Okay, everyone, are we ready?

We've got a quorum and I am going to call this meeting to order.

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the city council meeting.

This is the City of Alameda City Council meeting.

And we are about to go into closed session, but I'm going to ask our city clerk, Lara Weissinger to please call the role first.

Council members bowler.

Prior.

Here.

Mayor Azyashka.

I'm here.

And hopefully council members Daysog and Jensen will be here.

Yeah, we've got two more on the way, I'm sure.

Right.

And so um next we go to the consent calendar.

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

Um Madam Clerk, would you introduce the um consent calendar item?

Yes, this item is designating negotiators for um building 11 at uh 1190 West Tower Avenue, which is related to item uh four C the closed session.

All right.

So um there is um, so that's the consent calendar, and we can go ahead and vote on the consent calendar, just the um the negotiators for um for that item.

So do I have a motion and a second?

Oh, sorry.

Moved by the vice mayor, seconded by council member bowler, all those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that motion passes with three um approved and two absent.

And we're gonna go to public comment on the closed session item next.

And I'm just gonna read the um the rules of conduct for um for conducting um public comment, which is to say that um you're all welcome.

This is a business meeting.

We're here to conduct the business of the city of Alameda.

It is not a sporting event, it is not theater.

So what we do is we listen quietly and respectfully while other people speak, and we do not clap, cheer, boo, hiss, do the wave.

We don't do any of that.

This is a business meeting, but we do listen respectfully, and when it's our turn to speak, we get up, we go to the microphone, make it, I always say make it yours, whatever level is um parallel to your mouth and we can hear you.

When the timer goes off, please stop speaking because everybody gets the same amount of speaker time, which the clerk will tell you.

You're welcome to hold up signs.

That's your first amendment, right?

We just ask that you not hold them up over your head unless you're in the last row, so you don't block anyone else's view.

It is that simple.

And the reason that I laid down the ground rules at the beginning of a meeting is that for some people public speaking is one of the most stressful things they can do.

And I never want someone to not get up and speak because somebody booed or jeered at the previous speaker and they're afraid that will happen to them.

This is a safe space.

This is like your town hall, and I want everybody to have that same um opportunity.

And also because and literally today we often have young people in the audience and we want to set that good civic example for them.

You can certainly look around the greater community, state, nation, what have you, and see less than civil examples of governance.

That's not how we do it in Alameda.

So we just ask everybody to please um respect those rules, and we will have a nice orderly meeting and hear from everyone.

So with that, um, Madam Clerk, do we have public comment on closed session items?

We do.

Um we have in-person and remote.

Um, they will we have over the limit, so they'll each get two minutes.

Um, and we will I'll call the first three so the other two can be ready to go.

Uh Tamara, Sabelle, Cameron Warren, and Stephanie Warren with.

So when you hear your name and those who are in person, yes.

So come on up and just keep it moving so we can get out.

So are you um one of the first speakers?

Are we the first speaker?

So coming up when you hear your name, and like I said, make that microphone yours and welcome.

Okay.

Hi.

Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Tamara Sabella.

I am the director of community engagement at Kareka Park.

I was raised by my parents.

My father is a pilot, and I grew up in a household where he told me that flying planes was for the elite, and not everybody could afford and have access to experiencing the world.

When I took this job at Kareca Park, I was very excited to do the work that my father had raised me to do.

Avany Numesh had managed Greenway Golf, and I was their first hire five years ago, two days ago.

I've been here five years, and their vision was to make the golf course an inclusive, accessible space, open space for all, green space for all.

Public golf course should be for all, not a small percentage of the population.

I have been so deeply honored and proud to do this work, and I'm so grateful for Avenue Numesh to have seen that and hired me to do that work specifically.

And I don't understand why so much time and resources have to go to a legal battle with the city when those time and resources could enhance even more what we're doing.

If you look at our community and if you look at our impact report for the last five years, please, I ask you, go look at our impact report, come to the golf course, see what we have built in five years with the pressure of a legal battle, and imagine what we could do without it.

I'm asking you to listen and please pay attention.

Alameda showed up today.

They will show up again and again.

They are speaking to what Alameda wants.

I hope you hear them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Cameron Warren, then Stephanie Warren, then Iris Mitchell.

Okay, coming up.

Okay.

Hello, my name is Cameron Warren, and I'm a current eighth grader at Lincoln Middle School, and I'm also employed by Greenway Golf as a member of the Beyond the Bag Caddy program.

I've been playing golf for five years, and I started by attending a Greenway Golf program at Carica Park called Sundays on the Green.

I would never have taken up the game if I hadn't gone to the clinic, and I certainly would not have progressed to a plus two handicap or become so close to so many of the Greenway Golf employees.

What makes Greenway Golf so special isn't just the quality of the courses, it's the opportunities they create for young people like me.

Sundays on the Green wasn't just about learning how to swing a golf club.

It was about building confidence, learning discipline, and finding a place where I felt supported and encouraged to improve.

Through Greenway's programs, I've learned lessons that go far beyond golf.

I've learned patience when things don't go my way, responsibility through my job, and the importance of hard work and consistency.

These are lessons that I carry with me, not only on the course, but also in school and life.

Koreca Park is more than just a golf course, it's a place where people from all backgrounds can come together, whether they're beginners picking up a club for the first time, or experienced players working on improving their game.

It creates a sense of community that is rare and incredibly valuable.

As someone who has personally benefited from these programs, I can say that Greenway Golf is making a really positive difference.

Greenway Golf opens doors for young people, provides access to a sport that might otherwise feel out of reach and creates a positive environment where everyone has the chance to grow.

I'm incredibly grateful for everything that Greenway Golf and Koreca Park have given me, and hope that there are that many more people will have the opportunity to experience what I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Stephanie Warren, then Iris Mitchell, then Robin Lynn Wilson.

Okay, and Iris Mitchell will be ready to go right after that.

Okay.

Good morning or afternoon, evening.

Hello.

Hello.

Council members, Mayor Ashcraft, community members, honored guests, thank you for letting us speak about Greenway Golf, the managing board for Kreeka Park.

My name is Stephanie Warren, and all three of my children, and 22 of my Girl Scout uh troop members have benefited greatly from the inclusive and welcoming programs offered at Kareka by Greenway Golf.

Koreek has become my son's second home as he's participated in Sundays on the Green, Middle School Golf League, Four Vets Tournament, Drive for Change, Summer on the Green, and currently their inaugural caddy program, all provided by Greenway Golf.

My daughters were introduced to golf because of the free youth clinics offered at Krika through Greenway Golf.

My youngest even had access to left-handed pink child-sized golf clubs.

That's Koreca, inclusive, accessible, welcoming, accommodating, community focused.

Koreca consistently seeks program offerings with an environmental and educational lens.

As a teacher in AUSD, this is super deep.

They offer programs such as our school's auction event for free to hold the event for free, hosting our Girls Scout meetings in a lounge space for free, supporting our Girl Scout entrepreneurs during their cookie selling season in a safe and um appropriate environment.

They offered tours of the renovated fire tour fire tower and pollinator garden and bird watching on the course.

At my daughter's first golf clinic, the pollinator posse brought seed pod balls for the children to hit into the rough on the MIF.

Another event, spectators were welcome to catch a glimpse of the Eagles on course and learn about their nesting habits, and yet another hosted yoga and healthy awareness to community members.

Thank you for letting me share about community golf.

Thank you so much.

Your time is up.

Our next speaker, Iris Mitchell, then Robin Lynn Wilson, then John Ryson Weber.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Iris Mitchell.

As a resident of Alameda for the last 16 years, I see Koreca Park as a vital community asset in Alameda because of how it operates.

It is a highly quality public and sustainable green space accessible to us all.

As a parent, Koreca has been an important component of raising our children.

Whether we are participating in golf camp offered during summer months, dropping the kids off for some golf fun while we run errands or having breakfast or lunch on the course on a slow motion, slow motion Sunday.

It has become a place we enjoy as a family.

As a community, sorry, as a community, we enjoy the space using uh using the place as we can meet up and enjoy each other's company, have a picnic, meet up with friends from school or neighbor or the neighborhood, or enjoy some budget uh some burgers and french fries at the golf course.

Koreca is a place we can depend on that is safe and that we can enjoy with familiar and unfamiliar uh faces.

I am personally not a golf player or an athlete, as you can see.

Um, but Coreika has come to mean much more to me than just a place to play golf.

It also functions as a community hub for wellness, offering affordable recreation opportunities, youth programs, and a wide array of events to uplift and create opportunity for Alameda residents and visitors of surrounding counties.

It also has the feeling of a retreat that is close to home, where everyone is welcomed, which is very important.

It is a very special place.

Families, whether they enjoy golf or not, have strong ties to this golf course.

Enjoying the space and the benefits it provides to us all.

Please, keep this in mind.

Thank you so much.

Your time is up.

Our next speaker, Robin Lynn Wilson, then John Risenweber, then Karish Belutha Call.

Welcome.

Welcome, welcome.

It's I'm gonna be honest with you.

I didn't think I was gonna get so emotional being back in this room.

I worked in this community for 26 years, and many of you know of uniting Alameda for change.

Um, and I didn't realize that I worked with the kids at APC.

And I didn't realize that even I was welcome at the golf course.

I never got that message.

So when I got a call from Greenway to bring the kids up there, I'm thinking, well, what are you talking about?

These kids have been on housed.

These kids are never had a good life.

And I'm gonna tell you, you know, um the first time they they picked them up in the shuttle, and I knew these kids and the homes they came from.

And when they got off that shuttle, and this staff, every single time, every single year, welcomed these children that other folks don't see.

First time we were invited to go there, and the kids' eyes, the kids have looked at the green, just remind me.

What is all this green?

It was amazing.

Since then, it's changed a lot of their lives over the years.

They've learned more than just golf, they learn how to work with groups, they learn how to believe in themselves, they know how to be a good citizen in our community.

Things that I've worked with some of you trying to make that happen in the city for years, and it breaks, I'm gonna be honest with you.

I didn't expect me to have this emotion, but it breaks my heart because some on the count I I've introduced to those families to welcome on that side, telling them that we're welcome, it's gonna go both ways.

And to be here to be here tonight for this, they are doing what we are what most of the campaigns said what you want to happen, and so someone had dedicated free.

My services to have to be here to defend that, it saddens me, to be honest with you.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, uh, John Ryzen Weber, then Chris Veluther Call, and then Manny Vulutha Call.

Welcome.

Good afternoon, city officials.

My name is John Risenweber.

I'm a combat wounded Vietnam vet.

I currently am on the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Commission.

I'm a national ambassador for BGA Hope, and I've started, I'm a founder of the Bay Area Veterans Suicide Prevention Network.

And more importantly, seven years ago, I almost became a statistic of suicide.

Um three long years of counseling therapy through the VA, PGA hope, and playing golf has gotten my life turned back around.

Um, I've healed physically, mentally, socially, and emotionally, and a lot of that healing has occurred at Karica Park.

For the last four years, I've become extremely aware of all of the programs that they have.

I'm acquainted with Korea Park.

I've developed my golf game.

I've learned that giving back is what actually heals, and I've also learned to socialize.

I've made some of the best friends of my life there, who I never would have met without being at Carica Park.

Karica Park is so much more than a golf course, so much more.

It practices what it teaches, and that is so important, so very important.

And what it teaches is respect, art, inclusion, social awareness, responsibility, ecology, wellness, all of those traits that we need to learn and re-thank you so much.

Our next speaker, Chris Velutha Call, then Manny Velutha Call, and then we have a remote.

Welcome.

Uh good evening, Mayor and City Council.

Uh, my name is Chris, and I'm a sophomore in high school.

Um, here today because Karika Park is a special place for me and for a lot of other kids in my age, and I'm worried that the city's actions against Greenway and golf is gonna hurt our growth, not as just golfers, but as leaders in our community.

Greenway has built one of the best public courses in the county in the country between new between the newly renovated short course, the South Course, and the Incredible North Course.

They've created something unmatched in the entire Bay Area, and to me, Korea Park is easily the best part of the Bay Area, but Greenway is about more than just golf.

They've made an open space for everyone, veterans, artists, bird watchers, and students like me.

They champion the causes that I care about.

When I wanted to start and lead youth programs, Greenway gave me the space that I needed to do so.

And I guarantee that no other program, brand or anything can do what they're doing and create the impact that they made.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Welcome.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Mani Volutaco.

I'm here today because the gap between these council's accusations against Greenway and the actual reality at Koreca Park has become impossible to ignore, and it is time for a serious reality check.

For years, this body has leaned into a narrative of contract breach and mismanagement, but the facts on the ground tell a completely different story.

Despite every legal hurdle the city has thrown Greenway's way, they have always delivered.

The North Course isn't a theoretical project anymore.

It's a world class Robert Trent Jones masterpiece that is open right now.

It was built with a private capital, zero taxpayer risk, and an obsessive focus on detail.

You can call it a breach, but the golf world calls it the best municipal renovation in the country.

To keep pushing a narrative of failure when the success is literally across the street is a definition of bad faith.

We have to ask what is the actual motivation?

Is it personal rendetta?

Is it doing someone else's bidding?

Or is the goal?

If the goal was a great golf course, you already have it.

If the goal was a great community space, you already have it.

Instead of celebrating a partner that turned a struggling asset into a crown jewel, this council has used its position as a bully pulpit to harass a tenant.

You're leaning into old lies to keep new lies going, and it's a massive waste of city resources.

I challenge every one of you to actually go to the course.

Don't just look at a legal brief or hide behind privileged sessions.

Walk the North Coast, talk to the community members, and if you do that, you will realize that Greenway is exactly the kind of thing.

Thank you so much.

Our next speaker is remote, and it's uh Caroline Brossard.

Welcome.

Thank you so much.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Awesome.

Good evening, Council members.

My name is Caroline Bursard.

I am an Alameda resident, and I serve this community in my roles as co-founder and leader of the Alameda Mosaic Educational Advisory Committee, as chairperson for the North Region Selpa Community Advisory Committee, and as a fitness leader with No Excuses Alameda.

I'm here to speak in strong support of Greenway Golf and the continued investment in Koreca Park as an inclusive community centered space.

In just five years, Greenway Golf has created over 124,000 hours of shared community use, offering free accessible programming for youth, families, schools, and local organizations.

In 2025 alone, the space was activated 249 days out of the year.

That's not an occasional use.

That's a consistent, reliable public resource serving Alameda residents nearly every day.

What's especially meaningful is who these programs reach.

Over 90% of youth participants come from underserved communities, and more than 2,000 individuals and 80 organizations are served annually, many of whom had never accessed Koreca Park before.

This is what equitable use of public space looks like in practice.

Greenway Golf isn't just about golf, it's about reimagining what public land can be, hosting cultural events, educational programs, community gatherings, and creating space where people feel they belong.

They've also provided over 79,000 hours of free outdoor recreation, 10,0800 meals, and transportation support to remove the barriers to participation.

Imagine what Greenway could accomplish if the burden of this ongoing litigation was lifted.

On a personal note, my Afro Latino Nero Distinct Sun participated in Greenway's summer on the green program at Corico Park for two summers.

I met you time as our next speaker.

And that was our last speaker.

Okay, with that, we will close public comment.

And we thank all of you for being such well behaved, civil and formative speakers.

Thank you.

You were great.

All right.

So that was the extent of our um public comment on the closed session.

So now we're going to adjourn into closed session.

And we're doing it in this order.

So for staff who is here, um, we're starting with four C.

Um actually, Madam Clerk, why don't you go ahead and introduce all of the closed session items and then you can help tell what comes up first?

All right.

Okay.

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

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

The case name is uh National Prescription Opiate Litigation Court is United State District Court Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division case numbers one one seven MD two eight oh four DAP for C is conferences through a property negotiators pursuant to government code section five four nine seven five six point eight property is eleven ninety West Tower Avenue, Building Eleven at Alameda Point, the city negotiators of the interim city manager, base for use and economic development director, base for use manager, uh Francisco Torres of Jones Lang and LaSalle and Assistant City Attorney.

The negotiating parties are the City of Alameda and Poseidon Aerospace and our negotiation or price in terms of lease four D is conference with legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to government code section five four nine five six nine A.

The case name is the City of Alameda versus Greenway Golf.

The court is Alameda County Superior Court.

The case number is two two C V 011964.

And the order that uh sta uh council will hear the items is going to be I wrote it here.

Four C first, then for B, then for D, then for A.

So, first step staff, whoever is involved with um for C, the uh 1190 West Tower Avenue, come on back to the members of the public.

We have every intention of being before you at seven o'clock this same meeting.

Thank you.

Um, Balcony.

The balcony is always ready.

We've got a long agenda ahead of us.

So, um, and I will say before we start that um nobody told me until this evening that the presentation on the budget is 45 minutes long, so um I'm gonna be looking for some speed talking, but anyway.

Um we are going to, I don't know.

Okay, we are calling the meeting to order.

I've got a full quorum.

So um welcome everyone.

This is the city council meeting for the city of Alameda.

We have just returned from closed session, and I'm going to ask the city clerk Laura Weisinger to please announce any um actions that were taken in city uh in closed session.

Okay, regarding uh 4A, which was city manager hiring uh staff of righteous information information regarding 4B, which was opiate litigation, um, staffer righted information and council provided direction by unanimously by five eyes regarding for C, which was real property negotiations for building eleven staff of righteous information and council provide unanimously provide a direction by five eyes, regarding for D, which was greenway litigation, uh staffer righted information with no vote taken.

All right, thank you for that, madam clerk.

So with that, um we will adjourn the special city council meeting, which was the closed session, and we will go into the um special joint meeting of the city council and successor agency to the community improvement commission, which was also known as the redevelopment agency, but first we will start with the pledge of allegiance.

Council member buller and I ask you to lead the pledge.

To the republic, which stands one nation.

Thank you, council member boulder, madam clerk.

May we have the roll call, please.

Uh Councilmember Spuller, Dayson, Jensen, prior here, Mayor Ezy Ashcraft.

I'm here five present.

All right, thank you.

Um we go next to the consent calendar, and this is just for the special um agency of the successor agency to the community improvement commission.

And um we have one uh consent calendar items, and that is the um meeting minutes from our previous um meeting of this body.

Any comments on that item, madam clerk?

Uh no, they're just here for your approval.

You already approved them on the prior city council meeting, but the SACIC asked also.

Okay, um, yes.

So um, do we have a motion and a second to approve those minutes to ation to approve?

Motion um by council member bowler, seconded by vice mayor prior.

All those in favor signify by stating aye, aye.

All right, that motion passes.

And then we move on to um agenda items.

The two agenda items, madam clerk.

Would you please introduce the first one?

Uh recommendation to accept the fiscal year 24-25 audited financial statements and compliance reports.

All right.

And um, do we have a speaker on this item?

We do, our city auditor is here tonight.

I've got what I was thinking.

Come on up.

Welcome.

Good evening.

I'm very happy to announce that we received another no finding audit.

And would you like to introduce yourself for the public who might not know you?

Sure.

Kevin Kearney, I'm the city auditor.

Thank you.

And uh so I'll get back at it.

Um findings, which is fantastic.

That helps everybody in the city, helps with our ability to uh obtain money and to carry on with anything that has to do with uh anything that's fiscal in nature.

So I'm I'm very excited about that and very proud of everybody, all the departments, but in particularly the the finance department.

Uh the finance department, once again has been able to, you know, put pull everything together, and also we got another uh government finance officers association award, but this time we uh did something that's called the triple crown, which is fantastic.

We've been able to get this award well every year since I've been here, which has been forever except for one during COVID.

But this year we got we got two other awards.

We got an award for but the budget and and for our our AFR, but we got another one that's called the Popular Annual Financial Report.

And I would I would recommend this is this is your exhibit number two, and this is a kind of a very condensed version that kind of hits the highlights, and I think it allows somebody that's not familiar with financial statements to to get a real good read on what's going on in the city financially.

And these are these hard copies are available at the library and the in the finance department, but they're also available online, and I would highly recommend this to uh to to everybody really.

And this is the second year that we've had this, and I wanted to thank personally Ross McCarthy, who's responsible under his direction with this particular document.

And I think it's a very it's a big it's a big step forward.

And also regarding Ross, this is his first year really in the big chair, and I wanted to congratulate him and his staff for doing an excellent job.

And I really I really do appreciate that.

Because we don't applaud it.

Well, I don't care.

I'm applauding anyone, so that's the way we go.

Okay, that's all right.

So anyway, um other than that, let me see what else that that can we can we hit on here.

No findings.

One of I know we're we're in a we're in a budget cycle right now in the finance department, like most of the departments is you know, they're a bit understaffed, but they are very much understaffed.

And I'm hoping that uh as you guys are shaking the pillows to find some money, maybe we can get another uh budget analyst as we only have one, and uh the the amount of work that the finance department does and the number of long hours, it's it's significant.

So I'm hoping that uh maybe we can we can come up with something for them to keep them doing the fine job that they're doing.

So other than that, I think I've hit all the high points.

The main thing being a clean report, which is is significant for the city because there's many cities out there that certainly don't get that, and that's you know that's that sends you on a death spiral, and and I I applaud everybody for working hard, and I I applaud you, you know, under your direction to uh keep the ship on the in the right course.

I appreciate that more as a citizen than then probably most.

So thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Kearney, and for all your good work too.

And you know, um Mr.

Kearney was referencing that exhibit too, and I would just call your attention.

I love graphics and I love lots of photos.

Um, but on page 10, there's um a really great graphic how your property taxes are divided or distributed, and it's a dollar bill, and it's just sliced into portions and with a little annotation about where each of them goes.

So that's the kind of um the kind of uh um measures that I can under or information I can understand.

So um uh Madam Assistant Clerk, do we have any public comment on this item?

We do not all right.

So um with that, we will um I um would just love it.

Um we'll wait for a minute to everybody to sit down and take their seats so we can continue with the meeting.

That's all right, that's okay.

Um, okay.

So um we are moving on then to item three B.

We comment on that item.

Oh, I'm sorry, I just asked if there were any comments.

Yeah, there are comments.

I did I didn't I didn't hear you ask, but I'll take your word for it.

I mean, I wanted to make a comment on the audit and on the clean audit findings, actually, because I've um been a member of the school district, Almeida Unified during some challenging times, as well as the Board of Alameda Health System, and this is really something that we should celebrate.

I appreciate City Auditor Kearney coming up and and pointing that out because we need to celebrate that in the city of Alameda that we have a clean audit, we don't have any findings, and in fact, it's an audit that's been recognized by other agencies and by the um the agencies that certify these these audits.

And so I want to thank Director McCarthy for the hard work of the department.

And just point this out to the city that we are in good financial shape.

We have good leadership, we have good financial controls, and Alameda is stable.

So just keep that in mind, and we're gonna continue to provide the programs and services that this community deserves.

All right, so uh Mayor Ezie Ashcraft stepped out for a moment.

So I'm gonna run the meeting for two seconds until she gets back.

Um are there any other speakers?

No.

All right.

We'll have the council.

That's what I was trying to have to do.

Council member, but let me make it even clearer.

Any other counsel comments?

Council Member.

I do want to take a moment to uh extend a special thanks um to uh Kevin Kearney, our city, our elected city auditor, um, who has served in this position for so many years and appreciate his service and his um stewardship in making sure that um the good ship financial uh Alameda is sailing in the right correct direction.

So I appreciate all that work that you have done, not just now, but for over the decades.

Thank you, Councilmember Daysog.

Um, and so any other council comments, seeing none, um, before we move on to our um motion, I think though.

Oh, I'm sorry, yes, too.

Yeah, we need a motion in a second to accept the fiscal year 2024-25 audit financial statements and compliance reports.

Councilmember Jensen, you want to make that motion?

Sure.

Second.

All right.

On my left motion by Councilmember Jensen, seconded by Vice Mayor Pryor.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that measure um uh motion passes.

And you know, before we go on to our budget workshop and we'll get some comments, I'm just gonna do my general rules for um conducting a council meeting so we get it out of the way for the rest of the meeting.

So I like to remind people that this is um a business meeting.

We are here to do the business of the people, the city of Alameda.

Um, it is not theater, it's not a sporting event, so we don't applaud, we don't boo, cheer, jeer, do the wave.

And the reason I say this almost every time when we have lots of speakers, including out in the hall, is um public speaking has been found to be the most stressful thing for some people.

And I don't ever want someone to not get up and speak because they just freeze up or they're afraid that somebody might laugh at them or boo or make some rude comment.

We don't do that here.

We just listen respectfully to the speakers.

We don't have to agree with everyone that that's life, but we are civil in these four walls.

And um, so I want this to be a comfortable place to speak, and I also want to set a good example for young people who might be in the room because we just need good examples of polite civic engagement.

And um, so what we ask is that you come on up to the podium if you're a speaker, that you speak during your allotted time and sit down when um we say that your time is up.

If you have signs, that's fine, hold them up, just not over your head unless you're in their last row because you don't want to block anyone else's um views.

And that's just part of treating people the way you would like to be treated.

And finally, um I read this magic language, and then hopefully I never have to use it.

California Penal Code section 403 states it is a criminal offense for any person to without authority of law willfully disturb or break up any assembly or meeting that is not unlawful in its character, other than an assembly or meeting referred to in Penal Code Section 302 or elections code 18340.

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

So, there I've read the magic language and now we can get on with the meeting.

So Madam Clerk, would you introduce item three B?

And um just have to see if there's any uh instructions you gave me on this one.

No.

This is the one that's the long presentation.

Yes.

So yeah.

You want me to read the title first, or you want to say your part?

Yeah, um no, this is, you know, sometimes oftentimes we do a standalone budget workshop because, but we didn't this time for a variety of reasons, but we do have a really full um agenda, but everyone has their time, but we do ask you to be as efficient in your speaking as possible.

Um so um, yes, that is the um uh what else am I supposed to say?

I think it's just if you want to waive the speaking the presentation time to take a vote for that, or if you want to have a specific time.

So um council, normally by council rules, a presentation has um 10 minutes.

Um, this one apparently needs 45.

So I do need a motion to second and four affirmative votes to approve the 45 minutes.

And that's it's divvied up among all the um the departments and um you know it it is what it is.

So what do we think?

Move abstention to 45 minutes.

Okay, I have a motion by council member Jensen seconded by Councilmember Bowler.

Okay, any further discussion.

Okay, seeing none, um, let's have a roll.

Well, we don't need a roll call vote.

All those in favor, signify by stating aye.

I think okay, 45 efficient minutes it is.

Okay, madam cook.

Will you introduce that item?

And in order to keep things moving, as the clerk is introducing the item.

Whoever is first up, Mr.

McCarthy, whomever it is, please be up and ready to go.

We're gonna move things along.

Okay, okay.

So this is a budget workshop for fiscal year 2627 proposed mid-cycle budget update to provide direction on funding changes for the June 2nd, 2026 mid-cycle budget adoption.

And I believe um council member bowler also needs to.

Oh yes, go ahead.

Excuse me.

So, control program portion.

I have an investment in rental property units in Alameda, and I would just ask maybe and move to bifurcate the city attorney's portion that deals with that from the rest because I have to be out of the room during that portion.

That's like when we do our um suggestions or whatever, I mean discussion.

Um Mr.

City Attorney.

So, madam mayor.

One suggestion is that the council just conducts a uh budget study session as is without the city attorney's portion, and that the council will conclude that and recall the item, and then we will only present the city attorney item.

Um, and then council member bowler will exit the dais so that um the recusal be complete.

I've got that.

Okay, and so do we need to vote on that?

Uh the bifurcation, yes, but I would suggest that council member bowler do not vote on the bifurcation.

Okay.

All right.

So we're gonna do a second measure, second motion to bifurcate the city attorney's budget item because it includes the rent program.

And before we do that, presumably council member bowler steps out.

So I need a motion and a second not to include council member bowler and a vote not to include council member bowler who would like to do it.

It's moved by um by vice mayor prior seconded by council member Des Hog?

Sure, second.

Okay, all those in favor signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that passes with four to nothing with Councilmember Bowler abstaining.

Right.

Okay, anything else from council before we start?

No, okay.

Was that on my notes, Madam Claire?

No, sorry.

I didn't get that.

Okay, um, all right.

So I see um the the um finance um gurus uh in the wings.

Hello, welcome and um please introduce yourself.

Good evening, madam Mayor, city council.

My name is Ekat Burton.

I am our budget manager, and along with our finance director, Ross McCarthy, I will be giving you uh the budget overview before we dive into department requests.

Welcome.

So just want to ground everyone first in the council's strategic priorities.

There are five, and these of course went into the development of the fiscal year 26-27 mid-cycle process.

The last one about practicing fiscally responsible governance is something that we implemented quite literally after your body passed the budget policy in November 2025 with how we developed our mid-cycle budget.

So one part of the budget policy is to make sure that during mid-year and mid-cycle budget processes, that we do not make changes that are very significant in order to honor the biennial budget process.

So with that in mind, we instructed our staff when they submitted their department requests the following instructions.

One, that they submit minimal or only necessary workforce requests.

And then two, for any operations and maintenance budget requests that those be for minor and unforeseen issues.

So when we zoom out and look at where we are after balancing this budget, I want to emphasize first that the city continues to remain in a stable but also tight financial position.

That is due to our reliable reliable property tax revenues, our healthy reserves, and a modest resident residual fund balance.

Was to reinstate four police officers utilizing vacancy savings.

Add six additional uh full-time employees and only do necessary OM requests so that we can preserve as much of much as possible the residual fund balance because economic uncertainty is unfortunately still rather high.

As a result of these collaborative and collective efforts, when we published the staff report, we told you all in the staff report we had an anticipated ending residual fund balance of 9.69 million.

Now things have changed greatly since that staff report was published, including us learning recently this week about the Aquatic Center having its construction bid costs increased by five million.

So Ross right now is going to show you what we're seeing in terms of our revenues so you can get more context.

Thanks, Ekat.

Good evening, Mayor Council members.

I'm Ross McCarthy, Finance Director.

I've been finance director now for over a year.

Pretty exciting.

So I'd like to provide a high-level overview of our revenue assumptions for the current budget.

The city works with external tax consultants to develop projections for expected revenues throughout the year for this mid-cycle update.

These assumptions are still tracking.

So what you're seeing still reflects the same baseline assumptions adopted in the biennial last year.

Property tax on the left here continues to be our most stable revenue source with projected annual growth of uh three to four percent.

Uh this consistency does provide a strong foundation for ongoing city services.

Sales tax, however, on the right has softened since the uh COVID period, and we do not expect a full recovery in the near term.

This is due in part to the loss of our largest sales tax generator in fiscal year 25, as well as broader economic factors such as inflation tariffs and uh and changing consumer behaviors.

I did want to also briefly touch on our transfer tax, the one percent check uh one percent tax on sales of real property.

Um this historically has been our most volatile revenue source.

Um and fluctuates significantly with the real estate market.

While we've seen lower collections over the past three years compared to the pre-COVID and COVID eras, it is important to note that property transactions are still occurring.

And fundamentally, we continue to believe that there's a strong underlying demand to live and work in Alameda.

So while this revenue source is unpredictable from year to year, the long-term outlook for the local market remains uh remains positive.

There is a ballot measure coming in November, um, possibly coming in November that could reduce our ability to recover this transfer tax, but we will continue to keep you posted on that.

When we look at these overall revenue trends alongside our expenditure trends, we're beginning to see a concerting pattern emerge.

Specifically, expenditures are growing at a faster rate than revenues.

This creates what we refer to as a structural deficit, meaning that the gap between what we consistently bring in and what we consistently spend is widening over time.

We can fill this gap with one-time funding like grant funding or our fund balance, but ultimately we do need to address this structural deficit in the next biannual budget.

Speaking of our next biannual budget, I just wanted to put this out in front of you before we start our department requests.

We are already anticipating several ongoing costs that will need to be addressed as part of the ongoing budget for next biannual.

Some of these costs are essentially unavoidable.

For example, uh increased in insurance costs or unfunded pension liability.

We also have what we call a rate holiday, which is basically a reduction reduced rate for the city for the library fund and the IT service fund.

Um other costs such as funding dignity village operations will ultimately be a policy decisions by you, like by our city council.

These will involve weighing priorities and making trade-offs with our limited resources.

Taken together, these facts reinforce the need for early planning and thoughtful decision making as we prepare for our next biennial.

With this in mind, we will now transition to our individual department requests.

First up is Director Thorne Lyman with the base reuse and economic development.

Thank you.

And while Ms.

Thorn Lyman is coming up, I will note that actually that um ballot measure you mentioned is it did qualify for the ballot.

It will be on the November ballot, and that could be a threat to our revenues.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Director Ross already introduced me, so I'm just gonna move on.

Um, so this this past year has been a big year for us moving forward with lease renewals, new leases, and addressing ongoing maintenance needs.

Um, one of our big wins this year was securing clearance to have shade structures along Spirits Alley near Monarch Street.

Um, so we're very excited to implement that after this least turn nesting season.

We concluded the Rise Up Alameda guaranteed basic income program, and we'll be coming back to council in a few months with the final report.

Um, and we continue to support small businesses and nonprofits with technical assistance and grants in support of our economic vitality.

Um, this coming year, we will be looking to continue addressing our deferred maintenance on our housing, our commercial buildings, and our peers.

Um, we are not asking for any budget for that.

We have existing uh CIP allocations.

We also the market has really ticked up in terms of new commercial leases.

So we do expect to be bringing some major leases and sales to council.

And you're familiar with a lot of the programs on here for so for the sake of time, I want to highlight the one that you haven't heard about yet, which is that we will be launching a new economic development strategic plan this coming year.

Um so we'll be starting the baseline data analysis for that at the beginning of the fiscal year.

We have no requests this uh for this year.

We the council did grant a significant increase in our property management budget in the mid-year budget adjustment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um next up.

Okay, Clara Weisiger, city clerk.

And um, for my overview, the biggest thing that the clerk's office had in a 12-month period, we had all staff turnover except for myself.

So everybody uh was having to learn new things, and that was a lot of work and a lot of training and a lot of um, you know, just adjustments.

So we survived that, and um, you know, survived it pretty well, I think.

And then uh we also during that time period were able to upgrade some of the equipment in the cable studio.

Um, and we most recently passed a U.S.

Department of State recertification for our passport services.

So they recertify us like every so often, and so we're still doing well with that and passing with flying colors.

So that's good business.

We're keeping going.

Um, for the upcoming challenges, uh, general municipal election will be held this November.

There's obviously a lot of work with that with candidates, all of the measures.

Um, so we will be spending a significant amount of time preparing and and going through all of that.

Um, we have new Brown Act provisions taking effect July 1st.

So, uh a report will be coming to you guys very soon about uh service interrupt or technical interruptions during the meeting.

So, so more on that to come very shortly.

Um, one thing that we learned in looking at the cable studio is that we'd have to really do significant lighting overhaul to really improve the quality of the broadcast to not have it look grainy at all.

So um we will continue to look into that, but it is a big challenge, and we're not really sure how it would work in this room.

So there are no budget requests for this department either.

Thank you.

Next up.

Welcome.

Good evening, mayor, city council.

My name's Simone Falls, Housing and Human Services Manager.

Um, we're a fairly new division, and um we currently sit in the city manager's office overseeing affordable housing programs, including below market rate housing and low-income residential rehabilitation projects, social services, and homeless housing and services.

We collaborate with a range of Alameda organizations and partners throughout the city.

In October 2025, we initiated an engagement team providing street outreach, case management, and housing navigation services.

There's a common belief that individuals must be connected to shelter in order to gain permanent housing.

However, our new engagement team has already housed a handful of people directly from the street and provided shelter to over 25 unhoused individuals in Alameda.

This fiscal year we added case management services to the winter warming shelter for the first time, implemented a homeless prevention program, released a housing resource pamphlet, launched a new residential rehabilitation program, and began billing to the state for medical administrative activities reimbursement known as MA.

Last year, City Council approved a pilot program for social work services at the library, housing and human services contracted with Alameda family services to assign a licensed social worker.

This collaboration has proved to be beneficial to the community and the library staff.

The engagement team works closely with the social workers to support shared clients.

The social worker supports referrals to health care facilities.

The city would otherwise not have direct access to creating a streamlined referral process.

Housing and Human Services is doing robust work in the community as a new division.

There are partners in our work who are not clear on our work and their role in this partnership.

This is a challenge that we're working on.

We're currently undergoing a strategic planning process to inform our work for the next five years.

This process will include intentional efforts to inform partners in our community of the work we do and enhancing our work through strategic partnerships.

This process will also inform recommendations to the city manager and city council on the structure of HHS to op housing and human services to optimize services, utilization of funding and the potential for increased revenue.

Today we requested continue funding.

Sorry, I haven't been moving the someone's been moving it for me.

Thank you.

Today we requested funding for ongoing full-time licensed social worker services at the main library five days a week, including staffing and supply costs, totaling 155,000.

In just one quarter, the social worker provided therapeutic services 107 times and intervened in safety concerns four times.

This program relieves the library staff of attempting to provide services outside of their scope and expertise and provides critical services needed for our Alameda community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next up.

We will take a break until you sit down.

Anyway, we'll just give people a moment to file out.

And we have our windows open.

Yeah, it's warm, isn't it?

Okay.

All right, thank you.

And I do appreciate everyone remaining seated during the meeting.

There's probably some seats that just came available.

But when you stand up, you block the view of the people behind you.

And as I said at the beginning, we treat people the way we would like to be treated.

So don't block other people's view, please.

All right.

Okay.

And you were coming up to speak.

Were you now?

Come on out there.

I don't know that I'm you came up and people walked out, but I'm sure it's not really.

Why don't you introduce yourself, please, sir?

Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council Nick Luby, Fire Chief.

In 2025, the department responded to 10,074 calls for service.

Some of our overview and highlights for 2025 was 12 employee promotions.

We completed paramedic training internal for internal employees to get them trained up to the paramedics level and peer support training.

Our training facility also completed a reaccreditation of becoming one of only 28 statewide accredited local academies.

We updated our command structure through a reorg.

We installed state-of-the-art station alerting system.

Several new apparatus were placed in the service along with a fire dock for our new or relatively new fire boat.

And we started phase one of our emergency water supply upgrades.

For challenges, opportunities for fiscal year 26-27.

We look forward to completing the fall and firefighter memorial installation, finalize the facilities analysis and implement phase one of relocating fire administration and complete our ISO five-year recertification.

Additionally, we look forward to developing a strategic plan that will guide us for the next five years within the department and complete our emergency operations plan update for our EOC, along with ongoing strengthening of fire prevention capabilities and recognize 150 years of proud service to this community.

Mid-cycle asks, we have two asks in fiscal year 23-24.

The department admin tech three was transitioned to finance to assist with a centralized payroll uh concept and left a void within fire admin.

We are requesting an office assistant to strengthen administrative capacity, ensure consistent front desk coverage, allow higher level of staff to focus on other core responsibilities and increase fire revenue increases to fire revenues covers this cost.

Additionally, we are requesting uh funding for fire portable radios at a cost of total cost of 350,000 dollars, but this will be offset by fund 616, which is an equipment fund that has 250,000 in it.

So it's a one-time ask of 100,000 to do a 50% replacement of our emergency portable radios for the department.

And then the office assistant position is 130,000 100.

That's all I got.

Thank you, Chief.

All right, next up.

Uh good evening.

Uh Ross McCarthy.

I remember you.

Hi.

Um, finance insurance is just the city's uh fiscal health by developing the budget managing revenues and safeguarding public funds.

We oversee citywide accounting, financial reporting, payroll and vendor payments to keep daily operations running smoothly and transparently.

Our team also manages cash and investments, uh ensures compliance with all regulatory standards.

Ultimately, we provide the analysis and long-term planning needed to support informed decision making and sustain the city's financial stability.

Uh finance has had a busy year, um, bolstered by the fact that we were understaffed for most of it.

Uh I am happy to report that we will be officially fully staffed in two weeks' time, and I'm very happy about that.

Um I as mentioned before, uh as the city auditor mentioned, uh Kevin Ken Kevin Kearney.

Um, we did receive the triple crown as call from the GFOA.

But I do want to what he failed to mention was that about one and there's about 350 or so uh governments across the country that get that get uh this award.

So we're very excited about that and very uh very humbled as well.

We do have a laundry list of opportunities for this upcoming year.

Some things we need to do include creating a five-year forecast, modernizing the bank reconciliation process, and implementing a digital dashboard where Alamedo vendors can go to check on the status of invoices and other vital information.

Finance has two uh requests, two staffing requests for this mid-cycle budget.

Sorry, two requests for this mid-cycle budget.

Um, finance is requesting an administrative management analyst uh for our budget unit.

In prior years.

The city has had two full-time uh staff working on the budget, generally a budget manager and an admin analyst, since having only one staff through the entire budget process.

Finance has had has had, has had to pull in other staff members like me, the director, or uh the accounting manager to support budget development, uh which adds a stress to the other finance uh units, adding a support, um adding an administrative management analyst to the budget team unit will support the city's expansion of financial analysis and help other departments in managing their budgets as well.

Having additional staff person also provide coverage when the budget manager is out, as well as support in developing a succession plan for this critical role.

Our second request is an additional eighty thousand dollars a year in order to um in order to cover management fees due to an overhauled investment strategy.

While costs are higher, we expect investment returns to more uh to more than offset.

Over the next few years, we anticipate an extra million dollars plus in investment returns as opposed to our previous investment strategy.

Uh so these are the two requests.

And uh next is uh is Noel HR.

Okay, my neck, welcome.

Thank you, Mr.

McCarthy.

Thank you, Ross.

Uh good evening, madam mayor, members of city council.

My name is Noel White, human resources director for the city of Alameda.

Oh, wrong way.

So the human resources provides uh comprehensive citywide support in the form of labor and negotiations, training and development, recruitment and retention, and several other critical HR functions for the city.

Over the last year, some highlights, we've completed over 85 recruitments.

We've successfully negotiated nine successor agreements, amended to compensation plans, delivered a variety of citywide trainings on conflict resolution, wellness and supervisory training, and then we facilitated the resolution of complex and sensitive employee relations matters and investigations.

Collectively, HR's work ensures that departments are staffed, supported, operating effectively while maintaining compliance and strong labor relations.

Like many public agencies, we are navigating an increasingly complex uh environment.

Um, evolving legislation that continues to expand uh compliance requirements.

We need to modernize HR systems, which requires upfront investment in resources, and then economic and social pressures that are impacting labor relations.

However, at this time, it presents a variety of opportunities, such as centralizing services and leveraging HR expertise more effectively, looking to reduce potential risk and liability through proactive safety and compliance efforts, and then strengthening our recruitment and retention by fostering a safe and supportive workplace.

Collectively, these efforts position the city as an employer of choice and support long-term organizational stability.

For human resources, we are making one targeted strategic request in the form of a citywide safety officer position.

Um currently the way that the city safety duties are set up is that it's decentralized.

Many of our departments handle their own specific safety obligation and requirements with human resources delivering uh trainings uh that are uh required throughout the city.

While this model works, uh there does uh there does leave the opportunity for gaps, such as coordination between departments, potential communication loss, and it overall, when you are centralized, you can develop and create a more comprehensive program.

Uh, over the last almost, I'd say about 12 months, a little bit less.

We did pilot uh bringing in a contractor to produce and um perform these safety duties.

Over the last 12 months, however, we've determined that the more effective option would be to bring this position in-house to support our departments and deliver better service.

Uh this request would cost around 197,000 above baseline.

Thank you so much.

And introducing Demetrius for information technology.

Thank you.

Ms.

White.

Good evening and welcome.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the council.

Uh Demetrius Kagampan, IT Director.

Uh, the mission of the IT department is to make work life easier through the use of technology.

Now, now to further that uh mission, we've uh created a new division within the IT department called the Governance Risk and Strategy Division, uh short or GRS for short, uh which focuses on innovation, governance, uh risk, and training.

And also with cybersecurity being among the top priorities of the department, we have our cybersecurity program running from the new GRS division.

Some of the challenges and opportunities that we've identified for the next year is the rising cybersecurity threats.

They're continually increasing in frequency as well as sophistication.

So it's important that we have a robust cybersecurity program that helps us combat these types of threats and risks.

With technology change and adoption, it's important for us to identify tools that can help us with our productivity, but at the same time ensure that we have ample training to ensure that we're able to maximize the tools that we already own.

From an operations and services delivery standpoint, any time the internet goes down, we're all impacted.

So we're working towards creating a resiliency to ensure that business city operations are not impacted by that.

My first budget request is related to the GRS division that I mentioned earlier.

Considering the scope of the responsibility of this new division, I need an IT manager level person to assist me with to drive the division's agenda, align innovation projects with business strategy and compliance, provide accountability and promote continuous improvement.

Currently, we have an IT systems analyst that is acting as the lead for that division right now.

He's doing a phenomenal job right now, which is why I'm requesting that this position be upgraded to an IT manager role.

For the two cybersecurity tools I'm asking for, for the first tool, I want you to consider the immense amount of data that we have throughout the city.

It's important that we understand where they are and also what kind of data they are.

If we don't have that information, we're at significant risk.

So it's important that we have a tool that maps that type of data so we could locate it, classify it, and protect it accordingly.

So for the second cybersecurity tool, I want you to think of a like a fire drill or an earthquake drill.

Those drills are intended to help you identify your assessment, your or I should say your readiness for those type of events.

So think of the cybersecurity tool I'm requesting as a cybersecurity preparedness tool.

So it helps us understand where we are.

For the additional redundancy cable and internet funding, that was needed because in order for us to have the additional uh resiliency that I mentioned earlier, we have to install additional uh internet service services at the various city buildings.

Now, there's unfortunately there's a typo on this slide.

Um, I'm not actually asking for 251,000 for the uh cable and internet funding.

I'm actually asking for 131,900 instead um on an annual basis.

And the uh first security cyber uh cybersecurity tool, I'm asking for 120,000 on an annual basis.

The second cyber security tool, I'm asking for 25,000.

From a workforce change perspective, I'm asking for the IT systems analyst position to be upgraded to an IT manager role for an additional 40,512 on an ongoing basis.

Thank you.

Can you just repeat that in the previous slide?

You're not asking for 251,000, it's 131,000.

Yes, uh, mayor, it's uh 131,900.

Okay, surrounding error.

Yes.

Thank you for that, Ms.

Gampen.

Libraries up next.

Come on up.

Hello, hello.

Hi, good evening, Madam Mayor and City Council.

Um, Marlon Romero, acting library director.

Um, so some overview and highlights is the library has seen year over year increases based on usage and engagement.

Uh visitors increased over 15%, attendees over 2.5%, and circulation of materials went up 14%.

Um this fall we'll be launching the student success initiative, which will grant um all AUSD students TK through 12th grade uh access to all of our electronic resources, as well as uh checking out uh up to five books at a time.

And we'll also be launching our five-year strategic plan this year.

Uh for challenges.

Circulation has um grown consistently over four years.

Electronic collection shows the strongest growth, and uh just trying to find additional funding for an electronic materials essential to meet raising community demand and maintain reasonable wait times.

Um, and another one is try to secure funding uh for this library social worker and security guard, this dual approach to patron and staff safety ensures consistent protection while enabling proactive intervention before issues escalate.

Opportunities this year will be, we have a full year of two new librarian positions and our library assistant, and this will really help us expand outreach to under underserved groups in Alameda and improving the type of programs we offer.

And we'll also be increasing our library of things tool collection.

For mid-cycle budget requests, uh staff is requesting a recently vacated position, uh library assistant position to be reclassified as librarian one, has a core library function, this responsibility warrants a dedicated full-time librarian, and this upgrade to staffing has a net zero cost to the budget.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And next step is planning, building and transportation.

Come on back up with your other hat.

Change out, yeah.

Good evening again again, Abby Thorne Lyman, Interim Director of Planning Building and Transportation.

Um the department has completed a lot this year, including ongoing implementation of the housing element through code amendments and procedures, and working with my other hat, Bred on Park and Webster zoning adjustments to support the vitality of our two main downtown streets.

The building and code enforcement department is complete continues to complete a very high volume of code enforcement and inspection cases, including completing over 30,000 building inspections this year.

Transportation planning continues to administer the very successful water shuttle and implement the Vision Zero uh plan, including uh converting the first neighborhood greenway and advancing design on star drill pedestrian and bicycle improvements, and sustainability continues to advance shoreline adaptation plans and near-term sea level rise and adaptation projects, as well as moving to public EV charging implementation.

The mid-cycle budget proposals for this department reflect a consistent theme of adapting to increased demand, more complex regulations, especially at the state level, as well as increased pressure to move faster on everything, and a changing work workforce while trying to position the department to maintain remain responsive to city council strategic plan and community priorities.

We are looking to retain very talented, very critical, and very unique staff.

We are looking to move sustainability into the implementation phase with a lot of adaptation projects and to um ensure that our permitting system is actually meeting the advanced technology demands and abilities that it can.

So our specific um requests are to reclass the building official to an assistant director position, reclass uh combination inspector two to a plans examiner, align the sustainability manager's salary with the other managers in the department and city, um, shift uh part-time position that was in the sustainability department to become a full-time position in the sustainability department and to audit the Acela permit system to determine if it is appropriate to move forward with the Sela, how it can be optimized, how we can do a better job with our permitting system.

Uh so this first request is to um look at the Acela permit system and look for ways to optimize and make things more accessible to the customer and move faster and more efficiently for 75,000.

In terms of our workforce change proposals, um, as I mentioned, we would like to adjust the sustainability manager, the senior management analyst for sustainability, as well as upgrade uh two positions within the building department.

Those are our requests.

Thank you.

Um, Director Thorne Lyman.

Next up is police department.

Come on up and introduce yourself, please.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of city council.

My name is Nishot Joshi.

I'm the police chief.

Uh so to provide some overview and highlights of uh the police department, we've had uh two years consistent crime reduction and all crimes of over 20%, and those reductions continue in uh 2026 year three.

Um, continue complete compliance on all stop data collection.

We um consistently receive uh um a 4.7 out of five-star rating for officer professionalism, and that's significant because these surveys are collected after our officers respond to calls for service.

So uh the feedback is coming from individuals who are not having the best day.

Uh we uh continued hiring of new officers.

We've hired 11 this year.

Uh we currently have four in the police academy.

We're continuing the progress of Kalia accreditation, and we recently stood up a dedicated business district patrols.

Some of the challenges include uh the hiring and training, the pace and tempo for uh police officers, uh, from date of application to date of uh where they complete all preliminary training, is about 16 months.

Uh so there's a there's a long uh delay to get somebody uh in the door and on the streets.

We've got some uh service retirements pending of police officers and supervisors.

Um, and then as I mentioned earlier, we've had significant crime reductions.

Uh we've driven crime down so low that now the the reductions were kind of hitting a plateau, if you will.

As far as opportunities, I'm gonna go back to kind of ties into our challenges.

Uh we continue to hire and train uh police officers, our personnel and training staff work hard to get us qualified candidates.

Uh, they're working recruiting from all over the state.

Um we have increased service delivery response times with uh additional staff.

We have assigned more to detectives and traffic assignments.

Uh we um and we expect to do more of that if we add to our staffing.

Um additionally, we anticipate promotions as we um uh as we have see people leave and retire out of the department that we will have opportunities for people to move up in the organization.

And then uh Cali accreditation is on track, as I mentioned earlier.

So our ass, we have two.

The first one is uh for four police officer positions.

We're not asking for additional staff, meaning staffing on top of the already authorized, we're asking for the unfreezing of of uh four officers.

This would provide additional coverage for patrol, traffic, and investigations.

And then the second ask is uh an increase over time for crime scene technicians uh on weekend coverage.

We currently have five days a week coverage with uh with crime scene uh technicians on the weekends.

We have our officers having to do that.

So um those officers are pulled off of the their regular duties to uh handle those the collection of evidence.

If we do set aside uh overtime, it's it's a small ask, uh we could probably get um staff to handle that without impacting patrol.

And that's all we have from the police department.

Thank you, Chief Joshi.

Before we, and we can pause the clock for a minute before we go to the next presentation.

If you were in the audience and if there is an empty chair next to you, would you raise your hand?

And so people who were standing on the wall, you see these um hands up.

Go ahead and take a seat.

You don't need to.

Um, I can tell you we've got a bit more to go on this.

So you saw hands go up.

Don't be shy, go on over and take a seat.

Um, keep your hand up for just another couple of minutes if you would, folks.

So all those hands up mean there's a seat, we're all friendly, right?

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

Next up, it looks like public works.

And you can start the clock again.

Thank you, ma'am.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council.

I'm Aaron Smith, the City of Alameda's public works director.

Uh, public works spans a wide range of services as shown on this slide from maintaining over 75 city buildings, 480 fleet vehicles, 147 miles of street to environmental services such as our urban forest, zero waste, and preventing pollution from entering the bay.

This past year, we made strong progress in accessibility, sustainability, transportation, and overall system upkeep on accessibility.

We partnered with Housing and Human Services to invest CDBG dollars to install new curb ramps in the right of way.

We launched a new accessibility newsletter and improved the accessibility of the city's website.

On sustainability.

Council adopted the uh zero waste implementation plan update, uh, moving the city closer to its 89% landfill diversion goal through targeted programs and community outreach.

Um the city was recently recognized uh with a zero uh zero emissions vehicle readiness award focused on the great work the city's doing to bring charging infrastructure to communities that need it.

But we're doing our part with the fleet and initiated a process to develop a fleet electrification and charging infrastructure plan.

We hope to have that plan to council later this year, probably early fall.

In transportation, we advanced several key projects, including the construction of the first phase of the neighborhood greenway, the start of the Clement Tilden Safety Project, and we continue to advance the Lincoln Marshall Pacific corridor design.

In our maintenance division, they've been busy and we've responded to nearly 3,000 service requests and swept over 19,000 miles of curb, removing nearly 11,000 cubic yards of debris, which would fill three Olympic swimming pools.

Looking ahead, we sorry, looking ahead, we have uh yes, both challenges uh and opportunities.

Um, as we advanced ADA improvements, we're learning that removing accessibility barriers in city buildings is costing more than originally anticipated in our ADA transition plan.

So we'll be coming back to council uh with some funding proposals as part of the next two-year budget.

Uh, transitioning our fleet to EV will cost uh have some upfront costs for both vehicles and charging infrastructure.

And when we bring that plan back to council this fall, we will propose some funding options.

Um, and then also uh Public Works you know is really going to be looking at our staffing structure to ensure we can sustain current service levels, particularly as complete streets require more intensive maintenance.

Our mid-cycle requests are focused on maintaining progress and addressing critical needs.

They include funding to design improvements for the Bay Farm Bike and Pedestrian Bridge, in the attempt to extend the life expectancy of the existing bridge while we plan for its ultimate replacement.

We also have, as noted here, proposals regarding fleet electrification and readiness, both for charging infrastructure operational and replacement costs, a variety of zero waste programs furthering our sustainability goals, as well as a few targeted staffing requests.

One is Public Works is moving towards a model that has division managers, which is a classification we actually don't currently have.

So we are requesting our first division manager, which would be over environmental services, a new parking technician that's expected to be revenue supporting, as well as adjusting our traffic signal technician salary schedule to align with our streetlight technician.

So with that, I'm not going to go through all of the line-by-line slides, but I am going to be here to answer any questions and just follow-up discussion.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much.

Next step is recreation parks.

All right.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Jelson Long.

I'm the recreation and parks director here for the city.

This year, as you all know, we service everyone in Alameda from the very young to our seniors.

This last year, 25-26, we served well over half a million uh different uh participants in our programs.

We also focus that we also are responsible for maintaining over 300 acres of parkland as well as doing all small capital repairs in parks and keeping everything and all of our infrastructure up to date, not to mention planning some larger park projects like adding five and a half acres to estuary park and the development of the city aquatic center.

And then we also this last year restructured our park maintenance to deliver service more efficiently and also be more responsive to issues that arise throughout the park system.

Last year we added a park technician that was able to actually do small maintenance work that's actually very reactive and actually saves us money.

One of our strengths through our recreation, we're off, we're able to offer a wide variety of programs at an affordable rate and really be able to support the community through all those activities.

And this last year we were able to actually expand hours at the senior center three days a week and fully on Sundays by optimizing our use of part-time staffing.

Some of our challenges and opportunities that were within the 2627 budget is we removed the uh all the CIP funds for playground replacement.

So it's kind of delayed our process in keeping on schedule.

One of our other challenges is you know, since the pandemic, all the programs have grown, or everyone wants more, and so how do we maximize using and providing those services with limited resources, but also then catering as well to the needs of everyone to make all of our programs fully accessible and adding specialized staff to help make those accommodations, and then also with uh Mastic, you know, the full-time staff.

They're very limited, and the staffing is we've struggled to actually expand those programs, which we'd like to do more if we could.

So for our mid-cycle ask, focused in a few areas uh as uh maybe you may not know yet, but the Sweeney Park Trail Connectors will be opening in the next couple of weeks, adding connections to Sweeney Park, both north and south.

Um, we made a request to cover some soil expenses that we ran into during the construction.

Um, and then as I just mentioned, we are adding five and a half acres to the park system, which will have a lot of park amenities and resources which will require additional maintenance staff to help take care of.

Um so we're asking for that, and then there will be some OM costs once it starts up here at the end of the year.

Uh, that's for electricity, water, all the things you need to run a park.

And then as the department has been sort of expanding in a sort of capacity, administrative support is absolutely critical.

And so what we're asking for is to upgrade our office assistant to an executive assistant to help support the staff and all those different activities.

As you can see here, uh there's equipment allocation costs, it's a one-time cost.

There's some OM that's ongoing, and then the one-time cost for the soils for the trail connectors.

Um, and then we'll be adding the one uh maintenance worker, and then the OA to an EA we're actually paying for through a reduction in part-time hours in the department because we're able to provide more services to staff.

With that, those are the requests we have for this year.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And um, oh, there's a cheery one.

You want to go?

Tell us about this one.

Yes, so uh you have now concluded all the departments with the exception of the city attorney's office, which I'll go later.

Uh so the city manager's office wanted you all to see uh the uh requests that we the city manager's office is denying.

Uh these are all in the general fund.

Um then we also wanted to give you uh a summary of all the position upgrades that were peppered throughout the different departments so you can see them all in one place.

Uh, I want to note that out of these seven position upgrades, three are would impact the general fund.

And the biggest one at 70,000 is because of a grant that ended, and now the general fund is taking over the rest of that allocation, which is for the senior management analyst at the very bottom.

And then we also wanted to give you a table that shows the summary of the proposed uh new position requests.

Uh so all of these, with the exception of one, would be in the general fund.

That one exception is the aforementioned parking technician for 123,000 out of the parking fund and is completely revenue generating.

Uh so I am showing you these as the original requests, but Ross will be presenting alternatives next.

Thank you, Ekat.

Um, as you know, it takes city staff months to prepare the biannual and mid-cycle budgets during this time, uh, targets, projections, economic realities, all shift.

Right.

While we do our best to keep up with these changes, there have been a few larger than average shifts that have occurred in this last month.

Namely, uh economic impacts due to international affairs and uh locally here, the five million dollars in additional funding required for the uh for constructing the aquatic center.

What I have in front of you today um actually was just added today, we added today, um, was the uh slide to offer possible alternatives um to the ever changing to this ever changing economic landscape.

Um so I'll think I'll leave this slide up for our during our discussions if possible um and the next steps.

So we're looking forward to your feedback from our presentation as well as looking forward to adopting the mid-cycle budget on the first um city council meeting in june yeah thank you so much let me finish and then I'll call on you if you would please um thank you so much Mr.

McCarthy and to all the department heads and interims who presented really nice job you moved it along you made it um interesting I hope that everyone watching and listening can see what an intricate operation running a city is and why Alameda is such a well-run city it is all these folks who presented to you this evening and the staff who work for them and I thank you um we thank you this is it's tough times I get it before um I will call on the interim city manager in just a minute let me just explain we'll take clarifying questions from the council we've got lots of deliberations I'm sure but I think we probably have public comment do we madam clerk just one okay so um anyway we um we've got a bit of talking um yet to come so on to you uh interim city manager Adam Pollett sir thank you madam I just wanted uh our final instructor slide up that's all yeah I believe that was the um the idea um okay council clarifying questions we'll go to our one public comment and then we will be right back for deliberation and we'll get this item out of the way and then we'll go on we'll usher Mr.

Bowler out and we'll go on to the city attorney item any clarifying questions or should we yeah Vice Mayor I can wait you're gonna go I if you have a clarifying question let's take it all right um on page nine um it's it's showing the trend of what's going to happen to revenues versus expenditures um and then on page 10 sorry that was page nine on page 10 um there's some anticipated costs um for example like a grant is gonna be expire um the increased uh liability payments so I just didn't know if page 10 is in reference to the trends that we see on page nine.

So um if we can get there I can click really fast if we um but uh but really what we're looking at page nine I'm getting dizzy sorry closer I was like I just want to be thinking away yeah yeah so what we're looking at here is um for the fiscal year 26 uh 27 so just this fiscal year and next um and then starting here we're talking about next biannual budget so here's kind of like a taste of yes our expenditures are exceeding our revenue growth and so this is as it's as it's uh kind of expanding I was just trying to um reiterate that that difference needs to be covered by something um and so it's going to be possibly expanding more due to all these upcoming things um that we'll have to tackle during the during next year's biennial budget cycle okay so theoretically if nothing changes on on your projections on page nine and page the issues on page 10 happen then it could get worse it could get worse correct um okay um I did have a follow-up question um oh sorry this is my follow up question um there was on page five then um so we there is the at this moment in time a projected nine million dollar um surplus is that the word we would use uh yeah in excess of our 25% reserve policy yeah and then of course now we're like oh but the aquatic center bid increase by four million okay so um I guess we don't ever want to go to zero um we do not what is the because it's just the bar graph, um, I'm not reading real numbers, so like if everything like if we looked at mid-cycle 2027, um that nine or maybe it's does that all that money go away, that nine million dollars or so at when we created this uh slide deck for you the two weeks ago or so, um, our projected use of our projected ending fund balance was 9.7, which was roughly the same as um the the biannual budget that we had.

Um however, since that time we'd have to use five million dollars of that nine point six nine to um to uh cover the cost of the aquatic center.

Okay.

Um and so, yeah, while the the bar graphs themselves, these ones that you might be talking about are just examples of taxes that we have, not necessarily all of the revenues that we have.

Well, I just want to say that like being so close to your projections, I do think it's pretty impressive, and we are seems like we're being pretty efficient with taxpayer money.

So thank you.

Any other clarifying questions?

Uh Councilmember Bowler.

Thank you.

And thank you, Director McCarthy, for your part in this and a lot of hard work.

We we really appreciate it.

Um on page 85, when it has all the alternatives, I'm assuming that that those alternatives would essentially um increase our residual, right?

From the 9.69 million, if we adopt all the alternatives, we'll be to strong and putting aside for a moment at the aquatic center, right?

Correct.

Yes.

Can you describe where you think that number might be if we adopt the alternatives?

Sorry, I haven't um done the math yet, but I can by the end of the budget.

Is it fair to say that due to the structural budget deficits, um, the staff and and and coupled with the aquatic center issue, the staff is urging the council to strongly consider these alternatives.

Um I think that would be for either city manager Woldridge or City Manager, um, but but ultimately, yes.

Uh yes, I think that that was the case since you know new light has come and we've all you know uh information's always changing.

I believe this is what we've uh what staff and uh the management's office, the manager's office is requesting.

And assistant city manager Willard, did you want to add something to what Mr.

McCarthy just said?

Uh I'll I'll just reiterate what he he just said that the um interim city manager Paul is and I in discussion with um our finance director and finance team.

Um we do think it's it is prudent to to move with the um alternative suggestions of the for the budget given upcoming constraints, the aquatic center and other things that the finance director has outlined.

And I think it'd be useful to just explain to us and the public that's here that these are um excess residual funds, right?

This is not the the core rainy day fund that the city maintains, but still this is um so this is what put these extra funds, the 9.6 million are what puts Alameda in more stable position than you see many other cities in the Bay Area, right?

That sorry, yes, that's for me.

Yes, that is correct, yeah.

Above our 25%.

So we have a what's called what we call a 25% um city council directive threshold, which uh we take next year's um ongoing um expenditures, um expected expenditures, and take 25% of that total.

So basically a three-month reserve.

So those are our core reserves that we have, and this 9.6, 9.7 is on top of that.

And so especially in a climate where we're it's not just some unknowns with the aquatic center, but also unfunded pension liabilities.

You predicted that and some other factors early on in the presentation.

Um it sounds like some fiscal constraint might be prudent at this time, and I don't know who the right person is to comment on that, but I guess hence why the alternatives for consideration that you have in front of you.

Yeah, okay, thank you.

And I assistant City Manager Woolridge.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I would agree, yes, that I think um it's it's important to be prudent right now and conservative with our budget.

Um, we're seeing other cities around us having to make um very drastic 10% across the board cuts.

I'm hearing other city managers talking about browning out fire stations and and taking pretty serious measures.

And yes, we have the 9.7 um surplus above our 25%.

That 25% reserve really is it's not that's that's not just a rainy day.

That's if there's a major earthquake or something like that, that we need the city needs to have funds in the event of any a significant disaster so that we can continue to provide services for the community.

So, yes, we have the 9.7, but that's also our kind of economic reserve that we in times like this we want to make sure we don't to count Vice Mayor prior's point bring that down to zero um and be conservative with our recommendations.

Uh two points just the first point is just really quickly the reason why we use a 25% ratio is because 25% um amounts to basically three months worth of of cash on hand so in the event that that we really had a disaster we need to know that we have at least three months worth of of cash on hand to deal with those um emergency situations that's what 25 that's where the 25% ratio comes from that's number quick number point number one.

Well wait is since it's a question I think you're looking for an answer.

Oh no no that wasn't that clarifying questions Council Member yeah my um clarifying question has to do with so the issue with regard to the police force of hiring more for additional police force is not so much as is it correct to say it's not so much as um uh spending new money for that but allowing our police um department to um to spend the money that he has been allocated the the issue though is when we adopted the the um 2025 um 2026 2026 2027 two year budget we froze the number of police for sworn officers that he can hire at 72 when when historically we have always had 88 but or put 88 positions so the budget though the numbers that you see are calibrated to 88 but he could not spend all the way up to that to 88 um because he was frozen at 72 so now what he's asking for is it correct to say is to uh be given the ability to hire four more to to get to 76 your this these are not new positions these are now freeing up budget for the positions exactly so the and that's an important point that I want to get at later thank you thanks all right other clarifying questions council vice mayor prior and then council I'll be so quick council member Jensen thank you um so on the it looks like on the original proposal there it was to hire four police officers and on the alternative it says to hire authorized four police officers is that literally not a change I'm just confused.

No it's not a change we just want to make sure that it was all on one sheet.

Okay so these alternatives would it negate pretty much everything in the presentation like for example look like there were some departments where some positions like it seemed like people were getting a promotion and with that or maybe they were already doing the work and so we're like well now we're gonna give you the title because you're actually doing all this work and this is the salary that you probably deserve is what I'm assuming.

So does that go away if we do the alternate um for the alternatives we focused on the the full time positions that were being requested we did not focus on the upgrades um not all of them are what you're saying in regards to yes some are um existing people that um would need to apply for an upgraded position it'd be in terms of internal motion um some are um like a re calibration of yeah essentially like that was mentioned one of them uh grant is no longer um available and so it's in sustainability it's a position within that division that that was funded from some transportation because the person in that position was doing that so now it'll be fully general funded not some transportation dollars for example so we did not include the these upgrade everything on the upgraded positions list in our oh okay great yeah I just wanted to make sure because I was like oh these all seem like good ideas and then I was like oh or we wouldn't okay so we would do those things.

We just wanted to provide options for council to consider on the alternatives page.

Great, thank you.

And no, okay, you're good.

Okay, so council member Jensen.

Thank you.

Um I want to go back to I think it was Councilmember Bowler brought up the um oh no excuse me, it was vice Mayor Prior about the this is for for um Director McCarthy about the the um sales tax and the reduction or the the trending lower trending in sales tax.

I just want to ask you to re you mentioned that there was um in 2023 the largest sales tax generator left.

I just wanted to know what that was or what organization.

Well, um we can't um we can't say disclose that information, but yes, the largest um sales tax remitter did leave uh the city in fiscal year twenty five.

And it had has had a pretty substantial impact on budget revenue.

It has had a uh substantial um impact on um sales tax revenue, and that's of course going forward, right?

That's ongoing monies.

Um, so yes, it it has had an effect.

And can you advise why it can't be disclosed?

Um I can't the city attorney can speak to that.

Council member, it's my understanding that sales uh our tax information is confidential, um, much like federal and state tax information is also confidential, and that that's why director McCarthy is not disclosing.

Thank you.

My next question is about the um the next slide or two slides later, slide nine.

What are the I was gonna ask what are the reasons for the widening gap between expenditures and revenues?

You mentioned that that trend is increasing, and I think Councilmember alluded to that as well.

What can you talk about the I mean overall inflation costs have gone up?

Um, I mean, COLAS, I mean ultimately our our revenues over the past uh few years have been very stable, which is great, you know, right around the three to four percent range, very stable, reliable.

Um transfer taxes again, as I was speaking before, go up and down a lot.

And to tell you the truth, a lot of the um a lot of the fund balance or the excess fund balance we have now are residual transfer tax revenues that we that we received during fiscal year 21, 22, and you know, during COVID when the housing market was just crazy.

Um, so as far as it our expenditures are just outpacing our revenues.

That's in um the finance department, you're suggesting the administrative management fee increase of 200,000.

Sorry.

Sorry, missed that one.

It's administrative management fee for um or investment.

Excuse me, investment management.

Yes.

Um so yeah, can I talk about it?

Yeah, so can you just um that's a pretty big increase initially, but you expect to recover that over a period of some time.

Can I take over?

Thanks.

Uh sorry, appreciate it.

Uh yeah, so um in the past fiscal year in the past fiscal year, we've had uh we've worked with our city uh treasurer Kevin Kennedy to realign our um our investment strategy ultimately before we were making good money on our money market funds.

Uh the interest rate was high, and as the interest rate has come down, we've been trying to lock in higher rates, right?

So we're basically we're trying to instead of the money market being uh daily rate that goes up and down on the uh daily that we're trying to lock in longer bond purchases and and one into the three to five year range.

So in basically in a decreasing interest rate environment, you want to lock up rates as fast as possible.

And when we do that, we increase our investment fees because we have um PFM and Chandler who are our uh management strategists or investment strategists, um, buy them for us and start to manage the funds.

They do cost a lot, however, it is a great benefit.

Um I am very cautious when I say we're easily making our money back, if not uh in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year uh locking up interest rates now as the interest rates decline.

So that would tend to have a good return in your opinion.

Wonderful return, wonderful.

Okay, I another my another question is about a return.

Um, with regard to the to the safety officer in HR, and I want to know since we do have contracting services and programs that are addressed that would be addressed by this internal position.

Wouldn't we expect to see uh some sort of comparable cost savings if the position were established?

So there is the potential for future offset by eliminating you know contractual services or utilizing any other external entity to address certain um you know potential things that come up.

So yes, there is that potential to offset the cost of the of the safety officer.

Because you as you mentioned in your presentation, this these services are being provided by external contracts, is that right?

That is correct.

We're currently utilizing um it's a contract actually through the city attorney in VIRO Safe Tech.

Um so it's not actually a contract through human resources.

And yeah, city attorney even would you like to address that?

Sure, council member.

Um, if you recall last year, we um had one time savings that we were able to do a one time pilot program for um safety services.

Um as it turns out, the uh contractual services were not effective.

Um not able to adequately support the safety needs of the city, which is why I think HR director uh Noel White is seeking uh some other avenues, whether it's part-time or maybe different contractual services.

I mean, I think she's uh trying to creatively look for opportunities to address uh uh this limitation.

Okay, thank you.

Um yes, I do have another question.

The um for planning building and transportation, the again uh cost benefits, cost recovery, the ACLA permit system audit.

Are there any related consequences to improve efficiency with that audit expense?

To approve efficiency, thank you.

Efficiency of looking at the SLS system.

Um I think in the long run, there would be at the moment.

I think it's fair to say, you know, the permit, the number of applications coming in is a little slower than it usually is in terms of new development, right?

Um, but I think in the long run, um, we would we would be able to approve permit approve and review permit applications faster, um, which could potentially you know improve efficiency as well for staff, um, staff time and communication.

And it could improve efficiency for development and for um for new construction.

Yeah, for development, new construction, even just like remodels and and smaller scale things.

So, but just I don't think it would happen in the next fiscal year.

I think it's going to be a long-term investment.

Thank you.

Those are my questions.

Just following along on the Acela one, don't we already use a SELA?

We use we yes, we use a CELA.

Um, I might I might phone a friend because I am pretty new to the department, but maybe I could ask assistant city manager Wildridge to help me out.

Okay, because I mean we do use a CELA, I know.

Absolutely correct.

We do use a CELA.

Um, it's an older program, but it's it's a fairly standard for um permit centers.

Um, however, the the the previous planning building transportation director Ty um said that there's he had learned that there's a lot of ways that we could be using a Cello that we weren't, and it really takes a professional who understands it's a very complex software system who understands it to optimize it for us.

So this this effort really is to keep finish your sentence, you know, call on.

So that was my understanding was really to optimize it so that it is more effective use for for stuff.

But okay, um, and I will just say because I hear from the public a lot, I have heard complaints about the length of time.

It maybe it wasn't a CELA as much as it was outside contractors we use to do plan review, but why don't you enlighten us about a CELA if that's what you can do?

Yeah, well, in regards to council member Jensen, your question question, um the request is to actually use uh existing fund balance that's available to pay for this $75,000 audit.

So it's not going to be because it's a one-time cost an ongoing thing, but it's also using fund balance that the department has from existing grants to pay for it.

And the last time uh an audit was done was back in 2014, so over 12 years ago.

So there will be efficiencies created, but I just wanted to provide that additional detail.

So you all understand that it it really, because it's not in the general fund and it's using uh existing grant monies in part to do it, that it's not really going to be uh any kind of cost.

Okay, thank you for that clarification.

Vice Mayor Prayer.

Oh, um, it was back to um Councilmember Jensen's um uh question or about the safety officer and the screen went blank.

So were we is that in the alternative sorry it just um is it in the alternative um recommendation yeah it's uh it's it's not in it's currently in the again the alternative doesn't have to be as a one package it's really there for ideas for council to consider so you could choose to um to keep the the the safety officer and include that in your recommendation to fill that to to fund that position and not include some of the other ones so currently it's on the list as something to defer but certainly that's council's discretion.

If I may mayor also I have an answer now to council member bowler's previous question about um so the the 9.6 million excess reserve is if you um approved all of the originally recommended changes if you approved the alternative which basically only includes for the uh a position for the parking tech that's not general fund and the police officers the four police officers um that would save you eight hundred and forty one thousand four hundred forty dollars and bring your general fund excess to about 10 and a half million dollars you're welcome thank you did uh um thank you i'd be happy to call on you council member jensen thank you um what this is regarding the and i just noticed this thank you madam mayor for your consideration i the it's regarding the um the oh actually i'm sorry i didn't ask it because it has to do with the city attorney's office okay hold that one until you know later okay i'll come back to you have a question uh counselor designed uh i have a follow-up question um regarding um the um what's before us to um allow the police force to hire four more um uh uh officers uh sworn police officers um what's the stu well why don't we just go all the way to 88 well i mean what what is it that we're using the the difference the money that he's already allocated relative to the um the spending limit that we're that we are imposing and is this one or do we need sorry mr do we need you on this one or the chief can answer that okay go back and then i'm just gonna layer a question on you can answer them both are the four new positions in the report the four officers who are in the academy um no they've already been hired the uh they have not no they are i'm sorry they are in the they're they're they had four in the academy right i'm sorry i misspoke yes it's the four in the academy so they have not been hired as police officers yet those are the four that are on our list right that's correct okay and now to my colleague's question why not just go hog wild and go all the way to 88 Mr.

McCarthy if you'd like to submit come on up to yeah you can both you can share my but I want to make sure that it's not going hog wild because we know have the money for it but for whatever reason so when you ask the question you actually let them answer go ahead whoever wants to start first.

Council member I think um the the we are using that uh vacancy savings for other portions of the general fund and so yes we are um it would it would increase our fund like it would decrease our fund balance excuse me because instead of um having money for other portions of the general fund like uh what you have in front of you now um we would we would be using the instead of using that vacant savings vacancy savings to provide services we would just kind of it would just be sitting there um because we uh I can't hire police officers I guess that's where you say where you come in okay well thank you I appreciate that I appreciate that and go ahead Chief Joshi and separate to that so uh as I'm in my earlier um in part of my my portion of the presentation talked about how how long it takes to get a police officer in.

So what I'm looking at is phasing in to eventually get to that that that number of 88, but right now we are only able to train so many police officers uh so because we have once they graduate the academy, they have to ride with a field training officer.

We only have a set number of field training officers, so even if we had them all hired today, we wouldn't be able to get them out to the streets.

As we they'd have to a position where we need more police officers where we need to request um an increase in that number, we we most certainly will.

I hear what you're saying, but I don't think a council imposed hiring limit is necessary as uh as the manager of the police department.

You can I'm sorry, and the question is what again?

Well, uh it's more of a comment.

Thank you.

Yeah, well, we'll we'll save comments for when we deliberate.

Any other clarifying questions, council?

Thank you, Chief Joshi.

Okay, um, seeing no other council questions at the time, Madam Clerk.

Let's go to our public comment.

Okay, we have one, so we've got three minutes.

It's Catherine Schwartz.

Welcome.

Hello, hello.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and City Council members.

My name is Katherine Schwartz, as she said, and I'm the CEO of Alameda Family Services.

I'm here tonight to speak in strong support of renewing and expanding our library social work contract.

I want to share what this investment is already producing.

A library social worker joined the Alameda Free Library in mid-December.

By January, she was fully embedded, building trust with patrons, experiencing mental health challenges, substance use disorders, and housing instability.

In that short time, she has delivered, as Simone mentioned, 107 therapeutic interventions, made 53 resource referrals, and linked 25 individuals successful successfully to supportive services.

She has responded to crisis situations, de-escalated conflicts on the library floor, and collaborated with city city engagement specialists and building futures to connect people to housing and county resources.

Library staff report a noticeable decrease in problematic behavior since her arrival.

I want to be transparent.

Many of the people she serves will not sign a formal consent form.

They are cautious, cautious about systems.

And honestly, that caution makes sense given what many of them have been through.

But our social worker serves them anyway.

She shows up, builds trust, and provides care regardless of paperwork.

The numbers above reflect only a fraction of her actual impact.

This is exactly the kind of community-based embedded community embedded low barrier relationship driven work that moves the needle on homelessness and behavioral health, not in years but in months.

Renewing this contract will allow these critical services to continue and increasing the library social worker hours from 30 hours to 40 hours per week will increase her accessibility and improve overall engagement.

Thank you for your time and your commitment to the people of Alameda.

Thank you for all the good work you and your organization do.

And no, just applaud in your heart.

We got to keep this move um moving along, but yeah, it's impressive.

And thank you for recognizing that our listeners.

That was the only public comment, Madam Clerk.

Okay, so with that, we're gonna go to um council deliberation, and I'm I'm gonna lead um.

Um, was there another one?

Um, no, we're we've bifurcated, so we aren't even on that one yet.

You may stay, the city attorney may stay.

Okay, it's all good.

Um, so I just want to say again, thank you to everybody staff for the amazing work you do.

What I want us to do for the utmost protection.

I'm really protective of our city and our finances.

There are so many unknowns out there right now.

If you don't find it too scary to follow the news, um, you know that the pressures are out there from geopolitical activities that impact us right here.

I dropped my husband off at West Oakland BART to go to San Francisco Airport this morning, and as I was driving on, I guess it was 7th Street.

There's a shell station.

The price of gas was almost seven dollars a gallon.

That's impacting everybody.

It's also impacting our city and our vehicles, although we are transitioning to EVs.

Um, but there's that to keep in mind, and then I don't want to be cavalier about the November ballot measure on the state ballot that Mr.

McCarthy referenced.

I'm on the board of directors of the League of California Cities.

We were taking a fight this very hard position.

I can talk about it because it's not about measure yet, but it collected enough signatures.

So, but what that would do is wipe out cities' ability to charge transfer tax on real estate transactions, whether it's a residential sale or a commercial sale.

And as a charter city, we have had this provision.

We've been allowed to do this forever.

I mean, as long as we've been a charter city, it is a significant portion of the revenues.

If that is gone, then that reserve that we have gets skinnier.

And we did just learn this week that that aquatic center, which is a commitment, which we are going to do, but the price tag just went up five million dollars.

We're not gonna not do it.

We've sunk more than 30 million into it, and it's a laudable important project, but that's a reality.

We have to meet our existing commitments.

So I don't um I don't take comfort in the fact that we have that 25% reserve.

That's something a previous council, I was on it, voted for that's very wise and prudent.

Again, I talk to cities across the state.

When a disaster hits and you never know, um, an earthquake, a flood, whatever, FEMA doesn't kick in sometimes at all, and when it is, the payments don't come until after the fact, sometimes a lot longer after the fact, and cities suffer because of that, so we need that rainy day fund.

Um, in addition to the global uncertainty and prices of November ballot measure, we are sometimes faced with litigation from entities who want millions of dollars from us.

That's something that would come out of the general funds.

So we don't take that lightly, and this is the public money, a lot of this is taxpayer dollars.

What I would like to suggest is that wherever possible when we're talking about new positions, and by the way, staff, um, Mr.

Pollitzer, um, Ms.

Woolderidge and Mr.

McCarthy, I do appreciate you all putting your heads together and making this a little leaner because I did kind of have heart palpitations when I it's not that it's not needed, but the timing is not excellent.

I think we'll know more by the end of this calendar year because we would have seen a November election and a lot of things on it.

I so I just don't want us to be overly optimistic.

Um, I'm generally an optimistic person, but this really scares me.

What I would suggest is that wherever we're talking about new positions, please make them part-time.

We can always convert a part-time to a full-time when we say that, oh, we can we can do that.

Um, we've got you know, some something came up, that ballot measure didn't pass, we've got more revenue.

We can make that transition, but you can't do it the other way.

You can't, it's you know, you just can't take a full-time person in.

And it's there's a benefit package, it just gets more complicated.

So I'm not saying no, I'm just saying let's proceed cautiously.

I mean, there's some things when we're talking about um upgrading, for instance, a resiliency and sustainability manager.

Yes, that position, it's there, it should be upgraded.

That position, that individual brings in millions of dollars for resiliency and sea level rise adaptation, which is especially um important now that we are still back filling 55 million dollars in federal funds that got clawed back.

Um, so I'm just asking that we go position by position and say, not saying no, just saying not right now, and on the the public works um uh position, I know um we have an amazing public works director.

She's spread way too thin, but I also know that Public Works is doing this whole study coming up soon about how to restructure the department.

So rather than hire a full-time position for 251,800, if I recall correctly, how about we wait until that study comes back and informs us?

And again, I'm not saying no, I'm just saying not now because I'd like more information to be able to make a more informed decision.

We can always spend the money later, but you can't get that money back once it's spent.

And I am really mindful of the need to um to keep our reserves strong at these really uncertain times.

It may be that in um in um the um uh November ballot measures and everything's gonna be rosy, but we don't know that at this point.

Um, and then I'm I do understand it's great.

Um, Mr.

Long, our uh recreation parks director talks about this new park we're bringing online estuary to.

But if you keep reading, you also realize it then has 198,000 annual ongoing costs because you have to maintain your parks.

You have to make them clean and safe, and we do, but that's when we're not looking today.

We're not looking at the next fiscal year's budget, but it's out there.

So I'm just suggesting to our council let's be prudent and practical.

And um, yeah, like I said, we can always come back and make part-time positions full-time, decide we want that um position, but you know, let's get as much information as possible first.

Um, so next up, and and uh Mr.

Shin, I you look like maybe you wanted to say something.

Was I reading you wrong?

Okay.

Um, council member Jensen.

Um thank you, Madam Mayor.

And to you, I wanted to comment on your a couple of your points actually.

And the the first one was the safety officer for HR.

I just wanted to actually ask, I it sounded to me like the the city attorney said that the contractor that had been used had was not efficient that would use with temporary funds, so I want to suggest that that position be established because we don't really have an alternative, if I'm correct in what I heard, Mr.

Shin.

Council member, one alternative is to use part-time funding um to at least start the program.

Um I I've spoken to uh DHR director, and I understand that she supports having you know uh a start with part-time funding and uh to you know ramp that up as needed.

So have a part-time safety officer?

That would be uh I would definitely support that.

Thank you.

And then um the other comment with regard to your point about being prepared and not spending too much.

I just want to point out that I was um uh staff member in the city of Oakland, and there was a uh a cyber security breach, a huge cyber security breach in Oakland.

My information along with the information of all Oakland contractors, city staff, people who'd paid their parking tickets, it was huge.

And so I'm pointing that out because I think in order to to mayor's point, we should be prepared for an emergency, but sometimes we have to spend future funds now in order to be save money later.

And so I would like to hear um just from the IT director about I think it was about $250,000 that was recommended for security systems, and are there could you suggest all three of those are necessary, or is there one or another that would really protect us in the short term until the next budget cycle?

And just to be clear, I wasn't talking about cutting funds for programs and Mr.

Kagampa knows the minute the cyber attack happened with foster city, I was emailing him saying, could that happen here?

It's very reassuring what he told us, but point well taken, council member Mr.

Kagampa.

So it's the risk we take if we decide to spend later.

Um my concern is um we are always um uh right now our cybersecurity program is such that we are having we have a layered defense.

Uh but of course, with these other tools that we're requesting, it it protects data that is potentially vulnerable in this case.

So potentially we could wait um uh and roll the dice and see if it's okay to protect it now, or I should say later on.

Um my only concern is that um the recovery efforts and and all that could be.

Are all those programs intertwined?

Are they all three of the programs necessary or could the mid-year request be limited to one or two of the three?

So of the two of the two cybersecurity tools, the first one being uh the one where I use the analogy of um understanding where all the data is and being able to protect it and whatnot, that I would say would uh rank higher than the net preparedness tool.

Um, if I were to choose between the two.

Uh however, obviously I would like both, but uh if we do need to postpone it, uh I would say at least the the the data uh posture management tool would be the one I would prefer.

Thank you.

Then um yeah, I would support that.

Thank you for that information.

And finally, uh again, uh with uh with regard to the um public works division manager, I'll just say uh that I support that position.

I think that it's really critical that we have strong leadership at the top of all of our departments, especially public works, because we have some crumbling infrastructure, because we're doing so much to address sea level rise and address economic sustainability.

And and I um would suggest and and hope I know that the our um our sustainability manager has brought in a lot of funds to the city, and that'll continue regardless of whether this position is established, whether the department head position is established, but I would also suggest that there's probably a pretty good likelihood that there could be admin grant pass throughs to provide support for the admin costs related to positions.

This is often the case for grant funds.

So thank you to everyone at finance director of the departments.

This was really tremendous amount of information.

I learned a lot about what's going on in the city and how hard everyone in the city works.

So those are my comments, and those are the areas that I would like to see back into this this um budget.

Thank you.

Um, yeah, I was gonna um just kind of add to what council member gent said regarding the safety officer.

Um that you know, having a consult and it's essentially not money well spent.

So I'd rather spend a little more money and get quality work, especially this is going to be somebody that's gonna be invested in our city and know the staff and can enter um mingle with departments and on and on.

So I I think that um part-time is a great compromise.

Um it sounds yeah, so I'm I'm okay with that.

Um, but I I what I think is really important to me um is having the social worker in the library.

Um, so that is something that I would love to see continue.

Um, and that is my big push.

That's it.

Thank you for that.

I agree.

Um, let's just go down the line.

Councilmember Bowler.

Oh, thank you.

Um I think that the structural deficit problem is something that has to be um carefully considered right now, and it's a little different picture than it was when we first entered this budget cycle when we had a little bit stronger position.

I mean, between the economy, um, the pension issues, the aquatic center, and you know, some other uncertainties here.

These are these are really significant.

I mean, especially that aquatic center, five million dollars.

Um, as I understand it, when I look at the alternatives, it actually there's been some conversation, and I agree with my fellow council members on all most, I think most everything that's been stated.

Um, some of these items are upgrades or part-time, those are not the alternatives that the staff lists.

I think the staff is looking closely at the main items as being to get us to that 10.5 million dollar um result instead of 9.69.

And I and I support this, uh, these all these alternatives because basically, with the exception of the the safety officer, I think that's a fair compromise instead of using contractual services if we go part-time.

But other than that, um, all the other upgrades and part-time things aren't even listed as alternatives, so by implication, they're part of the uh staff recommendation.

That staff recommendation does include the public works parking technician.

I support that because there's full cost recovery there, so it's in a different category for that particular full-time position.

It also includes four full-time police officers, which I do support.

Um, going back in time, there was a decision made for the for this budget cycle for it to be a little bit more transparent than what had been historically, in the sense that instead of waiting till later down the line and getting a lot of cost savings from vacant police officer positions that were not filled, uh the the staff decided to promote a budget that included the transparent issue of the common uh feature of being unable, really unable historically to fill all these police officers' um positions for reasons that the police chief stated, and also you have to consider this in the vacuum of where we are right now.

We have a top performing department.

We have uh, as the chief stated, we have you know large reductions in crime across the boards for multiple years.

That's that's that's that's significant, that's impressive.

And part of it has to do with some of the technologies and things that were used.

We've had a series of uh budget works workshops and meetings over the last year or so that have really dived into these things a lot.

Um, what's the four additional officers going from 72 to 76 would mean just under 1 million dollars of additional um expense?

Yes, it's part of the original 88, yes, it's it's already been authorized in that sense, but we don't expect, I don't think if we got into some detailed questioning the police chief.

I don't think I think what he's told us implicit in that is that we can't get too much higher too quickly.

That's just not the way police hiring works.

And so if we were to go all the way to 88, I think that's roughly another three million dollars.

And and you know, if you're talking in the realm of these of the excess residual of 10 million dollars, that's 30 percent reduction in those in those um in those numbers.

And I'm not sure it's necessary right now for public safety.

I think we're talking about we're in a very strong position.

Um, having gotten to 72 officers, I would I might be corrected, but I don't think we've got to that in a stable setting for some time.

So the fact that we're there, that the department has done this great job of recruiting and training and and better job of retaining, that's been a challenge.

Um, of course it would be.

I mean, it's a it's a very difficult job.

Um, there's not as many people as historically want to sign up to do the job of police work.

But this is a great place to work in Alameda, and you can see across all of these different recommendations some really strong work.

And I want to commend um our interim city manager, Adam Pulitzer, our assistant city manager um Amy Woldridge, the our finance director, Roth McCarthy, and all the persons who sort of got creative and started with the premise that look every department in the city is important.

Every department needs to weigh in and figure out what is going to be essential.

And they've done that, they've identified that, and then when some circumstances changed, they reassessed, brought that reality to us, try to be as transparent as possible to make these difficult calls.

So I thought it was well done.

And I would support all the alternative uh recommendations with the correction of the um safety officer to being part-time.

Thank you.

And Councilman Daysak.

Well, great.

Well, thank you very much.

When we adopted the two-year budget that we're discussing tonight, when we adopted that last year, we agreed to set the police general fund spending budget at a total of 39,844,000 for fiscal year 25-26, which is ending next month.

That number of 39,844,000 dollars can accommodate 88 sworn police officer positions.

Why 88?

That is the annual number of sworn police officer positions that we have used as the target every year since 2011.

In fact, when I first started in 1996, there was 110 sworn police officer positions.

But when we adopted the police spending um budget totaling 39,844 for fiscal year 25-26, on that night, we froze police hiring at 72 positions, even though the 39,844,500 dollars could accommodate 88 sworn officer positions.

In effect, when we adopted that budget, we cut the sworn police officer positions from the traditional 88 positions to 72 positions for a cut of 16 sworn officer positions.

That is a 16% reduction in the number of sworn officer positions we can hire.

So again, for fiscal year 2025-2026, that will end next month.

We agreed to set the police spending budget at a total of 39,844 500.

Now, before us tonight, before us, tonight is uh a drive to set the police spending budget, general fund budget at a total of 42,973,000.

And that's for the next fiscal year, 2026-2027.

Bear in mind that 42,973,900 is a spending total, again, that is associated with the hiring of 88 sworn police officer positions.

In other words, that 42.9 million dollars could accommodate 88 sworn police officer positions.

But once again, the direction that uh is before us is to limit um hiring of sworn officer positions to 76 sworn officer positions and not to go to the 88 that could be accommodated.

So let me emphasize what's before us is not a revenue or a money problem.

We have projected on the revenue side, receiving enough revenues such that we are able to designate on paper at least, designate a total spending amount of 42,973,900 again, which is an amount that can accommodate 88 sworn officers.

But once again, we are purposely limiting the sworn officer hiring positions to 76.

Why?

Well, you kind of heard it this evening, because the savings resulting from not spending money that is rightfully for the police and safety of the residents of Alameda, that savings resulting from not spending the money that is there is being used for something else.

I didn't agree with that decision when we limited sworn officer position to 72 when we adopted the 2025-2026 budget, and tonight I still don't agree with the decisions to limit the sworn officer positions to 76, because once again, let me emphasize we have the budget on the revenue side to accommodate 88 sworn police officer positions, but we are purposely limiting it to 76 to force a savings that we're using for something else.

The police department should not be in effect subsidizing other departments.

I know that police chief uh Joshi wouldn't, you know, would have the greatest of all courtesies and respect for everyone, not to put things as bluntly as that.

So I respect them and I respect our staff, but as a council member, that's how I see it.

If we go to 88 officers, we are actually not spending additional new money because we already have the money, we're just making a conscious decision not to go to 88 and to limit at 76.

And last year we'd limit it at 72.

But to me, it's like I think a city of our size, we have always known every year, at least since 2011, that we really should be having at least 88.

What does that mean when you don't have 88 positions?

What that means is that the limited number of police that you have, you're burning them out because they're perhaps working overtime, or maybe that means you don't have the right enough police staffing at certain hours of the 24 hour cycle.

So to me, I don't agree with the decision to continue to limit the numbers well below the 88 that that we should be um targeting.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

I just want to make sure that out of respect for Chief Joshi, you did hear him when he said that even with that 75,000 signing bonus we offer, they still have a hard time attracting the quality caliber of officers they want.

And then there's the training piece.

He has only so many field training officers that need to ride with new officers for a matter of time.

So I mean, you you made your points very, very well, and there may be a time in the future when the situation can change, but I just want to make sure no one's left with the wrong impression because all of those are factors.

As soon as I finish my sentence, I'd love to call on you.

Um so anyway, I just wanted to make that clarification.

Period full stop.

Council member Jensen, yes.

And on the my question is regarding um the four police officer budget requests, which is 1.3 million dollars, and um it sounds like from what council member Day Sog is saying that that is actually not part of the that wouldn't come from that comes from some budget savings and it's already been budgeted and it would not come from the um carry for the 9.8 million that we're using to fund the other positions, um, Mr.

McCarthy, come on up.

Thank you, Mayor.

And thanks for the question, Councilmember Jensen.

Um, so the the vacancy savings uh when you look at the police budget itself, it is not included there.

The vacancy savings is included as the what we call non-departmental, which is basically the general fund as a whole without any department.

And so when you look at the um uh the numbers that um council member Desaw was saying before, yes, he is correct, and that they are budgeted in the police department itself.

However, the vacancy portion of that is um included in what's called the non-departmental, which is which can be used for any portion of the general fund.

So if to council member Desong's point, if we were to staff up to 88 officers, that would be about 18 to 20 million dollar expense.

And so that is already available in the budget.

Is that it's it's not available in the budget because it's used in other portions of it.

I eight, did you say I'm sorry?

For four officers, and that would take us to 76.

So to get to 88, that would be another 12 officers.

So um I'm just I don't I didn't actually know the map, but it would be around 15 or 16 at least.

One million or so.

Um, yeah, I'm not gonna.

No, just my point.

Even let's say 10 million, for example.

So if it were 10 million dollars to staff up to the 88 officers, if it were 10 million dollars, is that funding available if we were just to say let's just take that separately and it would it would it would be that savings is used in other departments, either the fire department or the finance department or city manager's office, it is used somewhere else.

So when we say the revenues are there, well, the so the police department doesn't uh produce a whole lot of revenues, they're very um obviously very uh uh respected and all that kind of but they do cost money, and so what what the revenues are or just general fund allocated, so from property taxes and transfer tax, like you were saying before.

And it's my understanding the revenues some of the revenue or the savings have been used for the new station for the new um police station at um in the west end partial savings have been used to support that.

I'm not aware of that.

Sorry, but I'm sorry, I missed that last piece.

That's a moot question.

I'm sorry, I don't want to take up too much time with that.

That so it in looking at the other positions and looking at all the positions in total, the positions that have not been approved or not being recommended for approval, it wouldn't be it wouldn't be appropriate to to look at the police officer positions as part of the total number of positions that have been requested in funding in terms of funding in terms of available funding.

Could you repeat that question?

Sorry, one more time.

So I understand.

If I were to say not approve, if I were to recommend not approving four police officers, and would that 1.3 million dollars be available to fund the other positions or programs or services that have been recommended by departments?

Correct.

Yes.

Thank you.

Councilmember Bowler.

Oh, thank you.

I just wanted to clarify a couple quick things.

Um when this budget cycle started, this council pushed city staff to increase the number of police officers that would be out on our streets.

Originally the budget was allocated for 70 officers.

That was this then city manager, Jennifer Ott was our city manager.

That was the staff's recommendation at the time.

And some of us pushed hard to try to increase that number, and staff found ways to do that.

There was a big discussion about this.

There was, you know, they called it um basically turning over rocks, trying to find ways all throughout our budget and ways to get creative to increase the number.

So I work in public safety.

Um I think public safety analogy is the core function of our government, it's extremely important.

If I thought for a second that this particular number of police officers increasing the number by four to 76, which we haven't gotten to that number of staffing in years in Alameda, would somehow still leave a problem for public safety, then I would be speaking up about it.

But I'm not the expert, even though I work in public safety.

I don't work in a police department, I work in a DA's office.

Chief Joshi didn't say there was a problem that required right now a solution in terms of hiring more police officers.

So I do support eventually hiring more police officers.

I believe there's been lots of discussions about how that can be done over time, but it's got to be done in a smart way so that we get the most talented people and retention is a piece of that because if you talk to people who are um doing the hard work behind the scenes within the department, they're concerned about the retention issues and they're working on those on daily basis.

And you know, this city council is concerned about those, and we've been working on them again and again in different things actions that we've taken.

So as those as that as those items improve and it's technology and other types of police services, and by the way, it's really important also to consider all the other things in the budget that touch on public safety.

We talked about social worker at the library.

Does anyone here not think that helps public safety?

It does.

There's a lot of different things that deal with social services, crime prevention.

It's one of the things that Alameda as a city that's concerned about, you know, residents of all types, we spend a lot of time on.

So it's a it's a it's a community approach, it's inner it's inner department, and it and it really involves a lot of different factors.

The fire department is a huge part of public safety, of course, you know, and their services with the care team and what they do for proactive law enforcement work is really important in Alameda.

So my time is up, and um, thank you.

No, I'm I'm good.

Thank you.

You've got lots of time.

I got lots of time.

I just I think uh council member bowler made many excellent points.

Um, and I just want to add to that if we were even to decide like this is really important, and we budgeted for it.

I mean, logistically, that money is just going to sit in a bank, and that's our money, that's taxpayer money.

Um, I don't want it to sit in the bank.

I want it to go to pay for the things that we believe uh, I mean, we just got a small taste of the things that our city needs, um, that our residents deserve that we pay into, and um I think that we have a plan.

Um, you know, we have increased um our safe our police officers, um, and to council member uh Bowler's point.

Um, and this is nothing that we're just gonna think about, talk about tonight, we're gonna forget about it.

Um, you know, this is it's constant.

Um, but we are also investing in like to your point, uh, Councilmember Bowler, um, like it the care team or having this the um the social worker, you know.

Um, these are the things are you know, the parks getting youth involved in activities.

There, there are so many things that we do as a community that helps with this.

Um, and I so I I don't even see it as diverting funds.

I feel like it's we're diverting funds to safety, not specifically police officers, but we are um so I I feel I feel like we're being very responsible um with our budget and absolutely keeping safety a priority for our residents.

And with that in mind, vice mayor, would you like to make a motion um that we um well it's providing direction on funding changes for the June 2nd, 2026 mid-cycle budget adoption that will come back?

We have before us um asked them to pull up on the screen this list, and I think you've heard the um the uh the change the correction on the wouldn't be a contractual safety officer, it would be part-time.

You noted that and was there what was the additional direction we were gonna include something else?

Um and again, this those are the changes, but well, it's there on the screen.

But the social workers in the library, we definitely want and just um director Woolridge.

Um, maybe if I could help recap and see if this is what um council is directing staff.

Um, so what I'm hearing is that you want uh we want us to incorporate all of the alternatives listed here under that alternative bullet point, with the exception of the safety officer um being a part-time safety officer, so adding that back in.

And you're okay with all of the other changes that you heard from the department heads for any kind of contractual services or the staffing upgrades.

Well, my ask was that any new hires be part-time at this point.

We can always transition them to full-time.

So for things like the park maintenance worker, public works division, so you're saying all of those be part-time as well.

I am okay.

We I'm happy to go back and talk to staff that may work for some positions and less so for others.

So I'll talk to the department heads and see where that is feasible.

Um, make a motion, and and then also we want to make sure that programs like the cyber security are all um they're as is.

That's why I wanted to confirm.

So all of the everything listed on of all the other requests, whether it was position upgrades or other contractual services or supplies, are as presented.

Right, and including the um the direction to staff uh to conduct the five-year budget forecast and return to staff with recommendations at the fiscal year 2627 mid year.

I think we have a motion being formulated by the vice mayor.

You want to trace?

She wants to do it, okay.

Yeah, I'll make a motion to accept the alternatives proposed for considerations, except for that.

Um the the um could we won't use we'll have a 0.50 safety officer, and other than that, except for the four police officers, we would have two police officers, and we would add to the recommendations for an amount we will still have a savings of about $50,000 by adding one library social worker, one public works division manager, one a stella permit system, and the IT threat ID and protection.

So those amounts add up to $550,000, which would be less than half of the savings for of two police officers.

Council Martinson, are you saying two police officers, not four?

Yes.

Well, I would not second that, and I hope no one else would either, but is there a second?

Well, and thank you.

I think that we have options to to provide other departments as well and hire two officers, and then we can go when we do the budget, the upcoming budget.

There'll be, and we have a city measure.

There will be opportunities to add additional police officers.

So assuming there's no second to that motion, I would then entertain a substitute motion.

Um I would like to make a substitute motion to um adopt the budget, um, considering the alternatives, um, including what we discussed tonight to change um the safety officer from contractoral to a part time.

And just to be clear, the um, I think that was social workers and library.

Thank you.

Is there a second to that motion?

Second by Council Member Bowler.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No.

Okay, that motion passes three to two, um, with Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmember Bowler, affirmative and council members gentlemen and Dayside opposing.

Again, thank you, staff, all of you who presented and those who work in the departments for all your thoughtful time and comments.

We have exceeded the two hour rule.

I always take a break, almost always take a break at two hours.

We're going to take it now.

It's just hard on staff and everybody who's staffing this meeting to go without a break.

So it's um we're going to come back at nine oh five.

Everybody, please be in your chairs with smiling faces at nine oh five.

See you then.

Thank you.

Yes.

Take your seat.

I'd love to go out to breakfast with you, but not at one in the morning.

So, um, anybody anybody who's still chatting might get a check for talking.

Did you get those in school?

I did.

Okay, we are back.

It's nine.

Oh, six.

We said we come back at nine.

Oh five, so here we are.

Thank you, you all.

You're doing really, really well.

I know this was a long session.

We're not quite done with that item because we bifurcated the city attorney's item.

So, um, but we're gonna move through more expeditiously now, aren't we, Madam Clerk?

Do you want to remind us where we are, please?

So we just have the city attorney portion of the presentation left.

We've got their slides ready to go.

Um, bowler has recused himself and left the meeting.

And so we can just go through the city attorney slides.

All right.

Hello, hello.

We're ready for me to proceed.

We are ready.

Take it away.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, esteemed council members.

I'm Julia Gonzalez.

I'm the Chief Assistant City Attorney, overseeing the prosecution and public rights unit.

Tonight I will provide an overview and highlights of the city attorney's office departments before turning it over to Bill Chapin, my colleague and red program director.

Last year was a banner year for the city attorney's office.

And if we could have the next slide, presentation.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you so much.

So last year was a banner year for the office.

Um, we received national recognition from the American Bar Association in its award of the Hodson public service award related to our affirmative litigation and advocacy on behalf of the Barn Hill Marina residents.

Our civil team joined many other local governments in suing the Trump administration to protect critical grant funding supporting important council priorities.

Thus far, those efforts have been successful, as the courts have granted a preliminary injunction in joining the federal government from imposing unlawful grant conditions such as anti-DEI and uh mandatory immigration enforcement conditions.

The prosecution and public rights unit highlight of the year was almost certainly launching the first in-city victim services program.

And that provides that provides crisis intervention, victim compensation and restitution support, as well as critical support services to victims here in the city of Alameda.

Further, the city attorney's office has been able to provide significant cost savings to the city by pursuing and winning half a million dollars approximately in grant funding to support this vital program.

It was also an incredibly productive year for the prosecution unit as we reviewed over 1,200 cases, misdemeanor cases, which represents a 50% increase year over year from 2024.

And that was utilizing the same number of staff.

So that was not with an increase to staffing.

Our police auditor continued her work with the Alameda Police Department in pursuit of Calia accreditation.

Her important compliance work also continues to be supported by grant funding.

So, in sum, we're pleased to report on these successes in which our department remains committed to accomplishing in cost effective ways.

Thank you.

I'll invite Mr.

Chapin.

Thank you, Ms.

Gonzalez.

Welcome.

Thank you.

The rent program, of course, is responsible for administering the city's rent ordinance, which, among other things, limits annual rent increases for most rental units in the city and also provides just cause eviction protections and has registration requirements for all rental units in the city.

Our operations are fully funded by an annual program fee that is adjusted each year based on inflation.

Since this current system went into full effect, the average annual increase has been 3.6%.

During that time, the rent program has also addressed some longstanding structural budget challenges, and through careful management of expenses, we've been able to actually expand our services without requiring any additional fee adjustments.

Just as an example, last year we established a new staff position focused on addressing and resolving invalid rent increases.

And as a result, last year, more than half a million dollars was returned to tenants who had been paying more in rent than what is allowed under local law.

Looking forward, we are excited to launch a new program in the upcoming fiscal year that will feature regular clinics where members of the public will be able to talk one-on-one with staff members and get answers to their questions about rent regulations, housing rights, and legal resources.

We're always looking for ways to improve our online resources.

We have several improvements planned for our department web page, registration portal, and informational videos.

And we will be coming back to you in just a couple of weeks with a proposal to better regulate the fees that tenants are charged for utility usage.

We think that these reforms are important, but they may require additional staffing to implement.

For the mid-cycle, we are requesting a 40,000 transfer from the general fund to support programs that provide housing to low-income residents.

Specifically, this is to address a policy decision that council made to waive the annual program fee for rental units that are in a housing voucher program such as Section 8.

This was recently reaffirmed with an updated fee resolution that council approved in April.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage and to support the programs like Section 8.

Uh, and thus it serves as an important component of uh the city's fair housing goals and the um uh uh and the goals to uh support housing for all Alamedans.

Um, through the registration process, staff has confirmed that this policy amounts to uh approximately $80,000 in fees waived uh each year.

For the council resolution, this amount is to be paid from the general fund.

Uh, however, we are only requesting 40,000 as we believe that the rent program budget can handle offsetting half the cost by earmarking some of the money that we collect from late penalties and other administrative fines.

Uh, and then future biennial budgets uh will include similar requests.

Um, and that is all that I have for you, be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much.

Um, council, any excuse me, clarifying questions.

And do we have any uh public comment, madam clerk?

We do not then we can go to council deliberation or council motion to approve.

Um I was gonna say I am definitely going to vote to approve.

I um I think it's important that we um support um, you know, affordable housing in any in all forms, so I think protections and all those good things.

Absolutely.

Yep.

So would you like to make that motion?

I move that we um adopt the uh budget proposal for the city attorney's office.

For the city attorney's office.

Okay, we have a motion by uh Vice Mayor Pryor, seconded by council member Jensen.

Any further discussion briefly, Council?

Quick comment.

You know, our city attorney's office, um, as some of you might know, but many of you might not know, is unique in a California in the way that it affirmatively um go makes an effort to help out uh tenants in achieving um fair um uh housing and um and and justice for them.

So most um city attorney's office don't do that kind of thing.

So um so I definitely applaud uh the work that um our city attorney even shin has been doing uh in in bringing that um from his previous place of employment, I think in Santa Monica to here.

Thank you for that observation, Councilmember Daysogan.

You know, Ms.

Gonzalez referred to an um award that the city attorney's office received from the American Bar Association for their their work in recovering quite a bit of um uh excess fees rents that were charged by this um property owner who owned a marina actually, and these were tenants in floating homes and houseboats, many of whom were elderly on um fixed incomes, and they were um they did a very good job uh taking that all the way to the court.

Was that one to the court of appeal?

Uh that case went to the uh federal court.

Federal court, that's right, federal court and and they won and they got this recovery for the tenants.

The American Bar Association makes that award to one legal clinic per year, and the Alameda City Attorney's Office won it for that year.

Don't applaud because we don't applaud, but just in your heart, you know, you should know that.

Anyway, so um we have had a motion to approve the requested budget by vice mayor um prior seconded by council member Jensen.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

I that was unanimous.

Could someone please find council member bowler and bring him back?

And um, and then we are moving on.

Okay, madam clerk.

So this meeting, you're you can adjourn and then we'll go on to the regular, yeah.

I can indeed.

All right, so um we have now completed the um budget workshop and um the special meeting that we had.

We're now I'm not gonna call the regular city council meeting to order.

And um we'll start with the roll call.

Well, has been at a five present.

Thank you.

And Madam Clerk, any um agenda changes?

I have I have one agenda change.

Um, Madam Clerk, the item on um what's the number?

The parking one is not going to be heard this evening.

That's the um that is 7B is a boy.

Okay.

So just staff help me out.

Um, we let Ms.

Smith go home.

Help me out with um, we should let her go home in just a minute.

Um help me out with how do how do we do this?

Is it a so you can you can vote to continue it to the continued section, section six of the next agenda, the May 19th agenda, or staff can just bring it back, whichever you prefer.

Um, I haven't seen what the next agenda looks like.

You all probably have a better idea than I do.

Where what would you recommend?

Is the first biggest item on that day, and then there's a recruitment thing that's required by law.

Okay, that's not too heavy.

Well, then six.

Let's bring it back.

And so we'll continue it and bring it back as we just need a vote if you're gonna.

Yeah, we need a vote.

Okay, so what we're looking for is a vote to continue.

Item 7 B to the six continued items on May 19th.

Thank you.

What she said.

Do I um have a motion and a second?

It's been moved by council member Jensen, seconded by Councilmember Bowler.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, thank you.

That was that.

Okay.

Um, now we come to proclamations and special orders of the day.

We have two proclamations, so both very special, and I'm not reading either one of them.

Um, but first I'm going to um turn to our vice mayor, Michelle Pryor, who will read the proclamation.

Well, what proclamation are you reading?

And do you want to tell us a little connection you might have?

Yes, this is the Jewish American Heritage Month proclamation.

Yay!

My mom watches meetings remotely every Tuesday.

Yeah, so I'm in LA.

I told her, like, stay up.

Like you need to see it's really sweet.

Um I'm really proud to read this.

My grandfather came here to the bay in San Francisco on a boat.

He was very undocumented.

Um, look at me now.

No, um, I I just um it just the things that are going on in in our times.

I'm I'm really glad that there are many of us that are standing up to the atrocities that we are seeing in our own country.

Um, you know, this country has been very good to me and my family, and I want that for all families.

Um, so here we go.

Jewish American Heritage Month originated with a 1980 joint resolution of Congress to authorize and request the president to issue a proclamation designating Jewish Heritage Week.

On April 24th, 1980, President Jimmy Carter issued the first Jewish Heritage Week proclamation.

In 2006, both houses of Congress passed resolutions urging the president to proclaim the national observation of a month recognizing the Jewish American community.

Since 2006, presidents Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden have all issued proclamations for Jewish American Heritage Month, encouraging the people of the United States to learn more about Jewish heritage and the contributions of Jewish people throughout the history of our nation.

In 1790, President George Washington expressed his support for religious freedom for Jewish Americans in a letter to the uh Toro synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, affirming that the newly founded United States would give in quotes to bigotry, no sanction to persecution, no assistance, and offered his wishes that the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the goodwill of the other inhabitants.

Today, Jewish Americans of many backgrounds, traditions, and identities, including generations of immigrants, represent a diverse and vibrant community that has helped shape American history, culture, and society through profound achievements across literature, music, science, education, government, law, the arts, and more.

Jewish Americans have enriched the civic and cultural fabric of communities across the nation, including here in the city of Alameda.

Jewish Americans have also contributed significantly to public service and civil rights, standing in solidarity with other communities to advance equality, justice, and democratic values.

Since our nation's founding, more than one million Jewish American men and women are I felt like I read that wrong.

Men and women are estimated to have served in the United States armed forces.

Oh, including two of my cousins.

Participating in every major American conflict and reflecting the bravery and valiance of Jewish American service members, including those that made the ultimate sacrifice to defending the Constitution, freedom, and the American way of life.

The history of Jewish Americans includes both remarkable achievements and periods of hardship, including discrimination and anti-Semitism, reminding us of the importance of vigilance, remembrance, and education.

The city of Alameda recognizes the importance of honoring Jewish heritage, celebrating diversity, and standing firmly against anti-Semitism and all forms of hate.

We affirm that education and awareness are among the most effective ways to combat anti-Semitism and hate, and commit to working to ensure the safety, security, and dignity of Jewish Americans in all aspects of their lives, including the workplace, college, and university campuses, synagogues, and at home.

Oh, can I use my name?

Yeah.

Now, therefore, now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Michelle Pryor, and also our mayor, Marilyn Ezie Ashcraft, Mayor and Vice Mayor, here by proclaim May 2026 as Jewish American Heritage Month in the city of Alameda, and call on elected officials, faith leaders, and community members to condemn and counter all acts of anti-Semitism and uplift Jewish stories and voices.

I also encourage all residents to learn about, celebrate and honor the rich history, culture, and contributions of Jewish Americans, including by participating in these activities presented by the Alameda Free Library.

There is a Jewish American Heritage School Age Story Time.

Tuesday, May 12th, 4:30 to 5:30, Bay Farm Island Library.

Stories, discussions, and craft activities exploring Jewish American identity with educator Natalie Aber, celebrating Irving Berlin.

I love him.

Saturday, May 16th, 2 to 3 p.m.

at the main library.

Family sing along, celebrating America's beloved songwriter with songs, activities, and stories.

This program is presented alongside Miss Jen from Temple Israel of Alameda.

And there's a film screening, Eli Weissel, Soul on Fire, Thursday, May 28th from 4 to 5:30 p.m.

at the West End Library.

It's a PBS documentary exploring Eli Weissel's life, writings, and fight against injustice, and free copies of night available while supplies last.

And last, live performance, uh Volcott, Saturday, May 31st from 2 to 4 p.m.

in the main library, a cappella vocal ensemble blending folk jazz and cantorial traditions, multilingual performance promoting peace and reconciliation.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Prior.

Nice job.

And then May is also another ethnic cultural awareness um month.

And so I have asked our council colleague Tony Desag, would you introduce yourself a little bit about your connection to this topic, subject matter, and then the proclamation?

Great.

Well, thank you.

It's a privilege and an honor to read this proclamation.

My grandfather, my late grandfather, came to the United States quite frequently because in 1918, while he was an 18-year-old in the Philippines, he had joined the U.S.

Navy in 1918 as a cook.

So that took him around the world, including many places in the United States, and ultimately in the 1940s and 50s.

And I've seen uh newspaper articles referencing um his sons.

Um had settled in downtown Oakland in the 1940s and the 1950s.

Um my father uh was still as a kid, still in the Philippines, but ultimately joined the U.S.

uh Navy and then um that's how we ended up in the United States.

Okay, so let me read this.

Uh National Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month Proclamation.

Tuesday, May 5th, 2026.

May is National Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month.

I'm gonna shorten that by saying AANHPI.

Um, Heritage Month, a time to recognize and celebrate the histories and contributions of peoples whose roots span Asia, the Pacific Islands, and the Native Hawaiian heritage.

Today, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are the fastest growing racial group in the United States.

This year's theme, Power and Unity, strengthening communities together, reflects the importance of connection, mutual support, and collaboration across cultures and generations.

We observe AA NHPI Heritage Month in May to mark two moments in U.S.

history, the immigration of the first Japanese people to the United States in 1843, and the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad on May 10th, 1869, built with significant contributions from Chinese immigrant workers, and the final point of which was the City of Alameda.

AA and HPI communities have been essential to our nation's growth through their work in science and medicine, education and law, business and technology, public service and the arts.

However, over the years, AA and HPI residents, including in the city of Alameda and the Greater Bay Area, have endured and overcome numerous hardships, although some still persist today.

These include the Chinese Immigration Act of 1882 that banned all Chinese immigrants for 20 years, and the incarceration during World War II of people of Japanese descent.

With the COVID-19 pandemic came an increase in racist and xenophobic rhetoric and physical violence toward Asian Americans, which unfortunately continues to the present day.

However, there are now organizations, including Asian Americans advancing justice, Asian and Pacific Islander American votes, and National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, all of whose work embodies this year's Heritage Month's theme of power and unity, strengthening communities together.

In the city of Alameda, over 30% of residents identify as Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, including Filipino American families with longstanding ties to the former Alameda Neville Air Station, whose service members' relatives helped build deep community roots here in our island.

AA NHPI residents from many backgrounds continue to play an essential role in the continuing story of Alameda.

These residents include Superior Court Judge Ben Reyes, the second, and former city council member Malia Vella, and Councilmember, Tony Desog.

Our community is also enriched by the legacy of AA NHPI residents who have served our community and beyond, including the late Wilma Chan, former California State Assembly Speaker and Alameda County Supervisor, including Betty Yee, former California State Controller.

And of course, Rob Bonta, California Attorney General and former state assembly member and former Alameda City Council member.

Also, Lena Tam, former Alameda City Council member and now Alameda County Supervisor.

Others include Reverend Michael Yoshi, former pastor of Buena Vista United Methodist Church and co-chair of Friends of Joaquin Foquin, and Joanne Guitarte, Alameda Businesswoman and former Chamber of Commerce Board Chair.

We also recognize leaders whose work created lasting pathways for others, including Patsy Takemoto Mink, the first woman of color elected to the U.S.

Congress, and co-author of Title IX, and Ellison Onezuka, the first Asian American astronaut and member of NASA's Space Shuttle Challenger crew, as well as Olympic figure skaters with Bay Area roots, Christy Yamaguchi, and Alyssa Liu.

The City of Alameda proudly recognizes the contributions of AA NHPI residents, past and presence, whose impact is reflected in the vibrancy, diversity, and wonder of our city.

Now, therefore, I, Marilyn Ezie Ashcraft, mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby proclaim May 2026 as Asian American Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the City of Alameda.

Encourage all residents to learn more about AANHPI histories and cultures, including through events presented by the Alameda Free Library, events such as Family Odyssey Dance, which is this Saturday, May 9th, from 11:15 to 1215.

And it's at the main library.

That's the family odyssey dance.

And it will also be at the main library May 17th, which is a Sunday.

And finally, there will be a talk given by Alka Joshi.

It's a talk being conducted in partnership with the Friends of Alameda Library, as New York Times bestselling author, Alka Joshi discusses her Jaipur trilogy and her new novel, Six Days in Bombay.

And she discusses that in conjunction with journalist Deepa Fernandez.

So that's a talk at the main library on Saturday, May 30th, from 1 to 4 p.m.

So make sure to check out the main library's website to see all the wonderful events, including the ones that uh Vice Mayor Pryor had uh indicated.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Desag.

Thank you both for reading the proclamations.

Okay, now we move on to oral communications, non-agenda items, where speakers may address the council on items not on the agenda.

We'll take 15 minutes now.

And if we have more speakers, there's another uh opportunity at the end of the regular calendar.

Madam Clerk, do we have speakers?

We do, and they'll get two minutes each.

Uh, the first is Tiffany Southwick, then Liz Varela, then Josh Altieri.

All right.

Come on up.

When you hear your name, um, come on up and like I say, make that um make that microphone yours, bring it to your level, and welcome.

Okay, let's see if I got my readers on.

All right.

Hi, everyone.

Um, Madam Mayor and Council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight on the heels of National Small Business Week.

Uh, my name is Tiffany Southwick and I own two Mary's Mercantile, a small shop on the waterfront at the Grand Marina.

And I have come tonight on behalf of myself and my fellow neighbors to firmly request action regarding the public access closures affecting our business district in the Grand Marina.

Um, let's see, we'll make it short.

Um, we got two minutes.

So um, basically, we are here because all of our businesses are in jeopardy.

There's multiples that are down there, and with this closure, we are all failing.

And we don't like that.

We have no exposure, no transparency from the city.

Um, we immediately come to ask you in desperate times to ask with urgency and direct staff to come with us to a concrete plan that includes immediate public-facing timeline for dock completion, a formal accountability structure between the city and the BCDC trust with documented responsibility, multiple wayfaring or wayfinding signs installed now from key corridors, because nobody knows that the Grand Marina exists at all.

Half of the people here don't even know that the Grand Marina has shops.

Um, active city promotion of marina businesses and events through city channels, a monetary contribution to offset the signage, promotion, and activation costs the businesses have been carrying alone.

Um, sorry.

Uh and if we don't find the funds, we risk losing an entire business district.

And this is very, very urgent and important.

So I hope that you might consider helping us.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Liz Varella, then Josh Altieri, then Corinne Kirschbaum.

Remember the no applause rule we applied in our heart to keep the moving, the meeting moving.

I saw this forella, did I not?

Was it my imagination?

Did she leave?

I saw her in the parking lot.

Okay.

All right.

Okay.

Josh Altieri, then Karen Kirschbaum.

Hi.

Welcome.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and uh council members.

My name is Josh Altieri.

I'm the uh communication banner and community and community programs manager at the Housing Authority, the City of Alameda.

Just wanted to share a couple quick updates.

Business as usual with the housing authority, staying busy, uh housing over 3,000 uh City of Alameda residents in 1,800 uh low-income households, as well as partnering with 400 over 400 local landlords to create more affordable housing uh opportunities.

Um, and we just concluded our uh 2026 customer service survey.

Uh we uh surveyed over 1,200 program participants, tenants and landlords.

We had a 15% response rate, that's the second highest in the last 10 years.

Uh, and 91% of the survey respondents indicated that they uh felt that the customer service they received from housing authority staff either met or exceeded expectations.

So we're happy to report that.

Uh next, we uh just published two uh affordable housing opportunities on the doorway housing portal.

Uh first one is Rosefield Village.

Uh, the application deadline for that is Monday, May 11th.

Um, the second property is Eagle Village.

The deadline for that is uh Wednesday, May 20th.

And the these are property-specific wait lists, not to be confused with our housing choice voucher program.

Anyone that's interested in these affordable housing opportunities, please visit us at www.alamedahsg.org.

And then we're gonna be listing three more properties in the month of May to include Esperanza apartments, our largest family property, uh, Parrot Village, another family property, and uh Lynette Lynette Corner, which is senior housing.

And just wanted to touch on one uh we have a couple highlights regarding community partnerships to benefit our program participants and tenants, but I only have time to mention one, and that we're gonna be partnering with the uh friends of the um Alameda Animal Shelter on Sunday, May 17th.

There's gonna be a pet wellness click, pet wellness clinic.

It's gonna be open to the public.

It's gonna be at Lynette Corner 2,000 leakers circle.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Corinne Kirschbaum, and then Kathleen uh Von Martin.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Okay.

What about her?

Well, kind of confused on what I should actually say tonight since I am here every other week.

My name is Corinne Kirschbaum.

And I am demanding for an independent investigation into the disturbing conduct of Marilyn as the Ashcraft.

I won't consider her mayor because she doesn't deserve that title.

And other city of Alameda officials.

I'm not asking anyone to accept my conclusions without investigation.

I'm asking investigators to look at whether Ashcraft acting alone or with other city officials participated in, enabled, ignored, or helped conceal conduct that may constitute whistleblower retaliation, civil rights in interference, witness intimidation, obstruction, misuse of public funds, false public reporting, conspiracy and fraud, waste and abuse involving homeless services, contracts, and public money, and federal and state, federal.

This is not simply about me being insulted, ignored, or disagreed with.

This is about what happened after I reported serious red flags involving the city's homeless services contracts, including missing financial reports, missing, not one for five years, not one.

Missing performance reports, not one for five years.

Missing evaluations, not one for five years.

Missing data, none, and a lack of proof that required services were actually being provided.

They weren't.

The city's own contracts required reporting and oversight.

Yeah, when I requested records, the city attorney's office admitted in substance that the city could not produce records they did not have.

I was also told that the Village of Love gave reports orally over Zoom, orally, taxpayers' money, orally.

You do this to you every time.

And I guess we should the next week.

And your time is up.

Our next speaker.

Kathleen Von Martens.

Welcome.

All right.

All right.

We um do not tolerate disruption.

You've had your time.

We'll take a brief break.

Yeah, there's more water.

Okay.

Our next speaker.

Come on up.

Let's let the door close.

It will close.

All right.

All right.

Welcome.

Okay.

Hi.

That was interesting.

Um, real quick.

This is totally on the you know, off the cuff here, but I I heard your IT person speaking about um uh cyber security concerns.

I work in tech, I volunteer at three different AI safety and risk grassroots organizations.

And I just want to make sure that all the good work that you're doing here is not jeopardized by the very very serious risks that are coming our way from the most recent AI models that you might have heard about that have come out from anthropic and whatnot.

So I just want to urge you guys to really harden your security.

And if you have any questions about whether you should be spending the money on it, you should.

And I would just urge you also to um, I know that you were the city was uh contacted by a group called the Frontier Valley a couple of years ago to set up some kind of tech system out on the base and whatnot.

You'll probably be um you'll probably be approached by uh AI data center type of people who would want to set up on the base because it's a great, seemingly a great location for that, and I would urge you to uh not go down that path.

So thank you for listening.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, that was our last speaker.

Okay.

With that, we will close public um oral communication, non-agenda items, and we will move to the consent calendar.

These are routine items that are approved um by um one motion unless council members remove items for discussion and removed items are called after agenda items.

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

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

Okay, and then um council, are there any questions you have?

We because you can ask questions on a consent calendar item without pulling.

And actually, I also wanted to okay.

We will come to that in a minute.

There's an item 5E where I'm gonna ask our interim, excuse me, ask our assistant city manager Amy Woldridge to just um give us a little thumbnail sketch of what Rise Housing Solutions does because it's it's an important program.

Um, but any clarifying questions, counsel about any consent calendar items, vice mayor prior.

Um, I do have a question about five C.

I was gonna ask your mic.

I've talked to you.

Sorry, if I I do have a question about five C.

Um, I was gonna also ask something about 5E and um sure.

So wait, sorry.

Okay, the five.

What else?

And then I it's gonna be a long meeting.

I think that was what those were just the and what was the other one?

E.

Well, she were you were already gonna ask, or Amy was gonna.

And if you think of another one, we'll go to it.

Okay, okay, and on um 5C, do you want to um introduce that item?

And um, I believe that's the police chief.

Yeah, um, so five C is the recommendation to accept the annual um automated license plate reader data report.

Um, I I've asked this before, but I just think it's important because we do get a lot of people asking.

Um I was gonna so two questions.

So I was gonna ask, is Flock the vendor we are using, and then if so, if we find out Flock is um being used essentially in a way we find intrusive, or for example, our info is being routed to an unfriendly party, how quickly can we shut down our agreement with Flock?

Sure.

So we do use Do you want to introduce yourself for the record?

Oh, I'm sorry.

I know you are the record.

Good evening, uh Madam Mayor and members of the council.

Umishant Joshi, police chief.

Uh so our vendor is Flock.

And then the second part of your question was Oh, like if if we find out that um Flock is using our information in a way that we, you know, they're giving it to a party that we find unfriendly.

Um I don't know another different word for that, um, or if they're just using it in an intrusive way, not in the way that it is currently being used, not in the way that it's intended in a way that we would describe as nefarious.

Like how could we, how soon could we end our relationship with them?

So that would be a breach of of uh the agreement.

Um to give a little bit more information on that.

Uh the way that the the information comes in is that it's it's actually the information is only with APD, but if there was some way that they were to go into our system and and share it um unauthorized, then we would uh that would be a breach of our agreement and we would move to uh end our agreement with them immediately.

Okay, thank you.

Any other clarifying?

Oh, you um would you want to hear what the assistant city manager says yes by the?

I was gonna my question might already be answered.

So I was gonna let you oh, we can ask the question.

Oh, well, my my question was um about how many programs are purchased each year through this program.

Or properties, maybe I think homes, properties, how many homes homes, what did I say?

I thought I said home programs, but anyway.

I meant to say home, sorry.

It's getting late.

I understand what you're saying.

Yeah, all right.

Great, thank you, Mayor.

Um, so the housing human services uh oops.

Um sorry.

Uh City Council two years ago approved a pilot and housing with Rise Housing and housing human services division oversees that um basically it's a single application system for below market rate ownership uh units that are these are ones that are required to be built by um residential market rate developers to fulfill their inclusionary housing obligations.

Um what this process does did is it greatly increases city's ability to more efficiently get the units sold and to get people housed.

Um, and if it means that each person only needs to, it's an annual lottery lottery, so it all means that each person only needs to complete one application.

Previously, each housing developer had their own process that complied with our requirements.

And then if I wanted to apply for a low-income below market rate house, I would have to submit to each of the different um housing projects, housing developments, but now they just submit one application, so it's much more streamlined for the applicants.

Um what it also did is it expedited the sale of these units, which lowered vacancy rates.

So, for example, to your question, Vice Mayor Pryor, um, since this program began in 2024, 18 households have purchased a below market rate uh unit in Alameda.

Um I also want to share that, you know, with the third party administrators when it was more scattered, um, there was different efficacy rates of how well they were getting how quickly they were getting people into units.

And one uh concrete example is we worked as is there was a housing development that was struggling to fill their units, was taking about a year and a half.

They met with us their last two units, they decided to because right now it's it's optional whether they want to work with us or work with our own administrator, they chose to work with us and we got those two units filled in three months.

So um it's a very efficient process.

Um, and I also just want to lastly add that the amended inclusionary um housing policy will be coming to you uh for review on May 19th.

And part of that housing policy will actually require um housing developers to use this process and will no longer be optional.

That's great.

Thank you for that.

And um, Ms.

Wildridge, if someone was interested in buying a below market rate home in Alameda, where would they go to find information about this program?

Great question, Mayor.

They go to the city's website, um Alameda CA.gov and just uh you can just use the search bar to look for below market rate.

Thank you for that.

Okay, any other clarifying questions, Councilor?

Uh Councilmember Jensen.

Thank you.

Um, I have a question.

I'll start with um the uh item on the purchase of vehicles.

Let me see.

Oh, yeah.

The vehicle purchase for J is 5J.

Thank you.

Yes, 5J, the recommendation to authorize purchase of for 2026 Rivian RIS and as well as um Ford and Interceptor Hybrid SUVs.

My question is um uh why.

Well, first of all, how were the uh how was Rivian chosen?

We heard this this um request with Tesla vehicles, and now I see that there's Ruby, and I just wanted to know how the how the Rivians were chosen from among the EVs and hybrids.

Welcome, Public Works Director Smith.

It's good you ignored me when I told you to go home.

Uh good evening again.

I'm Aaron Smith, City's public works director.

Thanks for the question.

I'm gonna um attempt to speak on behalf of both the police and fire department.

I represent fleet services, and we're also obviously part of the decision.

Um, and so I think as you've uh read in the staff report, what we're proposing is what we're calling a mixed fleet um approach right now as the market continues to evolve and change in terms of EV offerings.

Um, so both the police and fire have specific operational needs.

Um the Teslas that came forward were more specific to police patrol vehicles.

So we've sort of done some reflecting on that, and both the police and the fire department are now looking at Rivians, which is a sport utility vehicle.

Uh both of those would be used for staff or command vehicles as that model aligns with what they need.

Um, and then they both, as shown in the staff report, they have their own unique sort of upfitting cost, and Rubian offers a lot of benefit both in terms of operational uh flexibility as well as uh uh purchase pricing, although Rivians are a little bit expensive to other models.

Other models aren't really comparable, they it's not apples to oranges, um, and we were able to file some competitive pricing buying directly from Rivian and buying them all together.

We got discount pricing.

Thank you.

And when we this came before the council in February, there were two Teslas being proposed.

Now there's four Rivians.

I these are the same for the same purpose.

Is that correct?

And now there's.

So there's a total of 25 vehicles across the police and fire department that were scheduled for replacement this year.

Uh what came forward before uh were for the two police patrol vehicles, those were Teslas.

Those are now will be Rivians and the fire department.

They had their own um replacements.

They're selecting two and deciding to defer the rest of their replacements that were due this year until next year since new EV models are expected to be on the market.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I just want to commend the decision to buy the electric vehicles.

Um, we're an island, we know that sea level rise is an existential threat, and that greenhouse gas emissions make it worse.

So I appreciate our island city with its own municipal electric company that has a 100% clean green portfolio, putting our money where our mouth is.

And you heard today in the budget discussions that we're adding more EV charging infrastructure.

So thank you, Director Smith.

Um, and I have a question for on 5C for Chief Joshi.

Comment up, Chief.

Um, just to expand a little bit on what Vice Mayor Pryor brought up.

I I think that there has been some concern about the use of the data, regardless of um of whether it's in here or elsewhere and the distribution of data.

So um, I did read the report, and it it is clear that there are several steps that are taken before the data is released to another agency.

And you also did in the report list the agency's 14 agencies, I believe, that were able to receive this information.

So um I guess the concern is that one of those 14 agencies or however many ask in 2026 for ALPR data could share that data in a way that we would not that isn't in line with our policies.

So can you just comment on that, please?

Yeah, so when they make a request, we've created a form that they have to give an attestation that it will not be um shared or released outside of uh um of the investigation that they have going.

We specifically call out immigration enforcement.

It's against the law in California for municipal police departments to engage in any form of um ice enforcement.

So we make them sign to that uh before we release any information.

It's a document that we we save.

And the 14 agencies, it did not appear that any of those agencies were uh any kind of immigration enforcement or any certainly not ICE or other agencies, federal agencies that would enforce immigration um detention.

So so none of those were were for immigration, it's against the law to do that here in California.

Thank you, Chief.

Okay, any further kind of questions on the consent calendar?

Councilmember Bowler.

Uh this is for 5P.

It's the uh adoption of resolution to approve a partial exemption from public art ordinance for the McKay respite center, reducing the public art in lieu fee from 244,117 to 100,000.

Is there someone who can answer a question about that?

Hi, and the question just simply is like did this did we consider um reducing the fee to instead of 100,000 to zero?

And if so, um what was the rationale to keep it the way it was?

I do I have visited the site.

It's it's a work of art itself, and it has some really impressive art in it in some of its spaces, and I'll let you take it from there.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Jackie Kali.

Ah, I'm a development manager with base for use and economic development.

Uh good evening, Madam Mayor and esteemed council members.

To answer your question, Councilmember Baller, I do manage the city's public art program.

There is a 1% fee for the public art requirement for developments.

I have been working very closely with uh Doug Biggs with Alameda Point Collaborative.

This is their development project, and there is a precedent for a full exemption.

This was done in September of 2024 for the Alameda Food Bank.

Folks might recall that one.

And uh we did talk, uh, Doug and I about the option to do a zero.

They are committed to uh building art at the site.

They want art that's going to honor the history of the site, and they do have a preliminary public art on-site application that they've submitted to me, and I am working closely with Doug to complete that.

The first step in the process was to first lower the uh public art requirement for the site.

And um, I know that uh Doug Biggs is here this evening, and if he would like to come up and share a little bit more information about their thought process, but my understanding is that they are interested in committing art to the site that is valued at a hundred thousand dollars.

I think so the way that I would handle that is um we are about to do public comment, Mr.

Biggs.

If you could just be in a holding pattern for a moment.

Um, so was there anything else you wanted to tell us, Ms.

Kaley uh before we um go to the sure?

Thank you so much.

I think this is a wonderful project.

I'm really excited that this is um serving the city's most vulnerable populations.

I also also think it's really commendable that they still want to commit public art to the site, and uh they are interested in honoring the history of the Alone peoples here that the original inhabitants of Alameda.

I think it's very powerful, and so I I welcome working with Doug Biggs to realize their uh vision for public art at this site.

Thank you.

There sounds like they're committed to spend the 100,000 dollars regardless.

Is that what you're saying?

That's my understanding correct.

Okay, thank you.

By the way, was also my understanding from speaking to the artist that I think is going to be doing the work.

All right.

Are there any other clarifying questions from the council?

Thank you so much.

They'll go away.

Okay, yes, Councilmanson.

Um five P.

Do you do our Alameda, we have a number of Almeida Housing Authority developments that have especially at Northern Housing that have recently been completed.

Do they pay the one percent?

Yes, it does apply to uh municipal projects as well.

And uh it is something that once it exceeds the 250,000 dollar amount.

I work with planning to identify those projects.

Then we talk about what their options are.

And again, there are full and partial exemptions that we've done.

Um, and it would just be a discussion about whether or not they can commit to serving art at the site, or if they uh seek an exemption, I can work with them to do the staff report for that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And going once, going twice.

Any more council clarifying questions?

Madam Clerk, let's have public comment.

Did we lose our public speaker?

No, and we have two remote, but quickly I need to introduce the three hearings.

So I'm gonna introduce those first and then I'll go to that.

Oh, yes.

So um there are three public hearings on the consent tonight.

Uh uh 5V is a public hearing to consider adoption of the community development block grant home partnership investment program, fiscal year's 2627 annual action plan and authorize the interim city manager or designee to negotiate and execute related documents, agreements, and modifications at funding levels approved by Congress.

Five W is a public hearing to consider adoption resolution confirming the Park Street Business Improvement Area Assessment Report for fiscal year 2627 and leaving an assessment on the Park Street Business Improvement Area with a consumer price index adjustment of 3% for fiscal year 2627 and 5X, which is a public hearing to consider adoption resolution confirming the Webster Street Business Improvement Area Assessment Report for fiscal year 2627 and levying an annual assessment on the Webster Street Business Improvement Area with a consumer price index adjustment of 3% for the fiscal year.

And we do have three speakers, and I'll get three months each.

Uh, first in person is Doug Biggs.

Okay, and is he here?

Yes, there he is.

Okay, I saw you got the tour.

Okay.

Let's call on uh Doug Biggs.

Welcome, Mr.

Biggs.

Longtime no.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the city council.

Um, thank you very much for allowing me to speak.

Um, as Councilmember Bowler mentioned and those of you that were so gracious to come to our site that it's opening.

Art is really critical to the work we do down there.

It's healing for the patients that'll be the uh served there.

The public art that we're embarking on, um, is gonna be a series of panels along McKay Avenue that tell the history of that space, all the way from the Alone Indians to uh this opening of the hearts to bring in this due service to Alameda, including some history that's been lost over the years.

For example, the the time that the American Indian Movement bombed the Bureau of Indian Affairs on McKay Avenue that hardly anybody remembers now.

Um we've already invested a lot of money in in researching the history of the site by Paige and Turnbull so that we have accurate documentation on the panel.

So we're fully committed to having an educational opportunity for people to travel down that street to see what that building was, what that site was, and what it's become.

So for that reason, we didn't request a full uh you know reduction of the amount.

We're totally committed to bringing this artwork forward.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

All right, and our next speakers are remote.

Uh-huh, Zach Bowling.

Welcome, Speaker Bowling.

Good evening, council.

Yeah, uh, I I'm glad that we resolved the um public art thing.

I wrote a letter about that.

But it's specifically where I wanted to talk about the flock cameras.

I've talked about it even before we bought them, uh, going back.

I think Jim Modi, when he was on this council, warned about sort of the concerns that he had um back then about how the data could maybe be used for ice and um and what happened is I don't think any data that we've had in Alameda has been used for that purpose, but it has been.

We had Flock that got caught uh having uh contracts with the federal government, and only um when they got caught did they admit it.

Um but and I know we have AB or we have SB 34, which bans ALPR data uh sharing with federal immigration forces, but it's the unknowing sharing.

And I've raised this concern just on the technical design of Flock, not so much that I'm against ALPR cameras.

I think they're great.

I like the the axon cameras that are held with data on-prem.

It's just the way that Flock specifically is designed.

Cities love Flock because it's cheap, it's quick, it's simple.

You perk, you lease it, they install it, they maintain it, but that comes with risk because they store your data, your city's data, on centralized servers and Amazon warehouses or in Amazon data centers where that data is accessible.

And as a former Google employee that had to deal with FISA warrants and getting secret subpoenas for data from different sources from the federal government, that data can then be taken without anyone being informed to anyone in the city, which is why back then and why I've been pressing so hard that we pick an ALPR solution where that data is stored on-prem, hosted by our own IT department, where if some comp or some agency wants to get that data, they have to come through our city attorney and it it is vetted and there's somebody accountable in our own city to our own data.

It's the design of Flock.

It's it might be compartmentalized in the way that you look at it online and that you feel like you're safe, but it's physically stored.

Even Flock employees could see all of the cities at one point until they got called out on that.

Um, and then they finally got their SOC 2 and ISO certifications that they um don't do that anymore, but it's broken by design, being that they store all this data in one data center, all the city's data, all this video footage all together that they record across the entire United States, makes it an easy target for a dragnet operation to collect data about all of us in this country by this one provider, this one very popular ALPR um security camp provider.

So I just wanted to caution.

I know we've been talking about this even before we looked at vendors for purchasing this even before 2022, um, when I spoke about this originally.

I spoke about this, I think, back in the end of last year.

Brought this up for public comment when we had a news report about Flock.

Um, and uh there's the morning bun.

Uh Dudar Abrams has done a couple of reports on this specifically.

I am not against ALPR.

I want to make that clear.

It's just flock specifically in the technical merit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Welcome, Speaker Kirschbaum.

So I ended with the uh city attorney's office sending me an email stating that um these financial reports that were supposed to be turned in on the 7th of every month for every single contract were done verbally.

But then there's no amendments, there's no meeting minutes, there's no notes, there's nothing.

I was also told that the village of love gave reports orally over Zoom because of the sensitive nature of the information, and that there were no written reports, but there were no contract amendments changing written reporting requirements to verbal reports, and there were no meeting meeting minutes or documentation proving those reports were actually given.

Despite that, the city continued, oh my god, continued giving money to Joey Harrison, the director of Village of Love.

And mind you, she has known since December of 22.

She's known this, and she continued to hand this man millions of federal, state, city, and public funds.

10 million dollars.

And has nothing to say for it.

And in the meantime, when I came forward, I was villainized.

If you see something, say something, right, Marilyn, just as long as it's not about them.

Millions of dollars in public funds continued to be approved even after the city knew or should have known that required documentation was missing.

That raises serious questions about misuse of public funds, fraud, waste, abuse, and failure to perform official duties.

Instead of addressing the evidence, city leadership helped create a public narrative that I was not credible.

I'm a 30-year teacher.

I taught at three schools here in Alameda.

After I challenged Mayor Ashcraft publicly, she made statements in front of others that undermined my credibility and suggested I was at the problem.

I believe this was not just personal disparagement.

I believe it was part of a broader effort to discredit me as a complaint, plaintant, a witness, and a whistleblower.

And also to try out her litigation strategy that she thinks she's going to use that I've told her in four years.

For four years, it's not gonna work, lady.

I believe this conduct should be investigated as possible as possible as soon as possible as possible retaliation.

I engaged in protected activity.

I made public comments, submitted records requests, reported suspected misuse of public funds, challenged false public claims, and demanded accountability.

After that, I was dismissed.

Publicly discredited your time.

Thank you so much.

Good to hear from you.

Let's um go to our next speaker.

All right, and no further speakers.

Okay.

With that, we will um we will close um uh that was on the consent comment.

That's public.

Yeah, which item was that okay, sometimes we get a little far afield.

Okay, well, we've had public comment, we've had discussion.

I am ready for a motion in a second for the consent calendar.

That we approve the consent calendar.

Spin move by Vice Mayor Prior, seconded by Councilmember Bowler, all those in favor, please.

Further, I will have to um the recusal thing.

Yeah, yes, we need cues.

Okay, on which item um uh on item 5.0 and 5x.

Okay, so um with um noting your abstention from items 0 and x, we've had a motion by council uh vice mayor prior uh seconded by council member bowler.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any opposed abstentions?

Okay, well, the partial abstention.

All right, goodness gracious, it's 1008 and we've just finished the consent calendar.

Okay, I'll let the changing of the guard happen.

And um, all right, so then Madam Clerk, why don't you uh introduce item six A, if you would please recommendation to approve an agreement appointing uh Jared Jerry Bowden as city manager effective June 30th, 2026 and adoption of resolution modifying the city council appointee salary schedule, increasing the salary range of the city manager position by one percent.

This item also continued from April 21st.

And I need to quickly make an announcement.

I think that's okay.

Yes, yes.

So before uh voting on any compensation, the Brown Act requires it to be publicly announced.

Um, this um contract includes a base salary of 383, and 11 dollars with a guarantee that the salary always be at least five percent above the salary for any member of the executive management compensation plan, which is a one percent increase above the current salary range, a three percent um in deferred compensation, which is approximately 11,493.33 annually, a 550 per month automobile allowance benefits, including health insurance, leave accruals holiday pay, and cash out of two weeks of vacation and eight days of administrative leave annually and a 12-month severance package.

Thank you for that.

Um, all right.

Um, we are um we are looking for a um a motion to approve this agreement.

Okay, so I move to approve the city manager contract with the following three amendments.

Um in section seven, deferred compensation replace three percent city contribution with one percent, with the understanding that this topic will be further reviewed by the city council during Mr.

Bowden's first annual evaluation, uh second in section eight evaluation.

Remove the word facilitated before performance evaluation to allow the city council continued discretion in how to conduct evaluations and number three in section 14 automobile allowance and technology reduce the automobile allowance from 550 per month to 400 per month.

All right, thank you.

We've had a motion to approve second with comment.

And um, Council Rodesag wants to second with a comment.

Oh, yes, yes, go for it.

Um, well, thank you very much.

Um, when we first reported this out um uh from closed session, I it was reported that I had voted um on an extension basis, and I want to explain that and also want to explain why it's important to support this.

Um you know, like in any negotiations, there's a wide range of of issues that you have to evaluate.

And the one thing while I'm fine with um so many aspects of the um of the contract before us, one item that I did want to express some concern about was the guaranteed 5% differential between the city manager position and um and those um in the executive management um line.

It's my belief that the um salary um uh whatever it is should always be pegged by um by the uh city council while the salary could will always continue to be pegged by the city council.

There's also now the in uh the added um aspect of the five percent differential, so there'll always be guaranteed five percent above someone from the um executive management.

But you know, that's just one item out of the host of things that that we evaluated.

Um I did think that it was an important item, but um, and for that reason, during the earlier parts I have stayed.

But leading to my second point now, you know, we are um welcoming a new city manager who has experience here in the city of Alameda as a prior assistant city manager, and for all host of reasons um demonstrated that uh he will be um uh a great city manager for the city of Alameda.

So I think for that reason, um, you know, it's important that I set aside my concern about that that one element of of the contract and and you know, make sure to welcome our new city manager with open arms, uh Mr.

Jerry Bowden.

So for that reason, I second this.

Thank you for your second.

All right, any other comments, council?

All right, we've had a motion by Vice Mayor Pryor, seconded by council member Desoc.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Any abstentions, any opposed?

That motion carries unanimously.

Thank you, everyone.

And now we move to the regular agenda.

Madam Clerk, a lot of these people have been waiting for item 7A.

Would you please introduce it for us?

Public hearing considered appeal of the planning board's decision to approve a use permanent amendment number PLN 250649 to allow the continued use of an outdoor patio for amplified entertainment at 1200 Park Street and adoptional related resolution.

The city council is considering the matter on appeal and deepening the action taken by the city council at the public hearing, it may adopt, modify, or overturn the initial California Environmental Quality Act determination or require some further action.

The appealed use permit was originally determined to be categorically exempt from additional environmental review for certain sequel guidelines section 15301 existing facilities and 15183 project consistent with general plan and zoning.

Thank you and welcome back.

Would you go ahead and reintroduce yourself and um and this item and let's see, I um uh madam cook, do you want to just give an overview of how this is going to be?

So um the staff has its regular presentation, but then because this is an appeal, um there is a request that the um applicant and appellant both be given seven minutes to speak, and um that they can divide that up as they want, but that they'd be able to, you know, give an opening remark, um, you know, go in order with um it being I think the I've got it right here.

Thank you.

With the um appellant first, then the applicant, and then call for public speakers and then return back to allow them to have rebuttals with the appellant going first and the applicant second.

Okay, and we need a motion for the that to be allowed.

We do okay, so um council, do you understand what we just said?

We're going to um normally it would be 10 minutes for um the staff presentation, and we still have 10 minutes for the staff presentation, which and will that include from both our base research and economic development and the um assistant city attorney, or you were just here for questions.

All right.

Um so 10 minutes for the staff report, but then we want to allocate another 14 total, seven and seven for each party.

Um, but that includes the rebuttals.

So we need uh um at least four affirmative votes to do that.

Let's do a quick vote because we've been waiting a long time to get here.

Who would like to move that?

So moved.

Vice Mayor Pryor.

Um, is moved by Vice Mayor Prior, seconded by council member Day Sock, all those very pleased signified by Stadium.

I I that um I was approved.

Five zero um welcome back.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the city council.

I'm Abby Thorne Lyman, Director of Base for Use and Economic Development and Interim Planning Building and Transportation Director, in which I service in that capacity tonight.

Before I turn over for the technical details to Henry Dong from the land use planning division, I just wanted to pull back a little bit and acknowledge the important role that there's a symbiotic relationship between the residential neighborhoods surrounding Park and Webster Street and what happens on those streets.

And I think tonight is a matter of really balancing ensuring the economic vitality of our two downtown districts with the needs of the residents who surround the area.

So I think that's just big picture what this is really about.

So tonight, the purpose of this item is to address an appeal of the park station use permit for out the portion of the park station use permit that is regarding outdoor amplified music.

And I want to just I'm gonna steal a little bit of Mr.

Dong's thunder, and I'm going to say that in reviewing the appeal that has been brought forward here.

Staff have found that the noise ordinance, as currently written, does not really allow for the planning board to provide a level of nuance when they are thinking about different uses that are coming and proposing to be around on Park and Webster Street.

And so therefore the staff is making a twofold recommendation tonight.

Now the first is um to uphold the appeal, but the second part is really about reevaluating the noise ordinance.

Is our noise ordinance really serving us the way that it needs to be?

So I just wanted to preface by acknowledging this, acknowledging that perhaps our noise ordinance is not really where it needs to be for modern times.

We're not going to be discussing that at length tonight, how that's going to be.

That's for a future deliberation and many public hearings, but I did just want to preface and just just pull that conclusion forward for you.

So with uh with further ado, I will turn it over to Mr.

Henry Dong from land use planning.

Thank you.

Um and welcome, Mr.

John.

Come on up.

Good evening, uh, Madam Mayor, um, members of the council.

Henry Dong with the Planning Building and Transportation Department.

And so I'm just gonna go over a brief overview of how we uh got here today.

Um, this is an aerial shot of the um project site.

Um the project is located on the corner of Park Street and San Jose Avenue.

Um, it's uh located in the CC community commercial theater district.

And um surrounding properties include um commercial and mixed use um properties at the intersection and then up north on Park Street, and then residential um uh uses uh beyond on San Jose Avenue and um towards Park Avenue.

Um this is just a um site plan of the site.

Um the building for the facility um is adjacent to the north and east property lines, and then uh we have the outdoor um patio area that's located in front of the building uh facing over to Park Street.

Um, in the north or in the southwest corner of the site, we have the stage.

This is the outdoor performance stage.

Um, and the bands will um face towards the building uh and play it with threshold towards the middle of the site.

Um there's also um indoor performances that take place in the larger room of the tap house in the uh northeast corner of the building.

Um so just a little bit of background.

Um, so in February of 2023, the the planning board approved the design review and use permit for the rehabilitation of the existing commercial site for a tavern use.

Um, as part of that approval, they also approved the use permit to um allow outdoor seating and outdoor amplified music, uh, with the requirement that um the project come back for review um of the outdoor music um after six months of operation.

So in August of 2025, Park Street starts their operations, and then six months later, um, the planning board held their review hearing of the outdoor music, and then as part of that hearing, they approved um an amendment to the youth permit to continue the outdoor music with one additional day per month, uh, and added a requirement that further review take place after four months of operation there.

Then following after that in March, appeal was filed by the appellant.

And then we have staff's recommendation for the appeal tonight on the far right.

So the main difference between the 2023 and 2026 is that the board added the one additional event per month.

And then the biggest difference for the staff recommendation tonight is that we're removing the maximum allowance of 85 decibels and requiring that the um recommending that the project comply with the noise ordinance.

So the appeal itself really makes uh two main points.

Um first, the appellant raises the following issues for the board's decision that the decision does not analyze or mitigate the uh noise impacts of the project of the outdoor music, which is required by CEQA, and then secondly, that the project must comply with the noise ordinance and that the condition to allow up to 85 decibels for the outdoor amplified music events violates the noise ordinance.

And so upon consideration of the appeal, staff now agrees with the appellant as um Abby mentioned, and uh we're required uh recommending that uh that the noise ordinance um uh sorry um yeah that that we agree with the um appellant and that the noise ordinance does not explicitly authorize the board to approve a use permit allowing up to 85 decibels, and now we're recommending that the city council modify the use permit to comply with the ordinance, and then uh we're also recommending an evaluation of the noise ordinance um to determine if the ordinance adequately balances the needs of the local businesses on Park and Webster Street uh with the adjacent neighborhood quality of life.

Um and so with that, um staff's recommendation is to uh hold a public hearing, um, uphold the appeal, and then uh direct staff uh to review the noise ordinance.

Thank you, Mr.

Dong.

Um, do we have any clarifying questions from council before we go to what I imagine are many um uh public comments?

Uh okay, uh Vice Mayor Prior.

Okay, just so I understand the recommendation, it's just everything is the same, it's just that the volume is going to adhere with the current noise ordinance of the city of Alameda.

That's correct.

Okay.

I mean, and then the recommendation is to review it and just see if I like the way it was worded, sorry, in the presentation instead.

Uh sorry, I'm stealing someone else's words.

Maybe can we put that table back up so it's in front of us?

Yeah, it says uh direct staff to evaluate the noise ordinance um so that it balances the needs of Park and Webster business community with the needs of the adjacent neighborhoods.

So yeah, I thought that was well stated.

Okay, okay.

Okay.

Okay, that's fine.

I was talking about the comparison, but that one works too.

I council member Jensen, I think you had your hand up.

Um, with regard to the initial permit that was approved and then amended by the planning board.

I understand I I read it and I saw the references to general plan, but I didn't see references to the noise ordinance or to any specific decibel level.

I I my question is was there a specific decibel level uh cited in the original February 13th, 2023?

Um planning board use permit, or was it just related to the general plan?

Um yeah, so the uh 2023 uh use permit approved the decibel level up to 85 decibels, and that's the same that was approved for the 2026 um, and so that was a condition of approval in both of those decisions.

Okay, because I okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Bowler.

Thank you.

Um in the staff report, it talks about some additional noise testing that was done that was gave information that was not before the planning board.

Could you please elaborate on that?

Yeah, um, so staff had um gone out to the site after the um the board's uh decision and uh when the appeal was made and we ran some of our own just monitoring um for the ambient noise level.

So yeah, and we um I think we got uh 68 kind of closer to Park Street, and then um roughly like 58 or so um down San Jose, about 100 feet or so, and then just a couple of questions for the city's attorney's office um regarding the law, if I may.

Um, I think Ms.

Silver is here to address some that question.

Um, so the California Environmental Quality Act uh CEQA, how does uh how do you analyze the CEQA analysis in this case and does this new information um in terms of the noise levels, does that impact that?

If you could explain, and please be as detailed as you can.

Thank you.

Sure.

Um Cara Silver, uh special counsel um for the city.

The um sequa does include a specific category um that needs to be analyzed and and uh dealing with noise and noise under the um sequa guidelines, um a noise impact is triggered um if there are several things that occur.

And one of those, one of those factors is if the noise um of the proposed project violates um the city's noise ordinance, and so um here the fact that um there were some uh noise um uh noise uh readings that were taken by the appellants that exceed the noise the city's noise ordinance, uh that could be an argument that the appellants could make that CEQA was triggered and that there should have been further environmental review.

Um at the planning board level, we had relied on a um an exemption uh because the analysis was that um it was currently um 85 decibels, the the earlier permit, the 2023 permit, and just adding one additional event keeping the noise level um at 85 decibels would be a minor increase in intensity, and so we thought that that particular exemption um would apply.

However, um in looking at the whole record and in looking at the appellants um arguments, we believe that there is also an alternative argument that because there are uh there's evidence in the record that the city's noise ordinance um was exceeded, um, that that would trigger a further environmental analysis.

So are you indicating that there's basically two different ways in theory that a court could find that there was a CEQA violation here?

I think if if this um appeal was, in other words, if if this if it continues in with these sound levels that we've heard that are measured, um, are there multiple ways that CEQA could be a problem given our existing noise ordinance?

Yeah, so there are two different arguments.

The appellant makes um a secondary argument that says that even regardless of CEQA, the fact that this particular use violates our noise ordinance, the city doesn't have the ability to issue the permit.

So that's a second argument that the appellant is making.

Going back to the CEQA argument, there are what I had mentioned before was that there were several different grounds for triggering an additional sequa analysis.

And it gets pretty technical, but suffice it to say that that one of the arguments that we think is the strongest, the appellant's strongest argument is that this proposed use arguably violates the city's noise ordinance, requiring additional sequel review.

There is also another grounds that the appellant put in their papers that would also trigger a further CEQA analysis, and that is our general plan says that a decibel increase of more than five decibels would trigger sequa analysis.

Thank you.

All right.

Seeing no other hands up, I have it on good authority that we have 29 speakers.

So let's get started, Madam Clerk.

And you know, you've all heard me say more than once the ground rules, so I know you're all gonna follow them.

It's really important.

You will have two minutes.

Um, come right up when you hear your name called.

So you're next at the microphone.

And oh, Madam Clerk, are we taking both sides first?

Yeah, the appellant will come up in a seven minutes.

29 people, hold off.

Okay, appellants, come on up and introduce yourselves.

You have seven total minutes.

You can divvy them up any way you want with time for the rebuttal, right?

Can I set aside one minute for rebuttal?

You can set whatever math you want.

It's your seven minutes.

Let's do it.

Yeah.

All right.

Um, good evening, Mayor, honorable council members.

My name is Rebecca Davis, and I represent appellant Kevin Durfee, who lives across the street from Park Station Brewery with his family.

And before I get into the legal arguments, I want to be clear about some things.

Mr.

Durfee is not here to put Park Station out of business.

He is not opposed to the brewery or outdoor seating.

He's not even opposed to live music.

In fact, Park Station posts live music indoors on a regular basis, and that works out well.

The business and the neighborhood can coexist peacefully when music either stays inside or stays within the bounds of what the noise ordinance requires.

What Mr.

Durfee and his neighbors cannot accept, and what the law simply does not allow is a use permit that converts a residential neighborhood into an outdoor concert venue without any study of the impact and without any meaningful mitigation.

The level levels permitted are extremely loud.

Park station has been allowed to blast amplified music at 85 decibels when measured at residential receptors.

That's the equivalent of a jackhammer at 50 feet directly into a neighborhood of single family homes.

85 decibels is also a level at which OSHA warns of hearing damage with sustained exposure.

So this is what the neighbors have been living with.

Music can be heard loudly inside people's homes a block away, even with the windows and doors closed.

Children in the neighborhood cannot sleep.

One of Mr.

Durfee's neighbors has a child who puts her hands over her ears and asks her dad to make the noise stop.

Residents report being unable to hold a phone conversation inside their own homes with their windows closed.

These are not minor inconveniences.

People are considering selling their homes because of this.

Somehow the planning board approved an amendment which makes things even worse.

They did this by permitting a four uh equivalent to a four decibel increase in the loudness because the measurement point of the 85 decibels was changed by the board, and increasing the number of events from three to four.

In addition to degrading the quality of life of the neighborhood, in approving the amended permit, the planning board also violated the law in three ways.

First, on its face, both the original permit and the amended permit violate the city's noise ordinance, and not just a little.

They allow volumes which are 35 decibels greater than what is allowed in the noise ordinance.

And second, by approving the amended permit without analyzing and mitigating the noise impacts, the city violated CEQA.

As we've detailed in our appeal comment, none of the cited exemptions apply.

And by exceeding the noise ordinance, the permit's noise impact is inherently significant.

And finally, Alameda's municipal code requires that a use permit only be granted when the use will not cause a damage, hazard, or nuisance to neighboring properties.

The testimony before the planning board and what you will hear from others tonight prove that this use is harming the residential neighborhood.

City staff agrees, and their recommendation is to grant the appeal.

We urge you to follow it.

We request that you require Park Station to comply with the city's noise ordinance, just like everyone else.

Thank you.

And I'd like to turn it over to Mr.

Durfee now.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good evening, Alameda City Council.

My wife and I moved to Alameda from San Francisco three years ago when we decided to have our first child.

We looked at lots of other towns and fell in love with this.

And a little closer to the microphone.

As you know, Alameda, it's quaint, it's quiet, it's charming.

After moving, we were extremely happy with our decision and confident Alameda was the best place to raise our family.

Over a year later, Park Station opened its doors for the first time.

It appeared to be a beautiful space and a fun addition to the neighborhood.

Unfortunately, the live music events started, and we were shocked at how loud they were.

The noise was loud enough that it was very audible inside my home, and my infant son struggled to fall asleep.

Even after I turned on a white noise machine, I could clearly hear it through closed windows.

At one point, my desperate wife looked at me and said, we might need to move before we have a second child.

And while my primary concern is putting my child to sleep, this is not only a concern for parents.

Everyone has the right to enjoy their home in peace.

People should be able to read a book, watch TV, talk to their spouse, or simply relax without being forced to listen to music.

They did not choose.

Unfortunately, this issue has been framed by some as a false choice between live music and no live music.

The actual choice is between breaking health and safety laws designed to protect the public welfare or having a business make some adjustments.

I firmly believe there is a win-win here.

Park station can and does host live music events within their large indoor space and is able to do so while adhering to the noise ordinance.

This is a great way for the business to continue to host events while being a good neighbor.

I'm sure the beautiful open outdoor space is a big part of why people go to Park Station.

Part of the trade-off in having such a space, which is literally surrounded by residences and has no walls or acoustic barriers, is having to consider your neighbors.

I urge you to take their recommendation to help my family and my neighbors' families.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, and now we will hear from the applicant, and they have a presentation.

All right.

And again, you all have seven minutes to divvy up however you like when we will hear rebuttals after we've heard all the public comment later this same evening.

Okay.

Good evening, uh mayor and council members.

Thank you for your time.

It's appreciated.

Uh, this is a long and grueling process, but I want to start by by saying that when we opened Park Station in the last year, it wasn't without a lot of forethought about where we were going and what we describe this business to be.

Do you want to introduce yourself really quickly?

I apologize for that.

I'm Melody Tebow.

I'm one of the owners and managing members of Park Station.

This is my partner Grant Uskin, also uh managing member of Park Station.

We purchased the property in June of 22, and we received our conditional use of approval in February of 23.

It took three more years for us to build out this space and a lot of grueling process.

So I won't belabor that with this, other than the fact that uh we've invested a lot of time and money into building out our dream, and that dream included live music, which was outlined in the conditional use of approval.

We didn't pick 85.

That was a number that was apparently approved for another property or establishment on Webster Street or on the West E.

We were granted 85 and grateful for that.

But that's why there's a conditional use.

There's a period of time in which you have to learn whether or not that measurement of noise is adequate or too much.

I disagree with the appellants council in that we are not blasting 85 at the residential line.

We are we are actually staying pretty close to within the margins of what's reasonable.

There's more involved with detailing the data, and we have a consultant with Salter that we've engaged.

Salter has provided some data points.

Those are items that we presented, but I get that they're not prepared to discuss those until a later time, so we can have more collaboration on that.

We are asking though that we consider the fact that the noise ordinance as it exists today is more than a decade old, and it doesn't take into consideration factors such as COVID and the outdoor dining privileges that we've been granted as a result of COVID.

It doesn't take into consideration the parklets that we've added on Park Street.

We're trying to revive our city, we're trying to bring in new life, and in doing so, we're falling within an old noise ordinance that hasn't been updated to account for the ambient noise increase just in general.

So the ambient noise that was that was mentioned by Mr.

Dong was that the ambient noise on Park Street is 68.

The ambient noise down San Jose Avenue is 58.

The noise ordinance is 50 with with music in consideration.

We're never going to get to 50.

We have had our consultant give us some advice as to what mitigation members we measures we can take.

We have those measures and we're going to implement them.

But he explained to us that the only way that you get to 50 is if you build a wall all the way around the beer garden.

So in other words, we have to come to a compromise.

85 isn't the number.

We understand that.

That's completely okay.

We propose that we reconsider what another number might be.

So this weekend, this Saturday, we had our band adjusted to 75.

The measures at 75 resulted in a noise level at the appellants resident at 55 to 58.

So we were getting so close to where we need to be, but we need a little leniency in what that measurement should be allowed.

We're talking about an interim period of time where this is going to take some time to get a noise ordinance that meets the business community for Park and Webster Street, and it's going to set a standard and a protocol for all.

So that said, I want to end with just a few other comments that I think are important.

We did have our consultant give us some information on CEQA because we wanted to make sure we understood what the measurement was supposed to be.

So CEQA basically explains that the measures are a permanent increase using an annualized day and night average sound level.

No one has measured measured the DNL yet, so this point cannot be accurately quantified.

Salter estimated that the DNL, based on what we've been doing at Park Station, would increase the decibel level by two, which is insignificant.

So the fact that they're claiming that we are we're violating CEQA is not true, and it hasn't been proven.

And it would take a year to get the sampling and that data prepared.

So as we as we create this new ordinance, we want to have the businesses looked at and really appreciated for what the vibrancy is that we bring to the community, and the fact that this is not a process that is going to be four months.

It could be longer, could be many months or maybe years.

We want an interim agreement of something that we can live within that isn't 50 decibels at the property.

So we're proposing, based on our Saturday's experience, that we consider a 75 decibel level, which brings it down to 58.

And that can be proven over time.

We can adjust that as needed, and we can spend four more months just looking at data.

But the data really needs to be taken during the hours that are prescribed so that they're not unfairly treated and they need to be measured by qualified acoustical engineer.

My partner Grant has some more to share on some of the other neighborhood attributes that we've been able to bring to Park Street.

And you're running close to your just stop the clock for a minute, please.

In fact, we give them back two seconds.

The time you have left left includes free rebuttal, but you can.

Oh, okay.

So we should.

I'm not telling you what to do.

I'm just calling what the time says.

We'll save our time for the rebuttal.

All right.

Okay.

Thank you on both sides.

What we need to do, council, really quickly is a housekeeping detail.

We haven't done this too often this year, but in order for us to consider new items after 11 p.m.

And yes, we're going to go past 11 p.m.

on this one item, but we still have um we continued the one item, but we still have 7C, which is the bike share, and 7D, which is NL terminals.

Neither of them will have the kind of public comment this item has.

But what I need is a vote, and I need four affirmative votes to continue to consider new items after 11 p.m.

And so I would propose a motion that says we will hear those two items after 11 p.m.

And then uh I mean, those are the two action items.

You all can decide if you want to make council comments, but that is um what we really need to do is be able to move forward on these two because we've kept staff here for those two future items.

So motion to hear item 7C and 7D after um the clock strikes 11.

Moved by let's move this along, people.

We have 29 or more people waiting.

Thank you.

And very quickly, a second, thank you.

The mayor does not get more cheerful as the hour goes on.

It's been moved by council member Day, seconded by Councilmember Bowler.

All those in favor, please signify by stating aye.

Aye.

Okay, that was unanimous.

Okay, Madam Clerk, um, take it away.

And you go tell people how much time they have in all those good things.

Yes, everybody will get two minutes.

Um, you don't have to take that full two minutes.

Um I will call three at a time and we'll try and keep everybody lining up and going on quickly.

Uh Kathy Weber, Brandy Graham, and Bobby Centurion.

All right, come on up.

And you heard your name, so scoot out to the aisle, don't we?

Any daylight in between one speaker and the next.

Welcome, Speaker Weber.

Good evening, honorable mayor, council members.

I'm Kathy Weber, executive director with downtown Alameda.

Park Street is one of Alameda's primary uh commercial corridors, and it's a place that's meant to be active, welcoming, and culturally vibrant.

Park Station has helped bring that vision to life by turning a long vacant site into a place where people gather, enjoy live music, and support other businesses.

It provides a vibrant gateway to our business district.

While I understand and respect the concerns of from nearby neighbors, this isn't uh about choosing uh between quality of life and economic vitality, it's about finding the right balance.

Yes, there have been impacts, and those should be addressed with clear limits, monitoring and direction.

But solving this cannot be one-sided.

We should expect, we we shouldn't expect a business in a designated commercial business district to carry all of the concessions.

Living next to a walkable active district comes with benefits, but also requires some level of understanding and compromise.

Rather than eliminating the outdoor amplified music, I encourage you to allow it to remain in a limited, well-managed way, keeping the caps on frequency and hours, um, strengthening the sound monitoring, and continuing uh and a continue the the pilot as outlined by park station with clear checkpoints and allowing the city to make informed database decisions.

This is also part of a broader policy conversation.

As the city refines the noise ordinance.

Park station should be allowed to operate under their recommended framework.

We want a thriving business districts, and we need to support the businesses that are investing in them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Brandy can't Graham, then Ben Bobby Centurion, then Michael Hayden.

Okay.

Did Brandy such and such leave apparently so?

Because they're not okay.

Bobby Centurion?

Okay.

And then who's after that?

Uh Michael Hayden.

Okay.

Michael Hayter, if you're here, be ready to come up.

There will be a prize.

No, there won't be.

Honorable mayor and city council members.

My name is Bobby Centurion, and I live at 1201 Park Avenue, right behind Park Station.

When my husband and I purchased our home 36 years ago, we understood that the zoning for the area was both residential and commercial, and that there were two busy businesses very close by.

We were also aware that the location was just half a block from Alameda's main business district, and that over time, unless a city is in decline, it is natural for a city's main business district to grow in activity, traffic, and noise.

The owners of Park Station have invested a tremendous amount of time, effort, and money to provide Alameda with a unique place to enjoy music, and then is both family and dog friendly, and is now a valued and appreciated by so many.

They have been very good neighbors to me, quickly rectifying any small issue that might come up.

It would be so unfair to park station and its customers to take away their outdoor music, and it would also undermine the broader community's commitment to music, art, culture, and the businesses that help bring it to life.

When a conflict is mediated, neither side gets everything they want, and both sides are required to compromise.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Michael Hayden.

Then Warren Linney, then JJ Navarro.

My name is Michael Haddon.

Um good evening, City Council.

Thank you for your service and your willingness to stay so very late at night.

Um, so I have lived a block from the venue for the past 25 years.

Um, and I want to remind you that park station, there were three reviews by Alameda Code Enforcement, and they failed twice.

Um Code Enforcement, who I met some of the people, what one of the guys in code enforcement, they're very nice people.

Um, and their decibel readings match the decibel readings that I was getting on my phone.

So years ago, one of my students at uh Otis Elementary School uh moved during the school year to 1203 park.

So there's park station, they moved right over here.

You might not even realize that there are residences, people live right here.

People live right here.

People live all around Park Station.

Um, three weeks ago on a Tuesday, I heard loud music after 8 p.m.

I walked down to Parks Park Street and it was noisy.

I measured 75 decibels at the place where my student formerly lived.

Um at 850 on a school night.

Many elementary students are in bed by eight o'clock.

Kids need their sleep.

Why was the indoor music so loud?

Here's why.

You saw that picture.

There's this lovely wall.

But during their indoor music, they roll that wall up.

They roll the, I've seen them roll it up at least twice.

So it's not indoor music, it's outdoor music.

And again, I measured it 75 decibels, far above.

Um, so they don't they don't seem to follow the rules.

I mean, the presumption of indoor music is it's indoors, they literally roll up an entire wall.

So, thank you so much.

Our next speaker, Warren Linney, then JJ Navarro, then Nicholas Parker.

Warren Linney, are you here going once going twice next speaker?

JJ Navarro.

Welcome.

Hi.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of City Council.

I'm here to speak in favor of park station's permit to provide entertainment with amplified outdoor music.

This is my second time appearing before this council and in favor of forward progress in our community.

The first was in 2019 when myself and members of my community spoke in favor of dedicating part of the parks department's budget for a playground of what we now call Cho Chanyu Park.

That initiative was also met with resistance.

I recall some of the opposition complained of the impact that children playing would have in disrupting the peace in the neighborhood.

Today we have a small playground at Yorcheno Park and in a place once known for vagrants.

We now have families, and yes, the sound of children playing.

We also have Park Station, which has transformed an abandoned service station into a vibrant business that the community has quickly embraced.

Park Station, much like the revitalization of Church Annual Park, has gone a long way to bring new life to the Park Street corridor and the surrounding area.

I live near Park Station and I enjoy the music it brings to my community.

And much like the sound of children playing at the Chochenio playground, is a reminder of why this island is such a wonderful place to live.

Please allow Amplified Music to continue outdoors at Park Station.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next station.

Hello.

Nicholas Parker.

And then uh Jason Cook.

This is exactly what you're supposed to do as the speaker.

Come right up as the other one's going down.

Jason Cook, you're on notice.

Welcome.

Thank you, and good evening, Madam Mayor and City Council.

My name is Nick Parker.

I'm a resident of Alameda and a proponent for energetic and connected community, fully inclusive and supportive of music and the arts.

I should mention that while my family and I have lived in Alameda for almost eight years.

I mention this only because I have experience with many communities, cities, states over the past 22 years, and it was not honestly the easiest decision for us to decide to settle down in Alameda.

In the end, it was the tremendous potential of this diverse, vibrant, and growing island community that won us over.

So please don't limit these creative opportunities that set Alameda apart from the rest.

Park Station is a welcomed asset for our community and has proven to be an ideal fit for its current location in Park Street.

The unique atmosphere needs to continue to be celebrated mostly due to their effort in some supporting human connection.

It's a gathering place for Alamedans to experience some of the simpler joys of life with their neighbors.

And this is all happening in a well-curated outdoor setting.

Live music is a key component of that atmosphere, and I commend the owners of Park Station for recommending a sensible compromise on to strike a balance with their neighbors.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Jason Cook, then Kathleen Von Martins, then Mary Manning.

Okay, welcome.

Hi, thank you, Mary.

Mayor and uh the council members.

Mine's a little more informal.

I just want to briefly touch on the fact that Alameda is a community, and we need to do everything we can to enrich community.

I feel like Park Station has done that because we're a uh family island.

Um they welcome families, they welcome dogs.

It's an environment, it's a community, and what brings that to life is live music.

We don't have live music on the island.

It's one of the problems I've had with this island for the last 13 years, and I see it, and then I feel like they're gonna take that away.

It just crushes me.

And so what I heard here tonight is that Park Station is looking to compromise to work with the community.

I hear a 36-year resident of the neighborhood with nothing but good things to say about Park Station.

And I just think they're doing everything right, and let's support them because they're helping us bring this community and enrich this community the way it needs to, and we need to do more of it.

So thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Kathleen Von Martins, then Mary Manning, then Rand Robo.

Y'all are doing really well on this.

Hello again.

Thank you.

Um, thank you for hearing me.

My name is Kathleen.

I live three blocks from uh Park Station.

I'm also a musician and a singer in a band who would dearly love to perform there.

So um, that's just my bias, you know, just so you know.

Um, I feel like I've been there many, many times.

I feel like they've done a very good job at being uh conscious of the sound.

Uh and if there have been times when they've gone overboard, it sounds like you know, they just need to be told and they will they will do what needs to be done.

That place sat empty for so long.

There's still a business across the street that's empty.

I don't understand why that's allowed to pick to be honest, but that's another issue.

Um, please.

It's a great business.

It's a you've already heard it from other people.

We need this, that end of park station or at Park Street.

It's also a mixed industry and residential area.

When the big O tires was there, it was kind of noisy sometimes with all their pneumatic tools and everything going.

So come on, let's think about the whole community and we don't and we don't have enough music places in Alameda.

We don't have enough places for live music, and it would be a real shame if we made the wrong choice on this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Mary Manning, then Rand Robell, then uh Janet Bailey.

Welcome.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

I live at 1166 Park Avenue, which is uh down one block and up one block at the end of Chochenyo Park.

And I love having park station, and I love having live music.

And my question, and what I'm confused about is why does there a problem between live music and multiple amplified live music?

I don't know if Park Station has trouble getting musicians who are willing to play at lower decibels, or why it is that what they're asking for has to be right on the edge of what's acceptable.

Um, maybe it's because I'm an older generation and we're from the uh Hooten Annie age.

What there wasn't live uh amplified, and we were able to hear just great, and the the site is not that big, and it seems to me that it would be adequate at a lower decibel.

I can hear the music with my windows closed and the doors closed.

It's not intrusive.

I'm two blocks away, so uh, but I can hear it, but I love park station.

I've had a party, family party at park station.

We love walking by it and seeing people talking, and I'm not sure how they could talk at that decibel level when the tables are as close as this table to the stage.

I don't know why it needs that large amplification, but I do love Park Station, and I'm really pleased to have them in the neighborhood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Uh Rand Robo, then Janet Bailey, then Tito Villasenora.

Welcome.

Hi, I'll be quick as I can.

Um my family and friends go out for beers Saturday afternoon.

And when the weather's good, we want to be outside.

We won't go inside.

There's live music now on the island.

Yay!

Yeah, um, don't do that again, or I will I will take a long break and you'll be here even longer.

I meant it when I said she's trying to communicate.

No, but please be respectful of the hour and that everybody needs to have their.

If we take breaks for people that you hear, we're gonna be here even longer.

So I was just trying to communicate.

We're very happy that we have this venue.

Um the indoor would not work for us.

Um, it's an urban environment.

People who live on near a business district, I think should expect some noise.

I'll tell you one little story.

My uh son had a birthday party, and boy, were those kids loud, and we got complaints from the neighbors, but it's a kids' party.

It's during the day.

I mean, four o'clock to to seven or eight.

It's kind of literally the middle of the day.

There's a reason for quiet hours when people are need to be quiet.