Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the city council meeting for the City of Alameda.

Tonight is um Tuesday, April seventh, twenty twenty-six, and the council is about to go into closed session, special city council meeting closed session, and we will start with the roll call, Madam Clerk, Laura Weissinger.

Would you please call the roll?

Councilmember Spoiler?

Days on prior here.

Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft.

Here.

For present, and hopefully Councilmember Jensen will be here shortly.

Hopefully.

Okay.

And so um we will go next to the consent calendar, and this is for the closed session.

This is a routine item that will be approved by one motion, unless removed by council members.

Madam Clerk, do you want to tell us what that item is?

Yes, so this one is designating negotiators for the um real property negotiations for peers two, three and two, which is uh for C on the closed session.

Thank you.

But we're actually going to hear that first up, and thank you.

So what I need is a a motion, a second and a unanimous vote of all of us.

Who wants to make that motion?

Co Councilmember um Bowler makes the motion, seconded by Councilmember Daesog over there, seconds the gotta get in practice for the meeting.

The regular meeting.

All those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that's everybody.

Thank you.

And Madam Clerk, do we have any public comment on the closed session?

There is none.

All right.

And would you please um introduce the closed session items and tell us any additional information we need to know?

You've got it.

For A is public employee appointment hiring pursuant to government code section five four nine five seven, the title description and position to be filled as city manager.

For B as conference of legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to government code section five four nine five six point nine eight.

Case name of City of Alameda versus the Greenway Golf Associates Inc.

The court is Alameda County Superior Court, and the case number is two two C V011964.

Four C is conference with real property negotiators pursuant to government code section five four nine five six point eight.

The property is peers two and three, and adjacent property at Alameda Point.

The city negotiators are the interim city manager, base for use and economic development director, base for use manager and assistant city attorney.

No, um, that's how we're going to hear them.

So could we please have everyone who is associated with item four C, please join us in room three ninety-one.

And with that, we're adjourning to closed session and have every intention of being back before you at seven PM this evening.

All right.

Good evening, everyone.

Apologies for starting a little late.

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

The council has just returned from closed session.

And so I would like to ask the city clerk to please read announce any actions that were taken in closed session.

So item 4A, which is public appointment hiring, council will go back in after the open session to discuss that further.

Item 4B, which was existing litigation, staff provided information and council provided direction by five eyes.

Item 4C, which was conference with real property negotiators for the Alameda Point Piers 2 and 3, staff provided information and council provided direction by five eyes.

And item 4D, which was potential litigation, was not heard.

All right.

Thank you for that, Madam Clerk.

And with that, I will adjourn the special city council meeting, the closed session.

Well, not we're we recess it because we've got that one item to go back to after this meeting.

And then I would like to call the regular city council meeting to order.

And we will start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Councilmember Bowler, would you lead us in the pledge, please?

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

One nation.

Indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Councilmember Bowler.

Madam Clerk, would you call the roll, please?

Council members Bowler.

Dayson?

Here.

Jensen?

Higher?

Here.

Mayor Ezie Ashcroft.

I'm here too.

Five present.

All right.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, do we have any agenda changes?

We do.

It was noted on the agenda, but just in case anybody missed it, item five D, which was the little league MOU, has been withdrawn and will not be heard tonight.

All right, thank you.

Is it coming back at a later date?

Okay.

I don't think it's been discussed.

All right, that'll okay.

It'll be it'll be back.

Okay.

Um with that, um I um actually let me start first with my um rules of conduct for a council meeting um announcement.

Um not theater.

Um you are at a business meeting, we're doing the business of the people of the city of Alameda.

So therefore, we conduct ourselves accordingly.

We just listen respectfully.

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

We don't do that.

We just listen respectfully to the people who are speaking.

When it's our turn, we come up to the podium.

If you're a speaker, um please speak uh for your allotted period of time or less is fine.

Um, and then you know, step aside and let the next speaker come up.

And the reason I do these admonitions is that for many people public speaking is one of the most stressful things they ever do.

And yet this is the people's house.

We want you to come to feel um courageous enough.

It shouldn't take a lot of courage to come up and speak to your fellow Alamedans, but but it could be scary if people are not behaving or or hissing or booing or whatever.

So we just treat people the way we like to be treated.

That's pretty simple.

And um sometimes someone is addressing us for the first time, and it would really make me sad if somebody decided not to get up and speak because they were afraid of what kind of reaction they might get, and we don't want that.

And also sometimes I'm not sure we see sometimes we've got young people in the audience, but trust me, they're often watching at home because their parents have the um the meeting on or streaming it live, and so we want to set that example of good civic engagement.

Sometimes it can be challenging in today's environment, but we're here in Alameda.

This is our town, this is where we live, and we're can do business, and we can do things the civil way, and we do.

So we want to create a safe place to speak, to listen, to be heard.

You can hold signs up, that's your first amendment right.

All I ask is that unless you're sitting in that last row in the room, don't hold them all the way up over your head because you would block the view of the people behind you.

And we don't want that.

And then I read this little magic language that I never have to use, hardly ever.

This is from um California Penal Code Section 403, states that 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 302 or elections code 18340.

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

Okay, I've said the magic language, and now we move on to proclamations and special orders of the day.

And in fact, um we do have a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 as National Arab American Heritage Month, which is a pleasure for me because I am an Arab American and I even after my little scarf.

I have a necklace on that some of you in the room can probably read because it's my name written in Arabic, which is really special to me.

And I can even read it.

Anyway, um here it goes.

April is National Arab American Heritage Month when we celebrate the rich culture, traditions, and history of Arab Americans.

The diversity of Arab Americans, the diversity of Americans of Arab descent, stretches across geography, language, religion, and much more.

And this year's theme, Many Voices, One Community, celebrates the diverse faiths, backgrounds, and national origins of Arab Americans, while affirming the common values of family, resilience, service, and cultural pride.

National Arab American Heritage Month was launched in 2027-2017 by the Arab America Foundation, a nonprofit educational and cultural organization dedicated to promoting Arab heritage in the United States.

In 2023, the United States and the State of California and other states across the country first officially recognized Arab American Heritage Month.

By celebrating Arab American ancestry, we confront prejudice, dispel misconceptions, and harmful stereotyping, and honor the rich diversity of our nation, including the more than 3.5 million Arab Americans in the United States who are vital contributors to our society in medicine, law, business, education, science and technology, government, music, art, and culture.

It is important to celebrate the diversity of all cut cultures and heritages in our community as a reminder that despite our differing backgrounds, everyone is bound by a common hope for a better and more inclusive future.

In Alameda, we believe that all community members deserve to be treated with dignity, respect, compassion, and fairness, and that we must come together as Americans to build a peaceful, prosperous and diverse society where every individual is treated equally and feels safe.

Now, therefore, I'm Marilyn Ezie Ashcraft, mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby proclaim April 2026 to be Arab American Heritage Month in the City of Alameda, and encourage all residents to learn more about the history of Arab Americans, their enriching contributions to our community and nation, and to participate in events celebrating Arab American Heritage, including the Alameda Free Libraries offering of six cultural and creative programs and two book showcases on their online catalog celebrating Arab American Heritage Month.

I would list them all, but it would be almost as long as the proclamation.

So I just want to thank the Alameda Free Library for sponsoring.

And you can find this on the library's webpage, which is on the cities.

You can get to from the city's website.

There's art workshops, including led by MOCA.

Some of you know who what MOCA is, a Tatri's embroidery workshop, scrapbook book self-portraits, there are author events.

There are a couple of book club discussions that sound great.

And then on the library's website, there is the children's Arab American Heritage section and also the National Arab American Heritage Month.

And with that, I thank you for your attention.

And we will move on to oral communications and non-agenda items.

And Madam Clerk, how many speakers do we have?

We have two, so we'll get three minutes each.

The first is Brian Kennedy and then Gabrielle Duncan.

Welcome, Speaker Kennedy.

Good evening.

I'm Brian Kennedy.

On the 28th, I attended the uh No Kings rally in front of City Hall.

What an experience that was.

I showed up with a sign on one side of the sign.

Tony, you saw it.

It said Sanctuary Cities Kill.

It showed victims, pictures of victims killed by sanctuary cities.

The other side said angel families support ice.

And it showed heartbreaking pictures of angel families holding the pictures of their loved ones.

What do you think the reaction of normal people would be to photos of angel families grieving their lost ones?

Compassion?

Yeah.

Guess what the reaction was at the No Kings rally?

Rage, profanity, and hate.

And I even had one death threat.

Isn't that something there?

So it wasn't a normal reaction.

So I showed these signs off, and let me show you a picture of one.

This is Sheridan Gorman.

She was killed a month ago in the sanctuary city of Chicago, Illinois.

Her killer, an illegal alien, was sheltered by ice by that sanctuary city, and he shot her in the back of the head in that sanctuary city.

By the way, uh Illinois is also a sanctuary state.

Everybody else could see.

Okay.

Um mayor, and when people speak of the mayorship in Alameda, they usually bring up the you know fact that it can't be that tough to pass the bar.

Well, this guy is even worse.

You know what he did?

His name is Brandon Johnson.

Two days after she was killed.

By the way, Tony, Chicago, Illinois, strictest gun laws in the nation.

And the illegal alien got a gun.

How is that possible?

So much for gun laws.

You know what this character did?

He did a dedication on a snow pile, abolish ice.

Two days after this innocent 18-year-old girl was killed by an illegal alien because of Sanctuary City.

So congratulations, Marilyn.

You're only the second worst mayor in the country now after this guy.

Um and what's a leftist demonstration without the obligatory Jew hatred.

I was approached by a few leftists.

And the IDF did that, and I figured these guys are out of their minds thinking that's stuff, and that's part of the reason they hate Trump, because he supporter of American Jews in Israel.

And finally, the Piste Resistance was Pamela Price, former attorney general county validator, slimy criminal, slimy race hustler.

And if you criticize her in the slide of Shakya racist, and she's the one that had her boyfriend on the payroll at six figures.

The only thing that got better under her tenure was his golf game.

Because he was out playing golf, well, we're all paying for it.

So to be fair though, I will say this.

I did run into a few folks there, including one of the indivisible faces, a nice lady, who were actually fair and compassionate.

I chatted with them and they weren't aware of things like this.

What happens to people?

And they were they were cool.

So I got to give some credit there to be over.

But overall, it was a sore loser convention.

They're mad that Trump won.

You beat the snot out of uh knee pads Harris.

He's the president.

They gotta get used to it.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Gabriel Duncan.

Welcome, Speaker Duncan.

Thank you.

Um, good evening.

My name is Gabriel Duncan.

I'm the founder and director of the Alameda Native History Projects.

Uh the Alameda Native History Project is now delivering structured public programming in Alameda.

We are running acorn harvest trainings that are fully booked and waitlisted.

We have built and are implementing a training and certification framework focused on indigenous food waste and ecological stewardship.

We have secured a research grant.

We have designed and proven an acorn leaching machine.

We are training residents in building the capacity to produce a traditional food that has sustained this region for thousands of years.

This work is active, measurable, and growing.

We are requesting that the City of Alameda enter into direct discussions with us to develop a framework for managing oak trees in Alameda as a food-bearing and culturally significant resource.

We are also requesting that the city begin a formal conversation about the use of prescribed fire to reduce overgrowth, restore ecological balance, and support native plantings that require less water in our drought tolerance once established.

We are asking the city to begin planning for green levees and nature-based shoreline protection to address rising sea levels.

The Alameda Native History Project is ready to engage with the city on all of these areas.

Now is the time to act.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And that it okay.

So with that, we will close oral communication non agenda items, and we will move on to the consent calendar.

And this these are routine items that are approved by one motion, unless council members remove items for discussion.

Removed items are called after we finish the regular agenda, and council members may speak for up to three minutes on the consent calendar.

So first off, council, are there any items that council wants to pull from the consent calendar seeing hearing none?

Seeing hearing none, then um are there any clarifying questions council has for on any of these items?

Um councilmember Jensen Thank you.

Okay, and just you already said, madam clerk that item 5D was withdrawn.

Yes.

Yes, D as in dog.

Okay.

I have a question on 5G.

G as in good.

Um, and let's see, that one is um HHS, City Manager's Office.

Um who's gonna be prepared to answer that?

It'd be either myself or we have Housing Human Services Manager Simone Falls in the audience as well.

Yeah, I can see.

Um okay, who drew who drew the short straw?

Yeah, well, let's let's see what the question is, and then y'all can decide who wants to answer it.

Okay.

Um yes, Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you.

And um my apologies.

I briefly talked about this um with the city manager when we met earlier when we met last week, but um I didn't submit it formally yet, so now I'm gonna ask it.

It's regarding this is the resolution um to approve an expenditure for the day center relocation project.

And my question is um about the I I understand that the day center is closed right now, and so I wanted to just ask when the I I will support this um capital improvement project fund payment expenditure, but I just wanted to know when the the anticipated opening date of the day center was yes, assistant city manager Amy Wildridge.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um the existing day center will open on April 20th for services under an interim agreement, and then that uh with restorative pathways, and then the agreement will come, the longer term one year agreement will come to City Council on April 21st.

Um this is funding uh the day center renovation project, and that uh restored project will be uh open sometime this fall, around September Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Um Vice Mayor Pryor.

Um just on that item, I I do know the answer, but um I we always like a good question, Vice Mayor.

But I I had asked this also to the city manager.

Um the um sorry, I was trying to get the name of the business.

Describe it.

Uh who has the contract uh for the day center?

Currently no one Ms.

Falls is making her way to the front anticipating okay.

Did you find Oh, I thought, sorry, I thought, okay.

Is there a question?

Vice Mayor.

Yeah, I thought um so pre if it helps, Madam Mayor.

Do you want to tell us which item that might be?

Well uh uh Vice Mayor, I think you're still asking about the day center CDBG funding.

Yes, I thought the the previous provider was Village of Love.

Yes.

And then the provider the provider that city council had approved and um it didn't work out was with urban alchemy.

Yes.

And then sorry, so the not urban alchemy, the what was it?

Restorative pathways, sorry, that was my question.

Sorry.

So restorative pathways is um, and they are somebody I just wanted to say for the you know for the public that that we had all approved on uh other similar contracts, and that you're gonna bring forward the longer term contract.

Uh city council approved a uh restorative pathways to operate and main manage our uh emergency supportive housing.

And so they are already in there and and successfully doing that work.

Okay, and so they're doing this um on a short-term agreement, and then you're and it's coming back, is gonna be bid for this.

Ms.

Falls Falls.

So restorative pathways was approved about a month ago to manage emergency supportive housing.

We have vetted them, and they are going to temporarily manage the day center starting April 20th, and then we'll bring their contract to City Council on the 21st of April for you all to determine if you want to extend that contract for a full one-year term.

Great.

Thank you.

I just thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms.

Falls.

Okay.

Any further clarifying questions?

Council, Councilmember Desal.

Yes, thank you.

Item 5C, the strategic planning, there is item GO V 17, which is uh included as a new project for the strategic plan for I believe the upcoming year.

And GO V 17 uh refers to um work with the Alameda Sister Cities Association to support Alameda Sister City activities.

Um, I don't recall uh talking about that during our um our retreat um in Marina Village.

Um so if someone could speak to that, that would be great.

But before that, um two um there has been considerable controversy around the possible inclusion of a village called Wadi Fouquin as part of the sister cities.

So in what way um does uh uh GOB 17 specifically um uh deal with that matter?

Um uh yes, that would be the question.

Thank you.

Come on up and introduce yourself, please, Ms.

Henry.

Thank you, Mayor.

City Council, I'm Sarah Henry, Communications and Legislative Affairs Director.

Um and we did discuss it was a quick, very quick discussion, as you'll remember, but we did red discuss the proposed um additions, the projects that were proposed to be additioned by both staff and by council, and we did receive um at least three affirmative votes for that item to to be added to the strategic plan.

Uh however, the question that you're asking Councilmember Desag about whether or not it would be uh involved with working with the village of Wadi Faquin, the it's very clear that the item in the work plan is just to continue the work that's already being done with the um Alameda Sister Cities Association, ASCA, and that involves supporting the current sister cities that we have.

If we were to present a new proposal for a sister city, that would come before council after a significant effort.

Um at this time I know that they are wanting to look into two new sister cities, one in Mexico and one in Japan.

So this would continue to kind of extend that work, but um at this time it's the the project is limited to the existing sister cities that we have.

I see, thank you.

Any other clarifying questions, Council?

Council member, I mean advice mayor prior.

Um and I was gonna say it was I mean, I don't know if this is to Sarah or to all of us.

I thought that we had agreed um we we never took a vote either way.

And so I I thought our last position was that we tabled vote about um that about wadifu.

About Wadi Faqin.

So um in that disaligns with what Sarah just said.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

Okay, if there's no more clarifying questions, then um could we have our uh public speakers, madam clerk?

Yes, uh well, we haven't heard our public speakers yet, and we want to hear them before we take the vote.

Okay, so we have five, so look at two minutes each.

Uh the first is Jean Nader, then Liz Warmerdam, then Marla Coss.

All right.

Welcome, um, Speaker Nader.

Hi, my name is Jean Nader.

Um I'm a resident of Alameda.

I'm also a board member of Alameda Backyard Growers, and I'm very grateful that you've included the community garden in the strategic plan.

It's more timely than ever to have a community garden in Jean Sweeney Park.

The garden will be a much needed resource for people with limited access to growing food, such as renters, many of whom are permitted, prohibited from even growing food in containers, much less raise beds on the property that they live on.

It also provides a necessary space for people who want to grow food from their culture.

In the many years that I worked at um food systems at Stop Waste, I learned that while the food banks are a valued resource, not only do customers want fresh produce, but they really want access to vegetables that come from their country that mean a lot to them.

And lastly, the garden will be vital to building and fostering an intergenerational community on the island, which is essential given the times in which everyone is feeling very isolated.

So I'm hoping that you'll support that item in 5C.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, Speaker Warmer Dam.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councilmembers, staff.

My name is Liz Warmerdam, and I'm the current president of Alameda Backyard Growers.

On behalf of all of our board of directors, many of whom are here tonight, and our 2,000 plus followers and subscribers.

Hi, Laura.

Uh I want to thank you and your staff for including the community garden at Jean Sweeney in your strategic plan.

Um as you know, 15 years ago when the city purchased the Beltline property, um, residents were invited to help shape its future.

We talked, I think we talked to each of you about the different components of the of the park that were envisioned, walking, biking trails, picnic areas, playground, and all of those things have been have happened except for the community garden.

And you might ask why is a community garden really important?

Does it even really matter?

But the challenges, as Jean said, can only intensify every week.

Over a thousand families visit the Alameda Food Bank.

And through our Project PIC initiative, our volunteers harvest surplus backyard produce, and we see firsthand that food insecurity is not an abstract issue.

At the same time, wildlife populations across the country have declined, and gardens provide critical habitat for bees and other beneficial insects and birds that sustain our food systems.

And then finally, as Jean said here in Alameda, and many of you know that 50% over 50% of our residents actually live are renters.

And many don't have yards or raised beds or sunny balconies to grow their own food.

And a community garden creates equitable access to land, which is something that is increasingly rare and valuable.

Finally, the public planning process really matters.

Thank you so much.

Marla Cost, then Burkeen Evans.

Welcome, Speaker Coss.

I'm not going to do that this time.

The night is young.

Hello, everybody.

Ladies and gentlemen.

I'm Marla Coss.

I am the vice president of the board of Alameda Backyard Growers.

Last time I was up here before you, I was ranting about parking spaces and mulch, how it weighs 40 pounds, and it's on when you're on a bicycle, it's hard.

Now we're past all that.

We've learned that there's going to be a lot of restricted spaces in the parking.

Um for uh all electric vehicles, some for uh um handicapped, etc.

etc.

I'm glad that it's getting worked out.

I wanted to thank you for voting when you were at your retreat for voting for to put the community garden on the strategic plan.

I especially want to thank Tracy Jensen because she really true leaded us.

Um for those of us who aren't part of this the working city government, sometimes you get really lost at how do you how do you get your your feelings across?

How do you get your um how do you get your projects across?

When I was at the um I didn't write anything down here.

Um when I was at the ARPD uh meeting recently, they were talking, the commissioners were talking about there are so many things that we want to spend our money on.

Why should we spend it on the garden?

I'm glad that you guys have recognized us, and I hope that we can get the garden going.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Birgit Evans, then Corinne Kirschbaum.

Welcome.

Mayor, City Council.

I just wanted to thank the City Council for adding the community garden to the strategic plan.

I think it's really an important project.

Yesterday on the news hour, there was an extended piece about how the closure of the Straits of Hormuz was going to radically increase the price of fertilizer, and how the 20% of farmers in the United States who have not bought all their fertilizer are going to be facing some tough choices, and a lot of produce is not going to get specialty crops, are not going to get planted.

Um prices are going to go up.

And around the world, 45 million people are going to be affected by those increases in price.

And the community garden is really important.

We know we have a lot of people here in the United States who are affected, or in Alameda, United States, and Alameda, especially as SNAP benefits and Medicare are being greatly diminished this year.

In June of 2020, created a um the first free seed library in Alameda.

And we gave out 2,500 packets of seeds in 2020.

And last year we gave out 17,000 packets of seeds.

And the stories that we get, the stories we hear.

One of our seed librarians told us a story about a little girl who had learned how to plant seeds in school.

And she came home and she snuck up to the seed library, and she grabbed a packet of radishes and she planted them in a container.

And the next thing the mother knew was this pot had these little sprouts growing out of it.

And the little girl explained that she had planted the radishes.

And I hear stories like that every day.

And so it's a really important thing.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Karen Kirshbaum.

Welcome, Speaker Khrushchev.

So tonight I object to the approval of your strategic plan report.

Because before this council approves claim progress on homelessness, the public is entitled to one simple thing.

Proof.

So where are those plans?

Where are the regular reviews?

Oh geez.

Where are the metrics?

Where is the evidence?

And most importantly, where's the money trail?

When there are no financial records, not one for all these years.

And you have known since December of 22.

And what did you do?

You turned around after you turned around and you turned me into your villain.

And then you have the gall to write a newspaper article saying if you see something, say something.

Just as long as it's not about them.

We're talking 10 million.

But you didn't want to listen.

You would rather take my home away, throw me to the gutter with nothing.

You would rather kill my cat.

You would rather use your time as everyone.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

That was our final speaker.

And with that, we will close public comments.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good night.

Be sure to bring your beverage with you.

You know, Marilyn.

Good night.

Thank you for coming.

Okay, now we're gonna move on to the regular agenda item.

It's not rocket science.

There is not one.

Okay, so I'm gonna call item 7A.

Well asked the vote vote on the case.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Okay.

All right.

So we're not village of love.

We're gonna take a vote on approving.

If we could close the door, that would be awesome.

Thank you so much.

If you could close the door, all right.

So you know, everybody, this is just it it's it's not funny, it's sad, it's part of life.

And one of the things I've said in all the time that I'm mayor is we're not gonna shy away or skirt the hard truths.

And I will say that everyone on this council and especially our city staff work tirelessly to address the needs in our society.

We'd love to help everybody all the time, 24-7.

Sometimes it's just not possible.

So I hope nobody was too upset by that.

It's just it is part of living in the real world, and and um anyway, your city is doing things to help people and people have problems, it's complicated.

But this is the consent calendar, and what I'm looking for is a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar.

So move.

Move by council member Daysack, second by Vice Mayor Pryor.

I can read your body language.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

I alright.

That passes unanimously, and we will move on to the regular um agenda.

And then before we start, we actually have one presentation and it's hybrid.

We have the amazing Danielle Miller in person, and then we have her colleague who will be virtual.

But this is a report on items 7A through 7E.

All one report, but they what they would like to do, and and the city clerk who's our parliamentarian suggests that we vote to is and Ms.

Miller, is 15 minutes really enough?

That's really okay all right.

Um so what we want to do, um what we need to do is vote to um add five minutes because staff already has 10 minutes to do a presentation.

They'd like to have 15.

I need at least four affirmative votes, but I want five.

Um so will someone please add five additional minutes.

Okay, we've got a motion and it's been seconded by someone who's paying attention.

Thank you, Councilmember Jansen.

All those in favor, please signify.

Excuse me, please signify by stating aye.

I okay.

So you have 15 minutes, Madam Clerk.

Would you um oh look at that picture?

Would you please introduce the item and then we'll bring up our or will we will you just do whatever whenever.

Okay.

Um okay, so this is a uh accepting the grant and allocating funds for the Bay Farm Island adaptation project to address sea level rise by adopting a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute all necessary documents for the state coastal conservancy to accept uh two million six hundred and forty thousand in grant funding for the Bay Farm Conservancy to ex uh Bay Farm Island sorry, near term adaptation project and adoption resolution amending the fiscal year 2526 revenue and expenditure budget grant funds budget and capital improvement budget uh to increase expenditures and then um the five these five items are gonna be considered together, and then I'm gonna read the uh sequel language just once.

The phase of the project only involves planning studies to inform further future actions which are yet to be approved, and is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act review under SQL Guidelines Section 15262 feasibility and planning studies.

Further environmental review will be conducted for the individual resilience projects upon development of infrastructure design work.

And then there's uh the following four related contracts that are 7BC DE.

7B is executing a third agreement with the um amendment to agreement with uh Conger Moss Gillard Landscape Architecture and up to 3.4 million.

Um 7C is an agreement, uh First Amendment to an agreement with Greenbelt Alliance for up to 151,382.

Uh 7D is in a First Amendment to the Community Action for Sustainability for Sustainable Alameda Agreement for up to 86,560, and 7E is an agreement, uh First Amendment to agreement with San Francisco Estuary Institute for up to 44,200.

Thank you for that.

And just to confirm um City Attorney Ibn Shan, we can take one vote on all of these items.

You can.

All right, thank you.

Welcome and go ahead and introduce yourself, please.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, uh, City Council members.

My name is Danielle Mueller.

I'm the sustainability and resilience manager for the city.

I am joined tonight by uh Chris Giard from Sam CMG Landscape Architects, who's going to be assisting me in this presentation.

Um I'm going to tonight update you on the Bay Farm Island adaptation project, um, our shoreline adaptation plan, and then as um the the clerk mentioned, we're going to be requesting um amendments for four agreements for our technical consultants, our community-based organizations, and our scientific advisors that are involved in all of these projects.

Thank you so much.

All right.

So just to step back real quickly, this is a um map showing the near-term priorities for adaptation, uh, which are in pink and the midterm uh priorities in purple.

The near-term uh priorities address up to about two feet of sea level rise.

And I just want to mention we've begun work or have been seeking funding on uh nearly all or many of the near-term priorities.

Um tonight we're gonna focus on the shoreline adaptation plan, which is our comprehensive shoreline plan and the Bay Farm Island uh near-term project on the northern shoreline shown there.

I will start with the adaptation plan tonight.

Um by state law, we are required to complete a local shoreline adaptation plan by 2034, following guidelines that were developed by BCDC in 2024.

Um at that time, Alameda along with the city of Oakland had already begun collaboratively working on a shoreline adaptation plan uh with funding from the San Francisco Estuary Partnership and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.

So we're now calling that phase one.

It was completed in 2025.

But there were gaps between what we had planned to complete with that grant funding and what was being required by the BCDC guidelines.

So then the city sought grant funding through the SB1 grant program to complete a BCDC compliant plan.

We issued a notice of intent to complete a plan in December of 2025.

And we were awarded SB1 funds through the Ocean Protection Council to complete the plan.

And City Council accepted those funds at its December 2nd, 2025 meeting.

So work on that grant, which we are now calling phase two of the plan will kick off later this month and conclude in 2028.

The work to build on it.

The work will build on the current plan, address gaps to achieve our compliance with the BCDC guidelines, refine the strategy and concepts and adaptation pathways, develop a policy land use and funding plan, and include community engagement.

The plan will be developed in partnership with Oakland and through the Oakland Alameda Adaptation Committee.

So part of our request tonight is agreement amendments for the consultants, the community partners, the scientific advisor to utilize these SP1 funds to complete the plan.

And this is just showing a timeline of the work to be completed in phase two of the planning effort with plans to be completed by the end of 2027.

In the dark blue are elements, the elements are kind of how the BCDC guidance is laid out, elements A through G.

Elements A, B, and C, we are nearing completion based on the phase one work that we have done.

Phase the kind of middle element D is we've made substantial progress, and we're in the early stages of elements E F and G.

So now I'd like to turn it over to uh Chris Giard with CMG Landscape Architects to update us on the Bay Farm Island project and next steps.

Welcome, Mr.

Guiard.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

Um Chris Giard with CMG Landscape Architecture, and I'm glad to be here tonight to share the progress that the city and the design and engineering team have made on the Bay Farm Island near near term project.

And uh just a quick reminder this is a project that is focused on the most vulnerable parts of Bay Farm Island in terms of current flood risk and sea level rise.

But it's really about much more than that.

It's about how do we make a project that improves the environment in terms of ecology, but also improves public access and creates amenities along the shoreline.

Over the past year plus, since we were last before you, we have pushed the design to the 30% level.

And we've also engaged with the community during that time frame.

And we submitted the design documents to the city, the port, and other key stakeholders for review in late uh summer fall of last year, received a lot of good feedback and then concurrent with that, the city team was pursuing the grant that that is before you this evening for authorization.

And we also received a lot of good feedback from the Coastal Conservancy on the design.

And we have completed a more detailed survey of the site, geotechnical investigations and other you know technical requirements to advance the design.

And so we're now poised to go from 30% to 60% with the grant.

I'll just highlight here a few of the key features of the project as a reminder, but also some of the updates that we made in the process of the feedback that we've received.

And so just starting from Veterans Court.

Um there will be a drop-off area.

New parking.

I will note that we just recently received uh feedback from city staff that rather than the parallel or sorry, the perpendicular parking, they would prefer that we do parallel parking and maintain more of a street configuration.

I'll also note that Veterans Memorial Park will remain essentially intact as it is.

There's new bay trail improvements throughout the entire length of this segment of the project that will be brought up to current bay trail standards.

There's um opportunities to get down to the water.

So one of the things that we heard from the city was giving people an opportunity to get down to the water for all abilities, and so we've added an ADA access route down to the kind of shoreline edge condition from the top of the levee.

We've added a fishing pier.

There's currently an existing fishing pier that's dilapidated that's directly adjacent to the bridge that crosses beneath the bridge.

And so we've added a fishing pier, there are small seating areas, and then there's an overlook area at the lagoon site.

And then throughout the entire shoreline edge, we're employing really state-of-the-art nature-based solutions to restore the shoreline and prevent erosion.

Because we'll be, I think, really really innovative for Alameda, but also for the Bay Area broadly.

So just zooming in from the lagoon site on the on the far uh west side of the proposed project.

This will include a new pump station, a public overlook feature, and then there are series of cobble headlands that you see here in the drawing.

And these are intended to serve to hold the sediment that's moving along the shoreline to allow it to build up and prevent erosion.

And so this is one of the creative nature-based solutions that's being incorporated in the project.

Next.

And this is just showing a section of how this system works with the cobble headland, the areas behind that that are more naturalized, the levee itself, which is in the center, and then this idea of this overlook feature that provides a viewpoint over the bay.

Next.

And then just zooming into the veterans court area.

So there's a path that we'll take folks down to the beach areas and then the fishing pier.

There will be additional nature-based solutions that help restore the inlet there adjacent to Veterans Court, preventing the flooding, but also allowing for uh future marsh habitat to build in that area, and then the improvements to the public access with the parking and the turnaround.

And then throughout the whole project, there will be opportunities for signage and other interpretive features.

Next, I think that goes back to you, Danielle.

Yeah, so hopefully that's a good overview of where we are, and we're excited to advance the project with this new grant funding.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So just to summarize where we are with funding this project, um, phase one and phase two, which completed 30% design of the project that Chris outlined was funded with a uh legislative pre-disaster mitigation grant from FEMA, as well as some uh funds from the Alameda General Fund.

Um, and then as Chris mentioned, the city has been awarded a Prop 68 grant from the state coastal conservancy to complete 60% design and permitting, as well as design of an interim flood protection measure, raising the grade on island drive to protect the neighborhood from flooding uh coming from the Oakland side.

So on the agenda tonight is acceptance of those grant funds as well as a request for additional funding for staff time to support the grant.

Um so that is what we're calling phase three is the 60% design, and then future phases of the project will require additional funding from state or federal grants and and um also local funds from the general fund, possibly an infrastructure bond or other local assessments.

Um so this is just showing the timeline to complete the um 60% design phase of the project or phase three.

Um should council accept the grant funds.

The project would kick off in May of 2026, this May.

Uh we'd probably have a community workshop around next June with project completion in December of 2028, and there will be community and stakeholder engagement throughout the project.

Um over the next year, we'll continue to seek additional grant funds to complete design and uh fund construction, including uh from FEMA and others, uh other state grants, and um we'll target construction around 2030 if all of that is successful.

Um so that concludes my presentation.

Staff's recommendation tonight is to accept the Prop 68 grant to allocate $50,000 from the general fund to support public work staff um costs related to the project to authorize amendments to uh four agreements to support the Bay Farm Island and the Bay Farm Island project and the adaptation plan.

And I just want to note that CMG, Greenbelts, um, and CASA were all selected through a competitive process that was approved by council.

The San Francisco Estuary Umstitute was selected on a sole source basis because of their technical expertise in the in this field.

And we're really looking forward to continuing the excellent work in partnership with all of these entities as we move into the next phase of both the adaptation plan and the Bay Farm Island uh project.

So thank you.

That concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much, both of you.

That was nicely done.

Actually, I have a clarifying question.

The amounts are in the staff report, but for the public who's watching who might not have the staff report, tell us those grant amounts, because this is impressive people.

We wouldn't be able to do what we're doing and in the timeline in which we're doing it if we didn't have these grant funds that Ms.

Mueller and other staff have been brilliant at accessing.

So remind us how much did we get from the SB1.

The SB1 grant for the shoreline adaptation plan was uh 1.14 million dollars.

I went for and then there is the um the FEMA grant.

The it the Prop 68 grants from the Coastal Conservancy.

Is that the same as the FEMA grant?

No.

Okay.

I had the pro yeah, okay.

What's the Prop 68?

That was um 2.64 million dollars.

And then with the BRIC?

Um no, the BRIC was no more.

Um there is some FEMA funding, but is it state FEMA?

Um no, we received FEMA funding um through uh Congresswoman Barbara Lee at the time in 2023.

It's called the legislative pre-disaster mitigation fund.

It was essentially a congressional earmark, yeah.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Um no, so okay, so the ERMAC money is in there now being spent.

The um no, a lot of time, staff time and effort has been spent backfilling the FEMA BRAC um brick grant funding that was called back even though it was approved in a the previous administration.

Well, um thank you.

Well done.

These are just clarifying questions from staff.

Any clarifying questions?

Vice Mayor Pryor.

Hi.

Yeah, I have a lot of questions.

But I'm sure everything you're doing is perfect.

I this is just um I I just have a uh so when it says 30% design to 60% design, what does that mean?

Um so it's just where we are in the design process.

We completion.

We've done an initial concept, we've refined that a little bit to what we call about 30% complete.

Uh we'll refine it a little bit more with this grant funding and work on some of the permitting to get us to about 60% complete, and then we'll need more funding to really continue to refine and um finalize that design so then we can have a construction package that we can put out to bid.

Oh, got it.

And then is is part of this because we have the different companies um and the different cities, and so it's just a lot of information.

I'm I'm just curious why.

Or this is just from my or is this just an expected timeline, like 30%?

That's we're on track, and now we're at 60 and we're still on track.

Yeah, exactly.

Um we because we don't have nobody has given us all of the money to all at once to do everything.

Got it.

Um we get bits and pieces of of grants and funds that we can do pieces of the project with, and so we're just doing it in a stepwise fashion.

And then I and this is also kind of um so on the staff report, because they're all similar, they all say similar things.

So I'm just gonna go refer to staff um because um so at the so there's the table that has the different contracts for the contractors that you just named.

Um, and then there is like an approval date and an authorized amount.

Is this is the also is the authorized amount?

Is that the expected expense?

Is it the grant?

I I just was trying to figure out what that meant.

So that's the amount of the contract that was awarded that we entered into, either the original contract or the subsequent amendments.

Um those funds um were the amount that we would expect that contractor to expend under each of those agreements or amendments.

Um and the money for those amendments either came from grant funds or from uh general fund.

And that requests that we've so is this am I reading this right?

Because it says, you know, earlier in that these there are three phases, and then we see here there are three amendments.

Are these amendments are they coinciding with the phases?

Um not exactly because when we initially selected the CMG consultant team as well as our community partners, Greenbelt and CASA, um the RFP that we put out actually was three projects in one.

It was the original shoreline adaptation plan, which was phase one, it was the original funding um for 30% design of Bay Farm Island, and then you may recall we also had the estuary um Posey Webster Tubes project that we had some funding from Caltrans for.

And then you may recall we also had the estuary Posey Webster Tubes project that we had some funding from Caltrans for.

So it was funding for all of those things.

And then subsequently, City Council approved funds funding for other parts of those projects.

We also got additional grant funding.

We also did a geomorphology study on South Shore Beach.

So the each of the amendments kind of covers a different portion of funding that we've received, and then we amend the contract to use those funds.

So then where are we in the so when I read all this, it sounds like we're still getting grant funding to do planning.

So we have not started any projects.

Well, Bay Farm Island project is a project, but we are in the design phase of that project, and the goal would be to continue to get more funding and eventually to construct that project once we have sufficient funding.

Okay, so we're not doing multiple projects, we're just still focusing on Bay Farm, just the areas of the slideshow that you told us tonight.

That is the that is the project that has gone the farthest that we've received the most grant funding for.

Okay.

Um on the original the map on the first slide showed all in pink the priority areas, those are all areas that we do need to address in the near term.

Got it.

Um those are areas that would be um have our vulnerable within two feet of sea level rise.

That's about 2060 to 2080.

Um we don't want to build a project that's already going to be obsolete.

If we built it in 2020, it would already be essentially obsolete.

So we want to build it early enough to have some design life.

So there are is there is a suite of projects that we are kind of pursuing.

The shoreline adaptation plan, which we have started but will continue, is going to really lay out kind of what are all of the projects that we need to pursue, what's kind of the scope of those projects.

We've already started to do some of that because we have the Bay Farm Island project, we have the estuary project.

We've started looking at South Shore uh beach area.

That's another high kind of priority area.

Um so as a city, we are going to be pursuing and kind of pushing forward a whole suite of projects at essentially at the same time.

But the Bay Farm Island project is the one that's gotten the most funding and the most traction, and we're able to kind of like once we start getting funding, it's easier to get more funding and to just um keep building on that.

And then, yeah, because I think Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to understand how the financing of this um I'm just gonna concentrate on the CMG contract because in September the authorized amount was two million, and then we did an amendment for 75,000, and then a second amendment for over 500,000, and then there's a current amendment for three million.

Um I guess my question really is like um are these amendment changes expected and are the increases expected?

Like are is this typical, I guess.

Yeah, I think I it's important to note these are not because CMG has had cost overruns or because they've gone over budget.

Um, it's because we've asked them to do more work.

We have more funding and we've asked them to do more work.

Oh, okay, got it.

Thank you.

And then um, and this is just like a generic question, but there was um on all the staff reports, there was a paragraph about the brick funding, you know, having gone away, and then we sued and we got some money later on.

Um, did that cause any delays in any of the stuff we're doing?

And also has that caused expense to go up because we've now we have tariffs.

Um the BRIC project we we did um we submitted a BRIC grant in 2023, BRIC grant and application in 2023.

Um that was a really comprehensive project that included on the Bay Farm Island, the Alameda side, as well as Doolittle Drive and the Oakland side, and that was because we have flooding coming from all sides, and we really needed a comprehensive solution.

So we put together a large project with our partners in Oakland and the port and Caltrans and East Bay Regional Parks, and um there was it was a $50 million federal request at the time.

There was a community disaster resilienz that allowed us at the around the airport that allowed us to take advantage of um 10% local match versus 25%, which is pretty huge on a $50 million project.

Um we had found we had learned that our project was in federal was in FEMA review, so it had been moved from the state to FEMA, and FEMA was considering it for award.

And then in April of 2024, the BRIC program was canceled by the um current administration.

Um then we didn't hear anything.

There was some lawsuits that were filed and a court order for um for FEMA to resume the program.

They issued a new notice of funding opportunity just last week or the end of March.

The funding opportunity is a very different program than the one that we applied to.

However, our initial conversations with the state may indicate that we may be able to continue review of our previous application under the previous BRIC program.

But we don't have details yet, and the state is until the government is fully opened and FEMA is fully operational, the state's not able to have kind of two-way conversations with FEMA about the details of that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And thanks for that new information.

Thank you.

I'll follow up on that question actually.

Given that the state service conserved coastal conservancy funds have been awarded, which we're talking about this evening, and the potential for state FEMA to reallocate the BRIC funds.

Do you anticipate that the that the project would all still include Bay Farm, or would it be more focused, as you said, on South Shore and other parts of the I think if were we to determine that the BRIC program were to proceed as we wanted to, and and there was a possibility of us applying and kind of all of those what ifs that we can't answer right now, we would have an opportunity to adjust the scope of our um of our application, I believe.

And that would allow us to say, okay, now we've we thought um when we originally applied, we thought we would be at about 30 percent design.

Now we have grant funding to get us about 60 percent design.

So then our money would probably go a little farther and get us more money, more work done on Bay Farm Island.

And to Michelle's point, we know that Councilmember Prior's point, we know that um Vice Mayor Fryers point, excuse me.

Um we know that and construction costs have increased.

Um and so there's also questions about you know, we had a $50 million ask, we would need to rethink about what the the budget would be.

Um so all this to say is were we to decide to go after a brick and it were feasible, and um we would need to have some discussions and possibly re-engage our consultants for some additional scope to help us shape that project.

And um, this project was part of the as you discussed the the Oakland Alameda um adaptation committee's uh initial goals and objectives.

But it sounds like from the report, like we're kind of working, we're not really working together with the committee on this grant, and especially and on these these um this project.

Right.

One of the outcomes I think of the BRIC program going away, and we didn't think it was coming back, um, was that there's really no other funding source out there where we can access 50 million dollars in one shot.

Um, and so we kind of all we got together and said, well, it it seems like what we need to do is Alameda needs to see if we can find grant funding for our components, Oakland and the Port and Caltran need to get funding for their components, and we'll try and put it all together.

But it would be a much more of a piecemeal approach.

Um that's part of why the the Coastal Conservancy grant includes um some money money to think about an interim measure on Island Drive, because if we can't have certainty that Oakland and the port and Caltrans will be able to complete their portions, then we need to protect Alameda in order to remove our residents from the floodplain.

But were we to be able to pursue a more comprehensive project, we wouldn't need the interim measure on island drive.

That's really helpful.

And then so then my other question about about this particular grant is will the Prop 68 funds be available in future years for other local projects?

Yes, I believe it's an annual grant program.

Okay, then I have a couple technical questions.

The it uh from the um the presentation, it looked like the riprap removal will be it's all around the um veterans park and up to pass to the um the uh pump station all around there.

The levee portion will be from the case.

And so the riprap goes away throughout that portion.

No, that there's rip wrap there now, maybe a little bit, but mostly that's where there's um kind of the trail, and then there's kind of some eroding shoreline, and there's the boardwalk in front of the pool.

Um I think maybe there's a little bit of riprap by the pump station.

And the other noticeable thing, just to point out, and you're gonna probably say yes, that the street termination is now at the end of Veterans Memorial Park rather than the bicycle bridge.

Correct.

So it corrects that.

And then my question, my final question, kind of a technical, I guess, is how does the change address the overflow issue at the seawall, which is related to the king tides or other high tides.

That will be the levy, and so the whole thing will be at a higher elevation and we'll be able to address current flooding, king tides, and future flooding in that area.

Thank you.

Any other clarifying questions from the council before we go to public comments and then do we have public comment?

Uh we do.

We have three.

They'll get three minutes each.

Uh, two are in person, one's remote.

Uh the first is Lauren Isell and then Zoe Siegel.

All right.

Welcome, Speaker Iselle.

Uh good evening, Mary Ashgraf and um Council members.

My name is Lauren Isell.

I'm with Community Action for Sustainable Alameda.

Happy to be here.

Uh I'm here to just let you know that CASA, along with a bunch of other community-based organizations, has been working in partnership with the city and the Oakland Alameda Adaptation Committee for the past several years, um, helping the city um do outreach to our community to get feedback on what the community wants as far as um how we are going to address our vulnerabilities and our adaptation measures.

Um and it should be noted that um the majority of the folks that we've outreached to, which includes um over you know 5,000 um members of our community in vulnerable areas, um vulnerable and disadvantaged community members, uh, folks that are actually living in the areas that are currently flooded.

We've gone door to door over the past several years and talked to individuals.

We've done um fairs, we've done outreach to um, we've done presentation to HOAs, we've done waterfront tours, we've done walking tours, um, we have um done uh community engagement design fairs.

Um and you should know that the design for um the Bay Farm Island adaptation project at this point with the nature-based solutions as well as the public amenities and the public access and the bay trail issues uh all reflect um what the public has identified as priorities for these adaptation projects.

Um so the city is tracking in alignment with um what our community members are interested in seeing relative to these adaptation projects.

Uh in addition for the uh island wide project, the regional um adaptation project, um, we've also are um uh tracking with what our uh fellow community members are interested in relative to the geomorphic um study and the habitat study um over at the South Shore Beach and all of the nature-based solutions along around our shoreline, those all reflect what our community members um see as uh their priorities for these adaptation projects.

Uh and um the this interaction with our community members is critical to really getting it right and to making sure that not only are we protecting ourselves from flooding, but also um protecting the environment and making sure that we have public access and recreational amenities along our shoreline at the same time.

Um so uh CASA and our um and our community members um support uh moving forward with all these projects and Oaks um efforts.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Zoe Siegel.

Oh, welcome, Speaker.

Hi.

Hello.

Good evening.

Um my name is Zoe Siegel, and I am the senior director of climate resilience at Greenbelt Alliance.

And I'm here today in support of the proposed amendment to continue and expand the work with the City of Alameda on the sea level rise adaptation planning.

And this item is more than a contract, it's about an ensuring Alameda shoreline adaptation efforts are shaped by the people who are most effective, affected.

As you know, Alameda, as you know very well, Alameda is on the front lines of sea level rise and groundwater flooding.

And I work in a handful of cities around the East Bay, and I just wanted to give major props to the city of Alameda for really doing an incredible job and mainly to you know Danielle and her team for really piecemealing so many different complicated grants together and organizing this very complicated um process into a really incredible uh incredible process.

And this funding is absolutely necessary and really hard to pull together.

And this funding allows us to do that work well to reach residents across Alameda, as Lauren has has said, uh, partner with trusted other trusted community-based organizations and ensure that engagement is multilingual, accessible, grounded in real life experience.

And that also includes out reaching out to renters, frontline community members, and those who are often left out of traditional planning processes.

And we're not starting from scratch.

Through this partnership, we're as you know, we're already working alongside the city and local partners to connect Alameda's efforts to regional initiatives aligned with other funding opportunities, and really build a plan that is both technically sound and community driven.

With it, Alameda has an opportunity to lead and to really show what it looks like to plan for climate resilience in a way that's inclusive, proactive, and ready for complete funding in the future.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much for joining us today.

And our next speaker is remote.

We now have two remote.

Paul Boosterian.

Welcome, Speaker Vasterian.

Hi, everyone.

This is Paul Pustarian.

I'm a Bay Farm resident, so I wanted to speak in support of this going ahead with this grant.

Really appreciate Danielle, Chris, and the council for supporting everything so far.

It's been really great progress.

It's nice to see us working to address shoreline resiliency.

And as a bonus, making the Bay Trail a better place for bikers, walkers, and anybody who wants to enjoy our really nice shoreline.

And also doing it in an environmentally sustainable way.

It's really exciting to do it in a way that will last for a while and keep keep us from going back to the risky place we're currently in.

And also happy to see Island Drive as part of the plan.

I wasn't part of earlier plans.

And since we we don't know what we can get from the Oakland side, doing that as an interim measure is key to getting a large number of Bay Farm homes out of the floodplain.

So appreciate the strongly support moving forward and thanks everyone for the work so far.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Welcome, Speaker Amara Siri Wardena.

I can say that name.

Hi.

Hello, thank you.

Good evening.

I am Megan Amara Siri Wardena.

I've got a background in landscape architecture.

I currently serve as the garden educator at Love Elementary and a co-chair of Alameda Green School Yards Committee.

Also a mom of two and a proud resident of our city.

I am just wanting to voice full support of the Bay Farm Island Adaptation Project.

And I want to thank this city for bringing together such an experienced and thoughtful project team.

I appreciate the recognition of the expertise and the leadership in this project team.

I also believe this project represents an opportunity for Alameda to set a powerful example in the Bay Area.

We don't always have to leave that up to San Francisco, to be forward-thinking planners and implementers of climate resilience.

As adaptation strategies are developed, I encourage the city and the project team to think about resilience not only as protection but as connection.

The most successful city did designs, did they design infrastructure that brings people into meaningful relationship with their natural systems?

In particular, I hope the project prioritizes nature-based solutions that also create opportunities for play, expl exploration, and learning.

Shorelines, wetlands, and green infrastructure can serve not only as protective systems, but spaces where children and adults alike experience curiosity, delight, and a deeper understanding of our bay.

Through my work with students in outdoor classrooms, I see how powerful it is when children can physically engage with natural systems.

These experiences foster long-term stewardship, which is essential to the success of any resilience effort.

And I hope these values are embedded early in the planning process.

Thank you so much for your time, your leadership and consideration.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, that was our last speaker.

Oh, okay.

So with that, we will close public comment on items 7A through 7E.

And we can have council discussion, and then I am looking for a motion, and as we noted earlier, we can approve all of the items 7A through 7E on one motion.

So well, I'll just lead off quickly and say thank you so much.

Ums um Mueller for all your hard work on this and over the years and also just all the pivoting you've had to do.

I mean, as in life, you know, you think you're going one way and then life intrudes and you have to do different things.

And I will say I was just um remembering that back in January, I invited Danielle Miller to be my guest at the Alameda County Mayor's Conference because the um our guest speaker that month was from um base BCDC Bay Conservation and Development Commission.

And the and the topic was the how the regional shoreline adaptation plan is being implemented through the Bay Area.

And the assistant director for climate adaptation saw us mostly she saw Danielle, I think, in the audience, and just made a point of saying to all the mayors of Alameda County and our city managers and and other key staff who were there was that she wished that all of the cities, not just in Alameda County, but in the region, we're following the example of the City of Alameda and under Danielle Mueller Ship's leadership, we are lucky to have her.

And I will just say I listened carefully to public comment, and I just want you to know that we don't follow San Francisco.

We are plenty innovative on our own, and Alameda has a forward-thinking mayor with a little more experience in San Francisco's, but I'm a big fan of Mayor Lurie, in case you're listening to the Alameda City Council meeting.

But no, I and it's not the first time I've heard that.

Um I go to conferences, and when they see that I'm the mayor of Alameda, environmental conferences, we we are on the cutting edge.

And I just commend you for just doing more with less.

And you know, you brought these 30 plus stakeholders together for the Oakland Alameda Adaptation Committee, Oak.

And then, and then you all had to, I mean, you still in touch and meet and all that, but you were correct that you are sometimes stronger divided, but you know, going after the funding, and you know, we just hope for better things in the future.

But I think we're just fortunate to be here.

So shall we move this along?

I did want to make a comment.

I was just gonna say as Mayor Pryor.

This is, you know, the resiliency plan, but I just wanted to give a shout out to Dan Dale Mueller because it's not just climate change and the designing and then having to do the actual projects, but it's also the bureaucracy of you know, the grant funding, changing policy, and then the politics.

Uh so I just think you have uh you're like a mental contortion uh contortionist.

Like you're uh this is amazing work.

Um we you people kept throwing grenades at you and you just kept plugging along.

So I beyond appreciate all the work you've done.

And you'll probably be prepared to move the items when yes time.

Okay.

Anyone else want to comment?

Yes.

Um uh councilember Dayside and then Bowler.

Okay, thank you.

I just uh make my uh comments pretty quickly.

Um yes, and I would join my fellow staff members in um thanking our staff, particularly Daniel.

Uh our staff um staff uh particularly Daniel Mueller um and not only um administrating um this whole process of rounding up all the different entities but also doing the fundraising and putting together all the technical analysis analysts to give us their guidance as to um cutting edge um approaches to dealing with uh sea level rise.

Um thank her for all that, but also thank her and staff for being great spokespersons to the media and informing the media, the larger regional media as to you know the things that we're doing here in Alameda.

You know, um just recently um Ms.

Mueller was interviewed um by KQED and the um the segment is still there at www.kqed.org slash climate.

Um so you can see um a very thoughtful piece on uh what Alameda is doing with regard to um sea level rise one more time, www.

uh kqed.org um slash climate.

Um so you know I I think the thing that that catches my that caught my eye uh with regard to um that um interview is um a part where the um one of the interviewers says the following quote California has experienced about eight inches of sea level rise over the past century.

And as the world continues to warm due to fossil fuel burning, the bay could rise by about a foot by mid-century.

Um that's 2050.

So what he's saying is that over the past 125 years from 1900 to 2025, sea level rise grew uh increased by eight inches over the past 125 years.

And it would appear that over the next 25 years alone, sea level rise will increase by one foot projected.

Um and it will continue to increase possibly another two feet by 2075.

Every single one of us here on Alameda know by virtue of living on an island that you know we have no choice but to deal forcefully with uh the challenges that sea level rise is um posing all of us and and most importantly the future generations of Alamedans.

But here in 2026, I think um it's great to know that we have a team of staff members, including uh Daniel Mueller, but but all the other people who are working on this project in kind of positioning us for the coming years.

So I just want to say on behalf of uh the residents uh express our appreciation to the work that you've done and the fundraising that you've garnered.

Thank you, Councilmember Day Side.

Councilmember Bowler.

Uh thank you.

Um I just I think it's difficult to add too much to my um colleagues' comments because they are all very insightful.

I just feel that what stands out here is that, and it's not surprising we're getting awards and through this collaboration and having this uh planning phase where we're also looking for infrastructure.

We're looking at building the strongest possible foundation for future decisions and doing that through that combination of technical expertise, public engagement, and you know, scientific reviews, looking at a way to move forward that's credible, it's inclusive, and it's grounded in really good analysis.

So thank you to staff and thank you to our partners.

Thank you, Councilmember Bowler.

Okay.

Um we have a motion by Vice Mayor Pryor, seconded by seconded by Councilmember uh Day Sai got there first.

You may.

Thank you.

Um thank you.

I want to comment, thank Councilmember Desog as well for his comments.

I hope all our residents and businesses see the KQED story.

And I hope that all of our residents and businesses appreciate as much as we do the challenges that we face with sea level rise.

Finally, uh I want to thank my colleagues on the dais here for supporting ways to fund these challenges by supporting the resolution to encourage the adoption of the Make Polluters Pay Act in the State Legislature.

This action that we've taken, we will take tonight as soon as we vote, demonstrates how effectively climate action and resiliency staff have been in identifying funding opportunities and working, especially partnering and working with local environmental agencies to ensure that Alameda has an effective response to sea level rise.

So thank you to staff as well.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Jensen.

Okay, the motion.

Um we have um a motion by advice mayor prior, seconded by councilmember Gesog.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Aye.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you so much.

And thank you to Mr.

Guillard, who's probably uh moved on.

All right.

Madam Clerk, would you please introduce let's see, we are up to 7F.

Is that correct?

Correct.

All right, let's do it.

Introduction of ordinance, amending the Alameda Missile Code, Article 15, rent control limitations on evictions and relocation payments to certain displaced tenants to incorporate policy changes and clarifying updates and adoptional resolution concerning the rent program fees applicable to projects with below market rate rental units and adoption resolution for sending resolution number 15517 Ellis Act policy.

All right, before you begin and welcome, I think Councilmember Bowler wants to say something.

Yeah, I'm gonna do a uh recusal.

I'm gonna step out of the room um on item 7f just due to a possible conflict of interest arising from uh financial interests in uh rental property and related rental income.

So I'm gonna refuse from this particular and go ahead and introduce yourself, please.

Uh good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

Bill Chapin, director of the city's rent program.

I am here to present some proposed amendments to the city's rent ordinance.

Uh the last time that the rent ordinance had a comprehensive overhaul was in 2019.

Uh over the last six and a half years, rent program staff have been compiling a wish list of sorts.

Um helpful amendments that we think would allow for more effective administration of the program, uh, improved and clearer direction to tenants and landlords, and give council the opportunity to affirm some department policies.

Tonight we are bringing that wish list to you.

Uh so first up we have a set of amendments that would create actual changes in the current policy.

Uh the first concern is what happens when a hearing officer issues a decision and one of the parties is dissatisfied with the outcome.

If a tenant or landlord wants to challenge the decision, they have the right uh to ask the courts to review it.

Uh, however, say a hearing officer were to find in favor of a landlord who is appealing a rent program determination, and it negates some sort of critical city policy.

There's no legal mechanism at the moment by which the city can ask the courts to weigh in.

So this amendment would create that pathway.

City council could vote to affirm, modify, or reverse the hearing officer's decision.

And then if the landlord wishes to, uh they could file for judicial review of the council's action.

Another amendment involves relocation payments when a tenant is displaced through no fault of their own due to habitability issues with the rental unit.

The rent ordinance requires the landlord to make a one-time permanent relocation payment if the tenant decides to find new housing rather than waiting to reoccupy their unit once the conditions have been addressed.

Under the amendment, a tenant would have to first be displaced for at least seven days before they are eligible for the permanent relocation payment.

This protects landlords who are working in good faith to quickly address simple habitability issues.

The tenant would still receive daily temporary relocation payments for each day that they are displaced.

Thirdly, from time to time, a landlord gives an invalid notice to terminate a tenancy based on grounds that are not permitted by the ordinance, and then the tenant vacates, and only at that point is it brought to the attention of rent program staff.

This amendment would give the tenant the right to reoccupy their old rental unit.

And then a tenant who declines that offer would receive a permanent relocation payment.

There are also some minor policy changes associated with filing deadlines for buyout agreements and avoiding repetitive hearings.

For example, when a tenant just refiles the same petition after a hearing officer has already issued a ruling on it.

Next, we're looking at some policies that the rent program has adopted or implemented but are not expressly embodied in the ordinance.

For example, uh during the pandemic, we saw several examples of landlords who wanted to give their tenants a break on their rent.

And then once the tenant's financial situation had approved, to then return the rent to what it had been before.

We think that allowing this type of arrangement helps to keep tenants housed if they are going through a temporary financial setback.

And we don't want to discourage landlords from accommodating their tenants in this way.

This policy would, though, uh require documentation showing that the tenant understands that the rent reductions are only temporary in nature and not permanent.

Secondly, an important tool the rent program has to make sure that landlords are following local law is that the landlord must be in full compliance with the rent ordinance in order to be able to increase rent.

This amendment would specify that full compliance includes complying with anything that's in a hearing officer's order, and also that the landlord cannot raise rent for one unit on the property when there is another unit that still has outstanding violations.

Thirdly, in order to meet our fair housing obligations, the rent program allows exceptions for certain restrictions on owner move-ins when necessary to accommodate a disability.

So for example, uh when a landlord is unable to move into an upper level vacant unit, uh, so they have to do an owner move in on the uh on the lower level.

Uh and there's also an amendment to address uh how program fees are calculated for SROs.

That would be properties where tenants share kitchen and or bath facilities.

We think uh it does so in a way that strikes a good balance between protecting the rights of the low-income tenants who tend to live in these units while not overburdening the property owners with unnecessary fees.

Uh and then some additional amendments will simply clarify policies that are embodied in the rent ordinance.

The first makes clear that subsidized units that are owned by a public entity, such as the housing authority or an affordable housing developer are fully exempt from the ordinance, while privately owned subsidized units are only partially exempt, meaning that they are still subject to just cause protections and registration requirements.

Privately owned subsidized units would include both those rented to Section 8 voucher holders as well as below market rate units that are developed as part of an affordable housing agreement between the city and a for-profit developer.

And just wanted to note uh housing authority executive director Vanessa Cooper has expressed to me that she reviewed uh the amendments and she is supportive of them.

Uh secondly, from time to time, a property owner who is in violation of the ordinance uh sells the property without first addressing the violations.

Once ownership has transferred, the new owner assumes responsibility for making sure the property is in compliance.

And that could include paying outstanding program fees or refunding tenants who are given invalid rent increases.

Of course, the purchaser may have recourse against a seller who failed to disclose those violations during the sale process.

And finally, we are adding a definition of master tenant to address subletting situations and to make clear that by accepting rent payments, a master tenant may have obligations to the subtenant under the rent ordinance.

And then there are several additional housekeeping items that are fixing minor inconsistencies within the ordinance or amending definitions to line up with legal concepts.

Staff is also recommending adoption of two resolutions.

The first concerns the rent program's annual fees.

The resolution will do two things.

It adds language to justify late penalties, which was made necessary by some changes to case law.

And secondly, it will clarify council's intent that a waiver for rent subsidized units applies only to units rented to tenants in a voucher program, such as Section 8, and not inclusionary below market rate units.

The stated purpose when council adopted this policy was to encourage participation in these voucher programs.

As noted earlier, Section 8 units are still partially regulated, and therefore there are program costs associated with them.

The fee waiver means the city is covering those costs essentially by paying them on behalf of the landlord.

The existing resolution states that the waivers to be paid from the general fund, and the proposed resolution maintains that language.

Assuming council wishes to continue this policy, it will require an annual general fund subsidy of approximately $50,000.

We're not asking for any transfer tonight.

That request will be included as part of the upcoming mid-cycle budget update.

That policy is now embodied in an administrative regulation, so the resolution is no longer necessary.

And one final thing to note the section of the rent ordinance that deals with how landlords are permitted to charge tenants for utility costs is being kept as is for now.

That's not because we don't think it's in need of an update, quite the contrary.

But it is a more complex and consequential issue than these other amendments that we're recommending tonight.

And so staff is in the process of collecting stakeholder feedback and evaluating policy options, and we hope to return to you with some proposals to consider.

So to summarize, staff is recommending that you introduce the proposed ordinance to update and clarify the city's rent regulations and to adopt the two resolutions.

And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have.

Thank you.

Nice job.

Any clarifying questions before we go to public comment counsel?

Councilmember Jensen.

My question, my first question is about the provision number two in the in the update the ensuring full compliance with rent control law.

And so a landlord has to be in full compliance in order to impose the AGA.

Can you give an example of when a landlord wouldn't be in full compliance?

Sure.

So it could include if they have failed to pay their program fees, if they have uh given an invalid rent uh uh rent increase and haven't addressed it.

Um those situations are currently uh pretty clear uh in the rent ordinance.

Uh the big thing that we're looking for is there have been some situations where there has been a tenant has filed a petition uh requesting a downward rent adjustment because uh they've lost housing services uh or the landlord has failed to uh address some repair uh or other, and the hearing officer has ordered uh the landlord to uh to reduce the rent and to maybe pay some back rent uh as part of their decision.

Um then the landlord has not followed through and followed the hearing officer's order.

Um so this amendment in particular makes clear that that's another situation where they're not able to go ahead with an AGA rent increase until they've done the things that are in the hearing officer's order.

And I understand that, but is there a potential for a um a landlord to have made a mistake or put or um done something that wasn't addressed by a hearing officer and then years later to come back and say, okay, you imp you did those things and we just found out and now you and you imposed an A D AGA for the past three years, so now you have to pay it back?

Is there any any errors by by rent staff that could result in these repayment requirements?

Um I'm sorry, Bill, because the AGA is is approved by rent staff, right?

So what's the potential for an approved AGA to be clawed back, I guess is the question.

So ideally, uh as long as uh landlords are uh following their annual registration requirements.

They're reporting their registration uh each year.

Uh they the uh the rent registry that we have should be flagging any rent increases uh that are potentially invalid, and then staff sends a uh a notice to the landlord every year advising them, hey, there's a problem with this unit with this rent increase.

Um as long as the landlords then uh address that once it's been once they've been advised, uh they shouldn't run into problems three years down the road.

Now the problem is that we certainly have landlords who receive those letters and put them right in the trash.

Uh and then uh and then it's only three years later uh that uh that they come to us.

And our answer to them is that it is the landlord's responsibility to make sure that they are uh that they're in compliance with all uh aspects of the ordinance, which includes not increasing the rent beyond the AGA.

Right.

And with regard to the AGA, that this so it could put as you mentioned, it could be one unit that was um there was not a uh a stove repair, say or something like that that was highlighted and found to be the case, but either it wasn't addressed by the landlord or the landlord wasn't aware of it.

If the landlord threw the paperwork away, that's of course not um not something the city should worry about.

But if it was either not either the tenant didn't report it or rent con rent staff didn't respond to the landlord and share information with the landlord, then at that point the landlord has had AGAs for that unit perhaps, and perhaps for other units, then okay, it's a year or two later and it's determined by staff well that that um stove wasn't replaced or that duct was not painted or whatever it was, then those other AGA increases for the other units in that building would also be flagged and be not allowed or disallowed.

Sure.

So um I think in the example that you're giving where the uh say there's a you know a problem with the stove, uh it was not reported uh, for example.

Uh the the landlord would not be uh out of compliance until the tenant had filed a petition and a hearing officer had made a decision about that petition and given some sort of uh an order or direction for the landlord.

And and landlords are uh that they are full participants in that uh in that process.

Well, good.

That's what I just want to be clear that this wouldn't be just uh uh a year or some period of time later that the landlord, the rent staff would realize or recognize that um something had been uh the landlord hadn't addressed something and and tell them that all subsequent AGA increases were not allowed without having noticed it and and responded at the time.

Right.

Um yeah, uh just uh I guess uh uh and I uh I uh I follow your question um and I uh to re uh uh to clarify for everyone's benefit.

Uh what we're really talking about are rent program annual fees, uh registration requirements, um uh addressing any invalid rent increases that the landlord has been advised of, uh, and complying with the hearing officer's order.

Great.

That's really helpful.

Thank you.

And my other question is about the issue of clarifying owner responsibility after sale.

Um this is that when a property owner who is in violation of the ordinance sells the property without addressing the violation.

And I just I mean, this would be for the purchaser.

This would seem to be um I don't know how often this happens, and you might want to comment on that, but I'm I'm very uh I'll talk about this later, and and this isn't actually a question.

I'm just uncomfortable with putting the the burden on the purchaser for um things that the rent program has been aware of, has notified the landlord of, and then somehow the landlord is able to sell the property, and there would be some significant, it sounds like there could be significant fines or um or financial burden for the property owner, property purchaser.

Um this has happened.

Uh I would say uh only um uh uh it perhaps happens uh a handful of times each year, uh two or three times a yeah.

Um I believe that uh uh and uh perhaps uh either uh special counsel Michael Rausch, who is uh is listening remotely can uh can back me up on this.

It's pretty established legal uh principle that when a rental property is transferred, the new owner uh assumes all responsibility for the rental property, including any issues that arise.

Uh we do try to uh to the extent we can advise anyone who is considering purchasing a property uh to make sure that the property is in full compliance with the rent ordinance.

Uh purchasers are welcome to contact uh staff and to inquire about the status uh of a property.

Um I guess the the other consideration, there's a practical consideration as well in that um once a property has transferred and the seller is no longer a landlord, uh the rent program has very little uh that we can do to uh um compel them to take action to uh to rectify what the problem is.

Um I mean, just in closure then, so the new landlord would have to register and comply with all of the requirements for the rental property, and that's very clear and and entirely um logical and supportable, but just the the issue of um making sure that that the new landlord is aware of any potential problems that were uh in place when the property was purchased, and as well as um you know uh advising the tenants of um these types of guidelines as well.

So I guess uh I can just add quickly that um as part of uh their requirements uh when a property is sold to register that transfer with the rent program.

Uh and uh part of that process is uh staff being in touch with the new landlord and letting them know right away uh that there is an issue.

Thanks for your responses, Bill.

And just um to follow up on uh my colleagues' questions, wouldn't the seller of the property have the responsibility to reveal any violations to the seller?

Uh that's correct.

That's correct.

And in fact, uh the the rent ordinance actually contains a requirement that uh the seller must declose disclose anything.

Um it would uh generally though uh be the purchaser's decision about whether they want to pursue uh say uh small claims court uh against the uh the seller.

Thank you.

Any other clarifying questions?

I have a quick one.

Vice Mayor Prior.

Um I am glad that you are looking into updating the um utility uh charges.

Um do you think you guys will have something to bring back?

Uh we are hoping to be able to come as soon as June.

Oh, okay, great.

Thank you.

That was it.

Great.

And you know, I do see um that our special counsel Michael Rauch has just appeared magically before us.

Um Mr.

Rash, was there anything that you wanted to add to any of the um any information you wanted to add to any of the topics that have been raised thus far?

Madam Mayor, thank you for that.

And counsel uh Michael Rausch, special counselor for the City of Alameda.

No, Mr.

Mr.

Chabin did his usual uh fine outstanding job of identifying the issues before you tonight.

Uh I don't have any further clarification, but I'll be glad to answer any uh clarifying questions if council has any.

Perfect.

Thank you so much.

Don't go away.

Um I think we're done with council questions.

We'll go to public comment.

We only have one speaker, uh Timothy Hilton.

Welcome, Speaker Hilton.

Come on up.

And yeah.

We got to share the podium here.

Hello.

Hello.

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor.

Thank you, Councilmembers and uh other city officers.

Um I live on Shoreline Drive.

I've been a resident of Alameda for almost three years now.

I'm also a renter.

I appreciate the efforts forth here to update the rent control laws.

And I have also approached the city for issues with our units.

But the rent amount was incorrect.

And I was kind of surprised.

Went to my property manager, asked them, said, hey, have you updated the city on it?

Because you know, we have some issues.

And they said yes.

We've been back two or three times and let the rent control board know.

Say, hey, we live here, this person's left, and we pay more rent.

They haven't raised our rent.

A lot of my fellow renters in our apartment complex, which is a multi-story complex, are elderly and they are aware of rent control laws.

But you know, it's Shoreline Drive is a very nice area.

And probably for our market, we pay less than what's you know, probably other people pay.

Um so we like it.

And some people put up with these types of uh new ones, you know, nuisances or you know, maintenance things.

But one thing that we do not know is what problem the other units are facing, um, what maintenance issues haven't been addressed, and you know, also if their registry is correct.

Also, you know, sometimes we might see a notice saying, you know, you get a two percent raise on you know your door, but you know, generally as a community we all kind of keep to ourselves.

Um to me this is important because um as we had some problems with our landlord and our property managers, um we like to try to address them and figure out what's going on in our building.

Um I see these updates and the actually proposed changes to the utility um regulations uh would be very helpful for me as a renter, because then I'd be able to actually say, hey, I know this problem, person down the hall is having this problem, and you're raising our rent, but we also have this problem.

So I just wanted to come give my support, uh, appreciate the time to talk and if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer.

Thank you.

This is just um uh public speaking where you make the comments, but thank you for sharing, and of course, you have our rent uh program uh head right here if you want to have a side conversation.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Uh that was our only speaker.

No one online.

No.

Okay.

Um right.

Well then we will um close public comment.

And I would just like to comment on what I see as the importance of our longstanding rent program that has really been effective over the years.

And I mean, we just had a press release last week about a very significant recovery that your offices, um, Mr.

Chapin and Mr.

Shan, well, you're under the city attorney's office, uh, brought more than 20,000 in overcharged rent back to renters.

And in a in a area where rents are so high, where people are rent burdened, um, that sort of overcharging is significant.

And um while I think it's great to make sure that the landlord's um needs are all being met.

This the renters are part of the equation too.

And there are, you know, those of us who work in the housing um realm know about the three P's to prevent homelessness, and it is production.

We have to keep building more housing because supply and demand is is an issue.

Um and it's also preservation, we have to keep up our housing stock, but it's also prevention, and it's preventing people from slipping through the cracks.

And before we had the rent program, I mean there have always been, and there still are majority reputable landlords who want to do the right thing, but there's some bad apples.

And then there's also landlords who might not even have realized that they weren't abiding by the law by following the regulations until among other things that the rent program does is lots and lots of education for landlords for tenants.

There's workshops.

It's um it's very robust.

So I try to take a little more global perspective to just understand first of all, why we have this program.

It's not just to be a thorn in the side of one side or another.

Um is it perfect?

Do things happen?

And I mean, these are a lot of individual situations to keep track of, but stay in touch for anybody who thinks they're having issues.

I know this is a really um very dedicated um uh team, and they they want to be out there to just help people know their rights, know their responsibilities, and have a fair shake at the end of the day.

So I thank you for all the good work you are doing.

Um comments what this is.

That was empty, right?

Good state.

Um this is an ordinance um amending the Alameda Municipal Code as was um laid out for us in the presentation.

So Madam Clerk, we would um if this is approved, then does this come back to us for a second reading?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Um are we ready to take a vote?

Yeah.

Was that a move approval?

Councilmember Jensen moves approval and Vice Mayor Prior seconds.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No.

Okay.

And that um item passes four um affirmative votes.

There is one recusal, um, but it passes um with a majority.

And um thank you so much, Mr.

Roush, for joining us remotely.

It's always nice to see you and hear from you.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

Um we are going to move on now.

We have um okay, just fair warning.

We're gonna take a break at 9.15 because we will have been going uh two hours, and then after we finish the rest of the agenda, we're going back into closed session.

So, City Manager Communications, interim city manager Adam Pollitzer.

Anything for us?

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor.

No items for you this evening.

All right, thank you.

Madam Clerk, uh any further oral communication because it would have to be someone in the room.

And then we will move on to the council referral.

And um this is a matter placed on the agenda by a council member or council members, could be scheduled for future agenda items or just positive action may be taken on sufficiently noticed time-sensitive legislative matters.

Presentation limited to five minutes.

Council members may speak for up to three minutes.

So, Madam Clerk, could you introduce this item for us, please?

Consider directing staff to review precluding usage of city-owned properties as staging grounds and or basis of operation for purposes of conducting supercharged roundup of legal and undocumented immigrants and return to council with analysis and recommendation.

This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Desak.

Okay, and Councilmember Days, you have five minutes to present to us.

Well, thank you very much.

Um across Alameda County um have adopted uh similar policies that would preclude the use of their uh their city-owned um properties for purposes of particularly um uh the immigration um ice um uh to round up undocumented immigrants um and so um I think that we in here in the city of Alameda um should join um other cities um here in the East Bay in that regard.

I think it's especially important for a place like Alameda to do so because you know it was not so long ago that Alameda was referred to as uh Kansas by the Bay, um by which I think people were referring to Alameda being a conservative place.

I don't think we're conservative um anymore.

I think that's more um of something that happened in the uh prior to the mid-1990s.

I don't think we're ideologically conservative any longer.

Um we are uh more progressive, but we're also we still have um uh a uh strong um mainstream middle of the road bent.

Um and so I think it's because of that.

It's important for cities like Alameda that are middle of the road leaning progressive to take a stand.

I mean, we kind of um expect um uh cities in the Greater Bay Area such as San Jose or San Francisco or Berkeley to um lead in these situations.

But I think for the City of Alameda to join um in the mainstream of the other cities here in Alameda County in uh precluding the use of city-owned um properties for staging grounds for the type of um Roundup of of undocumented immigrants um that we've seen across the country.

I think it says a lot about you know where um where we want our country to go, more so than um when Berkeley or San Francisco says it.

I think it says a lot when it comes from Alameda.

So I've heard you know the concerns raised by residents of Alameda about this, and for that reason have brought this forward and would hope that um council directs our city um staff to come back and do the re review of how other cities are dealing with this and make some recommendations.

Do we have any public comment on this item?

There is none.

All right, we'll close public comment on the item.

So we will just go to the council for deliberation, three minutes each council members who'd like to start.

Vice Mayor Prayer, take it away.

I you know, I think that this sends a message to our residents that we stand with our immigrant community.

Um and it shows our values and that we are willing to take a stand against the atrocities we have seen in other cities in the United States.

Um I think you know people are really scared.

And so if they see us, you know, the civic leader saying, hey, this is not right.

We recognize the fear and the inhumanity, and and this is not normal.

And um, and we see you, we hear you, and and you know, we we will stand with you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Councilmember Bowler.

Thank you.

Um I do support um item 10A.

I I do think that this is an important um issue to look into.

I agree with Councilmember Daysog's assessment at the community.

I've met with community leaders.

I've formed the impression that people, through all the public input that we did receive tonight, which is not through the speakers, but through approximately, I don't know, more than 60 emails that we received.

Um people are certainly concerned, everyone's concerned about what's going on across the state of our country and also the um the issue of just urgency around that.

This this would apply for um city-owned properties, not federal lands, of which we have some in at Alameda Point, and certainly Coast Guard Island in Alameda.

But nonetheless, um it's one more layer in a in a concerted effort.

If the city of Alameda has a long-standing history, um not just of inclusivity and trying to really look out for all segments of the community and supporting and celebrating diversity, but also as a sanctuary city for some time trying to recognize um how important it is to uh to consider community safety and immigrant rights in the same sentence and to really think about um our our priorities tonight on as on agenda item 5C that was actually a topic that I introduced on in February at our strategic planning workshop, and then all the entire council supported it.

It's part of our strategic plan now to have an extended outreach and education for immigration rights in our in our city and our communications director has already been working on that.

There's trainings that have already been announced, there's more to come.

There's um important work being done at our city attorney's office that relates to this agenda item as well, different legal actions that have taken different ways to protect um our residents and also to take a stand on these um issues.

So I think it's a good referral, and I support it.

Thank you, Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you.

Um I'll support the referral as well, and I look forward to learning from staff in the future if it comes back when it comes back about the most effective ways to protect all residents and how the city of Alameda can safely respond if IC agents were ever to attempt to gather on city property.

Thank you, everyone.

Um I have a little different take on this.

Um I um do recognize that our residents, I mean, here in Alameda and across the country are angry, they feel hopeless, um, they are appalled in disbelief by what's happening in this country.

I am too.

But I also always want to speak plainly and the truth to our residents and not to be misleading.

And this sounds lovely, and I mean who wouldn't support a referral not to allow our city property to be used to round up immigrants.

But I also want to take a minute to look at what the reality of that would look like.

We have 77 police officers, period, full stop.

And even if the chief were able to pull them all out to confront ice in a public parking lot, um the odds would not be um great.

But the um the other thing, and and um Councilmember Bowler mentioned this.

We have lots of federal property in Alameda.

You will recall that back in October, without any notice to the city, um Coast Guard Island was used for staging for customs and border patrol.

We have 600 acres at Alameda Point that is federal property.

We have a Naval Reserve Center and we have a marine um center right behind it on um Clement Avenue.

So why the ICE would want to come to the City Hall parking lot is beyond me.

Um but it is symbolic and symbolism has a place.

I want us to stop and consider how much staff time we want to have spent on this and what we should take away from doing, because we did a priority setting workshop earlier today.

That's something we could later decide.

But I think did you thank you?

The city uh um clerk um helped me out by what what you can do in real time is if you um the the the um box on the left is if you see you think you see activity um ice activity, take this number down, take a picture of this screen.

It's on the city's website, call 510241401.

Um this is Alameda County Immigration and Legal and Education Partnership.

And this um Thursday um evening uh it's a remote training, but there will be this bystander training and conflict deescalation to to just tell you what you could do if you encounter a situation in real time.

This is something you can do.

So I just I again um we are appalled by what's happening.

If you really want to change the direction this country is going in, be sure to vote and vote in every election.

Thank you.

Okay.

So um council member uh Daesaw, do you want to move let me finish my sentence for starters?

Okay, Councilmember Desog, do you want to give us direction on what uh you would like to have happen next?

Yes, I would like to move uh approval of um of the item um directing staff um to uh review what other cities in Alameda County are doing with regard to um um precluding the use of city owned properties and to bring forward their analysis and recommendations.

Um but judging by um the um level of of concern uh I I I don't want this to um uh linger and so I would um direct staff to come back um by uh mid-June um with their recommendations and council member does that include what enforcement would look like if if that's part of their recommendations, yes.

Um you know I I would defer to our staff um to provide their recommendations or an and their analyses well I would think as a practical matter that we should include a look at what important enforcement looks like.

Sure.

Okay, that was sure.

All right.

Okay, and and I also need to just find out from staff, is that realistic?

Because mid-June is one thing, but then there's the noticing requirements and this time to prepare a staff report.

Could we possibly uh perhaps rephrase it to say as soon as practical or what how would um well I don't want this to linger forever because we do have our August recess.

Um so um and honestly, I was kind of hoping to get it done before July 4th, given that it's our 250th birthday, and it's a great time to you know celebrate, you know, all uh the fact that all are equal um before the law and that everyone should be um subject to due process under the law.

But the Constitution is still a thing.

Um so could you uh do that direction in such a way that as soon as is practical and I I I think there's a quite a delta between lingering forever, but that mid-June, you have to count backwards a bit on the timing.

That's true.

Um yeah, I I can go with pra as soon as practical.

So that's fine.

All right.

Do you need that uh motion restated or Madam Clerk?

You is she's her usual.

I got the two amendments that they councilmember Daesog agreed to.

All right.

So it's been moved by Councilmember Deslag who will second.

Councilmember Bowler will second.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay, thank you.

That uh motion passes unanimously.

Um and so this is what we're going to do.

Um we have council communications next, but I'm gonna move that till after we come back from the closed session.

But right now, council, I'm giving us 10 minutes break.

So it's um, well, it's actually 912.

I'll round that up.

Please be back in 391 at 925.

Um the council, Mr.

Chen, don't go far in case we need to consult with you.

Or but you could, I mean, we can consult remotely with you.

Okay.

And of course, I'm happy to be here.

Okay.

We're happy to do a removal.

But it's just it's just the council back in three nine three ninety-one, right?

At um nine twenty-five.

Okay, we're on break.

Uh so this meeting is just recessed.

Recessed.

Thank you.

Eight years, and she's stolen.

You're always ready in the document.

All right.

Okay.

All right.

Well, hello again, everyone.

We are back from closed session.

And I would like to announce the um uh the action taken on item four A, which is public employee appointment hiring pursuant to government code section five four nine five seven title description position to be filled city manager by a vote of four affirmative votes and one abstention, the council provided direction and the four affirmative votes came from uh myself, Mayor Marilyn Asie Ashkamp, Vice Mayor Michelle Pryor, Councilmember Tracy Jensen, and Councilmember Greg Bowler, and with Councilmember Tony Daysog exp abstaining.

All right.

Um I'm going to e exercise executive privilege and you can do twice as many council communications next time because I am going to adjourn this city council meeting.

Um thank you for the public who stayed and listened.

Travel safely going home.

Thank you.

Good night.