Hi, everyone.

This is like the first day of school.

Um welcome to the city council meeting for the city of Alameda.

Tonight is Tuesday, September 2, 2025.

And um, we are about to go into closed session, but before we do, I would like to ask the city clerk, Lara Weisiger, to please call the role.

Council members bowler.

Here.

Prior.

Here, Mayor S.

Yashka?

Here.

Uh, three present, and hopefully, Council members Daysog and Jensen should be here shortly.

And I got word that council member Daysug should be here around five thirty.

That's the only one I know about.

Okay.

So then with that, we're going to move on to the consent calendar.

These are routine items that will be approved by one motion, unless removed by council members.

We don't do that on consent calendar.

I'm going to have a closed session.

So, Madam Clerk, would you introduce item two A, please?

So, um two A.

Yeah, two A as the negotiators for labor and two B as the negotiators for um the two marinas, Fortman and Bellina Marina.

Okay, so what I'm looking for on my left and on my right is a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar.

I move to approve the consent calendar.

Well done.

It's been moved by Vice Mayor Prior, second by Council Member Bowler to approve the consent calendar.

All those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Aye.

That motion passes.

We do not.

Seeing none, we'll close public comment and we'll we will um adjourn in just a minute to close session to consider the following items, which I'd like to ask the city clerk to introduce for us now, please.

For A is conference of labor negotiators pursuant to government code section five four nine five seven point six.

The city negotiators are the city manager, human resources director, general manager of Alamina Missile Power, and Jack Hughes from uh Libra Cassidy Whitmore and the Deputy City Attorney.

The employee organizations are the electric utility professional association, International Brotherhood of Electric Workers, International Association of Firefighters Local Six Eight Nine, and Alameda Fire Chiefs Association.

Under negotiation are salaries, employee benefits in terms of employment.

For B is conference with legal counsel potential litigation, potential initiation of litigation pursuant to government code section five four nine five six point nine, subsection D four, number of cases is three with the city initiating legal action as plaintiff.

Under negotiation or price and terms.

Well, good evening.

Welcome everyone.

And again, apologies for getting off to a little bit of a late start here.

Um, welcome to the city council meeting for the city of Alameda.

Tonight is Tuesday, September 2nd, 2025.

The council has just come back from closed session.

And I am going to ask our city clerk Laura Weisinger to please um announce actions, if any that were taken in this closed session and a previous one.

She knows what she's doing.

Madam Clerk.

Thank you.

Um item for A from tonight, the labor negotiations.

Um staff provided information and the city council provided direction to staff with by a vote of four to one with council member Daysog voting now.

Um for B, which was a litigation matter.

Um council provided direction to staff uh by five eyes.

And regarding item four C, which was um property negotiations for both both a Fortman and Bolina Marinas.

Um council provided direction to staff uh by four one with um council member Daysog abstaining, and then uh from the July 15th closed session on um a potential litigation with Harbor Bay Business Park Association as the um uh potential defendant.

The city council unanimously approved the terms of a settlement agreement in the July 15th, 2025 closed session.

The settlement agreement was executed on July 21st, 2025 and includes the following uh terms.

The city will pay the Harbor Bay Business Park uh three million in available fund reserves within thirty days of executing the settlement agreement and four thousand four hundred thousand dollars annually for eight years for a total of six point two million compared to the projected fourteen point two million that had has been or would have otherwise been deposited into the fund funds are to be used by the Harbor Bay Business Park to convert landscape mediums and setbacks to drought tolerant planting, starting with the Harbor Bay business uh Harbor Bay Parkway entry into the business park.

Uh the bus the association also agrees to terminate any and release any claims against the city uh relating to the existing agreements, and after eight years, the city will receive the full property tax amount annually, which is currently estimated to be one point four million dollars.

Thank you, madam clerk.

And with that, I will adjourn the um closed session that we just came from, and I will call to order the regular city council meeting.

And we'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance, and I would like to ask my colleague Council Member Greg Bowler to please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Will you all please join me in with the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice.

Thank you, Councilmember Bowler.

Madam Clerk, do we have any agenda changes this evening?

We do not.

All right.

So with that, and before we do a proclamation, because we do have a proclamation this evening, I'm just going to give the ground rules that we abide by when we're in a city council meeting.

I was saying when we opened the meeting with um before the closed session that this is kind of like the first day of school because we've been on vacation uh the month of August.

I'm remembering how to lead a city council meeting again.

Not really, but um, we've been away for a little while.

But it's lovely to see a full um chambers, and I bet we've got people watching remotely too.

So just a reminder that this is a business meeting.

We are here to conduct the business of the city of Alameda, the people of the city of Alameda, which is many of you.

Um, but it's not theater, it's not a sporting event, Taylor Swift concert, it is not.

Um, so we don't applaud, we don't boo, cheer, jeer, do the wave.

We um listen respectfully to public speakers, and when it's our turn, if you choose to be a public speaker, come on up to the microphone, bring it up to the level you need it to be.

When the timer goes off that your time is up, please stop so I don't have to ask you.

And we um, and the reason that we have these ground rules is that this involves public speaker speaking.

I was a litigator for many years, and I'm kind of used to public speaking.

Most people aren't, and it can be very stressful, but I never want someone to not get up and speak because they're afraid someone might boo them, someone might hiss or laugh impolitely at what they say.

So don't do that.

Just treat everybody the way you'd like to be treated yourself.

And I also remind people that sometimes we have young people right here in the audience, but often we have them watching at home.

We want to set a good example of civic participation.

So we can we can do this.

We can we can voice our our opinions with civility.

And if you have signs, that's fine.

That's your first amendment right.

I just ask that unless you're in that very last row of chambers, don't hold them above your head where you'd block someone else's view.

Again, just treat people the way they would like to.

Um, I do not anticipate needing to use this, but I have to recite these magic words from the California Penal Code.

Um, just in case California Penal Code Section 403 states it is a criminal offense for any person to, without authority of law, willfully disturb or break up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character, other than an assembly or meeting referred to in Penal Code Section 302 or elections code 1834.

First violations will receive a warning and continued violations will require additional action, which could include police intervention.

Again, I anticipate none of that, but I just have to say that.

So I did.

Okay, so um proclamations and special orders of the day.

I love doing this, and we don't do that many of them just for special occasions like heritage um ethnic heritage months.

And it so happens that we are about to start National Hisp Hispanic Heritage Month.

So here's our proclamation.

National Hispanic Heritage Month is observed between September 15 to October 15 to celebrate the histories, cultures, and significant contributions of Americans whose ancestors came from Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America.

Hispanic history has played a prom a prominent role in American history, and today Hispanic Latinos are the largest racial or ethnic minority in both our state and the nation.

According to the U.S.

Census Bureau, the Hispanic Latino population of the United States is over 60 million, comprising almost 19% of the total U.S.

population.

Nearly 16 million Hispanic Latino Americans live in California, comprising 40% of our state's population, and more than 9,300 Hispanic Americans residents live in the city of Alameda, where they make up 12% of our population.

Generations of Hispanic Latino Americans have helped shaped our society, economy, culture, and values as political and civic leaders, scientists, educators, artists, advocates, and service providers.

They include labor leaders and civil rights activists Cesar Chavez and Delares Huerta, who co-founded an organization that became the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, daughter of Puerto Rican parents who became the first Latina and third woman to serve on the U.S.

Supreme Court.

Dr.

Ellen Ochoa, the first Latina to go into space when in 1993, she flew aboard the space shuttle Discovery.

Dr.

Ochoa later became the first Latina director of the Johnson Space Center.

Lynn Manuel Miranda, Tony Award-winning composer, playwright, actor, and comp and creator of the musical.

Hamilton.

Also what's the one?

Anyway, visual artist Frieda Kahlo, author Sandra Cisneros, California's U.S.

Senator Alex Padilla, California Assembly Member and Alameda resident, Mia Banta, and many more.

Alameda stands with Hispanic Latino Americans' efforts to overcome prejudice and discrimination and fight for workers' and immigrants' rights, access to health care, housing, education, and equal treatment under the law.

Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Marilyn, as the Ashcraft Mayor of the City of Alameda to hereby proclaim September 15th through October 15, 2025, as National Hispanic Heritage Month in the City of Alameda, and encourage all Alamedans to learn more about the identities and historical legacies of Hispanic Latino Americans that enrich our communities and shape our state and our nation.

An excellent place to do this is at the Alameda Free Library, where you will find related books, films, and other resources, and can attend Hispanic Heritage Month events, including Malinke Music, Thursday, September 18 at Bayfarm Island Library, and Tuesday, September 23 at the Main Library.

You can play Loteria, September, Sunday, September 21, 1 p.m.

at the main library, and there will be prizes.

And there is a screening of the Gods of Mexico documentary, Tuesday, September 23rd at 5 30 p.m.

at the main library.

Latin American Children's Music, Tuesday, September 30th, 1030 a.m.

at the West End Library.

Ooh, Cuna Makue, I might have mispronounced that is an engaging and interactive Afro-Peruvian dance performance on Saturday, October 11, 2 p.m.

at the main library.

And Hummingbirds, a documentary screening on Tuesday, October 14 at 3 30 p.m.

in the main library.

Do not worry if you didn't commit all those to memory.

There will not be a test.

And also, you could just look at the library's website, which would you can access at Alameda CA.gov under the tab that says library.

So there.

Anyway, now we will get back to our regular programming and we come to item number four, which is oral communications.

And this is where at the top of the agenda will take 15 minutes for people to speak who were here in person on items that are not on the agenda.

If you're to hear to speak on an agenda item on the agenda, this isn't your time.

And if there are more people left over, we take another we do another oral communications at the end of the regular agenda.

Madam Clerk, do we have oral communication?

We do.

And we have enough speakers that they'll get two minutes each instead of three minutes.

And the first is uh Zoe Wong.

All right, come on up.

Perfect.

Look at you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

I bought my home on Santa Clara Avenue because I saw kids playing in the slow street, walking or biking to the Delhi for lunch.

A site I hadn't seen since I was their age.

For reference, the Delhi I walked to from high school was in the shadow of ground zero right after 9-11.

As you've seen from my emails, and those are my neighbors, uh, we lost that safety to a unilateral decision by the city engineer.

A decision claimed to be about pedestrian safety.

But my public records request shows drafts and emails were vehicle speeds and volume.

The two most lethal threats to pedestrians were traded away to make driving easier.

Our streets are still dangerous, especially around schools.

We must stop treating driver convenience as more important than people safety.

Or worse, rehash this outdated illusion.

The convenience is safety.

It isn't.

If barriers make way for uh an airport greenway greenways, then we need somebody else for through traffic.

Speed homes are overwhelmingly popular, even among my neighbors who oppose those streets.

Most of the 14 cities across Alameda County already have transparent processes where residents can request traffic calming, including speed homes.

Alameda still does not.

I urge you to create a clear ministerial process where residents can request traffic calming based on objective criteria.

Traffic volumes, speeds, number of lanes, neighborhood support, and emergency services review.

And please avoid inequity.

In some cities, neighborhoods have to self-fund these safety measures, leaving lower income areas more vulnerable.

An equity fund tied to our housing element could fix that.

Please, let's move beyond debating driver comfort and start planning for safe, calm neighborhood streets for everyone.

If I have time, I'd also like to remind the council of our 2024 community survey.

And for the four slow streets, 60 favored, 60% favored keeping Pacific barriers until it's alternative, while 56% each supported keeping Versailles, Morton, and Santa Clara, the latter explicitly, until Central Avenue is completed.

The message from the public is clear.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker, Erica Hilton.

Welcome.

And Madam Clerk, if you want to maybe read the next two so people can scoot up to the aisle.

Anya Diebert and Harper Nelson.

Okay, so be ready.

Welcome.

So this is an agenda item that I'm going to talk about.

Should I wait until yeah, yeah, yeah.

It's a little confusing.

Okay, no worries.

Is Anya the same?

Okay.

You're both 7 a.m., correct.

Okay, that's the yeah.

Okay.

Harper Nelson.

Uh who is it?

Harper Nelson, then Bella Goldlasser.

Okay, come on up.

Speaker Nelson.

Uh Hello, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Harper Nelson, and I'm a student at Ensignal High and also a member of Youth Power Climate Action.

I'm here to talk about a state bill that was introduced last January, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund bill.

You may have heard of it from New York and Vermont, which are states that have signed similar bills into law.

This bill would make the biggest fossil fuel polluters pay for the damages that they've done to the climate from 1990 to 2024.

Californians shouldn't be using their tax dollars to pay for these damages when we aren't the main ones responsible.

Fossil fuel companies have been making billions from overheating our climate, leading to events like the LA fires.

The money from the Superfund would go to community resources, sustainable energy, and 40% of it would go to disadvantaged communities.

This bill would be a huge step in stopping climate change and benefiting our island.

So Alameda should pass a resolution in support of it.

I'm aware that the City Council has already drafted a letter in support, and we all applaud you for that.

But passing a resolution would be more public and inspire more people.

We wouldn't be the first to do this too.

San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berkeley, and Albany have already passed their own resolutions and support.

We need to join them and give this bill as much support as possible.

Thank you for listening.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh Bella Goldwasser and then Zach Bowling.

Hello.

See, I told you young people often attend the meetings.

Hi, hi.

Hello.

My name is Bella Goldwasser, and I'm a member of Youth Power Climate Action here in Alameda, as well as a second year environmental science major at UCLA.

To build upon what Harper just talked to you about, I want to take a moment to consider the many benefits that passing make polluters pay would have for the city of Alameda.

If the Climate Superfund Act were to pass at the state level, it would raise over 150 billion dollars over the next 20 years.

If this money were divided equally among California's 58 counties, this would amount to 130 million dollars per year for each county.

In Alameda, this money could go towards the wide variety of important goals outlined in our climate action and resilience plan.

Many top priorities like continuing to invest in active transportation and the urban forest plan, building out community solar hubs, and expanding local vehicle local electric vehicle charging are currently only partially funded.

Furthermore, Alameda's ambitious plans to prepare for sea level rise could unify utilize these funds to invest in natural system supports, like continuing work on DPAV Park, and create new infrastructure, like along the Oakland Alameda estuary.

The Climate Superfund Act can also support local community groups and innovative climate plans.

For example, one of the passion projects of youth power climate action is refrigerant transition, since commercial refrigerators typically contain a gas 4,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

Project Drawdown, an independent organization that conducts studies on climate policy efficacy, consistently ranks refrigerant transition as a top five solution.

And youth power would love to see a local program that helps smaller businesses move towards this transition.

In conclusion, there are many ways that the money raised by the Climate Superfund Act would support Alameda.

We would love to see what the city could accomplish with these funds and think coming out with a resolution in support of the bill could start important conversations locally and create positive pressure at the state level.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker, Zach Bowling.

Welcome, Speaker Bowling.

Evening, Council.

So I'm just gonna go a little ad hoc here.

Because you've got two.

Oh, two minutes, sorry.

Anyways, uh, I will follow up and send most of this comment to you.

But I I'm just gonna go a little ad hoc.

Um, I want to raise concerns about the flock uh security contract that we have here in Alameda, specifically the 14 different AI cameras that are our ALPR cameras.

I am not against ALPR cameras.

I spoke about it in 2022 when this this item came up when we said that a lot of us had brought up the concerns that we had for the design of the way that that particular ALPR camera was designed.

Um and even Councilmember Odie on this day said he was worried about ICE, he was worried about immigration customs enforcement and the overall design.

When these cameras take a photo, they go to a centralized database, not on our servers, but to a centralized database hosted by Amazon, where Flock has total access to it.

They advertise how they have interagency sharing and how easy it is.

And we know with new reports and why it's in the news, is that they had a program after telling people they didn't have a program with ICE that they were giving access to this data.

Now they've claimed, and I I've lost trust in this company, but they've claimed that they've cut off this this program that they had with them.

But they the the problem still exists.

They are a centralized company with all of our data on all of our drivers in our city.

They make it trivial to share data with other agencies, um, and including ICE, but then in a FISA court or a secret court order could give access to all of this without a person in the middle coming to Alameda to ask for it.

There's no one to hold accountable here, and they basically have a nationwide dragnet of all cars with all of the 49 states they're in to spy on people.

It's incredibly important with the actions that ICE has taken.

When we talked about this, it was a Biden era.

Now we're in a Trump era where we know ICE is using their tactics to come after people, and I don't want our devices we're paying and leasing to be spies in our own community.

So I ask you, agenda is this.

Thank you.

Um, thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh that was our last speaker.

That was our last speaker.

Okay, so with that, we will close um oral communication non-agenda items, and we will move on to the consent calendar.

Thank you, where um items are routine and can be approved by one motion unless council members remove items for discussion.

And any removed items will be heard after the regular agenda items.

Council members may speak for up to three minutes on um the consent calendar.

So um, first of all, are there any items on the consent calendar that any council member wants to pull?

Council member Days.

Uh item 5A, the minutes of July 1st meeting okay.

So we'll hear that at the end of the regular calendar.

Okay.

Any others?

Yes.

Councilmember Jensen.

5H.

5H.

Okay.

Um we will hear that at the end of the regular agenda.

All right.

Any other polls?

Okay, so um hold that thought.

And um, are there any clarifying questions?

Not counting the two items that were pulled.

Does any council member have any questions on the remaining consent calendar items?

Councilmember Bowler.

Uh 5K.

5K.

And um, Madam Clerk, could you introduce that item for us?

Yes, 5A is an agreement uh regarding the uh civic center parking.

K and kite.

Kite.

K as in kite is sorry, is an agreement for the civic center parking.

Yes, I said the right thing wrong.

You did.

Sorry.

Okay, all right.

And your question, Councilmember Bowler.

Um, I just have a question about the bidding process.

Okay, who's is that um public works director Aaron Smith who has answers to all things.

Parking structure related, welcome.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council.

I'm Aaron Smith, the city's public works director.

Happy to answer any questions you have, Councilmember Bowler.

Thank you so much.

I just uh really appreciate appreciate staff's attention to the bidding process, trying to make it competitive, um, looking at various things that were going on there.

And I guess my question, my my main question revolves around the staff report and indicating that um if we were to try for more bids again, that basically that would increase the overall project cost due to market fluctuations and additional administrative efforts.

But you know, if you look at the um the original budget was for about a million dollars, and that's putting aside the alternate bids.

One of the bids that came in that was not qualifying was for just under a million dollars.

Um, but the one that is recommended that is qualifying is substantially higher.

It's one point three, four, four million.

So it's a it's a it's a very large difference.

Um is how does the city come to the conclusion that more bidding would result in even higher than that?

Thanks for the question.

Um I know there was an additional um information that was provided this afternoon that I'm happy to share here now.

Um so the there was two bids, as you noted, um, which is on the lower side, but um this is sort of unique and nuanced work at a parking garage, it's not typical flat concrete work where we tend to get more bids, so we did get fewer bids.

Um the lowest bid, which was deemed non-responsive, um, did have their base bid less than a million dollars.

Um, but when you added in the other items, which we had intended to award, um, it made the project subject to our project stabilization agreement with the Alameda Building Trades.

And that lowest bid, um, even though we dismissed them, so it was sort of a moot point, acknowledge that they had not considered the fact that the project is subject to our project stabilization agreement if it if it exceeds a million dollars is the threshold, which means it requires union all union labor um on the job, and they would have revised their bid estimate to be actually higher than the second bidder.

So that was sort of an indicator for us that that's assuming we had additional bids that had responded, knowing that union labor is required on this job, that that seemed to be about what the market was bearing at this point, and and then and that's very helpful.

Like you're you're giving a lot more context.

I did see your email earlier today, but that that helped a lot just there.

Um if you go a little bit further, the question also asked like how do you project that it would be if you did go back to competitive bidding and assuming all those requirements that you would still be substantially, or I don't want to put words in the in your mouth, but the staff report talks about the cost being even higher.

So, what that be what that statement is based on is just we're now four or five months later from May when we had originally bid it.

So, in general, just costs continue to go up.

And oftentimes, just from experience in managing lots of projects, once cards are sort of played, um, meaning um contractors put a number on the table.

We oftentimes never see that number go down when we rebid a project.

We, if anything, always see that get ratchet up, and that's just based upon experience that the department has in bidding a number of projects.

That that that's our that's our belief that that's what would happen for this project.

Okay, thank you.

And if I may, I'll just add to that as you were discussing um director Smith.

So I'm the vice chair of the Alamity County Transportation Commission right now, and and we often get bids in that um are way higher than we were anticipating for our project.

And I was talking to our executive director recently, who's the former executive director of all of Caltrans, and I said, Why don't we go back out to bid?

And he said, you know, vice chair, once this the bid package is open, it's all public.

No one is gonna bid less than than the ones they're just not gonna do that.

And so then you do work with what you have to make it the best um possible contract.

But um, anyway, I I appreciate the explanation, but good to ask those questions.

Thank you.

Okay, and that was all for you.

Yes.

Anything further for our public works director?

Okay, thank you so much.

All right, and council, do we have any other clarifying questions on the consent calendar?

Um then I'm not seeing any.

So um, do we have public speakers on the consent calendar, madam clerk?

And really quickly before we call the public speakers, I would like to also announce that item 5T is a public hearing to consider adoption of resolution amending the master fee resolution number 1219 to make clerical and administrative corrections to the fee schedule for the planning division and public works departments, and now is the time for public comment on that public hearing as well.

And tell me what item that was again.

Five T.

5T is in.

As in Tom.

Tom.

Yes.

And then we have one speaker, and that is Gabrielle Duncan.

Okay.

All right, let's have our public speaker, um, Speaker Duncan.

Come on up.

Sorry, that's all right.

Can you read these minutes?

Hello, my name is Gabriel Duncan.

I'm the founder of the Alameda Native History Project.

Not really.

Hello, Mayor Ashcraft and Council members.

Thank you.

I'm here today to object to the city's continued payments to the Alameda Museum for storing our official archives.

The museum is barely open to the public.

It mislabeled Ohlone people as Mi Wok.

It doesn't have any African American history or any Asian American history.

It only focuses on white people's history and the history of the Alameda Naval Air Station and also the Victorian era of colonization of the city.

Um the Alameda Museum was called out for holding a loney funerary possessions and putting them on display, uh, which is against the Native American Great Protection and Repatriation Act.

Uh they simply began to remove pictures and other documentation of things like the dedication of the plaque that we now have at Lincoln Park.

Uh and that's not accountability, that's censorship.

Uh and it's especially despicable from an organization that we call the Alameda Museum, which is supposed to represent the history of all Alamedans.

The funerary objects in possession do not belong to the Alameda Museum.

They were taken from Alameda Shell Mounds and given to the Alameda Library.

There's no proof that they were legally transferred from the library to the Alameda Historical Society.

So therefore they're still in possession, or they belong to the Alameda Library, and furthermore, they belong to the city.

California law makes it a crime to remove or display burial items.

State law requires consultation with tribes, and new legislation has strengthened repatriation.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms these same rights.

Take possession of the funerary objects and hold them safely until they can be returned to the Muekma Olone tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Conduct an independent audit of all city-owned materials at the museum and commit to creating a new inclusive history center that tells the truth about Alameda's past and honors Native American, Black, Asian American, and all other communities which have been erased.

Healing from the past requires honesty and respect.

Alameda cannot claim equity and inclusion while supporting a museum that denies the very people who built this island.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

That was our only speaker.

Okay.

So with that, I'm going to close public comment on the consent calendar.

And I would ask for a motion, and this is the balance of the consent calendar, not including items 5A and 5H.

That's Apple and Happy.

So do I have a motion to approve balance of the consent calendar?

It's been moved by Councilmember Bowler, seconded by Councilmember Desog.

Any further discussion seeing none.

All those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay, Madam Clerk, we will return now.

Over churn will move on to the regular agenda.

And would you please introduce the um the agenda item and also tell us how the speakers are going to um is how the speaking is going to work.

Great.

Um, this is a public hearing to consider an appeal of the planning board's approval of use permit amendment PLN 240094 to allow additional operating hours for the existing legal non-conforming use gas station located at 1310 Central Avenue, as well as sale of packaged foods and non-alcoholic beverages in the existing store and adoption of related resolution.

This project is categorically exempt from additional environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15301 existing facilities.

And tonight we have a presentation, and we have so far I think close to 30 speakers uh on this item.

And after the staff presentation, because this is an appeal, um, maybe the uh council could vote to give the appellant and the applicant, the owner of the property, um, five minutes each so that they can give their presentation prior to the public comment.

Um and you know what, let's just vote on that now.

So, what the clerk is um city clerk is saying is that we will have the usual 10 minutes for our staff presentation.

But the the neighbor who brought the appeal of the planning board decision um would like five minutes, and the the gas station owner, um, the subject of this appeal would also like five minutes.

So um we're essentially uh voting on another 10 minutes a portion of the way.

Thank you.

Second.

All right.

So on my left hand, we have a motion to grant that time as noted.

Uh motion by council member Tracy Jensen, seconded by Vice Mayor Michelle Pryor.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, any abstentions?

That passes unanimously.

Welcome, Mr.

McGuire.

You want to introduce yourself.

Good evening, Mayor Ashcraft and members of the city council.

Brian McGuire, project planner here to present the staff report for item 7a, an appeal of the planning board's approval of a use permit amendment for the mobile gas station at 1310 Central Avenue.

On June 8th, the planning board approved changes to the existing use permit for the gas station, allowing some additional operating hours and the sale of a broader mix of products in the very small store on site.

We received a formal appeal from a neighbor, Leland Price.

Uh so are before you tonight to consider overturning, or a staff recommends upholding the planning board approval.

Um the gas station is located at the intersection of Central Sherman and Ensinal Avenue, also known as State Route 61.

Uh the gas station's been a part of the neighborhood since at least 1950.

The site was labeled industrial on the big land use map hanging in the first floor hallway and was zoned commercial with our first zoning ordinance in 1958.

Um City Council rezoned the property as residential in 1974, which created the non-conforming condition.

Over the following decades, numerous applications, appeals, modifications were considered, um, instituting limited hours, reinstating auto repair on site, and changing what products are can be sold, and so on.

The current conditions have been in place since 2012.

The Alameda Municipal Code provides the ability via use permit to change one non-conforming use, in this case uh gas station and a uh residentially zoned district from one non-conforming use to another of the same or more restrictive use classification.

The gas station currently operates 7 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

on Saturdays, and is closed on Sundays.

The use permit amendment proposes allowing the gas station to open from 6 a.m.

to 10 p.m.

Monday through Friday and 7 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

on weekends.

Currently, only automotive products can be sold in the small on-site store.

The use permit amendment proposal allowing convenient allows can would allow convenience items to be sold on site, though alcohol and tobacco sales would continue to be prohibited.

Reviewing the record from previous planning board and council meetings over the years.

Um primary issue that was clear with the site with the neighborhood seemed to be the noise generated from the adjacent auto repair use.

Um changes are proposed to the auto repair hours of operation, um, which is a separate tenant, as I said.

The proposed hours of 6 a.m.

to 10 p.m.

weekdays and seven to eight on weekends would still be more restrictive than any other gas station on the island, um, where you can see 5 a.m.

to 11 p.m.

or even 24 hour operations are the norm.

The appeal makes a number of arguments um in asking the council to overturn the planning board decision.

The appellant argues that previous violations of the existing hours of operation should be disqualifying, and that the planning board was not aware of that history.

Um in fact, the planning board staff report highlighted two prior verified occasions where pumps were left on overnight and noted that the application was mutually paused until the operator could clearly demonstrate their ability to abide by the current um conditions of approval.

The appeal states that the planning board was presented with wrong current hours, and this created confusion.

Uh the planning board staff report did contain one typo regarding current hours, but that issue was clarified twice during the meeting to make sure all planning board members fully understood the current hours and pro current and proposed hours of operation before taking any action.

The appeal argues that Sunday, the Sunday closure was required to allow the nearby church to use the site as parking.

Whether or not any informal arrangements may exist is purely a voluntary arrangement and not a condition of the existing use permit.

The appeal says that extended hours would cause increased light pollution, and the planning board did not consider the issue or take appropriate action to address potential impacts.

Continuing uh the last of the appeal arguments.

The appeal claims that the use permit amendment is inconsistent with the general plan.

Um among other things, the gas station has been a neighborhood fixture for over 75 years, and the general plan specifically calls out supporting existing legal non-conforming neighborhoods serving commercial uses that predate the zoning code.

The proposal is consistent with the general plan.

Um the appeal states that declining revenues of the gas station aren't a good reason to amend the use permit since Exxon Mobil had 300 billion in revenues last year.

Um staff recognizes that the station operates as an independent franchise, is a small local business and has been present in the neighborhood for a very long time.

Um another factor that staff and the planning board considers is that failed gas station sites tend to turn into challenged blighted properties.

Um and staff feels that supporting the business in a responsible way is in the community's best interest.

Finally, the appeal argues that the EV transition means that this action just delays the inevitable.

Staff acknowledges the broader trends in the automotive sector, but feels that severely restricting the existing business without a viable alternative in place would increase the risk of a long-term vacancy and cause the property to become blighted.

The attached resolution asks council to make the necessary use permit findings, such as neighborhood compatibility, and also find the project categorically exempt from CEQA.

With that, staff is recommending you hold a public hearing and adopt the resolution upholding the planning board approval to amend the existing use permit.

Um the appellant and the applicant are here to address the council, and staff is available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

And um what let's see, what we can do is we can take don't go away yet, Mr.

McGuire.

We can take any clarifying questions now, or would it be better?

I'm looking at city attorney to wait until we've heard from both the appellant and the um property owner or the business owner.

Madam Mayor certainly your pleasure, but if the council has questions for uh planning staff, this is maybe a time to this time for clarifying questions.

So I see council member Jensen, then Council Member Bowler.

Thank you.

Um thank you.

Mr.

McGuire, uh, I've been on the city council for nearly three years, and there have been just a few instances of planning board appeals coming to the city council.

Can you please clarify what are the circumstances for which planning board decisions may be appealed?

Yeah, so I don't know the last um, there's two sort of um ways of planning board decision typically, and the attorney's office may speak to this better than than I can.

Um get before the council.

There's either an appeal, so anyone can file an appeal of a planning board decision during the 10-day appeal window by paying the fee and providing the reasons for the appeal, um, or we also have the procedure where two council members can call an item for review, which has been the more often um path for a planning board decision to end up before the council in my tenure.

And to that point, this is uh because of your hard work and the hard work of city staff to ensure and and also the planning.

This is a time for question.

So I'm going I'm fine.

I'm going to a question.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor, um so the planning board staff, the planning board itself, but gets direction from staff to address some of the potential issues that you've raised, several of them that were um that are appealable.

And so those things would tend to be like more likely to be addressed during the planning board meeting and the planning board decision making.

Um I think I I think I understand the question.

Um the planning board did have the opportunity to consider basically you know everything that was contained in the appeal.

Um obviously it's you know, reasonable people can can disagree about a policy outcome.

So I think in this case um there was you know the member of the public disagreed, and um I'm sure you'll hear from both sides.

But the planning board did consider um the issues that are before the council tonight as well.

Thank you.

Okay, and let's stick to clarifying questions, just technical clarifying questions about the staff report.

Council Member Bowler.

Thank you.

Um thank you so much for your presentation on the issue of the um non-conforming use being of the same or more restricted use classification.

Is that because of what you talked about with other um gas stations in the city?

Because you it's a little bit counterintuitive, right?

Because you're thinking, well, it's less restrictive.

Yeah, the the interpretation we have and happy to defer to um uh city attorney as well, but the interpretation we took is that the language basically says it's of the same category.

So in this case, it's a gas station in a residential neighborhood, it's just the conditions of approval are changing.

Some jurisdictions might have um a different language or different sort of criteria they use for for addressing this non-conforming issue, but in this case um we interpreted that as a um the same use category.

So it's it's it's the the category is the same, the the conditions in which it operates.

Um, you know, the question of like isn't an expansion or you know, the word intensification sometimes gets used.

Um we also took the the you know, if we needed to, which we we didn't sort of read the language that way, um, given the the data that the applicant um provided planning staff to show the sort of trend of decreasing sales over the last decade, um it's it was sort of our supposition that over the years before the current owner and and with the current owner, there's been varying amounts of business activity on the site, and that given the drop-off in sales, the current um increased hours of operation would not increase the level of commercial activity at the site than has been historically present.

Um did that answer your question?

I yeah, I do have a few other questions.

Okay, and I was gonna say um Mr.

Shannon, I think we have our um from the city attorney's office Cara Silver, who is the attorney who advises the planning board.

And maybe Ms.

Silver, if you wouldn't mind moving forward in case um we have any just technical slash legal questions about standards and whatnot.

Thank you so much.

Um so you've got double coverage here.

Okay, go on, Mr.

Bowler.

Well, I guess I I could ask if the city attorney's office has any extra input on that issue.

And and do you want to repeat the question just so it's fresh in her mind?

Just the non-conforming use as being changed to one of the same or more restricted use classification.

Yes, thank you.

Uh Kara Silver's special attorney, and my my voice is not with me today.

Um, but I will try the best.

I can hear you back to the um so um Mr.

McGuire was correct that we did analyze this in terms of different use classifications.

So there are a variety of different uses that would be considered um uh non-conforming for this particular piece of property.

So it's it's residentially zoned, and so you know, a um gas station or a dry cleaner or a manufacturing plant would all be considered non-conforming.

And if you were to switch into one of those different thank you so much.

We're a full service operation, City Valley meeting.

Thanks.

Different types of use classifications, that's we we believe that that's what our ordinance asks us to compare.

In this particular situation, the use, which was a gas station with a service um service repair use attached to it, was not changing.

The overall use was not changing, it was just the conditions of approval, which were essentially the um operational hours that were changing.

Thank you.

And for Mr.

McGuire.

Thank you.

I want to just pick up on something you were talking about.

I'm gonna get your words wrong, so I apologize in advance, but to the extent you were talking about that this was the judgment of city staff that this use would be no more substantial an impact on the neighborhood than had been over the years, or something to that effect.

Could you could you expand on that a little bit?

And to what extent does that have to do with the distinction between what the repair shop and its noise issues versus the other types of potential disturbance that the pellet talks about for the uh store?

Yeah, I think when we were first looking at it, there was just the question of like you know, is this considered, you know, I think a lot of planners work in different jurisdictions.

Um, you know, the the I came back to that word intensification is sort of a a common threshold, a common standard.

But in our case, it actually wasn't the legal basis that we were worrying about.

Obviously, the the planning board and the council can consider the potential you know impacts of changing the hours of operation or the product sold on site and and come to your own judgment.

Um from so we we ended up not actually needing to rely on on any sort of legal interpretation of that.

It was really just what um Ms.

Silver was was saying as regards to the use classification.

Um but we did sort of think about it in sort of a classic planner mindset of like you know, is there could you justify this from uh uh that intensification angle if you needed to, but it turned out not to be the the course we we really needed to consider it from.

Of course, the you have discretion on this item and can consider um you know what you will, but just from uh interpreting the code point of view.

Um yeah, I didn't mean to talk about the code again.

I was I was trying to focus on the more the the policy planning perspective on how much of an impact this would have on the neighborhood if that was a substantial factor in your mind.

Yeah, I mean we were we're balancing the the sort of concerns the uh you know the policies that support um supporting neighborhood businesses, existing non-conforming businesses, it's an existing business.

So we're balancing those needs.

The the obviously the uh station provides a service to the community, and they'd like to provide more service to the community with different range of products, more hours, um, and balancing that against some of the neighbors who did have concerns about what they're selling or what hours they're operating in.

And so, you know, it's we we sort of tried to find that that balance and and the planning board um supported that sort of where we came to.

An another thing that stood out in your presentation was the notion that um if this business is not successful, that there might be a long period of time where uh this area becomes vacant.

And I know that was part of the staff report too.

Is there can you expand on that and to what degree did that really influence your your recommendation?

Yeah, it's one of one of a number of factors.

I think you know, we we've seen um just across the street or just up the street, you know, um former service stations that had underground storage tanks um are hard to redevelop um with new uses.

Um they often end up either just vacant or they the auto repair use could expand, you end up with more you know, cars parked in on the lot at all hours, you know, um, and just observing sort of how similar properties have evolved over the years.

We thought that you know um this was an opportunity to sort of support an existing business that was providing a service and um hopefully avoid um obviously we try to address those issues and and uh but avoid one potential outcome that that we've seen with these type of properties.

Thank you so much.

Anything further, Mr.

Bowler?

No, any other clarifying questions from council.

Okay, thank you, uh Mr.

McGuire.

So let's now hear from the appellant, followed by the business owner.

And so this is five minutes each, correct?

Okay.

Good evening.

Thank you, Brian, and the planning department for the summary.

Appreciate all the work you've done here on this issue.

Neighbors I represent move forward with this appeal because we did not feel that the planning board adequately addressed the concerns we have about the expansion of the mobile station on central.

I've spoken to dozens of neighbors that live in the blocks surrounding the gas station, and we'll try to summarize the key issues of concern the council here.

Uh, before getting to those issues, I did want to comment on what was just discussed about the the threat of abandonment with this gas station.

It's one of the reasons the planning board uh approved the hours here.

Um I think that assumption is false.

That the property has both a gas station and an auto repair shop on site.

And this is just regarding the gas station, but the property owner has basically two tenants on site because they're both paying rent.

And so most gas stations have one operator, not two.

Um and so the landlord who owns the station should be the one bearing the change of risk here with gas station gas revenues declining over time, and they should be lowering the rent for their operator or combining the operations into one to be more efficient on site.

Um this really shouldn't be borne by the neighborhood.

Uh so part of the issue that we're bringing this is this this permit expansion is going to subsidize the landlord who's receiving the rents, they're not being asked to lower the rent or charge less for the operators to operate their business.

Uh we're being asked to bear more hours for uh for the from the community.

So um with that, I'll briefly cover the issues that are most sensitive to the community that have come up.

First issue is expansion of hours into the night.

Uh this would be moving from an 8 p.m.

closing time to a 10 p.m.

closing time.

This is well outside the historical operation of the gas station in the neighborhood, which has never been past 8 p.m.

per Brian's report.

And many of the families who have young children, it's well past bedtime.

Cars filling up, play music or have loud engines, create a nuisance in the neighborhood.

We know this happens, and we don't have to speculate because when the gas station was operating their pumps after hours outside of their permit, uh we had noisy cars late at night, which led to complaints to code enforcement.

There's a light commercial area nearby, but no other retails open after 8:30 p.m.

It's really unfair to compare this gas station to ones on Park and Webster Street, which are zoned for commercial in high traffic non-residential areas.

When we purchased our home, uh we asked our broker about the gas station.

She said it was zoned residential, and the hours were capped at 8 p.m., which makes complete sense for location.

We have no issue with the current operations of the gas station.

The second issue is the addition of the convenience store, the permit.

The neighborhood already has a convenience store, A1 Market, just two blocks away on Incennal.

It's a family business owned and operated by long-time residents of the Franklin Park area.

And any sales at a new convenience store will come at the expense of A1 Market.

A gallon of milk that mobile sells is a gallon of milk that A1 is not selling.

The community already has a great convenience store, and late night gas is four minutes away on Insanal and Park, so there's no community need that's being met here with this expansion.

The third issue is that the sets of precedent that if your business is running poorly and the city will compromise the quality of life of its residents under the threat of a closure.

The bigger question, which Brian alluded to, is that Alameda has a stated goals of reducing CO2 emissions, reducing uh gas sales, and the question is you know, are we gonna be back here three or four years, expanding hours further to midnight or two a.m.

or 24-7?

We're adding a liquor store because of the threats of a closure.

So we're looking for some leadership here from the city council to set clear boundaries on what's appropriate for this location in our historic neighborhood because these changes come at the expense of the quality of life of the residents in the area.

We've had clear boundaries to date.

The owners and operators have known the zoning limits when they purchased the property and operated the property, and I don't see a reason for those to change.

In conclusion, if I can summarize our asks will be to limit the hours to 8 p.m., protect our local market by removing the convenience store permit, and require any future changes, if possible, to have both the approval of the planning board and the city council to limit continued expansion on the permit.

I thank you all for your time and consideration, and I deeply deeply appreciate your service to the city of Alameda.

Thank you.

Could you tell us your name, sir?

Leland Price.

Thank you.

All right.

Um do we want any clarifying questions of Mr.

Price?

I have a clarifying question, Mr.

Price.

Are you aware of um a bar called the Benton?

I am.

Where is that?

It's on Ensignal Street.

Are you aware that they don't have a permit to operate?

Answer my question.

You're aware of it.

It's across the street from the gas station, is that correct?

It is it is across the street from the gas station.

Okay, and I'm just looking at their operating hours, and we've got code enforcement in the room that I'm sure can follow up on any issues.

But according to the website, they're open from um 3 p.m.

to 1 a.m.

Monday through Thursday and 3 p.m.

to 2 a.m.

Friday, Saturday, Friday, and Saturday nights.

Were you aware of that?

Yes.

All right, thank you.

Um any other questions, council?

All right, thank you so much.

I have to point out that that they don't think you so much operate.

This was QA.

Thank you.

Um, Madam Clerk, would you call the um business owner next, please?

Yes.

Hello, hi there.

It's good to see all of you.

Um, my first name is Case, last name Ahmed.

Welcome.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Um to be honest with you, I don't know why he appealed because I'm not trying to stay too late at all.

The maximum I need to stay on the weekdays to 10 p.m.

and the weekend to 8 p.m.

That's all I need.

The reason I need to extend the hours, I'm really struggling with the rent, struggling with the taxes and the property tax too, and struggling with all the utility, and I'm trying to get some more hours.

And with that thing, I post the paper for in this on the gas station for support us to have more hours.

And I have 400.

All customers happy to come and help me and support me.

They are so happy.

And the comments, it's a lot of them give me the smile and give me the time up that we need this gas station to be open a little more late.

Not too late, but to 10 p.m.

So I'm so glad I got 400 signature with with the petitions.

And I'm not trying to, I'm not trying to sell no alcohol or no tobacco or anything.

Or any lottery.

Like no lottery at all, no tobacco, and no alcohol.

I'm trying to just stay to 10 p.m.

on the weekdays and in the weekend to 8 p.m.

just have a little water, a little soda, and that's it.

On Bark Street, this gas station is next to the house.

Open 24 hours.

And this one here, next one, open 24 hours next to a house.

I'm not trying to stay not late hours.

The city asked me to uh to stop the audio for the bumps, and I did already.

And the Q me you uh the community is very nice, so quiet, beautiful.

I respect all the neighbor.

We have the best neighbors in the Bay Area, and I bust this one zone in each pumps to let them know that we needed to be quiet and respect all the neighbors.

Since since June 9 when I came in here, I win.

The next day, June 10.

I have harassments from the neighbor.

Every day coming to me and harassment me and coming to watch the dispenser if it's off, it's closed or not.

I have a really really hard time with him to explain to him.

I'm not staying too late, but he's on me all the time.

And he came to harassment me, and I have a police report here against him.

I really don't want to do that to a neighbor, but I have to because uh I don't want no drama in the gas station.

And so far, he uh one of the neighbors came to me and told me I'm supporting you, but the reason I'm not supporting you because it's you stay until midnight.

I have he came and gave me a flyer from the neighbor.

It showed that I am opening all the way to midnight.

So he made people to sign his petition that he we opening all the way to after midnight, and we are going to do explanation.

We're not doing no expansion at all.

We trying to stay to 10 p.m.

And trying to help the community and help the customers.

That's mostly, but let me explain to you.

This is he made this one is fake, false, uncorrect information to people to sign his petition.

That we are staying to midnight and opening to make it expansion.

We're not the story so small.

If it's two people coming, the third person cannot come.

He complaining every day.

It's like you know, when somebody moved to next to the airport and complaining, it's so noisy from the airplane.

The other thing, you know, I'm I'm really struggling, and I really need those hours to help me.

If he doesn't want to give me Saturday or Sunday, help me with half the rent.

And I'll be happy to close and go swindle with my three kids here.

You know, it's very simple that.

But I need those hours, and I promise you, I would not leave it even one minute after the hours I expected.

And I'll be responsible for that.

That's mostly I can talk.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Um, council, do we have any clarifying questions from Mr.

Ahmed?

Um, Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you for your presentation.

So you've done some research and looked into these operating hours, how this might impact your revenue, your your ability to make more money.

It's to try to pay the bills and the rent.

I can't pay the bills and the rent on time.

Every time I'm late, I'm late, I'm late.

You know, the landlord is really tired of me because I call on him to extend to pay the rent.

No, I understand.

Yeah.

Did you decide going for you're going from um from to 7 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

to 10 p.m.?

So you're adding you would like to add two additional hours in the evening.

I'm trying to add two hours because I've been asking a lot of customers, and they're coming to me.

Why you not lay a little bit?

Especially Saturday.

Closing a 4 p.m.

super early.

People get off the beach or get off the work and come into the gas station.

The gas station is closed.

They're like, why is close?

They need uh the gas station to be more open and help me and help help me to bid the bill and help me help the community too.

Thank you.

Of course.

Any other clarifying questions, council?

Councilmember Bowler.

Sir Ahmed, thank you so much for your presentation.

Appreciate your time and thoughtfulness about your business.

You know, this the neighbors in the community, some of them have had concerns over recent months about, I guess, noise, lights, impact on the neighborhood at night on occasions when the gas station was operating outside of normal hours, whether it was a mistake or not.

How did you address those concerns and how would you address them going forward if you were granted this extra time in the permit?

Good question.

First thing the community is so quiet.

Perfect community.

The neighbor's so nice.

I'm trying to keep it as is.

The best thing I can do it, you know, the light, I will make sure all the lights off at 10 p.m.

And in a week at Saturday, Sunday, 8 p.m.

exactly, to make sure everything is off if they want me to keep it off.

And it's believe me, it's not going to be no noisy because I know how the there is running the neighborhood.

The people are so quiet.

The people just pumping gas and leave.

They don't even come to the C store.

Like 5% maybe come into the C store.

People really pumping gas and leave.

So I'm sure it's going to be more quiet.

And I promise you, it's going to be quite community quiet gas station.

You also, I mean, I noticed walking by your store that the blinds are down or there's different coverings on the windows.

What's the purpose of that for the store portion?

And um what type of traffic do you get in the store currently?

We we don't get that much traffic there.

Like it's just a regular people, most of most of them is the most a community coming.

But you're talking about the blender on the window.

That one is uh I like to change something new.

I don't want it to be like different uh curtain.

I just change it to a different curtain.

I want to see how it looks like, especially help me with the sun.

When we stay inside, it cover it doesn't make the sun go inside very good.

It's like nice, quiet, and cool.

And you understand that if you were granted additional time, um that could always be revoked by the city too.

Do you understand that?

Yes, absolutely.

What types of things would you be doing going forward to make sure that the neighbors' concerns aren't amplified, that they don't get worse over time?

Uh to keep first thing to keep my eye on everything.

That's number one, and keep it uh clean.

If you see loud, somebody came with a little bit of music, I can come out for him and tell him please slow down the music.

We leave in the neighbor, uh show respect.

I did that one time already.

Usually I never have anybody coming with loud music or with traffic, too much traffic at all.

So if I see something, I will come out and talk to them, slow down with the music, load the volume, please.

Like I have, I have a lot of sciences, so respect our neighbors and residents, no noisy or no uh loud music.

And what percentage of the time, like let's just say on the evenings, those last couple hours, would we expect that you would actually be there as the business owner?

What per what how many days a week do you would you actually be there for the last few hours?

How many days I work?

Uh I work there six days a week.

Uh so far now it's Sunday is closed, but if we open on Sunday, I will come closing time.

I have my other employee who's gonna be opening, and I'm gonna be the closing one to make sure everything is closed and shut off the pumps.

No bumps leave them on the night time at all.

10 p.m.

I want to close the bumps and Saturday, Sunday close them at 8 p.m.

No, even 801.

I will make sure clear them uh close them 7:59 or 9.59 in the night time.

And I promise you with that.

You can do any inspection and you will see them shut off the pumps, the dispenser.

Thank you so much.

That all for you, council members.

Okay, any other clarifying questions, council?

Okay, madam quick, let's go to public comment.

Okay, and I'll call like three at a time because there are 33 uh speaker slips.

And Madam Cler, do we have any on uh remote speakers as well?

No, not right now.

They're all in person.

Do they do everybody's here?

Um Richard Nordick and then Anita Burnaford and Tim Rumberger.

Okay, and you said two minutes each.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

I'm Anita Burnaford.

I'm here to represent Trinity Lutheran Church and its pastor, um, that are located directly across the street from the gas station.

We'd like to speak in support of them.

They've been very gracious to us as neighbors.

We've had a series of pastors live in the parsonage, which is immediately adjacent to the church over the years, and had very good relationships, and no complaint about noise or anything that's that's been raised here.

So we just want to say we've appreciated them as neighbors and and the kindness that they've shown to us and the the courtesy that they show to everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, uh Richard Nordick, then uh Tim Rumper.

Richard Horker.

Yes, please.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you very much.

I have how many minutes?

Two.

Two.

Oh, geez, okay.

Uh honorable uh Mayor Oshcroft and esteemed council members.

My name is Richard Nordike, and I live about uh a hundred to two hundred uh yards from the gas station.

Um I sympathize and I with due respect to the current owners.

I've lived uh at my location for over 35 years.

I'm acutely aware of the gas station.

Uh I'm not in favor of it uh for a number of reasons.

I I know the issue of uh convenience store has been brought up before and it's been rejected.

Uh the argument for extended hours, I sympathize.

I'm a previous accountant and CPA, and it's a bottom line issue.

Even if they're open for 24 hours, I doubt that there is much survival for that gas station under the uh present uh conditions of six other gas stations in the area.

The um uh unless uh excuse me here, I got my notes.

Uh negative aspects have been mentioned, uh potential uh traffic accidents at that uh dangerous intersection with cars coming in and going out.

Uh that's a major concern.

Uh another big issue uh is the uh children that go to Franklin School two blocks away uh with the traffic going in and out and in and out.

So I'm against the uh uh extended hours.

Uh my suggestion would be to reduce the hours, sorry, uh, to uh somewhere between uh nine o'clock and five p.m.

like it was before.

Uh inroaching on the hours uh uh additional ones.

We're gonna see it come back.

We're gonna have maybe a 24 hour or 7-11 there at some point.

The neighbors don't want it.

Would you want it in your neighborhood?

Would you want it next door to your house?

The answer is no.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Tim Rumberger, then Ethan Rafferty, and then uh Big Aki.

Welcome, Speaker Remberger.

Good afternoon, or good evening, uh Mayor and Vice Mayor and uh council members and members of the public that are watching.

Uh my name is Timothy Rumberger.

I'm a resident of Alameda for the last 30 some years.

Uh, live uh within a block or so of the gas station.

And uh just offering my comments here tonight to assist you in your duty to balance the needs of the residents, the many residents, with this one owner and parcel, and suggest to you that the competing needs and the needs of so many in the neighborhood that are opposed to it should be a factor in not extending these hours or expanding the use of it.

I've offered a letter, it's in your package, it was posted on the website today, so I won't repeat the details of that, but I'd offered six points.

I just summarized them here.

It's a very sensitive location, it's a five-point intersection, one of the few in the city.

When you try to cross that with your dog or your kids or the bike, it's it's complicated, and so that makes it different than any of the other units, other locations in the city that you should take that into consideration.

There's already excellent businesses near convenience stores that's been mentioned.

There are uh the fact that it's was purchased knowing these restrictions.

There's uh on behalf of the owners, they really don't have a right to expect a change now.

And all of us as residents who bought and have moved in there have relied on the existing restrictions.

Um I've mentioned that the traffic uh intersection is already awkward.

I understand it's going to be having a circle put in soon, a roundabout, um, which will reduce even further the six-point parking on the street.

There's almost no curbside parking, of course, it's an intersection.

Um, I'd only mention additionally that the one comment that was posted on the website was from a resident, but that resident lives on Cypress Street, two miles away.

Um, all the other comments that I've seen were in opposition to extending the hours.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Ethan Rafferty, then Big Aki, then Joanne Stewart.

All right, how mind that?

Hello.

The clock's already there.

Council members.

Um the gas station is an eyesore at the prominent intersection of a residential uh historic beautiful neighborhood.

Um the proposal will increase traffic as well as light noise and exhaust pollution, and will increase commercial activity in this residential neighborhood.

Um as Richard mentioned, they already earlier expanded their hours some years ago.

Now they want more later hours open on Sunday plus a convenience store, which is clearly um uh less restrictive uh classification.

Uh the next progression in this series of steps would be a 247 uh opening hours plus serving alcohol.

The convenience stores uh like Circle K gas stations are not even on the main couple of commercial blocks of Park and Webster Street, and yet we're looking at expanding them in a residential neighborhood and residential zoning.

Um we moved here 20 plus years ago.

The talk had been of removing the gas station, replacing it with the park.

Um to remove the ISO and restore the historic residential neighborhood feel.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh Big Aki, Joanne Stewart, and then Steven Van Meter Hello, pull up.

There we go.

Hello, my name is Bill Ake, and uh thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Uh, as I'm sure you know, the discussion around this uh gas station has gone on for many years.

As you also may know, and is highlighted in the planning report, the gas station and the auto repair use function are separate businesses with separate owners.

And the reason I mention that is because the planning report uh just tries to justify the increased hours and uh the convenience store on several occasions in the report by saying it's okay because they're not increasing the repair hours.

Uh the repair business is quite happy with their hours now.

They're not looking to extend her hours, so I don't feel this should be part of the justification.

Most of us in the neighborhood weren't wild about having a gas station.

We certainly didn't want a convenience store, uh, but the reality is we do have the gas station.

But um, as again in the the planning report, I think it's summarized very well.

The use of the property has been generally compatible with the adjacent residential uses due to carefully crafted limitations on the hours of operation and the types of services provided if they are adhered to.

So that was the agreement that was made, and that's what everybody has been uh accepted in the neighborhood.

Um in terms of the community, with the exception of the bar, which the mayor brought up, and uh which is a whole nother problem.

No one none of the other businesses in the neighborhood uh operate on these hours, and most are closed uh for Sunday, as the station currently is.

What's being requested is basically a 50% increase in the weekly hours, and I just feel like that's that's too much.

Um I don't have much time, but I'll close by saying the one statement again.

The use of the property has been generally compatible with the adjacent residential area because of the crafted limitations on the hours.

I urge you to stay with you.

Thank you so much in your time.

Is that our next speaker?

Uh Joanne Stewart, Stephen Van Meter, and then uh Mark Shoacton.

Welcome, Speaker.

Hello there.

Um, I just would like to say that I think our neighborhood is just perfect the way it is, and that I support what Tim and this gentleman behind me said, just don't make any changes, it's fine the way it is.

Thank you.

And who that speaker was who again?

Joanne Stewart.

Thank you.

And then Stephen Van Meter, uh Mark Shoackton, and then uh Jeannie Graven.

Welcome, Dr.

Van Meter.

Mayor and council members.

Thank you for the privilege of speaking to you.

I'm hearing impaired, so I haven't caught all the subtleties of the arguments.

I want to talk about traffic.

Some of it's anecdotal.

Sherman Street has become a crosstown street.

I've noticed the traffic on that, and I use it myself with heavy traffic more than in the past.

Who use the buses park on Bay Street?

I live about a block and a half from the area.

The future is the roundabout comes into effect in that area as I assume future planning is planning on that aroundabout.

And as the street diet progresses up Central Avenue from Webster toward our block, parking is going to be less and less available.

For these reasons, I propose I oppose any expansion of business in that uh area where the gas station is, and possibly the uh advent of a convenience store.

Lastly, I'd just like to say I'd like the council to consider uh preserving the character of the neighborhood and the conviviality of the neighborhood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh Mark Shualton, uh Jean Janine uh Graven and Donna Grabham.

Welcome, Speaker Schoenwalk.

Show Walter.

Mark Show Walter.

Good evening.

Thank you very much for hearing my voice on this matter.

Uh my name is Mark Show Walter.

I live at 1309 Sherman Street.

They have asked for expanding their hours before in the past, and we have begged not to do that in the past, and I'm begging you not to do that again now.

Uh we do not need an expanded hours for a gas station in our neighborhood.

There are plenty of 24 by seven gas stations on the island, all of them on the way off the island.

We don't need more time at a gas station in our neighborhood.

We don't even convenience store at the gas station.

A1 Market is right around the corner.

They're doing a great job.

They're open all the hours that I need.

Any other businesses would reduce their business.

And I I don't need another expansion store.

The expansion would only bring more delivery trucks and noise and light to our neighborhood.

We have a very quiet, beautiful neighborhood.

I love Alameda.

I love my neighborhood.

I don't word zoned a residential neighborhood for a reason.

We don't need to expand the amount of commercial business there.

If the business is unprofitable in the existing situation with our current permits, maybe they aren't a profitable business.

And just opening their hours for more, we have seen no evidence that suggests just having a few more hours is going to solve their problem.

The folks that are speaking out here tonight are the folks that actually live near the mobile station.

There's lots of talk of petitions for people that have signed but are not actually in the neighborhood.

Blight is not a concern.

I heard that raised.

It is so quiet at 10 o'clock right now.

It would be terrible to have more light, more noise.

I can I can see the light from the traffic light in my living room.

I can't imagine what adding more hours is going to do at this location.

So please please don't appear to be able to do that.

Thank you very much.

Janine Graham and then Donna Graham and then uh Tim Underwood.

Welcome.

I'm Janine Graven.

Thank you so much for taking time to listen to me today.

I am a neighbor from the corner of Sherman Street and Insanel.

I am directly across the street from the gas station.

And I have the unique benefit of having my bedroom face the gas station.

So what that means is that all of the noise that comes from that area will funnel across the street and up to my bedroom.

The reason being is that whole intersection is like an amphitheater.

I don't know if anybody's tested it, but you can stand in the middle of the street and talk to someone, and someone over there can hear what you're saying.

It actually just broadcasts the sound.

I can hear people at all times of night.

Um to your point, um, even people coming from the Benton.

Um even people coming from the Benton.

You can't hear them until they hit that section of the intersection.

And then it starts echoing everywhere.

So it really is a noise issue.

Um, even double paned windows aren't helping.

So please take that into consideration.

Um my second point is that adding a convenience type store there would take away from business at A1 Market.

And they are dear friends and neighbors in our community, and I would hate to see them lose any business at all.

Um I've never met a nicer man there.

I can't imagine him losing business.

So anyway, I wanted to say that we can work this out with shorter hours.

Nothing past eight would be better.

And just keep in mind that the residents there hear everything.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Donna Graham, uh, then Tim Underwood, and then Phil Graveham.

Madam Mayor and Council.

Thank you for the want to bring the mic down just a little.

Is that better?

I think so.

Uh, thank you for the opportunity to address you on this issue for the sixth time.

Uh, this has been going on for more than 20 years, and it's really weighing on the community uh to have to come and address this same issue time after time.

A couple of pertinent points that I'd like to make.

Uh, my daughter didn't mention, but she signed the petition that the owner had in the gas station, and to her mind it was misrepresentation.

The question was what hours would you be comfortable with?

Not are you comfortable giving us the hours that we want?

Different thing.

Uh we have been in our residence at 1344 Sherman for 53 years, and we have seen what happens when the lights are on at 10 o'clock.

We have lived through that disturbance, and we don't want to do it again.

Um there it is a community that is very unique, I think, in Alameda.

I don't know of any other business gas station really that is in such a quiet neighborhood, but it isn't quiet anymore.

Uh with the street diet, you've limited the lanes to one lane in each direction.

Traffic backs up now.

People are running lights to make it through the light because they don't want to wait the uh time for the three different signals to go.

Uh it's produced a lot of more noise from the uh fire uh engines and ambulances.

I don't know what rerouting they've done, but there's a lot more traffic there as well.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Tim Underwood, then Phil Graveham, then Heather A.

Welcome, Speaker Underbridge.

Sorry if I'm nervous.

Uh Madam Mayor, members of the council.

Uh my name's Tim Underwood.

I live at 1340 Sherman.

I've been there since 1986.

When we moved into that neighborhood, that service station was not working.

Was non-used a few months later, the uh gas, not the gas, but the repair shop opened with Mr.

Duffley.

Um totally object to these hours.

It's nearly a 30% increase in hours.

Uh the light pollution, the noise.

Um just the environmental.

I'm assuming if that guy's going to get a 30% increase in hours, he's going to get a 30% increase of gas deliveries.

That means you've got, I don't know how many gallons he stores, but a truck carries around 20,000 gallons.

They used to get delivered at night, and I complained and they cut that back.

So there's not that much happening.

But you're it's a residential neighborhood.

He's surrounded on all sides by houses.

And yes, there's a bar a block away.

They're busy time, it's like from five to eight.

I walk to A1 Market nearly every night because that's the way I've been brought up.

The bar is very few hours.

It's not busy.

It does have a lot of hours, so there are times when there's nobody in there.

Cross the street, you got a home decor shop that closes at three o'clock.

Next to them is uh barber shop.

He closes at six, closes early on Saturday, not open on Sunday.

Next door is a knick-nack wax shop.

And then there's A1 who closes at 8 30 out there slowly close at 8.

And next to them is uh 1500 uh salon, and they work very weird hours because sometimes they're there Sunday at seven in the morning.

Um doing a little bit of research on this.

Carb recommends uh 300 feet from gas station to housing.

Thank you, and your time is up our next speaker.

Bill Graham, then Heather A, then David uh Sadian.

Sadion.

Good evening.

Excuse me, my voice is not quite with me tonight.

My name is Philip A.

Grave and I reside at 1344 Sherman Street, directly across the street from the gas station.

The last of the gravens speaking tonight.

I first appeared before the city council, not this one, but previous city council in 1974.

At that time, I thought that we made a mutually agreeable arrangement between the city, the owners of the property, and the neighbors.

Over the ensuing 50 plus years, there's been one change after another.

I have a good relationship with the gas station.

I service my car there, I buy the gas there.

They've tried to be good neighbors.

But an increase in hours like this, almost 30%, is definitely going to impact on the quality of our neighborhood.

And that's not gonna, whatever the results of this tonight, it won't change my relationship with the gas station.

But please, I ask you to be considered maintaining the hours as they are.

We're in danger of losing our identity.

Please help us.

Thank you for listening to me this evening.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Heather A.

Then David Sedian, and then um Abdullah Fatah Kawa de Goar.

Good evening.

Mayor, members of the council, thank you for hearing this important neighborhood issue.

Um, I am opposed to increasing hours and increase um adding the convenience store.

As you can see, there's about 30 of our neighbors here as well.

Um, the neighborhood has opposed the expansion many times before, as you've heard.

Um, this is a low-performing gas station, and it has been um forever because it's surrounded by homes.

Um, unlike the gas stations on Webster and Park Streets where there's uh lots of commercial activity.

There is a locally owned convenience store already within a block, um, and they have actually added uh fresh healthy food, so that is a benefit to the neighborhood, and they and they live locally as well.

Um, the gas station has a history of selling convenience items without a permit and advertising for Walmart, which is uh directly taking sales tax away from um Alameda businesses.

Uh it's a no non-conforming use, and the owners were of course aware of that when they purchased the business.

These neighborly limitations need to remain.

Um, this is an outdated technology.

Um, gas stations are losing business because gas stations are losing business.

It is uh not something to do with their hours.

Um, I recognize I'm almost out of time.

Um, if the station were to fail, I think the neighbors can, and I certainly can envision a beautiful, you know, flat iron-shaped um apartment building where um families could walk their kids to school nearby.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh David Sedien, then Abdul Tagwar, and then Carol Brandmeyer.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and uh City Council members.

Um, I'm here to support the expansion of the mobile gas station.

I think they do a great job with customer service, helping elderly people, and I mean, just knowing as a I used to be a business owner in California for a long time.

It's really hard to run a business in California, and especially with EV cars, hybrids.

I know for them they need to stay, they need these hours to be able to stay in business.

People talk about the convenience store, like it's gonna cause you know a lot of misinformation.

They're saying that it's gonna be open as a 7-Eleven.

No one was here for the last meeting, or a couple people now.

They said I was here on June 8th, but now for them saying all these things, saying they're gonna be open till 12 o'clock, they bring a lot more people here to support against it.

And I I do think that people have to understand it's not that easy to convert a closed gas station into a park or into a uh apartment buildings or whatever you may be, it's very hard with the environmental contamination, and I think that has to be addressed as well, just knowing that a closed gas station is bad for everyone.

Also, the sales tax of the city is gonna lose if we're to close or they were to close.

And that's what I have to say.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Abdul Daquar, and then Carol uh Branmeyer.

Welcome.

Hello, Mayor and Councilmember.

My name is Abdul Doban, and I'm one of the owners of uh the mobile gas station on Central Avenue.

As I was looking at this advertisement, if I was one of the neighbors and I see the word expansion, I will go crazy and be like expansion is like it made it sound like it's a huge thing, so it's misinformation.

And then on this at the very end, uh they're all down uh further expansion past midnight.

We never ask for a past midnight, we only ask until 10.

And we are we'll be very responsible for uh for our time that we're in at that moment from any new eases, anything cleaning and everything else.

We'll make sure that everyone as far as uh for the uh auto shop, the auto shop is a separate business that has nothing to do with us, and we're not intending to uh take over it or open a 7-Eleven.

Our uh Kayok's uh place is is probably four feet by maybe six or eight, it's very tiny.

As Case mentioned, if three people walk in there, it'd be too crowded for them.

The only thing we were trying to have is some water, maybe some fresh juices, and maybe some uh granola bars for uh the morning people that's going to work.

We don't want to pack it with a lot of other stuff.

We're not gonna be selling no groceries, no milk, no alcohol, because people are talking about we're gonna take somebody else's business.

We already talked to those people, and they said they're with us, and we let them know that we will not take any of their business.

We only want some snacks, water, and beverages, and that that's it.

Nothing else.

And I thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Carol Brandmeyer, then Grace, then Camilla Sorno.

Hello, Mayor, Councilman, and all of you all.

And Madam Speaker, why don't you lower that microphone down just a little bit?

It's very flexible.

Hello, Mayor.

Hello, council people, and all of you all.

Um, I had written some notes, but I'm gonna have to change them.

I I'm just disturbed in my heart about this convenience store.

I saw a paper like this big regular typing paper about hours till midnight and convenience stores.

It's really, really sad that these people here that are mainly protesting are here based on a lie, L I E.

There is nothing about convenience stores.

I want to say, let's gentleman that was just here, the inside space isn't much bigger than this table.

There's not going to be any convenience store.

I have lived on Sherman Street about a block south of the gas station since 1996.

It's been my gas station.

There, I never hear loud noise music.

I come through after before eight, often it's all dark there.

The gas stations already closed.

The it it just said about this lie that has been promoted and signatures that have been taken on a falsehood of a convenience store and a gas station being open till 1201.

It there should, in my opinion, this should be addressed to the people that promoted that.

So I've known Casey, he's so kind, he helps everybody.

Only gas station I know with a disabled plaque that they will help you inside the store is some water, like you said, a few granola bars every Wednesday.

These drinks are given free to people, and I definitely want to support this gentleman's on the environmental impact.

People can lose their life when an apartment building or housing is built and have severe, severe health problems from the effects of being built where a gas station was.

And I want to thank you all very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Grace, then Camilla Sorno, and then Jesse Hemingway.

All right.

Welcome.

Hi, Mayor and Council members.

We do not want to expand one thing.

Never not never a convenience store, just drinks and snacks.

That's it.

We have customers who come and they supporters to be open on Sunday, you know.

They could come to us because they like the gas station.

And my daughter lives like two blocks away from the gas station.

My grandson goes to school right there at Franklin School.

And she supports us too.

And I don't know.

I don't see uh what a few hours is gonna hurt these people that don't want it.

I mean, uh uh, yeah, I just don't know what their problem is with us being open just two more hours and on Sunday.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Camilla Asorno, then Jesse Hemingway.

Welcome.

Hi.

Uh my name is Camila.

I've lived in Alameda for five years, just one block from the mobile station.

I have never had a problem with them in all of those years, and I moved here knowing there is a gas station.

I have been a patron of the gas station.

The owners seem like lovely people.

But I am concerned at the lack of financial projections presented, and was disheartened to hear of them operating beyond the approved hours.

I understand now it was a mistake, but to the neighbors, it felt like a dismissal of our concerns and a flagrant disregard of the rules.

They're asking us to trust them with extended hours and added sales without presenting a concrete plan of what we can expect from them to mitigate our concerns and without concrete financial projections.

I asked the members of this city council to take that into consideration and please vote no on the proposed expansion.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Jesse Hemingway, then uh Derota Krubnik, and then uh Mararius Krubnik.

Hi.

Hi.

Uh, thank you for your time.

I oppose this.

Uh I I I encourage you to vote no for all of the reasons, many reasons that have already been brought up.

I uh I don't have much to add in terms of detail except to say that we've been living in the neighborhood for 30 years, and I have not had problems with the gas station, but I don't want it to be expanded or the hours to be increased because uh it is a residential neighborhood, it's a complicated intersection.

And uh I also agree with the last speaker that said we don't we don't see that there's a projections that will uh this will uh save their business.

There's the there's no business plan projected be uh that has been presented beyond um uh that that would say this is the solution.

And I agree that there's gotta be a compromise and a solution can be made on many different levels, and it doesn't need to fall on having uh a residential neighborhood have a gas station open longer.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh Dorota Krubnik, then Marius Krubnik, then Bergman Ying.

Uh good evening, Mayor and Council members.

Uh my name is Dorota Krubnik, and I live across the gas station.

And I'm here today to respectfully oppose the request to extend its operating hours.

The gas station is located in the residential neighborhood, and extending the hours is only increased the traffic, noise, pollution, safety, like my previous speakers.

They said we have a school, we have a nice neighborhood, it's a piece.

I've been here since 1996, and we always have this issue.

We last time it was extend hours, another time extend hours, and it's always they wanted more and more.

So I'm kind of concerned about the future.

So unfortunately, the gas station has history of not respecting an approval hours.

Even after the last meeting, June 9, 2025, they continue to operate past closing on July 19 and 5.40 p.m.

while you're walking with my husband, we personally witnessed cars pumping gas after hours when the owners notice us, he came out and suddenly shut the pumps down, which showed they was not respectfully and they breaking the rules after even the last council meeting.

We want peace and safety for our neighborhood.

We are our neighborhood, we have Alamida, it's beautiful peace.

And uh we are simply asking you to propose our neighborhood from more traffic, more noise, more violation, more pollution.

Please do not operate this request.

Please do not approve this request for extending hours.

We love our place, we love, and they know when they move what they stand for, but every two, three years, and we always have an issue.

That's why the owners he said we cannot come on his property because we can see if the pump is maybe working.

So thank you so much.

And I hope Andrew.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Hi, good evening.

Uh bring the microphone up to you, sir.

So we need to go.

Good morning.

Council members.

I just don't want to repeat whatever everybody's saying before me because that's obvious.

Then pollution, noise, traffic, and stuff like that.

Uh it's obvious to me.

I'm I'm Mario Schroben, I leave across the street of the gas station.

So I I just want to add a brief little history because I got uh email.

Sir, if you would speak into the microphone, we could hear.

I got email from uh Bayon McGuire, and uh that was my answer to him.

Hi, thank you for asking.

I think they are doing okay now.

I haven't noticed any validation recently.

Since I see Mario Scrooge, that was send it what I send it back in in April.

So if I'm accused of housing the gas station, that's proven I'm not doing that.

And uh what my wife just was mentioned.

We're working on Saturday after it was 540, and uh I went to get my car so I could make a proof then they pumping after the hours.

So basically, that person came, shut down the the pumps, and it wasn't just like okay, I forgot close the uh shut down the pumps.

It was defense story.

He was actually watching who is pumping the gas when he noticed a neighbor, not friendly neighbor, maybe, but I wasn't unfairly to him.

That's what shows exactly when I was truly to that to them.

So that's what I see today.

It just lies.

I don't know if he's talking about me, about the housing.

I never been doing that.

That only I leaving across the gas station, I was only notice what was going on.

Thank you.

That's what I had to say.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh, Bermining, then Fad uh Alcoon Lani.

Larry.

All right.

Welcome.

And like I said, just make that microphone your own, bring it to the level you need.

Okay.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council members.

My name is Berman and I live on Central Ave, uh, Cross Street Bay Street.

Um, I've been I was born and raised in Alameda.

Uh, went to Alameda High, class of 80.

Go Hornets.

I'm concerned with extended hours primarily due to two reasons.

I lived my first half of my life in Alameda, and I just recently moved back to the house that um my parents owned.

Um, I actually extended my my commute a little bit longer, but I wanted to move back to Alameda because of the community and the safe and quiet environment.

Um that's that's the first reason.

The other reason is uh we're talking about convenience.

There's already a lot of resources in the neighborhood.

A one market is just down the street from me and has everything you need.

There's another market, you know, two blocks away on Lincoln.

Um they actually have a lot of items that are special for Alameda.

You know, they I actually buy my coffee beans there that are roasted in Alameda.

Um so what could be more convenient uh than the area that I live in.

Again, I want to keep this neighborhood safe and quiet.

As one of my neighbors already said, it's uh a perfect neighborhood.

And it would be perfect if it weren't for the squirrels that are eating my apples.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh, Fad.

Uh I'll call Lonnie.

Welcome.

Welcome, guys.

Uh I'm my name is Fod Cow Right.

I'm a partner for case.

Okay.

Actually, guys, the talking must have been.

Okay, I'm sorry.

Uh actually, guys, they talk mostly when I'm talking about it.

But I like what he said, exactly.

We too struggling to pay bail on time, taxes, the property tax, include the rent.

You guys imagine we just need cable hours to just run the business, keep the business running.

We don't make any private senses.

This is only in my income right now.

I'm just talking about myself.

I'm one of a partner.

I have two daughters after 20 years married, and my mother, she just came, and I have big family, so we need to protect our family.

We didn't we we're not gonna be rich in this gas station.

Reason why to give this butt because the neighborhood is very nice and quiet, and we need to make it quiet and nice.

And one more thing, uh one more thing about it's gonna be funny.

Is that okay if I say it?

Say it.

Yeah.

With the talking about the noises, I think do the guys think our customer the leave or the clubs and came to my gas station to dancing or what?

We just need to save our community and all the neighborhood.

And you don't know how much the neighborhood came to complain about why we close.

Most of them they have a deserve disabled, most of them they have uh they got they have to go somewhere else late times who need to do gas.

Some of them said, I don't want to do gas in somewhere else.

That is what it is.

And one more thing about the rumors we're gonna get the uh out of mechanic and make it the bigger like a 7-Eleven.

That's what he tells some people they came to us and said, why you lie to us?

We try to subvert you and we signed for you guys, and we said no, we do right.

This is we have the smallest place, and everybody know that.

Thank you so much, guys.

Please support us.

Bye bye.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh, Kimberly McBee, then Ryan Klausneiser, and then Adele Folly.

All right, welcome.

And when you hear your name, you might want to move out to the um aisle so you can be up next.

Welcome.

Hello, everybody.

Uh thank you for your time.

Um I live here in Alameda, um, and I'm very familiar with the gas station.

In fact, I was there the day that uh the gentleman across the street from the gas station, um, actually was there at the gas station trying to catch somebody after hours, the pumps were off.

I mean, he clearly clearly came across the street just to see if anybody was there.

Um aside from all that, I mean, you guys, I really believe that these guys are just trying to make an honest living, you know, trying to support their family by running this business and supporting your family is is keeping the hours, you know.

I mean, two hours extra is not that much, you know.

I don't think the place is loud.

I don't think the place is really bright at all, especially at night, and it's definitely not loud.

There's no music going on.

He he's very respectful, and a lot of the people there respect him, you know, and they they accept him for you know the business that he's doing.

I think he should continue to do that, and he's doing a great job.

That's all I gotta say.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh Ryan Klasneiser, then Adele Folly, then Christy Cannon.

I'm Madam Mayor.

Council.

My name is Ryan Klausenser, I love 1427 Bay Street.

I'm supportive of the staff recommendation and uh planning board on this matter.

Uh, I moved to Alameda because of the mixed use.

I like to be able to walk.

I know the batons getting a bad rap, but I like walking down the street, it's better than driving.

I like going to A1.

My kids go to Wood and Franklin, and they walked across there.

I have a frequent driver plug in Prius, so I don't I'm not an infrequent user of the mobile gas station, but they've been nothing but kind to me, and I think they fit in the neighborhood.

If anything, I maybe a lighting plan adjustment, if that's the complaints I hear.

Uh but I do look forward to the complete streets, which I'm very supportive of on Central, and I'm also supportive of the roundabout when that eventually comes as well.

So thank you, everyone.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh, Adele Folly, then Christy Cannon, then Zach Bowling.

All right, come on up.

Madam, Madame Mayor, the council, uh, good evening.

Uh actually, I thought that I was put in a car to support of my friends who own the gas station in there.

It was a great experience that to see the panels and how the discussion is going on here.

And uh I think uh my friends have been knowing them for quite a long time, and that they're sincere on their commitment that's too for the uh extension of the hours.

And uh as I see in the debate is going on, uh I think the uh the council and the mayor uh should give them an opportunity to uh to to try to uh to make their business as uh uh the uh good reputation of the media county as I seen today was a great experience to see the uh the attentive from the uh the panel council.

Uh thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Christy Cannon and Zach Fowling, then Cynthia Cooper.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Yes, you guys I've been listening.

I mean that I'm Christy Cannon.

I'm usually here to talk about transit.

Uh I'm not on, I'm not taking a position on the gas station.

Uh, but I wanted to just kind of remind everyone that we need to be thinking about the future here.

And I went back and looked at the record.

So in 2021, before most of you staff and council members were here, but I think the mayor and council member Desog were here when we discussed the roundabout.

My memory and from the record that I looked up, there's no roundabout planned there.

It was a hope to have a roundabout there, but because there isn't enough room to do a full roundabout, it was not accepted.

So I'm thinking that maybe that maybe the city could be doing something creative with the owner of the gas station and carve out some of that triangle, that's that narrow triangle that sticks out where the sign is, um, and get some kind of right-away there, which we probably couldn't use soon.

But if we had it there in the future, it would be one less thing we had to try to carve out to make a roundabout there.

It really is a very dangerous intersection.

I I looked at the maps.

I'm surprised that isn't it isn't a high accident area, and I think the only reason for that is because everybody who walks, bikes, rolls, drives through that intersection is super careful because it's so dangerous.

Uh it would be really, really helpful to have a roundabout there.

And if that's just not possible, then maybe the owner could think about three or four EV chargers there.

And I imagine they could be programmed to have date and time limits so they wouldn't go outside of the the whatever the agreed upon hours are.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Zach Bowling, then Cynthia Cooper, then Anya Diapart.

Welcome, Speaker Cooper.

Thank you, Council.

I'm getting ahead of myself.

Yeah.

Uh I last speaker actually touched on one of the points I wanted to talk on.

Uh so I live a little more than a block away from this gas station.

And while I'm indifferent about gas cells, I have an EV, I biked here tonight.

Um, I still would like to ask you to uphold um planning board's decision on this.

Uh first is the consequences.

Uh, this business has been here for more than a century.

I've got a photo of it from 1924.

Um, you could put it on the historic register almost.

If it's killed off making it infeasible to conduct business, we won't get new housing, like zoned or a new business here for decades.

We'll get an abandoned lighted corner on what could be a future roundabout.

And you don't have to look far, literally across the street is a gas station that has not been redeveloped in probably decades because it is too hard, infeasible, and it's difficult to deal with these lots.

I know personally.

Um, so it's notoriously hard.

I can't think of anything worse with the community character, property values, neighborhood safety, then a blighted lot.

Uh second, the appeal.

I I won't go on about the flyer um issues um because I have limited time, but uh it's snacks and drinks to survive.

It it's not expanding the footprints, they already have a store, it's just selling non-automotive stuff.

Um third, the roundabout.

Council knows we're planning a roundabout here.

There's that corner part of it.

I know this is a real property issue, so you can't discuss it publicly in session, but it is something to keep in mind.

I know the city is maybe talking to the landlord.

Maybe we can expand it to if we can afford it someday um to actually fund that roundabout.

Uh so finally, history.

This this was zoned C1 at one point.

And in the 1970s rezonings, we did wide sweeping rezones of Alameda, some bad, as we know, but uh this got swept up in it, and why it's not part of the Morton Street neighborhood community district that is commercially zoned, is kind of historical fluke.

And now we put all these highly restrictive uh zoning requirements on it and use permits.

So I asked your support to support the planning board decision.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Cynthia Cooper, then Erica Helton, then Anya Deart.

Welcome.

Hi, my name is Cynthia Cooper.

I live caddy corner to the gas station.

And what I've been noticing in all the conversations is a lot of the people that support it live further away.

And those of us that live right around it are like, this is not a great idea.

I can look out my window and see what's going on in the gas station on any given any given time.

And sometimes there is noise, and some of that might be the police checking it out more because there's definitely cars that congregate there and things that happen after hours, not their fault, but there's definitely some of that that goes on.

Um I wanted to say that um again, I lived there since 1994.

Um, that has not been a gas station the whole time.

When I moved in, it was a fenced-in, grassy area.

I can't remember the exact timing of when it got switched, but it wasn't, it hasn't been a straight through thing.

I wish them well.

They've been very kind to me when I've needed help with with um actually so more the automotive, but they've always been kind to me.

If you don't speak into the microphone, oh I'm sorry, I wish them well.

I said I I they've always been kind to me, and um, and they I've had some help from them in the past.

It's not that I'm opposed to them having a business.

However, extending the hours, what I saw was 6 a.m.

and 10 p.m.

I don't know about you, but I'd like to be asleep at 6 a.m.

and you know, or try to be, and I don't want to be up all the time late at night with people going in there congregating and making a lot of noise.

It definitely um has been an issue.

Um, it's also there's also light pollution, but also that's street lights too.

Um hold on.

You know, and and just I guess lastly, um, is that um they've extended the hours previously.

This is not the first time, so it keeps happening over the years.

So I think you guys need to look at how much that's had to be approved because you know it's not fair to the rest of the people.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker.

Thanks.

Uh Erica Hilton, then Anya Diver, then uh Amanda Michille.

Welcome.

Hello.

Hello, everybody.

Um, everybody said I'm gonna urge you to say no on this.

Um, I live at 1342 Bay Street, right around the corner, and we can see the gas station lights from my house.

And I think that the worry on the I I have empathy, all of it, and the worry is the amount of people.

We already have a lot of people coming down.

Sherman, and when it's dark and it starts getting dark at night, when the gas station's closed, everything's closed there except for Benton, but everything's closed and it's very mellow.

I worry about this gas station being open until 10 o'clock at night with all the people that are coming down and around and the people who congregate again there.

And again, you know, we live in a quiet neighborhood, and I'm just I'm worried about the early morning and the late at night living so close to it.

That's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Anya Daibert, then Amanda Michelle.

Good evening, council members.

Mayor Ashcraft.

Um, my name is Anya Diver.

I live at 1351 Bay Street, a block away from the gas station.

I like the gas station.

I have no problem with it, but I like the hours as they are.

We've um I'm a homeowner, we've lived there for 11 years in Alameda since 2008, and we have kids, you know, and it's just going just the traffic that goes along Central going to Ensinol is very dangerous.

We've had multiple accidents, and I mean, I'm a nurse.

I go to bed, I go to bed very early, but we don't need the we don't need the extra traffic, the late night traffic.

It's very loud, it's very bright.

Um, and I mean I urge you, I urge you not to extend their hours.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Amanda McKelly, then Karen Haynes, then Marguerite Jacques Molero.

Hello.

Hi, I'm Madam Mayor, Council members.

My name is Amanda McHaley.

I'm a newish resident.

I've been in the neighborhood just for a few years, and honestly, I feel like I'm playing catch up.

Um I was not here on June 8th because I had no idea this was going on.

So I don't know what the distance from the gas station is for sending notices, but I do not believe we got a notice at our house.

So I am not listening to rumors.

I don't believe they're trying to stay open till midnight or a convenience store.

Um we bought our home with a young child, knowing there was a gas station there in full support of the business.

I don't think it's an eyesore.

I do not think we should extend the hours.

I think uh the late night hours are concerning to me for safety, and my biggest concern about that entire area is that intersection.

My seven-year-old son, we never cross there.

I will never cross that until we make a change.

So I hope that this business can thrive and survive with the existing hours, and that you all will take it under serious consideration here that a lot of the concerns here are about the safety crossing and that the increased traffic will only make that less safe.

So hopefully we can at least get crosswalks that work and things in in conjunction with increased business in that area.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Karen Haynes, then Margaret Jacques Molero, then uh Zo Zoeing.

I don't see anybody in front of me or behind me.

Are you Ms.

Haney?

Marguerite.

Oh, is there a Karen Haynes going once, going ways?

Okay, okay.

Okay, you're up.

So it's and go ahead and bring that microphone down to your level.

Thank you.

Hello.

Hi.

Um traffic.

We're not inviting any more traffic that doesn't go up and down Incennel and Central already.

You've got college kids trying to get gas for their mopeds or whatever, you know, when they get out of school at 10, Laney, uh, not Laney, but um at um Alameda College.

And then uh during the weekend, my grandson was just at a festival in Alameda at the point, and he stopped by the gas station uh in the morning to get gas.

Uh and there they went they had went to the point for their function that was there.

Um they're not inviting any more people that don't already go back and forth.

I know many times Grace has uh somebody's come in and they're a little short on gas.

So she knows she'll give them five bucks, put five bucks in their garage so they can get to wherever they need to go.

Um convenience store.

How many times have you gone to a gas station and you're thirsty?

All I want to do is pick up something to wet my whistle and be on my way.

You know, that's basically what this is.

So as far as the extra traffic, oh, I want to mention the accidents.

We haven't seen there to my knowledge, and I've been there many years, accidents around our place that involve anyone coming from our gas station.

Um children.

We've got uh children school down the street, like a a daycare.

And it's um what's the name of that?

Oh, yeah, fuzzy.

Thank you.

Your time is that we'll have to end on fuzzy caterpillar.

Our next speaker is all wong.

Yes, welcome.

Hi.

Um, I'd like to um also uh affirm the points that uh the speaker just before me made, um, which is the uh the additional traffic.

Uh I I mean I I just don't see the argument for it, considering that all the neighbors who spoke before also mentioned that there are so many gas stations which are in and like along the in and out routes of Alameda.

So anyone who shows up at a gas station at eight in the middle of the island is from is a local uh and most likely they want water, not even gas.

Um again, the I don't see the argument for the competition against a convenience store that was that would be closed at the same time.

So if anyone's not open, then how could they be taking business away if anything that's generating more business?

Um and finally, uh, if the concern is unwanted gathering, um, wouldn't you want these fine folks to actually be keeping an eye out for you uh at that time?

Um it just doesn't add up.

Uh I I don't I don't see that you can have it both ways.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Um now we're going to remote speakers.

Um Jake Garfinkel.

Welcome, Speaker Garfinkel.

Good evening.

Um, it's very hard to run a small business these days, and I applaud the uh efforts being made by the uh current uh owners of the uh gas station.

If if the business were to close down, nothing else could be done with that property at a at a reasonable price.

It would probably cost them a hundred thousand dollars or more to get rid of the hazmat issue, hazmat issue.

Uh the lot would remain vacant, like the small former gas stations at Oak and Incennel and Oak and Santa Clara.

Uh you saw what happened when the city forced big O to closed.

The property remained uh somewhat of a blight for like seven or eight years.

Uh and that would happen also at the gas station we're talking about tonight.

Uh eventually, if there was no business uh active there, the owner would probably have to put up a fence to keep people from the the homeless people from uh going there.

If they put up a fence, there will be no parking for churchgoers or anyone else.

So forcing the business to close is uh short-sighted.

And um if the owner can make a go of it by simply adding another hour or two to his operations, uh I think that the city should support that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Sorry if my mouse jumped.

Uh oh, okay.

And Meredith Hoskin.

Welcome, Speaker Hoskin.

Hi, good evening.

Uh I thought I needed to say something for the community among the community members to support the decision of the planning board to grant the extension of hours and offerings.

I'm coming from the perspective that I'm concerned about the number of local businesses closing and the impact that has on our city.

And empty storefronts, and here we have an opportunity to offer one of them some small amount of relief.

So let's give them a shot and benefit from some of the great contributions they make to our community that we hope will likely outweigh the disturbance.

I also appreciate the commentary who called out people who work or study late nights and the types of residents who might be excluded from the early closure.

And trust me, I recognize all the concerns, and I sympathize so much for the worry of the nearby native neighbors.

I have small kids too, and nothing is more frustrating than late night road disturbance at that time.

Yes, it happens on my street too.

It sounds like the business owner and planning board will be closely monitoring for potential disruptions.

I'm sorry that to say, but we all recognize that Alameda is growing, it is changing, and all of us across the city are making small compromises for the better of our community.

And I want to thank the neighbors for your sacrifice for the betterment of the city.

Lastly, I worry generally if we let this appeal pass and go against the recommendation and decision of the planning board and our smart, hard working planning department, it will set a precedent and will hold up future progress when people are already feeling that local government doesn't get enough done.

With that said, thank you to the city staff and leadership for all you do.

Our next speaker.

So everybody get up, stretch your legs.

It's healthy to not sit for longer than two or so hours.

So um we'll see you nine thirty-five, everybody.

Thanks.

This is your sixty second warning.

All right, it is nine thirty five.

Staff, are you ready?

Just nod your head or give me a word of the hand.

And the balcony, are you ready?

Thumbs up.

Okay, we're back in business.

Hi, everybody.

Um, I'm gonna lead the comments.

I don't usually do that.

Um, I usually go last.

But I'm the mayor, yes, the mayor's prerogative.

I also spent six years sitting on this dais on the planning board, and and I was um I chaired the planning board for part of this, so reading this staff report and listening to these um comments is you know, kind of uh takes me back.

So what I want to say first and foremost is I support the planning board's decision, and I think the council should too, but obviously you all will make your own decisions.

The count the there are criteria that the planning board applies, and they're set forth in the um in the staff report.

Now, certainly the council can consider new evidence that is presented.

This is uh it's um a decision de novo.

We can consider new evidence that is presented.

However, the requirement to present a business plan to show how extended hours would increase your revenue is not among the criteria that we would apply.

And by the way, this is also my neighborhood, and it's a lovely neighborhood.

I cringe when my children tell me that neither they nor their children are their or their friends who they went to school with will ever be able to afford to live in Alameda most probably just because our real estate has gotten so expensive.

But it is um it's a lovely neighborhood.

My husband and I walk in the neighborhood most evenings, um, and I know that gas station, it's been 12 years that I've been driving an EV, so I have not been a customer, but I do remember when I had a van and I'd fill up and they'd have on Wednesdays was the lowest gas in town, and people would be there to take advantage of that.

Um this is a mixed-use neighborhood, and one of the criteria and the attractions of a mixed-use neighborhood is that it actually cuts down on driving all over the place because you have those amenities nearby.

And I was thinking of the gas station, and um Zach Bowling pointed out, I know it was at least 75 years, apparently it's a a hundred or so.

Um so you could say that people came to the nuisance, but of course the zoning was was changed.

But at the same time, when I think about when I used to drive um a gas-powered car and say it was at night, or even if I'm driving my EV and I need to stop somewhere and charge it, as a woman, especially if I'm driving alone, I'm gonna want to stop somewhere where it's safe.

That's a criteria.

People deserve that.

We um I've heard a lot of um confusing, I might even say contradictory statements.

Um people are concerned about noise.

I mean, I I'm just trying to think of it's not conversation, probably, but maybe there's ads or something, audio ads on the gas pumps that can be dealt with.

Um they're concerned about the traffic, the additional traffic it will create, but at the same time, it's a failed business model, so there's not gonna be that much business.

They're concerned about the children crossing.

We should all be concerned about the children crossing, and by the way, we should be driving slower, and that's why we're doing the road diets, and and we all need to do that.

We don't yet have the funding to do the roundabout, maybe someday, but not right away.

Um children are most probably not crossing the street, at least in the evenings between 8 and 10 p.m.

Um by themselves, hopefully with you know, someone holding their hand.

Um concerned about other businesses in the neighborhood.

I'm an A1 fan.

I shop there at least on a weekly basis.

You're right, Sam is the best.

I didn't see Sam opposing this or his comments at all.

And as someone noted, he does close at 8:30 in the evening, and Island Savoy a couple blocks away closes even earlier.

But again, there's room for lots of different usages, um, uses in in a neighborhood.

And the concerns that were raised, um I you you don't want light in in your windows at night.

I get that.

But there are ways to address that short of telling a business that we're not gonna support you.

Um because at the end of the day, as a city, we have as long as Alameda has been a city, small businesses, locally owned businesses have been the mainstay of our community.

We should support them.

We talk about that, we pay lip service to that, but what does it really mean?

And I do, I know lots of you in the room and lots who um lots who spoke tonight.

Dr.

Van Meter and I served on the hospital board together.

Um, but reasonable minds can differ.

And my concern is that this is a business who has been a responsible business all these years, and that they want to open a little bit longer and open on on um Sunday as well, um, should not be a huge impediment to the neighborhood.

I I don't think it's a reason that we should turn them down.

That's that's my um my personal opinion.

But again, they've been a vibrant business, well, quietly vibrant, and you're right, someone said it's a failing technology.

I'm I might not go quite that far, but it is true, and it was cited in the staff report that part of the reason that their income has gone down is that over the years more people are driving EVs, even gas-powered vehicles, their engines are more efficient, so they're not burning as much gas.

And I like to think that people are maybe trying to drive less and take other um means of travel.

So I and rather intriguing suggestion that some speaker made that maybe they could make space for some EV chargers.

We are definitely always looking to add EV chargers in the city.

But this is a small business.

I might add an immigrant-owned small business.

Um that's not a reason to not support um a business's request and the planning board.

Um, I think it wasn't unanimous, but there was maybe one um dissenting vote.

But that's that's pretty impressive.

And again, in part because I served on the planning board.

I know the amount of work that goes into digesting the packets to um attending the meetings, listening to all the all the information, and then coming to that decision.

So I am here to say that I will support both the planning board and the staff's recommendation.

Who would like to go next?

Vice Mayor Pryor.

Hi.

Um I I just want to say that I also support the recommendation of the planning board.

Uh, my my opinion is if we can give an opportunity for a small business to be more successful.

I I think we should take it.

Um I I absolutely listen to uh you know all the concerns.

I think lighting seemed to be the biggest one in noise.

Um I I just think that it could those things can be I don't know, mitigated.

Um I I don't want to belittle anybody's like grievance, but I I just would like to give this uh small business a chance.

Um I think um a lot of the arguments were like we shouldn't really even have a gas station um but it's there uh gas stations are almost impossible to I don't want to say replace but to to repurpose um it's just extremely expensive.

I think that's why we have vacant derelict gas stations on the island.

Um so I I think I would like to have a viable business there, um that seems to respect the quietness of the community.

Um I I lived in that neighborhood for seven years, and it is l I lived on 8th and Central, so that particular corner was extremely noisy with cars.

Um I could hear radios from four intersections.

Um yeah, once you get down the street a couple blocks, it's very quiet, it's lovely.

Um I would hope uh that I I I believe the owner that you know just to re you know to encourage the patrons to respect the the peace of the neighborhood.

Um and I think somebody else made this point.

Like if you're if you're going to that gas gas station, you're probably already on that road anyway, or very close to it in that neighborhood.

Otherwise, you're probably gonna be on Webster or or Park.

So I I think um yeah, I think the people that go there really have appreciation of the of the peace and the tranquility of of that neighborhood.

It's a great neighborhood.

And that's it.

Thanks, Vice Mayor.

Who wants to go next?

Councilmember Bowler.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and appreciated your comments and also the vice mayor's comments.

I do think that this is a business that generally has, for my understanding, a really good at reputation in the community.

I feel like it's it's really been a good partner with the city.

And you know, I know that just from talking to people over the years and and visiting the business.

But I notwithstanding some of the concerns, and I understand that neighbors have really significant concerns.

I I'm also concerned that a lot of this information maybe was beyond what the planning board heard.

We heard a from a lot of neighbors that were concerned.

Um to the extent that those concerns concern me personally in terms of the the community interest, it's it has to do with the noise, the light, some of the disturbance that would be, particularly at night.

So I wonder if the council members would consider thinking about adopting the staff recommendation without the hours in uh from uh 9 to 10 p.m.

on weeknights with that change.

So that's that's where my mind is at the moment, but I'm still open minding and listening to my other council members.

You know what I'd prefer to do, um council member bowler is to ask um um uh Ms.

Silver, um attorney who advises the planning board, what are what are some safeguards that could be built into say conditions?

Um I think the vice mayor mentioned that there might need to be monitoring of light and noise.

Can you help us out?

Sure.

Um there are several different um conditions that the city council can impose on this particular permit.

One is a um a uh maybe six-month biannual uh monitoring plan, and you could effectuate that with I would recommend that uh you do it with uh city personnel.

This the city personnel can be funded uh by the applicant um if if necessary, or or um, or they could just uh you know do maybe um a couple of inspections um on a routine basis and then report to the planning board.

That is a very typical way of addressing these types of concerns.

Um there is also um if you um the the planning board also has the ability to uh reexamine the permit at a certain interval, um maybe you know, call this up in in a year and and have a report to the planning board and the neighbors will be invited to that meeting, and there can be a discussion of the enforcement of the existing conditions, and then if the conditions are not satisfied, the planning board would have the ability to impose additional conditions.

So those are those are two thoughts.

Um those are methods that are typically used in this type of situation.

Thank you.

Back to you.

I have nothing else right now.

All right, who'd like to go next?

Uh it's either I'm happy to go through.

Okay, Councilor Days.

Great.

Well, thank you.

Uh thank you everybody for uh coming out and uh taking the time uh to voice your uh views on this matter.

Um also for those who uh came on uh line over Zoom.

Thank you very much.

Much appreciated.

Um as it stands now, the um gas station operates um roughly 78 78 hours per week.

So um Monday through Friday, they operate 14 hours a day, and Saturdays eight hours, and then Sundays zero hours.

So when you combine um the um hours of operation, it comes out to 78 hours per week.

And what they're proposing is to go from 78 hours in total to about roughly 113 hours in a week.

So that that amounts to basically a 45% increase in the number of hours.

Um 45% uh does sound like a large um step up.

Um I think um I think there should uh I think compromise um should not be a dirty word, I mean though in this day and age, especially uh with what's going on in Washington DC, compromise uh tends to be not a good word.

But um, but maybe there's room for compromise.

Um the way that I see it, um, they're operating right now Monday through Friday from 7 to 8 p.m.

Um, and they want to go from 7 to 8 p.m.

to um uh basically uh 6 to 10 p.m.

Um what I would uh suggest is um in the name of compromise um that Monday through Friday not change that it remains 7 to 8 p.m.

And that Friday uh that Saturdays becomes 7 to 8 p.m.

Uh so they would uh in this compromise, the um the current hours of eight hours on Saturdays would increase in the way that I see it to 14.

So Monday through Friday, seven to eight, Saturday also seven to eight, and then Sunday would also be seven to eight.

So basically the elegance of it all is your hours are seven to eight.

That's the way that I see it.

Um and I think that's uh a way to uh achieve compromise.

And so when you add it, when you add that all up rather than having a 45% increase in the total amount of hours, you would have basically a 26% increase from 78 to 98 to 98 hours in total for the week.

Um so I and the reason why I would um reach for a compromise is you bought the place knowing that it was a residential area.

So the concerns raised by residents do have to be considered here.

Um I I understand that you know some feel like well, you know, um that you can't reuse a gas station, that if it's not a gas station, then it's just gonna be a blighted area.

That's actually not true in the city of Alameda.

Um the uh motel on the corner of Webster and Pacific Avenue used to be a gas station, uh the hotel motel.

Um the um the homes on the corner of Otis Drive and Westline Drive used to be a gas station.

So we have in our um current history, you know, revamped um what used to be gas stations into different uses.

Um I I do think that that we should strive to reach uh compromise um the so that the uh the concerns of the owners are are met to maintain a business expanding their hours in my view by 26 percent instead of 45 percent, but also the rec concern of the residents in limiting um expansion because um the weekday expansions aren't aren't changed the gas station hours and from the way that I would do it, it would always be still still be seven to eight.

We're just making Saturday and Sunday consistent with Monday through Friday, seven to eight.

Simple, elegant.

Um with regard to the convenience store, um I you know the fact of the matter is as you well know for most of the gas stations, it's really the convenience store where where the um uh money is made or the profits are made.

Um with regard to the convenience store, the only thing that I would really emphasize is that this any sales that are not gas related have to be done within the building footprint, the existing structure.

Um so that's what I would suggest that we strike a compromise between the concerns of the residents and the concerns of the gas station owners.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Disa.

Councilmember Jensen.

Um I I appreciate the comments from Councilmember Day Sog and Councilmember Bowler about compromise, and I um would just say first of all that that might be an alternative, but according to the staff and to the planning board, the proposal meets the city of Alameda zoning and land use requirements.

And as we've heard, the decision by the planning board was appropriate.

So at this point, I would just point out that our planning board in Alameda and the mayor was a member for some time, serves our community with very little recognition, and they spent probably even more time, much more time than the three hours that we've already spent on this issue tonight, listening and discussing the uh options for this this um gas station.

And so I given that I tend to where I certainly do agree with the planning board's decision.

Having said that, we've heard from the community tonight.

I've heard from the community and I've and the community has raised some issues, particularly issues about the late night and and light issues.

Though those are the ones that really strike me.

And that might be of concern for the expanded nighttime hours.

So I'm not gonna ask this question, but my um my question later for staff might be whether the planning board considered alternative opening times.

I suspect maybe that was discussed, but perhaps not.

But with regard to hours, given that that we've heard the support from Trinity Lutheran Church, and we've heard we haven't heard concern about any from anyone about the current operating hours, about the operating hours until 8 p.m.

I I would just be completely supportive of the current operating hours and the weekend hours because I think it's appropriate, and I think that the neighborhood will not there are people in the neighborhood that will benefit and not just a neighborhood but in Alameda that will prefer to use this service station and this gas station on the weekend hours when if it were open on the weekends.

So I'm completely in support of the weekend option, and as well of I have no concerns, and we haven't really heard much in the way of concerns about selling some snack items and waters and some beverages.

So those things I think are appropriate.

And in Alameda, we we must support businesses.

We can't just say that okay, you meet all the requirements for zoning, you meet the requirements that the city has set out, but we're not gonna support you because you are on the wrong block or you're in a busy intersection.

And we have to be flexible in some ways, but we also want to recognize the needs of the community.

So I would ask if we as we move forward, I'm not going to make a motion myself, but if there could be some further discussion or if this could go back to the planning board for some discussion about the operating hours, particularly during the week, that request.

Um I am going to suggest that we not send it back to the planning board.

It is really hard on the business to just keep getting bounced back and forth.

And we are, we're the deciders.

So Vice Mayor, you had your hand up.

Um I like that we're having this discussion.

Um when we were talking about compromising, um, the thing I was thinking about are the morning hours.

Um I think a lot of us who get gas, um having a gas station that's open at least at six is extremely convenient, um, especially when you're trying to get off the island.

Um, I mean, there's a lot of traffic.

So I think having that option in the and you know, essentially in the center of the island, I guess relative to the where most of the other gas stations are.

Um yeah, so if we if we are considering that, I I definitely want to emphasize I think having a 6 a.m.

Um during the week.

During the week.

Yeah, Friday.

Yeah.

I I think I would recommend that.

Um I don't think people are in a rush to get off the island on the weekends, so I but I would definitely um yeah, I'm definitely in favor for Sunday for the Sunday hours and for at least the start time at six.

Um I but yeah, but it but I but uh again I I would default to um what the planning board had said.

Would you like to make a motion?

Maybe you and Councilmember Daysog could craft something.

I like seven, yeah.

I mean compromise, I think was the word I heard.

Funny how that works.

I was listening, Betty.

Yeah, I mean, I have I have spent many mornings getting gas, I guess, you know, between six and seven, just to give, you know, to because I commute and I want to get on the freeway.

So I think um and then we're gonna have a lot of traffic trying to get off you know the two once we start construction.

So I just I just think not having that option and then having to drive, yeah.

It I it would be so convenient.

I I just having a 6 a.m.

open time.

Um can I ask a question?

Oh please.

So are you saying the hours uh should be six to eight on Monday through Friday, seven to eight, Saturday through Sunday, uh Saturday, and seven to eight Sunday.

Um yeah, if if if if that was if that's a way to get this going, then I would say yes.

I mean, again, my my plan A would be the recommendation, but if the majority of us would agree to that, then I think that would kind of be my bottom line, I guess.

Well, I could live with that.

It's a 32 percent increase.

It's a three.

Can I make a point about that?

Of course.

Thank you.

Um, I also wanted to say something that I wasn't aware of after reading all the staff reports and watching some of the planning board meeting as well.

What uh what I came out with tonight um from some of the speakers and from the the business owners, um, and even some people who I spoke with in the audience who didn't speak about this business being very supportive of seniors and of um persons with disabilities.

And that strikes me.

I I think of the other nine gas stations in Alameda, which, as we've heard, and as we know, are on our commercial streets, and um they all all have convenience uh opportunities and and small stores, but none of those that I'm aware of will come out and help someone.

I heard from someone tonight that that has their oil checked there sometimes, and she just has to ask to get her oil checked.

And that's not something that uh when we talk about community and when we've heard from people in that community, that's not something unfortunately that we can find often in other places, even off of the island.

So I want to retain this business.

I think that that their dedication to the community has become evident.

But on the other hand, we want them to be supported by the community, and the late night hours may not be the best way to do that.

So I would be in support of the option that was discussed by my colleagues.

All right.

Um I move that we the there's gonna be a caveat that we accept the recommendation of the planning board, um, but we would amend the hours to be 9 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Monday through 9.

6 a.m.

Here we go.

Thank you.

Monday through Friday, 6 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Um Saturday and Sunday.

Saturday and Sunday, 7 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Yes.

There was one thing that I did mention though.

What was so the thing that I mentioned was that any non-gas sales has to be conducted in the building.

Of course.

And any non-gas sales should be conducted in the building.

Must be conducted.

Must be.

So, like no Girl Scout cooking.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um food truck on the uh or or or no ice cream uh outside of the uh uh a store, you know.

Okay, okay.

And anything else.

Okay, is that a motion and that's the second?

We have a motion by Vice Mayor Prior, seconded by council member Daesog.

Any further discussion, council.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstention?

I believe that was did you vote yes?

I did.

Yeah, you did.

Okay, that is a unanimous decision.

Thank you, everyone.

Thank you to the neighbors and the business.

And then remember the no applause rule, applaud in your heart.

That's what I say.

Thank you so much.

And um and thank you to staff and good work and nice compromise, I might add.

All right, we need to keep it moving.

So we are moving on to item 7B.

Madam Clerk, if you would um read item 7B and then city staff who are um who are um in charge, come on up.

Uh workshop to discuss Alameda's infrastructure and facility needs regarding streets and traffic safety.

Hi.

Hi, okay.

Let's give just a minute for the traffic behind you to leave.

Hi.

Okay.

Hello, hello.

Okay, take it away.

Okay, good evening, mayor and members of the city council.

I'm Sarah Henry, City's Communications and Legislative Affairs Director.

Tonight we're kicking off a series of workshops about Alameda's infrastructure and facilities.

Hold on.

Excuse me, everybody.

Hello, uh, members of the audience.

We are now on to the next item.

So please leave quietly.

We want to give as much respect to this next item as we gave to the gas station.

Goodbye now.

Thank you.

Close the door behind you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, back to you, Ms.

Henry.

Okay.

So tonight we're kicking off a series of workshops about Alameda's infrastructure and facilities needs, both deferred maintenance and upgrades needed to meet current standards.

Last month we launched the stronger together campaign to share these needs with the public because our needs are greater than the funds we have available.

Tonight, our focus is on streets and traffic safety.

We know that hard decisions had to be made during the budget process because funding could not cover all of the traffic safety and active transportation projects and ongoing maintenance, and we want to hear your priorities.

All right.

Um the city strategic plan is the foundation of our work, along with the priorities and projects set in the city council approved plans, like the general plan, vision zero action plan, active transportation plan, and the ADA transition plan.

Our strategic plan is guided by a shared vision for the future of Alameda, which includes key elements like safe neighborhoods, vibrant commercial centers, and beautiful outdoor spaces.

The vision focuses on access to climate-friendly transportation and ensuring we are resilient to climate change and prepared for natural disasters.

To turn that vision into a reality, the city council adopted five strategic priorities, and our focus for this workshop is the first of those invest in transportation infrastructure, economic opportunities, and historic resources.

It also touches on the last one practice fiscally responsible, equitable, and inclusive governance.

At tonight's workshop, we'll provide an update on the city's ongoing maintenance needs and the adopted plans we have in place that demand updated infrastructure to meet current standards.

We'll then look forward to hearing the infrastructure priorities of both the city council and community members, and we'll use this input input to start a conversation about securing greater local control over funding, a crucial step given the uncertainties in state and federal funding.

Last year we identified a need of at least 800 million dollars for public infrastructure citywide.

One of the biggest challenges we face is a large backlog of maintenance needs that we know are critical to safety, quality of life, and maintaining our assets.

At the same time, we must invest in upgrades to protect our aging infrastructure from natural disasters, including floods, rising sea levels, and earthquakes, and make our streets safer for all users.

This isn't just about fixing what's broken, like filling in potholes and repairing cracked sidewalks.

It's about planning for our future with long-term solutions.

Today we're focusing on streets and traffic safety needs, which includes everything from road conditions to trail maintenance, bike paths, and more.

We've been very careful with our funds, and we've sought out new funding solutions, but it's clear that the current resources combined with changes in federal funding are not sufficient to meet these critical needs, and our costs are only going up.

Last month we launched a new campaign to share information about these needs to the City of Alameda residents.

We'll be using different channels to reach residents where they are, and we plan to conduct a statistically valid poll this winter that will help us understand what is most important to the people of Alameda.

We want folks to know what's going on, why it's important, and how to get involved.

If the council determines there's a need for a revenue measure to meet our immediate and long-term needs, we'll return next year with draft language for your consideration.

This I just put up a couple pictures of some of the community outreach that we've been doing.

We created a website, posted information there with information on these workshops that people can attend.

Also, there's a feedback form where people can share their input with us.

We've done social media posts on some of the infrastructure projects that we've completed, but also some of the needs that we've had.

Posted some next door posts, and we'll do additional email outreach as well.

Later, when we're doing more engaging outreach, we'll be trying to hit the newspapers, and we'll also be doing online surveys as well to try to reach as many people as possible.

And we can put those surveys into the library and the senior center as well.

So this chart highlights examples of the assets we're working to maintain.

Like I said before, we're doing, we're talking about both maintenance and updating to meet current standards.

So thinking about maintenance, this is what we are working to maintain.

And each one of these has significant needs.

We have 128 miles of publicly maintained streets that require additional investment if we were to bring our pavement index from a score of 66, which is what it is currently, which is considered fair, to up to a good category.

We have 89 signalized intersections, and many of those are at the end of their life.

And we have 25 million square feet of pay square feet of pavement, which is much more than our annual paving program can repair.

We have more than 7,000 street lights, more than 25,000 street and park trees that the city is responsible for maintaining, and 260 miles of sidewalks that need to be made safe and accessible for everyone.

Alameda is home to 18 miles of multi-use trails and 59 miles of bikeways, which are a critical component of our climate action plan and our quality of life.

While we're busy maintaining those assets, we are also planning for the future.

The city has adopted a series of plans to help achieve our shared vision for Alameda, but we are lack we are facing a lack of new funding sources.

Alameda is a vision zero city with the goal to eliminate all fatal and severe injury crashes on our streets.

We have an action plan of projects, but many lack funding.

Our active transportation plan calls for straight, safe streets for all.

It outlines the need to build 15 miles of new multi-use trails and 50 miles of new bikeways, but we do not have a funding source for these projects.

Our ADA transition plan includes a number of critical projects that would improve mobility for our residents, and these two have insufficient funding.

And we'll talk more about those issues when we discuss flood protection, sea level, and ground level rise and disaster preparedness in our December workshop.

So to address these needs, we want to identify locally controlled funding sources for our high priority projects before costs escalate.

We believe that reliable funding will allow the city to focus on the health and safety of our residents and continue the environmental progress we are making without the risk of project goals being reversed due to external conditions.

We need a stable funding source that cannot be taken or restricted by the federal government.

We have needs that are far greater than our revenues and want to better understand the communities and the council's priorities and return to you with an action plan.

We also plan to take a deeper dive in January about some of our transportation projects specifically, some of the things we're talking here with our city council retreat.

But when we're looking at our streets, uh I identified earlier that our streets receive a grading of fair and that we need to invest in street maintenance to bring that to a good level.

And that's important because streets that are in fair condition or even worse cost an average cost the average driver a thousand dollars more per year in extra vehicle maintenance, repairs, and fuel costs.

But not only that, poor road conditions also increase the risk of collisions and are dangerous to drivers, passengers, and other road users.

We have 260 miles of sidewalks, and half of those are within damaging distance from a street tree, and a third are damaged or not compliant with ADA slopes.

Our recent ADA transition plan also documented 1,309 curb ramps in Alameda that are not ADA compliant.

And then our traffic signals need to be replaced before they fail.

And looking at traffic safety, we've identified a few projects.

Alameda is a vision zero community with the goal of eliminating traffic deaths and severe injuries by 2035.

To achieve this goal, we must address street design and create roads where everyone can get around safely, whether they travel by bus car, bike foot, wheelchair, or other mobility device.

Roundabouts replace signalized intersections and have safety and operational benefits for all roadway users, reducing crashes crashes and congestion.

Adding bikeways to increase safety.

We know that 55% of residents say they would drive less and walk and bike more if it were safer.

Projects in our low stress backbone bikeway network will create a complete connected bike network across the island.

And it's designed to allow people of all ages and abilities to get to key destinations, including schools, parks, transit, bridges, shops, and jobs.

We also are recommending considering adding three miles of multi-use trails for safe walking and biking, and we need to replace the Bay Farm wooden bridge that is deteriorating and at the end of its useful life.

So Alameda's infrastructure is facing big challenges, as I've mentioned, from uh aging facilities to natural disasters.

But at the same time, we need to plan for our future while costs continue to grow.

So we want to hear from the community and the council about how to address our critical maintenance backlog and commit to the upgrades that are needed to meet current standards.

We want to find the best way to achieve a local funding source that ensures Alameda is able to address its most pressing needs.

And then here tonight with if you have questions.

I I am here tonight, of course, and then City Manager Jennifer Ott.

We have Scott Wickstrom, our city engineer, and Lisa Foster, our senior transportation manager, who are all welcome to uh answer questions if you have any.

And then just a quick note to say that we will return to the council for a work session on facilities and public safety on October 7th.

Um so in the meantime, we'll continue to update the website and share information with the community.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms.

Henry.

Um we will at this time take clarifying questions from the council, then we'll go to public comment, then we'll come back for council discussing discussion.

So any clarifying questions from Ms.

Henry.

Vice Mayor Pryor?

Um, I just have a couple.

Um so in the presentation, it said that there are many traffic signal lights that are nearing the end of their useful lights.

Henry, you might want to come back.

Oh, sorry.

What how many?

How many is many?

Is it like 20% or 40% or getting two for two for we'll get city engineers?

Oh, okay.

Come on up.

He knows this stuff off the top of his head.

All right, put city engineers.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council.

Scott Works from City Engineer.

Uh, we have 89 signalized intersections within the city.

Um, and we have I don't off the top of my head.

I wish I knew the exact number, but it's approximately 20 that are operating on an older controller system that is so old that every time we go to uh to upgrade it, we have to basically start with a brand new foundation, rewire the intersection come through.

So those are those are looking at about 100,000 per intersection for that kind of upgrade.

Um, the other challenges we have a lot of intersections is where we want to start adding left turn pockets and other sorts of uh traffic control to help facilitate the traffic.

Um but our mast arms are old and do not meet current standards, so to put in a new mast arm to be able to put a new load on that uh is is quite expensive as well.

So it quickly adds up very easily to 10 million dollars.

Oh okay.

Um and then I know on a different slide it mentioned the ramps.

Um sorry, or you know, when you're on the curb and the ADA curbs.

Um and then on a separate page, it said that um the ADA improvements are underfunded.

Is it just that example of just the curbs?

Because I think I 35 million, I would have to go back.

So I didn't know if it if that was the only um ADA issue if there were more and what the approximate um how much are we underfunded?

Oh yeah, we are well staffed staffed.

Hello, nice to see you again, Aaron Smith, public works director.

Um the ADA transition plan is essentially broken into three components.

We have programs and services and ensuring those are accessible.

We have our building facilities, so this building that we're in, um, other administrative buildings, our rec centers, and then we have things in the right of way.

Um, and there's um the ADA plan did appear in two different slides.

Um, and to interpret what um Sarah meant in her slides, um, our ADA transition plan that council has funded in our capital budget to date has been for facilities.

Okay, and we funded completely phase one, and during this current capital budget, we partially funded phase two for city facilities.

Right of way, um we typically have been addressing those issues through our pavement management program.

We replace curb ramps when our pavement program comes through.

Um, this will be the first year that we're using CDBG dollars to actually do a specific curb ramp project.

So that's something new that's come out of the transition plan.

Um, but there's a very large number in the right of way that we really didn't put a specific number on the transition plan because it's it's quite large.

Um so the two components that that showed were city facilities, that is partially funded in the capital budget for phase two, so we will be coming back to seek additional funding for the rest of that, and then stuff in the right of way, which is um our curb ramps and our sidewalks.

That appeared in the second slide that had that 35 million dollar figure, and that's referring to sidewalk damage that would be city responsibility as well as the remaining curb ramps that haven't been addressed to date.

Okay, thank you.

Clarifying questions, Councilmember Jansen.

I just have one question.

When uh was the last time the city passed a funding measure to any funding measure, a bond or a parcel tax or one to support infrastructure.

The stormwater or this uh we passed one in 2016, we passed the UT the utility users tax in 2016, and we passed a sales tax in 2018.

I believe the stormwater fee was 2019.

Um, and so and then we did the transit occupancy tax.

Was that in 2022?

Yes.

2022.

Um we have been before the council several times before talking about other revenue measure ideas and specifically talking about our need for um a potential infrastructure bond to be able to um resolve some of these, uh some of this deferred maintenance and this unfunding that we have, um, but we just haven't quite gotten there.

We had a uh we were here, I believe in it was March 2020, and uh the the world changed and shifted and all sorts of things happened, but we're back to you now, and um and we want to hear from you about those priorities.

The list that we put together, those are just examples.

They total about 274 million dollars.

We could continue to add projects to that list if we wanted to.

We think those are some of the priorities from city staff, um, but that's what we'd like to hear from you about.

What you know, when you're thinking about your priorities for the long term, do those match up with your priorities?

Should we be thinking about other things?

And that's what we're here for tonight, and also to receive that feedback from the community.

So to um your response, thank you for your response to and it um if I'm correct, the only one of those um that directly supports infrastructure would be the sewer fee.

The stormwater fee, current correct, yes, this yes, that's correct.

Okay, thank you.

And um, and so my other clarifying question is the 274 million that we're talking about tonight is just for the transportation, and there will be the other workshops will have other estimates of other infrastructure.

Exactly.

I mean, one of the things when we did this last year, we identified over 800 million dollars in need.

Uh those costs have probably grown since last year, right?

So we believe that the need is is far greater than any revenue measure that we'll ever that we'll ever consider for the city of Alameda.

Um, but we want to be able to again meet the priorities of the council and the community.

Thank you.

Yep.

Okay.

I'm not seeing other clarifying questions.

Madam Clerk, do we have public comment?

We do.

Um we have one in person and then two remote.

Uh Zo Wong.

Welcome.

Um to express my support.

I'm sorry, Madam Mayor.

I don't think we now have many more remote, so the time is lowered to two minutes.

I apologize.

And um, you'll remind me when we need to do that vote thing.

11 p.m.

Yeah.

Well, yeah.

Okay.

Um I'm sorry for the interruption.

Go ahead, Barry.

Uh I'd like to express my support uh for um having uh uh having Alamedans raise funds for our infrastructure.

I'm deeply disappointed that our federal funding has fallen through.

I mean, in particular in my neighborhood, uh the Lincoln Avenue project, uh, and of course the earlier aforementioned uh roundabout.

Um those would have been particularly valuable uh for us and if it it is up to us.

Um I think the other half of it is uh I I urge that we become more responsive uh to citizens' needs for safer streets.

Uh and sooner.

Um the Vision Zero goal mentioned earlier for 2035.

Uh recall that originally it was 2020 because it was a better sounding number, and then I'm not sure if Alameda delayed it to 2025, but I know we also did 2030 at one point, but across the world, our various vision zeros have been pushed back like so.

Um I think it's clear from the responses from that survey I mentioned earlier that the public really wants safer streets now.

I mean, uh that they don't want to wait for major projects to be completed later because they get delayed and uh not funded.

Um to pick an earlier point about the speed homes, uh they're actually one of the uh besides the overwhelming support, they're also one of the cheapest um options out there.

Code compliant recycled rubber speed homes are like hundreds of dollars.

Uh and they can be self-funded by neighborhoods.

Like I mentioned, there's an equity issue there.

Um that again is up to policy to resolve.

Uh, but uh I I think we can get this done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um we have no more in-person speakers.

Uh remote, no more.

Okay, the rest is remote.

Um Cindy Johnson.

Welcome, Speaker Johnson.

Good evening, Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft and members of the council.

I'm calling on behalf of Bikewalk Alameda to thank you for initiating this important conversation about Alameda's infrastructure needs.

We strongly support finding ways to fund and complete the already prioritized active transportation and vision zero programs as planned.

Whether we're talking about kids are walking our kids to school, biking on an errand or to a job or just trying to cross the street.

We all deserve to feel and be safe while getting around Alameda.

Traffic crashes are tragedies that also cost our city millions of dollars every year in emergency response, property damage, health care, lost productivity and related impacts, proven safety measures, measures like road diets, daylighting, protected bike lanes, and safer interstructions, inner intersections can prevent life-altering injury and reduce those costs.

Safer and more welcoming streets and well-maintained trails that connect to key destinations like schools, shopping centers, and parks also make it easier for people to choose walking and biking, which means fewer cars on the road, less pavement damage, and lower repair costs, and less pollution, supporting Alameda's climate goals and making our neighborhoods more livable.

Safe sustainable mobility and access for all isn't a luxury, it's essential and cost-effective for a well-functioning city.

Infrastructure gets us there.

If a bond measure is considered again, we hope it moves forward.

Whenever there are opportunities to lobby the state to commit more funding to active transportation or transit, which are often shortchanged, we urge you to take them.

As suggested earlier this evening during the public comment, supporting polluters pay legislation legislation also seems worthwhile.

In the meantime, we support near-term steps like updating citation fines and parking rates so Alameda is in line with neighboring cities to help offset costs while improving safety and circulation.

We'll look forward to future workshops and being able to look at the all the city's infrastructure needs all together.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Mitchell Ball.

Welcome.

Hi, thank you.

Uh pavement management is the second largest item in the 2025 through 2027 capital improvement budget.

At 5.5 million dollars a year, this ongoing project is paid for in part by the gas tax, vehicle registration, and local sales tax.

Surprisingly, it is not paid for by one thing that most people would assume would pay for it.

Special Revenue Fund 265 parking, which accounts for revenues collected from parking meters, parking enforcement, and the civic center parking garage is not used to pay for pavement management.

Why?

Because this fund has been losing money since 2020, even if debt servicing isn't considered.

Let me repeat the parking meters on Park Street and Webster Street, Civic Center Park and Garage are losing money.

Since 2014, one of Alameda's parking program goals is to achieve an 85% occupancy goal.

This is based off of a recommendation from the most influential figure in parking research, Dr.

Donald Schupe, RIP, who recommends parking rates be set to achieve an occupancy rate of 85% or less to maintain parking turnover and allow people to visit local businesses.

In 2014, city staff measured parking usage during peak hours and discovered that nearly every single street within two blocks of Webster and Park Street was over 85% occupied.

However, despite this clear signal that parking rates needed to be raised, they were not.

Anyone who tries to drive to Webster and Park Street during peak hours today knows that there is no street parking available, and this is due to these unnecessarily low rates.

Pavement management is a worthy goal for the city, and it only makes sense that it be paid for by those who use it and make repairs necessary.

One of the ways that they can pay for it is through public paid parking.

Parking rates and fines are thoroughly out of date, and if city parking revenue is doubled, it could raise two million dollars a year, which could pay for more than a third of the current pavement management budget.

Alameda parking rates are much lower than neighboring cities like Oakland, Berkeley, and Emeryville.

And the 10% of households in Alameda that do not own a car should be paying not be paying taxes to make parking cheaper for wealthier car owners.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Jim Stralo.

Welcome, Speaker Straylo.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council and staff.

Infrastructure improvements costs businesses and taxpayers one way or another.

The other infrastructure workshops will address higher priority, more necessary improvements.

When it comes to transportation, the city council in 2014 deemed all city streets walkable and bikeable.

Therefore, citizens and businesses are interested in simply having streets without potholes and regularly cleaned.

Your road diets and encouraging young bicyclists to ride closer to vehicles is bad planning.

I was raised to stay as far away possible from vehicles.

Even these days, I see many young bicyclists prefer to ride on sidewalks than ride in the streets.

Every intersection is a potential accident to happen.

In 60 years of bicycling Alameda, I was hit just once by a driver not stopping properly at an intersection.

How many accidents are not preventable?

Because drivers make mistakes.

There are no protected bike lanes within any intersection.

I visit rural parts of other Bay Area cities where they absolutely need improvements.

It is more important to spend county transportation money elsewhere in the county.

Abandon Vision Zero.

Fix the Bay Area Bay Farm Island Wooden Bridge, repair signalized intersections, fund ADA, but spend the citizens' money elsewhere, not in transportation, not on the city's optional, nice projects of additional miles of bike-only lanes.

Save money for other city infrastructure projects.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Okay, yeah, they raised their hand again.

Let's see.

Um Jean Lahain.

Yes.

Welcome, Speaker.

Hi.

Um Alametans to End Alzheimer's.

And I um I haven't heard anything in our discussion today about what we are doing to help seniors who have uh mental disabilities, such as dementia.

Um, I did see that on the infrastructure um plan that there were um uh plans for ADA and and of course I it's I support that.

I support what bike uh walk a la media had said.

And um, you know, in general really support what the city is doing, but um I think we need to consider in our uh plans what is going to be happening with the significant increase um to 16 million Americans um in the next 25 years having some kind of Alzheimer's or dementia, and I have not heard anything about that um in any of the discussions.

And I just urge you to consider that and the infrastructure planning going forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

That looks like it's the last speaker, so there's nobody else.

The previous speaker was the last.

Yes.

The other person had a hand raises.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Then for that, we're gonna close public comment and we'll open it up to council comment.

What um actually um Miss Henry, I have a question.

Um I think it was Cindy Johnson representing Bikewalk Alameda who referenced the polluters pay legislation, and we heard a couple of younger speakers in an earlier, I think an oral communication non-agenda item talking about that.

Can you bring us up to date on what the city is doing?

Um, yes, absolutely.

Thank you, Mayor.

So the city's legislative agenda.

Is this on the agenda?

Part of this item.

Um well, because it was asked about for funding helping to fund roadways.

So that's the my question.

It's related unless the city were talking about ways to fund infrastructure, are we not?

Yep.

So um so thank you, Mayor.

So the polluters pay act, we the city it does um correlate to the city's legislative agenda that the council has adopted, and so we uh did prepare a letter um to go to the authors of that legislation.

We have not prepared uh resolution um as the individuals that spoke earlier commented on, but we have to do that.

I wasn't asking for one, I was just where we are in supporting the legislation.

Okay.

And is that is that one of the bills that's on its way to the governor's desk or my understanding is that is being halted by the fossil fuel industry at the moment um and that it's likely to not get signed this year but to come back next year.

Lovely.

Um I said that facetiously for the record.

Okay, well, thank you for that.

Um I guess I'll just um launch into a couple of comments.

Um thank you.

Um it is it is sobering to hear all of that.

Um I personally would not say it's never gonna be enough money.

We will get what the voters are willing to vote for us, and we will spend it wisely and well, and sometimes we have to triage.

Um there are not many cities out there that get everything they want just when they ask, and we're certainly not one of them.

Um I have had the privilege this year of being a part of the mayor's institute on pedestrian safety, um, one of a dozen mayors across the country, and we've um met both in person in DC and we've had a number of remote meetings.

I've brought staff, um, some of our transportation staff along with me.

Um one of the just suggestions that I'll share now, it's great to collect public comment, but something we learned, I think Rochelle Wheeler maybe was with me on this one, um, is that if you are a city and you're considering making a change to an intersection, and say that intersection's near a school, or maybe it's near a business district.

Do your tabling in real time when the kids and the parents are making their way to and from school, they're not gonna spend a lot of time because they're in a hurry to get where they need to be, but you can have a one-pager, it can have a QR code, you can get information, but too often I think what we do, and it's well intentioned, but we do our workshops on Saturday, but that means we don't um we don't see, we don't test the traffic pattern, the pedestrians and the automobiles, all that in real time, probably paying people to work on the weekends too.

But um they also um we've been on um a couple of sessions where they suggest that high school students are great at doing some of this assistance, and I think our our high schools all have you know environmental, they're always looking to to do work, real work in the community.

We've had some um fantastic high school interns um working for the city this summer.

So I would just say, you know, let's let's get out there and test in real time and then um yeah, I'm a fan of speed bumps, and we um the the city engineer who um joined me on one of the virtual um uh sessions.

We we learned about how you can do things like test aroundabout in an area, you know, not like Park and Webster or something and visit but in a more residential area.

There's a lot you can do with putting up speed bumps in a circle, painting it brightly in the and and doing you know, marking up.

So so let's do some of those things.

Let's test um, and it's these are things that I mean there are you know, planners and engineers and and um lots of technical experts that that's the beauty of being part of this institute.

We get to tap into some of these resources.

So um, yes, um the need is great, and you're right, it feels a little like um the wild west kind of out on our own, because we don't really know when the cavalry's coming in the form of federal funding.

But I I'm the eternal optimist, so I'll be light at the end of that tunnel one of these days.

But for now, we have things that and we certainly are working to leverage um state funding, county, regional, what have you.

Um so um those were my thoughts.

Thank you.

Anybody else want to chime in with suggestions?

Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you.

Um, Madam Mayor, to your point about revenue coming from alternatives.

I'm interested to know how much revenue the city could obtain through increased parking fees at meters, and in our parking garages.

Whether that could be substantial.

Here's the parking expert.

As brought up by one of the commenters.

Yeah, thank you for the question.

Um, so in 2021 is when we first formed the parking fund.

And if those that remember, that's when public works took over parking enforcement, and we consolidated uh both revenue and expenses related to parking into a single fund, that's the parking fund.

And since that time, we've been working towards ensuring that the fund is fiscally neutral so that our revenue coming in is matching our expenses, and we're we're nearly there.

Um we do have an ongoing debt service that I believe was mentioned to pay off for the construction of the Civic Center parking garage.

So once that's paid off the parking fund with current rates, uh, we believe we'll be covering its costs.

So the fund will be in a good state.

Um there certainly is opportunity uh for implementing demand-based pricing, particularly in our business districts, and that's something that our um our team is looking at with MTC.

We have a grant, um, and those dollars will be used to begin to think about um how to roll that out.

Um, and so there is room to increase um our rates.

Um I don't anticipate that being um sufficient or as grandiose and in terms of the numbers that we're talking about here needed for infrastructure, but there certainly would be room for there to be a fund balance that council could choose to repurpose for other uses, but we would be talking in the millions, not hundreds of millions of dollars.

So there is there is opportunity, and we will be rolling out demand-based pricing in the future.

Great, thank you.

I um I I appreciate that, and I I would support that.

I want to make sure that we're um getting the revenue that we can from people who are driving and parking on Park Street.

And uh I would also point out that having more um revenue from parking meters and looking specifically at meters to divert as much as possible to the parking garage once that's those improvements are done.

That would be really helpful, I think.

Great, and thank you for awarding that contract tonight.

So we're excited to kick those improvements off.

Okay.

Um I just want to close by saying thank you for the presentation.

Thank you to um staff and and to Sarah Henry, and what you asked about priorities, and my priority is safe streets.

And um in 2025, I've been on the council almost three years, and unfortunately, streets aren't getting safer.

We're investing, we're we're we're doing um what we can in terms of vision zero in terms of um road diets, and we have some new projects that will that are gonna be great for Bay Farm Island and for um the West End for Central Avenue.

But uh in 2025, nearly 50 pedestrians and bicyclists have been hit by vehicles in Alameda.

It's unacceptable, and it's something that we can do something about road diets, low stress bikeways, multi-use trails, safe intersections, these are all critical community needs that we can address with the infrastructure bond, as we heard not unfortunately not with parking fee increases, but we'll still use that to hopefully um reduce traffic a little bit if we can.

And I supported the proposal that came to the council in 2024, and I support this proposal to improve our roadways.

So let's move forward and let's do it.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Any further council council bowler?

Uh, since this is a workshop, I'm gonna take a little risk here and just kind of get creative for a second.

I'm just thinking about the challenge here.

I mean, I was really impressed that Sarah Henry was selected to put this presentation on because it is a communications challenge for the city.

We're we're asked to give feedback, but of course, ultimately it's about the community members, right?

And their their preferences and their eyes, like you know, do council member Jensen's really important points on safe streets, how instantial that is.

But if we have a lot more eyes on that problem, we're gonna have a lot more accurate uh feedback.

I think there's a challenge too in terms of funding from the standpoint of um how difficult it is to get this type of uh um bond approved by the voters.

So if there's a way for us to get more interactive, and so apologize in advance, but I'm gonna talk about AI for a second.

So that is trying in the spirit of being creative, um, just doing a quick search.

There's no single pre-built app that would perfectly do this challenge, but there's there is some functionality that can be achieved through combination of existing civic engagement platforms and using uh geographic information systems software.

So basically these are tools that are designed to gather location-based feedback on infrastructure needs, and then the cost aspect can be integrated through a structured polling approach.

So, for example, you'd there's civic and set um engagement platforms that include map-based polling features that allow residents to pin comments and suggestions to specific locations.

There's um there's also GIS software, that's the geographic information system software that does um professional type software that can do an in-depth analysis to be used in combination with the civic engagement platforms, or you can do um a mobile app of development approach, which of course is going to be a lot more expensive, but it's gonna be more customized and it's going to be um more complex, but it's gonna give really complete control.

And so ultimately what you're trying to do is the final project is very similar to what the city does otherwise, right?

Which is to visualize and report, present the findings to our stakeholders, our residents, and the public using interactive maps, dashboards, giving them a stake as it progresses to giving them some information, you know.

I almost think like um, did you know, and then something about where that person was.

A lot of the apps, I mean, I using my health app on my on my phone, I know that it can tell me if I'm walking or biking or driving.

Um, did you know X, Y, and Z, which is of course what you do anyway in polling, right?

Here's a specific question, and then a specific poll that goes with that based potentially on user habits and also location.

So just I know that's kind of out there and kind of, but um, I think that this problem is um is gonna demand a creative approach.

It's gonna, I think we have to think outside the box, and this is just one idea, but I'm sure other council members and the experts and city staff will come up with even better ones, but it's I think definitely a communications challenge and a data challenge, and to get really good um communities engagement, which we don't normally get to the level I think we need for this challenge.

Mayor, is it okay if I respond?

Yes, please do.

So uh I think it's a wonderful idea.

Um, I love the idea of looking into different forms of civic engagement and how we can engage different types of people.

We do something sort of similar now, but it's not to that level with uh using C click fix for our street safety concerns.

Um, and we've been doing this for the last couple of years.

We have a vision zero task force that meets regularly, and we go through and we analyze all of the street safety concerns that come in through C click fix, and we can kind of and and the city engineer knows it because he's he's in the lead on this, but we can look through these street safety concerns and they can see okay.

Here's where there's a lot of things that are popping up, here's where we need to focus on our you know, these types of concerns are bubbling up over here, but not over here.

And so it's been really helpful to be able to use that tool in that way.

But you know, with every day that we move forward, there are more advances being made.

And so to be able to take that structure that we've kind of made up on the fly and have been doing that for a couple of years and turn it into something that could be pretty amazing.

Um, is a is a great opportunity.

So I appreciate the suggestion, and I'll definitely loop back.

Thank you.

Good suggestion.

Okay, um, you know what, Vice Mayor Prior, before I go to you, we do have to just stop for a quick housekeeping detail.

We've been finishing without even having to do this motion, but we have one more action item, which is item seven uh C.

And so we need to vote before it's 11 o'clock to go past 11 o'clock.

What I would like to suggest, we still have to hear item um finish this one off and then hear item 7C, and then we have um speakers.

Well, we have to finish seven C and then we, as you will recall, two items were pulled from the consent calendar, so we're gonna hear those after the um regular agenda finishes and then city management communication, more oral communication, non-agenda items, and um a couple of other items.

So I'd like to suggest that we continue until midnight, because I really don't think we should continue into the next day myself.

So would and it takes a vote of four to pass that.

Do I have a motion to continue until midnight or we finish the last item if it finishes before midnight?

But do I have a motion and a second to do that?

Madam Mayor.

I specifically state that the items you're you're gonna call after 11 p.m.

That's what part of the motion requires a seven C the rise up, and then the two 5A and 5H with the two consent items, and also 11A, the voting delegate.

Right.

Okay.

Yes.

Yes, because the other ones they'll happen anyway, because we have to vote on forward.

All right.

I'm looking for a motion.

Um moved.

Okay, it's been moved by council member by Vice Mayor Prior um second by council member prior.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that was unanimous.

Okay, all right.

Back to you, Vice Mayor Prayer, you were starting to speak.

Um I I appreciate uh what council member Bowler said.

Um I I do appreciate the community outreach efforts.

Um because uh yeah, we we need to do this together.

The we all can talk.

I think we see the need.

Um it's very expensive.

Um I think one of the goals, and I want to give weight to this, was uh to essentially invest in infrastructure now before these issues become more costly in the future.

Um so you know I I think it was stated there's I'm quoting backlog of needed upgrades, you know, it's a problem.

It's just gonna get more expensive the longer we wait.

And the consequences to our safety and the quality of our life is quite concerning.

So um I know I'm sold on, but I I would I want to bring the community along with us.

I um so that we can solve this together.

I would add we have to bring the community along.

If we could vote on it right up here, I think we could do it.

Um other comments, council member.

Well, yes, thank you.

Council member Desak.

Yeah, I think for for me, several things.

One is definitely um would love to have uh very specific data.

Um specific as possible, but you know, if the data can be organized into certain um infrastructur uh standard infrastructure related categories for streets, you know, for example, you know, what are the streets that are in good condition, what are the streets that are in fair condition, what are the streets in poor conditions, what are the streets that are in failed conditions, um, because within these categories we know as um vice mayor prior said, we know that there are certain um cost implications first for um maintaining streets that are in good conditions uh it ranges anywhere from 20 cents per square foot to a dollar 25 cents per square foot, but then to maintain streets that are in fair condition, you know, this uh the i.e.

resurfacing, the the cost raise rises to 175 to roughly 250 per square foot.

But then for poor streets, you know, and now suddenly we're talking um, you know, three to five dollars per square foot.

So I think for the public, so long as we understand, you know, what are the the how what are the categories of of streets that we're talking about or whatever the um uh categories that we use for sidewalks.

So that's one thing.

Um the other thing is related to you know pr presenting the data um for the public, and and this is the reason why I did not support the infrastructure um um bond proposal um from two years ago or so.

I do believe that the voting public and the residents generally um need to know what it is that that we are asking them to help pay.

Um so in two years ago or so, I think there are these categories of of infrastructure that were gonna be supported.

But I think that that within the categories, we have to be able to to identify um specific um uh projects so that people know what what are good what's gonna be funded, or at least specific projects that that could be in a list, and that there is uh a clear process by which specific projects within the list are chosen.

And if we're going to do an infrastructure bond thing, that's certainly something that I'll be looking forward again.

And as we move to other transportation traffic infrastructure, that that would be great too.

But I think that's basically it, just making sure that that we've got the data in front of us that are the clear and that you know, should there be a proposal to put something in front of the voters that that that there is a list that is clear as to what are the projects people are expected uh to help support and fund um through their taxes or or or fees.

Um and I know that the residents, you know, West End residents would vote for things that are in the East End, East End residents would vote for things that are in the West End, Harbor Bay, you know, for um for other parts of Alameda.

Um but I think you know, so long as they see that there is a list in and that that um that that every you know that that that council or or whatever uh commission has has properly vetted it.

Um I'll just add that um I have great faith in the voters that um when we communicate to them when we're clear, um they they can make their own decisions and um if they're given the chance, but of course, if the measure doesn't get to the ballot, which happened two years ago, they don't even get to weigh in.

And now I'm just thinking of all of our streets and roadways and infrastructure are that much um older and at a time when um climate change is accelerating, our storms are getting more intense.

I have the floor, council member.

Thank you.

Um and so what I would simply ask, and I asked it when this came to us before, is um we have a role to play as council members, and it's great to give just direction.

We have a really smart, hardworking council.

We have a really smart, hardworking staff too, and they're actually subject matter experts.

There are reasons that of course you want specificity, but there are also reasons where you sometimes need to leave yourself a little bit of latitude.

So all I ask is that we come into the process with um with an open mind that we um we certainly share our views, but we also um listen and listen to the subject matter experts.

Back to you, council member.

Well, I just want to say that I proudly say that I voted against putting the measure to fund infrastructure.

I proudly owned that because I felt that it was not specific enough.

I'm aware of that.

Thank you so much.

Other um comments or shall we close this one out?

Uh Councilmember Jensen.

Um I just want to take this opportunity to pig back on Council Member Desak's comment about data.

Um I completely agree that data is necessary, and it's gonna be critical to tell the story about Alameda's deferred maintenance needs with information.

And we need information about specific projects, specific streets, specific intersections, but um to the mayor's point, I I'm not interested in tying the hands of staff by specifying where every dollar will go.

If that was um not exactly what the council member was saying, but that's my position.

So I want to point out or suggest that we have a lot of data, and we have data about what Alamedans want and where Alameda see problems, and that's in C click fix.

And so I would suggest I think there's uh all the time there's probably six thousand outstanding um C click fix, what are they called?

Um, tickets.

And they're not all about they're not all relevant, a lot uh probably half are about illegal dumping, which is quite another problem we could talk about another time.

But a lot of them are about intersection streets, street lights, um, landscaping, and um our bridges, etc.

So I I would just suggest my suggestion would be to get some data from C click fix and and bring that back.

I'd like to see where those projects would fall in under there.

Thank you.

Thanks.

But I'm gonna echo what council member bowler said.

I think there's a lot of potential.

We can we can come at this in a lot of different ways.

All right.

Enough said.

Okay, so we we gave input and um and more to come, so stay tuned.

Our next workshop is December?

October.

It's in the packet, yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

We are moving on to item 7C.

Thank you, all the 7B people, and come on up if you're involved in item 7C.

Recommendation to receive Rise Up Alameda Guaranteed Basic Pilot Program, 12 month interim report.

Good evening.

Hello.

Adam here, I given the time I have a presentation, but I could shorten it to about five.

We'd love to see your presentation, please.

Oh okay.

Thank you.

I'm Eric Fonstein, uh development manager with the city's base reuse and economic development division here along with my colleague Jackie Kelly.

We're here to present the one year survey report for the city's anti-poverty guaranteed income pilot program, which is a two-year program that started in December of 2023.

Our research partner, APT Global, has recently conducted a survey of all the program participants and compared these results with the control group of non-program participants.

The purpose was to measure the statistical significance of the program's effectiveness.

Apt will conduct a similar two-year survey at the end of the program.

So we're here tonight to present the one-year mid-program findings.

First, a quick review what is guaranteed income.

Guaranteed income programs provide a flat monthly cash payment to a defined population of residents.

These programs are distinct from other financial assistance programs, in that they are one, unconditional, for example, that they don't have work requirements.

Two, they're unrestricted, allowing individuals to determine what they need and how best to use the funds.

And three, they're regular payments over a period of time rather than a one-time cash payment.

These payments also are not enough to live on, but are intended to supplement a participant's uh needs.

There are now nearly 200 cities and local jurisdictions conducting guaranteed income pilot programs.

This is about double from when we started the program.

Almeda's pilot program called Rise Up Alameda provides $1,000 a month to 150 low income households for a two-year period.

The first cash payment was dispersed in December of 2023, and the final payment is this November.

There were three basic eligibility requirements for the program.

First, the applicant needed to be an Alameda resident at the time of the program, needed to be at least 18 years or older.

And the third requirement was to have an annual income of 50% or lower than the area median income, which in 2023 was about $51,000 for a family of one.

There were three basic goals for the program.

First and paramount was to reduce the economic volatility of the program's participants.

The second goal was to change the local narrative and perceptions surrounding poverty and sense of community belonging.

For example, changing the perceptions about who's an Alamedan and who belongs in our community.

And the third goal was to collect data and contribute to the larger discussions regarding anti-poverty measures.

Abbott conducted a random um lottery to select the 150 individuals out of about 2,000 eligible applications.

There are a couple of points I would just like to make about our participants.

The first point is our participant population is slightly older than other pilot programs with an average age of 49 years old.

About a quarter of our participants, about 26%, are 62 years or older.

Also, on average, our participants report in household income of slightly less than $22,000, which is significantly lower than the program's threshold eligibility requirement of 51,000.

And then also a majority of the participants report using some form of public benefits, such as food stamps.

So on to the findings.

APT measured 40 different outcomes and found significant improvements in 17 of them.

This is better than a majority of pilot programs across the country.

First, financial well-being.

Rise up recipients showed greater financial stability and resilience than the control group.

They're more likely than the control group to be able to handle a 400 emergency payment.

They were less likely to go into debt in order to pay bills.

They were more likely to increase their savings.

In terms of mental health, recipients report less or lower stress, increased sense of hopefulness, and an improved sense of mattering.

They also reported less chaotic home environments than the control group.

In terms of medical health, APT found increased medical care for older participants with more doctor visits compared to the control group.

In terms of social engagement, the recipients were more likely to be involved in community activities such as PTA and parents' groups, religious and social organizations.

Overall, the recipients demonstrated greater emotional connection, group membership, and felt more connected to the community.

There are some areas where app findings were inconclusive.

For example, there was no statistical impact on employment, and there was not an increase in unemployment.

However, Rise Up recipients who were unemployed at the start of the program reported feeling more hopeful about setting a check, setting goals and reaching those goals.

Also, participants were less likely to be employed full time than the control group.

But it is important to note that there are some instances in which reduced employment may be considered a good outcome.

For example, reducing our work hours to sign up for job training or educational programs in hopes of getting a better job would generally be considered a positive outcome.

In such cases, their income and employment rates may be temporarily declined as they spend more time learning.

Also, it's a common story in pilot programs for single parents to adjust their schedules in order to spend provide more attention and support for their children, such as picking them up from school or being together for dinner.

Similarly, there were inconclusive findings for housing and food security.

Just quickly, for example, due to the small number of program participants who were recently experienced or are experiencing homelessness.

Apt was unable to determine if there was any real change in homelessness due to the pilot program.

In addition, it may take longer for changes in housing to be reflected in the data.

For example, it takes a pretty long lead time in order to plan and actually coordinate moving into a better living situation.

So therefore, these type of housing changes and housing outcomes might show up in our 24-month report.

So next steps.

This narrative storytelling component is set separate from apps research, but is uh will complement the research findings by providing actual lived experiences that kind of help illustrate the data and exactly help people's experience in the program.

The telling of these experiences may be through a combination of workshops, panel discussions, videos, andor printed materials.

And then finally, APT will launch its 24-month survey in this this December, and we'll make a final report presentation sometime next summer.

In that report, APT will be able to provide more detailed information about the results in Alameda and be able to compare them with other pilot programs.

So that concludes the presentation.

Jackie and Ari are available to answer any questions.

Unfortunately, uh Judy Geyer, our expert from APT Associates, she was on the East Coast and I believe we might have Cameron Burns available from Mayors from Guaranteed Income to help answer any questions.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Vonstein.

I have some questions, but I don't need to start.

Did I see your hand up?

Okay, any clarifying questions?

I've got a couple.

There was, and by the way, um, I am a part of the mayor's for guaranteed basic income, and this project is near and dear to my heart.

And this project is near and dear to my heart.

On page two of the staff report, there's a reference to an advisory board was um formed to support Rise Up.

The advisory board is composed of community and advocacy organizations, individuals with lived experience, and city staff to help guide and inform decision making on key program elements.

I don't want to know the names of individuals like the individuals with lived experience, but can you give me a better sense of how many were on the advisory board and who they were, like of city staff or agencies or what have you?

Uh city uh staff from our department as well as housing and human services.

We also had representatives from Social Service Human Relations Board from the School District.

Uh we also had um let's see uh the Almeida Food Bank, uh APC, um those were some of the organizations represented on the advisory board.

Thank you.

And then on there was a finding that um there you didn't see outcomes um change in employment and housing.

And my question, I do realize that it the and the next steps include operation dignity um is going to be um this is on page five, that operation dignity will also offer the financial and benefits counseling uh will also offer free financial and benefits counseling to recipients when the payments and by the end of this year, but have they been offering that assistance up till now?

Uh we've offered uh benefits counseling right at the beginning of the program and as we're uh doing off boarding.

So we've been doing our outreach uh since the beginning of August on the benefits counseling uh and uh we've lined up benefits counselors to be available during this off boarding period from now through the at least the end of the year, depending on the needs, we might continue that.

Is there anything like financial literacy classes?

We've been uh working with operation dignity to identify what the financial um uh training might be.

Um whatever we offer to the uh control group we would have to offer to uh the general public and the non um control group.

So we just need to make sure that it's uh uh offered to everybody.

Um that means I would say I see, but I don't um okay.

Well, because my what I wrote in my notes, my question is is there anything that can be done to help improve outcomes in employment and housing?

Are participants offered resources such as employment training, job skill training, housing navigation, et cetera.

So um that can't be offered as part of uh yeah, we could offer that um and offer it to the program participants, but uh so it won't affect the research negatively, whatever we offer to the program participants, we offer to the general public as well.

I see, so you were saying in the context of measuring the outcomes.

Okay.

Um but once oh, and once the recipients are no longer receiving the monthly um income, the fall that they will continue to be followed, won't they?

Uh, that for the app to continue to survey them.

Yeah, they'll uh do the 24-month survey starting in December.

We'll also be uh in regular communication with the participants to help with this uh narrative storytelling component as well.

Okay.

So is there any opportunity for um employment and job skills training and yes?

Okay, what would that look like?

So we would um we've been talking with Operation Dignity about uh contracting those services, exactly what the workshops might look like and when they would be in terms of certain timing about the end of the year's schedules and multiple workshops.

They would still need to be worked out about the scheduling.

Okay, all right.

So operation dignity is gonna work on that.

Okay, those are my questions.

Thank you.

Other clarifying questions before we go to public comment, counsel.

I feel like a bobblehead.

Seeing none, um, Madam Clerk, do we have public comment?

There's none.

We have no public comment.

Um, well, then I will I will just then we'll go back into council this discussion, and I will say some of the things in this report that just jumped out to me.

Um, having worked to try to reduce homelessness in our community for um, well, as long as I've been on the council and certainly as mayor, um, but also because my very first job out of college, as some of you know, is as a probation officer, and whatever we can do to support families, and I realize not everyone was a family with young children, but when I read that participants had more time and they were able to participate in things like PTA, that I mean that just goes into creating a stronger family environment for giving parents those skills and just social interactions with other parents.

So that that was lovely, and also um the rise up recipients showed greater financial stability and resilience.

They were more likely than the control group to be able to handle a $400 emergency, which is the div definition of living paycheck to paycheck, and also um more than I think nearly twice as likely as a control group to have $500 or more saved.

So not only does that give you financial peace of mind, and I think for a lot of us, it's hard to remember back when $400 was something that was really hard to scrape together.

Um this is also what often leads someone into being housing insecure and eventually possibly even homeless.

And so that we could offer this intervention and see those kinds of outcomes, I think is really um meaningful.

So um thank you.

Any other comments before you wrap this one up?

Oh Vice Mayor, please.

Yeah, I I had similar takeaways.

Um I I put in air, you know, quotes uh dignity.

I I thought that was great the way this program um I think just uh allowed for that.

Um I think just you know, saying, like, here's your money, you spend it, you know best.

I I I think that was just very respectful.

Um I also uh thought about the uh able to handle 400 emergency and the community participation.

So um so yes, I had similar takeaways.

Uh so based on the success of similar programs in other cities, I was optimistic about the outcomes of the of this pilot program, and um I would love to see us expand this.

Um because you know, we take care of our roads, parks, and we prepare for emergencies, and this is another way we can uh improve the quality of life for our our local residents.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Anybody else?

All right, well, thank you.

Um thank you so much for that um that report, but we can't close quite yet because um people, but possibly not everyone who's watching um may know.

Um today is actually Eric Fonstein's last day on the job, and so um how special that he was able to present this um this report to us, which is near and dear to my heart.

And I have had the privilege of working with Eric really as long as I've been on the council, and probably before, like when I was on planning board, we've known each other a long time, right?

Um, and I have a proclamation because that's what mayors do.

So hopefully he doesn't run out of the room screaming.

But um July 23rd, 2001, Eric Fonstein embarked on his career with the city of Alameda, working as a management analyst in the base reuse and economic development department, but it wasn't called that when back in 2001.

What was it called, General?

Development services.

Development services, thank you.

Um, until being promoted to development manager in 2008.

Throughout the last 24 years, Eric has been dedicated to enhancing the city's economic vitality and community development.

Eric has consistently championed projects benefiting Alameda residents like you just saw, particularly through his workforce development initiatives, spearheading the city's annual job fair, which has directly connected local businesses with hundreds of potential hires, and we have one coming up, I think.

Um, and the annual career fair, which provides high school students with information on jobs, internships, and educational programs, along with resume assistance and professional headshots.

Eric has also been a vital steward of community bodies such as Social Service Human Relations Board or Shrub and ACCYF, which is Alameda Collaborative for Children, Youth and Their Families, where he has in collaboration with the late Alameda County Supervisor Wilma Chan, and AUSD and the city spearheaded a citywide student speech contest designed to inspire a safer, more peaceful community.

Eric helped research design and implement Rise Up Alameda, which we just heard about the city's first ever guaranteed income pilot program, providing $1,000 in unrestricted funds to 150 low-income Alameda families for 24 months, demonstrating his dedication to addressing economic inequality and improving the quality of life for all Alamedans.

Eric has steadfastly supported businesses across Alameda, notably through his exceptional oversight of the city's At Your Service program, which expedites plan checks and approvals for eligible tenant improvements, renovations, and new constructions.

His impactful work with businesses like Ex Alexis, Semi Freddy's, and CELA Nanotechnologies has been instrumental in cultivating a business friendly environment.

Eric has played an invaluable role in strengthening the City of Alameda's relationship with local businesses, which has included serving as the city representative for the downtown Alameda Business Association, DABA, and liaison to the Alameda Chamber and Economic Alliance, who awarded Eric the public-private partnership award in 2021, acknowledging his exceptional work in managing business grants and facilitating the creation of parklets during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Eric has drafted numerous speeches, including for me, uh talking points and proclamations for elected officials and senior city leadership, reflecting his eloquence, insight, and deep understanding of the complex issues facing the city.

Eric has consistently offered thoughtful support and steadfast counsel to his colleagues at the city, including mentorship and guidance for those early in their careers.

He has helped to improve the lives of countless Alameda residents, businesses, and colleagues during his tenure at the city and will be dearly missed.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Marilyn Ezie Ashcraft, mayor of the City of Alameda, on behalf of the Alameda City Council, do hereby express our thanks and appreciation to Eric Fonstein for his invaluable service to the City of Alameda and proclaim Tuesday, September 2nd, and we're gonna extend it to tomorrow, Wednesday, September 3rd, 2025.

So you're gonna have a whole day to yourself as Eric Fonstein Day in the City of Alameda.

Encourage all encourage all residents to join us in celebrating Eric's 24 years of service to the city.

We wish Eric all the best in his well-deserved retirement, where he hope his days are filled with family, friends, and a good book or several and for your wall.

We have this is an applause by people.

You have asked me, I probably wouldn't have signed the papers releasing them.

But they're job.

Thank you for contributing on the ballots.

You sure can come on up.

I've been very fortunate to work with some well, first of all, thank everybody on the day.

It's been great working with each and every one of you.

Um but I've been very fortunate to work with some very inspiring businesses and uh shop owners, locally owned businesses on really um meaningful projects like uh Rise Up Alameda, also during the pandemic, helping businesses with loans and with uh restarting the domestic violence task force.

Um thinking back over the last couple days about you know meaning of work and stuff.

Um it's also my colleagues.

I work with some very, very bright people and very caring people.

And I just want to thank Dwayne, Jackie, and Abby here and the department.

Um so I just I'm very appreciative.

Thank you.

Thank you, Eric.

You are part of this secret sauce that makes Alameda such a special place.

Thank you.

Anyway, thank you.

I'm glad we could do that.

All right, where are we, Madam Clerk?

We're gonna go back to the two can hold consent items at 5A, the minutes of the special and regular city council meetings held on July 1st.

Uh all right.

Thank you, thank you.

All right, yes.

Go enjoy your day now.

Bye, everyone.

Thank you.

All right.

Um okay, so back to five.

Um this is the case of the frozen iPad.

So you just go ahead and tell me.

I may minutes of the special regular city council meetings held on July 1st.

And and who that was a poll from who again?

Councilmember Design.

Yes.

Oh, yes, Councilmember Day second.

Thank you.

Uh there are just two points I wanted to make.

Um in the minutes, it it's written that under discussion, Councilmember Desog recorded a no vote on all memorandum of understanding, which I did expressed and then expressed concern about having a variable salary increase and equity adjustments.

I just want to note it's more in with regard to equity adjustments, it's more about expressed concern about certain double digit equity adjustments.

So I just want to correct that.

Um the other point that I want to uh make is that while I did vote for no, I did vote no on a lot of memorandum of understanding on July at the July 1 meeting.

I want to note that I am accidentally voted for item 5.0, which was the um uh the um radioactive um uh facility.

I'm sorry, I can't I can forget I could Pacific Fusion.

Um I meant to vote not a radioactive facility, but I think you're meaning to say Pacific Fusion.

I meant to vote no on on 5-0, but it's just in the all the other MOU uh items.

I think it was 5 F through 5 M.

I forgot to include 5.0.

So just want to note that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So, madam, can we vote on both of the pulled items or do we have to do them one at a time?

I think you should do one at a time.

Do agenda okay.

So, Councilmember Days, would you like to make a motion to move?

Okay, so we have a motion to approve item 5A of the consent calendar.

Do we have a second?

Second.

It's a middle.

And it's with those no changes.

I'll just make a note of it.

He's just oh I'm sorry.

Expressing his views.

I think did you, Vice Mayor?

Who seconded it?

Councilmember Jensen seconded.

So we have a uh motion by Councilmember Day Sug, second by Councilmember Jensen.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, and there were no no's or abstentions, right?

Okay, and then we go to our second poll, Madam Kirk.

Remind me.

Uh 5H recommendation to accept the City of Alameda's annual communications report.