Ready in the balcony.

Thumbs up.

Okay, is staff ready?

Well, if staff in the balcony are ready and we've got a quorum, we're going.

And we are about to uh go into closed session.

We're going to start first with the roll call, and I'll ask City Clerk, Laura Weissaker, to please call the roll.

Council members Daisy.

Jensen.

Prior here.

Mayor Ezy Ashraf.

Here.

Five present.

Hopefully, Councilmember Baller will be here.

Okay, great.

Um, so we have um two consent items.

Yes, I think we just take one motion to our own.

Okay, these are reaching motions that will um be approved by one.

Uh motion unless routine items that will be approved by one motion unless uh removed by a council member.

But again, this is just consent calendar for the closed session.

Madam Clerk, would you introduce those two items, please?

Yes, they're both related to uh 4A, which is the um real property negotiations for um 1501 Viking Street, which is building 166 in Pier 1, and um one is designating negotiators and then one is to declaring surplus lands uh for that and various other lands.

Perfect and um let's see.

Do we vote on the consent calendar before we take con before we take public comment?

Yes, there's there's no public comment on the consent calendar.

I would let you know if there was public comment on the consent calendar, but there's nothing.

Okay.

Well, with that, I'm looking for a motion in a second on the closed session consent calendar.

So move for it.

So move uh move by council member uh day subsequent by council member Jensen.

All those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye, aye.

That motion passes unanimously.

Madam Clerk, will you uh introduce the items that we're about to consider in closed session?

Yes, um, for A is conference with real property negotiators pursuant to government code section five four nine five six point eight.

The property is fifteen oh one biking street building one sixty six and thirteen ninety nine Fairy Point Pier 1 at Alameda Point.

Uh, the city negotiators are the city manager, base for use and economic development director, base reuse manager, assistant city attorney, and Cushman and Wakefield Managing Director.

Uh the negotiating parties are the City of Alameda and Power Engineering Construction under negotiation are price and terms.

4B 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, and Jack Hughes of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore and C deputy city attorney.

The city employee organizations are International Association of Firefighters Local 689 and Alameda Fire Chiefs Association and a negotiation are salaries, employee benefits in terms of employment.

For CS conference with legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to government code section five four six point nine.

Uh the case name is County of Santa Clara et al.

versus Christy Noam et al.

Uh court is United State District Court of for Northern California District of California.

Case number is 25830, and then another existing litigation.

Court is United State District Court for the Northern California District of California.

The case number is 25 C V07070 R S.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

All right, with that, the council and all the staff involved with item 4A are going to adjourn into closed session.

And for members of the public who may be watching, we intend to be back before you at 7 p.m.

this evening.

Thank you.

evening everyone and welcome to the city council meeting to for this is the Alameda City Council and tonight is Tuesday October 7 2025.

We have just returned from um just returned from closed session.

Actually we have a little break because we really moved along and I am going to ask our city clerk Laura Weisiger to please announce any action that was taken in closed session.

All right, uh 4A which was conference with the real property negotiators for building one sixty six and pier one um staff provided information and council provided direction uh by five eyes and then the next one was labor negotiators um for the fire unions and um staff provided information and council provide direction by five eyes and then the last item which was two um cases of existing litigation uh one uh county of Santa Clara versus Christinome and City of Fresno versus Scott Turner um staff provided information and council provided direction by five eyes.

Thank you madam clerk and with that I will um adjourn this special council meeting the closed session and I will call to order the regular city council meeting for October 7 2025 and we will start with the Pledge of Allegiance and I'd like to ask my colleague Councilmember Tracy Jensen to please lead us in the pledge.

Please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you thank you council member Jensen Madam Clerk could we have the roll call please uh council members bowler.

J Sag Jensen prior here ashcraft here at five present thank you and agenda changes madam clerk um do we have um give agenda changes I think um council member Jensen might want to think we might play that one by ear shall we to see how things are moving along well I can offer it now I know that um we will have I I was going to offer to move the agenda item uh the referral to the after the workshop which is five a so I wanted to move seven uh 10 a after seven a too seven seven big yeah, which I am fine with.

And my only thought was, and I'm not predicting, but if we move our agenda along and the students haven't arrived yet, we might just but you know, we will that that is fine because we want to keep school children um on their schedule, although they probably stay up later than we do.

Could we possibly take another look at as we open the regular agenda?

That's what I'm saying.

As we go through the agenda, why don't we play it by ear?

I will move them in when you know they're ready.

Thank you.

But after the first item on the regular agenda, perfect.

Thank you.

Okay, and was that our only one, Madam Clerk?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

And so then we move on to proclamations, and we do have a proclamation this evening, because October is Filipino American History Month, and we happen to have a council colleague right here on the dais who is um has some Filipino heritage, proud Filipino heritage.

So I've asked my council colleague Tony Desag to please read the proclamation.

Councilember Desa.

Great.

Well, thank you, Mayor.

Um I'll read the proclamation.

2025 Filipino American History Month Proclamation.

In October, we celebrate Filipino American History Month to honor the history, pursuits, accomplishments, and legacy of Filipinos in the United States and to showcase their heritage and culture.

The month of October was chosen to commemorate the first recorded presence of Filipinos in the continental United States when, on October 18th, 1587, 1587, Native Filipino sailors known as Luzonis, Luzones Indios, and conscripted into the Spanish Navy as labor during the Manila Acapulco galleon trade, came ashore from a Spanish galleon that landed at what is now Morro Bay, California.

Today, Filipino Americans comprise 17% of the United States total Asian American population, and are the second largest population of Asian Americans in California, which is home to approximately 1.7 million Filipino Americans and Filipino Americans in the city of Alameda comprise 10% of our population.

The history of the Filipino American community is exemplified by resilience and activism, as demonstrated by the tireless work of trailblazers like Larry Itliong, a leader, a leader in the Delano Great Strike of 1965, who partnered with Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta to create the United Farm Workers of America, UFW union, to fight for equal rights and better wages and working conditions for farmers.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, also an Alameda resident, is a present-day trailblazer of Filipino ancestry, waging legal battles almost daily, including at the US Supreme Court, to protect the rights of Californians.

Civil rights leaders like Larry Itliong could have been describing Attorney General Bonta's work when he said we are not just seeking to improve our own condition.

We are seeking to build a better society for everyone.

In September 1936, Bohol Circle Incorporated, the first and oldest Filipino American organization in the United States, was founded in Alameda as a mutual aid society embodying the Filipino value of Capua or interdependence.

In January 2023, the city of Alameda opened Bohol Circle Immigrant Park, a beautiful waterfront park and playground whose name honors this pioneering Filipino American community organization.

Alameda's enduring cultural connection with the Philippines was strengthened by our sister city relationship with the city of Dumaguete, established on June 5, 2015.

The 10-year anniversary of this relationship was memorialized this year in a ceremony with leaders from both cities coming together to reaffirm our mutual commitment to cultural ties and global understanding.

We also celebrate the entrepreneurial spirit of Filipino Americans who enhance Alameda's economic and cultural vitalities.

These Filipina and Filipino-owned businesses include Malaya Botanicals, a family-operated CBD health and wellness company owned by Pia T.

Barton, who also hosts the Alameda Point Night Market.

Whisk Cake Creations, whose owner, founder, chef and baker, and author, Henry Alwaian, brings his passion for Filipino flavors to the world of baking.

And Cafe Jolie Donut Petite, Cafe Jolie Petite.

Owner, Joanne Guitarte, who also hosts Alameda's Popular Donut Fun Runs.

In Alameda, our motto, everyone belongs here, is also an affirmation.

Today, Alameda stands in unwavering solidarity with the Filipino American community and all immigrant communities in our commitment to protecting civil rights and upholding California's status as a place of refuge and opportunity.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Mayor Marilyn Ezie Ashcraft, do hereby proclaim the month of October 2025 as Filipino American history month in the city of Alameda.

Thank you.

Thank you, counselor.

Thank you.

And I would like you to have a framed copy of this proclamation.

It just seems like you should have it for the wall of your office or at home.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah.

There you go.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Daisug has been serving on this dais for 22 years.

How many years?

23 years.

Twenty-three years.

So that's something.

Anyway, proud to have you.

So our next item then is oral communications non-agenda item.

This is where we take 15 minutes at the top of the agenda.

There'll be another opportunity at the end of the regular agenda where people can speak on items that are not on the agenda.

If you want to speak on something that's an agenda item, please wait until that time.

And depending on the number of speakers, the clerk will tell you you will either have uh two or three minutes to speak, and then I always like to proceed oral communications non-agenda items and the rest of the meeting with the ground rules for conducting a city council meeting, which is to say that this is a business meeting.

We are here to conduct the business of the people of the city of Alameda, you, us, and um, but it is not theater, it is not a sporting event.

So therefore, with the rare exception of applauding for an inspiring proclamation, we we don't applaud, we don't cheer, jeer, boo, do the wave.

We just sit and listen respectfully.

It helps me uh the meeting move along more efficiency, efficiently, but also for some people who come to speak at a council meeting.

It might be their first time ever speaking at a council meeting.

I've actually had people say I almost didn't get up to speak because the audience was so raucous, and that really breaks my heart because this is your house.

This is the people's house.

You should be able to get up and speak with respect, with civility, but to speak your mind, and I don't want anyone to feel intimidated to do that because they're afraid they might get cheered.

Well, they're probably not afraid they get cheered, but jeered or booed or laughed at.

So we don't do that.

We just exercise uh civility and courtesy.

This is Alameda after all.

Um, and um also they're often um young people in the audience.

I think we'll be joined by some later tonight.

They may be watching um on screen, and um, we want to set a good civic example for them.

This should be a safe place to speak and listen and be listened to.

Signs are fine, they're your first amendment right.

All I ask is that you not hold them over your head unless you're in that last rope, just don't block the people behind you, hold them up to your chin or whatever.

And then I um need to say that um, in accordance with state and federal law, the City of Alameda officials, including its law, um, sorry, that's the wrong one.

That's our sanctuary city policy, which I'll read if I need to, but this is the language from the California Penal Code, which states that California Penal Code 403, 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 section 18340.

First violations will receive a warning, and continued violations will require additional action, which could include police intervention, but we don't anticipate that because again, this is Alameda.

But with all that said, bear that in mind, and uh Madam Clerk, um, how many speakers do we have?

Uh we have four speakers, so we've got three minutes.

All right, um, and the first one is Gordon Williams.

Welcome.

Hi.

And just make that microphone your own, whatever level you need.

All right.

Hi.

Hey, thanks so much.

Uh my name's Gordon Williams.

I'm a resident of the Fernside neighborhood.

I'm here to talk about the proposal uh that was put up um a few weeks ago about uh closing off Gibbons Avenue, taking the left turn on the high street.

Uh this started for us back in March.

Uh, back in March, it was kind of a last minute change in the city agenda.

Uh, to add this in there.

Uh, we gave us waited up till one in the morning, spoke to you guys, and it was I admire you guys for your tenacity through that, but it's a long night.

But um, but yeah, uh, it was very, it seemed like a very rushed closed process.

Uh, this uh traffic study came out a couple weeks ago, and I the city was very transparent with all these workshops and the Zoom meeting.

I really appreciate that.

I want to just thank the city council for all um attending.

I know all five of you attended one or the other, and that was great, appreciate that.

Uh, just want to bring up a couple points of things that I learned through that process.

Uh, one was the question of this whole thing is about safety, traffic traffic safety at the intersection.

And the question was well, uh, how many of the accidents, the 22 accidents that have occurred there, occurred from people making a left turn from Gibbons, like, or that contributed to it.

The city, I think is gonna put that data together.

We found another slide from uh the consultant's report.

It showed that uh there was only actually five injury accidents in the intersection.

We know several of them that were not caused by the left turn on gibbons.

So that makes me question the whole is this really driven by safety thing.

What I heard in the community workshop is actually this has a lot to do with potential future congestion tied to the bike lane and that changes, and my comments there are like okay.

If if it's really about congestion, like and we're trying to make Alameda less congestion, then that's more of a let's look at the bike lanes on that.

I love the bike lanes, and I don't mind a little bit more congestion.

It sounded like it was just a like maybe 10 more seconds or 15 more sections at the intersection, which didn't seem so bad to me.

Um, was still not closing off gibbons.

I think I strongly believe we should keep gibbons open.

What we saw in that report is closing off gibbons to the high street uh bridge means pushing more traffic into the smaller streets, and I think that's unsafe.

I think that adds, and I I think that I'm getting the sense you guys are hearing from us.

Uh we've got a group of uh we have a petition online about this with over 320 signatures on it.

Uh, there was maybe 50 hundred people that showed up to those workshops, and I think there were maybe two people that were for it, maybe 98 against.

Uh, we're not really big fans of it, so um I'm taking every opportunity I can get to speak to you guys about it.

Uh what I think we should do is just pause the decision on Gibbons, like push that off, go forward with just making the intersection safer without closing off gibbons.

Uh we have all these other projects going on.

Let's let those happen, let those settle.

Let's put some common measures uh into the neighborhood, and then later do a traffic study that's actually representative.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker, William Morrison.

Welcome, Speaker Morrison.

Thank you for your time once again.

I've been a much more frequent member or shall we say visitor of the council for the same reason Gordon has.

We're looking at a situation that we find uh less than shall we say beneficial to the entire island.

And that's one of the things that I want to bring out is a lot of this the decisions that appear to be being made associated with this go back to past plans where some people believe there was a concerted directed effort to accomplish what is now happening, not necessarily for the benefit of Alameda, but for the benefit of various people with certain desires associated with it.

One of them being to make the island more bike friendly.

That's a nice term.

However, it seems to me that the manner in which we are going out or has been gone out so far to make the island more bike friendly is to make it more automobile averse.

And by that I mean the the effort to quote have what they call diets, where you reduce the size of the uh the roadway to make it more difficult to drive, where you begin to put bollards up at various areas to make it more difficult to turn or to get onto a roadway.

The only reason why I bring this out is this forum here, you are the only people I think that can say, hold on, wait a minute.

Is this the correct thing to do?

Shouldn't we uh and even more than that, is there's something we can do that'll get us there that we can back off from if we have to.

And from that viewpoint, in other words, when you do no harm or do little, sometimes it's better.

And that's the main thing I would like to advocate for you more so than anything else.

Along this line, at the same time, one of the things that I have found is the extreme difficulty of the general public, someone like me, to really and truly have a voice.

I got three minutes on a good night here, and that's it.

You know, and from that viewpoint, I I don't know how you do that, but I would task the city manager if at all possible to make her staff, city staff more, shall we say, accessible, or that the manner for access be more known so that people can express opinions without having to get inflamed or and do things frankly.

So that's that's the extent of what I'm looking for at this moment.

Once again, uh you are our representatives.

I appreciate it, and thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Rita Lark.

Welcome, speaker Lark.

Good evening, counsel.

My name is Rita Lark.

I came here to uh read a statement that I read at the other meeting.

I'm here tonight to share deeply troubling experiences since I have moved into the Esperanza Housing Complex, which is owned by Alameda Housing Authority.

From the beginning, I faced violations of my safety from a key box that's kept in the management's office left unlocked, and allowing unauthorized access to my apartment from the maintenance supervisor and his co-worker.

Now it has gone from there to uh multi-break-ins.

Every time I leave my house, I come back, I find either my couch, my love seat, or some of my carpet, like my tablecloths last night, pissed out.

And I have contacted June Campbell, the unbudsman Ryan, Vanessa Cooper.

I have non-stop contact with your Alameda Police Department to make incidents reports, but it doesn't make sense for me to have to keep going through this.

I love where I live at.

I just wish that somebody would take action.

I mean, these two maintenance men stole keys and and plus they're doing drugs, and then anybody that gives them drugs for a key giving them people's keys.

And they are taking advantage of by doing all these breakings and destroying my property.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Gabriel Duncan.

Welcome, Speaker Duncan.

Hi, my name is Gabriel Duncan.

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

I'm passing out a flyer for an upcoming lecture called Nations versus Nonprofits.

And I'm here to invite you to a special Indigenous Peoples Day session.

This training shows how to tell sovereign tribal governments from nonprofit corporations that present themselves as tribes.

We cover due diligence, clear red flags, and practical ways to support real tribal sovereignty.

It's on uh Monday, October 13th, Indigenous People's Day.

It starts at 10 a.m.

You can sign up to our website, native historyproject.org, and it's under the menu under nations vs.

nonprofits.

On the flyer, the special student cost is crossed out because we actually added a whole uh sliding scale thing so students can join for free if they want to.

Uh there's limited space, first come first serve for context.

Uh, the city previously listed a corporation on its website as if it benefited a local tribe.

Uh that was not the truth.

And this example shows how easily nonprofits and tribes get conflated or confused.

Tribes are sovereign governments with citizens, constitutions, elections, and leaders chosen by their people.

Corporations can serve tribes, and tribes can charter corporations, but corporations are not tribes.

Alameda sits on at least four shell mounds, the ancestral homeland of the Moekma Loney tribe, and as guests on Moekma land, we are responsible for knowing whose land we are on and speaking with care about tribal matters.

Uh please attend, direct staff or contact me through our website, Native History Project.org to bring this training to council because it's very important.

And this isn't about guilt, it's an invitation to learn together and to do better together.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, that was our last speaker.

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

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

Seeing none, um, does council have any questions?

Before I go to public speakers, does council have any questions, clarifying questions about any of the items on the consent calendar?

Seeing none, madam clerk.

Do we have any public comment on the consent calendar?

We do.

Okay, just one social three minutes.

Jennifer Rakowski.

Welcome, Speaker Rakowski.

Thank you.

I'm here to discuss item uh 5H, the uh command and control vehicle that is being proposed to be purchased by the Department of Public Works.

Um Mr.

Kowski, if you bring the microphone down, yeah, we'll be able to hear you.

Thank you.

Um so it's being proposed to be purchased by the Department of Public Works.

Um while I believe the council will support a replacement vehicle for one that I understand to be 30 years old, I believe it's being proposed prematurely.

Um command and control vehicles are clear items under AB 481.

Um, and even though it's being purchased by public works, the clear use is outlined in the agenda is for you by the police department, and that requires the process of being listed in the report vote by on you by this council.

Um so I believe the prior vehicle that's actively in use should be part of the AB 481 in your report.

It is in other jurisdictions in Alameda County, and I believe that council is being asked to vote prematurely on the purchase of this vehicle without going through a full AB 41 process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I'm going to ask a clarifying question about this agenda item.

And I see our police chief Nishant Joshi in the audience.

I wonder if Chief Joshi you could come up and just amplify for the council and and for the audience, anyone, or Captain McMullen, whomever, come on up.

If you could just explain what this agenda item is about.

And then the questions that were just raised, if you could help address this.

Thank you.

Of course.

Uh good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the council.

Um, so this is actually not a command and control vehicle.

This uh vehicle is uh called a uh crisis negotiation uh vehicle.

Um there's there's significant differences between a command and control vehicle and the vehicle that is being purchased to replace the the existing vehicle.

Um to summarize it, a command and control vehicle is essentially a police station on wheels versus this vehicle, which will be used by our negotiators for um incidents where uh negotiators have to uh are responding to a critical incident where there might be a hostage taker or um a barricaded subject.

So I've got some uh differences that I can I can share here.

So a command and control vehicles primary function is that it provides on-site mobile emergency operations uh center to coordinate multi-agency responses to uh large incidents like natural disasters, mass casualty events, or large scale public gatherings as opposed to as compared to the crisis negotiation vehicle.

Uh that just simply facilitates communication between uh train negotiators and uh individuals that are suffering from a crisis during a barricaded subject type situation.

Uh, as far as mission scope, a command and control vehicle, uh the mission scope is broad, multifaceted, it manages everything from logistics and uh resource allocation to communications and strategy for an entire incident.

The uh crisis negotiation vehicle is very specific and focused on achieving uh peaceful resolution for a contained situation, uh typically the size, uh, and if I may ask the uh clerk to um put some photos up for us, want to just show you some of the uh significant differences.

I'll speak on it as uh that's being loaded.

Um for the uh command and control vehicle, it's a large vehicle.

Sometimes it's like a bus that's been converted, as you see on the screen.

Uh, it could be a truck, uh, expandable trailer.

It's used uh to accommodate multiple workstations and personnel from different agencies.

Um, if you scroll down to what the vehicle, not this one, this is also a uh command and control vehicle.

That's what the inside of a command and control vehicle looks like.

This is uh uh negotiations uh vehicle.

Um so they're they're much smaller.

Uh we have several of these in in our city fleet for other departments that that are that are being used.

Um it's essentially a vehicle that that is used by the negotiators to um to gather intelligence to provide information to the mobile uh uh uh command type vehicle.

So those those are the differences.

This does not fit uh 41.

Um, when we look, you know, if we take a step back and and um assess what was the intent of 481, it was to ensure that our community or any community is not uh subjected to militarized uh type equipment, vehicles, things of that nature without the consent and approval of the community.

Uh and so this vehicle is is does not fit that.

That when you think about the vehicle that a vehicle that would apply under 481, it would be something that has um it's been weaponized, it doesn't roll on wheels or it could be rolling on on tracks.

It's something that absolutely looks like a militarized vehicle and has significant similarities to a military militarized vehicle.

The vehicle that's being purchased is not that, and Chief Joshi, this is the one that we're using now.

This is just an ex uh this is just an example of one.

But the one that is proposed to be replaced for APD, is it um a repurposed ambulance if I recall correctly?

It it is that's correct.

Okay, thank you.

And it's um, I think the reference is AB 481.

Is that the legislation you're referring to?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay.

Um else we should know before I see if any of the council has questions.

I'm gonna just turn over to Captain Uh McMullen because he has a lot of uh technical data on this.

Is there anything that you'd like to add, Captain?

Okay.

No.

All right.

Well, stand by for some questions.

Did I see Councilmember Jensen adjusting your microphone?

Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you.

Do you um you mentioned that other cities have similar um similar police crisis negotiation bans?

Is that correct?

That is correct.

I didn't I don't I don't believe I mentioned that, but you are correct.

There are other cities that have these types of vehicles.

And um we are using a repurposed vehicle for this that situation right now, right?

That's correct.

That in the other cities, do you happen to know if these are classified as um command and control vehicles and reported?

I don't uh the previous uh department that I worked for, uh this uh the Oakland Police Department.

Uh I'm very familiar with uh SWAT vehicles.

Uh I've served on the SWAT team for a number of years.

Uh the vehicles that fit the command and control vehicle are similar to the ones that were shown uh previously.

If you could scroll back up, Cleric Weisinger, something like that.

That's uh city of Fremont's.

Um that's that is absolutely not what we're trying to get.

But you it in Oakland, did they have uh police crisis negotiation vehicle?

Um I I don't know if they have one now.

Uh when they had one when I was there, uh it was I believe a repurposed it was it was also a repurposed vehicle, and at that time 41 was not um in in effect.

Uh that that came into effect uh since I've been here with the city of Alameda.

Thank you.

Any other council questions, clarification questions?

Okay, thank you both.

Thank you.

Okay, um, so then um Madam Clerk, that was our only public uh speaker.

Okay, so then does council have any comments on any of the balance of the the um consent calendar?

Seeing none, swiveling my head back and forth.

I am then just looking for a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar.

Um I move that we approve the consent calendar.

It's been moved by vice mayor prior second by is that you, council member?

Council member Jensen.

Any further discussions, seeing none.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, any abstentions?

Hearing none, that um the consent calendar is approved unanimously, thank you.

Um so then we will move on to our regular agenda, which is item 7a, and is as um the relevant staff are coming up or others are leaving.

Goodbye.

Thanks, staff.

Good to see you.

Um, I believe that this item that um presenters would like to have 15 minutes instead of 10.

I need an affirmative vote of four council members, hopefully five.

Can I get a motion and a second to extend the staff presentation time from 10 to 15 minutes on item 7A?

Moved by council member Daisoc, seconded by looks like Councilmember Bowler.

Um, all those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye, all right.

That is unanimous.

So um welcome, Ms.

Henry, and you have 15 minutes for your presentation.

Thank you so much.

And it won't be all me, it'll be mostly our consultants.

But well, 15 minutes is 15 minutes.

Take it away.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members.

Tonight we're presenting our second in a series of four workshops about Alameda's critical infrastructure needs.

Last month we detailed the deferred maintenance and upgrades needed to meet current standards and protect our streets and ensure traffic safety.

Tonight, our focus is on city facilities.

Alameda's strategic plan highlights the city council's five strategic priorities and includes a work plan of projects to meet these priorities.

This is in addition to the priorities and projects defined in many other city council approved plans.

Maintaining the city's existing facilities and ensuring our facilities are resilient to climate change and natural disasters is critical to meeting the city council's goals.

Our focus for tonight's workshop is on the strategic plan priority of enhancing community safety and services.

The purpose of tonight's workshop, where we'll provide an update on our facility needs.

We'll hear the priorities and the input of the city council and the community, and then we'll use the information we receive to continue the conversation we are having about how to secure local funding in order to meet these needs.

We've identified the need for more than $800 million to address public infrastructure needs citywide.

Last month we dove into the details of what's needed to address the large backlog of infrastructure maintenance needs and invest in upgrades to meet current standards before they become much more expensive.

Tonight, City Manager Jen Ott will introduce our consultants who will present their assessment of Alameda City civic facilities and fire stations and their preliminary recommendations for Alameda.

Since we started this effort, we've been sharing information about our critical needs on the city's website and social media.

At the end of the year, we're planning to conduct a statistically valid poll that asks Alameda voters what their priorities are.

These workshops are helping us gather input in advance of this polling.

And with all of the information that we're collecting, we plan to return to the city council to consider placing a potential revenue measure on the 2026 ballot.

I'd now like to turn things over to City Manager Jenna.

Welcome.

City manager.

Thank you, Mayor Council.

I'm gonna quickly introduce our consultant because of the complexity of facilities and the need for specialized services related to architecture, engineering, and kind of specialty services, something that really came out of the last uh infrastructure bond conversation we had was really identifying and specifically what our needs are and and the facilities that we asked.

We did an RF quest for proposal.

The city council approved the contract with RMRM design group.

Charles Dellinger is here from RRM Design Group.

And just a little bit of we did choose facilities that really and capital needs and facility needs that we can't just kind of put, we can't just uh incorporate into our normal CIP process.

These are much larger needs, needing to look at potential alternative sites, doing more detailed facility assessments, and so that's why we chose these particular facilities and then brought in an expert to help us.

So I'm gonna turn it over to Charles to walk through their findings.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you for having me.

You hear me now?

Yeah.

Thank you for having me.

Uh Madam Mayor and Council and staff.

Uh so we'll just overview.

It will be a little bit fast, and there'll be some specifics.

I'm gonna give enough, but also not too much.

So goals of the assessment.

I just want to highlight, we kind of already went over really evaluate the facilities, and we want to look at it from all aspects.

So we'll go through kind of how we did that and what the findings are, um, but really with the goal of what's next, right?

What's what's the future to look like?

Um we broke it into kind of two categories.

So it was all together, done as once, but it based on the facility.

So there's civic facilities and there's fire facilities.

From an efficiency standpoint, we did it at the same time.

There's a little bit of overlap in some places, potentially, uh, as we got into it, not as much as potential, but uh the presentation will kind of break it up that way too.

Just to make sure you're it's clear.

Uh, of the civic facilities, the animal shelter, the fleet services garage, the maintenance service center, all kind of located uh centrally on the north side.

Uh, and then the last uh feature that we looked at of city facilities was the Rack and Parks Corporation Yards, which is out near the point, and there's two locations for that.

And of the uh fire stations evaluated.

So we looked at all of them except for fire station 3, as well as the admin and fire training facility.

Uh that one's newer, wasn't part of the study, not needed.

Alright, we have a little bit of uh the evaluation.

So, first of all, we looked at what facilities you have.

What's this the capacity of those, both from uh you know, operational standpoint?

Are they safe?

Are they meet accessibility?

Are there seismically?

We'll talk about fire stations in particular, and also where they are in the community, and then does it meet the needs of the community, zoning, etc.

So kind of from a lot of different aspects.

Make sure that we're really looking at it inclusively of all different components.

Overall findings.

So just really quick highlight.

Civic facilities generally are undersize, outdated, and kind of not set up for modern operational efficiencies, and there's a lot of growth.

There's some uh caveats to that, but and then fire facilities generally again similar knots.

They've been a while since they've been built, so they're not up to kind of modern standards from kind of safety of the firefighters perspective and mainstream of the best uh facilities.

Uh operational efficiencies, and some of the facilities do need seismic upgrades, they were built before the essential facilities act.

Um, so there's kind of a risk there in the future.

Um facilities are like in a great location.

So the maintenance service center centrally located, it's in a spot that the public works can respond to either, you know, just emergencies or your general maintenance things that come up.

Uh fire stations one, two, and four, great location.

Chief has a lot of information on the response coverage.

Uh, and the fire training facility, because of its kind of location, is in a great great spot.

Uh others, the animal shelter, not in a great location.

Over time, we went from an industrial uses around it to residential, and they don't really pair well together.

Uh, fleet services garage, kind of similar in that same neighborhood, as well as the use of the waterfront uh has created some challenges.

And then the parks and rec yard is kind of far away, and they're making things work, is probably the best way to put it.

Um split up, so there's not some efficiencies because it's over two different sites.

Fire station five, uh, currently not used.

It is uh not necessarily in a bad location, but the current facility that's not being used is not up to standards, and there's some challenges with that being kind of a historic part of the base.

And then last is fire admin that is in too small of a space or spread out right now, so that'll be part of our recommendations to kind of consolidate.

I'm gonna go through a little bit quickly, but some additional findings, a lot of code and right kind of regulation with a lot of the civic facilities.

Uh where we went generally up uh outdated, a lot of upgrades are not that easily achievable.

That's probably one of the biggest things, right?

They're out of space and or it would be major structural renovations where you're just not getting the efficiency of making even like a renovation, uh, and then there's some operational effectiveness and uh supporting staff.

And I guess one other thing just to hit Alameda Point, you know, you know the city way better than I do, but Alemania Point is a place where you do have some land available, which when we're looking at relocating and finding the rest use, there gives us an opportunity.

Quick recommendations, and we're gonna get into this a little bit more in more detail.

But animal shelter uh really looking at relocating out towards the point.

Um we'll talk about kind of a combined facility with some uh compatible uses, uh, or an S uh location by itself.

Uh fleet services garage, lots of conversations with staff of that.

If we can move that out to the point, there's not a huge operational uh deficiency if we do that.

Uh the maintenance service center isn't a great location.

The building is in really good condition.

The site needs some work, so there was some other shuffling around that does free up some space and help them.

Uh, and wreck and parks are in some really outdated facilities.

They're split up.

There's a lot of uh ineffective operational there.

Um additional for the fire facilities, uh, particularly out at Alamina Point, there's inadequate uh coverage, so that is an area that needs to be addressed.

Several facilities are beyond their useful life.

Obviously, Fire Station 5, Fire Training Station, and then some of the others are on the older, older side, but we think they can be recommended renovated.

And fire admins, we've kind of already went over that.

Alright, so some recommendations for fire facilities.

Fire admin to relocate out of fire station one.

Look for a new location for them, and we'll talk about that.

That also frees up space for Fire Station One to expand and renovate without having to build a new fire station one.

So remodel fire station one.

Fire station two, we'll talk a little bit about this.

This is a very older facility, but there is some.

It's operational, and you can see there's quite a building deficit.

When it was built in 1984, things have changed a lot in the care.

There's been a lot more need in the city, so that's that's where it's mainly driven from.

There's no safety issues or anything there right now.

It's primarily a large operational.

Fleet services is a D, and it's meeting your staff is doing a great job of making it work type of thing.

There are some structural issues there, some cracking.

It was the data's wrong actually, it was 1969 that it was built.

So it's 67 years old, it's it's getting up there, and then the park and rec's yard, that's two facilities.

That's very old.

There's some pretty significant uh electrical structural, it's a big big building that they're in as old gym building out at the base, and then for the fire facilities, um, nothing, they've been maintained a lot better, right?

Over time, they're there, they do a great job, so not quite as uh detrimental, I guess, in the sense of what we do.

Fire station two is pretty undersized for the need, and it is uh an old facility from a seismic standpoint.

So that's a C.

Fire Station 5, which we talked about, you know, it's just not being used.

That is a D and pretty low and really hard to renovate because of the concrete structure.

And then fire training is at that same location, so similar issues.

I'm gonna go really fast through these, so I might skip skip ahead.

But we did do what we call a fit test for each of these.

After we kind of get the general sizing, we make sure that it's not a full floor plan, there's no design necessarily, but we're looking at both site and the building and make sure we're getting kind of the appropriate sites as we move forward.

So we did that for each facility.

Um, I'm gonna just spend a little bit here.

So with MSC, as I said, the building is there, and then you can kind of see that it does.

If we move animal services and fleet, it frees up some space.

Not ideal from a maintenance service standpoint of yard space of kind of current operational, but given the location and the um, you know, limitations of available sites.

We still think this is probably the most appropriate moving forward.

And I want to highlight briefly here, this kind of top right.

So as several of them are in there, you'll see we kind of looked at two different options individually and on a combined campus.

Uh there's some synergy of you know, resources there, not a huge because they do have some not a lot of uh similar uses within the facilities themselves, but a lot of synergies on the site in particular.

Uh parking, you're using it's same use, right?

With animal animals, not the same use, but you're not gonna complain with a parking lot and in a courtyard next to that type of thing.

And I'm gonna go really quick for fire admin, we already talked about moving the uh admin out that frees up fire station one, fire station two is to uh and lar or enlarge for the occupants and move one of the ladder truck out to the new fire station five, which is kind of a critical, and then uh just really want to hit because we did go all the way to doing response analysis on the different uh locations for Fire Station 5.

We still have a couple options, but really there is a kind of a gap in coverage uh out at the point.

Uh we looked at a combined facility of two and five, and that created just gaps in different places.

So it is recommended to keep to where it is, it's an ideal location there, and then uh look for a new location for fire station five.

Let's skip forward.

Uh you do see the cost that is all in cost, is what we're trying to do, not just construction costs.

Thank you so much.

Sorry for that.

All right.

Um, why don't you stick around for a minute to see if there are any clarifying questions?

I have one, but um Deputy Chief Moxie, I think you're probably better um to come on up.

It's not a tough question, but it's a fire question.

Um, you want to introduce yourself?

Yes.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council.

Uh Deputy Chief Cody Moxley with fire department.

He's also an impressive pitcher if you've ever seen him pitch.

Um I have.

Um, so in the in the assessment of the different fire stations, I noticed there was a notation on a number of them that um it lacks contamination control.

I don't know what that means.

What does that mean for a fire station?

And fire station one was one of them.

Um, so and you can raise that microphone, by the way.

Yes.

Here we go.

Um I believe it's referencing like when we go on calls uh having a separation between the workspace or where where we park the rigs and get off the rigs, clean up, and then going into living space.

There's no there's no barrier.

I believe that was right.

Is that I guess I could ask both of you because you wrote the report.

Is that anything to add to now?

Yes, at the microphone, please.

Uh kind of modern fire fighting or fire station design is you separate, we call the closer to the bike.

What we call the dirty or the hot zones.

Yeah.

Uh so when you come back from a call, you've been in a burning building or whatever it is, you could there's a place to kind of wash off, and then you have where we store the apparatus, which is you know, diesel fumes or whatever in there that's not quite as hot, but it still can impact.

Uh so what we kind of design is those is our separate portions with a barrier between the house side because you don't want to bring that in.

And there is like plenty of data on the increased cancer risk and all that from that carcinogens.

Uh so we actually create then kind of the the intermediate zone, which we're called you know, like a yellow zone where we separate those so you have a time to even take off your boots before going in the house house side.

This is very helpful.

And so then in our newest station, I always get my numbers mixed up.

What's the newest one by the EOC?

Three.

Thank you.

He held three fingers up for me.

Um, did we did did we build in that separation in that new station, newish station?

So station three, no, there's not, it's better than the other stations, but it's it's not quite there.

Okay.

There is a separation uh for like where the turnouts are.

It's there's drains, it's vented, it's it's it's proper storage for that because when we go on certain calls, if equipment's not cleaned, there is a little bit of off gassing, and so it's it's properly vented in the apparatus ventilation ship system is better as well as um just the apparatus room overall, has uh automatic dampers and vents that that exhaust all that those fumes.

Okay, good to know.

All right, thank you both so much.

Are there clarifying questions from council?

Can Council Member Daysa?

Yes, in terms of the pro the um contemplated animal shelters at um Alameda Point, um where is the location of of um number one and the location of number two, the cross streets?

Mayor, are you talking about where we might propose a combined facility?

We're so we're still one of the next steps is to look at that more closely.

Some of the locations we did look at, we want to be careful not to impact um spaces that have a lot of revenue potential or sales potential.

So we are looking close to where fire station five is now, but looking at building five also, there's a building on the corner, building 62, which is across the street from building five, or across the street from station five.

Um so we looked at that as a potential location for a new station five, a combined facility.

We might actually look as part of the building five or part of the land area around that.

So we still need to do a little, we've done some initial site fits, but I think that is a next step where we'd really want to dig into where combined facility might go.

Okay, the reason why I'm asking is um number two is hard to delineate, but um if one of the reasons is that the current um animal shelter at Fortman area um, you know, is bumping up against new uses.

I think the same argument could be made at number two, because there's just as many residential areas not too far away from number two, um, which looks like it's Viking and Hornet.

It's the Viking Yard where the REC uh parks and record is one of their locations.

Yeah, so number one is further away.

Um I don't know precisely where, but um, it's just something to keep in mind.

Okay, thank you.

Are there clarifying questions?

Council Vice Mayor uh and then council member Jensen.

Um yeah, I think this is gonna be quick.

So on it doesn't have a page number where it's the site analysis recreation and parks corporation yard.

Um it says the current building square footage is 23,000, and the proposed building square footage is 10,000.

So I was wondering.

That's a little confusing.

Um so they're currently in the old uh pool building uh out at the which is way more than they need, but they're using it for basically outdoor storage of a lot of equipment.

So they do need uh more storage space and our secure storage space, like secure yard, um, but and they're kind of making that work, I guess, of the thing.

So the they have a bigger building than they need, but it is not as much as they need in the sense of a yard and a full facility.

Okay, that answer your question.

Yes, yeah, that was confusing.

Council member Jensen.

The um three of the facilities are proximal to each other on the northern waterfront, and um I'm just wondering what are the geologic environmental issues or are there any that are contributing to the deterioration of those buildings or the need to move them?

I'm talking about the fleet service center and as well you've mentioned what the animal shelter concerns are, but are there other issues with the ground there?

Uh we did not do a forensic analysis of of the issues.

I will say at the fleet services, there is some cracking in the CMU and in the slab.

I would kind of presume that has to do with some differential settlement because of the water, but I we did not explore that from a kind of scientific perspective.

And as you mentioned in the report, it'll continue to be used for um as part of the the maintenance service center.

My next question is about the um that you in the report it says that several a number of these facilities were not up to code specifically the civic facilities primarily.

Are there health and safety issues, immediate health and safety issues at these sites?

Uh there are not any immediate uh issues at all.

Uh there are some accessibility compliance and stuff like that.

Uh, but no, we're not concerned that like the building's gonna fall or anything for that matter.

Accessibility in terms of restrooms, et cetera, in terms of ramps.

They've built way before accessibility compliance and um and there's been a lot of changes, even if they were built after that.

Um in the report I didn't see it, but um is there any somewhere?

Did I miss it that that where the fire administration could be relocated?

Was that part of Alameda Point or has that been determined?

Chief Louby, I didn't even see you.

I thought I'd see you come in, but then you're out of my sight line.

Was that intentional?

Hi.

I would have I actually would have called on you about the contamination issue, but that's it.

But that's okay, Chief Moxley did a great job.

Yeah, he did.

Um good evening, Madam Mayor, uh, council members uh Nick Luby, Fire Chief.

Uh Council Member Jensen, thank you for the question.

Um in working with RRM and having the discussion about uh utilizing the existing building of uh admin for expansion to build a decontamination corridor for the health and wellness of the firefighters.

That was uh a discussion, and there's options there.

And I will say, in addition to that, um we are spread out over five different locations throughout the city, our administrative uh component of the fire department.

So on top of RRM, it's something I've been looking at is to try to consolidate our administrative services and prudent of customer service and collaboration coordination and functionality in admin.

Uh two options.

One is to lease space, which a lot of fire departments are doing currently.

Um currently Berkeley just leased a big space, they're paying about 700,000 a month talking to their chief recently.

Or not a month, I'm sorry, a year.

That was bad.

Uh a year, and they're leasing, they're doing a build out.

I know um other departments have done it.

So option one is to find some commercial space.

Um now's a great time to do it because uh uh pricing is low.

Anticipate I went to the uh economic summit.

They say it's coming up, so now is a good time to explore that.

Other option is when um station five is built or training is built, uh, a new fire admin could be built along that uh lines.

I think it was at a cost I don't have I don't have it in front of me, but it would be included in that so that it would be a new facility.

Does that answer?

That answers my question, yeah.

Or it could be a combination of both, right?

So it could be depending on how long it takes to build station five.

We could use lease space for a period of time and then move them into a new station, and so there's also a phased approach too.

But as we look at the training site, that could be an option as well.

Correct.

When it is remodeled or or rebuilt, it could be incorporated in there.

Thank you.

Thanks, Chief.

And I I don't want to get into discussion because this is QA, but I'm glad you raised the option of lease space because we can all do this simple math and know that there are more dollars worth of needs than there are dollars available.

So we are gonna need to get creative and to the extent that there is a glut of office space on the market now.

Um, you know, that I I was gonna say, you know, shouldn't we also be considering that?

But it sounds like we are.

It's uh starting to become industry standard because of the costs.

Yeah, okay.

All right, thank you.

I have one last question, please.

It's um regarding the comp the combining of the um maintenance service center and the and the fleet site, the fleet maintenance, or at one point it's the the maintenance service center will take over the fleet and the um the animal shelter.

But my question is there's a large, I I it may be a parking lot, or it may be um a private lot in between the fleet center and the um maintenance service center.

Is that owned by the city?

I'm just wondering if that could be part of that new maintenance service center.

I don't think it's owned by the city.

Uh, there is a lot near the water in front of the fleet services that is city owned, but I know that uh is kind of precious territory for uh some some community members.

Um and just for a clarification, because I think it will help a little bit.

The fleet service center, what we're proposing is not to keep the building, but to keep the lot.

Oh, I think so most likely the employee parking for the maintenance service center, which then frees up the employee parking area at the maintenance service center to be used for more uh maintenance service maintenance service center uses, similar with the animal shelter is not to keep the building but keep the land for the maintenance service center because that's really what their their biggest need is is in operational uh space to get the trucks, they're pretty tight when they're they're all there in the morning and moving around.

Well, then this might be for the city manager in terms of first future uses.

Then the fleet service center backs up to Alameda Municipal Power.

So is it the same building, or would it be useful for that actual facility to be part of AMP, or would we dispose of it or um I think what we're we're talking about using that as employee parking?

There's a building with that's being used for the fleet service center as well.

That vehicles are serviced at.

What about that part of it?

So the building is kind of beyond its useful life.

That's the one that was built in 1969.

It does have some structural um deficiencies, and I don't think it would be worth trying to modify that.

Also, in the slab, that's where I do think there's some settlement uh issue going on the water, but that's not uh not my expertise.

Um that said, I think the best use because it is separated from the maintenance service center would be something like um employee parking, and that gets them right now.

There are a lot of them are parking on the street.

Uh the employee parking lot is too small, and but it is in a place that they could use for expansion of site area.

So, in other words, the building would come down.

Okay, that was my question.

Or they have indoor parking, I guess.

Okay, so ready for public comment in everybody?

Do we have public comment?

We just have one speaker.

All right, yeah.

Adrian Abuyan.

Welcome, speaker Abuyan.

Good evening, Mayor and Vice Mayor, City Council, and staff.

Um my name is Adrian Abouyan, and I'm the fairly new uh CEO of the Friends of Alameda Animal Shelter.

And I'm glad to be here this evening.

I just want to offer my thanks to you and commendation for exploring the many needs, of course, that exists in City of Alameda in terms of facilities, not only for the animal shelter, which obviously I'm biased to in some regard, but also important fire service and major civic facilities.

Um, on a day like today, it was a little bit warmer.

I oftentimes am reminded or thinking about the staff who currently serve or volunteers that I'm joined by some of our father's family this evening, um, just to support.

Um, but as they work in sometimes an indoor-outdoor facility, and of course, the neighbors who we really do think of, because of course the parking of our furry friends.

And so I just want to thank you for that.

Um, as I was reading um through the materials, particularly, you know, not just for the animal shelter as a place where we care for, we say both ends of the leash, the animals we cherish and the people who love them, but also the major infrastructure across Almeida.

And although I grew up here and now live in Oakland, um, I do think it's an opportunity for Alminans across our zip codes in Silent City to really consider what they believe the city and our needs are in terms of our population increasing, um, and the major infrastructure we need to make sure we have things like safety elevated, and of course, the way we care for our animals.

And so, however, we might support, I ask that you please call on us because this is a very important project.

And I um I just also want to underscore and thank the staff for the many hours work they're doing, of course, with RRM for putting in the time also to engage the team members way before I even arrived at Foss.

Um, I could see the time and effort that was put into this, so I want to let you know that I'm supportive of it.

Um let us know how we might be able to come out, and with a stronger together campaign, you know, not only in my civic service outside of just my my FOS hat, you know, engaging Alamedians, of course, who are in this room who might be watching online.

I'd really do ask Almanans to really lean in and understand this material because it can impact them, but also their generations or kids and people come after them in the resilience of our land city.

So thank you again for having this evening.

Look forward to seeing what comes next and we could support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, and is that all of our speeches and nobody online?

Okay, all right.

Well, with that, we will close public comment.

Oh, wait, we just have one, sorry.

Okay, Jim Straylo.

All right.

Um, welcome, Speaker Straylo.

Good evening, uh, council members, staff.

Uh, regarding the fire infrastructure, for many years I've been concerned about the city's evacuation plans.

How many people can evacuation evacuate the island per hour?

How many people can evacuate during the first hour will be higher than for the second hour, etc.

Because the evacuation routes will almost be traffic jammed.

As you build more housing units, are you statistically risking those new lives because of an earthquake explosion or water rising flood emergencies?

The city's road diets affect the gateway roads across the island.

When will the emergency operations center provide their official Alameda Island emergency evacuation plans?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further speakers?

That's it.

Okay, with that, we will indeed close public comment on item 7A.

And this is a workshop, so we don't have to vote on anything, we're just providing input.

So why don't we start on my right, if I may, with you, Councilmember Disa?

Uh yeah, you know, actually it's a comment, but it could also be a question.

Um I think one of the things that caught my eye, my ear was the notion that we will have a survey that is statistically valid.

Um I think that's the phrase that I heard.

I think the question is statistically valid at what confidence.

And that in turn presupposes a certain amount of uh respondents that you're gonna need to survey.

So do do we have that?

Yeah, we do.

Uh introduce yourself.

Sarah Henry Communications Director, thank you for the question, Councilmember Desag.

So when we've done this type of polling in the past, we've had between 400 and 600 respondents.

That's usually enough to get to the different individual questions that we're asking in our surveys, and that usually leads to about a 5% margin of error.

Um so we could uh have more survey respondents, less of respondents, and that margin of error would fluctuate.

Um but we try to get about a 5% or lower margin of error.

In which case I think you have to have like roughly 600 plus.

Could be yeah, could be uh yeah, for a 95% confidence level, exactly.

Um so I I think you know, one of the tricky scenarios, though, is because is when you start have when you start ranking all these different activities, and each of the one activity in the next, one could be like, you know, I'm just gonna make up numbers, um, thirty-two percent uh gets a favorable thirty-two percent, and then the next one could be I'm gonna make up a number, twenty-nine percent.

So, technically speaking, if the margin of error is five percent, that you can't distinguish the two technical statistically.

So, so you know how do you how are you going to address the fact that it how are you going to approach you know getting people's um input?

I mean, are you going to rank like fire and um uh fleet services or are they going to be done separately?

How does that so yes?

So thank you again for the question.

We would do them separately, but we're also not gonna just do kind of a one shot at the you know the language.

Um we're going to ask it in a couple of different ways to see how people respond to different types of questions.

And then after we do our first poll, we'll continue to do outreach, continue to collect data, and we'll go back and we'll do it again.

And so what we really want to do is we don't want to go into this without really understanding the priorities of Alamedans, and so that's our goal with this, and so we definitely want to be able to gather the best information that we can using this the using the poll.

It's a wonderful um resource for us, and so we're very excited to see what folks think.

But even when we're looking at the items, so you know, fire or fleet and the 29% and the 36%, um, you know, we're gonna ask that in a couple of different sections.

So we're gonna have it might be 36 in one place and 32 in another, and 20, you know, and then we're gonna combine all of that to be able to give you the best answer that we can.

Okay, and one more last question on on surveying.

Is it gonna be a telephone survey or is it gonna be an internet survey?

What's both.

So thank you.

The way that they do it now is it's done both um online and by phone.

Um, and then what they're doing is they're putting together, of course, what that statistically valid representative sample of Alameda voters are, and so they're gonna continue to poll until they've gotten to that threshold.

So they'll continue to poll in different languages, they'll call people, they'll they'll do the online research, whatever it takes to get them to that statistically valid place.

Yeah, so one more.

So, in terms of statistical validity, um I can't quite remember my statistics though.

So if you're going to like try to kind of track the um statistical validity of findings from a particular age group, let's say, you know, um 55 and older.

So, in order to definitely say 55 and older, you would have had to have reached out to whatever whatever your your confidence level is gonna be.

Right, that's for that age group.

Right, those are the tabulations in the back of a survey.

I think the tabs are what you were thinking of in terms of that terminology.

But yes, so in addition to kind of having that whole number and having that 5% margin of error, the 95% confidence, we want to have that in the in the tabs as well.

So we want to be able to have that same level of confidence in the different age groups in the different neighborhoods and all of that kind of thing as well.

So you you would really have to go for more than 600.

Again, it really depends.

I mean, they're gonna build it out based on based on exactly the sample that they're trying to find, but we're gonna, yeah, we're definitely we're working with FM3 consultants, and they've done our work in the past.

They've been doing our polling for over 12 years, and I'm sure they'll do a great job.

I'm just gonna jump in on the section of polling because it's now been 25 years in November, it'll be 25 years ago that I co-chaired the campaign to build the new library.

And we um decided early on that we were gonna poll, and we had a very reputable polling firm, and our poll um consisted the total poll was something over 400 um voters, but to to get to that number, you do a lot of outreach and a good polling organization with good questions, and and polling has only gotten more sophisticated, but um I will certainly have confidence in whatever the result will be.

And we'll know more when we know more.

But it's not um it I think 400 to 600 is a very decent number.

Yeah, I mean, even in the the online and people are getting it via email, but they're also getting it by a postcard in the mail that then they can type in their code and go online too.

So it's a whole uh variety of different um of different opportunities.

And then just to also say that in addition to that statistically valid sample, we're gonna do our own informal polling.

So we'll do our own surveys and things like that that we always do.

And it's actually really interesting, council member, when we go back and we look at our online surveys and compare those to the sample, because we get much greater numbers.

So if we have 2,000 or 3,000 Alamedans take our survey, it's gonna actually look really similar to the the statistically valid sample, which is which is nice, but it also allows even more people to participate.

So a lot of times people will hear that we have a poll out there, and you know, people are weighing in and they'll want to weigh in too.

So it'll give anybody the opportunity to weigh in.

Okay.

Councilmember Bowler.

So it as everyone's probably aware in this room at least that you know, this is the series of workshops we're looking at our infrastructure needs and um, you know, the questions that uh between the communications director and council member Daysaw were important because the last one we talked about, you know, different ways of also getting community input, getting creative, those are gonna be really important, especially with you know changes in technology, there may be new tools, but it's also really incumbent on Alamedans who are paying attention to kind of educate themselves and figure out why are these different facility needs, infrastructure needs throughout the our streets, what what's what are the the really the key points as to why those are important for our city to do its job so well because if you think about it over this the last few months, um we went through a budget season, we were spent a lot of focus on our employees bringing people up to uh to support the good work they do.

We have we're pretty fortunate in Alameda, we have very talented people in our city staff who do really really good work, and so we want to match that level of excellence with our facilities because that's the the structure, the environment, the technology that makes you know really important things happen, like when that fire truck arrives at your house at night, and you know, making sure that the responsiveness of our public safety services, police, fire, and then of course, all the civic facilities that we've talked about.

And when you have an animal shelter that I visited and is uh I mean terrific in terms of its its community members and the support that it has, it's just a great environment because the people there, but the facility needs is woefully inadequate as explained tonight.

So just you know, challenge everyone to think in terms of what's the end result of what type of city do we want to be, and we do have hard choices to make for sure but um I think it's really important for Alaminians to weigh in on this and to uh to look at that.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor Prior.

Hi yes I um so I just want to say thank um I really appreciated the report it was really great information.

Um my first thought was was like 800 million it's quite um it's daunting but you know it's clear that the facilities are in great need.

I think when I saw the the slideshow um when there were the maps for the the which fire departments are responding and that there is a gap I think that is um like I I feel like that's an immediate need and um you can't really put a price tag on that.

And the issue with the you know contamination at the different uh you know firehouses um I think that's really important to address you know we want to um these people take care of us and you know I would like to take care of them and um and then just with all of the civic facilities um I mean I think this was the the phrase inadequate um like they're undersized outdated and insufficient um and and I think as council member buller said everyone works so hard and I I mean in this position I would like to you know take down barriers you know so that people can do the job as well as they want to um and you know and someone said this tonight you know it did really just think about future generations too um so like we need to make some you know bold hard decisions but um but you know we want to be here you know for decades and you know we gotta start today so thank you Councilmember Jensen I couldn't agree more with my colleague um I want to but first I want to appreciate it piggyback on to the public comment that we received regarding emergency preparedness and I um have a question I would like to know how the fire facilities upgrades at station four or elsewhere would improve or impact the emergency operations center.

Come on back chief.

Nick Luby fire chief um counsel can you repeat the question how there are upgrades proposed or or outlined for fire station four and there's also a new fire station proposed for Elme to point how or would these changes impact the EOC for the EOC there would be no direct impact it would the impact the positive impact that would come for station four uh would be creating ensuring seismic resiliency of the facility so that on our worst day and that calls the calls come in that the crews are able to actually respond out of out of the building in addition to what we talked about health and wellness and decontamination for station proposed new station five same it would put coverage where there is no coverage and the and the other thing to take um for you to consider is it's not just about coverage within a district because we overlap all day long.

Station two goes on a call station three goes over to station two station one goes over to station three's district so there's a constant intertwining web of coverage so adding station five or engine five or crew five um yes reduces our response times NFPA 17 compliance we can get in fact the firefighting force in in alignment with national standards it also builds resiliency for the city and increases coverage citywide so if we have a structure fire on Bay Farm Island we still have two fire engines here to protect our community and we're not waiting for mutual aid to come protect our community.

Exactly.

And thank you for answering that and I I'll just put in my my own comment.

I mean it it just it goes without saying that improving and and making our fire stations safe and making our fire stations up to code and improving them as much as possible can only have a positive impact and make almost responders available and more ready to protect residents in the event of an emergency.

So this is um appreciated.

I appreciate all of the reporting and the deep dive into each of these facilities.

Thank you.

And I'll go last and I certainly appreciate all the the good information that was in the report and the um and the uh we're just gonna kill time while my iPad and freezes so I can read my comments, but I'm sure it will happen.

I appreciate all the um the uh information that was provided to us.

I don't need your iPad, you can be temperamental.

Oh there, look, it came back.

Um I do uh want to remind all of us and the public that is watching, the voting public, that there's a cost to deferred maintenance too.

So we we have a long list.

This was just one section of of what we're looking at, but we can't delay, we need to do this yesterday.

So we need to move forward.

But I'm also a realist, and in this day and age, we are going to need to do more with less, which means y'all aren't gonna get everything on your wish list.

I'm sorry, but I'm um, I mean, I hone those skills as a mom.

I can say no, because we don't I'm not casting aspersions at other cities, I don't do that.

We're all in this together, but you don't have to look too far down the road to the city of Hayward that is in a very serious budget crisis that is going to have to cut services and maybe be selling city buildings to just close budget deficits.

So we don't ever want to be there.

We're gonna take whatever revenues we can get and we're gonna stretch them as far as we can, but it also means that I will be looking to various departments and public safety is one of them for grant opportunities for you know, just beating the bushes for supplemental funding.

I'm a huge fan of the animal shelter.

Um, I'm going to the fundraiser that's coming up, maybe not this Saturday, but the following Saturday.

I also know that the um the animal shelter FAWS, the friends of the Alameda Animal Shelter, is a very um very robust, active.

Their volunteers are amazing and committed, and they raise a lot of money.

So what I would be interested in knowing, I said um FOS does a wonderful job of raising money for the animal shelter for programs for staff.

What percentage of the funds that are needed can we expect them to contribute?

And Mr.

Abuyan, um the new executive director said how can we help?

Um I hope you're listening.

I'm gonna look for a percentage of uh of the the revenues to come from very committed um uh fan base uh volunteers and just people love animals and they're willing to shout a lot show out of a lot of money for them on the um fire training center.

It is currently well, I guess it's the training center, it is the old station five.

Um, is that indeed an appropriate location because I've certainly heard some complaints from nearby residents over the years about smoke coming in when there is certain testing training with you know live fire going on, Chief Luby.

Um, and I think maybe you've addressed some of that.

I think there's been meetings with residents, but tell us tell us where we are now.

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor, for the question, Nick Luby Fire Chief.

Um, so let me give uh a snapshot of where we are right now with the um the input we've gotten from the residents at the lofts or building eight.

Um we took it very seriously.

We've conducted a community meeting with them.

We have a system set up that when we are gonna do live fire training that we do advance notifications, and it includes door hangers that go on to every residence in the that live in the lofts.

We also have a distribution list now and email list that people can opt into that we will send the information out to.

We actually purchased um a frame signs, you know, like the real estate signs that get put up uh several days before we do the burning so that they are sitting on the streets so that the neighborhood people, whether they're businesses or residents can see what's coming.

We have a dedicated email that they can email and a phone number they can call if they have concerns or on the day of the the training that we're doing, which is required training for us to maintain our um insurance rating of class one and along with certifying our entry-level firefighters to be firefighter ones and firefighter twos.

They have to do the training.

Um, in addition to that, we contracted with SCS engineers uh to do uh an assessment of our smoke that we do produce.

They're uh they had a five-phase approach to it.

We at this point have only used phase one, uh and they did come out and observe our burning.

They gave us several recommendations that we've worked on implementing.

If we move forward, I'll be positive when we move forward uh with a training center.

Uh, there will obviously be more consultation that has to come with the specialists uh to look at the smoke and make sure that we're positioning where we are doing the burning if we use that site, which they already actually in the report they gave us, showed us basically to go towards um the Lexington side so that the prevailing westerlies will take it more over seaplane lagoon.

Uh so they already identified sites.

Long story short, a lot more work would go into that when we actually do the actual design of the facility to ensure we're doing everything possible to uh take into account the neighbors uh and the smoke that's produced.

I have okay, I had one more thing.

One more exciting part of it.

Yeah, uh a new training center will have gas-fed props.

So it will reduce our need to do the live fire training, it won't eliminate it, but a lot of our training will be done in gas-fed props with gas lines fed into burned buildings that we use clean combustible gas, natural gas to do a lot of our training, and then we don't have to do the live fire for all the live fire training.

Okay, okay, good to know.

But then along those lines, um, what are the possibility of sharing a training facility with another fire department?

Say the aforementioned city of Hayward, and they're pretty amazing um fire training facility.

I mean, is there that capacity?

Uh it already happens.

We already we already trained um it's kind of uh there's a back and forth, there's specialties like Hayward has a BART train, we don't have a bar on elevated BART track with a Bart train, it's amazing.

They have structural collapse props uh for technical rescue, uh the new rescue just approved for stuff like that would be used with that a rescue company for lifting concrete and breaching concrete.

Um so we do go down there and we use our site at the same time.

People use our site.

Oakland uses our site, Livemore Pleasantons used our site because each site has a specialty, and our site our hope is our site will have a marine-based uh focus on it, so that we will be the place to come to throughout the Bay Area to get dive rescue training, uh rescue boat training, rescue swimmer training.

So everyone kind of has their own niche.

Um so the answer to question, it already does happen.

Uh, and I guarantee, so hey, we're our site will not be as big and robust as Hayward, so we'll probably still still use portions of it.

But you got to remember it means our resources are leaving our island when they have to go down there and train, and then we do potentially have gaps in our responses versus having them on uh in Alameda, still available to respond.

Okay, thank you.

Great answers, Chief.

Um, and then let's see if there's oh, you know, the one thing I wanted to just note is on the one of the charts that we saw in the presentation, the animal shelter was given an F rating, and I think my colleague um Council Member Bowler also noted it has you do read in the news about the animal shelters of other cities.

I will not mention names there.

Alamedas is not one of it is is very high quality, but the physical facility has seen better days, and now housing has come to the neighborhood, and it is um it is hard on the neighbors to listen to.

Sometimes there's just dogs that are um that are upset, and um it's hard for the neighbors to listen to that.

So, um, okay.

Well, with with all of those caveats, I know you were taking good notes, and come on in, young people, take a seat and just keep moving.

We will get to you very shortly.

Councilmember Design.

Great.

One more comment.

Um I do want to close by emphasizing the importance of the statistically valid survey and with an emphasis on uh especially the um uh the phone survey um and the reason why is because you know tonight we're looking at roughly 300 million dollars in facilities infrastructure needs.

When we dealt with the traffic, we are looking at 270 million dollars.

So the survey is incre is incredibly important in order to for us to prioritize what it is that the residents are willing to pay for.

Because I know you know, for example, I pay $7,000 in property taxes a year, and I'm sure there are people who pay much more than I pay in property taxes.

Um and at the end of the day, it's the residents who who we are gonna ask to support this.

So we so I think they need to know, and I'm I know you guys know this, um, but for the members of the public, they need to know that that we really prioritize the things that that we think um the emphasis should be on the infrastructure um deficiencies that we should be emphasizing.

Um so to me that's why the survey will be will be absolutely critical.

Thank you.

And Councilmember Daysag, I'm just gonna piggyback on that because this city has done a number of surveys, and they're statistically valid and relevant.

We use very high quality contractors, and um the entire community should have confidence in that, and hopefully the entire council as well.

Did I see other hands going up on my side?

No, okay, I'm seeing things.

All right, um, thank you for all the input staff.

You took copious notes and um and thank you for all the work that went into this.

This is where we are going to do a little presto change agenda um swap.

So we have a council referral that was brought by council member Jensen, and it's really down after the next two items, but um, because we have these uh students in the room, and I don't know, maybe some are even watching remotely.

I um going to make the executive decision that we're going to hear this item now, and so madam clerk, are you ready for us to do that?

Sure.

Okay, and um so um I'm council member Jensen, you probably know this better, but are we expecting public comment from these young people?

Okay, so do you want to lead us off?

Yeah, council member.

I I'll we'll begin and introduce this item.

Thank you for um hearing this referral.

I brought this resolution forward at the request of Alameda's Youth Power Climate Action Group, many of whom are here tonight.

And because I feel strongly that these companies that are profiting from carbon emissions should be responsible for addressing the damage that those chemicals have caused.

And while the Almeida is already on record in support of the legislation, I appreciate that.

And our legislative director Sarah Henry has written a letter in support of the polluters paid climate action superfund act of 2025.

The act is still in the legislature, and it's going to be debated much further, and it will be debated next year.

It's it's become a longer-term bill.

And so we have an opportunity, we can take this opportunity to do more right now.

We can and should do more.

Right now, this council can and should demonstrate our support for both this legislation by adopting the resolution, and um join with our constituents, including the students who are here and many other most other Alamedans, along with other California cities who are concerned about climate change.

So um this is this is not a uh resource-intensive resolution.

A number of other cities have passed resolutions, and uh I don't believe it involves substantial time or resources.

I've spoken to the city manager and to the city attorney.

I just think it's an opportune time, and we need to make it clear that we want polluters to pay.

Thank you.

Um thank you for that.

Um, why um I would love to hear the public comment, and then I'm also going to ask our communications director and legislative analyst, Sarah Henry, to give us an update on the current status of this bill and some insight.

I think you've had a chance to um to um and Councilmember Jensen, since this is your item, would you like to hear from Ms.

Henry now or after the students speak?

I am agnostic on that.

Oh, thank you.

Um, I would it would be great if um Sarah Henry could provide a brief just overview of what has been done so far and where the legislation is.

Thank you so much, Councilmember and Mayor for the question.

Uh so I just did a little bit of research today just to make sure that we were familiar with where things were at.

Um, and like you said, we did support um the SB 684 bill that came before the legislature this year.

Senator Mendevar introduced similar legislation last year in 2024 that did not move forward at all out of committee.

So this year she introduced it in February 2025, SB 684.

It was heard in the Senate Environmental Committee.

It passed.

Uh, that was on April 2nd, and it was referred to the Judiciary Committee where it has sat and it has stalled and nothing has happened.

So it did not advance to a floor vote.

Uh, it is declared an urgency bill, so that means that it doesn't die, which a lot of the other bills did die, and it instead moves to be a two-year bill.

So now we will wait, uh, and it can come back in January, and then what it has to do and is it has to get passed through by the end of January in order to keep moving through committee and keep keep things going.

So, but the current yeah, the current status is that it's stalled in judiciary and it's been moving forward as a two-year bill, and we'll wait and see what happens when it comes back in January.

Because Ms.

Henry, is it true that this um Monday, I think is a deadline for the governor to sign all the bills on his desk, so this is not going to his desk.

This is definitely not going to his desk.

That deadline had already passed in September.

So we're beyond that point, even if even if he wanted to, it couldn't go to his uh his desk at this point.

And when the bill comes back in January in the new legislative session, is it possible that it will be amended from what it currently looks like?

It is absolutely.

So the the author of the bill can bring back amendments at any time.

And in fact, I was uh listening to the committee hearing from back in April where they had a lot of support, and they also had some opposition, and the um author was definitely amenable to making some amendments as needed in order to get this you know moving forward and moving along.

And lastly, um was there opposition to this bill bill?

Significant opposition.

From uh from labor, from from uh from from work uh from labor unions, um, from different um construction trades and different things like that, but also specifically from the fossil fuel industry.

So I think it was uh based on the perceived notion that this would increase prices of gasoline for businesses, which uh other company other organizations like NRDC and Union of Concerned Scientists says no, they're you know this is gonna make the polluters pay uh as the bill is uh stated, uh, not uh not people from their purses.

And and if a group say of students um or anyone wanted to address correspondence to these opponents, how would they find out who they are?

Well, just like me, they can watch the video and jot some names down.

Um I would strongly recommend doing that.

You actually don't have to watch the video, there's a summary of it right on the website, and I'm happy to help them too.

All right, thank you.

We may call upon you for this.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Henry, can you just advise or or comment on what um with regard to writing a letter in support, which we do often for legislation, versus when um city councils and and other legislative bodies actually take more of a uh of a stance and and pass a resolution?

Is there um an impact either way, or are they both very similarly received?

Would you say?

My understanding is that they're similarly received.

When you go onto the website that shows the legislation, it'll show you know the the status, it'll show the votes, and it'll show people that are supportive or against.

When we support a bill by sending a letter on behalf of the city, uh we're submitting it through a portal.

If we were to, so we submitted that through the portal, so our support is being recognized.

If we were to pass a resolution, we would submit an attachment of that resolution through the portal as well.

It'd be the same mechanism, and it would show up in the same way that the city is supportive of the of the bill.

And when we write a letter, when you write a letter on behalf of a bill or in support or opposition, does the city council all take a vote in public session to approve or support that for that particular bill?

So the legislative agenda, you know, has a certain number of priorities listed in it, and the council is basically authorizing the mayor on behalf of the city council to submit these letters on you know within the um direction of the legislative agenda.

And so when we're receiving something like, for example, the Polluters Pay Act, we're looking very carefully at the legislation, and then we're you know, we're looking very carefully at the agenda to make sure this is something that the city council would endorse.

If we ever thought that there was something that wasn't exactly uh aligned with the legislative agenda, then we bring it back to council and ask for that endorsement.

And finally, so this legislation specifically has not come before the city council for discussion.

That's correct, yeah.

This is the first time.

Thank you very much.

Well, but it was part of our legislative agenda.

Right.

I mean, the tenants of the legislation is included in the legislative agenda, absolutely.

That's why we were able to submit the letter of support in the first place.

The mayor doesn't sign anything that hasn't previously been approved.

Oh, I know I think that I was asking about this specific bill.

Yeah.

And just to make the point that how bills do get changed just today, I signed a letter about a plastic pollutions bill that we had supported, but now with the amendments, we aren't supporting it, and we're saying if you don't change it.

So that's that's something that I'm concerned of.

But then, Miss Henry, can you also speak to the impact of say, oh, I don't know, a hundred students writing letters um on a bill, and and not just to the legislators, but to the actual um opponents.

Sure.

I mean, when you're looking at the supporters and the people that are opposed to the bill, it's generally not individuals, that's generally cities and large companies, large environmental organizations in this and this one.

Um, when what individuals can do is they can lobby their elected officials, um, they can lobby their assembly member, their senator because they're gonna be voting on the bill, and then certainly they can go back to that list of people that are posed that bill and and tell them that they're disappointed or use stronger language and let them know that this is not acceptable to them and that they want a different future and that they're they're here to stand up for it.

Okay, and maybe even attend a hearing.

But I um okay, I I have some thoughts I'll share later, but uh yeah.

Yeah, absolutely.

Attending a hearing is a great idea, Mayor.

Um, exactly.

So t-shirts with those t-shirts.

In fact, the the hearing that I watched uh this morning, there were a lot of red t-shirts, and so you'd be able to family.

All right, okay, I'm getting some good ideas.

Okay.

Should we go to our public speakers?

Yes.

Madam Clerics Tell us how this works, tell them how this works.

Yes, you will hear each get um two minutes to speak because there are over the number of speakers.

And um, I will call the three in a row, and then if the first uh person could be ready to go and the other two could get ready uh so that we can move along quickly.

Um that would be greatly appreciated.

So it's gonna be uh Sophia Lau, followed by Carmen Warming, followed by uh Bodie Finlaw.

All right.

So, um, Sophia Loud, did I hear?

Okay, you come on up.

Jump on up and when you go up to the microphone, just bring it down.

It's very flexible, you don't have to be gentle with it, but bring it to wherever level is like across from your mouth, and welcome.

Okay, good evening, council members.

My name is Sophia Lau, and I'm a student at Alameda High School, and I strongly support this resolution.

I would like to bring to your attention that this resolution can be viewed as a win-win um situation, not only for us but also for our community.

As you may know, companies surrounding oil and gasoline production are major contributors to the significantly devastating effects of climate change while us and the environment face the consequences.

Through this resolution, we can better help rebuild and recover damages done by the actions of these companies and have them pay so that we can move towards a more sustainable future.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker be ready to come right up because we'll keep things moving along.

Carmen Warming and then Bodie Finlaw.

Hello.

Okay.

Hi.

Good evening, council members.

My name is Carmen Warming, and I'm a junior at Alamuna High School.

Um I'm here to speak to y'all tonight on behalf on why it's important to adopt um this resolution that will then that will help pass the polluters' pay bill.

I believe that is unfair that us citizens and teenagers need to step up to clean up after someone else's mess.

A climate mess that has been going on for 35 years.

I wasn't even alive 35 years ago.

Um I really think that is unfair that we need to bring um this cause up to your attention because it should have already been resolved as it should be common sense to have the people who create the mess to pay and clean up after themselves.

The pollution these companies created affect your lives and families as well.

Do you not want them to clean up after their damages?

If yes, which is the right choice, and this is why I believe that you all should adopt and pass this resolution to help bring attention to this bill, which will then help and hopefully get passed.

Thank you so much for your time and have a great great evening.

Thank you.

Next speaker, uh Bodie Finlaw, then Neil Bos Bolusu, and then Hannah Nelson.

Okay, this last two be sliding over to the aisle.

Hello.

Hello, council members.

My name is Sodi Finlaw, and I'm a student at Alameda High School.

I deeply support this resolution and want to say how important it is to me and everyone that it has reached you.

By passing this bill, we are able to hold big companies like oil and gas accountable for the pollution they have caused.

We have faced many environmental problems in the last year alone, and the damages these events have caused is detrimental.

You know who can pay for these damages?

Polluters.

We have recently had a few damages, damaging incidents to our school Alameda High concerning other students.

These students have not received any consequence consequences or punishments for their actions.

I myself, being a part of leadership, we are forced to pick up after them.

Don't let these polluters get away with polluting our earth, because we will all be the ones to pick up after them.

Thank you, and I hope you vote yes to make polluters pay.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh uh Neil Bolusso and then uh Hannah Nelson and then Longsen.

Can you help us with your name if we got the pronunciation incorrect?

Hi.

Yes, hi, hello.

Ah, there's the timer.

Okay.

Hi, I'm Neil Belussu.

I am a senior at Alameda High School, and I'm working with Power Climate Action.

And I would like to bring it to your attention a couple things.

One thing being that this bill has been floating around within the legislature for around a year now without actually having been passed, which tells you a good deal about the power that the fossil fuel industry has within our government.

Oh, yes.

Which tells you a good amount about the power that the fossil fuel industry has within our government.

Another thing that I would like to say is that this is not something we're alone in passing this resolution.

It's already been passed by a number of other cities.

Some very large and prominent cities within our state, including San Diego, Berkeley, and San Francisco, among others.

And a final thing that I would like to bring to your attention is that this is more than just a symbolic gesture on our part and on the part of the other cities that are passing similar resolutions because they provide active pressure for the state government to pass this bill.

Pressure, counterpressure to the pressures being presented by the fossil fuel industry.

Nice job.

Are you done?

Thank you.

I think I see some debate team students here, possibly.

Yes, got that.

All right, who's the next speaker, madam clerk?

Hannah Nelson, then Long Sim, then Amelia Lamb.

Welcome.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Hannah Nelson, and I'm a student at Edson All High School and a part of Youth Power.

I am here today to ask the council to pass a resolution supporting the polluters' pay bill.

This is important to me because it will help the polluters' pay bill get passed, which would be a huge step in fighting against climate change.

Climate change is something I care about and it is affecting many people around the world.

I believe we need to start taking big actions against climate change.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Long Sim, then Amelia Lamb, then Kirsten Gi.

Welcome.

Hello, City Council members.

I am Long Sin.

I am a student at Ensino Junior Senior High School and I support the polluters' pay bill.

This I feel like this is a simple matter of taking responsibility for your actions.

I also want to highlight that this bill will target big oil companies, not small ones, who play a major factor into climate change.

This can also be um you know uh reference to like some taking action as how paper companies take actions over their uh take responsibility for their actions as they, although they chop down millions of billions of trees, they also replant millions of billions of trees.

That's it.

Thank you for your time.

I hope you have a wonderful day.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Amelia Lamb.

Didn't we just wish all our public speakers were?

Sorry, where were we?

Amelia Lamb, then Kirsten G.

Hello.

Uh hello.

My name is Amelia Lamb.

I'm a junior from Alameda High.

I remember seeing the wildfire wildfires in paradise when I was younger, and how orange the sky was in Alameda, and how that forced us to wear masks because of how bad the air quality was.

And so I'm even more tired of seeing the wildfires in LA that are even on a worse scale.

Uh, so I'm asking you to help us please pass this resolution to help polluters pay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh Kirsten Gee, then Jason Wu, then Ron Burns are now.

Welcome.

Hi, my name is Kirsten G, and I'm a freshman at Alameda High.

The impacts of climate change are being felt globally right now, and they will only accumulate and worsen in the future.

It's unfair to expect future generations who didn't cause this damage to have to clean everything up.

We should hold corporations accountable for their share of the damage by passing the polluters-based super pay super fund bill, so we can take action now.

Please pass a resolution supporting the polluters pay bill in the state legislature.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh Jason Wu, then Ron Bern Sarno and Harper Nelson.

Hello.

Hello, everybody.

Uh, my name's Jason Wu.

Uh, I also attend Alameda High, and I'm just here to ask for your support in the make polluters pay uh resolution.

Thank you.

Short and sweet.

Thank you.

Yes, is Ron Ron Bernstarno, Harper Nelson, then Judith McKenna Shea.

Welcome.

My name is Rowan.

I'm a student here at Alameda at ASTE.

And I want to tell you something.

Fossil fuel companies have been saying that because this bill they'll have to raise prices and hurt the economy of California.

That is a lie, and I want to tell you why.

This bill is only going to affect major fossil fuel companies.

The companies which have collectively cost the state billions of dollars through environmental damage.

The same ones which have made trillions of dollars in profit in the same period of time, which this bill will be putting a fee on them for.

It would not affect mom and pop producers.

Also, this bill is only going to put a 3%, 3.5% fee on these major companies' profits.

A tiny fraction.

Once again, that is their profits, not their revenue.

If these companies raise prices like they are threatening, for such a small cost, that would be a clear violation of the state's price gouging laws.

And that is an assessment that is agreed to by many of the state's economists, and I have papers which I will give you after to show you.

And even if they decided to break these laws, would still make no sense because they would have to compete with the minor fuel producers, which are not being feed.

They would have to compete with their prices, and if they raise prices, they would not get the same market.

They would lose market share.

These companies know to make the economically sound decision, and they would not do that.

Finally, even for all this, if they still follow through on this illegal and economically nonsense threat to raise prices, it makes no sense because gas prices are not controlled on a city by city or county by county level.

They're controlled almost completely by the price of crude oil, which is international.

Again, this bill would not affect prices.

It would simply, simply, for the cost that they are putting on our state onto them.

It is a tiny 3.5% fee on these companies' profits, not revenues.

It will not affect gas prices.

It will not hurt our economies.

Harper Nelson, then Judith McKenna Shea, then uh Schlumbrunn.

Hello.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Harper Nelson, and I'm a student at Ensignal High School.

I'm here to tell you that while this resolution is an amazing step, assuming that it is passed, we will need more to pass this bill.

Specifically, we need your help in talking to Lena Tam on the Board of Supervisors, Assembly Member Mia Bonta, and State Senator Jesse Aragin.

If we are going to pass this bill, we need you to work with us to talk to these people about it so they can help us.

We need them to vote for the bill when it's time, when it's not stopped anymore.

Lastly, I want to mention how much I support this bill and the resolution.

As you know, the window of climate action is closing, so this matters more than anything, especially for my generation in the world.

Thank you for letting me speak today.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Judith McKenna Shea, then uh Shlombrunn, then uh Jane Kramer.

Welcome.

Good evening.

I'm Judith McKennache, and I live in Alameda on medicine.

Also, I'm an environmental activist, and I've worked with this group of students, not each one of them, but I've worked with several of them on many of the projects that all of you have benefited from.

So I want to just speak in their behalf because they asked me to.

Okay.

Why am I here?

I have four quick points to tell you.

First, if not us, then who?

Not the feds, since today's federal leadership supports no climate change.

Initial new actions.

Their policy was saying, and I quote our great leader of our country who happens to be our president, climate action is for stupid people.

That's a direct quote.

Further, this administration has cut federal EPA programs and the EPA and most alternative energy initiatives like solar and electric cars incentives, and even backed out of certain climate accords.

Thus today, climate change is a down ballot issue.

If we don't fight for it, it won't be led at the federal level.

That's first.

Second, data on climate change empirically predicts local and national disasters.

Alameda and the state of California are uniquely at risk for highest devastations due to location and high-risk geodesign.

Third, intersectionality of climate change will impact us all.

Climate is not a one-issue.

It is connected to family, gender issues, as well as diversifying energy for survival and increased financial costs for all, especially municipalities.

Devastating climate crisis, thank you so much.

And we'll go on to our next speaker.

Thank you for respecting the time as all the students did.

No, you need to set a good example.

Excuse me.

14.

Your time is up.

Students, you all did a brilliant job of abiding by the time, and I thank you for it.

Our next speaker, Madam Clerk.

Uh Shlombrun, then Jane Kramer.

Welcome, Speaker Brun.

Thank you so much for listening.

Um, I am here to support the students, and what I would love is if you would just close your eyes one moment and think seven generations in our future.

Think about your grandkids, great-grandkids, great great grandkids.

They need this earth, and they really need us to make the polluters pay.

That is all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Jane Kramer.

Welcome.

Ah, welcome, Speaker Kramer.

Who, by the way, gets her as an Alameda resident.

She gets herself around the Bay Area, including to San Francisco for the MTC meetings when I now serve on the board.

It's lovely to see you here.

It's nice to see you here.

I see you at my MTC meetings lately.

I can hear it.

Okay, just tell us what you have to say.

Welcome.

We all know what climate change is at the local level.

All you have to do is smell what comes down the coast from the oil refineries.

That's no big deal.

That's no brain twister.

The issue is restorative justice.

And that means companies who thought that they could buy the environment and abuse us to not get away with it.

But there's the complexity.

This body will have to enter actively into deciding what that restorative justice will be.

And you will have to do it in discussion with the community.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is remote.

It's Ruth Abbey.

Welcome, Speaker Abbey.

Good evening, Madam Mayor Ashcraft and members of the City Council.

I'm Ruth Abbey from Community Action for Sustainable Alameda.

We are here tonight to support the adoption of the resolution.

We so much appreciate that the city has already supported uh SB 684.

And why we think it's important for the city to validate that action with a resolution is because we really want to support the idea of raising awareness for this issue, and to support the work of youth power and their advocacy around sustainability, climate action.

And number three, because this is such an important issue for the city of Alameda, because we are vulnerable to the impacts of climate and sea level rise.

So we feel as though taking a leadership position endorsing this action through a resolution is so very important.

And taking uh an advocacy position uh really codifies the work of the students, the city, the um community.

Uh so I very much appreciate all the work that has gone on into this, and we hope that you will support this uh resolution.

Thanks so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh that was our last speaker.

Okay.

With that, we will close public comment.

And I especially want to commend all the students.

You just did an excellent job.

I don't know if you practice and practice, or it just comes naturally, but um, you could give some classes.

Um, council comments.

Let's start.

Um, we've heard from Councilmember Jensen.

We can come back to you, but let's hear from uh the vice mayor.

Oh, I this is um an excellent referral, so I'm really glad you brought uh brought it.

It is very important.

Um, I think the students made a great point about people should clean up their mess.

Um, it's you know, I'm a teacher in the day.

It's something I I wholeheartedly believe.

Um, but I I'm just so impressed that you also uh collectively made a decision to come here tonight um to advocate for yourselves.

Um I it's um so you should be all be very proud of yourselves and uh keep at it.

And um, and thank you.

Thank you for your time and thanks for this resolution.

Yeah, councilmember Bowler.

Um so I just wanted to uh you know really thank everyone for being here tonight.

Some of the young people that are here today that are really looking out for the future of not just this community but the planet.

Really appreciate you and it was inspiring to hear from you.

I um I work in criminal justice and at the district attorney's office is my day job, and one of the things we do is environmental work too.

And I I think is uh as we heard that theme of restorative justice, that is important here, and this is gonna ultimately, I'm sure, be if it's passed in the legislature, a legal fight.

But uh, but it's one worth taking because I think there is a sense of injustice to where we sit today.

So thank you for bringing this forward, Councilmember Jensen, and um, appreciate everyone, Councilmember Desag.

Well, because we are an island, um, one of the rare island cities in California, along with Coronado in Southern California.

We are uniquely affected by climate change in the form of rising sea level affecting our beaches and our waterfronts, but also rising sea level in terms of affecting the groundwater as it's kind of seeping underneath the ground and pushing and raising up.

And because much of our land is built on fill, um Alameda Point, or even you know, um the area around Wood School.

Um, we're really affected in all parts of Alameda, not just along the waterfront, but also in inland Alameda by climate change.

And so I wanted to make sure to especially thank council member Tracy Jensen for bringing this very important matter up.

Um, and I also want to especially thank all of the youth who took the time to come out here tonight to voice your concern about not just your future, but the future of other youngsters who will follow in your footsteps, one, two, three, five, six, seven generations from now, as stated.

So I do want to say thank you to Sophie, Carmen, Sodi, Neil, Hannah, Long, Amelia, Kirsten, Jason, Rowan, and Harper.

And to Harper, yes, I will make sure to call Lena Tam to support this matter.

Um, you know, when you look on this dais, who you see is you, you know, um, councilmember Tracy Jensen went to Alameda High.

Um, Mayor Marilyn Adjee Ashcraft, also a Hornet.

Alameda High right there.

Yeah.

And uh Councilmember Greg Bowler is a Hornet as well.

Where are you?

I'm a jet.

I'm from Incennel, and well, we don't want to leave out uh uh grow up in Southern California.

Schools in Southern California too.

But the reason why I point this out is because you inspire us because I know that amongst you you will be the future council members and the future mayors.

Um, and I think it's important to support council member Tracy Jensen's referral as a statement, um, to supporting the youth of Alameda, um, because climate change is such a vital importance, especially to our island city.

We appreciate the fact that you took the time to come out tonight and have taken the time to all your friends to send emails to us to remind us to support this matter.

Thank you, Councilmember Jensen, for bringing this up.

And I'm gonna let Councilmember Jensen go last, so I'm gonna speak now.

Again, thank you to the students.

I will support this resolution.

I do want you to understand it's it's a little outdated because the legislature changed, and this is not the bill that will most likely come back in January, but that's okay.

I want you to stay engaged, and I also want you to take the wind to say you did this advocacy, and the council presumably unanimously passed this, but don't stop there.

There is so many things you can do.

I would be a detective.

I left Nancy Drew Books when I was growing up, and I would keep digging, and that's why I was asking Miss Henry about, but who were the opponents?

Where are they?

I personally think that letters, even visits and writing to the shareholders of these large corporations would have a huge impact.

So do those things.

You've got a really friendly audience here.

A letter and a resolution from the city of Alameda isn't gonna move the needle, but it was a great practice and advocacy.

If you ever want me to come and speak to your group, I'd be happy to talk about that.

And I also do meet with our elected officials on a quarterly basis.

I think there's a lot of things we can do, but I want you all the minute you're eligible to register to vote to register, including for this election coming up, and then vote in every single election from the top of the ballot down to the bottom.

Do not ever sit an election out.

That is where things really happen.

And also, you're all you're in high school, so you're going to be heading off to college or vocations or whatever.

I hope you go into the sciences.

I'm happy to tell you about that too.

But anyway, yeah, you and as I said earlier, I would just love it if all my public speakers were as charming as you were.

So thank you for brightening our evening.

All right.

Uh Councilmember Jensen, I will leave it to you to close us out and perhaps make a motion.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And I will definitely make a motion in a moment.

I want to thank all of the youth youth um power climate action group, not only the ones who are here, but the ones who aren't here.

And I want to point out that this group is also not only are they here to support this resolution and to make polluters pay and do whatever they can, but they've done a number of other things here in Alameda.

First of all, they've done they've they're have a project to support induction ovens.

They have a project to get rid of the refrigerants that are polluting our air in our many of our large grocery stores.

And they come together weekly, either by Zoom or together and meet with me.

I know some of you have also met with them, and they're doing, they're advocating, and that's so so critical that I I brought this forward, but they brought it forward.

They brought it forward to me.

And the other thing to um council member Daysogs point, they're from all over the island.

It's not just Alameda High, it's not Internel, it's ACLC, it's it's um St.

Joe's.

They're all of the students who care about the environment in Alameda are working together, and that's what we have to do.

We have to work together.

So I'm really I'm just proud to that you came to me.

I'm proud that I'm able to do this, and I'm proud of my colleagues that are going to support this.

I know.

So I will move that we pass this resolution to pass resolution to oppose the to support the polluters pay.

Now tell me what the title be um make polluters pay, climate action act.

Right fund.

Make polluters pay climate action fund.

And I believe Councilmember Desag would like to second.

All right, we had a motion by Councilmember Jensen, seconded by Councilmember Desag.

Any further discussion seeing none.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

That motion passes unanimously.

Do not applaud, we don't applaud.

That's part of the ground rules.

But thank you so much for coming out.

Um and I look forward to just seeing what you do in the future.

And the future starts like tomorrow and maybe tonight.

Get your sleep tonight.

That's important too.

Okay.

Everybody, we are going to take a break.

We've um I have my two-hour rule and we've gone just a little over two hours.

It's 9 07.

I'm gonna call it 9 10.

Everybody please be back in your seats at 9 20.

We're going to take up our um next two regular agenda items.

Okay, we are on um uh break.

Thank you.

How do we give us a h do we give us a hug If you'd like to join your colleagues, you're more than welcome.

Madame Kirk, would you please introduce item 7B?

This item is to take action to adopt the California building fire and other related codes and make local additions and amendments.

The out of municipal code to adopt the new 2025 California Building Standard Codes and local amendments implementing the Alameda 2020 2040.

That was hard for me to say general plan by repealing ordinance number 3338 and adding one Article 1 uniform codes relating to building housing and technical codes to Chapter 13 building and housing to adopt Chapter 1 Division 2 scope and administration of the California Building Code 2025 edition as the Alameda Administrative Code.

The 2025 California Building Code volumes one and two is amended.

The 2025 California Residential Building Code has amended the 2025 edition of the California Historical Building Code, the 2025 edition of the California Electric Code, the 22 edition of the California Plumbing Code is amended, the 2025 edition of the California Mechanical Code, the 1997 Uniform Housing Code, the 2024 edition of the International Property Maintenance Code as amended, and the 1997 edition of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and adopting the 2025 edition of the California Fire Code, including appendix chapters 4, B B B, C, C C D E F G, H-I-J-K-L, and Yeah, and M was missing that and necessary additions and amendments to Section 15-1 of Chapter 15 fire prevention due to local climatic climatic geographical or typographical conditions and adopting the 2025 edition of the California Green Building Standard Code and the 2025 edition of the California Energy Code with necessary additions and amendments to Section 13-10 of chapter 13 building and housing due to local climate, geological and topographical conditions.

This action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to sequence section one five three five seven eight and a separate and independent basis adoption of the local code amendments is exempt under SQL Guidelines Section 15061B3 because it can be shown with certainty that this action will not have any significant environmental impact.

Thank you, Madam Clay.

I think the staff report is going to be shorter actually than the title was been.

Welcome and please introduce yourself.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Clerk, for that introduction of the codes.

It saves me a lot of headaches of going through each one of those.

So I appreciate that very much.

Our fire marshal and deputy chief uh Justin Hearn and also our sustainability and resiliency manager Danielle Miller.

I really appreciate their contribution to the ordinance this time around.

And I wanted to give you a brief overview of this process.

This happens every three years.

These are mandatory requirements.

A lot of the presentations that I heard today are related to safety, you know, new fire stations and all this improvements.

So this is where all comes from.

This is uh this is the code.

So it starts at the state level, you know.

They um grab the model codes and then make amendments to uh uh uh identify specific conditions for the state of California, and our local level we make amendments to customize uh uh the code to suit the needs of the city.

Uh things like liquefaction, sea level rise, you know, seismic activity, things like that, they're addressed under uh those codes.

Um, like I said, thanks to uh Madam Clerk.

Uh she already went out.

These are the codes that we're presenting tonight.

Um but what are the building codes?

The building codes are a set of regulations that were established to address uh safety overall.

Uh they started in the late 1800s as a result of uh fires.

Uh the typical construction in the past was just wood and very dense communities.

So when the building uh the buildings uh was started on fire, there was a lot of death and a lot of destruction.

So the fire codes were adopted first, and then the uh it became uh little by little modern codes to address like seismic resistance, energy efficiency, and other um sections of the code that addressed like electricity and other uh plumbing and mechanical systems.

So to highlight some of the dangers that we have in the state uh for us in Alameda is liquefaction, sea level rise.

But we're in the state of California, so seismic activity is like huge.

Um, we also have on the modern codes like requirements to provide uh our emergency responders the tools to properly do their job and ensure safety for them as well.

Things like uh structural stability for the building, so the buildings don't collapse on them when they're responding to fires, fire access for their apparatus, turning radiuses, the number of fire hydrants that are required, the fire sprinkler system, fire alarm systems, and other requirements, uh, not just on the building code but on the fire side.

Those set of regulations also address property maintenance.

You know, as you know, the fire department does annual inspections at the businesses and and places like that to ensure that the systems that were originally put in place, they're still functioning.

And we also have uh codes that address blythe and and uh like over, like in condition like the photo in the middle, right down the middle.

It's uh a lot of uh accumulation of contents that if we have some fire activity, we would have a lot of disasters in the neighborhood.

Oops.

Uh, this is some of the projects that we have ongoing, you know.

Um I heard about the Alameda, you know, Friends of Animal Shelter, and this is just a project that is about getting completion, uh, the animal clinic for them.

This is one of the examples of the innovation of the codes where they have the ability to repurpose some uh containers into a clinic, you know, uh by making sure that the that is they're built safely and uh ensuring, like, for example, this will not burn, but then we have the issue that if they become electrified, people can actually get hurt.

So for systems like that, we have a specific uh requirements for grounding systems.

Um, well, like I said, I don't have to repeat all those, but I really wanted to highlight the fact that this is the first time in Alameda that we're adopting the international property maintenance code, and this is one of the items that I you know requested that I was gonna bring forward when I did my uh code enforcement update in January.

So really appreciate your support and the adoption of that code.

Um we made sure that when we were doing our functions that this item complied with the requirements of the strategic plan for the council and also for the Alameda Municipal Code.

We cited the sections there.

Um, and just to give you an overview and to highlight the importance, we're uh doing adoptions on six codes.

You know the fire code, the property maintenance code, the residential building, building residential code, those are administrative procedures, the green code, the energy code, and the plumbing code.

I want to highlight number one because we uh actually went to the realtor's board, and they're the ones that requested to put that item back on the codes.

Um this is an overview of the Cal Green and Energy Code highlights, and don't I want to want to bore you with reading all those, so I'm gonna skip that through.

And then uh some highlights on the fire code are just administrative procedures and also clarifying some language to align with the accessory dwelling unit the statewide uh with the requirement for sprinklers.

Um on the code enforcement updates.

I just want to give you a quick overview.

We've done a lot of a lot of improvements since I came here in January.

And one of the ones that I want to highlight, uh, thanks to Councilmember Desag, uh, is uh promised that I was gonna do more enforcement on on the tobacco.

And so we partnered with the California Department of Tax and Fees Administration.

We visited only five businesses, CS43 boxes of unlawful merchandise, and to give you a perspective.

There was 1470 violations on only one business.

Oh my goodness.

Uh we also been uh collaborating with the economic development team, uh doing a lot of um meetings with uh business owners, especially the ones that have vacant properties to make sure that we provide them the tools so they can establish a business and stay in business.

I always gonna take the opportunity to thank you because without you, there is no code enforcement program.

So I really appreciate all the support.

This time around, I also want to take advantage and showcase the the uh business partners that we have.

For example, when I was applying for a uh grant, we received letters from the Alameda Chamber of Commerce from the Downtown Business Association, and also from the Department of Public Health.

The recommendation is uh we recommend that the city council introduce an ordinance amending the Alameda Municipal Code to adopt the 2025 California Building Standards Code and local amendments implementing the Alameda 2040 general plan.

And with that, I'd like to open it for questions.

Thank you.

Um I will take any clarifying council um questions before we go to any public comments.

Any clarifying questions, Councilmember Jensen?

Thank you.

I'm just wondering what is the significance.

You said we mentioned it's the first time that the International Property Maintenance Code has been adopted, and I'm wondering why it's significant and why it's important.

Thank you for that question, Councilmember.

So the property maintenance code is basically a set of regulations that gives the officers the ability to instead of going through the municipal code and finding a section here on overgrown vegetation or on lack of egress or uh Burman, anything like that.

The building, the property maintenance code is a little booklet that has all those requirements, and it gives the ability for the officers to quickly find a section of the code that they can utilize to do the enforcement.

Thank you.

That sounds welcome.

Is that all for you?

Any of the clarifying questions?

Public comment.

We do have one remote.

Uh Ruth Abbey.

Welcome.

Welcome back, speaker Abby.

Hi, thank you.

Good evening.

This is Ruth Abbey from Community Action for Sustainable Alameda.

Mr.

Davos.

You could sit down.

This is just public comment now.

Sorry, continue, Ms.

Abby.

Oh, thank you.

We are just here to support the action and specifically around advancing the electrification readiness in homes.

As you recall, we were not, we have to rescind our our um ordinance that required uh electrification, but this will allow us to create an atmosphere to have homes be ready for electrification.

And because we have our municipal-owned utility and our um important climate action goals, that aspect of um uh this uh future action is really important to the city, and so we're just here to um speak in support of that action.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, that was our only speaker.

Okay, our last speaker.

Okay, so I will close public comment on item 7B, open it up to council comments or just a motion to approve in a second.

Vice Mayor.

Um my quick comment was thank you for your very thorough report.

And um, I move to um you have to say the whole title.

No, you can just say introduce the ordinance.

Okay, move approval.

I move approval for item, I would I'm sorry, I I had the it's 7B.

Yeah, sorry.

I move approval for item 7B.

Yeah.

And it's um it's been moved by Vice Mayor uh prior second by council member Jensen.

Anything else anybody wants to add?

And I do want to just echo thanks for all the hard work for all of you who um did this.

And I am so stunned by all those violations from one business violations of the tax tobacco ordinance off offline.

I will ask you who, but not now.

Um, okay, we've had a motion.

We have a second, all those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, any abstentions?

That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you, everyone.

All right, madam clerk.

Would you please introduce item 7C?

7C is um to take actions to form community facility district 25-1 West Midway facilities.

Um, and to annex community facility district number 17-1 Alameda Point Public Services District and levy special taxes.

There's a public hearing uh for community facility district 25-1 and resolutions that um form the district, future annex areas, determine the necessary necessity to uh incur bonded and indebtedness, call a special election, declare results of the special election, and um direct recording of notice of special tax lien and introduction of ordinance levying special taxes within the city of Alameda Community Facility District 25-1 West Midway facilities and a hearing uh regarding district 17-1 that via resolutions annexing the territory, authorizing the levy of special tax and submitting levy of tax-qualified electors, declaring results of special annexation election and direct recording of amended notice of special tax lane.

And Madam Clerk, help me out.

Is this where I open the public hearing or do we first hear if we hear the staff first?

Welcome and please introduce yourself.

Hi.

Yeah, good evening, Madam Mayor, member of council.

My name is Con Zoo.

I'm senior civil engineer with the public works department.

And tonight we have a public hearing to consider the formation of community facilities district number 25-1 West Midway facilities and the annexation to community facility district 17-1 Alameda Point Public Services District.

So in May of 2023, the planning board approved the development plan for the West Midway project, which consists of 478 housing units and up to 10,000 square feet of non-residential use on 26 acres of land at Alameda Point.

The city and developer also entered into a disposition and development agreement to allow the conveyance of the project site, which is city-owned property, and also provide for the timely build-outs of the project, including off-site public improvements, and among other things, also contemplated the formation of a community facilities district to fund the public improvements and annexation into the existing community facilities district to fund public services.

So community facilities district number 25-1, West Midway Facilities is a facility district to fund public infrastructure and is financed through the issuance of bonds and to be repaid over time by property owners within the district.

Um the special tax report, which is a document attached to the staff report, has a boundary map and description of authorized facilities, specifically the improvements to be funded through this CFD would be backbone infrastructure improvements associated with project.

So improvements like West Midway, West Tower, Orion, Skylark, essentially all public improvements.

And the project is required to annex into that district.

Essentially, this district funds public services, and these services include um maintenance of public roadways, utilities, it also includes uh maintenance of flood uh facilities and public safety, police fire, um.

Okay, on the at the September 2nd City Council meeting, council adopted three resolutions, which includes the resolution of intention to form CFD 25-1, resolution to declare intention to incur bond and indebtedness, to finance the acquisition and construction public facilities, and the resolution of intention to annex into CFD 17-1.

The resolution also established a public hearing date for the city council to consider formation of CFD 25-1 and annexation into CFD 17-1.

So prior to this meeting, City Clerk has published uh the notice of public hearing for both CFD 25-1 and CFD 17-1.

So for tonight, on deformation of CFD 25-1, council will conduct a public hearing and following the close of the public hearing.

If there's no majority landowner protest, city council can adopt the four resolutions to form the district and introduce the first reading of the ordinance to levy special taxes.

Uh on the annexation into CFD 17-1, similar to the CFD force 25-1, conduct a public hearing, and following the close of the public hearing, if there's no majority landowner protest, uh City Council can adopt the two resolution to annex the territory into CFD, existing CFD 17-1.

And staff recommends adoption of variance ordinances for the formation and annexation of the CFEs.

And this concludes my presentation.

We also have our CFD consultants on the Zoom call, and the developer is also on the Zoom call as well.

Alright, Madam Clerk, tell me when.

Yes, I I think you can also do council questions first and then use your hands.

Are there any council questions about any of this?

Okay.

Okay, all right then.

So I'm going to open the public hearing.

This is now the time and place for the public hearing in the City Council's proceedings for CFD or community facility district 25-1 and CFD 17-1 to provide funding for the Alameda Point area that will be needed by reason of the development of Alameda Point.

The hearing is to inquire into the establishment of CFD 25-1 and the future annexation area related thereto and the annexation of territory into CFD 17-1.

Before I formally formally open the public hearing, are there any owners of property or registered voters within CFD 25-1 or CFD 17-1 who wish to file written protests?

And if so, they must be filed with the city clerk now.

So I'm gonna just pause and scan the room.

So the public hearing is now officially opened.

Does anyone in the audience wish to make comments on this matter?

Do we have a public speaker?

Yeah.

All right.

We have one.

Mitch Ball.

All right, welcome, Speaker.

All right.

Hello.

This is three to four story missing middle mixed development that is bikeable, walkable, and transitable.

And I think this is awesome.

This is exactly what we need.

So there's no opposition for me to the development or the establishment of CFD 25-1, but I do have concerns about the calculation of the facility costs.

Disproportionately large development fees discourage building housing and make future occupants pay for the cost of existing occupants.

This isn't fair to future occupants who are typically young people, immigrants, or just without generational wealth, but want to work hard to better themselves, become middle class through home ownership, and achieve the American dream.

Disproportionately large development fees are responsible for the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, as well as the housing crisis in California and most of the Western world.

Additionally, in 2024, the US Supreme Court presided over case sheets versus the County of El Dorado and unanimously decided, both liberal and conservative justices, unanimously decided that development fees must justify themselves as roughly proportionate to the true costs to the government body applying them.

This is not an economic not just an economic justice issue, but a constitutional one as well.

And if the development fees are not roughly proportionate, this may open the city up to a lawsuit.

I'd like to refer to Exhibit 3B, the detailed list of facilities and estimated costs.

I'm not an expert here, but I do have questions that I believe the council members here should be asking.

Parks and Open Space is listed in backbone infrastructure.

So that means that future occupants will pay for the parks that will be developed near their home.

Parks in Open Space is also listed in development impact.

So future occupants will also pay for additional use to existing parks on the islands.

Now, if new parks are being built, this asks the question: won't existing occupants of Alameda use these new parks, reducing the use of the existing parks, thereby offsetting the additional use by the future occupants.

Each of these fees individually makes sense, but together, it seems like this might be double counting.

Additionally, a significant part of the cost here is on-site street work.

And this will be used to pay for new roads, new bike lanes, and parking spaces.

However, some of these roads already exist, and you know, I've biked on them.

They need to be repaired.

So I want to ask: does this facility cost here account for the savings to the city's pavement management budget?

Uh, because the city's pavement management budget will not be being used to pay for these repairs.

Again, I'm not an expert here, so maybe this is all things that have already been considered.

But I would like to request that the council members ask these questions and implore further to determine if these facility development fees are entirely justified through and through and need to be as high as they are.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And thank you so much.

So I will note that this is public comment, but I will also note that there were some interesting questions raised.

Would anyone from city staff like to flip a coin and see who has to answer?

City manager, city attorney, both.

I can I can start and then uh stop, but this isn't an action, these aren't development impact fees.

Um this is a community facilities district to fund public infrastructure, and given that the infrastructure out there is 70 years old, this is essentially a wholesale replacement of all new infrastructure, sewers, water, electrical streets.

Um, once these are constructed, then these streets will be integrated and become city streets and have dedicated right-away.

They'll get integrated into our payment management programs over time or whatever that time period is 20 years, they'll become part of the city just like all of our other streets and be part of our payment management program.

But this is essentially to build essentially brand new infrastructure because that the infrastructure that's out there now is so old.

So it's really, these are not development impact fees, this is separate.

And um, City Manager, have we followed this model before in other developments in the city, including in Alameda Point?

Yeah, we've established at Alameda Point, I think this is our first community facilities district that to pay for infrastructure, but I think we did this at Alameda Marina to help pay for some of the infrastructure there.

But the 17-1 was established at Alameda Point as a way to pay for ongoing services.

So this is a continuation of the way that we've dealt with community facilities district and other parts of Alameda Point.

Thank you very much for that.

Okay.

Um, any further speakers, ma'am.

There are none.

All right.

Um, then I will close the public hearing and we will now finish the proceedings for CFD 25-1, which means that city council will consider the adoption of three resolutions.

Do you read that?

Sure.

It's we don't have to read the full title, but it's the first three resolutions.

Forming the district, determining the necessary necessity to incur bonded and digitists, and calling the election.

So you have to adopt those three, and then we have to uh go to the ballot.

So you do can we adopt three or two one motion?

Okay.

Do I have a motion to adopt the three aforementioned resolutions?

Yes, of course.

The motion.

Yeah, I would just like to follow up on what you um opened up and with the public comment with regard to um the the uniqueness of this um community facilities district.

Right.

It's it's a place where um we at Almeda Point.

If you could just comment on this, as I understand, and I'm not an expert on Elmeda Point, but um I've been on the council for a couple years.

The the point um there are other arrangements that are unique as well where we have asked developers to to provide in kind or to do some infrastructure work in exchange for um not paying certain things.

So I mean if you could just comment on that because it is unique, and I appreciate the public comment about why this public district is.

I'm gonna pause before you answer and just ask that we um re we contain our comments to community facilities district, not developer uh contributions developing, because that is as you noted previously, Miss not what we're talking about.

So if you want to continue in the vein of community facilities districts, yeah, I'll just say that it community facilities districts are a common tool for large scale, either redevelopment or new development, where I mean your greenfield also, and where you have significant in backbone infrastructure, new sewers, water, all of that.

So this is a common tool that's used throughout California to help finance infrastructure.

It is very expensive to develop, either redevelop or do new development, and so this is a very common tool to help finance it.

It does not burden existing residents in any way.

It really just it creates the essentially the property owners or the new housing or and development within the area of the community facility district help offset some of the costs.

So it's a financing mechanism, but it is a very common tool for large scale new development.

And as you mentioned, we have the Northern Waterfront was another one.

Allow me to point the one that was being combined.

And then where else in Alameda do we have?

Maybe Bay Port was that?

Oh Alamina Landing was another one.

So again, large-scale areas that are undergoing significant redevelopment or new development.

We've used this same tool and other cities throughout the state use it as well.

Thank you.

Anything further, Council or City Manager, City Attorney Ibn Shen.

Madam Mayor and Council members, I I want to just add on to the city manager's point, which is that using CFDs to finance development is not only common, it actually assists in ensuring that existing developments do not pay for those new developments where there is no infrastructure available.

And so this is commonly done throughout California to ensure that the new development that needs those new infrastructures are paying for those services that are directly serving those uh new developments.

Thank you.

Okay, good great explanations from both of you.

Thank you.

Okay.

So I was asking for a motion to adopt those three resolutions.

Did I see your hand up, Councilmember Desag?

Council Member Desag moves and Bowler.

Are you seconding?

Yes.

And Councilmember Bowler, seconds.

Any further discussion, seeing hearing none.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Alright, oh aye.

That's a five.

At this time, I ask the city clerk to review the ballot received for CFD 25-1 and announce the election results.

We're all holding our breath.

100% in favor.

I love it.

All right.

So thank you for that.

And then well, the results of the election being unanimously in favor.

We may now proceed with the final actions for CFD 25-1.

And these two are just the resolution declaring the election results and then introduction of the ordinance.

Okay.

So I'm looking to my left this time.

Oh well, for any questions about that, this is just housekeeping.

So who's gonna move and who's gonna second?

Vice Mayor moves, Councilmember Jensen seconds.

That's what I thought.

Um any further discussion, seeing hearing none, may we have uh no, all those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye, aye.

We will now finish the proceedings uh for CFD.

Uh um moving on to the next section.

Yes, we're moving on to the next section exactly, which is community facilities district seventeen-one, and council is going to consider the adoption of the following resolution.

Madam Clerk.

Uh this is the resolution annexing the territory and authorizing the levy of tax.

All right.

Um, any questions, any discussion?

How about a motion?

All right, um, it's been moved by council member Desag, seconded by Councilmember Jensen.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Um that Matt also, well, I know at this time I asked the city clerk to review the ballot that has been received for CFD 17-1 and announce the election results.

Okay, since that resolution carried unanimously, um the uh results of the election are also 100% in favor.

Right, we need a germ roll.

Uh so the results of the election being unanimously in favor, we may now proceed with the final actions for CFD 17-1.

Madam Clerk.

This is the resolution declaring the results of the election and then recording the amended special tax leave.

All right, back to my right hand.

Well, I guess Councilmember Desag moves.

So uh Councilmember Boulder, would you like to move the declaring the results?

Yeah.

Yes, just please.

Second by Vice Mayor Pryor.

All those in favor, please signify by stating I.

Aye.

I, all right.

Um, that passes in the two.

All right, and with that, we have completed um item 7C.

Good work, everyone.

So then we move on to the frozen iPad, but that's why I have the paper back up.

We move on to item uh eight.

Which is city manager communications.

City Manager General.

Thank you.

We have some kind of housekeeping items, but we um as required by the city sunshine ordinance.

I'm providing 30 days' notice that the city will be initiating bargaining with part-time library staff on salaries, benefits, and terms of employment following their request to join the Alameda City Employees Association, ACEA.

Current memorandum of understandings expiring June 30th, 2027 between the city and ACA can be found on the city's website on the HR webpage, and negotiations will begin in November 2025.

Also, I wanted to there's um I wanted to provide a little information about a preliminary application to redevelop Harbor Bay Landing, 867 Island Drive.

Last week a developer submitted a preliminary application to redevelop the Harbor Bay Landing Shopping Center into 305 residential units.

This is not a formal application, and the developer is not seeking the city council's approval at this time.

No city action on the development will take place until a former application formal application is submitted.

The city's approved housing element includes adding mixed-use housing at Harbor Bay Landing, but specifically requires the project include at least 90,000 square feet of commercial space, including a minimum 20,000 square foot grocery store.

City staff will be meeting with the developer to reinforce that the current proposal does not meet the city's existing zoning requirements.

And then just on um some lighter news, just a couple events.

I just want to highlight tomorrow, Wednesday, October 8th, is international walk and roll to school day, which means we'll see a greater number of students walking, biking, and scooting to and from school.

So please be um have extra be on extra alert and look out for kids as they cross the street.

This Saturday, October 11th is Pride in the Park at Chechenio Park from 12 noon to 5 p.m.

And the San Francisco Pride Band will kick things off and we'll be welcomed by local elected leaders at 1245.

And then in recognition of United Against Hate Week, the Social Service Human Relations Board, SSHRB, is hosting a free film screening of the movie BIAS in council chambers on Thursday, October 23rd at 6 p.m.

So please join us.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Um and then we move on to oral communication non-agenda items, madam clerk.

We have no speakers.

There are none.

So then we've already done our council referrals, so we will move on to item 11, council communications.

May I start with you?

Uh yes.

Um over the past two weeks.

Um I attended the led abatement program on behalf of uh council member Tracy Jensen.

Um it was mainly an informative informational meeting.

Um so they kind of gave an overview of the program, so no action were taken.

Um so that was a nice meeting.

Um let's see.

I think um also there was the town hall meeting regarding Fernside Gibbons and High Street.

I think it was here in the council chambers.

Um I think that happened over the past two.

Oh, actually, I think we met three weeks ago, not two weeks ago.

Um, I think we yeah, so um, so that is and then on Saturday.

Oh, yes, on Saturday, there was the Filipino Island Fest, which was um uh very well organized and well attended and great food, a great entertainment.

Um, and it was good to see um so many people there on the dais as well as in the crowd, very nice.

Councilmember Bowler.

Thank you.

September 18 uh back to school barbecue for the Alameda Education Foundation.

September 21, the uh legacy home tour of the Bronze Coast Homes with the uh presented by the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society.

September 25, the Alameda Economic Forecast and Business Expo at the USS Hornets, presented by the Alameda Chamber Conference and other partners the same day, the grand opening of the estuary in Lynette Corner, and the same day the uh Gibbons High Street Friendside Community Open House Council Chambers and October for the Filipino Island Fest.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Pryor.

Um on September 5th, um, I also attended the Lynette Corner Open House, and I just want to say that it was very credible and special to see so many service-minded individuals and groups who came together to build permanent housing for seniors.

Um Lynette Corner, you know, does not just offer shelter, it offers dignity and community.

So I'm just so proud of Alameda's contribution, and I just also wanted to acknowledge the hard work of staff from just about every department of the city of Alameda.

Um and then also on the 25th uh the presentation and community feedback regarding the Gibbons and First Light intersection, and it was well attended, and a staff did an excellent job of listening and providing information.

On September 27th, at the Reap Center, um, they had the city's community outreach for our resiliency to climate change action plan.

I think I don't think I got the title correct, but um, there was a life size banner to show what sea level rise will look like on the island, and it it was amazing.

Um, and it also included what it would look like during king tides and very big storms, and there were just so many amazing informational stations.

So, staff again did a truly wonderful job and uh setting this alongside.

We had a lot of community partners too, so that was pretty cool.

And then on the fourth, the Filipino Cultural Festival, um, and I got to attend with most everyone here, and um and I got to deliver the city's uh resolution honoring Filipino American History Month.

So it was fun, it was great.

Thank you, Councilmember Jensen.

Um many of these events I also attended and had a very good time that a barbecue, the Filipino Island Fest, which was just amazingly well attended and um supportive, as well as um some events that I it was just me and the city attorney and Sarah Henry, which was the Jangin' Sister City cruise on the Cabernet Sauvignon, which was very interesting and um and there was a lot of people and it was it was quite fun.

I just wish I had a personal translator for the whole thing.

Um the food was great and a lot of fun people.

I uh also wanted to just close.

Well, I'll also add that um on the 25th, the staff did a great job.

Um, our assistant city manager did a great job presenting information to residents near Thompson Avenue on and near Thompson Avenue about the proposal to establish a vendor policy, a vendor ordinance for Alameda, and there was very interested and um support and also lots of questions which were which were effectively answered by both um Assistant City Manager Wildridge as well as we had some Alameda Police Department um officers who were providing information as well.

And um, I'll just close by saying that um today October 7th is unfortunately the two-year anniversary of a tremendous and and and horrific and terrible event that happened uh across the world, but has affected a lot of people both in our community, in our state, and in our country throughout the world, and I just want to um just remember and be cognizant and be thoughtful that today, October 7th, there's been a war that's been going on for two years, and I hope that we can help it to stop soon.

Thank you.

Um, so on September 20th, Saturday, September 20th.

I attended the um Asian Health Services Benefit Gala in Oakland, um, and Asian Health Services actually runs a dental clinic here in Alameda at the College of Alameda.

Um, one of the honorees that evening was our Congresswoman Latifus Simon.

On Monday, September 22nd.

Curbside Electric Charger.

And we did it in front of one of our housing authority properties ever at Commons and on the East End and great model.

And I now have talked to some cities around Alameda County who want contact information with this group.

On Thursday, September 25th, this was noted the Alameda Economic Forecast was held on the USS Hornet.

I moderated a discussion between State Senator Jesse Adagan and County Supervisor Lena Tam and then City Manager Jen Ott was part of a panel with an economist and I think Adam El Sessor of Penumbra.

I had to leave, so I didn't get to hear that.

And Friday, September 26th, I attended a celebration of the life of Chris Peoples, who was a long time phenomenal AC Transit board member, but just so much more.

There were lovely tributes to him, and he really for the last number of years, he himself was had a physical disability that required him to be in a wheelchair, and he went everywhere by public transit and was really an inspiration.

Saturday, September 27th, I led the family fun ride around the parks of Harbor Bay and Bay Farm, and then my husband and I started to ride back across town to go to the Sea Level Rise Planning Fair, but decided to stop at home and pick up our EV because it was pretty warm that day, but it was really a great event.

On October the second, I had the last of the four follow-up sessions for my mayor's institute of pedestrian safety, and this was on implementing quick build demonstration projects.

I hope that we may do one in Alameda soon.

Stay tuned.

Later that day, I also spoke at Oakmont Senior Living, which is over near the Barn Hill Marina, and really um inspiring to see this group of seniors wanting to know how can they be active in the city.

And then just yesterday, City Manager Jen Ott and I, and also Abby Thorne Lyman based Russian Economic Development Director.

We all attended the Belgian East Bay um Development Alliance Business Forum that was hosted at Almanac, and we had, I think we had the Belgian Minister of Development in our group.

I did find that Princess Astrid uh was not in Alameda.

She was in San Francisco with the lieutenant governor, but okay.

I, you know, we we love the minister to measure it.

But but uh just exciting to see Europeans interested in doing business, including here at Alameda Point.

And tomorrow, um, Vice Mayor Michelle Pryor and Assistant City Manager and I will all be heading to Long Beach for League of California City's annual conference.

So we will represent our city on lots of different issues and we are going to receive an award.

Um Ms.

Henry, do you want to quickly just no?

We're just never mind forget I said that.

It's uh uh spoiler alert.

Okay, no, I don't I didn't say that and not this time, but next time we meet, I will have some um uh nominees for boards and commissions because I can see that my staff is scheduling um interviews.

Really excited about the great um applications we're getting for all these different openings, but we take them on a rolling basis.

So if anyone's listening and still wants to apply for one of our boards or commissions, visit the city's website and apply it online.

All right, thank you everyone.

Great job.

I wanna say we did all unanimous votes today, did we?

How do you like that?

All right.

Good night, everyone.

Thank you.

This meeting is now adjourned.

All right.

Good night.