a moment and speak on behalf of Sean Bagby, the son of a Boeing worker and a Seattle public schoolteacher, Velma Bagby, for 29 years and a black man here in the city of Seattle where I was born and raised. This is larger than all of us, and not everyone in this room will benefit from this. But as I stated earlier, it's for our children's children and for those that go forward that this great city, with all of the economic availability and opportunity to make sure that all people, regardless of what they look like, where they come from that are here, can benefit from it. That is why I went in is extremely important. So I encourage you to please adopt this resolution. Thank you for all your hard work. Thank you, Sean. Pedro, before you begin, let me read off the next three names following Pedro B, Kevin Washington, Nate Miles in, Rian Johnson, Covington, Kevin, Nate and Rio will follow Pedro yet for sure. Thank you Seattle City Council for the invite. Many of favorites. When I was I represent the Carpenters Union and I am here on behalf of the Corpus Union to support the Initiative 1000 and Referendum 88. As a union member, we represent about 29,000 members through six states. A majority of those members here in Washington state. And we are avidly advocating for them to support and pass Referendum 88 and support one over 1000. As an organization, we see it as a huge, huge step for our communities to come up and be part of society and not being left behind. You know, the government always says communities always follow. We can't leave some people behind. Well, our communities of color have been suffering. And it always seems that we're always left behind. With that being said, I want to speak on my behalf and I think coming from. A sector of people that have always been stepped on, especially now in this tremulous government that we have in office, where they tend to criminalize, demonize for who we are. Because I was born with the skin color. And. It hurts me when I hear that because my kids, I have two beautiful daughters that are part of the system. And for them to go through this because they have to fight just a little more. And I'm sorry for emotional, but man. It's time for this country to pull together. A lot of our communities are left behind. We're being oppressed. And I don't want people to think that it is the white people that are supporting this, that it's their fault. It's not. It's a system that's been catered by the rich to keep these communities down. We see this system on an on going where they buy their kids to go to school one day to have no reason to be in there. But because of the privilege and I call it a privilege because of what they are, they're white. And because I did not choose to be born this way. But I am proud of being a mexican and I am proud to be here to support Referendum 88. And hopefully you guys will support it, too. Thank you. Thank you for the. First, give me honor to God, who's the head of my life. Counsel, I want to thank you for this resolution. And I also want to give. Real some praise to Representative Santos and to former Representative Wayne. Barry, who without them, we would not be here in the hard work that they've done. And I also want to thank some of the other people who are nameless, people like my father, Booker T Miles. I have to call his name, Mr. President. He and other contractors who put everything on the line and risk it all mortgaged houses to start before they could get jobs in the union. To. Really start businesses and put them on the line and start the small businesses. And they were the ones who really made this day possible today. And I want to thank them for that. I want to thank people on the education front that went out and took over the president's office at the University of Washington and kicked those doors open and made sure that we had an opportunity to go to that school there. And so which is why it makes me so mad when I hear the opposition say they're not qualified and what have they done? They don't understand the fact that I've watched a mother like Elise Miles, my mom, who was a part time domestic and a part time bus driver, get up on a bus when it was icy and fall off that bus, getting arthritis in her knees every day, though, making sure getting back up there when she didn't have. Insurance, making sure that she worked her butt. Off to get us to school, making sure that she went without that insurance because she wasn't covered every day, making sure. When she would go and. Scrub those people's floor with those arthritic knees and that that diabetes in her system. But made sure that we would work hard. So don't tell us that we don't work hard and we're unqualified. She told us to go to school and we have just as much right to that university as anyone else. And so the fact that you guys are doing this, saying there's going to be some fairness in this system and that this city council believes in fairness , we want to and on behalf the league smile and on behalf of Booker T Miles, I want to thank each and every one of you for taking a brave stand to do so. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Miles. Up there, Kevin. Good afternoon. My name is Kevin Washington and I'm a board member, Tabor 100. I'm also the education chair. I'm representing that organization. That's the hat that I'm wearing. Like to ask any of the table. 100 members who are here to please stand. Table 100 was founded right after I 200 passed. It was named after Langston Taber. It's an organization of largely, but not exclusively black and African-American businesspeople. In the 20 years since it was passed, the minority business community has been decimated. The number of contracts awarded low percentage of dollars of spend by the state, county, port and the city are not what they could have been and not what they should have been. If it had not passed. While I 1000 does not repeal I 200, it is a solid step in strengthening positive actions towards seeking an awarding of contracts within the minority business community. It also stands to impact. Admissions to the University of Washington or other public institutions. No more should city, county, port and state employees. People who award contracts, people who hire hide behind I 200 claiming that they cannot find a way. They cannot find the people there aren't qualified, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. No more of that. I'm urging you to support your resolution. I 1000 and referendum 88. This is long overdue. You not have a place to stand and a role to play. Urge you to support I 1000. Referendum 88. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Washington. The last two speakers I have just been following, Miss Johnson Covington will be then Robert Stevens. For the last year. I have. Greeting President and Honorable Council. My name is Rhea Johnson Covington. I'm your neighbor from Pierce County. I've come to stand in support of 31 913 Initiative I 1000 and Referendum 88 as a leading member of our on a corporate DNA committee. We recognize the importance of having intentional conversations that surround sensitive and emotionally charged topics to create process and procedures fairly. So I'm asking you here today, the city of the citizens of Washington State, not only to set aside your opposition, but let's reconcile our party differences. Join together to ensure all the concerns are heard. Each of us are accountable and lead in the development and implementation of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee on behalf of Washington State. Thank you for your time. Thank you. I'm Richard Stevens. Good evening. Good afternoon to you. My name is Robert Stevens Jr. I'm one of those 19 year olds that got drafted in 1965 and went away with honors and served my country and came. Back to give. To my. Community. I was able to go to school. The University of Washington for. B.A.. And to graduate school because those elements that are in this 1000 was in place at that particular time. I went to fight for my country so all of us can enjoy the bounties of this country. So I encourage you to support 1000 and to pass the resolution. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Stevens. So a few house came out and those are the speakers that I have signed up for. I also want to go back to the. In opposition to. And a lot an opportunity for the in opposition to once again to speak in opposition to resolution 31913. Holding the. Motion open. That opportunity is closed. Judge Shadid, I don't want to put you on the spot, but I assume you're here for the budget matter, not for this matter, because I would have afforded you some opportunities to speak if you'd like to. But I. I'm not sure that is correct. Okay. Yeah, I think there might even be some rules associated with you providing public testimony of something going on a ballot that I didn't want to. Yeah, I didn't want you to be unethical. A few things. And before we cast a vote, and I'll give my colleagues that opportunity to speak if you'd like. This has gotten very personal for many in this room. You've put your heart and your souls and your your time and your money and resources into this effort. And it's a beautiful thing to watch. It's one of the most, I think, well-organized and committed movements I've seen in political history. Overcoming odds, overcoming. Anger and hatred, even politics. And so just kudos to you. And I think you know who you are. I will. I've worked with you in the field and many of you I've known for 40, 50 years. Well, I'll show my age here. But as Councilmember West said, some of us are direct beneficiaries of the work you've done. So thank you for that. And certainly my ability to support this resolution. A housekeeping item and some good news here. And then our next four before we vote on it. I got hot pressing news that the mayor will be holding a. On Wednesday. On Wednesday. A signing ceremony of this resolution, assuming that it successfully passes at 515 and Norman B Rice Room at Wednesday at 515 there'll be a signing ceremony. So put that on the calendars before we vote on this exciting resolution. Does any of my colleagues, would they like to say any words before we close the comment section? Are we okay? Are we good? Everybody's happy. Okay. Those in favor of adopting resolution 31913. Please vote i i those opposed vote no. The motion carries a resolution. Adopt and share will sign it. Thank you. You all deserve the applause. That is our last agenda item. Is there any further business to come before the council today? I have one and that will be. Carefully. Prepared. I asked to be excused on November 4th from the City Council meeting. It's been moved to saying that I'd be excused from it November 4th and the city council meeting. All those in favor say I. I oppose. The ayes have it. And if any further bids come for the council and not everyone. Have a great day. And we stand adjourned. We're coming back and we are coming back for our budget hearings. Three 2320. We will be back. Yes, Mr.. Representative Santos, this legislation.

Recommendation to Assign a Portion of the $28.68 Million of Funding from the Federal Government through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021 to Assist with Recovery from the Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic. (City Manager 10021030/Finance 10024051)

AlamedaCC_07202021_2021-1102

So with that, we'll say next slide, please, and thank you. The interim final rule is really what guides the the elements that are eligible for the that the spending. There are there are some pretty big buckets there. We did using the interim final rule, using the the guiding principles, using the city council priorities that had been established in those kind of general topic areas. We did come up with three recommendations or a recommendation and two alternatives. These are for discussion purposes. We still really are at the early stages. There's time to refine and make changes to this program. Overall, we've heard five as recently as today from the Housing Authority and it's clear that we need to have some additional conversation with that group. The options that have been presented will likely will likely generate they're the kinds of projects that will likely have a blend of funding sources. And so I'm mentioning that because the the way that the staff report is structured, it's 100% ARPA funding for each of these topic areas. So for example, the Marina Village project, if we were to move forward with that and it's a little bit of a webbed agenda here this evening with closed session, the prior the prior item that was discussed as six a and now this item. But if we were to move forward with the Marina Village Hotel project or motel project and conversion, there would likely be a series of funding sources or a number of funding sources that would develop that project. This report looks at it as if ARPA was 100% of the funding source. So the reason I'm mentioning this is that with any alternative that we or any projects that we move forward with, we're likely to be checking in with council every 3 to 6 months. As projects firm up and spending starts, we'll be able to better assess the amount of ARPA funding that's remaining on the table. So I'll say next slide and we can talk more about that maybe during the Q&A. So the requests that are in the report total a little over $51 million. And they're in those kind of four broad topic areas that that I discussed earlier. Next slide. The staff recommendation focused on, I'll call it, spreading the wealth, but spending kind of creating a program that was within the means provided by ARPA. So it's about $28 million. The first year or two is about $14 million, which is what we have in our first tranche. And this really allowed us to hit the ground running on some of the supportive transitional housing options that are available. I was listening loud and clear to the conversation earlier this evening and recognize that this recommendation may need to be adjusted. But that was the rationale behind the staff recommendation. These are properties that the city owned that we had the ability to move on quite quickly and actually start to spend money in the in the next year . So with that, I'll move on to the alternatives because, well, I think it's important to based on the prior discussion this evening here, those as well. Next slide, please. So we had some housing proposals. These these did look at going all in on housing, including both transitional and hotel. Again, with a blend of funding sources, we could likely get the the $28 million of ARPA to go the distance and actually probably even be able to fund other options that are not considered in this option. Next slide. This this is the opposite flip of the switch where we did not focus on housing, but focused on things like broadband, small business support and and creating those kinds of lending hotspots and other technology support for for members of the community. It applies the same a similar equity lens. What we learned and saw loud and clear during the pandemic is that not having access to Internet for certain populations was particularly difficult. And it created challenges that that we we likely could have foreseen had we had we predicted the pandemic but are really important to address moving forward. Next slide. So if that this is this is a point in time where we have an opportunity over the next essentially three and a little bit years to to program our ARPA spending. And we have about four and a half to five years to spend these dollars. So this is our first attempt at identifying some priority projects. There'll be a lot more discussion. We want to be accountable and transparent to the community, so we will be reporting back regularly on how the money is spent. And so with that, we'd like to hear counsel's direction and on the guiding principles that are included in the report. And if there's anything else you'd like us to associate with those so we can use those moving forward. And then if there are projects that we want to that we want to start to move forward on at this point in time relative to the overall ARPA investment, that would be great. So with that, I'll conclude staff's recommendation and our presentation and we'll move on to questions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bird. Nice report. And madam, click, do we have public speakers on this item? You do not. Oh, now we have one. Okay, well, we will have any clarifying questions from council, and then we'll hear our public speaker. Or maybe there might be more than one council member next. But if you can say your hand up. Yes. Thank you. And thank you for the thorough report. For the revenue loss proposal. Does the current budget that the Council adopt adopted include $8 million in revenue loss, or would that be that would be new funding not not considered in the correct. And we would bring that back as part of either midyear or mid-cycle update, depending on when the actions occur, when the directions received. Or sooner, if that's if that's possible. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other clarifying questions before we get our public comment or comments? Okay. Madam Kirk, you're going to call the first speaker or the only speaker when you've got two. Right? Three. First is Josh Dyer. Good evening, Speaker Dyer. I can living you. So I am a member of a recent member of a really great group here in Olmedo called Transform Alameda. And we some of us along with us the Alameda Justice Alliance and Renewed Hope and an ARC and other groups have the opportunity to meet with you. We appreciate that to talk about your thoughts and our thoughts on how to use these ARPA funds. And we are also glad for the opportunity to share our kind of more developed proposal with you. So I just wanted to for those who had other people who may be listening, what kind of briefly what our ideas are that so transform. Alameda believes that the city of Alameda has a once in a generation opportunity here to use its ARPA funds to establish comprehensive, integrated public services that are fundamental. We feel for a safe, healthy and thriving community. AMO is created in response to this terrible public health and economic crisis that has, as we all know, impacted the poor and the marginalized more so even than than others. The goal of ARPA is to lift up members of our community in a way that supports and sustains well-being in this unprecedented infusion of federal funds should be used in that spirit, we transform Alameda. We propose that the city use these other funds directly to address our communities in interconnected needs and struggles, specifically around housing, mental health, economic security and climate vulnerability. We realize, obviously, that not not all of you think these things can be fully addressed with this one funding source. But we think that this is these are the lenses through which we should be looking at how to spend these moneys and minds in the future to provide the fundamentals for a functioning community. So for housing, we really strongly support the Rainy Village in project. We also would like to the City Council to consider looking to fund a community land trust or some other sort of thing to preserve housing, look ownership here. We love the idea of a mental health clinic that could potentially be housed in a park in a part of the hospital that's being underused right now. We'd love to see a a a resilience hub on the east and or central part of the island in order to when it inevitably gets very hot, we can have people have access to cooling in other parts of the island. And finally, we're really interested in a UBI pilot that fits Alameda specific needs. So I'll stop there. Thanks very much. Thank you. Our next speaker. Laura Thomas. Good evening, Speaker Thomas. Living there. It's nice to speak to you again. And you and the entire council I standing in for renewed hope advocates here and to say that we stand in full support of those priorities that were listed in the letter. And I think you got a letter from me today to that effect. And I'm really happy to hear Josh talk before me because he pretty much put out all those priorities that we talked with you yesterday. I just want to say in general that I think this notion of community resilience is going to be very, very important in the years to come. I just think cities and towns everywhere and their leaders are going to be called to more and more to help the residents survive those natural disasters and a certain amount of social upheaval, as we can see from what came down just with COVID. And I think the the loss of workers, the fact that we don't have workers in our restaurants and our businesses is really has made us less resilient in the last year. I think that's it's really unfortunate and it's something we're we're going to be looking at with if we follow these priorities through, I think our survival will depend on making sure that we all help one another and and erase that divide between the haves and have nots that seems to be growing, especially in the Bay Area. And all of these proposals really speak to values that we hold and renewed hope and we hold them in the Alameda Justice Alliance. And I think we actually many people in this community that have marched just in the last year to see past injustices remedied also hold these values. Everybody wants to see us move towards the care of the entire community. And when we do move to care for the community, I think we're actually going to have that safe and secure community everybody really wants. So I thank you for your attention. I think these priorities are very important and renewed, hopefully supports them. Thank you. Our next speaker. Nancy Schmidt. Good evening. Speaker Schmidt. I thank you. I really appreciate your proposals here and the discussion completely and wholeheartedly agree. I did want to make sure that we come up with some kind of community criteria that does reflect our values when it comes to social justice and equity, and that if there is a way that we could measure how these dollars are being spent and identify kind of almost a scoring mechanism, if we could, the reason being that one is this is a once in a lifetime opportunity and every penny that we get really needs to be spent to the best possible use and to have the most effect for the most people. So many are in need. And I I'm just curious because there had been discussions earlier in the previous agenda item discussing looking at different housing options. Kind of when it comes to cost effectiveness, but also impact, what's the impact going to be? And are there ways that we can look at the impact of those dollars and not just simply looking at how much they cost and what those alternatives are, but to really look at the social impact, the equity impact, and then also how it reflects our values so that we if we were to give a report card back to the community of Alameda, what would that report card say as far as how we chose to decide to spend those dollars? Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. That was our last speaker. Okay. So with that, I'm going to close public comment. And, you know, Mr. President, if I could just ask you, we've been on a couple of webinars together about our refunds, and I think you've probably been on even more. To just give the listeners an overview of the the reporting requirements, how strict it is to adhere to the. The. The the structure, the requirements of this funding opportunity. Sure. And I'm going to I'm going to invite Andy and Jennifer into the conversation, if that's okay with you as well. But the the reporting where it's frequent, we have to be updating the federal government regularly on the use of our funds. And he sent a calendar which I don't have in front of me right now, but I think she's looking for it. I think it's every three months or so that we are we're required to report. And really, the thing that's been stressed by all of the folks from the federal government who've talked with with city officials, is the the importance of of adhering to the to the the the eligible project list and making sure that there is accountability for the dollars that are spent so that the federal program doesn't have there's no ability to. It's beyond reproach. The idea is that these are these are an investment in your community. And they they we are ensuring that we are taking good care of the public dollar as we're investing in the community. And so any we'll have a lot more detail on the the report, the actual reporting requirements and frequency. But the overall intent is to make sure that local governments are doing their their very best to be transparent with the community and investing in a way that's consistent with the interim final rule from the U.S. Department of Treasury. Thank you. And Ms.. Two, what would you add to that? Yes, Jason, very comprehensive. Before you go, I know. I apologize for interrupting. I'm hearing a lot of static, as are others, too. Yes, it's very garbled. Any suggestions this way? I figure. I do have a headset and I can share my screen with that. One. You seen the screen? Yeah. Oh, sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, so this is on the calendar. These are the operating dates is pretty much the first day is August 31st with interim report. And then there's a lot of strict requirements on a quarterly basis. By October 31st, we'll have to complete our second and third quarter. And every quarter we have to some. Points maybe. You can call in. And actually, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I think this is probably deeper information than I really need. I suffice it to say, there are strict reporting requirements that the city will have to adhere to. But I think I wanted sort of the overview so far. So thank you both very much. And yeah, we we will have to figure out what the audio challenge was there. Council questions, comments, your recommendations, who would like to start? Councilmember Knox White thinks so. I think I really appreciate coming back with three different concepts. You know, for the most part, I do. I'm fairly supportive of the of the housing proposal. I do. I would I would be open to considering some form of you know, I would say say hybrid that had a little bit of business assistance. But for me, business assistance is not grants to businesses, but thinking about things that again, one time, one time funds that could actually go to rebuilding the resilience of our of our business areas, specifically downtown and in Webster Street. So whether that's ways in which to kind of make permanent some of the some of the things that we put in that are attracting people to our downtowns in order to in order to strengthen the local economy, those kinds of things. The reason I asked about the budget, I think that if we were to put some of this into revenue loss and then we would have the flexibility to use that on projects we wanted to use. That would be the about the only way that I would be willing to consider revenue loss in this. I don't want to just see it as kind of backfilling things we've already actually dealt with in the budget. It's not to say that we didn't have pinches in the budget, but I really appreciated that what the first principle of one time only costs. But for the most part, I think your housing only proposal as it links up with item, our conversation around item six eight is probably the most impactful. I do agree with the this is a one time opportunity. Let's see and let's use it to to, you know, have some ongoing and strong future outcomes that we can look back and say we didn't we didn't squander this and just throw around 5000 here and 5000 there and wonder what happened with all the money. So thank you. It's a great, great, great work. Thank you, Councilmember. Now it's like Councilmember Harry Spencer. Thank you. Mayor, and thank you staff for this very comprehensive report. I am concerned about dedicating the 20 plus million dollars out of this 28 million for the purchase of the hotel. For me, I'd like to actually spread this as much as possible to impact as many people as possible that really have, I think, been greatly impacted and left out that the Internet, smart city, wireless hotspot service, wireless hotspots. I think that those are critical. This this gap of the digital gap, I think now we're having an opportunity to close it. And as we all know, we're having a meeting right now online that many people cannot access. They haven't been able to apply for honestly supports. They haven't been able to. All of the students trying to study this really been a hardship. They've been left out of our society for a year and a half now. So for me, that's actually a very high priority. I also noticed in. Exhibit five that. There's just comments in regards to your possibilities to support public health, support for isolation, quarantine, vulnerable populations to medical and public health services. I think that that's actually a very, very important to try to figure out how people that are vulnerable, when they're impacted from COVID, how how do they exist, they need help. So I think that that does meet the needs. The assistance to households. That was another thing on exhibit five, food, rent, mortgage, utility, legal aid, cash assistance, things like that, as well as new and expanded child care. I think those types of services that cover low income, lots of people that are very vulnerable. I think that that's a very good use of this money and I'm really concerned when we're talking about dedicating, I think it'd be like 4/5 of the money to one project. It would impact maybe 50 people versus I'm going to just thousands of people that are have been left behind. And I think we have to really think the medical especially, you know, so those things that I've just said, I'd like to see us to consider. Thanks. Thank you. Let's go. Next, Councilmember De Salud. Sure. Yeah. In terms of well, you know, to begin with, I would have loved to have some of the money towards a kind of a Jean Sweeney Park. But I accept staff's analysis saying that that's ineligible. And so we move on in terms of what's before us. I, I support one of the categories being housing. And if there's going to be an abundance of funds for particularly the Marina village in, I'm supportive of that. Although I want to make sure to say $20 million of the $28 million probably isn't the right number. So. So I'm sorry. That's that's just not going to work. I think what we what's what's going to drive the number is whatever our analysis in terms of the sales and all that kind of stuff. But my gut level tells me, you know, $20 million is too high and dedicating so much of the $28 million on one thing is probably not going to not going to fly. But I am supportive of housing and and dedicating a portion of that to the marina village. And because I do think it'll be a cause the way that I want to pursue it, at least it would be a permanent asset of the city of Alameda. And like I said, by virtue of its location to all the social and public and economic amenities, I think that makes it something that we shouldn't miss an opportunity to to to take advantage. It's not on the list explicitly. But you know what keeps me up at night, especially when we got the report about the about the groundwater coming up as a result of sea level rise. I think that's something that keeps me. Up at night. I know that it's not on the list, the category of sea level rise. But but I just want to note that it is something that keeps me up and it is something that cuts across the city. I don't know if somehow that's housing related insofar as, you know, all the houses, all the residential buildings or for that matter, all the buildings have to link up through our stormwater system or or take advantage of our stormwater system. But I just want to know that that's the thing that keeps me up at night and I'll just leave it at that. Thank you, vice mayor of L.A.. I absolutely support spending ARPA funds as needed based off of our assessments relative to the Marina Village. And I think that that is a good use in terms of when we talk about equity, sometimes those who need the most help. That's really what equity is about, as is sometimes we are going to spend a significant amount of resources to have an impact on those who need the most help. And I think, you know, I think that we can do something really positive there. I also think that there you know, if there are concerns relative to additional well, I think that we've addressed most of our budget shortages. But if there are service needs that are ongoing relative to providing services, I want to make sure that we're not cutting further services. So I do want to make sure that our budget is taken care of and we don't have additional cuts because I think we passed a fairly tight budget. I also would like to find a way to. To maximize the use of these funds for other housing needs. So I just want to make sure that that direction is very clearly given to staff. So if it's not the Marina Village and what are other ways we can we can maximize and assist with the housing needs that we have, because that is the top council priority. I think that there are other things that that are being discussed at the state level by Senator Skinner. Huddle is working on that. There's a number of other things. I think there's going to be multiple layers of assistance coming to families and to folks in need. And I really do think that where we can make the greatest impact with the ARPA funds at the city of Alameda level really is towards meeting our housing needs. Thank you. So, just to wrap up, I. Just. Dropped my agenda. I'd be lost without it. I want to echo something Councilor Knox White said in our previous item. We should think big in what we're doing. These ARPA funds have been described as a once in a lifetime opportunity. Once in a generation. This is the sort of thing that won't come around again. So we do want to do big things that make an impact. And and I applaud the the staff report. It's very well laid out. I want to just I draw your attention to page four of the staff report where there is that discussion about the housing, homelessness and behavioral health. And there are some projects that are are proposed the part of transitional housing program, the hotel acquisition. I agree with my colleagues who have said yes use ARPA funds toward the purchase of the marina village in but not all 20 million. And it's also important to remember that there are other sources. This is going to be a matter of cobbling together some sources. It's just so exciting to have these opportunities are coming added around the same time. But in addition to this federal money, we've got money coming in from the state. There's some county money that may actually be used to help us we may be able to use to help pay the operating costs. So, no, we don't need to take 20 million of our 28 million for the marina village in. But we can we can have some pretty good seed money to help make that project a reality. But I also want to just go back to what a couple of the speakers have said, and I should stop and say it was a pleasure to meet yesterday on a screen like this, but with members of the Animated Justice Alliance, the Transform Alameda and the Alameda Renters Coalition. Thank you so much for enlightening me for your comments this evening on a number of different topics, including this one. We did talk a bit about this possibility of using part of Alameda Hospital as something akin to the Whitebread Clinic that you've heard discussed in these meetings before. That's the underpinning of the Cahoots Program in Eugene, Oregon, because it is this facility that provides mental health, physical health, substance abuse, housing, resource connections, and also things like just a day center, like a respite care for people who just need to get off the street where they're having whatever episode or mental health crisis they don't necessarily need to be committed or even overnight, but they just need a place to get away. And so we have started conversations. I will talk this up as often as they have the opportunity. And I know that our city manager, Eric Leavitt, is in conversation with the city managers of the city. Eric Hayward in San Leandro, right? Yeah. And we are neighboring cities, similarly sized and there is some interest and the city managers are looking into what the possible funding mechanism might be. I know they want us to connect back with health systems that oversees Alameda Hospital, Highland and others. But I think there's some pretty exciting potential there for us to provide these alternative services that would be well needed by our community and maybe some of our neighbors. And also to help Alameda Hospital, which I understand is struggling a bit with low census numbers. And, of course, our residents, property owners here in Alameda, whether you business or residential, you pay $298 every year in your property tax. I know because I chaired that campaign and, you know, we created the health care district to be able to levy that property tax. So let's make sure our money is being well spent and maybe bring in some other dollars from outside communities. So very much interested in in pursuing that opportunity to to make that a reality with some of these are funds. And then as far as the universal basic income, just last week in the one of the trailer bills to the governor's budget, there is money, a nice pot of money for pilot programs, for universal basic income. What little I've been able to read about it, it would be directed toward youth, young people exiting the foster care system . That's a population near and dear to my heart. Some of you know, I have a background as a probation officer, and these are kids who pretty much raise themselves sometimes just. Shuttled around from one foster home to another. And then they come to an age. They're young adults and they're out on their own. And so if they could be assisted with universal basic income and we have them here in Alameda and also some of the pilot program would be directed toward pregnant mothers in certain income categories. And we've talked earlier, there's not much better investment you can make than in in children and babies and you know healthy growing up. So so I don't know that we need to set aside ARPA funds now at least maybe not in the first tranche because I think we should take take a shot at applying for those state funds. And at our mayors conference, county mayors conference meeting in May, one of our speakers was or our speaker was Michael Tubbs, former mayor of Stockton, California. And you probably all know about that two year pilot that Stockton did. So I know the city manager and assistant city manager have Mr. Tag's contact information. He is now an advisor to. An. Economic adviser to Governor Newsom. So I think that's where that that UBI pilot program may have come from. I'm also really intrigued by the concept of a community of land trust. This is something that our neighbor Oakland has done and other cities as well. It was mentioned by a couple of the speakers and it's an opportunity when there's maybe a distressed property or foreclosed property for the city to buy it and, you know, turn it into that affordable housing. So maybe some money for an affordable for a community land trust. And then so with my meeting yesterday, I'm afraid we didn't get to talk about a community resiliency hub. I am really intrigued about what that is. I confess this is the first time I heard that term, so email me and tell me more about it. But that might be something that we should look into too anyway. And I want to just send a huge shout out to all of the staff who helped put this report together. That was a lot of material, and I know you're going to have a lot of work to do with just these different allocations and the reporting requirements. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So with that, I let's see, I'm just looking back to the ask, is it that we are just giving staff directions? So okay, so the recommendation is to assign a portion of the 26.8 million and again in two tranches. So we've only got the first tranche right now from the ARPA, ARPA of 2021. So staff to you staff. And I'm going to include the city attorney and city clerk. Do you have a. Direction from. Us? Do you want need a motion? What's your pleasure? So, Eric, take himself off our tickets. I want. To make sure. That it. Other too. I was thinking emotion if you wanted to. I mean, I think we have some direction, but I think a specific emotion would be helpful just to give us specific direction on which which of those approaches. I think I sort of understand. But want to make sure. Okay. So, Mr. Bowden, you want to weigh in on what you've heard and what you might need in the form of a motion to provide clarity? Well, I guess what I will what I will say is that I heard from four council members, too, to focus on housing as in that Marina Village project. I think some of the earlier items this evening lend themselves to that. The timing will have to work work on a schedule for that piece of the project and our analysis of the true costs and the funding sources. I think public health came up in a couple of different contexts, and so I think that we could provide some additional options related to public health and how we how we invest in. You know, whether it's mental health clinic or whether it's other local support for public health. And then the the. Business assistance didn't come up more than once. I think it'd be great to hear counsel's direction related to the general fund and revenue loss. I guess the only clarifier that I'll put on to that is that that funding does come back in and then it becomes part of a broader ability to spend on different priorities. And so it is more flexible in some ways. Once it does come back through the general fund so that that is something that we can continue to refine and we have until the end of 2024 to fully program all of these funds so we could look at it in future budget cycles as well. So so it doesn't have to be done tonight. But I just wanted to add that context on the the revenue loss discussion. Yeah. Thank you for bringing that up. And I favor the approach that you just articulated because ARPA is wonderful, but we are limited to them. We have a lot of things we can spend on, but we are limited to the the regulations that the federal government has put forth. If this money goes back into the general fund, it gives us much more flexibility for other things that we can spend on. So that would be my direction. But guess what? And that's what I was just going to call on you. Thank you for putting your hand up because you brought this up from the beginning. Yeah. So I would be supportive of that. But I would also want to make sure that we had some sort of spending guidelines. I don't want to say let's let's just ask for the 8 million. It's flexible and then it becomes kind of the grab bag. That's not like if we're giving direction on the project, we should be. Then in my mind, the flexibility should go toward to meet the goals that we're spending the rest of the money on for the most part. And not that. You want to propose some. You know, I guess for me, I'm I feel like we're honing here still as opposed to just selecting, you know, and so so I think actually that the assistant city manager did a great job of of, you know, as the one business support person. And I will I will let that go. But I think I think he I think he did a good job of kind of outlining that in terms of the goals, I think that they should be kind of housing, mental health and and public health related programs that are not would not be reimbursable through this program. And I don't know what those would be. I didn't come actually prepared for for for kind of. Yeah. And Vice Mayor Val, I set your hand up. Yeah. I was just going to say, I think that that's really what I was getting at. When I talk about the revenue loss and potential loss of services, I think we as a council can can outline what that would be. But my concern is, you know, if we're if we're looking at revenue loss, that could impact the services that we're trying to provide relative to this program or to other priorities. That's really what I would be looking for in. Counsel for her center. Oh, and I was just going to say, Ross. I guess maybe you guys. Are relative to the business, and I think businesses are also included within that directive as an impact to loss of services. We have done a number of different things for our business districts, including providing outreach and things like that that have had and services that have provided, you know, overall help for the for the entire business district . And I think to the extent that that so I do think it is relevant and tied to this conversation. Councilmember Knox, what I had said specifically, he's not necessarily interested in more grants. We've done a lot of grants with city funds, but I think that where we can leverage funds to provide services that are overarching, that meet a number of different needs, that's really what I'm looking for. Okay. And Councilmember Harry Spencer. Thank you, ma'am. So I wanted to follow up in regards to the smart city master plan that is on here, as well as the hotspots. I don't, of course, hear of any other support for it. So is there other money that the city is planning to use for that, or what is the I'm going to ask starter or is it going to be funded from some other way? Or what is what is the plan? Oh. And I will just throw in. Actually, I. Support that too. Is it we I guess I thought we were doing this for categories, but are we? Mr. Bodie, can you help me understand, because I saw. That the focus was in the report was on the four categories based on the input that was provided in May. But again, it it was it was an attempt to try and put our finger on where the the council wanted to, to focus the funds. The there is the possibility of adding to the program as we go. We're in the planning stages for that smart city master plan, for example, and we have funding to plan. But in terms of dollars to actually build it out, those have not been identified. So if other funding sources come to the housing topic for the Marina Village Project and there there remains ARPA funding as we go, we should be able to we should be able to reallocate those things on a on a rolling basis. We just don't want to wait too far in. I've been preaching that we have time, but eventually we will run out of time. Yeah. Councilmember Herrera. Spencer, go. Let's go back to you. I, I, I, I wanna hear what you have to say, and I think I support it. Well, I've been looking at these attachments, so we had multiple proposals, but we didn't just go line item by item. We're looking at your proposals as well as the categories. But one of them had wireless hotspots, $50,000. Is that something that's a standalone that we could dedicate $50,000 to hotspots? It is, and it's something that we could do. It's probably one of the, I'll say, lower hanging fruit, but probably very impactful, particularly as people are still doing a lot of things from their home at this point in time. Then there is also. So that's I think I think so. Right. So I think that's very important. But the service wireless lending hotspot, 18,007, what can you describe what that is and. Sure. This would be a program delivered by the library. We would essentially let people sign out hotspots. And I can't remember the number of devices, but it's a lot like your video. Your wireless system is 30. Thank you. So you'll be able you know, a household could theoretically be powered by one of these hotspots that they've signed out from the library, and there'd be no cost for that. It would just be like checking out a book and this program would fund the service and and and then obviously it would come back over time and it wouldn't just be something that would be given out forever. It would be on a lending basis. So if somebody did it for a couple of weeks, they could do that. They needed it for longer. We could probably figure that out, too. And then that virus hotspots. Can you say give us a description of where those would be across town? These are these this is all part of the library program. The broadband system would allow us to to create a network across the city to really create an Internet of basically a hard wired system that would allow us to increase Internet speeds across our community. The wireless hotspots could be adapted to those, and we could certainly stand up a broader network. So there's the lending from the library, and then there's the hard infrastructure, as well as the wireless infrastructure that would come with it, with the with the overall broadband program. And they're all tied to smart cities, whether it's a lending system or whether it's physical improvements and infrastructure. It is part of our broader effort to improve connectivity across the community. So. But if we don't. If we don't. So I'm not hearing 6 million. Maybe I didn't hear. Maybe I misheard or whatever. But you have on here another you have the 54 hot spots and then you have 18 seven for the landing. When you're talking about broadband, is that under the master plan, 6 million or is that correct? Yeah, that's the broadband is the 6 million. It's the Smart City program that basically would be a fiber network across the city, wi fi in our business districts. It's a it's an entire system that would be in the ground and above the ground that would that would improve connectivity across the community. So can the 50,000 and the 18 seven be used without that or you need the system. That can be used without that? So I would like us to at least consider the 70,000 to help people be able to have Internet access. But my preference is to do the 6 million plus. Thank you. I'm supportive of what Councilmember Harry Spencer says. And also bear in mind that we're talking about two tranches. So to the extent that some things really need to be done now and some can be done. You know. In a year when we get the other. Half. Or leveraging some of the money toward that. But I think that's very important. Mr. LEVIN. Actually, excuse my interruption. The city clerk would normally be reminding me we need to make a motion council before 11:00 and it's 10:52 p.m.. So we have these remaining items before us on the regular agenda. 60 is the police policy. Six F is the public art ordinance and six G is the Sunshine Ordinance. There are also five council referrals, but I don't think so. But do we have a motion to. I would entertain going to midnight to try to get at least D.F. and G heard. Councilor Max White, a motion made by Councilmember Knox White to add the secondary need for votes to pass. And we need to do it fast before 11. Face Maravilla There you go for a second. Thank you, Mayor. We have a roll call. Vote, please, Madam Clerk. A fleur de thug. I heard Spencer now Knox and actually I Leola. I may or as the Ashcraft high net carries. Four, two, one. Thank you. Okay. Who is speaking with it? Oh, Mr. Leavitt, I am sorry I had to interrupt. Yeah, go right ahead. But based on what I have heard in the last in the discussion, specifically in the last probably 10 minutes to 15 minutes, I would recommend that you direct us to go back and bring back a program that that's a combination of option one and option two. Because I think your focus was the housing, but also option one had a lot of the focus on things such as broadband and that type of infrastructure. The revenue loss could be used towards the housing and bring back a package combining those two. That would be my recommendation because we could probably narrow the broadband, maybe not go the full 6 million and maybe do some of the elements that have been talked about tonight. That sounds promising. What do we think, council? Councilmember Knox white guy. Any thoughts? Yeah, I guess I just want to say I am supportive of the the wireless hotspots and whatnot that the councilmember, her sponsor, was talking about. I'm going to get a little nervous when we start getting the broadband ahead of us actually having a smart, smart city plan. If staff is, I'm not going to say don't bring it back. But I'm because I have some concerns and I'd like to know a lot more about what literally we're going to do as opposed to just putting some broadband in and hoping to connect street lights and traffic lights to it. I think that to me, that's not good. That's not what I'm thinking about when I'm thinking big and and impactful. So they're just throwing that out there on the on the broadband. I'm a little. Yes. The wireless hotspots. And we're not 100% onboard. Okay. Yeah. I can hear her, Spencer. Still muted when more. Okay. My apologies. I continue to keep having unstable internet here. So is it is it possible to get more information from staff in regards to how many what percentage of our population actually has not had Internet does not have Internet access and how impacted they are? Because maybe I'm overestimating the impact. I feel like it's a very important need that impacts many. But obviously I'm not hearing that from my I don't really feel like I'm here. It's very much. So I do appreciate some of the support, but I would like some more information if possible, in regards to how great is the need , because maybe I'm overestimating it. Thanks. Well, I would suggest that rather than send staff to do more data digging, that we actually pursue this in the manner that the city manager proposed and to have him come back. I'm mindful of Councilmember NOx. We don't want to get too far out of our smart city plan. And, you know, there's some other ways we may be able to fund that. Infrastructure bills come in, come in from the feds soon, we hope. But, I mean, I do think that was a plausible suggestion by the city manager to have staff come back with this combination. Kels very nicely. I wish I could say I was a part of weekly meetings last summer with the school district to kind of answer that question. At the end of the day, while there were a few people, it was the numbers were not huge and they were very disparate. And what we found was that it was not something where infrastructure specifically was going to solve the issue, that there was there were needs of folks who had more need for a specific one household connection, as opposed to giant backbones of infrastructure. And so nothing kind of really moved forward because the school district was already handing out hot spots to families that needed them. So I think that that's where I think the hotspot idea continues to kind of build upon that. And then as we're doing the Smart City rethink, we can plug in further with what we learn. Councilmember Spencer. Fazio. So, yes, I've heard about the students getting them, but I've also heard the seniors that we normally see at these meetings have not been participating. And I think that that is actually a need. So maybe Mastic can help us figure out how we're going to connect our seniors to our community. Thanks. Let's have a motion. I will move. It is unfair. I'm not going to move to support the city manager's recommendation to combine to have staff come back with a combination of options one in two that has a housing focus but includes some revenue loss, flex for flexibility and wireless hotspot, and potentially some broadband support as discussed. And in addition to the public health and mental health that was all folded in. Right. Sorry. Yes, that was perfect. Thank you. We have a have had a motion. May we have a second, please? Health over day 3 seconds. All right. Maybe we have a real cover up with expectation. Oh, it is. If I. Were Spencer, I not quite. I. Leola. Mayor as he Ashcraft High that carries by five eyes. All right. Thank you. Thank you again, staff. Good work. Thank you, counsel. Good discussion. Let's move quickly on to item six D Medicare for you introduced. That was a thank you staff. Good to see you all. Good night. Recommendation to authorize the chief of police to update the existing Alameda Police Department policy manual to be current with the existing best practices and statutory requirements. Thank you. And I know there is a little changing of the guard here. And as I believe our new police chief, at some point, I suppose we have to stop saying new, but he's still pretty new. Here is our police chief, Nishant Joshi. Welcome, Chief Joshi. Good evening, Madam Mayor, and city members of the City Council. So I'm the item that I'm bringing for it has to do with departmental policies. Well, when I first came to the department about five weeks ago, I learned that there were several policies that required updates to meet statutory requirements and best practices. So the department contracts with a company called Flexible and Flexible develops and updates. Our policies, like support, consists of a team of policy and legal researchers and attorneys who regularly review case law and legislative updates along with industry best practices as they make these reviews. They automatically, excuse me, send policy update recommendations to the department. The department has reviewed the recommendations and is going to ask for authorization to update the policy. So I'll provide a brief overview. There are several policies of of that that include the recommendations that are in here. So I'll start with the first policy, and that's policy 300 that is on use of force. The previous. Chief Joshi, I apologize for the interruption. I did also just want to introduce the other individual on camera who just came on is Alan Cohn from our city attorney's office, who represents the police department. Welcome, Mr. Cohen. All right. Sorry, Chief. Back to. You. Oh, no problem at all. So the first policy is excuse me, policy 300 on use of force. The previous policy did not contain language that specifically prohibited the use of the carotid restraint or chokehold. And so the department did remove that as a as a force option last year. However, now this policy recommendation includes specific language that calls out and prohibits the use of such holds. The California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training removed the instruction as well. And so we're recommending that we accept this recommendation. I'll move on to the next policy. That's policy 314. That's on vehicle pursuits. The previous policy had language that permitted a secondary vehicle that's involved in a pursuit to notify dispatch of the pursuit. And it says as soon as reasonably practicable, practicable. The new language is actually more straightforward, and it directs a secondary unit to notify dispatch of their involvement in a pursuit immediately. And this is significant, especially as a chief. There's an as I think about risk it with vehicle pursuits, there's an inherent risk associated with vehicle pursuits. And then anytime we add an additional vehicle in a pursuit, the risk increases as well. So we don't want any delayed information about how many units are involved in pursuit because we want our monitoring supervisor commander to be in a position of advantage where we're I require them to constantly monitor the pursuit detail so they can determine whether or not to cancel a pursuit. So it's minor language, but I think it's very relevant and important to adopt. Next policy is 320 on domestic violence investigations. Previous policy included factors such as marital status between the aggressor and the victim. The new policy is inclusive of all classes policy 324, which is temporary custody of juveniles. The policy, the previous policy defined, quote, sight and sound separation as located or arranged to prevent physical, visual and auditory contact. The new policy continues that definition, but also adds that is more than brief or inadvertent. So it's just clarifying language on existing policy. The previous policy also directed officers to transport juveniles who are suspected of using a firearm in a crime to a juvenile facility. The new policy actually increases that threshold by directing officers to transfer juveniles who use a firearm to commit a felony.

Recommendation to use City Prosecutor budget savings from FY 19, increase appropriations in the General Fund by $295,525 in the City Prosecutor Department.

LongBeachCC_01212020_20-0067

All right. Is. Excuse me, is that number 22? Okay. Yes, we're going to we're going to move some call 22. It's going to take us about 5 minutes. And then we're going to go to the big oh, my pool item. Item 22 is a communication from city prosecutor. Recommendation to use City Prosecutor. Budget savings from FBI 19. Increase appropriations in the General Fund by 295,525 in the City Prosecutor Department. Yes. Congressman Mango? Yes. I want to first support. Prosecutor Halbert and all the great work he does. And I appreciate you and I appreciate the work you do. And I even had great hesitation last week with making the option for the city auditor to bring forward her amendment to the floor without going through Budget Oversight Committee. $295,000 is a considerable amount of money, and I appreciate that you have budget savings. And I among our council and a huge advocate for those that save should get to eat a part of their savings. However, at a time when we're facing potential budget shortfalls and we've had hundreds of animal advocates here who can't hire a $40,000 a year, part time person to clean animal cages when our be safe programs in the summer cost. $30,000. This could be ten of those programs. I would really appreciate my council colleagues supporting sending this to Budget Oversight Committee. It would not be a long process. The Budget Oversight Committee meets February 11th, and I would be happy to put this on the agenda. But I think it's important for us to do it as a part of a process. And I think it's important for us to make allocations at this level with a global picture, not just with a single part of mind. Furthermore, I support homeless programs and homeless services. We do have a percentage of a specific kind of funding for those types of programs. This is general fund money that could be used for park programs, animal programs, library hours on Sunday and things like that. And so I think that it is important to take a step back further. When I asked Mr. Halbert if it was going out through a contract or any of those things, he was talking about potentially adding a staff member. And it's really hard when our animal control staff make minimum wage and we don't have enough of them to clean cages to make this independent decision for $300,000. So if my colleagues would be supportive of my motion is to send this to Budget Oversight Committee to be agenda ISED for the February 11th meeting. Thank you. And I would also recommend that all department heads who want to do that. Asked to agenda do budget oversight committee. Thank you, Congressman Austin. Thank you. And so we we approved something very similar just this last week for for our city. I know. And and obviously, I'm a member of the Budget Oversight Committee and I'm speaking in favor of this this particular motion. Madam Chair, with all due respect, I mean, I understand where you want to go with this. How do you envision this this working out? It goes to the Budget Oversight Committee and then comes back to the city council. So this money is from prior year savings. Mr. Modica, would you be able to tell me if we took this act tonight versus February 11th, when that money becomes available and in which fiscal year? So that when you put me on the spot, it's probably in the next 30 days or 40 days. We're normally closing at the end of February. I think this request is to do that when we close and it's just you're doing it a little early. So we do have that kind of time available. So what I envision is for us to discuss the priorities. We have a budget meeting that has some discussions from staff on the shortfalls for next year and the potential risks and areas that we have to consider. And I think that this should be discussed as a part of that. So the city prosecutors department had a $591,000 fine, 19 savings in their requesting $295,525. I'm sure during that B or C meeting, we will be discussing how to potentially allocate the balance. Is that. So? Currently, the staff bring forward a set of recommendations for mid-year. Typically, if a department head does not get their money back, it becomes available for divide by nine in the next year. We made some allocations based on savings and so we already put together a list of what would be funded with this money. And so I think it's important for us to make a decision and I will speak on my vote. Last week it was with great hesitation that we made that, and I in hindsight, wish I had not been supportive of that. It was I really feel there has to be a process and I know that I should have started last week. But better to save. Where we are. Okay. I'm going to ask. I know we're on my time and so I'm going to defer and I look forward to hearing from the rest of my colleagues. You're comfortable in your eyes. Thank you. I share the same concerns as Councilman Orson. I understand what Councilman Mongo is saying, but frankly, I think we should start off with congratulations to you for ending the year with a budget surplus as high as you did and not scrambling at the last minute to figure out how to spend every single penny of the money that was allotted to you and instead telling us honestly what you actually need to help us combat homelessness in the city of Long Beach. I think the fact that you're asking for less than a half or about a half of that is is frankly something you should be rewarded for. And I do not want to. This is a this money was allocated to your department as a department head to be able to make a determination of how best you want to use that money. You ended up with a budget surplus. We want to encourage our department heads to do that and not feel that they might risk losing that money if they come out with a surplus as opposed to a deficit. So I am wholeheartedly in support of approving your request this evening. And and I think the diversion programs that you've been involved in in the city have been extraordinary. They have commanded attention from throughout the nation, and they have come in at a very responsible cost in terms of I know how much these programs cost. Frankly, I'm shocked that you're able to do as much as you do with the budget that you have as a person who does your profession on a daily basis. So I would urge my colleagues to support this item if we're going to have a change of policy regarding surplus having to come to posse first. I'm not opposed to that either, but I don't think we should do it without giving notice to the department heads, because if that's the direction we're going to go, I guarantee you will have less surpluses throughout every department next year. Right. Thank you. Thank you. I agree with Councilmember Austin and Councilmember Price. I applaud you for the budget savings. And I think any time that a department can save money and then be creative with how they want to use those funds to achieve the goal of that department, it's important we support that. Any budget conversations, really, whether it's the body or during the budget process where this entire council gets to weigh in on the budget, I think is is appropriate. Thank you. I come from a. Ago, so I think it's important to note, Ms.. Price, that Councilwoman Price, that the policy is that they do not get to carry it over. We have made an exception for Prosecutor Halbert for two years and we've only made an exception for city auditor out one year. This was the first time it caught me off guard. I have a lot of questions about it, but the policy of the city is that this is not allowed and that is why it's coming to council because it is an exception. At which time last year I made similar comments that we really need a process specifically. There are programs on contingency Sunday library hours, be safe programs and other things that right now Grace is bringing to our February 10th 11th meeting a list of here's the priorities and here's how much money is being rolled over. And so we're only going to be able to fund A through F. And so I think that the council should get to know what that is when making the decision. And we made an exception for Prosecutor Halbert last year and the year before two times. And we made an exception for councilman I'm sorry, a prosecutor, city auditor. O'DOWD One time. But I also believe that we we have a bigger discussion that we started, which is the vacancies. We have department heads who come to us on a consistent basis and say, I need seven staff. And to your point, both Ms.. Pearce and Pryce, there are staff vacancies in development services that each year happen, and each year they ask for more staff, and each year they have a budget savings because they don't fill the staff. Now part of that is because of the process and the specific challenges that we have in civil service. But we need to get to the bottom of whether or not these departments are appropriately staffed. And Council of Prosecutor Halbert would not have been able to use this money and spend it last minute on printer cartridges or whatever he could, because from what I understand, this is a one off funds. It was salary and employee benefit funding that was available. And from what I had in my very short discussion with him earlier today, a few moments ago, he would be using this money for another staff member for this program, which if he stopped at the same level he was staffed out last year, he would have the ability to do that anyway. And so. And I don't know what percentage of his total budget is, $300,000. But coming in 1% above or below, it absolutely should be rewarded. And we should have a program that does that. But if we had other departments come forward in my discussions with Mr. Modica, if we had other departments come forward and do the same thing, we would be in a world of hurt and we're already in a position where we cannot fund. What we've approved to finish this year. And so for those reasons, I implore everyone to support the motion on the floor. All right. Thank you very much. My comment on this and my perspective, I don't think Dan would even come to us that this wasn't necessary, whether it's for a staff member or whatever it was, and especially at this time of night, you know, because one thing I do know, if you don't use it, you lose it. And Doug, I think what you're going to use it for is totally acceptable for us. And I'm concerned and I will totally support you tonight on this item. Thank you. Mrs. Cindy has. You know. Okay. I just want to say that I am not saying that what he's asking for is not appropriate. I'm not saying that it's not a good program, and I'm not saying that we wouldn't award it through the process that we have planned on February 11th. All of that is still completely possible because he was so prudent to bring forward the items so early. We hear from him. Of course. If you'd ask him. Yes, but wait till she finish, please. Okay. Mrs.. India's. Oh, yes. Okay. Do our public comment on this, folks. Okay, fine. Now, would you like to speak there. Very briefly and I apologize. I thought this was going to be your fastest item tonight. I didn't know it was going to be the longest. I do believe this is the fifth or sixth year that the council has allowed my budget savings to be reallocated to me. It started, I know, when Councilmember DeLong was on the Budget Oversight Committee. So I do believe there has been a precedent in my office. So I wanted to mention that the second thing is the innovative programs that our office has really is a reflection of a partnership between the council and my office, because I could not have started these programs without having the budget savings from previous years reallocated so that we can do creative things that we didn't think of in the current year. So we start programs. We look for grant funding. The biggest reason that I have this much savings are really two reasons. My office has been very aggressive in getting grant funding everywhere we can to bring money into the city of Long Beach. And the second thing is, when we have a vacancy, we delay filling that vacancy as long as we can in order to generate savings, knowing that that savings will help us to fund the next program. So I want to thank you. And I do take to heart all of the comments. And Ms.. Mungo's comments will be taken to heart and I will bring it. Earlier, I was asked to hold off. John GROSS asked me to hold off until January. I was ready to make this request earlier. I would have been happy to bring it to Bossi in October. I was asked to wait till January and then I was asked to cut it in half. This is the first time I've asked for half of the budget savings to be carried over because it was such a large amount, because the city is in such a financial situation that it's needed. So I was more than happy to do that. But I do appreciate the partnership. I do appreciate the programs we have are a result of your allowing me to do this. So I thank you for that. And next year I'll bring it to BMC right away and get this input as soon as possible. But I do want to thank you again for considering it. Thank you. And us. Thank you and thank you, Doug, for for all that information. I did want to hear from you. I also wanted to thank you for all your hard work that you do. And I will be supporting this. Thank you. What's a woman? Mango. Mr. Halbert, do you know the average amount we've allowed you to roll over in the last five years or approximate? I do not. You know, last year's amount. Of time I had, I don't recall. Mr. Modica, do you have any financial management staff that might know that? I don't think we have that tonight. I would just say to the council that. I appreciate that Prosecutor Halbert has had savings, but if every year he has savings, then potentially he has enough money in the budget to do the program. But I don't know that because I don't have enough information at this time. So that's all. But I really appreciate it. And I do think the program is important. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. So it's no public comment is that we. We the as I understand it, the motion was Councilwoman Mungo's motion to refer to B, O, C and nice and a second. Yes. And I'd like to ask Mr. Halbert if he'd be supportive of that. I would appreciate the council just approving it tonight. I'd like to make a substitute. We've got. To prove. It. I couldn't. Austin, did you say something? Okay. Council. Councilman Austin removed the second. So no, we don't have a motion on the floor and somebody else wants to second. Councilwoman Mangos. I think Councilman Price is going to make a motion. There's no second. Rate so she can make. The original motion. Councilwoman Price, if you want to make a motion. I'd make a motion to approve the request, as indicated in item 22. We have a second. Right. This is it. And then we should have public comment. As for public comment on the motion. Any more public comment? No one should sign up for the public comments. So I appreciate. Okay. Mr. Mongo, you wanna speak one more time about it? I'm just very disappointed because I've tried to do my diligence. I reached out to Mr. Halbert a week ago. I wish he would have been supportive of going through the Budget Oversight Committee, especially since we have plenty of time. But please, please cast your vote. Bush and Kerry's.

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

KingCountyCC_07142020_2020-0073

So go to check out Shakespeare's or Wonder scavenger hunt for the summer. With that, we will go to item seven on our agenda, which is proposed motion 20 2073, which Quinn which would confirm the executive's appointment of Kimberly Deering Durango, a resident of Council District 2 to 2 for culture as an executive At-Large representative. I'm April Sanders is here to brief us on the motion. Ms.. Sanders, the line is yours. Thank you. For the record, April Sanders Council Policy Staff I propose motion 2020 0073 would confirm the executive's appointment of Kimberly Mariana, who resides in Council District two to the King County Cultural Development Authority as an executive at large representative for a term expiring on December 31st of 2022. And I'll bypass a little bit of the background since we heard quite a bit about our culture previously. But but for culture is governed by a 15 member board of directors who are required to have a demonstrated commitment to and knowledge of cultural resources, be active and experienced in the community and, and have concerns or have the ability to evaluate the needs of cultural constituencies in the region as a whole. Directors are to represent a range of talents, experiences, backgrounds and viewpoints. Mariana is resident of Council District two, and if confirmed, would serve as an outlier as representative. She earned her Master of Architecture degree from Savannah College of Art and Design. And throughout her career, she's worked as an architectural engineer designer, working on projects in tribal communities throughout the county. She currently works at the Hawk Artist Collective and serves as an indigenous design consultant to the city of Seattle. This appointment, it appears to be consistent with the criteria established in the Fort Culture Charter, as well as the process established in the ordinance by council in 2018. Mr. Yana is on the Zoom call today to answer any questions you may have, and we have a couple representatives from Fort Hood today. I see both Fran Carter and Claire McHugh on the line to answer any questions as well. And that concludes my staff report. Thank you. Questions of Ms.. Sanders. Welcome, Mastriano. Would you like to make? Make some opening comments and introduce yourself. Stern. Hi, everybody. I'm Kimberly Brianna. I'm man Dan and the doc said those are tribes in North Dakota. I'm a third generation urban native, so I grew up in Bozeman, Montana, and have been in this region in coastal territories for about seven years. My husband grew up on the east side and we're planting our roots in this area because we love the multicultural, vibrant, vibrant ness of this area. And yeah, thank you. Intro Thank you. Have you. Have the opportunity to attend some foreign cultural board meetings today. Can you tell us a little a little bit about your work with or knowledge of your culture? Yeah, it's for culture, definitely. So I've attended all the board meetings for this year so far, or I missed one. But I just I'm learning about the role of the board in terms of how we help the staff make sure that they're honoring the roles of this sacred this sacred organization and the the responsibility we have to our community and cultural cultural vitality. And so I. I'm still learning a lot, but I think I've attended some of the some of the panels where like you're where you're choosing applicants for the different for the different funding grants. And so I feel like I have a you know, I'm getting a better overview of all the different aspects that our culture and many different aspects that our culture supports our community. And thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Lambert. You. Thank you very much for your service. And I see that you are and have a master's of architecture degree and that you are working around needed things. So as you're going out to some of the native areas along the way, you'll see some barns and the barns and the and the agricultural areas that are important for the work that goes on, I mean the work that goes on, but also for the history and culture. So I hope that you'll get to see the barns that we have already installed and then barns that need to be restored as we go forward and look at that as a project. Thank you for calling behalf of grain elevators in Montana. Everybody. Concerns are really important to preserve. So I understand significant. Other questions. I would entertain a motion to approve the motion 20 2073. So moved, Mr. Chair. I believe that was Councilmember Dunn has moved to the approval that would give a do pass recommendation in motion 20 2073. Is there any further discussion or debate? Saying No, Madam Couric could ask you to please call the roll. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Council Member, Belgium. Two High Council Members on duty. Both II. Council Member DEMBOSKY II. Council Member DEMBOSKY BUT Council Member Dan. I come from number ten both by councilmember. I Councilmember Caldwell supports I Councilmember Lambert. I count Lambert. Both I. Councilmember after grant. I. Councilmember after Grant both. I. Councilmember one right far. Councilmember Bond. My fellow council members. Our High Council members are. Hello, Birdseye. Mr. Chair. Hi. All right, barcodes. I remember on my phone reports I missed the chance. Bogus 980 noes. Thank you. By your vote, we've given a do pass recommendation. The motion 20 2073. Well, I'll send it to all council. And unless there's objection, we will expedite and put it on the consent agenda. Seeing no objection. That's what we shall do. And that takes us to item eight, another Ford Culture Appointment Motion 20 2075 to confirm the executive's appointment of Regina Roux, who is a resident of Council District two as a full culture, another executive at large appointment. Ms. SANDERS.

AN ORDINANCE relating to grant funds from non-City sources; authorizing the Directors of Transportation and the Seattle Center to accept specified grants and execute related agreements for and on behalf of the City; amending Ordinance 125475, which adopted the 2018 Budget, including the 2018-2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); changing appropriations to the Seattle Department of Transportation; revising allocations and spending plans for certain projects in the 2018-2023 CIP; and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts.

SeattleCityCouncil_03122018_CB 119205

Bill past chair senate please read a goodnight and or six to short title. Agenda Item six Cancel 119205 relating to grants fund grant funds from non city sources authorizing directors of transportation self-centered to accept specified grants and executed related agreements for on behalf of the city. The committee recommends the bill pass. That's why. I'm Brian. Thank you. This is an ordinance that allows us to accept grants that we've applied for and been successful at. There are five projects listed on this grant acceptance ordinance. The total is about $9.5 million. The grants are coming from a mix of sources. Puget Sound Regional Council has a couple in Federal Transit Administration as a couple, and the Federal Highway Administration has one. If folks have questions, I'm happy to try and answer any comments. Questions. If not, please call the rule on the passage of the bill. Or as I. O'BRIEN So aren't I? BEGALA Hi. Gonzales I herbold. JOHNSON I'm President Harrell high eight in favor and unopposed. Bill Pass and chair of the Senate. Please read agenda item number seven the short title.

Ordinance Amending City of Boston Code, Ordinances, Section 1, to Codify City Policy Regarding the Display of Flags on City Hall Plaza. On motion of Councilors Bok and Louijeune, Rule 12 was invoked to include Councilor Flynn as co-sponsor. On motion of Councilors Bok, Louijeune and Flynn, the rules were suspended; the ordinance was passed. Councilor Arroyo in the Chair.

BostonCC_08102022_2022-0961

Thank you, Counsel Arroyo. So dark at zero nine, 552.0960 will be referred to the Committee on Government Operations. They'll stay in committee, basically. Mr. Clarke, please read. Dawkins 0961909. Each year. Policy regarding the display of flags on City Hall Plaza. The Chair recognizes this council blocking of the floor council block. Thank you so much, Mr. President. Mr. President, if I could suspend Rule 12 and add you to this docket. Sitting in here. No. Objection. So order. Excellent. And a. Well, I'll also be speaking through the chair of government operations essentially and passage, but I'll leave that to the chair. So, you know, I think I. Many of us have the experience of walking out of government center to stop and looking up and seeing the three city flagpoles and then seeing behind them city hall . And if you walked out, if you weren't a city councilor, you were just a resident of the city of Austin, and you walked out and you looked up at the flagpole and you saw a flag you didn't happen to know of flying on the third pole. You might well say to the person with you, Oh, I wonder why the city's flying that flag today. I wonder what flag that is. And I think the reality of the situation is that when people see our three flagpoles, they're with the the US flag, the state flag, and often, but not always the city of Boston flag and city hall behind it, they identify those flagpoles with city hall. And that has been the kind of history of that site. What the Supreme Court basically said to us and the decision that came down a couple of months ago was, yes, that's true. And it clearly looks like these flagpoles should be operated as kind of an extension of city hall and express in the city's messages. But the way you guys were running your program to manage the third flagpole opened you up to a different interpretation because we were running a, um, a program where people could basically just fill out an application and say, Hey, I want my flag up there. And we would raise it. And in the context in which we're doing that, taking all comers, it's that not acceptable under the First Amendment to pick out one entity and in this case can't and say you can't raise your flag. And I think, you know, the court gave us a thoughtful and reasonable judgment on that front. And fortunately, it also laid out a roadmap in the decision by Justice Breyer for how the council could and really the city could reassert the fact that those flagpoles are an extension of city hall and are a place where we express the messages of the city of Boston. And the way I would think about this from a kind of First Amendment perspective is that you could have any sign you wanted and walk down Cambridge Street in protest. And your First Amendment right is to have that sign in your hands saying whatever you want to say. If you want to hang that sign up on City Hall, our property management department would be within its rights to take it down and saying, Oh, that's not something that the mayor of the council put up on the building. And so basically what this is about is identifying the flagpoles as a site of government speech in the same way that what we do with the lights or with anything hanging from city hall, etc., is a site, a government speech expected expressing the messages of the city of Boston. And I think that's important because I think that our residents, when they see the flagpoles, they do expect those messages to be coming from us. And obviously, both this body and the mayor are the duly elected representatives of the people of Boston. And so the ordinance that's before you today would basically follow the Supreme Court's recommendations. And it's been reviewed by the city's Supreme Court legal counsel and to set up a policy that would follow what the court suggested, which is that we clearly be making a kind of codified city decision when we raise a flag on that third flagpole that isn't the city of Boston swag. And so this creates to pass for that one runs through this body by through a resolution and the other runs through a mayoral proclamation that said either side of the fifth floor can do that and. And you know, I think there's a couple of reasons to seek suspension of passage today. One is that it? Having been told, hey, you need to have a different policy on this if you want to operate a flag raising program. I think that it makes sense for the city to have that policy in place as soon as possible and kind of end this interregnum. And also know that, you know, there are communities that we often on this council wanted to support and raise flags for. I think there's a lot of folks who would love to see a mayoral proclamation enabling us to raise the Dominican flag next week on Restoration Day. I heard recently from Councilor Flaherty that, you know, there might be an opportunity later in the month to support Ukraine with the flag raising. These are all decisions that would, under this new policy, have to be made by other council resolution or a proclamation of the mayor. But none of that can happen unless we actually codified this new policy in statute. So I think it gives us an opportunity to follow the law. Be clear, based on the Supreme Court decision that we got and go back to a mode and sort of on better footing this time where we as the represented city of Boston Express, you know, all of the all of the cultures and messages that we'd like to include and celebrate using that flagpole as an extension of that . So I'm really grateful to my colleagues that Councilor Councilor Lujan, who's one of the one of the legal minds of the council and to President Flynn. And I can also say that, as I mentioned before, both the Supreme Court council that the city retains for Supreme Court advice and also the law department has reviewed this legislation in detail. So thank you, Mr. President. And as I mentioned, it's, I think, the business of the chair since of the current operations, but we are seeking through him suspension of passage today. Thank you, Counsel. BLOCK. The chair recognizes Constitution. Constitution. You have the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I won't speak long because I think Counsel Robert covered most of it. But, you know, we as a city city council, we love our flag raisings. For too long now, too many of our communities haven't had the opportunity to raise a flag because of this outstanding Supreme Court litigation that has been costly and time and has taken a lot of our time and attention. Justice Breyer gave us good guidelines on which we could have flag raisings that really our speech that we endorse here as a body or endorsed by the mayor, both in terms of celebrating the diversity of our city and the richness of our cultures and the causes that we support. And I think the language in the ordinances was reviewed and edited and made as inclusive as possible. So I think this is a good path forward so that we can start raising flags. Council said next week the Dominican flag. There are many flags that, you know, celebrations that we have for the remainder of the year, for next year that we want to start getting started on. So I think this is a fair ordinance in response to the Supreme Court's decision, and it allows us to get back to the business that we're doing in supporting the speech that we want to support on City Hall Plaza. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Lui. Jen. I recognize Council President Ed Flynn. Thank you, Counselor Arroyo, and glad to partner with my my colleagues. And, you know, when city council is in with Mayor Wu's team as well, I think flying a flag on city hall. Has the opportunity to bring us together as a city. We celebrate various countries. We celebrate their contributions and sacrifices to the United States, whether it's whether it's Mexico, whether it's Ireland, whether it's. Um, another country. But it's about bringing people together. It's about recognizing the sacrifice that immigrants have made to our city and to our country and the other. The other aspect I'd like to highlight, too, was I always love looking up when I see a flag and seeing the P.O.W. and my flag, which is often in many city and state buildings, and that's the prisoner of war missing in action. And that's to remember service members that are unaccounted for. Still to this day serving serving overseas. But that flag is also a reminder to. They are family, that our city did not forget them or our country did not forget them. So when I see that, when I see that flag, I have a smile on my face because I know that those military families are being thought of by our city government or by our federal government. Thank you, councilor. Thank you. Council President Clinton. In order for me to speak on it, I. The chair recognizes. Counsel Baker. Counsel Baker. You have the floor. You sure? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just had a question. So through you to either one of the the the lead sponsors, every flag raising will have to have a resolution come through here. What is the mayor's if so, if the mayor wants a flag raising, that will have to be a resolution that comes through here and a vote on it. But the chair recognizes counsel, board counsel. What can you respond to that question? Yes, thank you. No, it's it's either a mayoral proclamation or a city council resolution. So the idea being that the way that the council expresses sort of the sense of the body formally is by resolution. The way the mayor expresses is through proclamation. I think folks have often seen folks receiving know their equivalent on the mayoral side with that folder in the proclamation. And so it's basically the idea that either body the key thing from the court's decisions perspective was that we needed to kind of express it as officially our message, like from the city of Boston. So the idea is we we use either the council's way of sort of expressing official things or the for the mayor's way. And one more question. Would the what the mayor's proclamation have to be voted in this body here. Which the chair recognizes council? Look. No, it would follow the same the current path by which the mayor promulgates proclamations, which is unilateral on her side. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I think I'm a little concerned about taking votes on up or down on different flags. I'm going to support this here today. But I think where we potentially can be the brunt of the joke on this one here, because I think the I think what will come in front of us all the time will be those really controversial ones. And we'll have to vote on them and we'll be in the paper when it comes to Satanic Temple and whatever other sort of fringe groups come in front of us, that that that want to have their flag sewn. I'm trying as I'm trying to see around that. So again, I'm feeling like I'm going to support this. But I do think there is potential in the future for. Ask to be in the middle of a Supreme Court fight that we don't necessarily want to be in or should be in. So I do have some concerns and. I'll figure out the vote when I. When it's in front of me. Thank you, Castle Baker. I'm going to go to council break, and then I'm going to go back to council. Council balked at. You need to say something immediately. I was just hoping. Because it's directly on Councilor Baker. That she recognizes council. So so just because it's another point of clarification, part of what's shifting here is that whereas for before there was like an intake form for people to raise their hand and say, hey, I want my flag raised because these are expressions of the, of the city. Like there there is not an intake form type thing. So basically like there's only going to be a resolution to even be voted on. That could lead to a flag raising by the city council. If a member of this body introduces said resolution. So to Councilor Baker's point about sort of like people putting things up for to kind of force draw votes like it would only be if somebody on this council move such a resolution that it could be voted on. I just want to clarify that. Thanks. Thank you, Councilor BLOCK. The chair recognizes Councilor Braid and council bread. You of the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you to Councilors Barclay Vision and yourself, President Flynn, for initiating the formal codification of the city policy regarding regulating our city. Manage public spaces for government speech. I think one of the things that we basically didn't have, we didn't have a formal codification of a policy to or over oversee the flag raising issue. So that got us into trouble. And it begs the question, you know, as we think one of the issues that we've been working on, as in offices, is to review the re qualification of our ordinances. And I think this is an opportune time to, uh, to look at all of these issues. I know this is a slight sort of segway or a sidebar to the conversation about specifically to the flag raising issue. In Chapter eight of the Ordinance of 1975, the city established a uniform procedure for the adaptation and probably promulgation of forms and regulations by the city departments adopting the State of Massachusetts, Massachusetts State Administrative Procedures Act . So, you know, after 50 years, I think the Supreme Court has, in the case of the flag raising issue, has given us a timely reminder that we need to maybe initiate a review of how all of our department regulations are adopted and promulgated. And, you know, in the context of reviewing our codification of our ordinances, I look forward to digging deeper into that and trying to get some consistency. You know, with this an issue with clarification of the flag raising issue, I'm sure there's other issues that we need to attend to as well. Just do it in a matter of Good Housekeeping and putting everything in order. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. Brady in the chair recognizes counsel. Royal counsel. Royal, do you have the floor? Thank you, counsel. President Flynn, as chair of government operations, I will be seeking suspension of Rule 33 so that this matter can be adopted today. I think much of sort of the nuance on the new legal sort of findings as well as why it's important, have already been discussed. So I'm going to keep it very short just to say that this ordinance doesn't conflict with any city of Boston code or ordinances. And I'd also like to thank the original co-sponsors of the ordinance councilor back in the region for bringing this to the floor so that we can clearly establish guidelines for the display of flags by the city of Boston. And I think it's already been said, but this has already been vetted by both our law department and our council that we use for Supreme Court cases. All right. And so I think this is ready to go today, which is why I'm offering it up as a suspended passed. Thank you to the makers. Thank you as well to you as an original co-sponsor present one. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel Royall the chair recognizes counsel Murphy. Counsel Murphy, you have the ball. Thank you. Counsel. President So I did have some concerns when I first saw this that this would be a violation of free speech. And I do have to say thank you to Counselor Bach for using my concerns there. When you talked to me through that, the one question that I still have and if one of the original sponsors could reply, why does the mayor need us also? Why can't it just be a decision by the mayor? Why are we the council also weighing in on the flagpoles, which I thought were the mayor's flagpoles, because I know in the past we have this balcony out here and maybe that's a different conversation the council can have on if we want to hang flags off our council back balcony. But if someone could just clear that up, that would be helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Murphy, the chair recognizes Councilor Bourque to respond to that question from counsel. Murphy Thank you so much, Mr. President. I think so. First of all, obviously, there's no requirement that the Council ever take resolution action to lead to it to a flag raising. And so certainly it could become the pattern and practice that we ceded that to the mayor. I think that that said, I'll be a little bit of an institutionalist here. I think that this council represents the city of Boston just as much as the mayor does. And so when we're talking about an ordinance that we would codify into our municipal code, I think it would be it would sort of be a shame for the council to kind of cede its right to also establish a message of the city of Boston, even if in practice, we end up deciding that it's it makes more sense to let the mayoral proclamations become the default or something. I think that it would sort of be a a seeding of sort of like. Are kind of like rights and prerogatives to also express messages on behalf of the city of Boston, which I take us to be doing every time we file a resolution on something. So I think that's the that's the reason. And that said, obviously, like, you know, when you think about even just timing things, right, like if this were to pass today and we're talking about the the being able to raise the flag as the city for the Dominican Restoration Day on Tuesday because we don't have a resolution before us here. Obviously, that would be done by mayoral proclamation. So and I think obviously there will often be times where the council's Wednesday meeting schedule is such that it makes more sense to do it by proclamation. But I will just say that I would feel queasy about giving up our prerogative as a duly elected body representing Boston to also be a decision maker on this. So thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Does anyone else have any questions or comments on this? Um. Would anyone like to add their name? Please raise your hand. The Mr. Kirkland, please add counsel of Royal Counsel and counsel of Colorado, counsel in front of his name as Andersen. Please have counsel. Varro counsel. Clarity. Please. Please. Council world. Council is blocking motion and are seeking suspension of the rules and passage of docket 0961. All those in favor say aye. I opposed say no. The ayes have it. Docket 0961 has passed. She wanted to be a spy, so. Sorry. It was. It's okay. Thank you. DAWKINS 0962 lucky numbers 0962 consoles turn off at the following order for a hearing to discuss safety concerns associated with double decker sightseeing busses and reclaiming a double decker bus. Public safety measures in the city of Boston.

Recommendation to request a report from City Manager and Police Chief on gun violence in Long Beach within the past year, including what steps are being taken to address the violence and what additional resources are needed to assist with those efforts.

LongBeachCC_05172016_16-0438

Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Muranga and Councilmember Richardson recommendation to request a report from the city manager and police chief on gun violence in Long Beach within the past year. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And I want to thank my colleagues who signed on to this. This item. I want to, first of all, start by applauding the hardworking and dedicated men and women of Long Beach PD for the work that they do to keep our city safe on a day to day basis. They have a tough job and we very much appreciate the work that they do. However, recently, over the past several months, we have experienced an increase in violent crime, particularly gun crimes in some areas of our city, which has been very, very unsettling for many of us as city council members, but many residents as well, families who have been impacted by gun violence neighborhoods. And it does have an impact when when those actions happen. I know gun violence is actually down. If we look at the statistics over the last 20 years. But we are experiencing an uptick. And from my perspective, any gun violence is is too much gun violence. And we can and should do better. And so what I'm asking for from our or I'd like a staff report from the P.D. to to give us some some some insight as to what sort of strategies and what are we doing to to try to reduce gun violence over the next in the coming months as we are approaching our 2016 summer? Also, what can this council do to better support you in terms of reducing gun violence? Mayor Councilmembers, we have with us tonight all three deputy chiefs, Rich, Rocky, Mike Beckmann and David Hendricks. We also have Tracy Coalinga, our neighborhood resource officer. So I'm going to turn it over to our deputy chiefs. But I do want to point out as well that this is probably the last time you'll see Deputy Chief Rich Rocky buying a microphone. He'll be retiring in early June after a 30 year career. And congratulations, Chief Rocky handed off to you. Thank you, Mr. West. Honorable Mayor. Members of City Council. Yes. We, too, share your concern with the increase in in gun violence, as we've seen so far this year. And we are doing many things to try to impact our gun violence that we are seeing throughout the city. I'd like to point out that one. In 2014, we ended the year in a 40 year low in violent crime in our city in 2015. In 2016, we started to see some of that rebound, specifically in the area of violent crime and in our gun violence. Through April of 2016, our city has experienced a 13.1% in violent crime. We have experienced an increase in our shootings of nearly 42% compared to the same time last year. About one third of these shootings are gang related, and we have seen an increase of 46.7% in gang related shootings from this time last year as well. Murders are also have shown an increase this year of 83.3% year to date compared to 2015. Most of these, however, are gang related, and that's where we're focusing a lot of our attention to impact these crimes. One thing I'm going to add into this is our robberies. Although some of our a lot of our robberies may not be involve guns, some of them do involve guns. So I thought it was appropriate to talk a little bit about that when we're talking about gun violence. But we have shown an increase of 24.3% of robberies through April 2016 compared to 2015. And just to clarify, robbery, this crime occurs when someone takes the property from another by force or fear. And most of these robberies that we experience in our city are street related type crimes. And again, many of them don't involve guns, but some of them do. The common things taken in these robberies are cell phones, personal items such as jewelry and money, and these are often crimes of opportunity. In addition, as we talked a little bit about the 40 year low in violent crime in 2014 and then bouncing back the last 17 to 18 months, according to a recent report of Major City Chiefs Association, major cities across the country and even into Canada are experiencing similar increases in their violent crime categories, as we are seeing here in Long Beach. And they're seeing these during the first quarter of 2016 compared to 2015, like we are here as well. Some of those challenges that we continue to see and that have been something that we've been focused on as an organization is several legislations, legislation, challenges that have come our way in the recent years. Other well-intended to reduce prison populations. We have seen that legislation impact us and we're still working with our. Agencies across the country and major city chiefs to determine how this legislation is, in fact, impacting us to get more empirical data. A lot of what we're seeing is anecdotal at this time. So some of our strategies that we have employed and I'll mention a few, I do have many of them and we can include these in the upcoming report. But I want to point out before I get into the strategies and just thank our dedicated police officers in the city. We have a group of officers who work extremely hard to impact crime and keep our community safe. And in doing that, they work with us and employ various strategies to impact crime. And to name a few, like I said. Through crime analysis, we adjust resources throughout the city to impact crime when and where they're most likely to occur. We focus enforcement at the patrol divisions by directed enforcement teams in Impact Motors, public safety realignment teams, patrol officers and canines. Through April of this year, a public safety realignment team has performed 213 compliance checks and made 93 arrests. We've increased our court order arrests to 82 versus 69 through the end of May of 2015, and May isn't done in 2016. So we'll see that number grow. And we have surpassed our court order enforcement, increased proactive enforcement with the use of overtime for violent crime and property crimes are most likely to occur. These efforts, in combination with quick response to priority calls for service, has resulted in an increase of seized guns this year. These are evidence guns taken off the street. And so far we have seized 186 versus 139 from this time last year. So we are continuing to impact our gun crimes by taking guns off the street that are in the hands of those that want to do harm. Local and regional narcotics enforcement to impact a funding source for gang operations. And with that, I can answer any further questions. Catherine. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you to Councilman Austin for for bringing this forward and for asking me to join join in with them. And thanks to our police officers and our violence prevention team. I know I know very well our statistics. You know, I know statistically we are up in gun violence. And I know statistically there is an increase in homicides, particularly in my council district this year. And I know that conversations are taking place at kitchen tables in our community and taking place taking place in my own home. So I do think it's important that we as a city council do have these conversations at the highest levels of our city. It's important for the public to know that this is a priority for us, that we are doing the best, doing the best that we can, constantly innovating and looking at new approaches, not just focusing on suppression, but placing a real focus on violence prevention and investing in this like we've never invested in it before. So, so, so know. I want to again thank Councilman Austin for bringing this forward. But I think we need to continue to have these these regular updates and dialogs until we turn a corner, until, you know, additional resources are put on the table for us to to really make an impact and keep our community safer. Thanks. Thank you. Next is council member. You're actually. Yeah. Councilor, we want to. Thank you, Mayor. And I, too, want to extend my my gratitude to the men and women of the Long Beach Police Department for all the work they do that they put themselves in harm's way every time that they out in the street. So I really appreciate the work that they do. And I also want to thank Cosmo Ralston for including me in this in this in this item here, because it's my district is obviously very impacted by this as well. One of the things that I think that as we pursue this and go forward, I think we also have to look at the besides the effects of legislation that may have an effect on where we're at right now. But also, we also have to look at what are the economic and socio economic aspects of why we have an increase in crime. We always know that as we go into a recession or we go into a hard economic times, that there's an obvious increase in crime. People are become desperate or become more compelled to get what they need in in a very easy way. And it's been said there are crimes of opportunity. So we always have to keep people informed about how to secure their homes, secure their vehicles, secure their properties. And I think that obviously we need much more information on that. And besides that, we also need to keep more information and contact in regards to what to do in in dangerous situations. I don't think there's enough of that education going on. So I think that's another aspect that we need to look at as well. One of the things that I would also like to see in whatever is coming up in the report is the increase that there has been terms, there has been an increase, as we have heard right now, in gang activity. But I'd also like to know if there's new gangs out there that are that are developing and coming up. Is there any new activities that have been presenting themselves at great challenges to our police department as well as other public safety personnel? And also the the the the the guns that that have been confiscated? Perhaps we will get to a better understanding of where those country are coming from. There's no question that a lot of the the gun incidents that are being perpetrated are from stolen guns. Very few are bought for the purpose of of a career of causing a crime. The most they are stolen. So maybe we have to have more education as well on securing the guns that the owners might buy locally and just giving them more information about how to secure and how the proper use and safety of those those weapons so that they don't become easy access for for a potential burglary or or a car theft, whatever, that that would make make a gun accessible to a criminal without bad intentions. So I would also like to to to have that looked at and more and more education. I mean, there's nothing that is more important than anything with with our community and our residents to give them information. So the more information they get, the more knowledge they gain material, making themselves much more safer. I think it's a it's a is an improvement in our in our community. So I would like to see and they don't cost money. I know that nothing comes cheap. Creating more brochures and literature and distributing those is an issue. So we have to look at and how we're going to not only get these these guns off the street, but also how we're going to secure those that are that are owned by private citizens, that are become victims of a theft that later on becomes a weapon for for bad intentions. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you. I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this forward. I actually didn't know about the item until I saw it on this week's agenda. But I think it's a very, very good topic to discuss. It's actually something we've discussed at the Public Safety Committee meetings. And Deputy Chief Hendricks has given us reports on all of these topics, public safety. And I'm wondering, as we're talking, whether it might be useful for us to maybe take up the issue that Councilman Turanga just mentioned regarding new gangs and gang outreach activity, outreach and outreach and education activities that are going on citywide. Because I know we have multiple grants and multiple outreach efforts going on. Maybe we can have that presented at a future public safety meeting, committee meeting, and then we could forward that report to the full council. Is that something that you guys would be able to accommodate? A council member prays. Absolutely. We can accommodate that and come back with that. Okay. So maybe we'll go ahead and add that to our next public safety agenda. And then I'm also wondering and I wonder, I'm just throwing this out there if maybe it would be helpful for us when we do cover some of these topics. And earlier tonight, we had a fireworks item on we'd covered the same topic at Public Safety. Do my colleagues think it might be helpful to have some of those reports forwarded to the full body for discussion? Because we can we can think about maybe doing that from the Public Safety Committee standpoint on issues that really impact the whole city. Gun violence, fireworks. We talked about maybe gang and gang activity and education. Those are three things that I was thinking might be relevant to the full body. We could have the reports forwarded to council. I'd like to hear what my colleagues think about that. Well, I think that that's actually a great, great idea. I also sit on the public safety committee. I agenda is this particular item outside of the committee because I think it merited a a a citywide stage and a council wide discussion. Several of our council districts are impacted. Not each not everybody on the public safety committee is is as impacted. And I wanted to make sure that we were included in our residents, as well as sending a message to our residents, more importantly, that this this this issue of gun violence is extremely important and that the city council , the entire council cares about it. And we wanted to make sure we aired it in front of the council to give it a bigger stage. Obviously, most of the public is not paying attention to our individual committee meetings, but good work is actually happening in those committees. And in fact, much of this information has been presented to us and Public Safety Committee, we're working. Councilmember Price is our chair and is very thoughtful. We are working to with PD and with fire on constantly on on the issues, the big issues facing our city. But this particular item I thought merited a larger discussion. I do have a couple of follow ups and they do want to hear from the public as well. But in light of the challenges outlined, the legislative challenges, the the the challenges that we may have with with staffing, what more can we do as a city to prevent crimes? And I know we have a violence prevention plan. I know we have a lot of great innovative approaches right now that are unique to our city in a lot of ways. But what more can we do? And this this is it's an open ended question, but it's a question that I would just really ask for us to think hard about, because I can tell you that this council member and I know others are committed to doing doing whatever we can to to make our city safer. Councilmember us and we are doing an awful lot in impacting in enforcing violent crime. And we work collaboratively, collaboratively as a city to impact that. So we certainly can look at what what we can do differently or add to. But I think in the report you will see the comprehensive approach that we have. So so, Deputy Chief, I want to congratulate you also on your many years of service in your retirement. We did not see A, B, one or nine or we did not understand and know what the impacts of of legislative actions would be. And there's a lot of there's theories that that maybe some of those actions have resulted in some of the upticks in crime that we're experiencing today. Now that we know or now that there is a theory or hypothesis out there, that that that some of these legislative actions have created a situation now that we have more crime or we need to be more alert. The question is what what else can we do? And if you don't have the answer today, I'd be happy to get an answer at a later later time to give you 30 days to think about it, to come back to this council. But I think what we need to do as a as a what I'm looking for today, and I know our public in many communities are looking for is is innovative new approaches to to dealing with this issue because we have new, new scenarios facing us today. I can answer that, Councilmember. I think that's just something that I know that working on with our government relations with Diana Tang, we can certainly report back on what's happening with those propositions throughout the state of California. Okay. Well, I'm definitely looking forward to hearing those report back from Diana Tang, and I would encourage our PD to continue to stay the course and work continue the great work that they're doing on our behalf. My, my, my, my concern is that we need to look at some alternative approaches, some sort of new strategies that may not have to be laid out here before the council, but some more aggressive approaches to to end gun violence, particularly when you can you can almost put a map out there and understand that, you know, there are hotspots throughout the city that we need to be really, really focusing on. Okay. Councilman Price. Thank you. So one of the things that I hope that we can do, this discussion of an uptick in crime is affecting every single council district. I mean, every single one. I just looked at the TFF that you guys that the police department sent out on crime stats and you know there. Property crimes and theft related crimes have gone up more in some districts, a lot more in some districts than others. And this is a conversation that we're all having across the city. So I would like to elicit input from my colleagues in terms of how we can better use the Public Safety Committee to vet out some of these issues so we don't have to do it tonight. But as as everyone kind of walks away and thinks about these issues because we're all addressing them when we go to community meetings, we're all talking about the various issues that impact our neighborhoods, and we want to make sure that we have accurate information and that we're appropriately setting them as a committee and also as a body. So one of the things that we could do is maybe we can start doing, you know. Regular reports. In terms of specific type of information that we're bringing to public safety. Deputy Chief Hendrix always gives a very comprehensive report on whatever the agenda item is, and I usually reach out to my fellow committee members and ask them what items they'd like to put on the agenda. One of the things that we could do, and I'm happy to do it in our office if my colleagues are interested in this, is we can put together kind of a summary of the items that we discussed at the public safety meeting and what correspondence went along with those agenda items. And we can distribute those. And then if a council member wants to have a further discussion, because I think that's a really great point, we may there are a lot of these topics we should be talking about. As a group. We can agenda as those that come out of public safety and maybe ask for additional reporting that wasn't included at public safety, because sometimes public safety is the first place where we're hearing about an issue and questions come up that necessitate further follow up. So if everybody wants to kind of think about that, we don't have to make any decisions about it tonight. But I'd. Love to be able to use. The Public Safety Committee as a venue to further vet the information that we as a council body hear so that we're all on the same page and able to report to our constituents consistently and and with full advocacy on their behalf. I will say and I remember having a conversation offline with one of my colleagues about Prop 47 before that passed, that I knew for a fact it was going to have the impact that it's had, and it's been devastating. The number of drug addicted individuals we have out there are contributing to our current stats. And that is a situation that I think absent some statewide resources and intervention is not going to go away regardless of how many resources we put into the problem. The reality is there's no longer any incentive for people to make meaningful, sustained long term changes. And as a result of that, we're going to continue to see that problem go up and that problem is going to increase with theft related crimes. And the theft related crimes are going to lead to violence and the violence related crimes are going to lead to gun use and weapons use. That's just the pattern. So anything that my colleagues think as a result of these discussions that we can do to better utilize the public safety committee as we move forward on these citywide discussions, I'd love to hear from you at some point so that we can, you know, be the most efficient and make sure everyone gets access to the reports that we may have. So thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Ringo. Well, I'm just going to go ahead and throw it out there. There's the big elephant in the room is guns. And their accessibility and their misuse. And until we really, really get some real good gun control laws in, we're going to always have this problem. So what can you do as a public safety committee or what can we do as a council if we're going to have to address that? It's not the time tonight or maybe in the near future. It's certainly a federal issue as well as they're looking at implementing some kind of ID. Then application processing for applications for guns. But those are the legal ones. And what we have here but when we're looking at gun violence and we're looking at how they are acquired by gangs and to prepare to perpetrate robberies and assaults and everything else, I mean, we're not going to be able to really get a handle on this. But then, you know, and we do it at the risk of of being a target of the NRA and other pro gun activists out there. So we really won't be able to resolve maybe the gun issue. But certainly, as I indicated earlier, education and information is the immediate thing that we can do. And that's something that I think the public safety committee can do. It increased its accessibility to the public in terms of what to do in those types of situations or how to secure, again, their their their guns and making them less available for for theft and illegal use. So it's a difficult issue. It's one that's not going to be resolved immediately, obviously, but it's certainly one that eventually it's going to come to us. I recall many years ago, the city council was addressing the very same topic, gun violence. And there was a proposal put on the council. I don't know who was around at that time back this goes way back 1980s and 1987, somewhere around there. There was a proposal to eliminate what they called at that time, Saturday night specials. Anybody caught with that would be or committing a crime would have added penalties for for carrying those. And they were basically outlawed in the city in terms of gun sales. I think stores were required to eliminate the sales of those types of handguns. So maybe that could be another way of addressing this type of of activity as well as I think there was also an effort, not a recall when that was, but to also look at the elimination of gun sales of an AK 47 or other automatic automatic weapons. How many AK 40 seconds are used in these crimes? I have no clue. I'm probably, I'm guessing, probably very small because there aren't that many out there anymore. But those those types of things that we could look at, maybe the types of guns that are being used in the in in gun violence would be. Useful, perhaps, in terms of the types of guns. I'm not a gun aficionado, so I have no clue as to what type of gun is popular with with purpose. But maybe that's something that we could look at in the future. MCHUGH Councilman Alston? Yeah. I don't want to beat this to death, and that's probably not the best word to use, considering. But it's a real word because there are a lot of people in a lot of families facing just that death in their their families. Death on our streets as a result of guns. I brought this idea forward in all sincerity, to try to get ahead of summer 2016. Generally, we see a rise in crime during the summer, and I do not want this council or anybody in the city to to become desensitized to gun violence is not normal. It should not be acceptable for for people to be dying in the streets as a result of gun violence. And I think we can and should do more as a city council. I did ask a question and I got two different types of answers. What can we do or can we do more? And the answers and what I like to think about is, is improving technology. Improving community policing and new approaches to community policing. Gang intervention strategies. And I know we have all of that there, but I think we have to do more because the numbers don't support a measure of success. And so I think we need to continue to do more, continue to work hard. This is no way a blemish on our our hard working men and women of our police department. It's no way of a blemish on this city and its leaders, but we have to do more. And the gun violence I went to a vigil just a couple of weeks ago, and it was it was heart wrenching that a 16 year old kid was was murdered in a park within walking distance of his home to to be with his family and to understand the anguish and the the pain that that that family was suffering as a result of that crime. And this is happening all too often throughout our city. We need to pay attention to this and we need to step up. And so we may not answer the questions this evening. We may not have all the answers this evening. But, you know, I would just ask my colleagues and yes, we're going to work through our public safety committee and city staff to identify more solutions. And I'm committed to doing that. Thank you. I'm just gonna make a quick, quick comment as well. I just want to make sure that we to add as well that I appreciate the conversation and think there's no bigger issue right now in the city than ensuring that we are adequately addressing this issue of crime that's beginning to increase across the city. And we know that it's not a challenge that we have alone is a challenge that we share with almost every major city, particularly in the state of California. And on the issue of guns. The chief has often said that we are now seizing more guns today than we have in recent memory. So we seized more guns were seizing more this year than we did last year. We seized more guns last year than we did the year before. And we're just seeing more and more illegal guns on the street. And so that is a incredibly serious concern, I think, of everyone that certainly is of the police departments, and that is something that we need to address. In addition, I think that we have to also having a realistic and honest conversation about the resources that our police department has. I think they are doing everything they can with what they got. And I just want to thank them for for their hard work. They're out there. They're out there every single day working very hard. And and we know that it's it's it's incredibly tough. And so we appreciate them. And I want to thank everyone that's had the discussion tonight. There's a lot more to do. The just as important is and the chief will say this, as important as policing is violence prevention and making sure that ah that there's parks for kids to play in, making sure the programs are strong, making sure that services are in place for those in need that need them as well. And so I think that that approach has to be a unified approach and it's crime fighting, but it's also violence prevention and ensuring that people have access to to economic opportunity and to and to safety in their neighborhoods. So I will say to Mr. City Manager, it's I think it's partly related. The sooner that we can implement our citywide LED light program, I know we've started that. I think the better we've having visited some of our test neighborhoods that are that are seeing that it's it is a dramatic difference of how bright we change neighborhoods and we had that light. So the sooner the better. And in fact, we should speed up that process if possible. Let me turn this over to the public. Anyone any public comment on this item? Please come forward. Karen Refight again. We will never get ahead of this problem as long as we continue to be reactive instead of proactive. Before I retired, I worked for the Boys and Girls Clubs for six years. I've done over 30 years in youth work, many of it in gang infested territories. I actually employed gang members, ex-gang members in one of my previous jobs. Five years ago, I wrote the Calgary grants pro bono for the city. Those grants were proactive grants and they were incredibly successful. Pat West and Community Development made a decision to shift in a different direction. There are differences and gang members. Adult gangs are different than youth involved in gangs. We need to identify those differences and create programs that divert our youth away from being wanting to be involved in gangs. Some of the kids have no choice with their in a third, now fourth or fifth generation family that's gang involved. You have to do something really drastic to break that gang cycle. As long as we deny that that Long Beach has a major drug problem. And Councilwoman Price, your comments just right on. Long Beach is one of the main entry points for drugs in the United States, and we need to have more resources. And I think one of the escalations in the gang violence is because we no longer have the gang unit. The gang unit was actually, I think, very critical in reducing the impact of gangs on our city. So I hope that the committee can discuss some of these options. I really hope that you would look at the Calgary program that was that could have been a model program. And many cities copied that grant and used it to get a grip, a Calgary crowd to their own. So I think we've missed an opportunity here and this is part of what the outcome is for missing the opportunity . Thanks. Thank you. See no other public comment? I'll take it back to the council. This as they believe you receive and file by Councilman Austin. Please go out and cast your vote. And then staff. He'll be returning hopefully at some point here too with the much more report things. Motion carries. Thank you. Next item. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to approve the fiscal year 2016. Second Departmental and Fund of Budget Appropriation Adjustments Citywide.

A RESOLUTION setting the public hearing on the petition of West Coast Self-Storage, and General Steel Services of Washington, LLC for the vacation of a portion of 29th Avenue Southwest and a portion of Southwest City View Street in the Greater Duwamish Neighborhood Planning Area, according to Chapter 35.79 of the Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 15.62 of the Seattle Municipal Code, and Clerk File 314357.

SeattleCityCouncil_07172017_Res 31758

With the report of the Full Council Agenda Item one Resolution 31758. A resolution setting the public hearing on the petition of West Coast Self-Storage and General Steel Services of Washington, LLC for the vacation of a portion of 29th Avenue Southwest and a portion of Southwest City View Street and the greater Duwamish Neighborhood Planning Area, according to Chapter 35.79 of the Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 15.62 of the Seattle Municipal Code and Clerk File 314357. Introduced June 19th, 2017. Councilmember O'Brien. I didn't realize this one was me. Oh, you want me to do it for you? You know it. Make enough to say yes. Let's see here. The strict one. Strip vacations in a day. Apologize my notes, said Councilmember O'Brien. And I just follow my notes. And you probably could just read the caption. But this is the type of legislation that it does require a resolution to notify the notice for public hearing. So this is exactly what that does. Yes, it's just a routine notice to set the public hearing on the petition from West Coast. It's what I heard you say. That's okay. Okay. Articulate. Thank you very much. Those in favor of adopting the resolution is so well articulated by Councilmember Bryant. Please vote i. I. Those opposed vote no emotion carries the resolution adopted the chair will sign it. Please read the report of the Gender Equity Safe Communities and New Americans Committee. The Report of the Gender Equity Safe Communities and New Americans Committee Agenda Item two Council Bill 119018 An ordinance related to the Bias Free Policing Adding a new Chapter 14.11 consisting of sections 14.11 .0101020.030.040.050.060. To the Seattle Municipal Code to codify Seattle's commitment to bias free policing, require the Seattle Police Department to have bias free policing policies

Recommendation to approve the use of Sixth Council District Fiscal Year 2015 one-time infrastructure funds in the amount of $20,000 to fund community improvements in the Sixth Council District.

LongBeachCC_03082016_16-0224

Kate. Members, cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Item 12 Communication from Councilman Andrew's Recommendation to approve the use of six Council District Fiscal Year 2015. One time infrastructure funds in the amount of $20,000 to fund community improvements in the Sixth Council District. Councilman Andrews. Yes, I agree with you. And once we got the. Estimate for two point. Okay. You right? Thank you, Vice Mayor. This mobility item is a support of the first. You know, I established Parklet outdoor area outside of downtown Long Beach and the Fourth Street Retro Road. This community driven project is great for the Wrigley neighborhood and the open space is the mobility is just what our neighbors need and is all within walking distance from their homes, along with the support supporting the group of the local business in the Wrigley area. This new park that will be supporting the development of a Willow Street pedestrian friendly from the showing and traffic and slowing down traffic and bicycle pedestrians and improving streetscape and enhancement. With that said, I would like to request the approval to use a six district fixed fiscal year 215 one time infrastructure funds in the amount of 20,000 to help fund this project. Thank you. Councilmember Andrews, there's a motion and a second councilman around here. Would you like to address it? Councilmember Andrews and I share that Wrigley area and this is Bono's. It's been an iconic business in the Wrigley area, and I fully support this. This idea is one I hope that my colleagues do as well. Thank you. Thank you. So any member of the public that wishes to address the Council on item 12. Great. And Councilman Andrews, this is wonderful. Thank you for adding this to the district. People really enjoy it. Thank you. First time. It's wonderful. Members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Item 14.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all documents necessary for a Supplemental Agreement to Management Agreement No. 21667 with SMG, a Pennsylvania joint venture, for the completion of certain capital improvement projects at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center located at 300 East Ocean Boulevard, in the amount of $2,150,000. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_06062017_17-0441

Motion carries. Item 19 Please. Report from Economic and Property Development Recommendation to execute a Supplemental Agreement to Management Agreement with SMG for the completion of certain capital improvement projects at the Long Beach Convention and Entertainment Center in the amount of 2,150,000 District two. Thank you. City staff, please. Our esteemed assistant city manager, Tom Modica, will handle this. Thank you, Mr. West. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. These are tidelands dollars that we're investing back into our convention center. It will be a mix of projects to upgrade some of the infrastructure and also to help the convention center book more business, especially out in that plaza area, which is very rapidly becoming a quite marketable area for them to bring in convention something like nobody else has around in the area. So we're available to answer questions if you have specific questions about the project. Thank you. Dr. Pierce. Yes. I want to thank staff for their hard work on point rather the funds to make sure that our convention center, as I was talking earlier, has the bones working. And when do we expect some of these projects to break ground? So we expect the the fountain repairs to begin very, very quickly and we will sign an agreement with SMG and they will be conducting that project. We expect it hopefully in the next couple of weeks and to be completed by the end of the year. And with the fountain repairs because it's 1.5 million, does that trigger a project labor agreement? And this it would. I'd have to check the actual agreement, I believe, because it's not done by the city, but by and done by an outside party, that it is not part of the project labor agreement project. The Labor Agreement covers city projects that are done with by city staff, but we can certainly take a look to see if they were included in that. So let me ask, are the entitled costs of the found repairs 1.5 hours, some or someone else putting additional funds into. The cost of the found is is 1.5. So it's all city funds being used. That is city funds for that particular project. Yes, there are funds in the seaside way, general improvements. There are SMG funds that are that they are putting their own money into that and CVB money into that. Okay. I do want to point out, though, prevailing wage does trigger. And so it is a prevailing wage project that is required when there is any dollar going into a project like that. Thank you, Tom. Yes. Just thank you for this. I know that we're making sure that, as we mentioned earlier, that not only is the convention center a beautiful place that people remember, but that we're maintaining our competitiveness by investing in it and making sure that that's an investment that's going to last a long time. So thank you very much. Vice Mayor Richardson, any public comment on this? Kate members, please cast your vote. Motion carries.

Local Maintenance Districts Group 1 Tonight, Council was scheduled to sit as the quasi-judicial Board of Equalization to consider reduction of total cost assessments for Local Maintenance Districts. However, since no written protests of assessment were filed with the Manager of Public Works by September 27, 2018, Council will not sit as the Board of Equalization for the following Local Maintenance Districts: 15th Street Pedestrian Mall 20th Street Pedestrian Mall Consolidated Larimer Street Pedestrian Mall Santa Fe Drive Pedestrian Mall C St. Luke’s Pedestrian Mall Delgany Street East 13th Avenue Pedestrian Mall South Downing Street Pedestrian Mall Tennyson Street II Pedestrian Mall 44th Avenue & Eliot Street Pedestrian Mall West 32nd Avenue Pedestrian Mall Broadway Pedestrian Mall ‘A’ South Broadway Streetscape (Arizona to Iowa) South Broadway Streetscape (Wesley to Yale) South Broadway Streetscape (Iowa to Wesley) Tennyson Streetscape (Portions of 38th to 44th)

DenverCityCouncil_10152018_18-1175

Thank you, Councilman Flynn. I don't see anybody else in line for announcements. Just double checking. All right. Moving right along. There are no presentations. There is one communication tonight. Tonight, council is scheduled to sit as the quasi judicial board of Equalization to consider reduction of total cost assessments for local maintenance districts. However, since no written protests of assessment were filed with the manager of public works by September 27th, 2018, Council will not sit as the Board of Equalization for the following local maintenance districts. 15th Street Pedestrian Mall. 20th Street Pedestrian Mall. Consolidated Larimer Street Pedestrian Mall. Santa Fe Drive Pedestrian Mall C St Luke's Pedestrian Mall Del Gainey Street East 13th Avenue Pedestrian Mall South Downing Street Pedestrian Mall Tennyson Street to pedestrian mall 44th Avenue an Elliott Street Pedestrian Mall West 32nd Avenue Pedestrian mall Broadway Pedestrian Mall A South Broadway streetscape Arizona to Iowa South Broadway Broadway Streetscape West Little South Broadway Streetscape, Iowa to Wesley Tennyson streetscape portions of 38 to 40 fourth. And we have no proclamations this evening. So resolutions. Madam Secretary, will you please read the resolution titles?

Recommendation to Receive Direction from City Council Regarding Uses for a Potential Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Grant Award. (Community Development 267) [Not heard on June 15, 2021]

AlamedaCC_07202021_2021-1004

Thank you. Thank you, Miss Butler. It's always nice to get fans we weren't anticipating. And that's what we have here. And thank you for your report. And Madam Kirk, do we have public speakers on this item? We do not. Okay. Well, counsel, it's if we have no public speakers, then I'm going to go ahead. They're going to go ahead and close public comment and we will just launch right into council questions, comments, motion, what have you. So Council, what's your pleasure, Councilmember Herrera Spencer and then Councilmember Knox. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Jack, for this report. I'd like some more information about the all of these items. How, for instance, how did you come up with the ratio? Is there some formula that the reference of the 125,000, if I heard correctly, and I read this correctly, it's ten persons, but I don't know for how many nights. And I'd like to actually know what is the cost per night that you're estimating. And then the second one, the Street Outreach, Mental Health. Do we have an organization right now that you're working with that you're extending what is the 75,000 buy and then the last digit, the amount that. 85,000. Is actually the most broad. That could actually be my preference. And I don't know if you could allocate more money to that. I really like the idea of that includes assistance for car repairs, paying back rent and utilities for previously homeless or those most vulnerable are on the verge of becoming homeless. And this to me is actually, if I'm understanding correctly, is the most similar to some sort of universal basic income where we help, we treat people that they know that they how to spend the money work best and can get the most bang out of it. And I think that that might actually be my highest priority is where I think it could be most efficient. But so I would like more information of, you know, what is the cost per night for the overnight shelter. I think maybe some people can figure it out, maybe lower if we give them more money to spend. Thanks. Okay. So I don't have the cost per night, but I could probably calculate it. I would need to go through my notes for that. What I do, what I do have is that. And the way we the way that it was figured out was we were trying to have a stopgap measure for a for for shelter. We need a way to put people in shelter temporarily. It cost about $100 per night to have people in in shelter temporarily. And this would allow us to get some of the most vulnerable off the street. People say that they don't have a place to stay at all, and that's why they're setting up camp in our city. We would be able to move them temporarily to a shelter. So I will I will come back to that item. As far as as the other items are concerned, mental health, we do have a provider that we're working with that that does provide mental health services that could tack on to what they are providing. We have not negotiated a deal with them, but we we have talked I have talked to them about perhaps having them work with some of our moderate and extreme mental health folks that that that we have in and that are homeless in Alameda that were trying to get in into permanent housing. But we can't do that because their health condition is such that they can't be trusted in housing at this point. And then with the flexible funds, the amount was based on being able to provide the temporary shelter and the mental health service, and that was the remaining amount. So I will get back to you on the the shelter item. Okay. You have to do a calculation. And Councilmember Harris, as you had more questions. So I would like to know who that provider is that you're looking that's currently working with the city that you're looking at extending. Um, the, the shelter, the, the case provider would be Operation Dignity. Thank you. I had a question having to do with mental health assistance, Mr. Butler. Is it possible if we were to augment the amount we're spending on those services now, that we could have someone on call 24 seven for somebody who's just having an episode and looks like they could use some assistance, as. Does. Operation Dignity. I think they do outreach. Outreach, correct. And what you know, what are their what are their what's their structure now? Is it Monday through Friday certain hours? Is it on the weekend? No, it's not on the weekend. It's Monday through Friday. Mm hmm. So would there be a possibility of extending to the weekends and maybe the evenings? We could look at doing that with the dollars instead of doing the mental health piece. Are you? Are you? We don't have them doing any mental health. Okay. I was confused when you said Operation Dignity. I was. Yeah. So who who would be providing the mental health services? What I would be proposing is operation. Technically, they provide it in other jurisdictions within hours. Got it. Do we not currently provide some mental health assistance to our homeless population? No, we only provide case management. Hmm. Got it. Okay, so this would actually be something new. We're starting. Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, then I could see the I could see the the reasoning for starting with a monday through Friday model. But hopefully, perhaps if it's successful, it could be expanded to to longer, because I think we could probably all agree that people that just have their mental health crises Monday through Friday. Okay, I, I have some other thoughts, but I'd love to hear from the rest of the council council members. Anybody want to add anything or to be like these recommendations? Council member, not quite when it was. Ready to move the staff recommendation. I think they did a great job and I just want to thank them for their work. They moved the staff recommendation. Okay. And did. Okay. Let's have a say and then maybe have a just a little bit more discussion. Council member, they said, are you seconding? Okay, perfect. We've had a motion by council member that's. Wait a second. By councilor would decide the. I just wanted to. I love everything you proposed. Ms.. Butler and then on the page three where it says if well, it's a carryover from page two, if other funding is sufficient to address the mental illness needs of the city's housed staff recommends that the proposed mental health funding referenced above be divided between and allocated to the other two categories, that being increasing the 67,000 plus fortnightly shelter to 185,000 plus, and then increasing the flexible funds from 14,000 some to 100,000. Alternatively, the funds could be used for transitional housing programs such as the community cabins. I might like to see some of that money going to try to help get those shelters where people could go. That I do think more than 14,000 for flexible funds is a good thing and jumping it all the way up to 100,000. That's quite a bit. And again, this is only if we find that there's funding coming in to cover the mental health services that Ms.. Butler's proposing. But I. Anybody else have any thoughts about that? Ms.. Butler ahead. I should say that this cut, the funding cut, can span over a couple of years. It's not just a one year funding amount. And so the the moneys for the flexible funds, which just extend for a longer period of time. Okay. Okay. I thank you for that clarification. What period of time are we talking about? Currently the funding would probably last about a year, just over a year and a half. And if you extended it, it would last approximately two years. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Okay. Councilmember Herrera Spencer. Q In regards to mental health services, I don't know if we've looked in at Almeida Family Services, and I know they provide quite a bit of mental health support to other APEC, I believe, as well as our schools. And obviously within the community they offer quite a bit of counseling. So I don't know if you checked with them, if they would be eligible to help with any of your ideas. But I, we we could we could extend it. We could do an RFP for these services. We don't have to go with the entity that I spoke with. It was just that I spoke with them because they do provide it in other locations. It's my understanding when analysts here she had spoken to Alameda Family Services in the past for services and they they are interested in providing services but maybe not of this type. I can go back to them and speak with them about that again. And then APEC, I was not aware that they provided mental health services, so I can also speak with them. Family Services at least provide some mental health services to APC. Sorry if I misspoke. Okay. I really value our services of the different locations within the community already. And I and I this my understanding that they have the capability to do the Weekender 24 seven services. Well, I can I can definitely speak with them. So just this is, you know, something to look into. But regardless of the formula, how is it the bet is that this. This allocation. Really the best use of. The money? I'm not really sure because I'm not really sure what it's based on. But I, I do like with, you know, flexible funds and letting it can go to a lot of different options. So I just think that so when you're saying the one 2575 and then the 86, is that like at some point it means the city gets these means that they could reallocate depending upon what things actually cost and where we actually see the greater need to meet people's needs. Yes. So to answer your first question about the the cost, it would be $1,250 a week, and that would be five, five days a week. Just $50 plus the weekends. So it would be seven days a week. And then your second question. I'm sorry, I was doing the calculation to try to get you your information. What was the second question going back to the first one then? Is it how many days does. Over a year? It's over a year, 50 to 52 days and ten people. And it's $1,250 a week. Okay. So depending upon if that really is the best uses the program unfolds, I'd like to hope that we can have some flexibility there because I think keeping people in their homes might actually be a good use of that tool, which is the flexibility issue option. Anything for the second baseman, Avila. Okay. Vice mayor of L.A.. It just we know that our unhoused population has grown. We have a significant need with the folks that are going to our shelter. We also know that they do not have a place to go at night. And I think that this is a good opportunity. I think that what we are going to find is that this is insufficient to serve. That need is substantially insufficient. This is not a huge amount of money that we're talking about. I'm very supportive of the staff recommendation. I think it is trying to maximize the space that we have at our data center while still addressing with dignity the needs of the folks that we have. So I'm prepared to support the proposal tonight. And I also just think that at the end of the day, I also want to be cognizant of staff time. We are having this staff work on a number of different issues. And so I actually don't support having them try to go back and kind of do work a second time. We keep bringing up Alameda Point or we keep bringing up different vendors relative to the mental health services. We have vendors that are already operating in this space and so are providers, I should say. And I think that we need to honor the work that's been done rather than second guessing it and, you know, move forward with this. I think there's going to be other opportunities. This is not something where I think that, you know, an RFP or anything like that is needed. I think it would actually delay providing these services that are very, very much needed. That's all. I would say I agree with that approach. Anyone else want to add anything before we vote on approving the staff proposal? Remind me. We had a motion by Council member Knox White and it was seconded right. By former SA. Correct. Okay. All right, then. Well, let's take a roll call vote, if we could, please. Madam Clerk. Councilmember de SAG. Yes. Herrera. Spencer, I. Knox Light. Hi. Fella. I mayor as Ashcraft high. That carries by five eyes. Great. Thank you. And Ms.. Butler, thank you again for all your hard work in following up on this. It is so important we have not had a place in Alameda where every day of the year there is someplace that an and sheltered person could lay down their head and have a roof over their head. And so now this is an important first step toward doing that. So thank you so much for all your hard work and we'll look forward to hearing more from you. Okay. All right. So with that, we're going to close. I turn six B and we're moving on to item 60. Madam Kirk, will you introduce that item for us, please? Recommendation to assign a portion of the 28.68 million funding from the federal government through the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to assist this recovery from the impacts of the COVID 19 pandemic. Right. Who doesn't like talking about money coming into the city, huh? And I see some familiar financial faces. We have our finance director and Anita, we have Jennifer, 12, also from finance. And I think. Do you ladies have a presentation? I believe you've got a PowerPoint. Is that you, city manager? No, I think. Mr. Bowden, are you. Oh, I'm so sorry. Yeah, I'm going to try. I'm going to do the presentation, but these folks are critical to the conversation. So we'll tag team the responses and Q&A segment. All right. Thank you. Good evening. Anyway. Thank you very much. Council members, we have another update for you on the the American Rescue Plan Act funding. We hope that the conversation tonight starts to start to funnel our our priorities into a particular direction. Next slide, please. And thank you. So as you all know, we've got $28.68 million in ARPA funding coming to the city of Alameda on June 17th. We received our first tranche, which is a $14.34 million, and we had City Council direction on this topic back in May. There were a couple of themes to the meeting in May. One of the things that we took away from that meeting was setting up a framework for us to be able to allocate these funds. So we did set up some guiding principles for council's consideration this evening. We also distilled down the topic from the main meeting into four topic areas supplementing revenue loss. This is general fund revenue. Loss was one of the topic areas. Addressing housing, homelessness and behavioral health matters was another topic area building broadband infrastructure in the community and really investing in that in that key and really underinvested in piece of infrastructure in the community was another topic area that came to light. And then finally the household and local small business assistance programing, which which is essentially a bucket at this point. There is no program designed around this like we had with prior funding sources. First, with respect to COVID, COVID response and recovery, the monies are intended to be a response to COVID. So that is a critical, critical theme, underlying theme that needs to be considered throughout the discussion. Next slide. So these are the guiding principles. There are eight of them on the screen. The ones that I guess all I'll I'll call out this this information is all fleshed out a little further in the staff report. But we did want to make sure that we called out the equity lens as a particular item that we're wanted to emphasize with the ARPA dollars. This is a response to COVID. And COVID did impact certain certain elements in our community, certain folks in our community, more so than others. And so as we look to funding opportunities, this is a way to to ensure that we are spreading those resources a little more generously to areas that were harder hit by the pandemic and the impacts also that the general fund has taken a hit during COVID, and we did bring in less revenue. And so the idea of being able to top up the general fund, which does provide services across the community, is is a topic area that we wanted to make sure was in there. And finally, the one time expenditures element was a theme that we pulled out as well from the the main the main discussion. This is this is one time money. So anything that we create that creates an ongoing operational cost is going to be something that the city's general fund or other funding sources would have to absorb. So with that, we'll say next slide, please, and thank you. The interim final rule is really what guides the the elements that are eligible for the that the spending. There are there are some pretty big buckets there. We did using the interim final rule, using the the guiding principles, using the city council priorities that had been established

Recommendation that City Council Establish a Procedure for Appointments to Regional Boards and Commissions, and Guidelines for How Appointees Reflect City Policy and City Council Directives. (Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft)

AlamedaCC_05052015_2015-1626

Nine A recommendation that the City Council establish a procedure for appointments to regional boards and commissions and guidelines for how appointees reflect city policy and city council directed. Then it was placed on the agenda at the request of members. Member Ashcraft. Thank you. Mary Spencer. So very simply, the city charter specifies the procedure for appointing members to our internal boards public utilities, civil service planning, social service, human relations, library and historical advisory boards. And I think we just added in. Well, no, we didn't quite. But we're going to contemplate adding another procedure for the rental rent review advisory committee, I feel. And in those cases, for all of our internal boards, the, the mayor nominates the appointees and then the, the council votes and the language is in the charter. But the charter, for whatever reason, is silent on the procedure for appointing representatives to our regional boards and commissions. For example, the Alameda County Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments, a bag, Waste Management Authority, League of California Cities and so on. So although in some cases in League of California Cities is one of them, it's specifically mandated by the Regional Board how that appointment is made. But for the rest of those regional boards, the charter is silent and those boards are silent. My recommendation is we have talked about a rules committee being formed one of these days, and I think that this is something that the Rules Committee should look into. My recommendation would be that the same procedure applies for appointments to regional boards and commissions as applies to internal boards that the mayor makes his or her recommendation and the council votes on that, and that's how it's done. So that's part one. And then when it comes to representation on a regional board or commission, the and this is something that I've had some discussion with the city attorney about all those issues, stepped out of the room. But since actions taken by regional boards and commissions can have significant implications for the city, for example, our ability to secure funding for transit improvements or alleviate traffic congestion. And I think it's important that there be some guidelines that create a procedure for how the city's representative represents the will of the council or the, you know, guidance of the the city. If there's been a vote, for example, how that position is represented on these regional boards and commissions, and then for all of us who serve on these regional boards and commission a procedure to report back if we voted on some matter of civic significance to the city, what that vote is. So I'm not looking for a vote, you know, to create the procedure now. But it's something that I'd like both the Rules Committee, when we do establish a rules committee, I don't think we've done that yet to look into these appointments to regional boards. And I would like city attorney to bring back information for us. And I believe there is caselaw there is attorney general opinions and some other procedures that govern how a representative to a regional board represents the city on that regional board. The other member comments. Remember data on the two items. The first one my comment regarding. Nominating and placing persons on external boards. I think the straightforward way of just you had indicated the mayor nominates and if the the board so chooses the board can then vote on if. For the most part, I've never seen any controversy around that. I'm not I'm not sure that one needs a rules committee altogether. I think it's just you that do. It the way. We do. You meant the council, not the account. You said the board votes on it outside. The council account. Yes. So I think that's pretty straightforward. On the second item, as I sit on the California League of Cities. I'm more than happy to hear what other council members have to say. I myself, when I attend meetings, I live tweet so that if the public is so interested, they can follow. In the last meeting, for example, there was a vote where one member had wanted to expand the the work of the League of California Cities, Housing and Community Development to include specifically homelessness. What to do about that? And the Housing and Community Development Committee decided not to include homelessness as one of its work items. I, in fact, voted to include it. I was fine with including it. But, you know, certainly that's an instance when, you know, I'm making this decision on behalf of the city. So I have no qualms in. An American. Vice mayor. And I think lead California cities is a little bit different because it's not a taxpayer funded. I mean, cities fund it, but but the Waste Management Authority and the transit authorities are directed. Those are mandated taxes. And I think I served under a previous mayor. I think the prerogative of the mayor is to represent the city at these boards. And that I've seen, at least in my experience. At this at this level, I think it gives that he is the office that's representing there. But I do have expectations. I have expectations when I serve one or two times as an alternate staff recently on the agenda. And reminded me of which agenda items that were in the city's interest that we have had votes on, etc.. So I think that that partizan expectation I have and there's an expectation of a report back. And I think whatever liaison committee we have or whatever external committee that that usually happens in council communications. I think we have a lot on our plate. I. I have respect for the past practice. It seemed to work. And until I hear that, there's a problem. Think this is really a back burner item and at some point there is a problem, we can address it. But I think the issue of prepping and the issue of reporting back is how we how we manage this. And I'm not an informal way but in in a practice that seems to have served the. I'm ready. Thank you, Madam Mayor. My my feelings are pretty similar to what the vice mayor just expressed. You know, as far as part of the appointment, I mean that's I mean that's typically been the mayor's you know to the victor goes the spoils right. I mean. That's your job, your prerogative. And, you know, if somebody feels slighted, then, you know, try to make sure you have a relationship with the person who makes the appointments. I mean, I don't know what else to say about that one. The second one, you know, I'm a little bit concerned about, you know, the the direction, you know, given to us as we serve on these either as alternates or representatives and and making sure that, you know, we follow as our is we represent the city. So I would think that we represent the policies that have already been adopted by the city. So I would be concerned if, you know, somebody was representing a different policy at one of these regional boards. And I think that was kind of the the impetus for for this referral was to make sure that, you know, say, for instance, on Acts, you know, that if if we have spoken as a community and we have spoken as a council to be supportive of something that our our representative represents us, you know, same with Waste Management Authority, you know, a bag and so on. And then, you know, I know I've heard reports back from League of Cities, but, you know, I'm not recalling very many reports back out from from some of these other other regional boards and commissions. And I'd like to see something, you know, written down that, you know, there was a policy that, you know, we knew how we were directed to vote. And I you know, if the policy is that you agree to serve, then you agree to sit down with staff and go through the agenda. You know, maybe that's what it is. But I'd like to make sure that, you know, we're all fully briefed and fully prepped and that we're representing the city at these boards and commissions with the proper, you know, authority and proper positions. So so to address something, Mr. Councilmember, what you just said and the to the victor goes the spoils. And if someone feels slighted, I didn't bring this because I felt slighted. I not that I was appointed, but I didn't feel slighted. But my concern was simply that these regional bodies are significant to our city in many ways, not least of which has to do with funding streams. So I feel that those are decisions that the entire council as a body will be held accountable for. So I would at least like as much say in and it really is just maybe a formality, but at least it's a way of bringing it to the public. And, you know, we're all about transparency up here. So that just like tonight, we considered the representatives for this East Bay Regional Parks Liaison Committee, and the public could see it in the public could, you know, hear who the appointments were. And, and it was from a referral from council member Vice Mayor Matariki. So I'm just saying I think that we should treat all of our appointments equally. I think they're all equally important and I think the implications of our service on a regional bodies could be even greater than, say, the Historical Advisory Board, which would at least come before the council. And I do agree with Councilman Brody's assessment about the importance of having just some oversight, not oversight, some direction in policy. And this is something I was saying the city attorney and I have had conversations about. There is some. But when it comes to the representative of the city serving on a regional board and carrying out the the will of the council, the will of the city, there is, I believe, some attorney general opinions, some case law, some other procedure that could be spelled out for the council so that we're just not not only the council, but the public is clear about that. And I, I don't think it has to be very long and involved, but I would like to see that done. Thank you. So I would not support asking council to do more work at this time. I would support I agree with the member vice mayor's comments. On this entire item. And my only concern would be that the member that has brought this item served under the prior administration, and it's my understanding that this item was not brought at that time. And I do believe that the members of our council that serve on the Commission's report back on what I would consider issues significant to the city. And there are. So I support the prior practice in this entire regard. Their motion. I have one more comment. Vice Mayor I'd like to maybe address this to the Interim City Manager about the the assurance that when these regional bodies produce an agenda that someone has to attend, whether it's the primary or the alternate, that the practice is, I've been away for four years, but the practices that whether it's public works , whether it's but most of the time it was public works or whether it's planning and community development for a bag that there's there's a briefing, it's done. And I experience this with CMA that no longer exist. That the city engineer sat down with me and said there was the vote in 2006 and now it's coming before SEMA . And this is this is critical to the city to implement what we did. That's what I'm looking for. And is that something that happens? And can we be assured that it will continue? I'm not sure if it's happening right now. Um. So. Well, let me out. So you serve on a transit liaison committee. Do you receive a staff briefing for it? Usually a staff person comes and we talk before we go. And that first meeting got postponed till July, but. Yeah, so it sounds like you do all right. It hasn't happened yet. It did in the past. Okay. The May the April meeting was canceled, so there was nothing. So do we send a staff meeting with the council? You know, I don't know. I don't know. So how about. Me? You know, sometimes. Yes, sometimes not. Sometimes staff. Depending upon what the items are, staff does brief, for instance, on waste management. And there is a change here in regards to our delegate our primarily is on now member. But staff does brief the representative on that item and attend a meeting and is very is always available during the meeting. League of Cities Member If you and I were there, I don't think. Actually that it's Tony. Member Councilmember Desai is our representative. We just we attend the East Bay division meetings sometimes, but he's the actual. Sorry, I meant the annual conference. That's that we just attended. I don't think. Go. Oh, all right. Yes. And you're the representative to that one? Yeah. Okay. On that one, did you have staff? Staff. I don't know. So I think there are definitely sort of the thresholds of where when when staff attends and when they don't. And I think primarily it's when money is involved that we make sure that we're there. For example, waste management, particularly with rate increases. AC DC Obviously, I think that's absolutely critical, so. We'll find out. Mr.. That's right. Yeah. I think maybe the league California cities, you know, that's less of a I think I mean, if we have staff, I think that would be helpful. But it's also not as critical, I think, as the ones where there's money attached. Although I will just add that staff, of course, doesn't attend the closed session. Oh, right. Correct. And that's a good it's a good point. In regards to closed session, I'm not sure what report out we could do on items in closed session either. You know, I don't think that's a big deal usually. I mean, it's okay. Well, it probably depends on what the item was, but. But if it's in closed session, I don't think. It can report it to us. Yeah. Yeah, I think that's the way I think council as a body would want to know. All right, so. Does that satisfy you in regards to. Your concern? I think a little more clarification wouldn't hurt. I don't think that up until now, I don't think we need to set up a committee now. We I think we have to you know, we have to make sure sign signees set. I just want to make sure that the briefings are done and people are reporting out after. Right. Well, I think if I heard Councilmember Desai correctly, you said earlier, just do the appointments. I mean, the appointments are obviously all made. So this is going forward. Do them the way we do our internal bodies just, you know, bring them out so the public can in No. Two in the council can vote in. It's really a formality, but at least it's public. Yeah, I'm fine. I so that there would be a change to require. Council to approve as much as what you're asking the. As much as we do. Any other appointment you make, Madam Mayor. So I don't support any change, as has been the practice and precedents, far as I know for the history of our city. And I would see. And what what I recall from the previous mayor, Mary Gilmore, is that she actually pulled the different members of the council asking their interest in particular serving on particular bodies. And then she made the appointments. But she, you know, she please check with us. So we we knew where to put them. And then we got a list that was emailed to us showing us what our assignments were. So I'm just one it was just one of those areas where it was interesting to me that the the charter was silent about appointments to regional boards and commissions, and yet it prescribes the procedure for the internal ones. And again, to my point, I think the regional body parts are just as important to the public. And so, you know, I don't think we're asking for a major change. And just I just want to make sure to say for the League of California Cities, you do have to get voted. Exactly that, because. I think that's my impetus for this. I hear what you're saying, but. Do it like the league. Any other member comments? Mamelodi. Yeah, I'm not going to talk about the appointment process, but you know, just to echo the vice mayor directions and then that we also get some direction there, you know, on informing on what the city policy is in this area, if there is one. And if there isn't one, well, then great. Tell us there isn't one. I mean, that's that's really all I was asking for. Is there emotion? Hearing them moving. Well all our moves that we. Adopt the the recommendations that I've heard from. The. I think at least a majority that we use the same appointment procedure for regional boards and commissions as the League of California Cities prescribes in as we do for internal boards and commissions. And that we have some clarifications of what, if any, city policy we have towards with regard to representing city policy on a regional board and commission. And if we could bifurcate those two. Yeah, I'd like to move to to split the question on that. Okay. Okay. So the first one is establishing the procedure for appointments to regional boards and commissions. You're a second. I'll second because I don't think it will. All those in favor I others oppose. No, oppose. Abstain. But motion fails. Two in favor, two opposed and one abstention. The second part of the motion. The second part is to have the city attorney come back to us with guidelines on what, if any, city policy we have. Or what city policy we might consider toward. Representation of city policies on regional boards and commissions. Is there a second? I'll second that one. Any comment? All those in favor I. Pose. Pose. Abstention. And one abstention. Motion carries three in favor. One opposed and one abstention. Thank you. Next item. Ten Council Communications. And a consideration of Magu's nomination for appointment to the Golf Commission, the Public Art Commission and the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners.

AN ORDINANCE relating to Seattle Center parking charges; amending Section 17.19.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

SeattleCityCouncil_11192018_CB 119381

The committee recommends the bill pass as amended. Cancel 119 384 relating to regulatory businesses and professional license fees. Committee recommends the bill pass. Okay, we have five through eight. I think you see the synopsis that you've all worked on. Is there any interest to any need to say anything about any of these bills? Well, good. Okay. On number five, please call the role in the passage of Council Bill 119381. Gonzalez I Herbold II Johnson Suarez Mosquera. I O'Brien. So want I make sure I. President Harrell I nine in favor and unopposed. And just for the viewing public. Many of these bills that we will pass of that exceed 30 their individual actions taken that I'm assuming many council members would speak to toward the end of the budget process as opposed to individually. Many of them worked on several pieces of the legislation that are embedded in this. And so I anticipate that words will be shared with you all and feelings hopefully when we get to that end. So this is the factory part, so please call the roll on council. Bill 119382. Gonzalez I. Herbold I. Johnson Whereas mosquera i. O'Brien I so want I make sure i. President Harrell I. Nine in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and chair of the Senate. Please call the rule on council. Bill 119385. Gonzalez I. Herbold I. Johnson Suarez Mesquita I. O'Brien so on. Make sure High President Harrell High nine in favor and unopposed. Passes and show sign it and please call the roll on the passage of council. Bill 119384. Gonzalez I. Herbold, i. Johnson Suarez. Well, Sarah, I. O'Brien Hi. Sergeant Bagshaw. Hi. President Arrow. Hi. Nine and favorite unopposed. Bill passed and show sign it. So let's go with nine through 13. Please read nine through 13 into the record.

Recommendation to Approve Otis Drive Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Project Design Concept Recommendations. (Planning, Building & Transportation 4226287)

AlamedaCC_06042019_2019-6917

Recommendation to approve Otis Drive, Traffic Calming and Safety Improvement Project Design Concept Recommendations. All right. So we have. Who do we have here? Good evening, Madam Mayor. Members of the council. My name is Scott Wickstrom, the city engineer. Tonight, along with David Parisi from Parisi Consultants, we will be presenting the Otis Drive Traffic Calming and Safety Improvements Project. As council member, I'll know the slide projectors not in service. And so our one, we have the best slide presentation that the public will never see. That said, I'm going to go through and really try to hit the highlights of the entirety of the presentation staff report as well. Written should be very thoroughly and will certainly be available for questions at the end. And I will just add that the staff report is available online and the presentation is excellent. So if you're really interested, you can take a look at it online. Thank you. So I'm going to I'm going to jump ahead and I'll kind of let you know the title of the sheet. I'm on the third slide, which is the project goal, and it's singular. I was very specific about that. It's to improve safety for all users. It's really reducing driving speeds. That's one major component about it. It's also improving safety for pedestrians at crossings. It's providing for bicycle safety that doesn't really exist in terms of a dedicated bike facility on the street right now, improving bus stops, operations and then, where possible, doing green infrastructure. Next slide this will be a phased approach project. Two years ago, with the capital budget, the city council authorized or appropriated $500,000 to study this, to reach out to the public through public workshops and then bring back forward ideas. And what we are proposing to do is a two phased approach. The initial phase will be short term, relatively inexpensive, predominantly paint type based improvements that with a request that has been before you already with the 1921 capital budget, an additional $500,000, we believe we could implement final design this fall and actually construct in spring of 2020 should the Council approve our initial approach tonight? There's also some long term improvements that are proposed with this project that depend on the full menu of potential improvements may cost several million dollars and we would be soliciting grant funding for such a project. We are not asking council for final approval of those long term improvements at this time. We're really focusing on looking for approval of the short term recommendations project schedule. We've had a survey that went out last fall. We've held two community workshops. We've been to the Transportation Commission twice, most recently on May 22nd, in which case the Transportation Commission voted 4 to 1 to support the project. And I would say that all five commissioners were in general support of the project. There was one the one dissenting vote was more of a concern about the treatment of the bike facility adjacent to Rattler Park, which we'll be talking about a little more in the future here in this presentation. So as I mentioned before, if approved by council tonight, we're looking to finalize design this fall and go into construction in 2022. Jump ahead a couple of slides to where we talk about vehicular speeds. It is a concern. Everyone who's driven out at unnoticed drive can pretty freely attest to that. I'm sure the residents can speak to it pretty, pretty freely. And they have regularly told us during during our workshops, a couple of notes, you know, the average speed depending on where you are in the quarter, somewhere between 28 and 30 miles an hour. The 85th percentile, which is really what the police can enforce at, is 33 miles an hour. And during a single day, when we recorded speeds in a single afternoon in February, the max speed recorded was 75 miles an hour down the stretch. And the police department has assured me that that is not unusual to see excessively high speeds because of the straightness, the with the lack of stops or other traffic calming devices on the street. Next slide is really types of collisions, and they're kind of clustered at a lot of the intersections. I want to call just one thing to do for which is there's a variety of types of different types of collisions that are tracked. But for the vehicle, bicycle vehicle pedestrian it at this point comprises 19% of. The collisions. And as you would run to the very next slide, you look at the injuries and fatalities over that same four year or five year period. Those 19% of incidents comprise 54% of injuries. And there was one fatality not too long ago at one of the intersections on the street. Moving to next slide, which is traffic volumes, I spend a little bit of time here because it's kind of important to what we're really ultimately proposing to do here. Otis Drive is two lanes each direction. Generally speaking, a simple way of thinking about a lane is its operating capacity as a thousand cars per hour per lane. So you can have 2000 cars per hour going in each direction on Otis Drive. As part of our study, and there's been a very robust collection of data or series of data that have been collected over the last four years. We have 92 separate data points collecting data along here. We generally find that the traffic volumes west of Grand Street are on the order of 4 to 500 vehicles per hour during the pump peak. And Eastern grand to traffic is a little bit heavier, but it's on the order of about 600 vehicles per hour. So it's well less than the current nominal capacity of 2000 cars per per lane or 2000 cars per hour for a two lane street, and still a significant amount of excess capacity, as you would look at a potential lane reduction or a road diet to a two or three lane configuration. So that's a very important point to factor. And we did work with AC Transit very significantly about their bus stops. They we have basically incorporated not only recommendations for improving safety and maintaining their access and use along this quarter. So it's been a good partnership with them. And then I want to jump a little bit into the community survey and the first workshop and I'm going to there's a whole series of slides with some nice pictures, but there's a community workshop, number one, that has key issues affecting Otis Drive. And really the top four items on here are good to take note of speeding. Number one concern, lack of pedestrian crossings, particularly between Grand and West Lane and lack of bicycle facilities. And the fourth one is Safety Grand and Otis and lack of protective left turn. So those comprise the top four issues brought up part of the as part of the workshop. I would be remiss to say that we also did the survey earlier in the year and one of the concerns that came up, or at least a couple of concerns that came up during the initial surveys, were concern that Otis Drive would would be developed in a similar way to Shoreline Drive. There's some concern about that. And I want to say that there are two very different streets, and it's not really appropriate to compare them directly. My personal opinion that the treatment for Otis or sorry for Shoreline Drive is appropriate for Shoreline Drive. Otis Drive demands a different type of a treatment so that fundamentally they're very different streets and have different sorts of approaches about how we would do traffic calming and improve safety for all the users. Secondly, there is also a very significant concern about enforcement and a lot of survey results and general public concern that if there is just better enforcement, the speeds would go down. And Sergeant Foster has been and he's here tonight, has been at all of the committee meetings, and he spoke at length about that. And basically and I'm going to paraphrase a little bit, but what is more correct statement was but we can't really enforce our way out of this issue . The road is just basically too wide. It encourages speeding by its design. So moving ahead to the next sheet, which is, I'll say, measures to implement and I'll spend just a brief time looking at the first six cities. Number one survey result was a center left turn lane going from a four lane road to a three lane road. A road diet. Number two were the addition of bike lanes or bike facilities, depending on how you want to take that landscaping came in there, read curves at corners for visibility. That's a pedestrian improvement, pedestrian safety. And then the last two roundabouts and protected left turn a grande are two different ways of approaching that challenging intersection at Otis and Grand. And and Mr. Parisi will speak a little more directly about what the two different alternatives potentially could be there are and what our what our recommended one is at this point for a potential long term solution. So with that, I'm going to turn over the mic to to David and let him kind of talk through the our toolbox. Thank thank you. Thank you, Scott. Madam Chair, City Council members, my name is David Preece in the Civil and traffic engineer with Prezi Transportation Consulting. And I had a great opportunity, the pleasure of working with your staff and the community on this project. And it's been very enjoyable and we've learned a lot. And the first thing we did is. Worked with the community at that first open house to really understand existing issues up and down. Otis Drive the segment, Otis Drive that we are looking at between West Line and Willow is 1.1 miles in length. And as Scott mentioned, there's many, many issues going on with the street. We spent quite a bit of time not just looking at the issues, but also collecting data, looking at traffic volumes, crashes, the infrastructure on the street. And after the first community workshop, we then went back and started developing a toolbox of potential short term and long term measures that could potentially be implemented along Otis Drive. There's a slide that's called traffic calming and safety tools, and there's a bunch of them that were considered. The intent of the project is to provide some measures to improve safety, to encourage more reasonable travel speeds. Scott mentioned there are some speeds that are incredibly excessive, improve the visibility and safety for pedestrians not only crossing the street but walking along the street as well, and to increase bicycle comfort and safety. Next slide is titled Advantages of a Three Lane Street. I'm going to spend a few moments here. Otis Drive a 64 feet wide between the curbs. There's a lot of space. And as Scott mentioned, there's more space than is needed for the traffic volumes that we see today and expect in the future. So we are proposing what is called a road diet and that is reduce the number of thru lanes from 4 to 1 in each direction, plus a continuous left turn lane in the middle of the street to facilitate left turns in and out of side streets as well as driveways. This provides some additional room to not only retain the on street parking along the curves, but to install a bike lane that has a buffered strip between the travel lane and the bike lane. According to FHB Way, who has reviewed lots of road diets that have been developed throughout throughout the United States over the last decade or so. Roadways can reduce collisions substantially by about 19%. Definitely see speed reduction. Average speed reduction about three miles an hour. But what's probably most important is the excessive speeds coming way down. So those those 70 mile an hour speeds or 45 mile an hour speeds being reduced, collision reduction. Obviously, for pedestrians, there be fewer lanes to cross, better visibility, more space for cyclists, particularly if bicycle lanes are provided and the ability to have smoother traffic flow. In other words, speeds that are pretty consistent across the board. Next few slides show some of the tools that are being proposed. They do include the installation of buffered bicycle lanes and some red curb striping at intersection corners and in front of the crosswalks. These certainly would provide better visibility between pedestrians and motorists and vice versa, but also could can provide better visibility for motorists coming out from the side streets as they look to the right or to the left before they enter the traffic stream. We are also proposing not only creating high visibility crosswalks at the locations that already have crosswalks, but installing four new ones along the 1.1 mile long roadway. Certainly at some places there are not left turn lanes, such as at Grand and Otis. We're looking at installing left turn lanes dedicated just for left turns for east west traffic on Otis as well as at Grand. And in the future, when there's money available to dedicate to traffic signal upgrades, providing left turn arrows as well. The short term and long range improvements do include the consideration of curb bulbs in the short term, using paint and and bollards to provide more bouts that can reduce crossing distances, increase sightlines, and also help reduce speeds in the long term. Transitioning those into curbs that are sticking out about six feet into the street, which is slightly less than park cars do. There's a slide titled Modern Roundabouts as a long term solution. We have proposed and we got good feedback from the community. The installation of a modern roundabout at Otis and Grand Modern Roundabouts have been proven to reduce speeds through intersections, reduce the potential for many different types of conflicts, including left turn conflicts and broadside collisions. And also they provide splitter islands for pedestrians can cross a traffic stream one lane at a time and really just to provide a balanced solution for all users traveling through an intersection. There will be street trees. There are a lot there are many streets, trees on the on the streets. Some are in good health, some are not. And actually, there's 21 vacant street tree wells that would be planted with trees as part of the short term improvements. The types of trees will be worked out with your arborist in with the neighbors. There is some. There's a slide called a community workshop, too. And that is where we came back and shared with the community some of the ideas for short term as well as long range improvements, and spent time work with the community at five different tables talking about some of these and getting a further additional input. There is a giant plan that is called Otis Drive Traffic Calming, a safety improvement project that shows in two strips the short term recommendations and then in inset boxes each of the potential long term remedies that can be pursued individually or as a packages in the future as funding becomes available. And I will turn your attention also to a slide called four lane to three lane converge. And this shows what the street would look like with the conversion between intersections. There's plenty of capacity to provide this retain really good traffic operations between intersections with this lane conversion, and it's important to pay attention to how the intersections operate. And so there would be some slight changes at the interchange intersections with left turn lanes in signal phasing or a roundabout. There is also some images here that show grand a photograph of Missouri Otis looking at looking at Otis West of Grant. Under existing conditions, you can see how wide the street is. In some cases, there's some empty walls on the south side of the street in this photo. The next photo is a simulation that, ah, that we prepared that shows what the street conceptually would look like in the future with three lanes, which is inclusive of a continuous to a left turn lane buffered bike lanes and the retention of parking. The last image shows some trees that have matured over time as a short term plans becomes a longer term plan. These are again, the street tree types are to be determined, but certainly trees and canopies can provide traffic calming experience along a roadway such as Otis. I'm not going to go through all the rest of the dozen plus images, but I will just quickly highlight what those show they do. Start from the West at Otis in West Line. In each of these shows, existing conditions followed by short term and then a long range solution. So at Willow, at West Line, the intent is to provide some striping improvements, some areas to protect the cyclists that are crossing this four legged intersection and also moving the bus stop, the westbound bus stop around the corner. Bus stop improvements are part of the overall project. There's currently ten bus stops. Two of the bus stops would be removed. Other bus stops will be relocated to far side locations instead of near side. That is a preference of AC transit as well as the provision of the pavement behind the curb to provide areas for the lifts for the busses. So to make the bus stops in compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act at West Sign, a long term improvement looks similar to the short term but has more protection for cyclists and is you'll if you look closely, you'll see curbs and curb extensions for, you know, long term improvements at the intersection. There's a sample of Larchmont. Larchmont is a popular intersection today where many people cross the street. There is not a crosswalk there, not a marked crosswalk. This is a location where we would install a crosswalk initially in the short term conditions with high visibility markings signing, as well as temporary curb bulbs and a long range condition. This would be converted into permanent curb bulbs. There are three other locations that are also do not have crosswalks currently. Those are Torrington Isle, Arlington Isle and Glenwood Isle. Each of those three additional locations would also be provided with crosswalks similar to Larchmont and the existing crosswalk at Waterview and San Creek will be upgraded to provide again high visibility crossings, plus the rectangular rapid flashing beacon assembly. Next, you will see, I believe Otis and Grand is a intersection. We spent quite a bit of time at not only our bus stop, the bus stops being proposed to be relocated, but in the short term, the turn lanes for Grand and for Otis left turn lanes would be provided, the crosswalks would be enhanced, red curb striping would occur just before and after the intersection. To open up the sightlines, temporary curb bulbs would be installed and there'd be. Areas for cyclists who chose to use that either as a through cyclist or as a turning cyclist behind within as a painted curb bulbs. The longer term solution is a modern roundabout. Cost actually would be very similar to upgrading the signal and providing curb bulbs. So the cost difference is actually very is very is about zero compared to what a long term solution would be if we upgraded the signal and provided complete curveballs at the intersection. But over time, the maintenance costs are considerably lower because in electricity and I've previously mentioned some of the safety considerations with a modern roundabout. We also spent quite a bit of time looking at how to treat cyclists or a bicycle facility in front of Rider Park, particularly in the eastbound direction. One of the options is to provide what's called a buffered class two bike lane, where the bike lane where there's parking against a curb followed by a bike lane, and then the buffer lane, which is the proposal for the entire corridor. And then the option that was reviewed was to provide what's called a parking protected bike lane, where the bike lane is against the curb, then there's a buffer and then there is parking in that area. This is a spot where you're doing this would not require removal of a lot of parking spaces, maybe one or two for this option. And it's it's a feasible option. The Transportation Commission, there was one member who was in favor of this. Four were in favor of retaining taining the proposed class. Two buffer bike lane. And last but not least, there would be a transition at Willow. Willow has two streets that are offset, and we have determined there's some ways to do some signal timing adjustments there to make it work a little bit better. But by the time eastbound traffic gets to, well, those can be necessary to restore two traffic lanes at the Western intersection, and that can be done while also retaining a bike lane. There are some treatments, including bike lane, striping and sure lane users through the intersection that are being that will be pursued as well at that location. And similar to other spots where there are bus stops, bus stops would be relocated and we've worked with AC Transit on some better locations than the existing locations for the bus stops. That is. That's it in a nutshell. Those are the proposed improvements, short term and long range. And tonight we're looking for your input on the short range or approval of short range improvements and input on some of the longer range ideas as well. Thank thank you, Mr. Parisi. And before we go to public comment, I assume we have some speakers slips. We I want to see if council members have any clarifying questions they want to either ask of our city engineer, Mr. Wikström, or of the consultant Mr. Parisi, and he clarifying questions. Counsel Let's start with the Vice Mayor. Thank you. I guess this is a question for for Mr. Wickstrom in terms of the process tonight. These are not final drawings. These are just kind of initial conceptual concepts, I mean, somewhat fleshed out. But in terms of my interest, just to be clear, is if whatever we approve that we are able to move forward tonight and not come back in six months with new revised drawings. In terms of the ability to discuss additional things here, how does this process accommodate the ability to kind of consider additional tweaks, changes, significant changes? We can certainly take those under advisement. I think I'd probably start by saying what we're really seeking from council tonight is approval of the concept, the primary components of the concept, which is the reduction of a four lane road to a three lane road. Whether that is acceptable, whether you know, whether how it's structured with a buffer bike lane along the bulk of it, we are certainly throwing up an alternative in front of Riddler Park. So that's something that we want to get feedback from council on in some direction about how to move forward, some of the finer level details in terms of the ball buyouts and potentially our RFP locations. Those are all fine level things that we can certainly take input from council. But without without the expectation, at least my expectation that we would need to come back to this body. I think the big question we're asking for is primarily the four lane to three lane reduction and the improvement of this type and nature of improvements. And if there's some detail comments, that's something we can certainly work through at a later time. Great. Thank you very much. Okay, Councilmember Odie. Thanks. My question and I because I received a constituent inquiry about this today, I know it's once a year, but our 4th of July parade comes down Otis and turns on two grand. And I guess the concern was that we'd still be able to have enough clearance for, you know, the larger trucks and floats and everything to do that under under the long term solution. Can you? I think that was discussed at the Transportation Commission, but maybe you can remind everybody here tonight. Yes, that was that was an issue that was brought up prior to the Transportation Commission. And we did look at the type of vehicles that are used in the parade and also kind of modern roundabouts are designed to handle large vehicles, to handle trucks, to handle fire trucks, to handle that kind of stuff. So while we haven't also studied every potential alternative or say, float size and stripe, there is an expectation that we should be able to accommodate the 4th of July parade through this intersection with the roundabout. And again, that's not a decision we're asking council to make tonight, but certainly if there's a support for it, it would be something that we would absolutely consider as that would go for a grant application or any future potential final design. Thank you. Councilmember Daza Oh, great. Just a set of questions in a letter to a resident resident named Kline on the second page of the letter. Staff wrote the following The US Federal Highway Administration provides guidance on traffic volume threshold levels for four lane roadways that might be candidates for road diets, Staff continued. Their research indicates that current and projected traffic volumes on Otis Drive are below the threshold for impacts to roadway operations. Because I didn't quite see the specific numbers. What are the FH A's traffic volume numeric thresholds? What are the actual numbers and how does the Otis drive numbers that we see compare to those? Are we significantly, you know, is it is there a significant difference or is it less than 60 this difference less than significant? That's a great question. So according to have a typically when a roadway has less than 20,000 vehicles per day, it's a good candidate for a road diet. Otis West Grand carries less than 10,000 cars a day. Or does these two grand carries less than 15? Thousand vehicles a day. So at those levels, great candidate for road diet. The issue is really not the street between intersections itself. It's it's really how the intersections, particularly the signals, the controlled intersections are treated and how they operate. So we spend considerable time making sure that the signal timing, the lanes and the configuration would accommodate the traffic volumes existing and future at an acceptable level of service during peak peak periods. Okay. Second follow up question. The number 19% reduction was quoted that the FH says that there. I suppose research of research. I don't know if they actually did it themselves, but their research of research shows that there was a 19% reduction. So are we saying that the 38 collisions over a five year period would drop down to roughly 30, I guess would be the number which would be I think 30 is roughly 81% of of 38. Is that what we're looking at? I'm not making a prediction about exactly what will happen with the types of collisions that the FAA researches. Across all the road diets combined, it's a weighted average. I think there's a potential for even larger reductions with Otis Drive. We've spent quite a bit of time looking at the crashes. The crash types went over those, not only at the intersections, but at the Mid-Block locations and many of the treatments that we're proposing. We believe the crash potential not only be reduced, but the severity index would be as reduced as well. So we think that would provide great potential for that. Great. Thank you. Two more questions. Does the state of California, much in the way that we used, was threshold numbers for the state of California have numbers that that are also used when determining whether or not road diets are appropriate. You know, I'm not familiar if the state has some, but many of the case studies in the FHA freeway analysis came from California. So and certainly California has been a leader in providing road diets on four lane streets. Okay. Well, state of California met Caltrans. I mean, because oftentimes we turn to Caltrans, I think for a lot of road changes, whether or not they meet what are called state warrants. Yeah. Caltrans has also adopted a complete streets policy and they are very much in favor of measures such as road diets and modern roundabouts because both have been proven to reduce or to improve safety and reduce collision potential. And final question once again, on the typical speed on Otis Drive. Right now, the speed limit is 25. I know we've heard outliers of 75 miles per hour. But what's what's the typical speed that people are actually traveling? Was it 32 miles per hour that I hear? Yeah, the average is between 28 and 30, depending on what section. I think a little bit west of Grand, they averages is about 30. So the average is in excess of 25. Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilmember Villa, do you have any questions on the staff report? Okay. Thank you. And I don't either at this time. Okay. And so we do have public speakers. We have. Four. And, you know, my caveat, if any speaker happens to have a child with them, they go first. Oh, is that. Mr. Kaiser? Oh. Yeah. You know. I believe there is a gentleman with a cute little blond daughter. I'm guessing a daughter brought a child so he could go first or. I don't know. You're telling us your name, sir? My name is Mrs.. Morgan Belanger, Mrs. Leona. And we ride two miles to preschool every morning. Thank you for having us. Right. We. That's the city council. Oh, I'm. I'm speaking in memory to shift the mood. A little bit of teeth rusting. I didn't know Ms.. Rothstein, but I rode past her body on Howard Street in San Francisco about three months ago. She was riding in a class two bike lane until a driver opened a door into her pathway. She swerved and was struck by a passing truck. I came upon the scene about 3 minutes after the collision. It stuck with me pretty well. Open doors are far from the only obstacles present in bike lanes not protected by parking rights. Her vehicles are ubiquitous and I'm sure you've all driven through school zones in Alameda in the morning. It's kind of a disaster when parents drop kids off in the bike lane. Nine year olds on bikes have to swerve around by mixing with traffic. That's an unprotected bike lane. This is our chance to fix this problem cheaply with a little paint and good design. The city we share a border with Move Fast. Howard now has a Class four protected bike lane on the stretch in question. Who knows how many lives been saved in three months? Who knows how many will be saved in future decades? San Francisco has even set a precedent with a very recent protected lane in a school zone on Valencia in front of Friends School. And we we now have an opportunity to get a design right in the first place. I urge you to approve the road, Diane, with the class four parking protected bike lane to keep us and our children safe. I'm sorry to bring the mood down a little bit. Yeah, thank. You. That was important. Thank you. Okay. The next speaker is Joe Kaiser, then Pat Potter and Jim's trailer. Big evening. I am a Otis Drive resident and I am here in support of the project. I believe I actually spoke with Mayor Ashcraft a number of years ago about this project or the concept of it. Rome wasn't built in a day here. But it's very exciting to have it reach this point. I have two young children, both of whom are attending Wood Middle School currently, and I look forward to when one of them will move on to high school. But I look forward to both of them being able to more safely ride their bikes, walk on the streets, to drive them to and from school and other events without having to worry about people speeding past in the second lane, going upwards of 50, 60, 70 miles an hour. At times, I had the opportunity to work with other residents, to be trained by police, to operate radar guns on the street. And I can tell you that just anecdotally, from standing out there for ten or 15 minutes at a time, we would often record people going 40, 50 miles an hour pretty regularly, certainly well in excess of 35 miles an hour. We would write write down a number of license plates within a ten, 15 minute period. And some people actually the police would reach out to them with a notice. You know, residents recorded you going a certain speed and some people wrote back and were very kind of shocked at their own behavior, glad that they had been notified that they had been, you know, engaging in unsafe driving practices. I think that residents would appreciate having the opportunity to drive on a road that does not encourage those kinds of speeds. I also wanted to reflect to the the council that the city staff, the Privacy and Associates consulting firm, has been very responsive to community, a lot of community input. They've received that input. They've included that input in their plans. I've been very impressed with the level of detail that they have gone into discussing these plans with the community. So I think that, you know, the proposal that's being made to the council has been very thoroughly vetted and researched. I also wanted to put in the note for a video that I believe you all received from Jennie Gong with the two children. She assures me that they actually prepared the entire script for that video. They spent apparently a number of hours putting it together over the course of about a month, maybe more than a month. So if you haven't watched it yet, please watch it. They really poured themselves in the. That project. And they wish they could have been here tonight, but hopefully the video suffices. So thank you. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Kaiser. I next be. Here. Pat Potter, then James trailer. Pat Potter and then Jim. Okay. Hello. Hello. I'm Pat Potter. I'm part of the city's transportation awareness committee. I'm also the chair of Kansas Transportation Committee and also now president of Bike Walk Alameda. And I'm a little choked up from what that gentleman told us because that's exactly what I came here to talk about. I'm not quite sure how we can put safety in the title of this, given that we're not getting a protected bike lane down the entire Otis. However, I do realize there's budget constraints, so I just want to look at a protected class for Bike Lane in front of Riddler. And the reason is, is because that is an area where parents park their cars right along sorry, right along the sidewalk to get into the park for their kids to play sports. So what happens is when they come out and they get in their cars and they take off and they don't look, if we don't have that protected bike lane, we're going to have a bicyclist squeeze between that car that hasn't looked and the car that's coming down the street that has only one lane because now we've put in the center lane. So what happens? The car pulls out, bam, the bicycle get hit, gets hit. Then there's a second thing that can happen. So the car pulls out, doesn't look. The bicyclist sees the car, he swerves so he doesn't get hit and bam, he gets hit by the car that's coming down the street. Car can't go anywhere but right into him. And there's a third. So the the parent is late to the game. The bicycle is riding down. The parent swerves in front of him to get into that parking spot, nix his front wheel. The bicyclist goes flying. Where is the safety in that? So I strongly, strongly urge you, beg you put in the protected bike lane so you have the sidewalk, the bike lane, the barrier, the cars park and then the traffic. Thanks very much. Thank you, Mr. Taylor. The building. Madam Mayor. Council Members and Citizens Council. One block away is simply a very satisfactory route as Shoreline Drive obviating the need for all of this and, you know, work on all of this. The big thing is, is Otis Drive is an emergency master emergency safety route. Once you road diet, you're not going to get that lane back. So you are making decisions that affect the safety of the island for a long time. If you must have a bike lane, please. Class two and not class four for the following reasons. Because class four puts bikes on the passenger side of the cars that will be parking along Otis Drive. Currently one vehicle parks on Otis Drive. You have the car and you got a curb. Stepped right out. There's nothing in between. But when you have a lane in between now the passengers exiting a car now have to look. Not only the driver has to look on the left, the passengers now have to look on the right side. So it's dangerous. Now, look at the exception that they made for Whitner Park. It's Woodland Park, not Litter Park. People said, please do not have a class for near Rattler Park. They, the kids leave their vehicles quickly, etc.. So right now they are already proposing that you have class four over here driving. Then they want to switch over at Riddler Park and then switch back again under their current proposal, because they see that there is a reason not to have a Class four at Riddler Park. My argument is that same argument, the entire length of the project. It doesn't mix well in transportation. The lanes are supposed to be from center to curb. Fast, fast as fast, slower, slow. And then, you know, off to the curb. With class four, you've got fast, you've got zero when you've got cars parked and another fast lane because you've got bicyclists now going 12 miles an hour. But oh my God, the thing that I run into most is the damn scooters that are going a 20 miles an hour and they will use the bike lane. So you will have 25 mile an hour zero for the park cars and 20 miles an hour on the passenger side when you if you pass class four. So I am totally against class four. The proposed diet is similar to Front Side Boulevard, west of High Street, and Public Works has always mentioned a desire to further road diet for Inside Boulevard. They're not going to do it now, but they're proposing that it's law enforcement that will make the difference on speed. Just that. Do we have any further public comment? Okay. With that, I'm going to close public comment and we will move into council discussion. Who would like to lead off? Councilmember Daisuke. Well, thank you very much. I I will pick up where the last public speaker talked on the on the topic of law enforcement. You know, having grown up in Alameda in the seventies and in the eighties, I think everyone in town always knew that Otis Drive was a speed trap. And this was the case in sixties when I talk with people who grew up here and then and it was a speed trap because you would have cops who would literally stay at at any of the intersections where there was the intersection by Cruzi Park in Otis or the intersection, they would hang out at the intersection. It might have been the same court, by the way, just shifting from one part of Otis Drive to the next. But it was a law, and I think that everyone knew it. And I think what we what we don't have is we don't have that level of of of attention from our police force. I think that's the part that that we need to focus on is enforcement. Because when we get back that culture, people always talk, yeah, you know, don't don't spit on Otis. Don't spit on Otis. Just like we did back in the seventies. In the eighties. And when I look at the data that's presented here, while staff had indicated for leading issues, the one issue that just pops out automatically is speed, whether it was at the workshops or I'm sure through the online. And just, you know, by your experience, I hear that the maybe the typical speed is 33 miles per hour, but I don't think so. I think the speed is certainly hovering above that. So speed, I think, is an issue. And I think the remedy is is enforcement like we used to do. I at the end of the day, Otis Drive still needs to handle a vehicular var a volume of vehicular traffic that allows people to go from one part of the island to, say, shop at South Shore and back, or even allows people who live around South Shore to get to work in a orderly, safe manner. And right now, obviously, it's a speed trap. But but I think the remedy that's being promoted here is a bit too excessive. I would I would support enhanced enforcement by the police back in the way that we used to do it. I'm intrigued by the the discussion about the bike lanes, whether it's class four or class two. I'm open to the class four, like bike lanes of, you know, sidewalk bike lanes and and parking stalls. I'm open to that. But in terms of like redoing the streets from four streets to streets one way, going this way and one going that way, I'm just not there and honest. I just don't think the data supports it. I don't think it supports that as the remedy. It's tragic. You know, what had happened several years ago at Grand Street and Otis Drive in terms of Mr. Sauce. And we certainly want to do everything to prevent that. But by the same token, to me, I think the answer is enforcement. I mean, that's what we used to talk about, the three E's enforcement and engineering. And so it's I think what's missing here is the enforcement part. Thank you. Councilmember De So who's going next? And I should ask Councilmember Vela. Do you want to go next? Sharon. I'm not going to go there. Okay. I thought maybe if Theo let you, you could go now. Yeah. Um, so I think. And, you know, I think that this is a good start. I think that there are the recommendations that are being put forward. I think I'm going to address a lot of the issues that we have. Certainly visibility and things like that are, you know, we need to make those improvements. And I do think that, you know, to Councilmember Point, there may be some additional things that need to come or become a part of this. And I wouldn't I just don't want to fold it up. And if there are other suggestions from from other council members or change that as we move forward that we're looking at, it will be added. I would want to make sure that the fact is integrated in a way that doesn't delays that I'm getting implemented in terms of the enforcement aspect of it. I think enforcement is important, but I also think that it's not everything you want for me to be enforcement action. Yeah, you can catch people in some days, but you know, that doesn't necessarily overall change the behavior. And a lot of what we need to do is just make the road more visible and and multimodal friendly. Because I think what we're trying to do with a lot of the recommendations that are being made by staff. So I'm looking forward to supporting them, thinking that I wouldn't put this number of different issues in ways that other thoroughfares don't. Mainly because it is such a provide a fine artery of the artery of travel. And so I think that it's going to be evolving. And as you definitely implement things along the way and found that some of the more people in the world but I think the people to learn from that. So I'm I'm prepared to do that. Thanks. Councilmember Vela, vice mayor. And that's why I would like to go next. Thank you. So I want to thank staff. I know that this has been a long and well engaged process to get us here, and I think it's exciting. I feel the need, I guess, to to address a couple of points that have come out. I mean, we already have a really good example of protected class for bikeways that handle a lot of people getting out on the passenger side and kids not getting hit. And that's the first side by Lincoln Middle School. Unfortunately, there's no projector tonight, so I can't show some of the video I feel I shot about three months after it opened, but it's quite amazing to watch. Middle school kids probably the least aware children in the entire spectrum of age get out of a car, look to their right, wait for the bicyclists and go, or the bicycle slowing down to let the people cross. I will say along Riddler Park, I think the Transportation Commission got it 100% wrong. The statement that they made was, Let's put in class two and if it's a problem, we'll go to Class four. And it was because a single speaker raised a concern of kids going to soccer games, getting out of their cars and crossing the bike lane, being a safety problem, thereby putting all the kids on bikes in the lane next to the cars and the busses and everything else that drove drive by that. We have a lot of data that suggests that parking protected bike lanes not only are safer, but that they increase biking among populations who are interested in biking but don't feel that they can do so. And it would be my hope that in looking at the two alternatives, we've not heard a reason why not to do a Class four along Riddler. We haven't actually heard a reason why we should do Class two along Riddler. I also wanted to just talk about I would like us to consider whether or not we needed to a turn. Lane On Otis we have streets like High Street, like Fern side, like parts of Broadway that carry 2 to 3 times as much traffic as this section of Otis. And they don't have to wait turn lanes if it's needed in order to create some sort of a median in the middle of the in the middle of the street. That's perfectly acceptable. But the amount of traffic on this street does not warrant three, let alone four, four lanes. And so I would like to encourage us to look at how we can use that that space a little bit better, even if it's bigger buffers, etc.. I would also I don't want to hold this project up, but I would like us to I some staff, some questions ahead of the meeting I would like us to look at. I have the privilege of working with coordination nation leading by. Facility designers at my job in San Francisco. And I did talk a little bit with them about this. And I think some of the assumptions that went into whether or not we could do a class for along the length of Otis were not quite right for the facts of Otis and the facts being that we have two car garages. These driveways are not driveways like in, in and out or something with high volume. These are these are driveways that are probably used 2 to 3 times a day. The bike way would be one way. We probably don't need to create visible 20 foot visibility zones on either end of the bike of the thing. We could probably get away with something closer to ten or 15 on the near side and going down on Otis the other day, I think we would only lose 1 to 2 parking spaces. I know that there's some issues around per block. Sorry for block face. Yeah, sorry. I can see the city engineer giving the you're nuts look. So to clarify that, I know that there are some issues around bus design and whatever else, but I think that we have a climate plan that is coming forward that says we need to make mode shift real. We have city surveys of our residents that say that something like 75 or 80% want to see better bike facilities in. Less than half of them are concerned about taking lane. So, you know, we know that the the larger voice out there is supportive of this road diet. I mean, in fact, a group during the last election ran a weekly ad in the paper saying that my biggest flaw was that I might support road diets on four lane roads and I won. So apparently that's not a not a reason not to vote for people. So I would like us to go a little bit bigger. I would like us to I don't want this to slow down, but I definitely do not. I would like us to look at how busy answered the question. How could we? What would it take to get a class for along Otis as opposed to the are there problems? And therefore let's put in class two. I would like to look at the I really appreciate the the the neck down at Grand in Otis. I think that there are some additional parking protected or sorry, protecting the intersection designs that could be included into the short term design, using posts that go out into the middle of the intersection and actually carrying the bulb about further, that the bikes would come around. And I'd be happy to, to, to share some photos of what that would look like, what San Jose and other cities have done. Regard regarding that. I would like to look I would also like to make sure that we look a little bit more at the merge at Willow. I am as somebody who when I biked down Central Avenue in the bike lanes and at High Street in the bike lane is to the right. And then we all have to merge into a lane on the other side of High Street. It's a very uncomfortable thing to do, and I'd like to see if we can find a way to design where the the second lane that pops up along the curb actually is a shared lane with a bike box at that intersection, so that the folks who are going through the intersection are already merged and not trying to merge as they're as you have. Right turn lane. Right turning traffic. I also just wanted to call out the mayor and I had the opportunity to go to the AC TSI all day retreat last week and the county presented its new high injury network of streets, which are the 14% of streets in the county that are responsible for 72% of all collisions. And this this street is one of them. So if we're going to address safety, these are the this is this is the right. And I've been asked a lot, why are you doing this street? This street is out of the entire county, one of the 14% most dangerous or not most dangerous, but most collision prone streets. So, again, I think that there's been a lot of great work here. I think we have a decent project. I just ask I want to ask the question, how could we go a little bit further and what would that look like? We designed this this neighborhood is designed like a lot of suburban neighborhoods that don't even allow street parking. If every house has two cars, every house has a two car driveway and you can park four cars off the street without ever needing to park on the street. So I'm not as worried about losing a couple of spots here and there. There are some design issues with big gaps and whatever else that will be challenging. I'm not saying it's easy or a slam dunk, but if we could just look at how we could go a little bit further, I think that would be fantastic. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Odie. Thank you. All the good points have been taken already. Okay. No, I will. I do have a few to add. So I mean, I agree with a lot of what the vice mayor said. I mean, road diets, to me, that's not a flaw. To me, that's you know, that's a positive trait and and a positive value and a positive policy we want to make. I do agree with a lot of what he said. I think we can do better in some areas. So first of all on the the area I think class for I think. That's what we need to do. You know, what we have to start doing, I think, is shifting our our perspective. Now we look at this and this is all about safety, but it's also about encouraging more bicyclists, encouraging safer pedestrian access, encouraging more bus. So this whole multimodal thing, that's what we want people to do. So as if we're going to focus on that, then we can't prioritize parking as something we consider in these designs. You know, we have to start prioritizing that because what we want to do is encourage people to drive less and park less and, you know, have fewer cars in the city. So I think that's going forward. I hope we can have a better focus and not think parking, you know, is the the issue that kind of stops our progress as far as some of these multi-modal projects are. I do agree with the vice mayor also. I do think we should consider some type of class for all the way down. Otis I don't know why we wouldn't want to do that. I look at the West Line Drive and, you know, I'm not an engineer, so I don't really know. But a lot of that looks like paint from like short term to long term. So, you know, if we do it, just having people come into the middle, you know, maybe that's something people could take a look at and maybe move more towards that long term. Because I think on the long term, the bike lane stays on the right hand side and doesn't you're not making bicyclists cut across traffic and go into a center lane because if we're going to encourage more people to commute than I imagine most people are going to be turning down the West Line and not going into the park like they probably are today. I do agree that the Willow intersection is a little bit messed up, so I'm going to go through there many times a day. But, you know, I'll leave that for the engineers. I do like the idea of the traffic circle. I think this is something, you know, I forget where I think it was in Kauai. I saw it last and it you know, they work there all over Europe. They seem to work as an interesting spot. For one, I think there are other places in Alameda. There was some blog post this morning about some ideas. And, you know, I think putting traffic circles in is long overdue. And I didn't realize until today when I heard the presentation that the actual long term cost of that is less than maintaining street light or traffic signal . So I think that's something we need to do more of, especially at some of those those more problematic intersections. There was one other thing I wanted to say, but I kind of lost lost it because I didn't write it down. But, you know, I think this is a good a good first step. I do think we can do better. I support moving forward with the the short term fixes, with the with the class for and just as as we look more for for traffic circles, let's just make sure, though, you know, our parade is sacred to Alameda , so let's just make sure we're not impacting that in any negative way. And the last thing on the safety and we were here a couple of weeks ago with the budget and we heard, you know, we're down, it's 8 to 10 police officers. So I don't know if that's a problem that's going to be long, long term or whether we're going to be able to solve that. There are challenges hiring police officers. Our police chief went through a very eloquent presentation talking about it. So to put all our eggs in the enforcement basket, you know, I don't know if that's the solution. So let's just keep that in mind, too, as we go forward. You know, eventually we're going to want to have more modes of transportation, like Councilmember Vella said. So I'm supportive this excited by it, and I hope that it comes in sooner rather than later. Okay. Well, I will do my remarks last. And first, I want to thank staff for all your good work and also the consultant. I was able to attend one of the public workshops and I and I told Mr. Parisi afterward that he really has a gift. Not only is he very knowledgeable about his subject matter, he's really good with a crowd and a crowd with tough questions, and he fielded them all well and didn't get ruffled. And and also, I think Sergeant Brian Foster, APD back there in the room, his presence was really useful because he could step in and answer traffic and enforcement related questions. So I think I'm going to start with what I consider a big item, which is the Class four projected bike lane along the stretch of Otis Drive in front of Riddler Park. And I support Class four over Class two. And here's why. In reading the consultant's memo, which is Exhibit six to the staff report on page three, there's an explanation of something called level of traffic stress alerts. So an Altius one is a roadway by. Physical facility bike lane that's considered suitable for children. And at the other end of the spectrum is an LTC for suitable for experienced adult cyclists who are comfortable sharing the road with automobiles traveling at 35 miles per hour or more. So the important thing to know is that under existing conditions, Otis Drive is considered and ELTs for I'm an adult, has been riding a bike most of my life and I live near the intersection of Grant and Otis and I purposefully avoid either walking because I've almost been hit too many times in broad daylight by people making that left turn and certainly riding my bike. I have other ways to get to South Shore on my bike, but if so, LTC two is what a class two treatment would would give us. And that is considered that represents a level of traffic stress that is comfortable for most adults. Well, it might be comfortable for most adults, but it's not good enough for me. I want my city to be as bicycle friendly as possible. And when you think of the location there adjacent to Riddler Park, where as was noted by Miss Potter, lots of sports events take place from Little League to soccer to, you know, school functions. We we want people, families with their children to use these bike facilities. So let's give them the safety to do that. Not only will we reduce accidents, we will also reduce the number of people jumping in their cars to get from place to place. B It's also Riddler Park is also in the very close vicinity of Wood Middle School, and I spend most of the bike to school days at Wood Middle School, and I know that a lot of students ride their bikes. So and they come from I would just drive both ways. So let's make it as safe as possible for them. And as far as the concern about, you know, passengers getting out of a car and stepping across a bike lane, well, you don't walk across the street without looking left and right. So I'm I'm hoping that people will, you know, keep their common sense with them when they get out of the car. And it runs both ways. Bicyclists also, we when we're on our bikes, we need to be cognizant of others around us. I always say use your best biking manners. Set a good example. Don't you know, give us a bad name as as cyclists. So I'm all for class four. The other concern that I have about this plan is, and I think it was touched on in the staff report, but a question that I would just want answered and actually maybe. Mr. WIKSTRÖM You can do it now if or. Mr. Parisi So the intersection at Otis in West Lyon. So you're going westbound on and Western. When I go to Crab Cove this Saturday, I'll be judging the Sandcastle contest. Y'all come out. It's a great event. I will ride down Otis Drive to go into Crab Cove. But the intersection there is really frustrating for a bicyclist. You got to get over and press the button. So is that is that going to be addressed in the in the new treatment? I know they're tossing the coin and whoever loses has to come up and answer my question. So it is at West Line. Yes, there is no bike lane now through that area. So under the short term solutions, we are showing a bike lane transition into what's called a bike box. So you'd be in front of traffic when light is read and you can elect to go straight across or take a left turn. And in the long and that won't require any curb work but a long term solution. We are showing a protected intersection where you can stay to the right and take advantage of a bike signal. Okay. But what if you wanted to go straight ahead into Crab. Cove. Because. Right. Right now, is there there's not a a well there. Yeah, there's not a you you cross over and one leg of the crosswalk on the south south side of Otis is what you use if you try if you want to go straight through in the auto lane, you've got to hope to get behind an automobile because there's nothing about my bicycle that will trigger the signal to go to green. So is that going to be addressed? Yes. In the short term solutions with the bike box, the detector will sense that you're there and you can go ahead in front of traffic. Perfect. Okay. That sounds good. As far as the the modern roundabout. So call that at Grand. And Otis, I, I am told that that's the way to go, that the data shows that it increases safety. So for that reason, I'm for it. This morning I did, or this afternoon I emailed both of our public safety chiefs, police and fire and asked, would you have any concerns? Our fire chief just asked that when you get to that point in designing it, that he be consulted to make sure that whatever vehicles need to may need to traverse that roundabout can do so safely. And I yes, the vice mayor noted that friends friends I drive is an excellent example of a very successful class for Bike Lane. And as it is right now, it does transition from a class two to a class following back to a class two. And it's still a great lane and I'd love to see more class fours, but it works as it is. And I do think that. The big. Picture we have to keep in mind is that the name of the game now is Complete Streets. That means we're no longer auto centric, we no longer plan for the automobile and everyone else gets the crumbs. We are trying to get people out of their automobiles. And so we have to make it safe and feasible for people to use other modes of transportation. And I'm impressed every day when I'm out and about seeing Alameda EMS, getting their children around, hauling their groceries, pulling those carts, doing a lot more than I do, just riding my self around on a bike. They they are doing that now and even more will join them if we give them the the safe bicycle facilities to do that. And enforcement, while it's always important and is was noted by Councilmember Ody, the reality is we have a finite number of police officers. We try to increase that number. And as we add to that number, others retire. And so we'll rely on enforcement, but not solely. We have to make smart choices with the design of our road. So with all of that, if there's no further comment, I see we should do this is a recommendation to approve the traffic calming recommendations. The Vice Mayor seems like he'd like to say something. Both Mayor, I. Have a proposed motion. I am willing to hear it. Okay. So understanding that small tweaks and things like that don't need to be in this. I remember it. Small tweak. Yeah, it's about a. Meeting that's engineering speak. I would like to move that. We approve the plan and specifically calling out support for a reduction to two lanes of travel, one lane and each way in each direction that we would like to see a class for along Riddler, that we would like staff and the consultant to give class for the full length of Otis. Another look. May I just interrupt you for a minute? So when you say the full length of is, you are. In the. Project. This project. Okay. From Willow to Westlake. Thank you. Yes. And and in terms of the long term, I know you're not looking for it, but support for the roundabout as a long term solution, I think at least the other things I've talked about, I feel are following the tweak category. That was the notion. Okay, so we have a motion. Do I have a second? Yes. Okay. Well, that well, that the new mom is second. Okay. So it's been moved by the vice mayor, seconded by Councilmember Vela. We're going to take a voice vote. Has that Councilmember De said? Nope. Next fight. I. Yes. Vela. Yes. Mayor. As the Ashcraft. Yes. That passes for to one motion passes. Four, two, one. Thank you, everyone, for all your time and effort. And now before we move into item six C, I'm going to actually. Yeah, I'm sorry. I later understand a Yelp incident in your corner. What what was the vote? Because are you saying you want three lanes or are you saying did you all just vote on three lanes or did you all just vote on two lanes? I just want to make sure. We're down to traveling, distracted, not get into the two way turn lane. We are giving staff the flexibility to look at and make the right engineering decision about how to address giving travel lane in each direction. Is that sufficient for you? Okay. That's a that's a yes from city engineer. Okay. All right. So I was trying to say thank you, everyone. And then before we move on to our next item, we're going to take a ten minute break. So we will see you back in 10 minutes. It's 833. I'll see you back at 843. Thank you. There's a couple of recesses on the team just saying that we haven't had a break. Since we went into closed session. 20. Hey. Oh, no, it's okay. It is. We like to see our council members sprint. It is 843. True to our word, we are back for item six. See? Madam Clerk, will you introduce this item? Yes. Public hearing to consider adoption resolution confirming the ballot results to determine whether majority parties exist in the proceedings. To increase assessment in island city landscaping and lighting. District 84 to Zone four, Park Street District a resolution confirming the ballot results and providing for no majority protests and will have even annual assessment in island city landscaping and

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; amending Section 23.41.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code to approve the 2018 University District Neighborhood Design Guidelines.

SeattleCityCouncil_02192019_CB 119362

The report of the Planning and Zoning Committee Agenda and 13 Constable 119 362 relating to the license earning in many section 23.40 1.0 ten and said I misspoke her to approve the 2018 University District Neighborhood Design Guidelines Committee recommended the passes amended. Katherine Johnson I'm sorry to say that applause is not for, you know, you know. Rarely does anyone applaud land use decisions. Council President But we don't do it for the recognition. We're going to take action this afternoon and to design guidelines that actually many members of the community have spent a long time working on to get us to this point. The first as our clerk read out, so everybody is the university district design guidelines. And these are really critical in this state of time because of the recent zoning changes that we made in the neighborhood and now prevalence of new projects that are going on in the neighborhood that are taller buildings. So these design guidelines reflect a change in the character of the university district and will allow for more compatibility with those new high rise character buildings of the University District by the light rail station. It started with a series of community workshops in 2017 2017 and resulted in the design guidelines that are here in front of us today. I'm happy to talk through some of these, but really this is about how do we create more opportunities for those tall towers to reflect both off of each other and have a presence in the neighborhood? How do we create better urban context and Ali space activation in particular? We've got a lot alleys in the University District, not dissimilar from downtown that we'd like to do a lot more activation. How do we create some setbacks, particularly in the University District, to reflect the unique character of the Ave itself? And then how do we do better with public space realm connectivity? So a lot of really great stuff in here. Happy to ask for your support. Thank you very much. Any questions or comments? If not, please call the role on the passage of the bill. Whereas I must get to I so what I thank John Gonzalez Herbal Johnson by President Harrell eight in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and share of assignment. Please read the United Number 14.

A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Montbello Organizing Committee to provide sustainable transportation services, including electric shuttle, e-bikes and charging station to the Montbello community. Approves a contract with Montbello Organizing Committee for $828,904 and through 3-31-2025 to provide sustainable transportation services, including electric shuttle, e-bikes, and charging station, to the Montbello community in Council Districts 8 and 11 (CASR 202262111). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 5-16-22. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 4-13-22. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilmember Hinds called out this item at the 4-25-22 meeting for a one-week postponement to 5-2-22.

DenverCityCouncil_05022022_22-0392

Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screens. And Councilmember Hines, go ahead with your comments on resolution 392. I thank you, President Pro Tem. And because I called or I deferred this last week, I want to provide a little context as to why I deferred it. And just on its face, this program checks so many boxes. I have been a huge advocate for multimodal transit and breaking Denver's dependance on cars for a long time. And this provides mass transit options for people who choose not to own cars and for people who cannot afford cars. It provides a more environmentally resilient way to get around our city, including shuttle service bikes and micromobility. What's even better is the solution is all electric. So shifting away from internal combustion engines is another critical step to ensuring we preserve our habitability on our planet. Finally, we'll be fine with climate change. It is our own habitability that we are destroying. What I didn't see in the contract in the in the original language was accessibility. And I believe that our our city should serve all residents, not those who are easy to serve. And I had two concerns. One is the electric shuttle accessible to people with disabilities. And two, is the electric vehicle charging station accessible to people with disabilities. I didn't have answers to the questions like last week, but I've now received responses to both questions. I want to thank Mr. Salisbury and Director Rink of Kazu. I want to also thank the organizing committee, including Ms.. Haines, specifically for your responses and and Ms.. Haines for for specifically mentioning excessive ride in your comments during public comment. So my first question was, is the electric shuttle wheelchair accessible? And I am happy to say that the answer is yes. The Montreal Organizing Committee did say we are deeply committed to pursuing options that improve transportation accessibility through this grant, particularly when it comes to the electric shuttle. We are very interested in pursuing a vehicle option that is wheelchair accessible since many of our community members and program participants are disabled or have mobility needs. Again, as Ms.. Hands had mentioned, excessive ride. As as wonderful a program it is and as liberating it is as it is for people with disabilities. It only has it can only provide so much. So I want to thank the Mandela Organizing Committee for calling that out and making that a value and a priority. The second question that I had was regarding the electric vehicle charging station. And and I want to thank Keyser again. The response was that the. The new parking lot for this building has ADR spaces is required by law, one of which will have access to an EV charging station. I think this is this is also interesting and critical. And and it is it needs the law as it is today. This is something that I think is is important to talk about because we civil rights is about equal access for everyone, including in this case, people with disabilities. With this charging station, it has two, two ports. It's a dual charger. One is in an accessible parking space. About 10 to 12% of Colorado drivers qualify for a disability parking placard or plate. And in this situation or in this configuration, 50% of the spaces are reserved for people with disabilities. That that that isn't in the spirit of of ADA or in the spirit of civil rights. That's nothing that that the organizing committee has any power or purview over. I would say that that we are looking into that as a city to try to figure out how to best provide access for people with disabilities and access for everyone else so that it is all equal access. So, so while I recognize that the commitment that the organizing committee has and, and Kaiser has to, to providing access for everyone, I see this as an opportunity for us to make our, um, our access to ev charging stations even better. And I hope that we can continue to move forward in that direction in the future. Thank you. One more time for answering all my questions and I will be yes. Vote. Thank you. That concludes the items to be called out. The bills for introduction are ordered published. Council members remember this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilmember Ortega, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Madam President, pro tem, I move that the resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed on final consideration and do pass in a bloc. Vote for the following items. 22. Dash zero three. 92. 22. Ford 13. 22 for 1722 for 2721 1502 22 210. 22 310. 22 three 5722 four 1922 415. 22 420, 22 395. 22 three 9622 402. And that's it. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Gilmore. I. I. CdeBaca I. Clark All right. Flynn High. Herndon, I. Hines I. Cashman I. Can each. I. Ortega. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Madam President. Pro tem i. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. 13 eyes. 13 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Council will not take a recess on Monday, June 6th. Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 22, Dash 0412 Changing the zoning classification for 4401 South Quebec Street in Hampden South.

Recommendation to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee's proposed funding recommendations, as amended, to the FY 17 Proposed Budget. (A-11)

LongBeachCC_09132016_16-0820

Motion carries. Item 20. Recommendation to adopt the budget oversight committees proposed funding recommendations as amended to the fiscal year 17 proposed budget. Oh. Okay. I think. Mr. City Attorney, just on a protocol question. I think Councilman Wingo, as the chair, does she have the floor to explain it, to go over the the item? That is correct. The earlier this afternoon or this evening, the Budget Oversight Committee considered certain recommendations that were passed and the chair should introduce it and then it would be subject to debate on the floor. Okay. Councilman Mongo. And there's already a motion and a second on the floor to approve. The motion on the floor is to accept or to adopt the Budget Oversight Committee proposed funding recommendations as determined earlier today. Earlier today, the Budget Oversight Committee. Recommended a budget that is not balanced. And so I am asking my colleagues to vote no on this item and receive and file. And I have a I have a substitute motion. Can I receive in file this one and then make a motion or should I just substitute? I think what we need to do first is explain what was what was approved by the budget over. Capital. City so that the the body can decide whether you want to discuss amending it or approve as it was recommended by the budget oversight. Okay. Why don't we actually, I think what would be helpful is I think there's a there's Bossi recommendation handout that was passed out and councilman, go why don't you go through that so that it's pretty clear what the recommendations are. And then at that point, you can either substitute or we can vote on the motion. Thank you. Wonderful avoider. I'd like to speak to the motion as well. Oh, everything with the motion. Okay. Absolutely. Today, a budget oversight we recommended. Just for a point of clarification, I'm. Miss Eriksen, would it be best if I used the order from the structural document that we created after that meeting or. Can I read from the itemized document? Is this okay? Will your stuff be good with this one? The motion in languages is perfect. Perfect? Yep. I'm on it. Okay. Motion to amend Mayor Garcia's proposed budget recommendations and recommend the following changes to the City Council motion to use 1.666 in general fund one times, including for 75 from City Manager's Fiscal Year 17 proposed general fund strategic one time investments 600,000 in fiscal year 16 General Fund available 70,000 in fiscal year 17 General Fund Temporary surplus in 521 from a relief of reserves for litigation and liabilities that are no longer needed for their original purposes. This funding is to be appropriated as follows. 695 in the police department for the hiring of officers offset by reduction of force 75 and the city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments for minimum wage. Education and enforcement and 220,000 previously approved by the City Council for Wage Theft Enforcement. 280,000. In Health and Human Services Department for Homeless Rapid Response 150. And the Public Works Department for tree stump removal 96 in Parks Rec and Marine for expansion of Be Safe 65 and Library Services Department for the expansion of Sunday Library Hours 130 in Health and Human Services Department for Public Health Professional two and the Office of Equity 250,000 for Capital Infrastructure, Economic Development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the City Council districts, any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion for contingent appropriation of fifth fiscal year 16 general fund surplus in the amount of 500,000, subject to funding availability for capital, infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the city council districts. Any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion to use propositions and Proposition eight beginning funds available to appropriate $250,000 each in the police department and fire departments for homeless rapid response. Motion to use special advertising and promotion funds. Beginning funds available to purchase. I lost my line. Thank you. Appropriate 60,000 of Parks Rec and Marine Department for Municipal Band six week schedule motion to use fiscal year 17 savings and Thailand's Debt Service and appropriation in 500,000. And Public Works Department for Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to Make 80,000 of the 176 in City Manager's proposed General Fund strategic one time investments for b safe structural offset by a decrease in structural funding for the Language Access Program, which will instead be funded as a one time in 17. And that's part of the Office of Equity Funding that's back uniting that motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments to a Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative to be directed at the discretion of the police chief motion to use 1.08 million and measure a revenue in the fire department for the Restoration of Fire Rescue 12, offset by a reduction in public works department measure a funded residential street repair projects. An additional 30,000 is needed to fully fund the restoration, and then city staff are directed to utilize cost savings and or funds available to make up the needed balance. Thank you. The way we're going to do this, I just checked in with Charlie because I want to make sure we have the the protocol, right. Because Councilman Mongo does have the floor, but there are a first and a second on a on another motion, even though the councilman wants to make a substitute motion. So what we're going to do, I'm going to hear first from Councilmember Austin and then we're going to hear from Councilman Price. And then I go back to Councilwoman Mongo, who can then at that time, if you'd like, make another motion. Councilmember Austin Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And it has already been a very long day with the Budget Oversight Committee having a great, great work and debate on on this FY17 budget. I want to first start out by thanking you, Mr. Mayor, for proposing a a budget and giving us a strong guideline, our city manager, our financial management staff. I want to commend the work of the Budget Oversight Committee chair, Councilmember Mongo and Pryce as well. We've all put a lot of sweat equity and brain equity into coming up with a document that I believe truly reflects the values and priorities of the residents throughout the city and the diverse priorities of the residents throughout the city of Long Beach. I am in support of of this Budget Oversight Committee recommendation, and I'm encouraging the City Council to support it as well. There is an area of a rub. And as you heard from the Budget Oversight Committee chairperson, she believes that there is a structural imbalance in this proposal, which is her prerogative. But I disagree. In this city, managers and mayors proposed budget. They propose to restore public safety services in the same vein in which we are seeking to do so in this Budget Oversight Committee recommendation. We looked at this budget very carefully and looked at where opportunities were, and this $1,080,000 to restore rescue 12, in my opinion, is very necessary. Just in the past week, we have had two rescues go out of service, which meant delays. And those delays can result in a loss of life and our inability to save lives. We made a commitment as a city council to the residents of the city to restore public safety services. To the best extent we possibly could make. And we didn't tell you them that we were going to put this much in to this and this much into that. I mean, I think the city empowered this council to come up with priorities and to to to to address the needs of this city. And and I want to thank Councilmember Price for her support on the Budget Oversight Committee for this recommendation as well. I do have a question for for the chief. I made my comments. And also I want to while the chief is taking coming up, I do want to just recognize the the advocacy from some of our council colleagues, member Rich Richardson, in particular, the last budget cycle. There were people lined up here from North Long Beach. There were postcards. There was a campaign put forth to restore Rescue 12. It was a priority for our city, which we weren't able to deliver. A year ago, we went to our residents and we we asked them to take the leap of faith to raise their sales tax in an effort to improve public safety and infrastructure. And I will tell you that in proposed the Nephi 17, there will be some tremendous infrastructure repairs throughout our city. Public safety resources will be restored. And not only police, but fire. But at this juncture, I think it's very, very important to look at this as an opportunity. We're talking about $1 million a year over the next three years, over the next five years, whatever it takes. That is a small investment for livelihoods in the city of Long Beach. And so, Chief, Mark, my question is, will this $1,080,000 in measured revenue, is that adequate to restore rescue 12? Mr. Mayor. Council Members Council. Council Member Austin. Yes, I mean, it's about $50,000 less than the actual cost of a rescue. What we would be able to absorb that. All right. And then and then secondly, I know as a department chair, as a as a department head, you laid out priorities for restorations, for rescues and engines for this council over the last couple of budget cycles. Can you remind us what those restoration priorities were. For Council Member in 2013? I sent a memo to the mayor and the full council that outlined those restoration priorities. It began with Fire Engine eight, which has been a topic of discussion in this proposed budget. Then would come rescue 12. Then would come engine 17. Then Rescue 22. And finally on to Engine 101. And today, as of today, that the data sets that we used to make that decision in 2013 have not have not changed. And with the restoration of rescue 12 help take any strain off of the existing system for four. Paramedic responses. Well, Councilmember Yes, the the reality is any time you put another resource into this system, it will ease the pressure on the entire system and in turn, provide greater opportunities for us to lower our response time citywide. All right. Thank you. I have no other questions. I would just ask to my council colleagues. Support the C recommendation. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilman Price, who is the second year on the motion. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I, too, want to start by thanking our the chair of the block, Councilwoman Mungo. She worked really hard on this budget and her recommendations. I agree with almost entirely. And I really appreciate the work that she's put into the budget. Again, almost everything that she's recommended, I think is spot on. I also want to thank the mayor for the budget recommendations that he brought forward. I think those are very thorough and they take into account the budget priorities that the residents have voiced to us over the course of these last few months, as well as in the budget surveys. And of course, our staff has worked really hard on this. Leah Erikson should be commended for working so closely with Councilwoman Munger, Chair, Mongo on this budget. Both of them have done an exceptional job. I support this motion, but I do want my colleagues to know that I'm open to suggestions and recommendations. My hope is that we can have a discussion. We measure a past. And we talked about some of the proposals for Measure A in terms of infrastructure. But I don't believe that we have yet had a discussion regarding the proportion of money that we allocate to public safety and the proportion of money that we allocate to infrastructure . And having to modify that. Our public safety scenario in the city is changing very rapidly. I think many of us on the council are receiving more and more calls every day regarding the types of crimes that are impacting the lives of our everyday residents. We are receiving calls regarding public safety issues like a lack of resources in terms of fire resources. And I think those issues are something that we need to talk about as a council. Just because we had a plan in place at the time of the measure. A campaign doesn't, in my opinion, at least this is how I communicated to my residents, is that our focus would be infrastructure and public safety and that we would be working together as we go through the years, through the months to make adjustments, as long as that money is allocated for those two purposes. And I think this is a time for us to have a discussion regarding our priorities moving forward. I think that as chair of the Public Safety Committee, I receive calls constantly and also we discuss within the committee the resources that we have and the lack of resources that we have. And that's why for me, any time we are allocating money to any causes or or any issues, the first question I ask is where else could this money be better spent? Where else would our residents be needing this money more? And it's important for me that we think mindfully about that before we make decisions on allocating money. Because the number one response that I give to my residents when they call and they want more enforcement or shorter response times, is that we have a lack of resources. So it's hard for me to be able to justify that answer if I know that we're allocating money elsewhere. So for me, most of the time, I'm probably going to be in favor of allocating any extra money that we have to public safety. In regards to Councilman Austin's motion. You know, we have areas in the city of Long Beach that have 10 to 15 minute response times for paramedics and 911. And we're meeting the standard of the the national the recommended standard of 6 minutes, only less than half of the time when we're responding to two two incidents. And of course, with the addition and the restoration of services, gradually that number will get better. But I think when you're thinking about that response time, if you're a person in need of care and you have to wait 10 minutes for the paramedics to arrive, that is a higher priority than getting an additional two streets fixed or three streets fixed. I just think it's important for us to have a little bit of perspective here in terms of what we're allocating our money to. I'm not saying infrastructure is not important. It's absolutely important. I'm just saying it's important for us to think about perspective as we move forward. We have for the next six years approximately $47 million of revenue that but for an unforeseen circumstance we can count on in the city of Long Beach, we can plan that that $47 million over the course of the next six years and try to get as much of our infrastructure done as possible. But I think we should have some perspective in terms of the proportion of money that we're allocating to public safety versus infrastructure. Both of them are great causes that. Benefit the city. But I think that we need to focus really on that. And then finally, I did want to make a comment and I said it in Boise, and I'm not sure how many of my colleagues were there, but the money that we reallocated as a recommendation from wage enforcement, you know what I said it Boise is I'm perfectly okay with giving some money to wage enforcement. I have a hard time with the 700,000 because I don't believe that that's money that's necessary to go into that department or that that effort. Now, perhaps once we find out whether we can even enforce, we can allocate more. But I don't think that's money that we need to allocate today. Instead, I think that's money that we can use towards beefing up our public safety resources. And I would like that money to be allocated to the police department for their use in terms of additional police resources. But again, I'm open to suggestions. I'm open to talking with my colleagues. You know, this isn't one of those things. I have a feeling that there's, you know, some agreements in the works or whatever. I just want us to make sure we have a discussion that we're all kind of involved in so that we can move forward . And I also know that in regards to the municipal band Councilman Austin and I recommended that we stick with the current schedule. You know, that's what we're hearing from the band, folks, in terms of what makes sense for them. If in fact, and I know Councilwoman Mango feels strongly about a different proposal, so I want her to have the opportunity to communicate that because again, this is just a recommendation and I'm open to any suggestions and would love to hear from my colleagues on it. Thank you. Thank you. We'll go back to Councilman Mongo who has the floor and and you're able to make your substitute if you'd like to now. Thank you. I'd like to start by asking the chief a question. Both chiefs are there. How great. Chief Terry, would you recommend that a city put something in place as important as a rescue if there's no plan to keep it in place long term? Mr. Mayor? Council members. Objection. Leading. Yeah. I'm taking a note from my colleague. Two seats over. Oh, she actually gets argumentative. Okay, great. So we have a we have a question, so we're gonna get the question answered and then get back to the votes. Mr.. Mr. Mayor, council member, could you apologize? Could you ask the question again, please? Would you recommend that our city put something in place as important as a rescue if we do not have a plan or funding to keep it in place long term? Well, Councilmember, I. I think the city has established and we have done in the fire department a very good job over the years at putting things in place that have structural support behind them. I think we've seen things being put in place and then shortly thereafter, due to budget constraints, they get taken out again. I think it'd be very difficult for me to determine exactly what the future looks like at any given time, but I would only be supportive of restoring things if it was structurally restored. Thank you. In recommending in alignment with the Chief and the Budget Directors recommendations that we should structurally fund structural things, I'd like my colleagues to support a receive and file of this motion. Okay. So there is a substitute. Councilman. Yes. Okay. So there's a substitute motion to receive and file the B or C recommendations. That's not a motion. I move to receive and file the recommendation of the B or C. That's a motion. That's correct. It would it would in effect, there would be no recommendation from the EEOC to adopt on the budget. Okay. So the motion is a substitute motion. We're going to take a vote on this. I know there's. There's still public comment. There's comment from the other member. But. Councilman, I have the floor. So thank you. So unless Councilman Pearce, Councilmember Pearce or Vice Mayor Richardson want to speak to this motion, which I'm. No, no. Okay. So not now. You want to vote first on the substitute to receive and file? I have some questions on the substitute. Absolutely. So let me first just go through the other. So, Councilman Pearce, you removed yourself. So, Vice Mayor Richardson, I'm assuming then do you want to speak to the substitute or not? We're going to go back to the discussion now. I'm going to withdraw. Okay. So then please withdraw so I can do this in the right order. Now I have Councilwoman Price. Thank you. So I guess the question I have is. If we haven't already voted on the budget priorities for next year's measure funds and how do we know this isn't going to be structural? Well, currently the way that. I actually saw a couple among I was actually I probably should have said it better. I guess the question was for Leah Erikson, because we're talking about I mean, you're welcome to comment on it, too. But that was my question, was that if we haven't yet voted on how we're going to use Measure a funds next year , then how do we know this isn't going to be structural? I'm just confused about that. Vice Mayor No, actually, the question is to staff. So I'm going to I'm going to direct this question to staff. So Councilman Price has the floor and it's a question to staff. Mr. ERICSON Councilwoman Price of as I indicated in the Budget Oversight Committee earlier today, we have a three year outlook for our use of Measure A and are in our budget and in our three year outlook we included $150 million infrastructure spending plan with projects that are detailed and listed. In fact, in the budget book we have 17 projects listed and a list, tentative list for FY 18. And then we also have maintaining public safety services and restoration of of a fire engine eight and the South Police Division. With all of that, we have plans for the measure eight funds for the next three years. So any dollar taken away or any dollar added to expand public safety would need to come from a dollar that was previously planned for for infrastructure. So this motion currently identifies an offset for the 17 portion. And what we are doing is we're respectfully asking for direction from city council on what would not get funded for infrastructure in the next two years. So but the budget outlook that you're talking about, how would we go about amending that budget outlook? What would be the process for that? Councilwoman Pryce, you could direct that you do the restoration and then you would identify what infrastructure that. So you're basically giving us direction to fund public safety, additional public safety, and then you would identify what infrastructure you wouldn't want to that you would what category of infrastructure that you would decrease the funding from. Could we do would we have to identify that category tonight or could we have a date certain where we come back? Because if if each council member, for example, deferred $100,000 or $150,000 of projects for 2018, that would give us the money that we need to restore. Engine I'm sorry. Rescue 12. Councilwoman Price, you could you could come back. But just to note, we did have the Citizens Advisory Committee meet on this exact plan last, last week and approve it. So any changes to that plan would also need to go through the Citizens Oversight Committee, too, as well. And so you could come back at a future date. Okay. And that's just what I want. I mean, obviously, the Citizen Advisory Committee wants to make sure that we're spending the money on public safety and infrastructure, but we can still I mean, we're not tied for the next three years to every single project we can modify things. That was my understanding when we voted on it, that that we weren't tied to these projects for all time. I mean, things might come up that might necessitate us spending money in different areas. So I'm imagining that we can take a vote as a council on that, right? Councilman Price That is correct. It's just that normally when you when you it does involve tradeoffs. And so to be clear to the to everybody involved, this does require less infrastructure. And so the sooner that we have clear expectations from city council on what direction you want to take, the better it is for setting expectations. So, yes, you're correct. It could change later. So basically what this would mean is if we were to approve this recommendation tonight, the next year of the $47 million that we're going to get in 2018, we would have to find $1 million of that money that would go to rescue 12. Correct. And so that would mean 1 million less of infrastructure spending in 18. Right. 1 million. And what's the total infrastructure spending that we have scheduled for 18? When? One moment me grab that 37 million. It's $37.1 million. Is the tentative list for a fight 18. So instead of $37 million, we would spend $36 million and we'd be able to restore an engine in North Long Beach and increase response times for people that are in need of medical attention. I mean, to me, it seems like we could work together to come up with that million. You know what? What I would love to know is I know there's an alternative plan in place. I mean, I've definitely seen the movement that's going around the council chambers. I would love to know what it is so that I could decide how I want to vote on this motion, because maybe there's an alternative plan that's better . And so, you know, I would I would ask Chair Mango if maybe, you know, I don't know how this works kind of with the strategy, but I'd love to hear what alternatives are available before we vote, because I know she's been working very hard on this. So I guess that's a question not from us, Erikson, but for Ms.. Ms.. With chair. Chair. Mango. I'm unable to agree with anything that doesn't provide at least $3.3 million to restore rescue 12 for the full three years. And so with that, I'd like to vote on receiving and filing this and going to a balanced budget proposal, at which time I'm open to discussions of Rescue 12, again, like I asked for at Bossi. But unfortunately my colleagues did not give me that opportunity. So I just like to vote, to receive and file. And at that time we can get to a balanced budget. Okay. I'm going to go to Councilmember Austin unless Councilman Price's anything else. I don't have anything else. Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. Okay. So I guess the question is for our financial management. Ms.. ERICKSEN. Um, the the restoration of engine eight. How is that different from what we're proposing to do to rescue 12? Council member Austin We programed the restoration for fire engine eight in all three years of our outlook and therefore it came off the top and therefore there was less money for the infrastructure spending in the plan. So so we did account for it every year of the three year outlook as a structural spending. But every year it still has to come before the city council for it to get approved. Is that correct? That is correct. And so if city council chose not to approve Rescue eight and 18, that there could be one or $2.3 million of additional funding for infrastructure or for other public safety purposes. So from the from the this Mungo's argument that the restoration of Rescue 12 is is somehow not structural. Would the same thing be said for engine eight? I'm sorry. Can you please repeat your question? The argument that the restoration of Rescue 12 not being structural, could the same thing be said for rescue for engine eight? Councilmember Austin, as I mentioned, we did structurally plan well. You planned it over a three year outlook, right? I mean, so I just don't understand how how restoring a rescue in this the using the theme park what might measure a is any different is particularly when we have to come here year after year after year to approve the budget. It's it's a shell game. And and for this council, it's about priorities. And so I don't have any further questions. I would just, again, ask that my my colleagues support the bill's recommendations and reject these receive a file. Okay. We're not going to go to a vote. There is a substitute motion by Councilman Bongo to receive and file this motion. So please, members. Gordon, cast your votes. Was. The motion to receive and file both these recommendations. Motion carries. Okay, motion carries. So the basic recommendations have failed. Now we're going back to Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to amend Mayor Garcia's proposed budget recommendation and recommend the following changes to the City Council. If you were here for Budget Oversight Committee, you've heard this once before. There are very few adjustments. Motion to use one point. Actually, there are no adjustments. Motion to use 1.191 in general fund one time funding, including 600,000 in fiscal year 16 general funds available 70 in fiscal year 17 general funds temporary surplus and 521 from a relief of reserves for litigation liabilities that are no longer needed for their original purposes. This funding is to be appropriated as follows. 280,000 and Health and Human Services Department for Homeless. Rapid response in the Public Works Department for. Tree removal replacement. And and stamp removal 96,000 for the Parks and Recreation and Marine for the expansion of the Be Safe program 65,000 and Library Services Department for the expansion of Sunday library hours to a fourth Branch library to be determined by the Department 130 and Health and Human Services Department for the Public Health Professional two and the Office of Equity 220,000 and Financial Management Department for local investigations related to wage to 250,000 and capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programs to be divided by nine for city council districts . And exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion for contingent appropriation of fiscal year 16. General fund surplus in amount of 500,000, subject to the funding availability of capital, infrastructure, economic or existing city programs to be divided by nine for the City Council districts. Any exceptions must go to the City Council for approval motion to use beginning funds available to appropriate 20 50,000 in each of police and fire for a total of 500,000 for homeless. This rapid response motion to use the Special Advertising and Promotions Fund as AP Beginning Fund Balance Balance to appropriate $90,000 in Parks Recreation Marine for Municipal Band eight week alternative schedule motion to use Fiscal Year 17 Savings and Tidelands Debt Service to appropriate in 500,000 in the Public Works Department for Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to make 80,000 of the 176 in the City Manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investment for B safe structural offset by the structural availability by Language Access Program, and it's merged into the Office of Equity Motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in the city manager's proposed budget for strategic one time investments in the Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative as directed by the police chief. Okay. There's emotion any second on the on the motion. I'm going to turn first over to Vice Mayor Richardson and then we'll go down the list. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want I was silent on the last vote because I wanted the opportunity to put everything in context and not piecemeal out certain justifications here. And I'm going to end with a friendly amendment. So, number one, the Budget Oversight Committee does not have full control of the city council. And although we we do work to to sort of respect those recommendations when there are dramatic changes right before the vote, it makes me lose confidence in their ability to actually present something that the city councils can support. And the indication of that is when the chair votes against the product that comes directly out of their committee. As a chair of a committee. I would I would hope that, you know, if something comes out of the committee that the chair can't support, the city council would consider that this was a dramatic change, a completely dismantled wage theft, which was a very significant issue here in this city that we discussed. And we found a middle ground approach that respected business, and it addresses workers concerns and that was completely thrown to the side. And the excuse was a very insulting and insincere attempt to utilize or leverage a very real need for a rescue in North Long Beach for north Long Beach residents. And that's why right now I'm going to go through why this made absolutely no sense and why we need to have a better plan. And we're going to talk about that plan tonight. So, number one, the recommendations here, there are a lot of good things here. Number one, we we we supported one position to support equity in the health department, which has been a priority at city council. So that's a great thing. We should acknowledge there's, you know, homelessness, rapid response, a creative way to leverage police and fire and add additional positions to go out and respond immediately, immediately to the homelessness issues popping up citywide across our city. Next, there was I mean, you know, library hours are things we support. A lot of good things that have organically come up through the community and that that that I do want to support. So I'm glad that those things are in this motion. The the context about rescue 12, the recommendation I could not support for a couple of different reasons, but I want to kind of go through this exercise and better understand it. So so city attorney, the recommendation that came out of that came out of Boston on rescue 12. What was. Can you just restate that? So we know so we understand what that was and why this is very different. I'll explain the why, but you can just tell me what it is. Thank you. There was a motion that was adopted by the Bloc was to use $1,080,000 and measure a revenue taken, I think, from the Street Improvement Fund to fund the fire department or rescue 12. And it's offset by public works measure funds residential street repair an additional 30,000 is needed to fully fund the restoration and staff was directed to find funds available to make up that balance. So how long would that funding last? Like, how long will we actually have that rescue based on that allocation of funding? Vice mayor. This this identifies the basically the first full year of funding for the rescue. This was. About a year's worth of funding. Okay, so what would happen? So, number one, what is are we projecting a deficit next year or a surplus next year or the year after? Vice Mayor Richardson We are in fact projecting shortfalls in 18 that will need to be balanced in next year's budget. So in order to maintain that restoration, we would have to, as a council, either cut or identify new revenue, correct? That is correct. Okay. So there are I do appreciate admire all the ideas about, you know, being creative about infrastructure. And I personally know and I've been following and I know a great many of many people have been following other infrastructure revenue opportunities associated with infrastructure like L.A. County Measure M and and so have we taken a look at that as a city like what our potential impact might be? What are we if should voters make a decision to move forward with that? Vice Mayor Richardson Yes, we do. We do have estimated impacts. If it's passed based on the local return, that would come to the city of Long Beach. And do we have a rough number on what we think that is? Yes. It's approximately $7. Million. $7 million. So if the voters approved that in November, couldn't we reprioritize infrastructure funding in the general fund to support services instead, since we have an additional funding source, ongoing funding source for that. So if Measure M were to become available part of the $150 million plan, that was an infrastructure investment plan that could be funded by a number of different ways of money that would be coming in. So the council could take a look at that again. And if they wanted to use additional street money from Measure M or stick with what is currently planned. And when is that? When will we know whether that's on the table or not? November eight. So two months from now. Yeah. Okay. So are there other revenue opportunities? I know that the city council vote voted to place a cannabis item on the agenda for November. And have we done an analysis of the revenue impact from that source? We are. We have done an analysis of Measure M-A and it where it can vary pretty wildly. But what we're estimating is if recreational and medical marijuana use were allowed, it would generate about $13 million. $13 million structurally, and $7 million for infrastructure. Okay. So when in a question about Measure eight, when does Measure eight actually kick in? When do we start collecting? January one. But not at the beginning of this upcoming FY17 fiscal year. Correct. January one instead of October one. I understand. So the problem with the BMC BMC original recommendation is that it uses it uses it doesn't structurally fund restoration. This leads to could this have an impact on our credit score as the city. Ask Lee Erickson to answer that. I? Vice Mayor Richardson. Yes. One of the things that the credit rating agencies do look at is whether or not we follow our financial policies and strictly balance the budget every year. So it could potentially have an impact. Okay. So this puts in that recommendation could potentially lead to about a negative credit rating on the city, a potential of putting rescue 12 back in service just to pull it out at the next budget. Should new revenue not not be available and in frankly, it's too contingent on it's not a strong solid plan and it rolled the dice with lives and you can't do that. I agree. We have fought for six years to restore rescue 12 since my predecessor, Steve Neal, was in office. And we yes. Last budget, when R&D was eliminated, we did fight and we have continued to fight and organize in the communities to do this. I want to see this happen, but I personally feel North Long Beach and all the cities, all the residents our city deserve a real plan, a better plan, not, you know, not a half baked plan. And so what we know is that we have potentially two revenue sources that could or could not be available in just two months. We know that we have potentially improved revenue projections on the first responder fee, which is fairly new. We know that measure kicks in in January and that there may be an ability to leverage measure a improved projections from first responder fee potential, you know, potential revenue from measure made here in Long Beach and measure aim at the county. We know all those things. So I want to conduct I want to make a friendly amendment now to councilmember budget chair mongo that we conduct an analysis of all of these revenue opportunities that include measure em, Long Beach measure, L.A. County measure and Long Beach measure in May and the first responder fee. And we make a plan to restore additional apparatus three months from now in January. Once that has happened, three months from now, in January, once we know what our complete budget picture, picture, our pictures, our picture is, and once we understand what the what the voters are going to do. And just to make sure that we are you know, that this is important and the entire city council has expressed that maybe infrastructure might not be the top priority one. We want to make sure this is sincere and put some money aside right now to support that should it move forward. So to support this plan and if the other revenue doesn't doesn't cover it, then we this is what we can do to kind of support this. But we don't want to spin it because it's not structural. We want to just hold it to the side. So to support this plan, let's set aside $1 million and measure any funds from let's let's see. I think I see we have 500 from the each of the ranchos and reserve it to support these restorations until this plan has come forward and we have we have some clarity on our revenue picture. So that's my friendly amendment. I'd like to hear all friendlies before making any decisions. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Richardson, are you all done with your comments? I am for now. Okay. Councilmember Pierce and I know just real quick before Councilman Pacheco, I think there may be a problem with some folks screen. So just the order I have is councilmember pearce, councilman price, councilmember your ranga, councilman austin and councilmember super nice offer and then Councilman Gonzalez. So next up is I'm sorry, Councilmember Pearce. Thank you, Mayor. I want to thank all the work that's been done by staff, by the council, by the mayor in preparing the budget and really trying to be thoughtful and measured with what kind of budget we passed today. And I'll echo the comments by my colleague, Vice Mayor Richardson. We've when it comes to wage theft, we've already been there. I think there was a commitment last week to make sure that money was there and that we table that for future discussion about how those dollars are spent. But want to make sure that that because we just did it last week, stays there. Second, I want to say, you know, I appreciate going back and funding some of our libraries and and parks. I think there's more that we can do and want to encourage us to kind of look at that and continue that conversation as we go forward about where some dollars might be found for that. But third, I have to say, guys, while I while we've been having this meeting, we've said a lot of things about public safety being a number one priority that, you know, we've people voted very highly for measure with the assumption that we were going to invest in public safety. We know through, you know, different conversations in our computer community budget process that public safety has been a number one priority. And while we're sitting here in our council meeting, there was a fight and shots fired in Alamitos Beach tonight. And so we have a marine area that has poor lighting, that doesn't have enough staff, that is consistently struggling to make sure that we have safe areas, whether that's around our restrooms, whether that's, you know, up against the seawall. And that when we're talking about what number one is important is safety. And we have consistently had community members come out and say that they do not want to invest in one time funds on things like pools. But we want to invest in public safety. I think we have to look at the dollars that we have here. And this year alone, we have $1.7 million allotted to a pool that doesn't have a plan to be built yet. While we all are in agreement that public safety is a priority. So while we have two 2 million, we've got 2 million this year allotted to that. And that is new money without a plan. So I have a question for our staff. How much would oil cost have to go up in order for us to reach a plan to see this pool being built at the $103 million mark ? That question makes. Sense. So that's a difficult question to answer, but I'll do my best in. I'll give an example. In 2015, when oil was at $100 a barrel, we were essentially going to be fully funded for $103 million, was going to bring in about $39 million. And that would have gone to fund the pool so oil could go back up. It would need picking an exact number is very difficult. There are other funding solutions that we're trying to work on, but if it was just relying on oil, it'd have to go up pretty high. And how much do construction costs go up each year that we wait? That's also a difficult question to answer. We've estimated in the past that it could go up about $4 million a year, about 4% if it's a $100 million plan and it's 4%. We have seen cost escalation go above that. It really is project specific. In some projects, in cost escalation is 10% and others it's, you know, 1 to 2%. So it can vary pretty wildly. But I'd say 4 to 5 million a year is a potential. 4 to 5 million a year. And this year we have 2 million slotted for it with no real idea about where we're going with other funding cost. I would like to also ask of our fire and police department how what's the increase in calls that we have annually that 2%, 5%? Councilwoman Pierce for the police department in 2015, we had a a little over a 10%. Increase in our call. For calls for service volume. And I want to say, year to date, the last time I looked at the numbers for 2016, we were up a little over 7%. So it is our workload is definitely increasing. Councilmember The fire department is much the same. We typically our 20 year historical average, we typically see a 3 to 5% call volume increase annually. This year, however, we're right at about 6% in total call volume. Wow. Thank you, guys. I mean, to me, I cannot. You know, with a full heart. Say that I want to fund something that doesn't have a pathway right now with Tidelands funds, which, you know, are only in two districts. I would want to see those Thailand funds used to offset public safety with shovel ready projects like lifeguards making sure that our lighting is there and ensuring that we have dollars there for overtime pay for our Marine patrol that we seem to be short on right now. And so I would like to make a friendly to the council member to a lot $31,000 or $31 million to public safety and shovel ready projects in the in the area. Wow. That's a price. That's a lot more than I thought you were going for when you started that speech. I'll start by saying that in a similar way that I don't believe in funding things that aren't having a path to funding like the engine. I feel the pool is different because it is money being set aside towards a one time, if that makes sense. And I would not be comfortable taking away funds that had already been allocated by prior councils at this time. Without a plan or a. I need something much more broad and. A much more specific and much less broad on money for the police department or something. But I do have an awesome list, I would say, of of fire department overtime at $2 million, beach lighting and public safety improvements at six. But I, I hear that when I started this, 31 million was not something that was on the table. Would you be willing to accept a friendly for this year's funding of one of 2 million? What would you use it for? We would use that form of marine patrol equipment and over time we would use that for beach lighting and safety improvements and fire department, tidelands, infrastructure. So all things that are one time fees. I'll take it under advisement. Thank you. And, Mr. Mayor, if I can add quickly, just a point of clarification. We believe what's in the budget for the 17 budget for the pool. If I can just clarify that there is $1 million out of Tidelands. And then there was in the city manager's proposed budget, $500,000 in a contingent appropriation in the general fund, which is , I understand the Bossi recommendations would swap that with Tidelands. So for a total really all told, if the Bossi recommendations go forward of 1.5 million and it's all tidelands, no general fund. So would the things she's asking for qualify are all of those things in the. I mean, I guess you'd have to. They're all in the title and they're. All in the title. Yes. Okay. I'm not accepting. Not an okay of accepting, but okay of understanding. Yes. Okay. To be clear, it is using those Thailand funds instead of using them for infrastructure of a pool, using them for safety along our Marine. It's just so hard for me to take money from an investment to move it into a safety idea, especially things like overtime in the such. But I will take it under advisement. What? Next up, we have Councilwoman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. So a few few thoughts here. I agree with Councilman Richardson's position that there were a lot of good points in this budget. I completely agree with that. I think there are a lot of great priorities in this budget. I don't necessarily follow the logic. Not that I not that it's wrong. It's just I don't follow it in regards to this idea that things are half baked because, you know, for example, he's asking about marijuana revenue. What? We have a two from four that staff wrote. And although he asked about the revenue, he didn't ask the follow up question of what the enforcement costs would be to the city and actually were projecting to go into a deficit as a result of that. So, you know, I think, yeah, it's absolutely the revenue is going to come in, but there is a cost to the city to enforce and police it. But so we have to factor that in. So we're basically relying on a projection and making financial plans based on a projection of what might happen. Measure A, you know, and I and I appreciate that. You know, we're we're all you know, Councilman Austin and I and many of my colleagues who even if they're not voting, weren't voting with the recommendations that came out of Bossie tonight. I think the one thing that I think is factual is those who are in favor of Rescue 12 fully and completely understand that it's going to benefit directly Councilman Richardson's residents. And that's okay. And that's great. It's a wonderful thing. And I find it ironic that in looking for the revenue to set aside, he's looking at facilities and other districts and not his own as a place to set aside the money. You know, for example, there's $4 million set aside for Highland Park. Certainly a million of that could be set aside. But in any event, in the spirit of what we promised the residents and what we promised the citizens in regards to measure A, we specifically made some commitments to them as to the ranchos. So I want to talk about that first. I can't speak for Rancho La Cerritos because I'm not as involved in their project as I am with Rancho Los Alamitos. But Rancho Los Alamitos, it's not getting a facelift and there's not going to be any sort of luxurious accommodations. It's getting a new roof, it's getting some seismic structural improvements made to it. And Long Beach Unified requires, as part of its curriculum that students every student in a certain grade go through Rancho Los Alamitos, which is a city facility. And I know any biotech is not here, and I don't know if there's anybody here who could speak to it. But the the seismic issues that Rancho Los Alamitos are actually very real. And again, this isn't a beautification project. It's a safety project. So in the whole spirit of, you know, we've promised we can't go into 27, 2018 because we have a budget outlook that includes information that we haven't yet committed to, but that residents might be looking forward to. I don't know how we would go into 2017 where we've already published the list of what's going to happen and take away from those projects. But so I would I would ask my colleagues not to support that. Setting aside that money, I think it's interesting. You know, Councilman Richardson, I would say to you, I'm here. I congratulated you heavily with the Michelle Obama library. I'm here supporting everything I can do for Rescue 12. I support what you've done in your district. And I would hope that we don't get to a place where we're where we're divisive. I understand some may be upset at my stance on the wage enforcement issue last week and the fact that I didn't think it was a prudent use of money. But in general, I support my colleagues use of money in their districts and use of building up the infrastructure and making the lives for the residents in their district better. And you'll never see me vote against a project that you have proposed for your district, ever. I just don't do that, and I wouldn't do that. But we're talking about citywide issues, I think about whether or not we have other priorities. And and so I would just hope that, you know, we can we can separate the issues from one week to the next and not hold grudges that result in things like taking money away from seismic facilities that seismic needs. And in regards to the pool, you know, I appreciate where Councilwoman Pierce is coming from. I think it will be interesting. And I, you know, definitely want to hear what the aquatics community thinks about this, because this is the first I've heard her want to take $30 million from the pool project. So it will me that's certainly not something I had heard in my. I am. I work with Councilwoman Pearce in advance of her being on council and the numerous discussions that we had. So it does take me by surprise a bit that she'd want to take $30 million from the pool. But but I do want to say a few things about the pool. Much has been made of the pool. Yes, the pool is an expensive facility. We have heard a lot of people say it's more expensive because of where it's located. That's actually not true. The place price per square foot of the pool is the same price per square foot as competitive aquatics facilities throughout the United States. In fact, we fall right in the middle range. The thing about the pool that's different is that we're going to be able to house and see competitions at the pool, which we haven't been able to do. We don't have any facility in the city of Long Beach that can house and see competitions. Why is that important? Because out of one of our local high schools alone, we have churned out more Olympians than any other city in this region. Wilson High School has churned out more Olympic athletes than any other high school in this region. So the aquatics lifestyle is a huge source of pride for the city. And, you know, long before Councilwoman Pierce or even I got onto this body, there were discussions about the plans for the pool. I stepped into this role, and I honored and respected the work of my predecessor with the aquatics community to get the project to the place that it was when I entered the scene. And we had a stakeholder committee with residents and aquatics professionals to talk about what the needs of the pool would be to try to make this a facility that could really be an iconic facility for the city of Long Beach. The money that's proposed right now is investment money to try to find a funding gap. We are not going to be able to fund the pool through tidelands money alone. And that's why we are going to be taking $500,000 and investing in future funding opportunities, whether that be grants or whether it be fund raising. We've already met. We're working very hard. Trust me, my colleagues, I'm not sitting here waiting to build the pool year by year at $500,000 a year allocations every year. We're working really hard. The mayor, I want to thank him. He's been incredibly helpful to me and the city manager and assistant city manager Tom Modica. And we're we're trying to find creative ways to fund the pool. We're working hard on that. We definitely are not going to be looking to the general fund to fund $44 million of the pool. We're talking about $500,000 to try to invest in funding opportunities for the city of Long Beach. A lot of fund raising companies require you to give money in order to be able to set up a fundraising plan. And if we're going to raise $40 million, we can't just do it based on amateur fund raising techniques. We're going to need to bring in a private company to help us figure out what our options are. So that's the story with the pool. And so I would urge my colleagues, you know, let's again, you have never seen me and nor will you ever see me vote against a project that's going to benefit your residents in your district. None of you. We may not see eye to eye on things, but I'm not going to punish your residents because you didn't like something I did the week before, and I'd ask you to please not do that to my residents either. We don't agree on wage enforcement. That's okay. But please, let's not carry that meeting after meeting because that's not fair to my residents and certainly not fair to the thousands of Long Beach Unified School students who go through the Rancho every year. So thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilmember Gringo. Thank you, Mayor. You know, budget season is never easy. I go through a budget season every January with my wife. Talking about how we're going to spend our money for the year. Looking forward to April 15 to when we have to do our taxes. And then sometimes we come up with the budget surprises, making donations that I didn't know she made or me making a donation that she didn't expect that I made. So there's always these negotiations and these nuances with budgets that that are very difficult. And that's what we're dealing with right now. It's never easy. When I was I was looking at the at the EEOC meeting earlier today, and I was somewhat taken aback by some of the recommendations that were coming through, because I saw them as 11th hour type changes that I, I questioned because as far as I was already . Oriented, too. We made a commitment to the people through Marjorie that we were going to use those funds. As we said, we were infrastructure, public safety, and we were going to take care of all those issues that we needed to. Once those funds start kicking in in 2017, 2018. Including and that included, you know, monies towards reestablishing not only a south division for the police department, but also hiring new police department personnel and also reinstituting Engine eight and Rescue 12. It's all there. Why is it important for like at this point to do that? I would just taken aback by it. And it wasn't so much that that I was taken aback by. It was how we were going to fund them, you know, at the expense of of a minimum wage, at the expense of of the municipal band. We promised that we were going to give eight weeks back to six weeks. That's going backwards. We were also going to take money away from homelessness response. We're going to cut back on the safe program, some library hours. I mean, I just couldn't couldn't fathom why we were making those kinds of cuts when we have a plan. And the plan is already set. It's ready to go. We adopt this budget and we let the rest of it kick in when we get into our 2017 2018 budget with major funds coming in in January. So and then the final part, I guess the one that got to me was at the end, you know, there's the committee chair. Took issue with some of those cuts, and I could see why. I mean, it was it didn't make sense to me and it probably didn't make sense to her. So I'm glad that she has her alternate amendment to the motion. I agree with it. It's it's a structural plan. It's not one based on one type funding. It's structurally sound. And that's what we need. We want a balanced budget. And I think that that's what the proposal will do. And more than that, more than that, it's a responsible budget. It's one that we can all live with and knowing that there are going to be other measures out there in the very near future. Council Vice Mayor Richardson brought up Measure M. They're going to be coming up in November, which provides an additional source of funding that will just give us a bonus. But of course, we don't know that. We won't know until the day after the election, November 7th anyway. So I mean, I'm I'm supportive of the the motion presented by Councilmember Mongeau, and I hope that my colleagues do as well. Thank you. Next up, we have council member Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'm going to do my best to try not to sound half baked in my my response. But I think I need to address a few points here this evening. I was appointed to serve on the Budget Oversight Committee. And while I do and I did give great due respect and accolades to our budget chair, who has done a remarkable job and put a lot of time into developing this budget. And she's talked to every one of our council colleagues, clearly. But it is a committee and a committee and city council members are free to disagree. And we disagreed on probably 1% of this entire less than 1% of the entire budget. Right. Most of the budget recommendations put forth by the Budget Committee chairperson were agreed upon or agreed upon by the committee. Right. And most of what is being proposed, I want to be very clear, will probably be here for the next 3 hours talking about this, but will be agreed upon by the city council. We're talking about $1.1 million. We're talking about two weeks from the municipal bill. I really want to keep this conversation dignified and respectful, understanding that, you know, I'm not going to respond to childish at hominins or petty attacks against my district. Measure a. There were promises made in Missouri and the ranchos both Rancho, also Cerritos, Rancho Los Alamitos were included in that promise. And so to to come in and say we want to make a friendly amendment. That's nothing friendly about that. That's hostile. That's a hostile act for my district and people who are working hard to make that rancho and both ranchos treasures in our community. A lot has been said about speculative ink revenue. Measure M and we will have a study session next week which will be pretty robust and we'll have a full breakdown on what measure M does. But what it does is add a half cent sales tax to the residents of Long Beach. And that's a conversation we need to have. Right. But it's speculative and risky to just speculate a budget based on what the voters may or may not do. Measure M I would say the same thing about that, but there's also still Measure R that provides funding for streets and infrastructure projects in our in our community that was passed by voters in 2008. So so, Mr. Modica, I know you're a subject matter expert on all measures. How much do we get annually for Measure R. For. Streets? Mr. Chair and Councilmember Austin, if memory serves, it's about 5.7, $5.8 million from Measure R. And that is also included in our R, C, IP and streets budgets. Correct. Corrected funds, primarily residential streets. All right. I wanted to make sure that we understand it. And is there a sense that they don't measure R. I believe it's a 30 year sunset at this point. It's 2039. You all right? Yes, sir. You know, measure it in. By the way, as we will learn, next week has no sunset. That's correct. And so and I want to be very clear. My motion to restore Rescue 12 is certainly benefits. I think the entire city, as the chief mentioned, that, you know, it take strain off of the system. In my district, I have two fire stations, both our have rescues, rescue nine and rescue 11. And so my motion was not to benefit my district and it wasn't about me. Right. It wasn't a selfish emotion. It was it was a motion to actually, I believe, help and lend a helping hand to our residents in North Long Beach and particularly the council member in that district. So I want to move off of the the the measure. Because if the councilmember in the ninth District doesn't want rescue 12 right now and he doesn't think it's important enough to do that, then I will get off of that that flight back to the municipal band. There was an existing motion by Councilmember Mongeau. She has generously put together a plan that would expand the municipal band concerts from six weeks to eight weeks. Right. What we heard in Budget Oversight Committee to address Councilmember Yolanda's point, it wasn't a cut. It was to keep it what it it where the where it is. Because the folks who are operating the municipal band concerts the and I would invite them to come up and speak on this if not out of order. They recommended six weeks. They wanted six weeks. They don't think it's functional or or doable to do that. And that's what I heard from them. And so that was in my motion, original motion to restore it back to six weeks. And I can tell you that the residents who I know and as well as you, Mr. Councilmember Urunga, are very happy with six weeks of municipal ban. And if we break it up as being proposed in the two four from okay, we're going to skip a week and then come back a week. That just messes up the the the I would just call homeostasis of of a neighborhood. People get used to going to municipal band on Wednesday nights or Tuesday nights or Thursday nights. It's part of a tradition. And sort of to make it make it inconsistent I think would be a disservice to our residents. And so those are my comments. Like I said, I think we agree on most of this budget. I hope we can can get there again without the pettiness about without trying to throw digs at one another and do the right thing for the residents of the city of Long Beach, this city. So is that a friendly? The friendly would be, too. Yes, my friendly would be. Thank you, Chairman. Go would be to to keep the municipal ban schedule as as proposed in the mayor's budget. So I want to talk a little bit about that. I've worked closely with the Parks and Rec Department and one of the members of the Friends of Municipal Band. I'd asked for the cell phone number or contact information to get a hold of Mr. Curtis, but was unable to get a hold of him. And so I wasn't able to talk through all of the things that the community had talked to me about. So a couple of key points. I appreciate the employees of the municipal band. I love the municipal band. I've probably been to the most municipal band concerts of anyone here on on the on the dais. And Mr. Curtis is nodding that that's true and not always do I go up on stage, but sometimes I do. And I want the community to know that both the mayor and I care a lot about the municipal band. The community. Has shown us by the lack of attendance on Tuesdays that that is not a night that is convenient for them. Two council members have not been able to attend these municipal band activities and pull together the support on Tuesdays because they're here at council. Collections on Tuesdays are extremely low. And so in those things, when I hear that a colleague of mine would love to have a Friday night concert, I think that there's extreme value in that. I know what Friday night concerts in the park mean to my neighbors. We have the largest turnout of all the municipal band concerts in the city. And so when I looked at the schedule proposed by Parks and Rec and Marine, it wasn't as similar to the proposals that I had heard from neighbors that I'd communicated, because there were a couple of things different. One was that there would be eight separate shows, and I don't think that that was the intent. I think that in discussions with Councilmember Richardson and Councilmember Urunga, it would be neat if a show had a jazz theme, a show had a Latin theme, but within that, there would still only be five shows. Week one would be show one, week two would be show two, week three would still be show two, and it would rotate to a different set of parks. And then the Symbion symbiotic myth that Mr. Austin, the Blues Council member, also said, okay, well the symbiotic ness that Councilmember Austin referred to would be backfilled in the way that Councilmember Price and I backfill the end of the summer right now with local bands that are well known the Emperors, the Elm Street Band, Knight Rider, those groups. So there would still be eight consecutive weeks of concerts in Eldorado Park because I would put up my one time funds to support that and ensure that there was no decline. I would even go as far as to say that we would collect during those weeks and still donate all the money to the municipal band for weeks. They're not even playing, so they theoretically have collection two locations on the same night. And from what I understand, Eldorado Park has the most generous bucket collections within that. I talk about how I really care about the employees, and we as public servants are all here. For the neighbors, it's mostly about the neighbors. There are no additional general funds going. The original mayor's proposal was general funds of 60,000. My proposal is 90,000, but it's from special advertising and promotional fees. And the reason I feel that that is appropriate is because I believe that Sapp funds are appropriately used for the minivan because it is such a special citywide opportunity for people to engage, and it does fit the definition of special advertising and promotions. So just as I am going to listen to all my friend live, I will hold that friendly as well. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Supernova. Thank you. I think I'd like to piggyback onto one of the friendlies, but I don't know which one, so bear with me here. What I'd like to talk about, you know, let's just just take the premise that Councilmember Austin has. And if we want to look forward to other revenue sources for restoring rescue 12, you want to look at a plan for, you know, a couple of months from now. I'd like to add engine 17 to that. And I've talked about this before, so please bear with me. We had back to back garage fires last night and a week ago Monday, and those were total losses of garages in very densely populated neighborhoods where the fire came in and confined it to one structure. So last night we had a garage fire in the in the heart of Los Altos. And the apparatus showing up would be engine five from the fifth District. That's in the Eldorado Park area. Engine 14 from the third district by the Colorado Lagoon. Engine 19 from the fifth District out on Clark, engine 22 from the third district. That's on Atherton and Palo Verde. Rescue eight from the third district. That's in Belmont. Sure. Arson one and arson six. So my question for Chief Terry is what was left on the east side of Long Beach? I think Engine four would have been did not respond to that. But basically, my point is it takes a lot of resources to respond to a structure fire. Okay. He's nodding for you. Okay, great. So I think that's just anecdotal, but it's an example of the need for a fire engine in my district. I have the only district without a fire engine. I'd like to thank Districts three and five for sending all that equipment out last night. And I would just like it included in the conversation when we're looking at restoring rescue 12. On another point, completely separate, but we are looking for alternative revenue sources. Thank you, Margaret, for speaking on the libraries. What I'd like to add to that conversation is that I don't think it's actually been decided, but we're looking to add Sandy hours to the libraries. I'm fortunate enough to have two libraries in my district, Los Altos and brew it, and neither one is is kind of in that conversation for adding sun hours. So I'd like to look at a revenue source and that is finds that our access to JetBlue airlines and it's a substantial number. Many of you may not know that those fine dollars go to the libraries. And for the past year, that is 12 months, the total is over half a million dollars. That's $538,200. So I would like the folks at the library just to consider those revenues for adding sun hours to Los Altos. And I say Los Altos because there's no other library in the city that is more impacted by the airport. These not only are they right in line with the approach, but they're at a point where the planes are just a few hundred feet above them. And so I think it's only fitting that they might be considered for sandy hours using these phones. Um, I think that's it. And to chair mongo, I'm not sure how that works out in a friendly I'd like to as I said, I'd like to piggyback on one of the others. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. So I'd like to just thank my colleagues for this great discussion. I think we have a lot of priorities, many of us. And I think we certainly have to look at these priorities holistically and what makes sense for us all. And for me, I would say, you know, stuff is an important issue. It's not just a. Prudent you know, we're talking about a prudent. Use of money, not money down the toilet. And I think we heard that earlier today, and I was very shocked when I heard that. And I would think that, you know, thousands of people missing out on their their livelihoods and making a means and a better life for themselves is very important. So I'll leave it at that. I hope that we can stick with keeping with that funding that we had allocated as of last week and sticking with that plan. Another big important thing, I think for my district, there are certainly parks and libraries that are very important perks that don't even have programing. At this point. So we don't even get anything. I mean, there's you know, I've spoken with our director. Marie, about this, and there's ways that we, you know, proactively go out and look for or when contractors proactively go out and look for park places. And, you know, a lot of the western side of the city, you know, sometimes there's not enough funding for parks. So I'd like us to look at five parks. These parks are as follows Craftsman Village. Which is between the first and second District. Peace Park between the first and sixth District. Drake Park. Chavez in Seaside. Park. All in the first District. I think those are very heavily used parks. Be safe. It are at a couple of those parks. But I think we. Have an amazing park staff that I know can come up with something if we just had the funding to be able to provide additional resources. And it also helps with public safety as well. I think it's very important that we activate these parks for kids at times, that they're out of school at times, that they are not in school in the summer and that they have something to do. And those are areas I feel that would be most impacted, impacted in a very positive way. And I believe the funding. The. The I'm sorry, the. The cost for each was. 26,000, I believe. For Saturday and Sunday too. To be able to. To fund them for 4 hours. So that's where I'm basing this off of. And then secondly, the main library I know that is in the second. District, but I've often spoken with. My colleague, Councilmember Pearce, about this. And we. Also. Have many residents who have asked about the main library and how very important it may be to extend hours. I know it's a very big library and I know adding Monday may be very costly. However, it would be great to. See additional hours at the main library, and I believe. That that is I don't know how many hours, but I've. Been I think we've been quoted about. $26,000 as well. To extend some hours. So I'd like to have us look in that direction. Also, I think it would. Be very fruitful for our. Residents to have additional hours to do homework. Tutoring, whatever we might need. So I think that gives us a total. Of about $156,000. Not asking for too much, but I think that these programs could certainly be used very positively in our districts, and I'm very excited to see homelessness move forward. I also. Think the municipal band being able to have more opportunities for growth and certainly Rescue 12 as well, I certainly believe in that and extending more public. Safety. Opportunities. So thank you very much. Next up is Vice Mayor Richardson. Thank you, Mayor Garcia, and thank the council for so many thoughtful responses. Just, you know, following tracking this, you know, I, I don't have a $100 million pool in North Long Beach. I don't have a historic rancho. I don't have a municipal band. District nine does not have two rescues. Well, we do have is a 93 year old community center, a Highland Park. We have a brand new fire station with absolutely no rescue in it. And frankly, we have a plan for both because North Long Beach residents deserve both. And it's unfair it's an unfair proposition to make residents of North Long Beach or Central or West choose whether they should have a community center that doesn't have asbestos or a paramedic rescue unit. That's an unfair proposition. And when you make the council have a hard choice between a rancho and a paramedic, you see where values truly are. So there's no need to imply that someone doesn't care about their district or want to restore services in their district. The truth is, you know, we fought this fight for a long time when, you know, when the city council tried and rolled the dice on R&D and that pot, that pilot was eliminated. It was the rescue in North Long Beach that that suffered. And that was eliminated when the council made that choice. So what I'm saying is I don't want to roll the dice with our residents. I frankly think this is a bad it's a bad plan, and I'm proposing a better plan. And if North Lawn Beach has to, you know, look at these revenue sources and look at all of it to restore something structurally, that's great. Now, in terms of the funding for the for the ranchos. So number one in this budget has a restoration of engine eight in Belmont Shore, which is, you know, great helps the system . It has restoration of the downtown downtown division, which I'm completely supportive of. And, you know, and no one said anything about, hey, your district is winning or your area town is is winning. And I put forth you know, I had a conversation with Councilmember Pryce today, and she said, What do you think about. Well, I said, I'd love to have your support on my plan. I think, you know, I've been working for a long time, you know, what do you think about this? I'll think about it. I'll take it under advisement. And today, a completely different plan caught me blindsided on something I've worked on for six years. So, frankly, Northland Beach deserves a better plan. I don't have to be, you know, be petty about a rancho or not. My motion stays the same, but I'm going to withdraw the portion about the ranchos simply because, you know, it was interesting to see how people react when they have to make the choice that we make in North Long Beach every day. Thanks. You mean the friendly stays the same, right? You're not. The. Yeah, the friendly is going to stay the same. I'm going to withdraw the element about I mean, we're going to we still want to look at measure 8ammam first responder fee and Measure A, but I'm not going to specifically call out those ranchos. I think the point has been made here, but those are the sources we should look at. And just to be clear, we're not saying that those measures are going to pass. But we shouldn't necessarily be ready and have a plan. If on November 8th, if the voters decide to implement those, the residents know exactly what they get because the plan is put forth and has been transparent. If it fails, then we know we're left up to measure a and first responder fee one way or the other. We're in a position to talk about and discuss restorations on January 1st first, which is essentially three months from now with a better picture. So it's just more responsible to do things that way. Thanks. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. So I want to state for the record that my comments in regards to the poor have been something long going and trying to decide how we prioritize equity in our city. That this is a conversation that I've had for several years and that I see the value of the pool. My daughter swims at the pool every week. It is a great asset to our community, but when we're talking about public safety, I have to put that into context. And so, you know, it's my obligation to prioritize funds for safety. I understand it's a lot of money. Right now, we have $58.8 million already allocated to the pool that can be used to help fundraise. And I would like to reach some beach safety priorities currently. So I would like to ask Mr. Modica, if you could share with us a list of shovel ready projects that would help improve public safety along our beaches right now. Well. So to just give us a sense of some of the projects that are that we are looking to have additional funding. There's a big list of projects all the way up and down the beach in you know, from we have a very large beach. We do have some needs in our marinas for sewage removal systems that it would be one of them. We also have beach maintenance needs up and down the beach in terms of our path. We have parking lots that need to be resurfaced and also could be brighter at 72nd place. And at Granada we have if I try to think of some others. We have other like deferred maintenance at the convention center in terms of lighting and safety, lighting and safety systems. There are a number of different projects up and down in the Tidelands that could use funding. And, you know, so hopefully that's somewhat of an illustrative list. If if the council really is interested in that, we could look at a more prioritized list of going back to our project needs. We wouldn't be prepared to do that today, but we could do that down the road. Thank you, Miss America. I went through the capital improvement list that you have there that include things like Marine patrol equipment, fire department, beach lighting, safety improvements and fire department, tidelands infrastructure, which are some things that I would like to see addressed quickly and and hopefully get us a path to do that. With the 1.7 or 2 million, I know there's a couple of numbers that are out there, as you know, and a quick turn around. And so I just wanted to make those last statements and definitely, you know, we look at our park programs and making sure that we don't have parks that are without park programing and fully supporting the extended library hours here at the main library. And I would also like to say that in addition to seeing those library hours extended, making sure that we have a quick turnaround on when our new main library is opened, that that library has full time hours, including Mondays and Sundays. And so that's not something that's urgent today, but want to make sure that we're working toward structurally supporting that. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I'm not sure if there's still a friendly out there regarding taking money away from the fool. But if there is, what I would request is that we would that certainly we can always take money away from the pool. So anytime you're mad at Councilwoman Price, you can always try to take money away from the pool. We don't have to do it tonight. The only thing I would ask is the aquatics community. I'm already getting emails from people who are watching this at home, so the aquatics community has a right to be here to be heard on that. So if you if you want to take money away from the pool, great. Let's go ahead and do that another time and not tonight so that they have an opportunity to be heard, because they've been working on this for a long time, too. I do want to publicly apologize to Councilwoman Gonzalez regarding my comment earlier at BMC regarding us flushing our money down the toilet, that that was a wrong comment. You know, I'm not human. I'm I mean, I am human. I'm not perfect. I'm only human. And there's been a few times when all of us have said things we regret. And certainly I'm there's I'm no exception. I am I am flawed in all the right ways and all the wrong ways. And if there's some and I have to say, I was very disappointed in how we voted last week, because I know what all these needs are. And I had come to the meeting last week and had articulated everything that I put on those two PowerPoint slides with one of my colleagues. And I was very, very upset and I just felt like was just very angry about how that vote went down. And so I apologize. That was absolutely the wrong use of the word. But I do believe it was a waste of taxpayer dollars simply because we don't even know how we're going to use the money and if we can use the money. And so, I mean, no, just and I've said repeatedly, of course, sometimes people forget that I said it last week and I said it earlier tonight. You know, we have this we have this thing in law under the evidence code. It's called evidence code 356 that says when you mention one part of a conversation, the other side has the right to come in and put it into context and talk about the totality. And I did refer to it as money going in the toilet, but I also, in the same breath said I am totally in favor of funding it at some level, just not at that $700,000 level. And and I hate when people repeat something that you said and don't repeat all of it because it takes it out of context. So I'm invoking evidence code 356 and saying I said more than just that. And what I said was I didn't think it was a bad idea. I just don't think we need to allocate 700,000 to it. So with that. You know, and the other thing, Councilman Richardson, you know, I. Sometimes I have conversations with colleagues and I feel like maybe we had completely different conversations. Oh, is it here? Yeah, he's here. I did talk to Councilman Richardson today, and I told him I had an idea for rescue. Honestly, if this isn't important to Councilman Richardson, I don't even know why I'm fighting this fight. I really thought this was important to him. And as a way of trying to reach out and extend that olive branch, I called him and I said, I'm willing to defer $150,000 of projects out of my budget, if you will. If you think that's a good idea, what do you think about that? Do you think that's something that we can do to to, you know, pull the money together? I shared the same thing with Council on Mango. I was just trying to find a way. And what I was trying to say to him is I'm willing to try to come up with the money, and I'm even willing to defer one of my own projects and take a hit for this for you. And he said, Well, I'm thinking about Measure M, but, you know, quite frankly, you can't accuse people of having half baked ideas when we're relying on a measure that hasn't even gone to the ballot yet. So I was just trying to bring that idea to fruition for him. So it's not that I didn't agree with his plan. I think if that county measure passes, yes, of course, that's an extra source of revenue for us that we can think about. But I was just trying to advance things because I thought it was important to him and I was I was trying to extend the olive branch and that was probably a mistake on my part because it didn't get accepted in the spirit that it was sent. Having said that, what I would like to do is from the $700,000 I'd like to make a friendly from the $700,000 that we approved last week, I would like to allocate $156,000 to the projects that Councilwoman Gonzalez wants, including the five parks and the extended hours at the main library. I'm completely supportive of the main library, extended hours. I would actually love to bring back the main library on a Sunday. I spoke with Glenda Williams today and Main provides a really unique opportunity for the city. The reason it's never considered as part of the Sunday library hours is because it's so large that the amount of money to staff it on a Sunday is really difficult to do. But they have a studio there with 3D printers that we don't have anywhere else. They have video editing software that we don't have in any other library. They have a Long Beach history collection, which is phenomenal. They have the Miller Room and Art Resource Center, which we don't have anywhere else. We have 70 public computers there, which we don't have. That's a lot of computers. We have a lot of wi fi, more access to wi fi. And we have an auditorium that houses 286 people there that we don't have anywhere else so I'm all for extending Sunday are the hours that main. I'd also like to take $65,000 from that $700,000 and allocate that to a. Fifth Sun Library. And that would be Los Altos to accommodate Councilman supervisor's request. I think he makes a very valid point. So for, you know. Right around that $200,000 range, we can accommodate Councilwoman Gonzalez's requests. The main library extended hours and open up another Sunday library hours. I would feel like that would be a really great accomplishment for us if we're able to do that tonight. And we'd still have 400,000, more than $400,000 for wage enforcement. And if we're able to do more, if we're able to do more with the state, then we can look at our budget and add to it next year . But this is our first year. We don't even know how we can spend that money yet. So why don't we start with 475 or whatever the case may be and we can always add to it next year if we find that there's a place for the city to actually enforce that money. I'm not against it. I just don't think 700,000 is reasonable. And then finally. I think that they're the I have a I, I appreciate the creativity that Councilwoman Mongo has put into the municipal band scheduling, but it was very difficult for even me to follow. So I just want to you know, I think we should stick with the six weeks and the and allow them to keep the schedule they've been doing. But again, I know they're here. They've been here through both meetings. I'd love to hear them talk about it if they if they would like to. Thank you. Next up is Councilman Andrews. Thank you, Mayor. Mm hmm. Just getting to that final hour. I just thought I would just sit here, just listen to all of this, because, again, this senior spokesman of the group, I just what I'll only think about. Are we really serious? Can't we just all get along? And it doesn't seem like that because we're talking about friendly motions. Friendly. Is it really friendly? You are not asking for very much because. I know my district is really there with me 100%. And the things that I. Hear in the budget and I want to commend, you know, Mrs. Mongeau and. Mrs. Price and also Mr. Austin. You guys have worked very hard, extremely hard with this budget situation. And we sit here and we're promising Young off a lot the money. We assume it is there. But I'm. Just sometimes I just wonder, do all of this that this bickering that we're going back and forth and see and I wish, you know, you're saying this is why is all of. That necessary? Because I think. At the end we will have a balanced budget and a lot of you may be happy, loud you. Want. But in the. End, we will have the I've been here for over ten years. We always balance the budget. But through this I don't think it's been this strenuous, you know, among the diocese, the way we've been going at it and the time of were taken. It's not all necessary. We'll get through this, you guys, so you can go home, go to sleep, do what you have to do this. I tell you, the budget. They will take care of this. I want to thank Mr. Super now. Well, then, you know, because I don't know what, if any, is the way the way they're talking. So possibly I'm glad we're going to be able to get mine, you know, especially especially for my part, you know, because the fact that that's what I need mostly in my district, you know, it's more time in the parks because that's what I use with my kids. I always told you I tired kid is a good kid. We're going to get money for that. You now is here really the my biggest thing it was for station 12 but I have a feeling that that's going to come to fruition also and I'm hoping that it will because the fact we had a terrible accident, you know, in my district and it had it I one of the you know, the other stations that it really caused maybe and I'm not saying that that was the biggest part of it. But still, we need all of our stations, you know, open. I just feel like we have to find money. But one of our basic things, you guys were doing all of this talking, but I hope we stay really, really compassionate about. That of homeless. You know, this is not a district problem. This is a national problem. And you guys take that under consideration. Open up your heart and soul to. Our homeless people out there. We're really trying to find a place to lay their heads in, food to eat. Thank you again. Yeah. Thank you, councilman. Next up is Councilmember Orengo. Thank you, Mayor and councilman councilmember. The Andrews spoken like a true statesman in regards to the level of discussion we're having here. But, you know, I have to say that if you say it only when I heard just a little while ago explanations of discussions that took place between two individuals and, you know, some some backtracking on it, that that gives it more credibility and should than it deserves. It was said, move on. Let's continue on. A lot of this a lot of the the discussion that we have right now is based on what happened at the EOC. And there were some things that were presented at the B or C that were surprising to a lot of people to me. And I said that earlier and, you know, while I was maybe under my breath saying some unsavory comments, I didn't make them public. You know, I kept on to myself and I have to and you know, I've been an elected official now 16 years. I was first elected in 2000. In 2000. I've gone through many budgets. This is my second one in city council. But I've been through many budgets, including at the national level. And there's always, always a disagreement with where money should go and everybody always has a priority where to spend it. I have one too. I didn't mention it earlier because I thought, well, I didn't think we were in another discussion at that point. Now I'm at a discussion where I want to bring up an issue that's important to me, too. But what I'm trying to say here is that we are going to disagree and we always are going to have that that that differences in opinion. But we and we should and let's maintain that the collegiality of who and what we are. We are nine different individuals representing nine different. Council districts. But we are one city. And we have to keep that in mind always, because no matter what happens in District nine, in District one, District eight and District seven, six, whatever it all, it affects all of us. And I don't think that Councilmember Richardson, you know, Ed, besides what might be said and it was said that that he might not care about his. Unit 12 paramedic unit. Unit 12 being activated. He does? Of course he does. We all do. But, you know, saying that, you know, maybe we should withdraw from this fight. It's not a fight. It's a discussion. It's a it's a perhaps. And in fact, we all agree on it. We just don't agree on how we get there. Because we all do care about public safety. We all do care about lowering response times and the increased response time said having a lack of units available at any given time in any given day affects all of us because we know how important it is, especially when we're talking about protecting life and property. So having said all that, I have one one an item that I would like to see increased or at least worked on, is that my office has been working with the Arts Council and most recently my, my, my office sponsored a open conversations forum with the Arts Council and the Long Beach Unified School District, and their efforts to improve arts education in the schools and the Arts Council has about $50,000 is about $50,000 short of reaching a goal to improve opportunities for poor people in the arts to do outreach into the school. So there's there's an effort to get some a challenge grant out there for the Arts Council and I would strongly support that. We, we, the City Council support that. And, and I would like to also add a friendly that we moved to provide $50,000, $50,000 challenge grant to the Arts Council and to make sure that in FY17 that we we start looking at getting permanently and institutionalizing funding. For the Arts Council Arts. The Arts bring brings a lot of not only tourism to Long Beach, but it enhances our city as a whole. Mural projects getting getting the schools to participate in more arts functions. So I think we we need to look at the arts as well and financing them and providing them with a challenge. Grant would add that to that. So if, if it were to be amenable to the maker of the motion, I would appreciate an additional funding for the Arts Council through a challenge. Grant. Member Your anger. I'm sorry. What Council? Councilmember Your anger when you say challenge? Grant It would be that they would need to fund new fundraising of an equal amount to draw down the grant. Exactly. Okay. So it wouldn't be traditional. It would be not the traditional fundraising, but new fundraising. That would be. Gosh, great. I, I will ask. There's no Mr. Eriksen. Oh, there she is. I've always loved Eriksen. Miss Erickson, I know this is one of the things we've been talking about for several weeks, and we were trying to fund and I know one of the questions was whether or not the SEPP funds would qualify. And in all the hectic ness today of Rescue 12, I actually didn't ask you that. At B or C, would you be able to let the committee know that so that I could move forward with your answer? Chair Councilwoman. Mongo. So the. A special advertising promotion funds could be used for the Arts Council challenge grant. Wonderful. And that would have been a part of my earlier motion had I gotten to discuss it at BRC. So absolutely that I know I usually wait to accept all the friendlies, but in this case, this was something that I was very passionate about from the beginning. I know that many of us were. So as long as they are fundraising new money and it does not necessarily need to be for any services, I know we talked about what their original thoughts were and there was some duplication. We want to make sure there's no duplication and then they would be able to draw it down through a challenge. Grant So I think that would be wonderful. Thank you for bringing that back up. Thank you. And then I think also what I was just talking to Councilwoman Mungo. Once we get through all the friendlies, Mr. City Attorney, we're just going need to confer with you for a minute to make sure we have them all down. And we understand they're very clear so we could do these appropriately. Councilmember Austin. Thank you. And I'll do my best to be very, very brief. This is my fifth budget and I can tell you the very, very first budget that I came here, a lot of very tough decisions were made. We were looking at cutting just about everything. We were about 17 million, 17 and a half million dollars in the hole. And so the challenge was just before this council, I think, are the problems that we have are good problems because we're trying to figure out how to spend money and deliver services for our residents. I wanted it to go back to the municipal band issue because I think our black chair, Councilmember Mungo, eloquently laid out her intentions on what it meant to go from 6 to 8 weeks. I just want to just clarify, make to make sure that are we actually getting more concerts in eight weeks for the same amount of counts, concerts in eight weeks? Can anybody from staff answer that? So, Mr. Mayor, a members of the council essentially and the what we were asked to do is come back with a memo to say, could we reorganize the current six week session into eight weeks and eliminate Tuesdays, which is a low attendance day? And so we send a memo today. So the eight week season would essentially be the same amount of concerts, I believe it's 24 as in the six week season. So it's the same amount of concerts when you issued the memo and came up with that. Were you able to confer in any way with those who were in operations with the municipal band? Yes, we did spend the last week taking a look at what those costs would be and also working with the municipal band to see, you know, because they there are costs on the city side for providing rentals and equipment. And also there's the operational impact of the band. So it is possible and there are some complications and some challenges in doing that. And we've outlined the outline those in the memo, and it's a cost of about $30,000 to do the additional equipment rentals and to have extended time for the band to be able to play for eight weeks. So effective from Councilmember Yar'adua's friendly amendment were to be accepted and we were to do $50,000 and challenge grants using the same money that we would use to fund a couple of more weeks of municipal band at the same level of concerts. We could actually do that. So it looks like we're moving in the right direction. Well, Mr. Mayor, I would love to have the prerogative to just ask the minister, the representative from the municipal band, to come and answer a couple of questions. Let's let's get through those that are cued up and then we can go ahead and go there. I think I think I want to. This is germane to the topic that I'm dealing with right now. Okay. Well, we did public comment. I'm going to hopefully clear some stuff up here, but the miss will be on next, so. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Austin, are you older? Okay. So I want to. I want to touch. There's a lot obviously being discussed right now, and I might have some comments on some of the other proposals that are out there. But I want to just focus on two right now that are important and then we'll hear where other colleagues are on some of the other stuff. So I want to talk a little bit about Rescue 12, and I also want to talk about the municipal band here in just a minute as well. The first thing I just want to say, obviously been hearing a lot and including the PSC meeting and I just want to make sure that I'm clear as well that there's there's no one on this council that has advocated more for the restoration of that rescue than Vice Mayor Rex Richardson. In fact, I think on a weekly basis, he comes into my office and asked me about the plan to restore Rescue 12. So I want to thank him for his advocacy for that. And I want to thank him for being the biggest cheerleader and supporter of getting that rescue back in service that there is because of that advocacy. I know that Vice Mayor Vice Mayor Richardson has been working directly with the chief, has been working directly with the rank and file membership, has been working with City Manager West on looking at ways in the next few months of putting a plan together to restore Rescue 12 in a way that is long term, that doesn't take away from the infrastructure projects that are in the Missouri plan, but that is something that could provide consistent service and that we're not worried about whether or not it's going to be eliminated in the near future. In fact, I know that the vice mayor and I are committed to ensuring, just like a year or two ago when I said we would get Engine eight restored and put back in the budget. I'm I'm certain that we are going to work as hard on the next priority, which is getting a rescue 12 restored. And in fact, we are a few months away, I believe, from putting putting together a plan that is going to work on Rescue 12. And so I just want to thank Vice Mayor Richardson for his consistent advocacy and and being its rescued 12th strongest supporter. And I'm confident that we're going to get that and that rescue restored into fire service over the course of these next few months in a way that is long term, that can't be that can be supported . And where we don't dip into infrastructure, as I've always said, with infrastructure, it gets more expensive every year. So we don't fix the cost of something. Today is is will be more expensive next year. And so I appreciate the discussion around that. I also want to thank the the the men and women of the rank and file of the fire department because they've been a part of these discussions. I know as early as this morning, Vice Mayor, you've been meeting with the. Membership. And and they're on board with with this with this plan and moving forward. And so I want to I want to thank you for that. I also just want to just to mention and again, there might be other things I want to jump in on a little bit later. But I also want to just quickly mention the municipal band. So I think that and I know this that that councilmember Mongo is a huge supporter of the band because I've been to concerts with you. She wants nothing but to maximize the concerts. I think at this time. I'm hopeful that we can stick to the original schedule that we that was proposed initially, add the additional $60,000 to create permanently that six week. And then I think we're all open and I know that the band folks are open to having some conversations in the future about how we can make some some changes if there's interest from from the council. But I would like to just ask Councilman Mongo, and I think that that she she wants what's in the best interests of the band as well. If we could stick to the original schedule on the band that was presented and and go from there. So that's where I will leave that suggestion to the council, the councilwoman. At this time, it looks like there are there are not additional comments. So what I'd like to do is just take a 1 to 2 minute, not really a recess, but I just need a confer with the city attorney and and the chairwoman of the BFC to ensure that we have all the friendlies down exactly as they were said before we move on to actually discussing. This may or may be helpful if if myself and Lia could read them before we take. This break. That would be great. There were so many friendlies and that would be great. Okay. So as I understand, the motion on the floor is as written by the council person from the fifth District to move on 1,191,000 and general fund one time funding, including 600,000 and therefore 16 general funds available 70,000 in FY17, general fund, temporary surplus and 521,000 from a release of reserves for litigation. Liabilities are no longer needed for the original purposes. These funds are appropriated as follows 280,000 in Health and Human Services for Homeless Rapid Response. 150,000 in the Public Works Department for tree stump removal. 96,000 in Parks Rec and Marine Department for expansion of the Be Safe program to four additional locations to be determined by the Parks and Rec Department. $65,000 in library services for the expansion of Sunday library hours to a fourth location to be determined by Parks and Rec or by the library services. Sorry. 130,000 and Health and Human Services Department for Public Health Professional and the Office of Equity. 220,000 in Financial Management Department for local investigation related to wage enforcement and 250,000 for capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine for the city council districts. Any exceptions must go to the city council. Motion for contingent appropriation of FAA 16 general funds surplus in an amount of 500,000, subject to funding availability for capital infrastructure, economic development or existing city programing to be divided by nine by the city council districts. Any exceptions to go to the City Council motion to use Proposition H beginning funds available to appropriate 250,000 each in the police department and fire department for homeless rapid response and in motion to use special advertising and promotion funds. Beginning funds available to appropriate $90,000 in the Parks and Rec and Marine for Municipal Band eight week alternative schedule. And emotion to use a FY17 savings entitlement to debt service to appropriate 500,000 in public works department for the Belmont Pool and Aquatic Center. Motion to make 80,000 of the 176,385 in the city. Managed proposed general fund strategic one time investment for be safe structural offset by a decrease in so in structural funding for the Language Access Program, which will instead be funded with one time in seven NY 17 and a motion to designate 500,000 of the 2.2 million for police overtime in the city manager's proposed general fund strategic one time investments to a Neighborhood Safe Streets Initiative to be directed at the discretion of the Chief of Police then. We had friendly amendments. First Friendly Amendment from CD nine was to report back in January on potential revenue based on the ballot measures for the purposes of adding back rescue 12. Then second a friendly by Council District two to reallocate $1.5 million from the Tidelands to Marine from the Tidelands Belmont Pool budget to Marine Safety. Three. Friendly amendment from CD8 to change the allocation for the municipal band to increase the funding by 60,000, not 90,000, and go from a eight week schedule to a six week schedule. Four friendly amendments from CDA four to review or approve reallocation of the fines from JetBlue and the airport two that go to the library to fund a Sunday programing at Los Alamitos. Also to look at a program or possibilities for funding. Fire Engine 17 for Long Beach Fire Department. Five. Friendly amendment from CD1 to allocate additional funds for park programing at five parks in the approximate amount of $160,000 and $26,000 for additional funding for hours at the main library. Friendly Amendment six from CD three to allocate $160,000 to fund CD one's friendly amendment for the park programing. And then the $65,000 to fund the additional hours that Los Altos library said for a friendly amendment. That money, as I understand it, would come from the 220,000 added for wage enforcement, leaving 475,000 the original wage enforcement funding. And then the seventh Friendly Amendment was by CD seven to add $50,000 challenge grant to be funded from the SRP, a special advertising and promotion fund. And then I believe that's all of the friendly members. It is a complex list. However, what I'm going to do I'm going to take just a minute. Mr. City Attorney, can you come over here with that list? And we're going to make sure that we're have the same thing here with the chair and we're not going to recess. But this is this might take us just a minute or two. Okay. Thank you. Okay. We're going to I think we have all the the motions. I'm going to ask. Mr. Eriksen, if you can just stay up here in case we get one of these. Incorrect. Okay. And then we're going to go and go through all the motions. Each. Each we have. We have the motion on the floor that we have. We're going to go to the friendlies. And then Councilman Mongo has, I think, an additional two at the end. Okay. Okay. Great. So I'm gonna turn this back off. I can have a council back. Okay. Councilman. Mango, you have the floor. Thank you. I have a list of friendlies that I'll be accepting. I will accept. So I'll read all the friendlies and then at the end I'll say which ones and accept it. And how's that? Item one is Council Member Richardson's plan of coming back in January with a review of the potential sources we discussed related to a plan to restore Rescue 12. It was to come up with a plan now, correct? To restore it by. Get restored in jail. Thank you. Yeah. You'd think I'd heard that from you so many times. I would have known it by heart by now. Item number two is the $1.5 million of shovel ready projects from Tidelands. Item three was a six week muni band. Item four is. $130,000 for. Parks programing in downtown and 24,000 for a additional evening hour on Thursdays at the main library and. It doesn't have a source. Am I able to add a source right now? Because I don't make okay. I'm just reading them. Next is the reallocation of wage enforcement funding to fund item four. Item six was a challenge grant for the arts out of South funds, but I'm sorry I added that, so I can't say that yet. A challenge grant for arts and then seven was the mayor's recommendation for the muni band at. Six. At 24 concerts and that they would work with parks and rec to. Figure out how to accommodate the community and it would likely be six weeks. Oh. In item five with wage theft, there was also 65 allocated for. Los Altos. Definitely not Los Alamitos. Los Altos Library. We are definitely not funding this library outside our city. Yes. Okay. So now for a point of order, what would you like me to do next? At some point, we're going to have to decide whether to accept the French. I'm going to do it right now. Okay. So I am going to accept Councilmember Richardson's friendly on Rescue 12. It's been a priority for a long time. We've been working on options for a long time. I'm really proud of him that he got this way. And I appreciate the work that he did. Item number four. I'm accepting the next item number four, which is 100. And stand by. I don't know, before which was 130,000 to park programing and 24,000 to. Thursday our I will accept it with a slight change that I would like to add an additional hundred and 34 central parks parks in the central part of the city . And I need to come up with a source, so I'm going to give you some revenue because I don't approve things that don't have a revenue source. I'm very consistent. If I can read this. Stand by. I'm going to fund that through contingent appropriations. And the reason I'm going to do that is because it's far enough away in the summer that we'll know by then if we have it, and I'm confident that we will. But we'll be sure by then. And if we don't have it at that time, I'd like it to come back to council to find another source. But I'm confident we will that. Okay, great. Next all except friendly number six, which is the arts. Challenge grant through set funds. And I'd like to make an additional amendment to my own motion. Related to the Los Altos. Los Altos. Library to add sun hours. But to study what's allowed for Sunday hours, as we know that there's some trickiness to those fines that Councilmember Superman mentioned. And so if the libraries could send back a two from four on that and let us know what's possible and try to work on making that a possibility, that would be great. Can I get a quick pause before we do anything else to confer with Miss Erickson to make sure that make any other mistakes. Or if we need decisions on the other friendlies that you have not discussed. I. Well, I don't plan to accept them, but I might make one more change to my own motion. Standby. Okay. I'm going to have two other suggestions to that. To the councilwoman. Were you ask if we got 134 Central Park program? I mean, they said that. Okay. Thanks. Well, I want to clear that up real quick before we move forward. So one thing is, is I just. 130 for the 134,000. Let me be clear, it's 130 for downtown park programs and an additional 134 Central Long Beach Park programs. Okay. So it's two separate 134 to the park programs. Just to be very clear. Plus the 24. Plus the addition of the extension for the library. Okay. I would also like to ask Councilwoman Mungo, I understand what's the conversation around around the pool? I think it's important that we that we fund the pool. I think it's important that we have the money to move forward on the pool. But I understand Councilman Pierce's asks and how important she believes the priority to move, particularly the lighting on on the on the beach as a priority. Since the last time we did the title and priority discussion, I know that Councilman Pierce was not here. I know that was done under Vice Mayor Lowenthal with Councilwoman Pryce. I'd like to ask Councilman Mongo, if we keep the pool funds in place, if we can have a dis a staff report for Mr. Modica and work with Councilman Pierce on re looking at that list so that we can set her priorities and that one around 1.5 million that is clearly in the area that she'd like to see done for this lighting project so that that can get moved up as soon as possible and we can get those projects done and so that she can be a part of that process. Can we do that? Yes. And just for clarification, we understood her motion to be public safety type projects rather than lighting projects. If that's something that we can look at, kind of public safety type project. I may have misunderstood. I thought it was I thought lighting was part of it, but maybe it wasn't. So part of the public safety was lighting. So part of it it's include I would include that into public safety. Okay, great. So then the motion would be for funding stays the same, but we do a review and we'd like to work to move this 1.5 up as as close as possible on the posture to meet Councilman Pierce's answer. And I would I would ask that when that comes back, that we ensure that where the funding source is coming from, I wouldn't want to take dollars out of other capital improvement projects that are already shovel ready. Absolutely. So that will rule review. So you get a chance to be part of that discussion. So, Councilman Mongo, can we be okay with that? I'm okay with that one. Okay. Thank you. And so just to clarify, the contingent preparation for the library hours and the two park distributions is to 84 and then to speak to. My agreement with Councilman Price on programing and setting aside funds. I know that we are probably expecting a two from four back from the city on wage enforcement. So I think that the specifics of what that is for, it might not be necessary at this time and so that it doesn't need to be spent and that we could set that aside until the two from four comes back on what those programs are and what that looks like. So if I understand that we would you would ask us to not spend the wage enforcement money until we have a chance to give the council an overview of what those moneys would be spent for. Did I get that correct? That's typically what you would do. Let the council know what you do before you spend it. So but you're asking us rather than included in the budget and it's just for the city manager to spend. You want us to come back with a report about how it would be spent? For the council to consider. It's in the budget and you will inform us of how it would be spent. Not necessarily in the same original. I know there's a lot of confusion last week and I just want to make sure that we have time to have a plan. Certainly we can certainly outline what that plan. Would be, but the money is as as is presented in the budget. Understood. All right. Okay. So I think that covers all the friendlies. We have a motion on the floor. I'm going to go to Councilmember Super, who's cued up and then we're going to go to a vote. And just to clarify, the municipal band proposal is for six weeks. And the $60,000 additional. That's what that was the. And to discuss with the community. Correct. 24 shows to discuss with the community. What we're doing that we're doing, the six weeks. They're going to discuss that with the community. But I think we need clarification on the budget. Is it 60,000 for the current six weeks and working on what we would then look for the next season or is it 90,000 for the eight weeks and do it now? So. I hear strongly from the community that they want the municipal band. And I have serious fears that when we did not fund the amount last year and when there are several council districts that don't have concerts and that there are still concerts happening on Tuesdays that have low attendance, that that is not in the best interest of the community or the band. And so I have tried to communicate this. I have worked hard. And I would like to set aside the 90 and a affirmed 24 concerts and leave it to the Parks and Rec directors discretion to work with the band to make sure that while the band is a priority, we as a council, our number one priority is the community. And we need to work together to make sure we find something that works for everyone. And I think that that is what makes the most sense. If there's underutilization of those funds, maybe it could go to help the lack of the hole that was left in the prior year. But there is 90 available from state funds today that we can put over to that cause, if that makes sense. Let me go to concern for supernova first. Okay. I think this is a friendly on the library finds for chair mongo. Okay. On the library finds. In place of a two from four from Glenda Williams. I would recommend first of all, there are a couple of entities here. The Long Beach Public Library Foundation actually receives the funds. Those are then passed on to the libraries. What I would ask is that we get a two from four from the city attorney's office on what the parameters are of this consent decree and where the monies can be spent. So we can certainly do that. Okay. So. So if Councilmember Mongo is agreeable to that, we're going to have the two from four be from the city attorney's office. He's agreed to that on the consent decree violations. Absolutely. Okay. The second piece is and I'll say it one more time, I, I totally support studying funding for Rescue 12. I would just like to add Engine 17 on to that study. Station 17 is unique in that it's its area abuts six different fire stations. So when you don't have 17 some place centrally, potentially six different fire stations are covering that area. I think it's well worth studying. And if we're going to study Rescue 12, I think Rescue 17 should come next in line and should be a part of that study. Councilmember maybe wasn't I wasn't clear, but it was basically the chief's order. So look at the revenue sources go as far as you can go on restoration. So so I would you know, that's the intent. So call out 17 as well. Okay. Thank you. So so that's agreeable to Councilmember Richardson, so. Absolutely. I mean, it's not just fires fire, it's PD. There's been conversation about gaming. And although you just have to talk with the Chiefs, they've both established priorities. The idea is a plan to get us to more restoration, a structural plan. So that could be, you know, rescue. Well, the chief stated tonight what his order is. So that doesn't change. The path to 17 is through rescue 12. And then on PD, you just have to talk with the chief as he was. Priorities are okay. I'm aware of his priorities. I just wanted us to mention that in in our in our amendment here. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you. I want to say that I want to thank Chair Mungo and the entire council. I think we've had a really great spirited discussion tonight where we're all advocating for different priorities to the city. And I appreciate the collegiality and the respect and make a commitment that I will always try to to honor those principles. I will say that I'm a little bit confused in regards to are we funding the Sunday Los Altos library hours? And then we're also going to look at the additional revenue source or are we not funding the Sunday Los Altos library hours? Because I really would like to try to fund the Sunday library hours. I know, I know. But I would ask for that too. I just don't have any more sources of funding. I've been tapped dry, I think Leah told me on, like, our fourth meeting. Stop turning me upside down and shaking me so. Money falls out of my pockets now. I just want to clarify or. I wish I did. I mean, I want to fund Los Altos. I would not if I wanted to fund the main library. It's just so expensive and there's just so much need in our community for things that I, I, I don't have a place for that. Leah Yeah, a point of clarification. So currently the motions do not have funding for a Sunday library, but I would like to point out that we have indicated that the Library Department can't continue to sustain and over time model for additional branches. They're really they're really strained with the three libraries they currently have. And they did identify a fourth library was funded that they could manage that. So we will study the fines issue and will study, you know, funding Los Altos. But I just I wanted to caution that it might not be sustainable or feasible to do an overtime model. So the cost may may be different than the $65,000. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Okay. With that, again, I want to thank everybody. I think it was a successful night, even though it was painful at times. But it was good. Thank you. Okay. And then the mayor and I have discussed some options for the Muni band. I am very, very positive about them raising this money. And we have another fundraising option that might help fill that gap. So what I'm open to doing is another year of week, six or six weeks with Tuesdays. But if we are not able to correct the issues related to Tuesdays and the lack of attendance and lack of funding, we are going to have to have a very serious conversation next year because. The community deserves the band. And. And the only way that's possible is if we meet the fundraising goals. And you have to know I love, love the Muni band and I love a lot of things in life that I sacrifice personally because I never want to be in debt and I never want to own anyone. And where we are today is where the muni band is 30,000 behind. And that hurts my heart. I know that I've talked to Laura about a fundraiser on the 22nd that I want to help with or I'm sorry, in November that I want help with. I want you guys to get the money. And I really feel that if you're collecting a lot of money on Thursdays and Fridays, we need to look at where that is and where that gets the support. I know Laura brought up an idea of moving Wednesday through Saturday. There's lots of options. I just want to come up with options that get us to a point where we're getting the collections that we need. Because what we don't need is to come back every year begging for money. And I say this to anyone who comes to me for one time, if you talk to the Arts Council, they'll hear the same thing that I've said to you and to everyone else. I want to help us get to a place where we're doing fundraisers that have high ROIC. I have the partnership motion that Mary is working on, and those are all options. But I'm going to go with the six weeks. And if you come up with a plan to move to six weeks, it's more feasible in terms of fundraising. That'd be great. And if not, please, please work with us on what those things are, because that's a budget share. I can't recommend a program that's in the red every year. I can't and I don't want to be in this position again next year. So let's more work more closely together. So, yes, Mayor, I'll accept your friendly. Okay, thank you. And I'm going to and I'm we're going to work together and and figure that last piece out. Thank you, Councilwoman. So from there, we have the motion on the floor. So, members, we have the budget in front of you. Members is going to cast their votes. Motion carries. Thank you. We have a couple more budget votes and they're going to take a recess before the rest of the council meeting. So let's finish up the last few votes which are administrative here. Okay. Next vote.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute any and all necessary documents to amend Contract No. 35546 with Curative, Inc., of Menlo Park, CA, for COVID-19 testing kits and lab services, to increase the contract amount by $690,000, pursuant to Chapters 2.69 and 2.85 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (LBMC), and to include a contingency in the amount of $3,475,000, for a revised total contract amount not to exceed $6,507,813; and Increase appropriations in the amount of $4,165,000 in the Health Fund Group in the Health and Human Services Department. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_07142020_20-0673

Motion carries. Okay. My final item tonight is new business item number 30. Report from Health and Human Services recommendation to execute all necessary documents to amend contract with curative for COVID 19 testing kits and lab services to increase the contract amount by 690,000. Citywide version site comparison there has. Both the second. Duke. We have just a really quick staff report on this. Yes. So we do purchasing for our testing kits. That's what this is. We did an emergency purchase under the emergency authority, granted the city manager and we're bringing this to you for ratification. We are making additional changes to our testing. We know a lot of people are coming to our testing sites, will be announcing that later this week and will be testing about 13 to 1400 people every single day. And this this money will help us do that. And if you have any specific questions, Kelly might still be up and awake on the call. So we think she's there. We appreciate this. This is a very I wanted a quick staff report. Obviously, this is very important for the city and the people are lined up trying to get called the test. So most consecutive, you know, is there any public comment on. There's no public comment on this item. Let's go to a vote. District one. District two. I. District three i. District four. I. District five. I. District seven. Hi. District eight. I. District nine. I yield my time. The motion carries. A. Okay. So that that concludes our agenda. I'd like to go into new business. Any new business? If you will indulge me for a second. I would like to just give some closing remarks. Recommended by the mayor. I just want everybody to know that July 26 marks the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act

AN ORDINANCE granting BSOP 1, LLC, permission to construct, maintain, and operate a private parking area on East Howe Street, east of Fairview Avenue East, for a 15-year term, renewable for one successive 15-year term; specifying the conditions under which this permit is granted; and providing for the acceptance of the permit and conditions.

SeattleCityCouncil_04122022_CB 120281

A report of the Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee agenda item to cancel the 120281 an ordinance granting Vsop one LLC permission to construct, maintain and operate a private parking area. The committee recommends. The bill pass. Thank you. As as chair of that committee, the Transportation Public Utilities Committee, I'll go ahead and provide a brief report on this item. Colleagues, this project is at the second and final stage for approving a 15 year term permit to enable a public plaza, improved walkway and related parking improvements in the Eastlake neighborhood and District four. The proposal enhances the use of space for the public and helps even helps protect a large conifer tree. This committee or the committee? Its transportation? Public utilities. Adopted previously Resolution 31988, granting conceptual approval for this project and today's Council 120281 is essentially recognizing that state and central staff have confirmed the applicant has met and will meet the public benefit and other conditions we adopted a year ago and we received a briefing on this at our previous committee meetings. And I really want to recognize the collaboration among our Department of Transportation, the East community, and the private property owners for moving forward and making these improvements that everyone will be able to enjoy. Our committee unanimously recommended approval of this bill and we ask for your vote today. Are there any comments? Great. Will the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill? Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Councilmember Morales. Yes, Councilmember Mosquera. I. Councilmember Salon? Yes. Councilmember Herbold. Yes. Council President Pro Tem Peterson. Yes. Six in favor. Nine opposed. The bill passes and the chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Will the clerk please read item three into the record? Agenda Item three Council Bill 120282 An ordinance vacating a portion of the alley and block six A.A. Denny Second Edition. The committee recommends the bill pass.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ CM14-020 for architectural and engineering services for the Belmont Plaza Pool Facility Rebuild / Revitalization Project; award the contract to Harley Ellis Devereaux Corporation, of Los Angeles, California (not a MBE, WBE, SBE or Local), in the amount of $7,144,301, plus a 10% contingency of $714,430, for a total amount not to exceed amount of $7,858,731; authorize City Manager or designee to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any amendments thereto; and Increase appropriations in the Tidelands Operation Fund (TF401) in the City Manager Department (CM) by $7,858,731. (District 3)

LongBeachCC_03042014_14-0170

Yes, 15 has been been withdrawn. Item 16, luxury item 16. This communication with the Office of the City Manager and the Parks and Recreation Marine Department with a recommendation to adopt specifications for architectural and engineering services for the Belmont Plaza Pool Facility. Yes, Mayor. Members of the Council tonight we are here to award the contract for architectural services to design the new Belmont Pool. As you recall, in January 13, we had to close the Belmont Pool due to seismic conditions. In February, the council reviewed the options and alternatives and approved the conceptual design for the new pool and asking that we further evaluate the potential for a separate diving well within the indoor pool, and also the feasibility of a movable floor for the indoor pool, which this contract will in fact, in, in fact, look at those two particular issues. In December, we did open the temporary pool, which is up and running and a big success. And now our efforts are directed towards the permanent pool and the design of that permanent pool. So in December, we issued an RFQ and 21 firms submitted proposals. A team consisting of the director of Parks Rec and Marine Public Works, Development Services, City Manager's Office, and our project manager, Dino D'amelio from Anderson PENNER all reviewed the proposals and narrowed it down to five firms that we then interviewed, and the decision was unanimous to select Harlee Ellis Devereaux corporations with Hastings and Cervera. They are an excellent team, extensive experience and we believe will design a facility that we all can be proud of. Given the significance of this particular project and also the award of this contract. We'd like the the firm to give the council a brief presentation on their experience and background. And so I'm going to hand it over. The team would tonight would consist of Peter Devereaux, Brant Miller, Eric Katcher, Paul Graves and Michael Rotondi. So with that, I'm going to hand it over to our team to do a brief presentation and then we'll hand it back to staff. Mr. Mayor and City Council, thank you very much for having us here today to talk about our qualifications. For the Belmont Pool Project. With me next to me is Eric Kolker with Hastings and Cervera. Paul Graves with. Councilman Hunsaker. And Michael Rotondi with Photo Architects. I do apologize. Peter Devereaux was stuck. In traffic and couldn't make it this evening. Once again, my name is Brant Miller. I'm with the architecture firm Harley Ellis Devereaux. We're very excited about this project. A little bit about our firm. We just recently celebrated a 100 year anniversary, which we're very proud of. We are a national firm with over 300 individuals of architects and engineers in offices in. Los Angeles, San. Francisco, San Diego, Detroit and Chicago. Really focused on a variety of projects. And particularly. With this team put together with expertize. And in aquatic centers. We're going to take the next 5 minutes or so and talk about our qualifications, partly because we're running late and want to run after that U.S. group and get my business card to them. That was a fantastic presentation that they did. They provided everybody real quickly. The team organization, I. Won't go into the detail. The expertize that was put together on this project really was put together based on the requirements of the project itself, with the idea of a competition pool, with the idea of a recreation pool. With the iconic. Nature of the project. We put together a group of consultants and partners on this team to really meet those requirements for the city. The expertize that this team has together in planning and constructed pool and aquatic facilities ranging from recreational and. Competition and Olympic venues over the past 25 years has been over a thousand facilities. And so, once. Again, the qualifications of this team. Were short with the thousand, apparently more than that, but really bringing together a team with what we think is the right qualifications for for the city of Long Beach. So we've got about 12 slides to talk about. Some of our experiences. And then we'll we'll end with. Michael Rotunda. And some thoughts about the site and some of. Opportunities for the project to roll quickly. This is Occidental. College. This is in a planning phase right now in fundraising. A 36 meter pool. Really focus on. Competition for the university itself. Oaks Christian High School. We developed Olympic sized pool. It's 50 meter by 25 meter. Really focused more on competition for that particular venue. This particular project on it, would it actually in Michigan, this was a combination of within a single facility, both. Recreational and. Competition facility and accommodations. This is our project at Georgia Tech. This was built. For the 1996 Olympics, if you recall, in Atlanta. And it is a one of the fastest pools in the nation, the holder of many a world record and American records. From the competition standpoint. It's also referred to as a dotted ice. So it is a 50 meter by 25 yard pool with a separate diving well. One of our other competitions sites is a facility that's hosted National Conference Grand Prix swimming event since its opening. It's Michael Phelps most favorite pool. He swam and is leading into his record Olympic gold medal run in the 2008 Olympics. It's also adopted a configuration. And in the case of the University of Missouri, from the standpoint of recreation use, it gets tremendous community, regional and then of course, student use. City of St. Peter's. This is a municipal facility that was built for the Olympic Festival and has hosted Olympic trials for swimming and diving. This is a 50 meter pool with a moveable bottom so that it has a full depth for competition but provides great opportunities for recreation because and that's shallow in that that moveable bottom can go from zero down to seven feet. That's also an example of a diving tower that's part of the main pool, and it has some recreation. You can see at the very end of this, it has some slides and some other fun recreation components in the building as well. We also wanted to share with you some of our outdoor facilities. This is a municipal facility, outdoor ranging from zero entry to of course, you can see the slides, vortexes, lazy rivers, a whole component of opportunities for recreation use, including also lap swimming and some competition events as well. The University of Nevada. This is in the this is one of their lap leisure component facilities. And then in the adjacent building, there's actually a 50 meter Olympic sized pool as well. You can see the spa next to the windows really does provide some of that indoor outdoor experience. Denison University is an interesting project because it does have the Olympic 50 meter pool. You can see in the far of the photo and then in the near, as opposed to placing the separate diving. Well, at the end of the 50 meter pool, it's located towards the towards the middle and actually creates like a tier an L-shaped facility. So it's just a different configuration. This Integra Fitness Center is really just an example of the combination of both leisure components and recreation. With lap swimming in the outdoor environment. Southeast Missouri University is really trying to illustrate some of the recreation components that we've worked on on some facilities. Not to say this is what will be here, but it's definitely something that we wanted to share as vast experience, everything from the Olympic venues to university climbing walls in a pool. Again, with Arnold Community Recreation Center, just again, help bringing aquatics into a community is vital for the success of an overall project. Blue Water YMCA. Again, just another example of the indoor aquatic facilities. Good evening. I'm Michael Rotondi. I'm an architect and an educator. So I come at projects in a in a in a with a broad overview of how it can serve the community in many, many ways, as well as with a precision of working with my friends here to make a facility that's quite extraordinary, which in the brief it talks about iconic architecture. In my experience, both direct and indirect, through my studies of architecture for many years, an iconic architecture comes from an iconic site. This is an extraordinary site. It's a there are sites. That have ocean meeting city, but there aren't too many sites that are on an exceptional bay in a wonderful city like Long Beach that has the pool mediating where land meets water and where city meets land and water. The the fact that it's a it's an in-between location for a pool makes it a. Very exceptional creative challenge, which is makes the project all the more fun. The way we're beginning to talk about it beyond preceding function is how to configure the light, how. To configure the space and the water in order to configure the communal life. And most of all, the charge that we have is to is to take the vision of the city as expressed through the council, to make a place that is going to attract people from all over the world. Thank you. So we'd like to thank the mayor and the city council for their time. So Mayor councilmembers, that concludes our report of this. We're asking that you approve the staff recommendation to award the contract for this team. Mr. O'DONNELL. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the presentation. You seem well-qualified to move this project forward, and I am happy tonight that we are moving this project forward. Quick question for city staff. You've heard me say several times throughout this process that we should do everything we can to incentivize the early construction, the expedited construction of this project. Are those concepts or is that concept built into this contract rewarding tonight? Yes, we have actually a very aggressive design, a time frame for this. And then what we will be doing when we go out to bid is for the contractor. We're going to do a new methodology for selecting that contractor, something we've never done before to ensure a we have a quality contractor and B, that they're going to deliver this project in a more expeditious way. Great. Are there financial incentives? We're exploring that possibility at this time. But there aren't in tonight the contract or awarding tonight. There is not no what. Instead, in essence, what we did was establish a very aggressive timeframe. And in order to accomplish that, we are paying the price, you might say, in order to ensure that we get the plans and all the permitting and everything in place within our timeframe. So what's the timeline are we looking at? Why don't you break it down? There's the timeline for the design. Yes, there's actually, as you know, we're we've got to prepare conceptual plans and we're going to likely have those done in May, June. Then we will meet with stakeholders to discuss some of the outstanding issues, will come to the city council to make sure we're going in the right direction. And then, of course, we need to prepare the entitlement applications, complete our environmental review, go to the Coastal Commission, go to the Planning Commission, and then ultimately return back to the council so that we anticipate, in essence, doing all of that. I've got the schedule here so that we would likely be going to the Planning Commission in September to get the reviews and approvals. And then shortly after that, we're moving into a design and construction drawings. As you know, our timeframe for getting a pool completed is within about two and a half years. So that's the timeframe that we're looking at to get this project done and approved. Great. Well, I would have liked to have seen some financial incentives built into this, because to me, that's the hammer on getting this done. And it can be done. You know, it's it's not unique necessarily. It is probably in the public sector. But again, it's happened in the public sector before. Is there anything we can do to tighten tighten down the timeline between now and September? We've talked about it's going to take four months to drop conceptual write in conceptual. So just that they're just there and they're not any design necessarily any structural design. They're just you know, they we need to explore the conditions of the site. There's a lot of background information that needs to be conducted in order for us to determine the kind of building that we can design and the configurations that that site can support. So there's a lot of information that needs to be done as background before we can actually start designing it. So we I can assure you that we have a very aggressive design schedule, that the construction component is where we're going to need to explore the possibilities of incentives, because that's where the area and projects typically bogged down is in that construction phase. Correct. Okay. Listen, if there's something we need to do to move this forward a little quicker, the design component, please come back to council and ask us to do it. And I hope that the firm will communicate with you. If there's something we need to do to move this along, they too will share it. And when we get to the construction phase, maybe they have some ideas. Maybe we can look at some things some other entities have done to expedite the construction. But I think we need to do all we can to move this forward and move it forward rapidly and again end up with the best possible product. I know there's a balance there, so thank you. They keep concern for over Dylan. I have a couple of questions for the design team. Well, I think, as you already know, the council is looking for a world class, iconic facility. So I'm glad you comment on that in your presentation. We're looking for a facility that supports competitive swimming, it supports water polo, it supports community recreational swimming, and it supports an indoor diving component as well. Yeah, the assistant city manager talked about perhaps some conceptual and meeting with these stakeholders in May, June. And I can tell you, as I mentioned, those different things that we have some very eager, interested and active stakeholders. And I guess what I'd like to know is why, from a conceptual perspective, you wouldn't meet with those stakeholders early on in March. Right. Let's get going. Listen to at least what they have to say, what their aspirations and hopes and goals are for the project. And then, you know, a month later, you know, 30 days in April, we to come back and say, hey, based on what you've heard and we've heard from city staff, we've listened to the council, this is kind of where we're headed and make sure that we have a process that's very engaging as we go through this. Because when I hear that it's going to be, you know, May or June before me with stakeholders to talk about a conceptual design. And, you know, I share Councilman O'Donnell's concern about it dragging on. So could you speak to how quickly you could have some of those meetings? Yeah, I think that we. Can work with the city schedule. And obviously work with staff on developing any type of. Expedited schedule in that process and. Including. The community. In that process along the way. And we can work with staff to develop that schedule. Okay. So but I mean, specifically, do you see, you know, within the next month meeting with the four or five or six stakeholders representing some of those different groups and, you know, hearing at least what their aspirations are for the pool. I think that is absolutely an opportunity for that. Okay. And then how much time do you need from the time you hear input from from staff, from council, from stakeholders to say, okay, I've listened to you. Now here's kind of our first draft of what we think this facility is going to look like potentially. I think the current schedule has us in a 4 to 6 weeks period where we're. Evaluating the multiple options. That are on the table. And as you know, it isn't just. The single option. There's multiple configurations that the current design or the current concept has provided and what the City Council has approved for us to evaluate. So when you're talking about the multiple options, you're referring to the ten meter indoor dove. Well, as well as the moveable floor. That is correct. Okay. And I notice that in a couple of the pictures you had, you talked about some diving components and where those indoor ten meter dove facilities. Okay. And you're so your experience is at least in these other facilities, you were able to accommodate that. Yes. I mean, and that would be typical of one of the resources that are provided. In this type of facility. Great. And I think you also mentioned there was at least one facility you designed that did have the moveable floor. Is that correct? I mentioned one, actually. There were a couple examples you can't tell. From the photographs. And how is your experience with that? Fairly positive. I mean, we seen the council. We think that would be a great feature of the Pools app. In your experience as well? Yes, it takes. A body of water that can be between seven and nine feet deep all the way across and makes it usable for any age group. Because of the depth you can change literally. The platforms can come out of the water, so it goes from zero inches down to all the way down to the bottom. So it gives you tremendous flexibility, which you normally don't get in just. A square body of deep. Water. And that was our impression as well as as we listened to the needs of a different group and trying to determine how to accommodate as many as possible, if not all the mobile field floor seem to be an ideal capability to try and meet that variety of needs. Okay. And one of the other things is we've, as you know, we've selected Murtha and has done the temporary outdoor pool. So we've kind of picked that technology. How has your experience as a design team working with Murtha? Are you knowledgeable of used in the past? Do you see it continuing to play a role? So we've worked on many projects with Murtha, actually on similar renovations where we've taken existing purchased facilities or existing purchased pools and put them in new facilities. We're working on the Omaha facility right now, which utilized the 2008 and two and then 2012 Olympic swimming trial facilities. And that was a Murtha pool that we're now repurposing and utilizing. So as a firm, we've done that quite a few times. So I'm unclear. So are you experienced with acquiring the current technology design and using it in new facilities? And is that a vendor that you typically or commonly or occasionally work with? We've worked on numerous facilities and projects with Murtha. We're very familiar with the technology. And then utilizing and repurposing is something that we've done in the past and are currently working on now. But I guess when you talk about repurpose repurpose purposes, and that's different than your design as you do a designer of facilities. So, you know, I think Murtha's the best technology. I mean, you use it some. Times have not always on occasion. I'm just trying to. Sure. I understand. Your. We use Martha in certain applications where it. Murtha is a movable and portable pre-engineered pool. The other alternative is a concrete structure. We've done an approach both the same way. They both have particular benefits, pros and cons with the current Murtha pool that's sitting in the parking lot now, that is a temporary pool put up utilizing the pre-engineered structure. Putting that back in the ground is something that we've done in the past and for this application would work quite well. So because that's our expectation, right? And this is not to do we expect that to be disassembled, protect some of material cost and then put it in front of the facility. Absolutely. Yeah. Okay. Great. Well, thank you very much and look forward to work with you. And thanks for joining us. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Neal. Don't leave, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. Appreciate the rendering. Your work looks very impressive, but I do have a question in regards to do you plan over the life of the contract to utilize any. Local contractors and. Even possibly any minority businesses? Currently we have submitted. Our consultants for the team, which I believe does have a certain level of local presence. On that. Obviously, when this goes to bid, I think that on the construction side, we have great opportunity to look for integrating those type of services into a general contractor. Thank you. Thank you. We were also with you there. Thank you very much. Not seeing no other comment here. Any public comment? Just before we made the motion. Do you want to do it now? Move the staff recommendation. So we have a motion to move the staff recommendation. And there's a second. I will take public comment. I am Francis MLA from Harrison. I reside in District one. Vice Mayor Garcia and sitting council member said in the city, what a phenomenal presentation. I was looking at the variety of the polls. It is quite impressive. What's so awesome about the city of Long Beach is they do have an ADA compliance officer and I was looking at this because soon there will be the Paralympics and I don't know if Long Beach has a vision or in the future. I have an opportunity of maybe having the Paralympics at the Belmont pull. So I wanted to bring it to you. You may not be able to address this, but there are persons that use the pool for recreational purposes that are adults and children. They also use of therapy. But amazingly, those persons that train, you know, for the Paralympics. So I don't know if there's different types of things that will be needed for the pool or its built in universal design. But I just wanted to give it to you so that that door is open looked at, and so that opportunity will be there for all people. Thank you very. Much. Thank you. Next speaker. Mr. Vice Mayor. Members of the Council. Mayor Foster. My name is Lucy Johnson. I live in the fifth district. And this week you were correct. I am pleased with the. The choice. Thank you very much. I am pleased with the the selection of the architectural and engineering design team, particularly after I did learn that Councilman Hunsicker was part of that and once again involved as they were five years ago. And what we were trying to do this. Back then. Oh, excuse me. I come from the city staff and project manager Dino Amelia for completing their evaluation of these 21 separate proposals in a short period of time. It was encouraging to see that the original timeline is stated in the request for Call of Qualifications was met. Also very much appreciated was the timely posting of the list of proposers and the posting last week of the staff evaluation report on those 21 proposals. I do, however, have a couple of remaining concerns that were reinforced when reading the item before you tonight for approval. I think Dr. Councilmember Geelong has addressed this to some extent or to a great extent, but specifically that language says as required in the February 12th, 2013, council approval. The scope includes comprehensive design services for state of the art, recreational and competitive indoor and outdoor pool and an natatorium facility and provides for the study and feasibility determination of a separate indoor diving well and adjustable pool for system. Debbie McCormick addressed the diving mill issue in just a moment, but we all know that both are feasible, and I think your design team has already talked about that in terms of especially the some of the slides they had that showed a separate diving well, numerous slides and also the removable fourth floor. So the question for the council tonight is whether or not you will actually direct staff and the project managers and design team to incorporate those both into the final design. I thank you all for your support of this important project. The entire aquatics community in the United States is anxiously awaiting the completion of this new world class Belmont facility. As a side note. We have a Facebook page Rebuild Belmont. Plaza Olympic Pool. As of today, we have 1113 likes on that page. And the latest post, which was regarding an article on Swimswam Wwe.com, which is based out of Austin, Texas, about the selection of Harley Ellis Devereaux that you're looking at tonight, have been asked to approve tonight that post, one post alone had 809 people looking at it as of today. So I hope you can appreciate that this is much looked at not just here locally in Long Beach, but around the country and around the world as well. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening. My name is Patrick Kelly. I'm with Teamsters Local 952 and Teamsters Joint Council 42. I want to thank all of you for your public service and thank the public for being here on Mardi Gras. It shows a lot of dedication and I hope you all have a good Mardi Gras as you go forward. My question on this project is, and I think that it is, but I want to make sure that it's going to be done under prevailing wages. And if somebody could answer that and also we would ask that you consider a project labor agreement with local hire that will help the building trades people that are out of work . Some of the crafts have 40 or 50% unemployment. And as you know, there's a tremendous amount of unemployment with young people and other people in the neighborhoods here in Long Beach. So thank you again for all of your work and happy Mardi Gras. I got some pushback because requested a quick comment from staff on that. Yes. Again, this is just the design phase that we're talking about. But for the construction phase, yes, it would be prevailing wage. And we will present to the council the option of using apply for this project also. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, I'm Debbie McCormick. I think you met me last year and one other time during the year. I wanted to thank you because the last time I was here, it was a wonderful day. You all made a wonderful decision in voting for this new pool. We really fight for it. I think we helped educate the city about what the needs are in the aquatic community. You heard from the greatest divers in the world, the greatest coaches in the world. And I got a letter from our high performance director of U.S. Diving emphasizing why it's important to have a separate indoor diving. Well, with the platforms, of course. A lot of that has to do with the temperature of the water. A lot of that has to do with having simultaneous events going on at the same time and not being in anybody's way. So that really is really important. The depth of the pool is already there on. I know you're going to have the support of UC Davis. I'm very excited to work with this new team and and express some of my ideas. I think I have a lot of good ideas for the city and the diving world is cheering. Everybody is really paying attention to what's happening. They're all going to be here. I can't wait to help put on a really big show for you for the grand opening. I was at the grand opening of the outdoor pool. It was so exciting to see so many happy people smiling faces. And I can't wait until it's our turn for diving. And I just think it's just all wonderful. I want to thank Gary DeLong and Patrick O'Donnell for doing so much on our behalf. And I just wanted to remind you that you're all invited to a little diving show at the Martin Luther King Pool April 9th. I've invited the city council and the aquatic capital of America, which I now on the board of, and they support a lot of my ideas. We want to show you kind of how the little kids start. And I also want to thank you for supporting us in changing electricity from 122 to 20 so that we could put in a bubble machine. We want to invite you to all put on your Speedos, jump in the bubble. And I just think I really appreciate your support and I'm so excited about this and I want to help as much as I can. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. We especially want to see Gary in those videos. I think you can see him on a screen on Anaheim. Right. Good evening, counsel. My name is Michael Kirkpatrick. I'm a member of the third district and a swimmer at Belmont Plaza. I'm thrilled to see this project moving forward. The one thing I'd like to make sure I get across is that this project should not be rushed, as was evident. This is going to be an icon for Long Beach and I'm thrilled that it's going to go fast. I want to be in that water as soon as I can. And you've got a lot of people in the community who are really interested, as Judy mentioned. The Facebook group has a lot of people who are interested in. I also run a website that talks more about it. But ultimately, we don't want this thing to run over or get too many people, too many competing interests. Please listen to us. Take our input, but take the thoughts of what seems like an incredible architecture team to heart as you move forward the project and don't rush it . Thank you very much. Happy to see the ball coming. Thank you. Next speaker. I am Kurt Schneider. And Mr. DeLong had mentioned having the stakeholders meetings with the architects. I think it's a fantastic idea. I'm recently gone through the purchase of the adjoining property with Yankee Doodles, and we're working on the rest of the block. And in doing so, I think it's very important because there's a lot of effect from this project on the adjoining properties. There's going to be a removal, I hear, of the the street in between the pool and the property that I'm involved in. My hope is that when you say stakeholders, it's not just the water polo diving and swimming, but you also have all the other beach activities that we want to activate the speech to its fullest. You don't want to spend $63 million and you have a wonderful pool, but it's only used during swimming season and you want to have everything like bringing in the diving. It would be you'd be very remiss if you had built this without diving. Also, the removal of the street. Again, make sure you have all the stakeholders at the table and take some time to make sure that you make this the greatest swimming center in America. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Well, sounds very good. But Long Beach has a problem of over developing swimming pools available at Jordan High School, Lakewood Park, Jordan High School King Pool. The university could even scheduled in, then a pool was available. And of course the pool that they claim to be a problem with an earthquake, the Belmont the Belmont Pool, all those were available. You chose to build one because of the Belmont pool being a possibility of an earthquake. Well, there are all sorts of risks in life, and that was very minimal. But that was the incentive of moving this pool forward. This new one now. Much has been said about being movable for. Oh, it's very good. But really, is it I mean, the expense involved of that, they mentioned it. It concentrated on that because it was so expensive and an item that should be looked forward to. But what the Olympics doesn't have, the Olympic pools don't have movable floors. Why do we need one? All you have to do is start at the end of the pool, the the shallow end, and proceed to the deeper and one and the end. You don't need a oh, you don't need a livable floor for multiple activities. They don't have all they don't have are having all different activities at the same time. So I think there's a problems here. I applaud the fact that language wants to improve, but millions and millions of dollars is going be spent on the needy and and education and a lot of other things other than over developing that which doesn't need to be developed. Thank you. Next speaker. Hi. My name is Jessica Payne. I'm the president of the McCormack Divers Booster Club, Council Members, Mayor Design Team. I just want to thank you all so much for what you're doing for the Long Beach Aquatics community. I've been involved with diving since my son started in the year 2000 with McCormick divers. We lived for five years in Australia, where every all the major cities have a major aquatics facility that looks a lot like some of the facilities these gentlemen have designed that have fabulous competitive facilities. Sydney has the moveable floor. It was thrilling to be there when they were moving the floor for a big event at the same time that they had the water slide going and all of the recreational along with the competitive, it can be done. It can make Long Beach such a destination. The diving and aquatic community around the world are watching this project and waiting with bated breath to see how fabulous it can be. And thank you for supporting us in this. Thank you. See no other public comment on it? We do have a motion on the floor and a code call. Please go ahead and vote. Motion carries nine votes. Yes. Great. Thank you. And next item, please.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending and restating in its entirety Chapter 5.58; amending Section 21.15.110, Section 21.15.1725, Section 21.32.035, Table 32-1 of Chapter 21.32, Section 21.33.050, Section 21.34.030, and Section 21.35.030; adding Section 21.52.030; and repealing Section 21.51.243, all regarding massage establishments, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_07102018_18-0497

Bush and Kerry. 35 police. 35 is a report from Development Services and Financial Management. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach menus barcode or regarding massage establishments red and adopted as red citywide. And a second. Any public comment on this? Please customers. Motion carry. Thank you. The second public comment period is up. K is please come forward. Oh, I'm sorry. No. The agenda is over. It's the second public comment period. Yes. Please come forward, sir. Oh. On a personal. Let me go ahead. Good evening. Honorable Mayor. Members of the council. Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Jennifer Krall. I am a resident of Long Beach. I grew up in the third district, currently live in the second. I have recently founded a501c that I am trying to turn into a51 C3.

On the message and order, referred May 18, 2022, Docket 0626, for the supplemental appropriation Order for the Boston Public Health Commission for FY22 in the amount of One Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Two Hundred and Ninety One Dollars ($123,291.00) to cover the FY22 cost items contained within the collective bargaining agreements between the Boston Public Health Commission and AFSCME, Council 93. The terms of the contracts are October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2023. The major provisions of the contract include base wage increases of 2%, 1.5% and 2% percent to be given in January of each fiscal year of the contact term, the committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to pass. The report was accepted; the order was passed.

BostonCC_06292022_2022-0626

22 increases contained within the collective bargaining agreements between the Boston Public Health Commission. And Ask Me Council 93 submits a report recommending that this man are to pass docket number 0626, the Committee on City Services and Innovation Technology, to which was referred on May 18, 2022. Docket number 0626 Message In order for the supplemental appropriation order for the Boston Public Health Commission for fiscal year 22 in the amount of $123,291 to cover the fiscal year 22 cost items contained within the collective bargaining agreements between the Boston Public Health Commission. And ask me Council 93. The terms of the contract contracts are October 1st, 2020 through September 30th, 2023. The major provisions of the contract include base wage increases of 2%, 1.5% and 2% to be given in January of each fiscal year of the contract term submits a report recommending that the matter are to pass filed in the Office of the City Clerk on May 16, 2022. I can have a zero 6 to 7. The Committee on City Services and Innovation Technology, to which was referred on May 18, 2022, so I could 0627 message in order for your approval in order to reduce fiscal year 22 appropriation for the reserve for collective bargaining between $94,113 to

A bill for an ordinance designating 5001 Packing House Road, the Armour & Company Administration Building, as a structure for preservation. Approves an individual Denver landmark designation for property located at 5001 Packing House Road in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-15-19.

DenverCityCouncil_02112019_18-1539

813 IES Council Bill 1477 has passed. Councilman Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 1539 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the council bill 18 dash 1539 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Council Bill 1539 is open. May we have the staff report? Good evening. My name is Karen with Community Planning and Development and we are here for 5001 Packing House Road. It's also known as the Armor and Company Administration Building. Landmark Designation was established in 1967, which provides you the authority to designate properties within the city and county of Denver. Approximately 4% of the structures in the city are designated, or about one in 25 buildings. For this particular property, the owner is the city and county of Denver and it is in the National Western Center, as you can see, as highlighted on the map in red. If you look down towards the bottom of the map, you can see the outline of the stadium arena. That is also a Denver landmark. This particular property is in an area of change with its current zoning as I am x five with a use overlay of two. There is plain support for the designation in both the National Western Center Master Plan and the Elyria Swansea Neighborhood Plans, which both call out for the designation of historic structures. Specifically the designation of structures within the National Western Center. And as you can see, the red box down there at the bottom is the stadium arena. And the small diamond up at the towards the top is the property that we are looking at for a property be designated per ordinance. It needs to meet a designation criteria in at least two of the following categories history, architecture and geography, and to maintain its historic and physical integrity. And then the LPC needs to consider how it relates to a historic context or theme. So for this particular property, it meets two criteria under history one under architecture and three or two under geography. In the first under history, it has a direct association with the historical development of the city, state or nation. This particular property is strongly associated with the meat processing facilities at the Denver Union Stockyards. The armor building was the administration building for the Armor and Company. The in this particular area, the meat packing processing plants had a huge amount of authority and power within the city and county of Denver, and the industry was incredibly strong. They oftentimes not only owned the meat processing plants, but they also owned some of the yards, they owned the cattle, they owned the ranches. So this is one of the last remaining buildings that's associated with the meat processing plant, which was so intrinsic to the development of the city and county of Denver. It is also significant under history for having a direct and substantial association with a person or groups of persons who had influence on society. So this particular building is associated with a couple of different groups. The first is the Gephardt family. The Gephardt family is the is the family that started the armor company. Henry and then his son, Charles, were the two that were the instrumental members of the Gephardt family within the armor packing industry. Henry founded the Colorado Packing and Provision Company, and then he was really instrumental in the Denver Union stockyards. He was an executive of the Western Stock Show, and he present he helped produce the National Western Stock Show. It was then passed onto his son, Charles Gephardt, and he was there when the Armor Company ended up purchasing what had initially been the Colorado packing and provision company. And then they allowed the Gephardt family to continue to run the business. And this is the building that was constructed for the administration of it. But since so much else has been lost, this is the one of the buildings that's associated with the Gephardt family. This property is also associated with the the neighborhood that surrounds it, that the meatpacking and the meat processing was one of the stable positions that could be gained by the immigrants who came over. And so it is primarily blue collar employment for the immigrants who are primarily Russian, Slavic and Eastern European, east from Eastern European countries at this time. And so the meat processing plants provided stable employment for the populations that lived in the neighborhood. And so this is a representative of the ability to maintain and live in that community was through the meat processing plant and so it provided stable employment for the population. The property is also significant for its architecture, for embodying distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style or type. And this is a neoclassical style. It was constructed in 1917, and it can be seen through its cobbled cornice at the top. From the simple geometric designs on the brick walls. The very regular and symmetrical form. And in the fenestration pattern. And then the one story porch. Oftentimes on a neoclassical, you'll actually see a two story porch. In this case, it's a slightly stripped down version with the one story classical columns. And then finally, it's significant for its geography for promoting an understanding and appreciation of the urban environment by means of a distinctive physical characteristic or rarity. In this particular instance, it's rare for being the sole remaining building that's related to the meatpacking industry of the swift and armor plants that had been demolished. And so as you look at the 1961 Sanborn map, you can see the arrow that points to the the one admin building. All of those other buildings that are on there were associated with the with the with a swift in armor plate or with this with the armor plants. And they have since been demolished. And so this is the a rarity for being one of the only remaining meatpacking industry plants in the city. And finally, it's a significant under geography for making a special contribution to Denver's distinctive characteristic. This isn't something that is used or is there aren't many properties that are designated under this. It's the designation that is what makes Denver. Denver and the National Western Stock Show and the Denver Union stockyards are intrinsic to the character of Denver, and they have defined Denver as a major livestock hub since the early 20th century. And so this building is strongly associated with the intrinsic nature of Denver's history. After meeting all of the criteria, a property still has to maintain its historic and physical integrity, which is basically does the property look like what it used to look like? And as you can see from these pictures, it is remarkably intact. Underneath the boarded out, underneath the boards, there are the windows that still remain. So overall, there are minimal changes that have occurred to this building on the right hand side, which is actually a little hard to see. It's behind some bushes on one of the windows have been turned into doors. But overall, other than the painting of the brick and the boarding up of windows, but the windows there are still underneath. It has a remarkably good integrity and staff, as well as the Landmark Preservation Commission, found that it maintained its historic and physical integrity . And finally, the Landmark Preservation Commission considered how the structure relates to historic context or themes. And they looked at how it is associated with the development of the meatpacking industry in Denver, the growth of ranching in the livestock industry, and then with the National Western Stock Show and found that it was related to multiple historic contexts in Denver's history. When the commission reviewed that, they found that history under one A and one C, architecture under two A, geography three B and three C, that it maintained its historic and physical integrity. And they found that it was eligible to be a Denver landmark. They voted unanimously, eight zero. And I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you very much. We have three individuals lined up to speak this evening. So if you've signed up to speak on this item, ask you to come up to the front bench. When I call your name, step up to the podium and your time will begin to elapse. First up, we have Eric Anderson. Good evening, councilmembers. My name is Eric Anderson. I'm the design manager for the mayor's office of the National Restaurant Center. This is a very important building to our new campus. It sits right. In the middle of all the things that. Are going to happen. And we're really looking forward to seeing a new use here. So I'm here to answer any questions regarding the site or the building itself. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next up, John Olsen. Thank you very much, council members. My name is John Olsen. I'm the deputy director of Historic Denver. I'm here to absolutely support this as a designation up at the National Western Center, part of the National Western Stock Trail. I'm here as a part of of being with this historic Denver, which, of course, you're very used to seeing me from that standpoint. But I'm also here from the point of view of the National Western Citizen Advisory Committee. And in our conversations with the community members and with History Colorado and with the National Western Center, this was one of those buildings that was identified very early on as being very important to the site. We're talking about a very exciting development that's going to happen to the National Western Center and a national Western Stock Show area . But we want this to be part of Denver. And this is something that is a part of Denver. It's associated with Denver. The community members have associated with this with the meatpacking industry because they have a large history with the meatpacking industry. A lot of the descendants still live in the Globeville, Elyria, Swansea area. So from that standpoint, this is going to be very exciting. This is going to be a piece that's going to integrate, I think, very well with the development that's going to be going there. And it's really going to show what we're all about here in Denver that we're forward thinking when it comes to agriculture and urban ideas. But we understand and identify the importance of our past and the reasons why this location was so important to Denver. So thank you very much. Thank you. And next up, Jesse Pearce. Jesse Paris Black Starts a movement for self-defense. Deborah Thomas Out Loud and positive commitment for social change. And I'm also now large candidate for 2019. We are actually in favor of this. Abbie reminds me of a time when Denver was such a humble place to live and it was a cow town and you could travel through the town in 10 minutes. Now try to. It takes over an hour. So, yeah, we're definitely in favor of this. It should have been done already, but yes, we're in favor of this. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Eric. Could you tell us from the standpoint of the National Western Center project, how does the landmark designation fit into the plan overall? If you go back to the master plan that was approved 2015, there were four structures. That were historically significant. That we thought at some point needed to be kind of kept. And talked about and make sure that we we. Were clear about what they wanted to be before we did anything else. And this was one of them. Very important. Of course, the 1909 Stadium Arena Building was the first one. And then and then we also had the livestock exchange building. Which will be moving forward hopefully soon. And then, of course, the Denver Coliseum, which is to be determined at a later date. TBD. Yes, thank you. I just want to make sure that folks understood how this fit into the overall plan. We've been looking at this for a long time. Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Councilman Brooks. No, it's okay. You're good. Councilwoman Ortega. I'm not sure who can answer this. I'm just trying to clarify. Is this the the residence that Tom Anthony lived in? It is. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, seeing no other question, the public hearing for Council 1539 is closed. Comments by members of Council Councilman Brooks. Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. It's it's nice to have a landmark designation where everyone is in support of designating this. So I think all parties and I think the National Lessons Center for for taking the lead on this and making this easy over this 250 acre redevelopment. So we've been talking about this for a long time, and it's always been a priority and a value from the residents in the area to make sure that these properties are historically designated and that they capture the fabric of the context in the neighborhood. And so I'm excited to support this and I hope my colleagues will do the same. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilman Brooks. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 1339. Yeah. Brooks. Yeah. Black tie. Espinosa I flinch. I humor. I Herndon I cashmere. I. Can each Lopez I knew Ortega I assessment i. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting in results. 1313 accountable. 1539 has passed. Councilman Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 1542 on the floor?

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3411 Albion Street, in Northeast Park Hill. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from E-SU-Dx to E-MX-2x (urban edge, single-unit to urban edge, mixed-use), located at 3411 Albion Street in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-8-19. Community Planning and Development has determined that the requirement for a legal protest (signatures from at least 20% of property owners within 200 feet of the subject area or 20% of property owners within 200 feet outside of the subject area) has not been met (petition signatures represent 0% and 7.4%, respectively).

DenverCityCouncil_02252019_18-1541

All right. Madam Secretary, please close voting. Announce the results. 1111 eyes constable 18 dash 1540 has passed. Councilman Flynn, will you please put council bill 18 does 1541 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 18 dash 1541 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. It's a public hearing for Council Bill 18. Dash 1541 is open. May we have the staff report? Yes. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Courtney Livingston with the Planning and Development. This is a request to rezone a single property at three four 3411 Albion Street from ESU D X to IMX to x. The property is located in Council District eight in the Northeast Park Hill statistical neighborhood. The subject property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Bruce Randolph and Albion Street. One half block east of Colorado Boulevard. The site is approximately 31,000 square feet in size and has an existing 7100 square foot brick building on site, which was previously occupied by a church. The rezoning to AirMax two X has been requested to allow redevelopment for the property as the congregation is relocated. The site is currently zoned Eastside Tax, which is a single unit residential district that allows both the urban and suburban building forms. Earmarks two X can be found to the east, east three X zoning and APD is found to the west. In the south is ESU DCS. The subject property was used as a church and the surrounding properties to the south and east are also places of worship. The property directly to the north was once a restaurant and is now vacant. Generally, there's a mix of commercial uses you'll find along Colorado Boulevard, and then there's various types of residential densities and residential uses found interspersed throughout the neighborhood to the east. So these are photos, this site and the existing building. And then here are some photos of the immediate surrounding context with the multi-unit residential to the northeast of the site, a converted single unit Victorian home that was converted to the resident restaurant use that's now vacant. We also have the places of worship found directly to the east and to the south on site, and then you have the gas station to the west there. So this application was noticed according to code requirements. In December, the planning board voted 6 to 1, recommending approval of the rezoning. Representative of the Northeast Park Hill Coalition spoke at the Planning Board hearing in opposition to the rezoning with concerns related to the provision of affordable housing and the development paying a linkage fee rather than to providing affordable units at that time. The applicant, Northeast Park Hill Coalition and the Denver Islamic Center voluntarily entered into mediation after the planning board hearing. Discussions at the mediation focused around the provision of affordable housing. Additional details about the mediation can be found in the staff report and attached to the staff report. In terms of public comments received by CPD prior to today, there were eight letters of support for the rezoning. There are 29 form letters opposing rezoning, 104 signatures on a petition letter in opposition, as well as 200 signatures on a Change.org petition in opposition of the rezoning. There was a protest petition submitted last week related to this rezoning. We reviewed the protest petition and found that the signatures were not the valid signatures were not obtain, and it did not constitute a valid legal protest. So to approve a rezoning council must find that the proposed change meets five criteria from the Denver zoning code. I'll step through each one. How? Each one? So first, with consistency with adopted plans, we have comprehensive Denver 2000 blueprint Denver 2002 and the Park Hill Neighborhood Plan of 2000. In terms of the comprehensive plan, the proposed amendment will enable walkable mixed use development encourages quality infill development through its design standards that is consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed district is proposed zoned district is consistent with the comprehensive plan 2000 strategies. So in Blueprint Denver 2002, the site has a concept land use of single family residential and these areas single family homes are the predominant residential type. Although the proposed Imac's two zone district will allow for more than just residential uses, its limited application will still maintain the character of the low scale district. It's also identified as a area stability blueprint. Denver notes that the area's stability is to maintain the character of the area while accommodating some new development and redevelopment. The application asserts that this area should be considered as a reinvestment area and these areas have opportunities for reinvestment through modest infill. Blueprint also notes that in areas of stability, the appropriate transitions should be used as a tool for ensuring compatibility of development. The IMX Chest X District includes building form, skills, setback and use limitations that ensure compatibility. The proposed rezoning would support limited redevelopment as inconsistent with the blueprint Denver Areas of Stability Recommendations. So in Blueprint Denver, Bruce Randolph is shown as a residential collector and Albion Street is an designated local. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the plan's recommendations of support for limited redevelopment on a corner of a collector and a local street embedded in a preexisting neighborhood corridor. So then we have the Park Hill Neighborhood Plan of 2000. It was adopted by council in 2000. Implies this subject property goals generally discuss maintaining character mix of housing types and densities, minimizing visual impacts and maintaining enhancing the viability of the residential and commercial uses along Colorado Boulevard. The rezoning will allow for low skill multi-unit dwellings, limited commercial, which would support the viability of Colorado Boulevard and provide a compatible mix of housing types. The proposed rezoning of IMAX to EX is consistent with the goals of the plan because the allowed building forms, the design standards and the use limitations of that zoned district ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff also finds that the proposed rezoning meets next to criteria that the rezoning will result in a uniformity of district regulations and will further the public health, safety and welfare through its implementation of adopted plans. And it will also allow for the compatible redevelopment that allows more opportunities to live, work and play within the Park Hill neighborhood . The application meets the justifying circumstance criteria by identifying change or changing conditions. The application calls out the recent development in the neighborhood of those townhomes across the street. Additionally, the commuter rail station at 40th in Colorado is less than a mile away, and it came online in 2016. And finally, the proposed redevelopment is consistent with the urban edge description because of its low scale multi-unit commercial areas embedded in residential areas. The rezoning is consistent with the general purpose, as is an existing neighborhood site, and promote a pedestrian, skilled, walkable area. Finally, there is consistency with the intent of the mix to district as it's located on the corner. It's limited in nature to just one parcel and with low scale and low intensity uses within an existing neighborhood. In conclusion, CPD recommends approval based on finding all review criteria have been met. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have eight individuals signed up to speak this evening, so if we can make room in this front bench, I'm going to call the first five up Matthew Kingsbury, Glenn Goldberg, Dr. Robert Davis, Jessie Pearce and Abdul Rahim Ali. If you want to come up to the front, Matthew Kingsburg, you are up first. Mr. President, for council members, my name is Matthew Kingsbury and the pastor of Parkhill Presbyterian Church at 3411 Albion St Grace Church in Pearce from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. Our congregation came to the difficult decision to sell our property about two years ago. The this property at 3411 Albion Street has been owned by the congregation since the early 1950s when we moved there from. 26 and Downing Street. I've been the pastor there since 1999 and help the congregation work through this process. One of the reasons that we determined to make the move is that over the last 30 years, we've had no new members come from within the immediate community. Our last member from the Park Hill neighborhood moved out into an assisted living facility about 15 years ago. Since that time, we've seen growth from outside the neighborhood. And so we don't we've not been able to bring in anybody from the neighborhood, haven't had influence from people in the neighborhood and worshiping with us. We think that selling the property and so that it can be developed into residential housing would benefit the neighborhood. Right now, there's an awful lot of drug dealing, vandalism, vagrancy going on on our corner, things that you don't want your kids finding in our church parking lot, drugs and human waste products, for example. So we think that having residents there can help clean up that a little bit just by having more people in the area. We also want to point out that or I'd like to point out that as we've been negotiating with the with the neighborhood and through the mediation process, hearing their concerns that the congregation made the decision to lower the cost of what rather price what we would receive for selling our property in order to provide affordable housing. The congregation, many of the members of the congregation at that meeting, one we agreed to do so, stated that they wanted to be able to give up some funds that we would be able to use to further our mission in a new location in order to help those who are underprivileged in the Denver community, which we will now be leaving so that we can move to a places closer to where our members currently live. We want to point out that the planning board and the planning was a planning staff, so I can't keep track of all the meetings I've been to and who everybody is over the last number of months. They're all in support of this. And so for these reasons, and I could keep on going, I'm a preacher, I want to recommend that the council does approve this change in zoning. And I will be here if you have any other questions. Thank you. Next up, Len Goldberg. Good evening, members of City Council. My name is Len Goldberg. I'm the developer and I'm here just to answer any questions you might have during the process. Thank you. Next up, Dr. Robert Davis. The Evening City Council. I stand in support of this rezoning for a couple of reasons. The first is that we were able to come to a an agreement to put four affordable units in the development. And the second one being that we are going to promote the units in community publications so that we can attract a a larger swath of the community, both economically and racially. And I hope that this becomes a model for future development projects that we will build upon this to make sure that as we are developing in the city, that we're doing so with an eye towards being more inclusion based. But I do have a few concerns that I want to speak about, even though I stand in support of this and hope that it will be voted tonight. The first concern is I feel that the process that the city has currently is very favorable toward the developer and does not encourage community input. And so I'm asking the city council that as you look toward the future, that you become more conscientious about the needs and the desires of the individuals who currently live there. Currently, Minister, they're currently working to build up. It's nice to have people come from the outside, but we need to hear more of the voice of the individuals who are actually living in the community. We need to be intentional about seeking out those voices and hearing them as the second thing that I'm concerned about is that we're not really addressing the larger issue of affordable housing in Denver. Putting four units in the park community does not really address the larger problem. We're kind of trying to empty the ocean with a teaspoon and we're not getting in the way. So I'm hoping that this body will will take that into consideration. The last thing is this process did not lateral naturally lend itself to promoting racial diversity. And we put a little Band-Aid on it by asking that the sale of these units be publicized in community newspapers such as Fivepoint News and the Body of Christ and the Denver Weekly, etc. But this that was not a natural part of this process, and nor can that be the end of this process. So I'm really admonishing and asking that this body will be more intentional about a including the community intentional be about making sure that as we're doing these developments, as we voted to previous ones tonight, that we are attracting people from various economic and racial groups. And with that, thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Pierce. Jessie Paris represented for Denver Homicide, Low Black Star Action Movement for Self-defense and Positive Action Commitment for Social Change. And I'm also an At-Large candidate for the May 2019 May election, and I reside in Council Brooks District. I was against this. But after hearing the words of the community that I was born and raised in, I grew up in this neighborhood. I went to Smith and Hallett. I resonate with the residents of this neighborhood, predominately the black and brown neighbors that feel that they do not. Are included. In the city. Planning and development that is rapidly happening throughout this whole town. There's rapid gentrification going on and the community's input is not being heard. And the community has come out today and let you know that. So I'm not just speaking, but the whole community is speaking. And I hope that you hear us loud and clear. So with that being said, we are for this. But as the previous speaker stated, you need to take it to full consideration the input of the community. And think about the decisions that you make before you make them. Because we don't need any more unintended consequences. The city has a housing crisis. This is the least that could be done. These are affordable units. I want to know exactly what the ammo level is going to be for these, and I won't know exactly how many units. Who is going to be residing in this property and. When the. Groundwork for this is going to begin. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Abdul Rahim Ali. Good evening. City Council. This has been a arduous task over the last over the last month. And we we were happy that we came to a resolution. We've been able to speak with the mediator and and go through mediations. And we've had personal conversations with Mr. Goldberg. And we feel that this resolution that we are coming to now is fair and we support it. But we we would be remiss if we didn't mention the fact that affordable housing is an issue in city of Denver, not just park here, but in the city of the entire city of Denver. This is the issue. But this particular process has brought consequences, good consequences, where we have actually Christians, Muslims and Jews working together. And that's historic in itself. We hope that you consider this resolution that. We go forward in support of this housing and that this is just the beginning and this is just the first step . And we think that there will be many opportunities in the future for the city of Denver and particularly Park Hill and diversifying the community and park here. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to call the last three up so if we can make a room for them in that front bench. Patrick Key David more of it's and Bruce O'Donnell if you want to come up to the front and Patrick here up next. A tricky. All right, David. More of its. Thank you very much for your time. And if David more of its own property directly across from the the church lot definitely in favor of the the zone change we think that the the project fits the scale of the neighborhood. We think that the the price point though some may think that it is high for the neighborhood. It actually does fit in with the proximity of the neighborhood and some other projects down Martin Luther that are that are currently being developed and being finished. So we think it fits the scale as well. I was able to talk to a few of the neighbors, the letters that you guys actually have in your packets. I was able to talk with them to get them to to kind of discuss the project. And they're not just in favor but actually kind of excited about it having a new development across the street. And we think that it all fits in. So with that said, I hope that you guys all vote in favor for the project. Thank you. Thank you, Bruce O'Donnell. Thank you, Mr. President, a members of council. I'm Bruce O'Donnell again at 386 North Emerson in Denver. And I'm the owners representative on this rezoning request. As you know from the testimony this evening, there is a staff recommendation of approval and also planning board recommending approval. There is good plan support and justifying circumstances for this rezoning request. This is a mostly vacant and largely underutilized site bordering Colorado Boulevard. It's zoned for single unit. Across the alley is a car wash and a gas station and fast food on the other side of the street on the east side of Alby. And this entire block is already zoned m x to ex the exact zone designation that we're requesting. And it supports townhomes exactly like we are proposing to build here. And so those entitlements have been in place and been successful for some time. You mentioned or you heard earlier in the staff report that there had been significant opposition to this rezoning request, and that was true until we sat down with immediate neighbors and the registered neighborhood organizations. And so today we have letters of support from nine immediate neighbors. We also have a letter that's in your file from the Northeast Park Hill Coalition, the R.A., recommending that you vote in favor of this rezoning and supporting the rezoning. And then tonight, I was able to hand the end to the council secretary. And there are officially in your the records of this meeting, letters of support from the Northeast Denver Islamic Mosque and the Denver Park Hills Seventh Day Adventist Church. And you've just heard the representatives of those religious institutions speak in favor of and requesting that you approve this rezoning. So with that, I'm going to sum up by also requesting that you vote to approve Council Bill 18 1541 rezoning 3411 Albion Street to M x to x. This support largely came through work we did over the past couple of weeks with CPD and OED to come up with an agreement we're working on to build affordable units . And the plan is to build for deed restricted affordable units consistent with Ovid's formulas and calculations. And we're available to answer any questions. Should you have any. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Bruce. I'm not sure if you're the one to answer this question, but what will the project require for tax credits in order to meet the affordability on the units it. No, it will not. And then lastly, how how will the agreement be enforced? So right now we have a memorandum of understanding with the Northeast Park Hill Coalition and the mosque in the Seventh Day Adventist Church are in and the applicants are all parties to this memo you and there's an exhibit to the memo U is an OED document called agreement to build affordable units. And we ran out of time today to get that actually executed. But it will be recorded against the property. And I'm not sure if there's a representative from OED here tonight or not. But if not, Courtney has been very familiar with it from KPD who gave the staff report. And so it would all it will all be enforceable through Lloyd's regulatory toolkit. And that's because of the requirement for the. What's the the the build alternative? Yes. Yes. So we're we're going to do the build alternative instead of the linkage fee. Great. Thank you so. Much. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Just a couple quick questions. There was another I was actually at this planning board, but I didn't see the entire deal. There was another no vote for planning boards, according to you. Is there? Yeah. At that December hearing, there was one no vote. Interestingly, there wasn't a ton of testimony and conversation that led us to understand fully why the no vote was voted on that way. There wasn't a ton of testimony. Okay, great. And then, Dr. Davis, quick question for you. So, you know, been on the diet for about eight years looking at these rezonings and looking at other cities the way they do rezonings and outreach. And and by far don't have a perfect process. But you said some pointed comments around. There needs to be more community process. And this this process we have is an advantage to the developer. Can you give us some specific examples that you would request for us to change around the process? So one of the things that I think would be beneficial is, of course, that it would be mandated that developers have to meet with the various community organizations to get a better understanding. Because one of the things that was discussed in of the proposal was that it's going to be very similar to the units that are across the street. So right there on Albion, but on the other side of the street, those units are really what we considered, what I considered to be the problem or one of the symptom of the problems. Let me say that what I mean by that is we did a I had my administrative assistant to do a search on the owners of the property. It's not ethnically diverse so that, you know, so if that's the model that we're using, I was not here when those units were built. But so but I don't know how many I know as I spoke to the leaders of my congregation. They were not brought in, even though the units that were built were right across the street from us. But we were not brought in on the process. We have the imam here. I don't know how much they consulted the mosque in the building of those units. All that right there in and of itself brings a problem. And so, as the gentleman said, he went and spoke with people in the community and the people that he spoke with, people in those developed units, but they're not from the community. What I mean by that is they bought those units and moved there. But that's not they don't have the historical understanding per se. And I'm not trying to isolate them and say that we shouldn't talk to them. But I think there needs to be a larger conversation that includes those registered community organizations that says when we when we do these type of developments, we're going to make sure that they're in on the process and especially the immediate neighborhood should be invited to come to the table. When we get to when we get to an, I don't know, all the various acronyms, but not when we get to the to the city to apply for these various things. But at on the front end, we sit down and have these conversations. Yeah. So I appreciate that. And I just wanted to just say it since we're on the record talking about that outreach, because I think it's really important and I think we need to be talking about specific outreach changes. So one specific change and if you indulge me, Mr. President, we passed we just passed this ordinance, and it was sponsored by Councilman Espinosa that every home within 200 feet of a new rezoning must be alerted. Right. They get something in the mail. Every developer that comes in here must reach out to a neighborhood organization. Some don't respond, things like that. Those are kind of things we have in place today. Okay. But when you say mandate, what is the that extra? I'm just trying to. You know. Well, that extra piece. So you're saying that those things are already in place. And again, I'm I'm new here. So but as I was as I was a part of this process, I did not. First of all, my church, which is right across the street, literally across the street from it, was not you didn't receive. And no one. I receive anything. No one reached out to us. No conversations were made with us. And I'm pretty visible in this community. So that was concerning to me. That's helpful. And I'm just going to stay on this real quick, because this is something that we pass. And if you didn't get notification, this this is a problem with our system. Cordy, can you just come? You want to say opposite down about me? You do what you want you to, pastor. So I'm just curious. Every property within 200 feet should receive a notice of any rezoning that comes through for City Council for review. Far before we get to planning board. So what do churches not receive that? Is it commercial properties do not receive that. What's the every property within 200 feet should receive that postcard. It's a postcard. So, you know, it might have been missed. I'm not sure. But I do know that this rezoning was noticed according to the code requirements. That is the mail postcards at time of application. And for the planning board hearing. So we sent out two mailings. We also post the property and then send that notification to the Arnaud's. Okay. And just just for the public's edification, when do you post the property? The applicant posts the property and they post it for the planning board hearing. And then they post it again three. Weeks or two weeks before to two weeks. Before, prior to the planning board. And then again for this city council hearing three weeks prior. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Doctor. Thank you. Councilman Brooks. Councilman Herndon. One question for CPD and I meant to look this up. So with the current zoning, what can be built now? So not expecting an exhaustive list, but just kind of generally. Right. So it's ESU docs and that is single unit. The D, the X signifies the building forms. You have the suburban house form and the urban house form. Places, places of worship are also allowed under the code. The one unit or places of worship. Things like that. Yeah. Okay. They must. Thank you. Councilman Herndon, Councilwoman Kinnick. Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to ask CPD about the protest petition. I'm pleased that we ended up with a situation where we have majority community support here tonight. But there was earlier protest position and towards the same type of questions Councilman Brooks was asking about how we can do better. I think that there seemed to be some confusion about who's eligible to sign when you have an institution that doesn't have the same kind of traditional ownership as a single family home. So I wanted to ask about whether or not CPD has learned anything about how we can, you know, either one better educate folks on institutions and how signatures work for them and or do we need to make any changes to our code to make sure that we are not just accounting for single family homes, for example. Right. And the the protest petition, when we hand out that form, we also hand out instructions with protest petitions. They're pretty detailed instructions, multiple pages. And it goes through and it says, you know, the name must match exactly as you hold deed to the property. And we also say that we need authorization. If you're an LLC, it says on those instructions, you know, you need to have provided authorization that you're allowed to sign on behalf of this organization, and we can look at ways to make those instructions more clear. I think that that would be something that we can work on right away. Yeah, I think that it sounds to me like those are really geared towards businesses and homes, whether they be apartment buildings or, you know, single family homes and churches and nonprofits are totally different types of entities. I'm not sure that most churches or nonprofits would know who holds the deed decades and decades into their existence. So I think, one, if you can please take a look at whether or not the rules we have are actually appropriate for institutions like those that the deed holder might be long deceased , for example. And then secondly, yes, whether or not you can do some improvements, so are those things that you're willing to go back and take a look at? Yeah. And I know that the committee planning development, we have a Process and procedures subcommittee, a team of staff members and we work on, you know, instructions in these type of things to make them more clear and just better applicant and customer service type things, not like code related, but little things that we can tweak and then we can take up the chain. So we are working on things like that and I haven't taken a look at those rules and regs, but often things like a frequently asked questions or guide by the type of property would be much better than a rule regulation code type language. So thank you for that. Yeah. Thank you. Councilwoman, can you seeing no other questions? The public hearing for Council 18 1541 is closed. Comments by members of Council Councilman Herndon. Hey, Mr.. President, I want to applaud everyone for coming out. And I have to admit, usually when I hear we have three public hearings, I look up at the clock and to say we're at 750 is is really is really good to my colleagues. If you've never come out to this area, we throw one heck of a Denver Days event. I know Councilwoman Kennedy has been out there. The mayor has been out there. And so that was always a good time. And I'm glad to see that we have come together on this. Our charge here as a body is to make decisions based off of the criteria. And I was going to spend a little bit of time walking through the criteria and why I do think it's appropriate, but with the direction and people members speaking in support, I won't go through that level of debt because I want to take the time to applaud the people in this chamber because we saw where we were and you look up to see where we are now. And I think one. We sit down and we hear each other and hear each other's concerns, and you can reach a point of consensus. And to the numerous people, we need to support the leadership and members of Northeast Park Hill. Pastor Davis. Imam Ali. We have demonstrated that redevelopment can be successful where the parties can say, hey, we're at a place where we are, are happy and we do have an affordability challenge. And one development, one parcel is not going to solve it. And I believe as a city we're taking steps to get there. And so this is one of the steps and thank you for the for the acknowledgment that we need to do better. And I think CPD will take that to heart. And we can certainly have conversations as a body how we can make this, because we want this to be an inclusive process where people make sure they're all heard. And so as as Pastor said, this can be a model and I hope that other future opportunities, we can follow the model. We can look the Northeast Park Hill and said, hey, this is a way that you can get together and all the parts can get away with a successful conclusion. So I will be in support of this and I would ask my colleagues to do the same thing. Thank you. Councilman Herndon. Councilwoman Cannick. Thank you so much, Mr. President. I came to find that this rezoning meets the criteria, but I do need to go ahead and just put a couple of things on the record. First of all, I just want to put on the record that I had a number of contacts from the community asking for information about how this process worked, particularly when things were beginning to get contentious. We talked about the opportunity for mediation and that the city could offer a mediator if that was needed. I just want to be really clear that each of those communications I shared that I was not able to take an opinion on this zoning, and none of those conversations included information that was outside the record. It did not change in any way my opinion on this rezoning, but I think that what it showed me and we've all had every single person, as Dennis said, has had this experience. It is so difficult. Our entire job is designed to have this interaction and two way conversation with the people we represent and it drives us crazy as council members. We just had a meeting about this today that we cannot do that two way communication around rezonings. We can't, you know, say, here's what we like, here's what's challenging. We can't form an opinion ahead of time because the rules of how we do rezonings prevent us from doing that. And so it is. So I hear, Pastor Davis, your words so clearly about how it feels like there's not enough community input. And one of the reasons I think that is, is because the rules don't let us do that. We spent a long time with our lawyers this afternoon asking about Will. Is there any other city that allows for this? And the answer is, this is not just because of property rights. It appears that this is the standard practice in cities. And so so that is a challenge that leaves us saying how do we create the type of community input that the community desires? I mean, you can't have the normal back and forth that we have around, for example, a policy debate that, you know, where the council members can answer questions and share their views with their constituents. And so I want to just I, too, want to applaud the community because I feel like what you did was you stepped into the gap that our system creates, and you didn't let it be a barrier to having your voices heard. And so I really think that the self-organization that you had, the fact that you got access to a mediator and worked to have someone help represent you in that conversation. And I think that is, you know, to your credit, that you were able to do it. But I agree with you that I wish the system did not leave you in that boat. So I feel like the conversation I want us as a body to have is if it can't be us, is there an office of neighborhood assistance, for example? That can be the place where you can go and get some more of that support and expertize. I mean, I was able to answer process questions. I think any of us can and would answer questions to help folks understand how things work. But where you need an advocate, where is it that you find that? So so I'm intrigued by thinking about other ways when we're stuck in parts of this that we can, you know, think about how to create more of that. The second thing I just wanted to focus on is just the substance of what you have figured out in terms of your agreement. And so I want to just say a word to Pastor Kingsburg, who I'm not sure if he's still here. He may have had to leave. But the fact that that oh, sorry. The fact that I was looking at your old seat there, the fact that your congregation was willing to step up and thinking about making the pricing work, you know, to the developer who is willing to think about changing your your mix of of your product and to the community for your creativity. Again, and talking about, for example, the affirmative marketing, that it's not just the price of the unit, but it's it's how the word is spread. And we know from Councilman Brooks is just. That a townhome project that did similar marketing did results in a very local group of residents from the area, really getting the chance to buy a home and build wealth, which I think we do actually have a lot of very affordable housing in Northeast Park Hill. We don't have a lot of affordable homeownership for African-American and communities from diverse backgrounds to build wealth. And so that is actually a gap that this project is helping to fill. So I'm excited about it. I agree with Councilman Herndon that one project doesn't solve the challenge, but it creates these openings for more conversation. So I appreciate the way you've all used the linkage fee as as a launch pad to build those homes on the site. And I want to thank everyone for participating in what is clearly not a perfect process, but one where you managed to find a way to common ground. So thank you very much. And you can reach Councilman Brooks. Yeah. Thank you to my colleagues for for your comments. I just want to just go straight to the the community. I mean, I think we hear a lot this is such a complicated and convoluted process. We know that from a community perspective. But I want to recognize you tonight and use yours as an example that actually in this convoluted process, it worked. It worked on your behalf. And so I think there's a lot more to build off of. I think there's a lot of examples that other the other 72 neighborhoods throughout the city can build off of and take it to the next level. And there's another thing that we've that I've been doing in the district and it's it's also council initiated rezonings where actually the councilperson is the is the person who takes on the rezoning for two property and maybe the property owner in the community to come to some sort of agreement. And so there are ways around that. But it's hard, it's convoluted and there's all those issues. And so I really appreciate all the work. I want to thank the developer, the property owner, the church for being willing to engage in conversation and engage in a solution. And once again, thank you all for going through security in the parking meters and sitting in these hard seats. We really appreciate you being here. It's when folks are not here that they're not a part of the of putting their fingerprints in building this city. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman Brooks. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I won't repeat what my colleagues have already said in just thinking all of the all of the players who came together to come to this consensus in being able to move the project forward. I'm not sure when things changed, but city council members historically have played a role of bringing both sides together. I did that on the seven zoning changes that we did down in lower downtown. We had both sides at extreme ends of the spectrum and and we were successful sitting down without saying, I'm on this side or I'm on this side, but being able to bring opposing views to the table and being able to find that middle ground and then bring it forward. And I'm not sure, you know, what's changed that would not council allow council members to continue playing that role without prejudicing our vote, because we sit like a judge up here when we deal with zoning matters, we cannot indicate if we're for or against a rezone application, but we can bring two sides together to find that middle ground and hope that we continue to have that conversation about how we can play a bigger role in working within our communities. To address that, I appreciate the fact that the agreement is being filed as a. Part of the title to the property because that then assures that the agreement is something that will follow through. If, for example, the developer decided to sell the property, it assures the community that that agreement holds true because it applies to the land. And it's not just an agreement between the two parties. So I think that was a big part of the decision moving forward. So I just want to commend all of you for your work. And it sounds like we'll see a great project there with some affordable units in the near future. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. See no other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Brooks High. Black Flynn. High. Herndon, I. Cashman. I can eat. Lopez. I knew Ortega. I. Susman. I. Mr. President. I. I'm secretary. Please close voting. Announce the results. 1111.