Good afternoon and welcome to the community and economic development committee meeting of Tuesday, July 22nd, 2025.

The time is now one thirty-one p.m.

and this meeting may come to order.

Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit speaker cards for items on this agenda.

If you're here with us in chamber or would like to submit a speaker card, please fill one out and turn one into myself or a clerk representative before the item is read into record.

Councilmember Ramachandron.

Councilmember Unger.

Chair Brown.

Present.

Thank you.

We have three members present, one excused five.

Before we begin, Chair, do you have any announcements at this time?

And then before we um get started, um, was there a note around quorum at this time?

A comment on that.

I'm I'm checking, but I think we need we do need a I think we need a quorum in person under the rules.

Um, to my understanding, because I'm I'm present via teleconference notice, not AB 1449.

That it does count for quarrel.

Okay, thank you.

Sorry, okay, perfect.

Well, good good afternoon.

Um, community members, council meet um, council members.

Um, thank you for joining us for community and economic development, um, and we can go ahead and get started.

Thank you.

Item number one, approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting held on July 8th, 2025, noting that there is not a report attached, so we cannot approve these minutes.

So we will move on to item number two.

Determination of schedule of outstanding committee items, also known as our pending list, and we have one speaker that signed up for this item.

Um, can we hear the public speaker?

Ms.

Sado Olabali, you can come up to the podium.

Uh I repeatedly state that the community and economics development department does not make an effort to work in the best interests of the African Americans community, and I'm gonna demonstrate that because there are many initiatives and grants provided by the state of California that specifically target African Americans.

There's the California Dream Fund Micro Grant that includes helping black entrepreneurs.

There is the Oakland Black Business Fund, the One Million Black Businesses Initiative, the NAACP PowerShift Entrepreneur Grant, the WUSH Local Empowerment Program, which includes targeting African Americans for entrepreneur pursuits, the California Black Freedom Fund, the leading edge fund, which targets African Americans, and the Transform Business Grant.

None of these grants have been pursued by the economic and workforce development department, but they have pursued funding the persons who are involved with the uh what is it called?

I can't think of it now, but you also have another one that's not the non-citizens grant that you they brought to you.

Okay, so when are y'all gonna hold this department accountable for serving everybody, particularly African Americans?

We have an unemployment rate of African Americans of eight point nine, eight point nine, highest in the country.

All right, thank you so much for your comment.

Um to the to administrator leak.

Um, any changes or any updates on the pending list?

Thank you, Chair Betsy Lake, Assistant City Administrator.

There are no changes.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Um, and so I'll make a motion to move this um forward.

Second, thank you.

That was a motion made by Count Chair Brown, seconded by Councilmember Unger to approve the determination of scheduled outstanding committee items as is on roll council member five is excused, council member Ramashanjan.

Councilmember Unger and Chair Brown.

Aye, thank you.

Item number two passes with three eyes, one excused to accept the determination of scheduled outstanding committee items.

Reading in item number three, adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to apply for and enter into enter into execute and deliver all documents required or deemed necessary for participation in the state of California's pro housing designation program.

And we have three four speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

We will hear for this item we will be hearing from Caleb Smith from HCD.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Caleb Smith for the Housing Community Development Department, a senior policy analyst here.

We are seeking the council's authorization to apply for a renewal of the city of Oakland's existing pro housing designation.

The pro housing designation program is a program the state of California created to identify and reward cities that go above and beyond the requirements of state law for advancing housing at all income levels and especially affordable housing in their communities.

This program is been in place for about uh three years roughly now, and the city of Oakland was actually the first community in the San Francisco Bay Area to receive the state's pro housing designation.

A number of other communities have received it since then.

And the design of the state's program has us reapply every few years to continue to demonstrate to the state that we are going above and beyond the requirements of state law to advance housing, both through our land use programs as well as through our funding programs and other activities.

Now, this pro housing designation program uh provides the city with an advantage on a variety of state funding programs, most of which are related to affordable housing, but also some of which help advance other kinds of infrastructure.

For example, I believe there's an inner city rail program that our friends at BART might find an advantage to from this designation.

There is also a dedicated, though small grant program, the state of California operates, called the Pro Housing Incentive Program, which is a special set aside of funding for affordable housing related purposes that the city of Oakland can apply for if it is designated as a pro housing community.

Based off of our existing pro housing designation, we've already uh successfully received uh 2.39 million dollars from this dedicated funding set aside, which we are able to put towards our homeless housing programs, as I believe uh capitalized service uh reserve.

So, with this continued designation, we will be in a good position to apply for that again in future if future funding rounds are available.

And then for this wider spectrum of state funding programs, uh every advantage helps because these can be extremely competitive uh programs, um so every edge matters.

Um so this pro housing designation is again going to be very helpful.

Um now I'm pleased to say that this pro housing designation should be a slam dunk for the city of Oakland.

Um we have already started self-scored ourselves against the application, far exceed the minimum threshold, and it's really a testament to the work of this council, uh, previous councils and a variety of staff who have helped uh the city move forward a variety of policies and programs to advance housing.

Uh, some of the types of things that we're going to be including in this application include uh Oakland's specific plans, which have been really uh in helpful when it comes to advancing the construction of new housing.

Uh we recently saw that over the past five years, Oakland completed over 14,000 new housing units, which is almost half the entire housing stock of the city of Alameda for a sense of scale.

Um, and a lot of that has been built in the neighborhoods which are subject to area-specific plans like the Broadway Valdez specific plan, as among others.

We've also seen the city of Oakland take other types of land use steps, for example, um ending single family zoning, allow for duplexes uh citywide, as well as triplexes and fourplexes on many lots where that was previously not allowed.

There's the affordable housing overlay, which creates a ministerial approval process for affordable housing across the city of Oakland.

And we also see other land use policy changes, uh such as the recent action that this council took to create a new ministerial pathway for one to 30 unit projects, a pathway that uh I am not aware of any other California city necessarily having something quite like that, similar, as well as the work the city has done to create objective design standards to create predictability for people who want to build in Oakland, and then creating a streamlined approval process for those projects as well.

On addition to these uh very helpful land use programs, uh the city's also made considerable funding investment as y'all are aware.

Uh, with the passage of the measure U bond.

Um, many of those dollars uh have been invested in a wide variety of projects around Oakland, and we will be pointing to a variety of those investments, whether that's some of the new construction program, um, some of the conversions of motels to housing through things like project uh Project Home Key and other related investments, as well as our acquisition conversion to affordable housing of existing buildings, um, made again possible through local investment.

So there is a wide spectrum of activities the city does to make it a welcoming place for people to build housing at all levels of the income spectrum to make sure that we can maintain the economic diversity that is a key ingredient for why Oakland is such a special place to live and to work and uh we're excited to again receive this pro housing designation uh to help us advance our work to maximize the amount of state resources we can bring to bear on affordable housing and other kinds of investment in Oakland.

So that's a brief overview of this pro-housing designation.

We're now pleased to take any questions.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much, colleagues.

Any questions?

Uh Councilmember Unger.

So just really briefly, what does this get us in return?

What do we get from the state for being a pro-housing designated city?

Certainly.

So there is uh, so in addition to the public recognition of being pro-housing city, uh, this provides us with an advantage on several funding programs.

Um there's uh a long list.

Um the full list is including the staff report, but some of the examples include uh, for example, the state's Calhome Program, uh, which is a program that cities can apply for to uh receive additional funding to pay for things like down payment assistance for their residents or home rehabilitation programs, um, the pro housing designations uh used, I believe, in uh some of the transit-oriented development type affordable housing funding programs that the state has.

So this really gives us a little bit of an extra edge for our projects in some of these incredibly competitive funding processes, as well as again this dedicated uh funding pool that the state's established specifically for pro housing jurisdictions where all other cities are not even able to apply for it.

So it's really a bit of a funding boost is the primary way that I would think about uh the state trying to make a tangible incentive for the state cities to go above and beyond.

But I have to give credit to Oakland.

Oakland did it anyway, even before we even heard this pro housing designation existed.

Excellent.

Um, any hands online?

Okay, we can hear from the public speakers.

Calling in the names that signed up for this item.

If you're in person, you can come up to the podium, state your name for the record, or if you're on Zoom, please raise your hand to be easily identified.

David Boatwright, Asada Olabala, Tamar Verid, and Derek Barnes.

So to help with housing, you need to do like the county is getting ready to do when they're looking at the city of Russell receiving reparations for uh being pushed out of their housingness, blacks and Latinos who had previously lived in uh the uh area known as Russell City.

They all programs that housing and the city departments don't speak to that specifically look at housing or home ownership for African Americans.

One of them is building black wealth campaign uh which addresses home ownership gap for black Californians.

Another one is neighborhood works ownership endowment initiative that helps blacks be included in overcoming barriers to home ownership.

So we got all of these initiatives that y'all never speak to departments that can the the largest percentage of people who are homeless or African Americans, but you don't come up with any solutions.

So you also have that the city has made substantial financial investments in affordable housing.

If that's the case, why we got all of these homeless people still on the street?

You also say that Measure U was used for affordable housing.

Measure U has only been able to use 171 million dollars.

Uh 32 million of that was used for Lincoln Park Recreational Center to re be rebuilt.

Majority of any money used for Measure U has not gone to uh affordable housing.

And you race an equity statement.

You say we are increasingly investing in historical disenfranchised communities.

You don't talk about you're not investing in black people who have the greatest needs.

David Bowrite District 4.

It is surprising that Oakland would qualify for this designation.

Given the said the recent said example of the removal of Oakland's tiny houses projects, and it is imperative that contracted that one contracted project manners managers be thoroughly vetted before they are employed, and two that the city has designated an effective oversight for each project.

With the shortage of housing for the homeless in Oakland, the city cannot afford and then destroy any housing projects.

Thank you.

Calling in the names that signed up for this item.

Okay.

Sorry.

EBRHA, you can unmute yourself and begin your two minutes.

Hi, Madam Clerk.

Can you hear me?

Yes, you can begin.

Great.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members and city staff.

Derek Barnes with Ebra.

I'm here to offer uh cautious support for renewing Oakland's pro housing designation.

The good news is that the designation opens the door to hundreds of millions of potential dollars in critical state funding for affordable housing infrastructure and transit, as the report suggests as a D3 resident.

Um that's a lifeline, you know, we can't afford to ignore, especially as Oakland faces um the historic fiscal crisis and a mounting housing emergency and homeless crisis, which seems to be getting worse.

But the designation means nothing nothing if we can't deliver on what is promised.

So I urge you to ask some profound and necessary questions.

First, do we have the staffing, the systems and internal discipline to meet the compliance reporting and execution standards this program demands?

We all know the city's performance measure limitations, the limited infrastructure and antiquated technical resources.

Let's make sure we're not overpromising with no real plan to follow through with real impact.

Next, how will the administration ensure that this funding equitability reaches historically disinvest disinvested uh neighborhoods like East Oakland and West Oakland without uh fueling gentrification or displacement?

We're all exhausted by the promises of community and racial equity without any real and tangible results.

And then finally, I'd like to know what went wrong with our failed um earlier round application.

It's unclear to me what happened.

Uh what lessons did we learn if we learned any and what's changing before we complete uh in the next round?

And council, the goal isn't just to call ourselves pro-housing, the goal is to be pro-housing in practice on the ground and across every neighborhood.

Let's make sure the designation is more than just a political merit badge.

Um, let's make it mean something.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair, that concludes our public speakers on this item.

Okay, excellent.

Um, Councilmember Ramashandran has her hand up.

Yes, thank you so much.

I have a quick follow-up question to staff.

Um, so since 2022, um, do you have an estimate of about how much money our state housing designation has gotten us, or whether it's intangible in other ways, if it's not a dollar amount, that would have been able to benefit from it?

Sure.

Uh, through the chair to council member Ramachandran.

So the state has had uh uh direct funding program for these pro housing cities.

Uh the pro housing and center program, we've received thus far 2.39 million dollars uh through that program.

Um if we were to apply for a future round, we would need a separate council authorization for that.

Uh we have also applied two times after we got the first 2.39 million.

One of those applications was not successful, the other one we're still waiting to hear back on.

The state has had a policy of trying to make sure that every pro housing city gets funded at least once.

So the fact that we got funded first means that we have not yet gotten additional funding from that program.

But the fact that we applied that we were so early meant that we actually got more money than the cities that got their pro housing designation later because the state actually reduced the maximum amount that cities could ask for once they got more cities with that designation.

So it was good Oakland moved first.

And then there's also the broader question of for these other programs where there's a scoring bonus for our pro housing status, how much additional funding have we got?

I'm afraid that that is difficult for us to tell because some of these are programs that are affordable housing projects would directly apply for rather than the city.

So we don't necessarily have full visibility into their funding applications, the results of those competitions, and whether this designation was enough to uh push them over the top, as it were, into being funded or not.

Okay, thank you so much, and thanks for your efforts.

I think this is a great thing at our disposal, and I hope it can help us stay competitive in the future.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Excellent.

Um so thank you so much, Caleb, for um your presentation, and you know, kind of as was stated, very um appreciative of the leadership, um prior leadership to ensure that um as a city we um have this designation and really wanting to ensure that we have it going forward in doing some research.

I do see that some of the other cities that cities and counties that also have that same pro housing designation.

I think that it does make sense that um whether it was in round one and waiting to hear back as far as in round two, how that goes, because I think a lot of our neighboring what I see is a lot of our neighboring jurisdictions also have that same designation.

Um so I think that that may kind of speak to um how the state of California wants to also ensure equity in some of these other um cities as well.

Um, so just kind of want to say that publicly, and I really look forward to some ongoing conversation around how, as a you know, the city of Oakland can can really truly be a leader um both um in word um and then also in action, kind of as was mentioned by our public speakers around equity and really looking at some of the neighborhoods um, you know, across the city of Oakland to ensure that we um you know our are um indeed pro housing.

Um so thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilmember.

And so I will entertain a motion.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

That was a motion made by Councilmember Ramachandran, seconded by Council Member Unger to approve the recommendation of stop and to forward this item to the September 16, 2025 City Council agenda on consent on rule.

Councilmember Fife excused.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

I.

Councilmember Anger?

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

I thank you.

Motion passes with three eyes, one excused five to forward this item to the September 16th, 2025 city council agenda on consent.

Reading in item floor.

Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement with the unity council or its affiliates for a term of 24 months with one six-month administrative extension for the potential lease disposition and development of an affordable housing project on the properties located at 3550, 3566, 3600, and 3614 Foothill Boulevard, subject to the completion of the California Environmental Quality Act determination uh sorry determination, and there are five speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um, so for this item, we will be hearing from I believe it's Kimani Rogers from uh EWD.

Yes, that's correct.

Uh good afternoon, Chairperson Brown and members of the committee.

I am Kimani Rogers from the Economic Workforce development department.

Um and I have a presentation.

Okay.

Staff seeks authorization to negotiate and execute an exclusive negotiation agreement with the Unity Council or its affiliate to develop an 82-unit affordable family housing project on the city-owned 36 and foothill properties.

And there's just a quick design right there.

36 and Foothill consists of four city-owned parcels split into two sites on opposing sides of 36th Avenue, site A and Site B.

Site A contains 3550 and 3566 Foothill Boulevard, while site B consists of 3600 and 3614 Foothill Boulevard.

In 2020, the City Council had the 36th and Foothill property declared surplus land, pursuant to the California Surplus Lands Act, or SLA.

In compliance with the SLA, staff issued an initial notice of availability or NOA in late 2020.

In late 2021, state HCD confirmed that the city had met the SLA obligations and could proceed with the sell or lease of the property through the issuance of a request for proposals or RFP.

So EEWDD partnered with Housing and Community Development Department and the Department of Race and Equity to both draft and release the RFP on December 31st, 2024, with a submittal deadline of March 15, 2025.

Interested development teams were encouraged to submit their teams' qualifications, a design concept, and a financial proposal for review by city staff.

The city received proposals from two development teams, one from a five key school, five key schools and programs urban shelters LLC joint proposal, and another one from the Unity Council.

And both proposal summaries are there.

The five keys team proposed a senior housing project on both site A and Site B with up to 101 residential units split between studio and one-bedroom apartments.

It would serve a range of income levels up to 50% AMI or area median income.

Resident services would include case management, wellness programs, public benefits, and health benefits assistance, transportation assistance, etc.

Excuse me.

The Unity Council proposed a family housing project on both site A and Site B with up to 82 residential units, but between one, two, and three bedroom apartments.

It would serve a range of income levels up to 60% AMI.

Resident services would include educational activities, group events, referrals, language assistance, and assistance with benefits and health care documentation.

The proposals were evaluated by interdepartmental panel, including staff from EWDD, Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Race and Equity.

The proposals were evaluated and scored based upon five criteria identified in the RPRF and the criteria are listed there.

The average scores of the evaluation panel resulted in the Unity Council team proposal scoring significantly higher than the five keys team proposal, with significant disparities as identified up there in experience, financial capacity, and financial feasibility categories.

Interviews of the two development teams were also held by the evaluation panel.

After factoring in both the written submissions and virtual interviews, the panel recommended the city enter into an ENA with the Unity Council team for the proposed development project.

Some additional details about the Unity Council project.

It proposes three different levels of affordability with up to 25% of the units set aside for formerly homeless families at or below 30% AMI with additional splits at 50% and 60% AMI.

Site A would be a five-story building with 43 units, property management and services offices, a multipurpose community room, and outdoor space.

Services available for residents will include workforce development, use services, senior services, family services, and job search support.

The 21 formerly homeless households will receive intensive case management support to ensure their stabilization and success in housing.

The project will be designed to employ sustainable methods throughout the project, including managing indoor air quality, increasing energy efficiency, and ventilation through system design.

The design also calls for a low water landscaping approach combined with bioretention planters and potential roof water capture for landscape.

The developer has been awarded grant funds through the EPA to mitigate brownfield sites, which they plan to utilize on the property.

The Unity Council has extensive experience developing and managing properties in the area.

There's a few of the examples up there.

Of note, their 1921-36th Avenue project, which is the one on your far right, is a preservation project they completed five years ago, which abuts the project site and allows for the possibility of shared resources amongst the two different properties.

The proposed ENA will have an initial term of 24 months for a non-refundable exclusive negotiation payment in the amount of 25,000 dollars and one administrative six-month extension option with an additional payment of $6,250.

The NA process will require that the developer meet certain key ENA milestones, including soliciting community input and zoning approvals, while the city and the developer negotiate the specifics for the for the potential disposition of the property.

Approval of this item would advance the citywide priority of housing, economic and cultural security by providing up to 82 units of affordable housing.

Excuse me, affordable family housing in the Fruitville area.

Staff is therefore recommending authorization to negotiate and execute an EA with the Unity Council to develop up to 82 units of affordable family housing at the 36 and Foothill site.

City staff and a representative from the developer are available for any questions.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Is anyone here from the Unity Council and/or the other provider?

Or is it just the Unity Council?

The Unity Council will serve both as a developer and the service provider, and there are representatives here.

You're welcome to take two to three minutes to offer any remarks if you would like.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Thank you.

Kamani.

My name's Abra Levine.

I'm the Vice President of Real Estate Development at the Unity Council, and I'm here today with my colleague Vivian to represent the Unity Council and our partners.

We're grateful for the opportunity to discuss and hopefully to move forward with an ENA for the 36 and Foothill sites and greatly appreciate your support.

As you heard, our proposal for the 36th Avenue Foothill Boulevard sites will transform four vacant lots into a vibrant mixed-use family hub.

Our current proposal features 82 affordable family units with up to 25% set aside for formerly homeless families.

Each building has a residential lobby, mailroom, on-site laundry, outdoor courtyard with shared residential amenities and parking concentrated in separate buildings to maximize space for each use.

Site A will also house classroom space for the Unity Council's career and resource center and workforce and small business teams, and include a head start program open to residents and the larger Fruitville community.

This integration of services within the housing development is designed to empower residents and to build resilient communities.

And due to our deep roots in the Fruitville community, our existing service delivery capacity, and extensive experience in affordable housing, the Unity Council is uniquely positioned to develop these sites.

This proposal is a natural extension of our long-standing work in the Fruitville.

Over our 60-year history serving the Fruitville community, the Unity Council has provided a wide range of programs, including early childhood education, youth leadership, workforce development, small business consulting, senior services, housing development, property management, and resident services.

The project will enhance the community by providing quality housing that uplifts the commercially active Foothill Boulevard and underscores the Unity Council's long-term investment in the community.

To date, we have successfully developed a preserved almost 600 affordable apartments and roughly 200,000 square feet of commercial and community serving spaces, all in the Fruitville.

As Kamani mentioned, we currently own and operate three properties totaling 80 units on 36th Avenue, including an eight-unit building directly adjacent to the 36 and Foothill Boulevard sites.

Though we bring over six decades of experience delivering affordable housing and culturally rooted community services in the neighborhood, our work is grounded in centering resident needs and supported by deep sustained partnerships with local organizations and stakeholders.

The proposal shared today is merely our vision for the site, but this is just the beginning of what we know will be an exciting and productive partnership with the city of Oakland and the community to further refine the project's design to best reflect and respond to community priorities.

We look forward to the process, and we thank you again for your support.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

I have a couple questions, but we'll definitely invite my colleagues if they have any first.

Councilmember Ramashandran.

Okay.

Well, I'm super excited for this for this project, and I'm really grateful to the leadership of the Unity Council.

And then I guess I'm just curious a couple things.

I know that as outlined in the report, there are a handful of housing developments that you all have worked on, especially in recent years.

I am curious if there's any key takeaways from some of those recent developments that you will be like in you know desiring to implement kind of in this particular proposal.

And then I think it was also mentioned that there is a category that will be for um you know those who are experiencing homelessness, and I guess I'm curious how you um how does the unity council kind of plan to um you know get folks into the housing that are experiencing homelessness?

Like is there a particular um area within the city you're focused on, or you know, what is that outreach look like?

Mm-hmm.

So I think one of the things that influenced us as we were putting together this proposal is certainly our experience leasing up our most recent uh projects for the most recent one, which is 181 units.

We have had over 8,500 applicants, and a lot of them needed larger units, frankly.

And we also, as I mentioned, own uh 80 units that are that we acquired actually in 2020 through our preservation activities that were existing multifamily properties that were not restricted, and we acquired them with the help of the city and were able to restrict their affordability long term, and a lot of those units also, those are one and two-bedroom units, predominantly one bedroom, and a lot of household really need larger units.

So, as we were thinking about kind of the target population and the unit mix for this project, we definitely wanted to ensure that there was ample larger units to accommodate families.

And in thinking about the population, you asked about the homeless families.

We have engaged through some of those other projects also, developed relationships.

Certainly, there's the coordinated entry system process, and we would likely expect to work with them to as a referral agency for these homeless units.

We've also engaged with the school district, the Oakland Unified School District has a McKinney Vento program where they outreach to homeless families within the school district, and we've been working with them as well to create a pipeline and referral source.

Wow, excellent.

Thank you so much for sharing.

We can hear from the public speakers.

Thank you so much.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on this item in no particular order, you can come up to the podium or please raise your hand on Zoom to be easily identified.

Maciel Jaquez, Asada Olobala, Abra Lavine, we already saw, and then Christopher Martinez.

We can start with Zoom users.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Marcel Jackis, and I'm the deputy director at Centro Legal de la Rasa, a longtime community-based organization serving Fruitville.

And we're here today in strong support of the Unity Council's proposed new development at 36th Avenue in Foothill.

As someone who was born and raised in East Oakland and as a community partner who has worked closely with the Unity Council over the years, we've seen firsthand their commitment to equitable development, cultural stewardship, and deep community engagement.

They're a trusted steward in this neighborhood.

I can say that from personal experience.

Not just the developer, but an anchor institution that understands the needs of longtime residents and works collaboratively with local organizations like ours.

We're excited to see this project move forward and are confident that it will bring much needed affordable housing while uplifting the voices and priorities of the community.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for your comments.

So thank you.

So something's going on.

I just pulled up the 990 form for the Unity Council.

So on their website, 990 form 2018.

So when you pull up the form, it says name of organization, Spanish speaking unity council.

So where is the 990 for the Unity Council?

Then when you look at the staff, the administrative staff for the Unity Council, and the administrative staff for the Spanish speaking Unity Council, who's the exact same people.

What is what is being represented here?

That you have the Spanish speaking unity council putting themselves in the position of being another group called the Unity Council.

And when you look at the work that the Spanish speaking unity council does, it's the exact same thing that the Unity Council does.

So something's going on, and I don't know what it is, but I got a feeling that they're trying to misrepresent that they don't really they represent Spanish speaking people.

And Fruitvale.

So they have in their report the race and equity statement.

Fruitvale is an ethnically and racially diverse area.

Fruitvale is 20 53.8% Latino, 10% black, 10 to 15% white, and 15% Asian.

Why do you have to misrepresent that you have diverse community?

You are predominantly Latino community.

It's nothing wrong with that.

But don't give the appearance that you're representing diversity when you are not.

When you had the opportunity to partner with Neighbor Works America in 2016 with Wells Fargo Bank to help black ownership, ownership to take place.

For people who were involved in redlining, what they did is gave it to all the Latino people.

And no black people got any housing.

If they did, very few.

Thank you for your comments.

Christopher, you can unmute yourself and begin your two minutes.

Thank you so much, uh, committee members.

My name is Christopher Martinez, and I'm with the Spanish-speaking Citizens Foundation, a community-based organization serving Fruitville and all of Oakland since 1965.

And I'm here today to voice strong support of the Unity Council's proposed development at 36th Avenue and Foothill, not just as a partner, but as someone who has seen the impact of their work firsthand.

Early in my time here at Spanish Speaking, I worked with a multi-generational family living just a few blocks from this site.

They were struggling with rising rents and poor housing conditions, but they stayed because Fruitville is their home.

Their roots are here.

What was needed was not just shelter, it was stability, dignity, and the chance to thrive in the community they love.

That's exactly what this project represents.

The Unity Council has a long track record of doing development with the community, not just to it.

They're not just builders, they're bridge builders.

They listen, they collaborate, and they act with care and integrity.

We are excited to see this project move forward and confident it will bring deeply needed affordable housing, not just in name, but in practice, while keeping the voices and needs of longtime residents at the center.

Thank you so much for your leadership and for considering this important investment in our community.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Chair, that concludes all speakers on this item.

All right.

Well, thank you so much.

Um I'll entertain a motion on this item.

So moved.

Second.

Um, second second, and I also have a question.

I apologize, I forgot to raise my hand.

Is it okay to still ask, Chair?

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Um, thank you for the presentation and for detailing um the process.

Uh the transparency is very much appreciated.

Um, I have a question about the timeline.

So if this is a two-year ENA that's we're gonna be negotiated, um, do you have and then obviously based on funding applications at different uh state levels and all of that, um, do you have any approximate estimate of a range of times in which you know ground would be broken for this project and or when applications for the actual housing would be taken.

Uh to the first part of the I'm sorry, through the chair.

Uh, to the first part of the question in terms of timeline.

Uh DNA is just an exclusive negotiation period, and so uh we allow for two years with an additional administrative option of six months to begin early negotiations.

Um at this time, I wouldn't feel comfortable or confident giving any type of hard deadline um through the ENA period, um, as we discussed.

Uh some of the negotiations will be uh we'll be seeking uh community input.

Uh there will be the process to go through planning and zoning requirements, um, there are various uh negotiations with the city regards to potential lease, um, an appraisal of property will need to be held, etc.

etc.

And so um I don't feel I'd uh at this time it would not be uh prudent to give a a timeline as to when uh ground would be broken.

Um and then the second part of the question um I I can you repeat that?

I don't know if this is more to staff or towards the uh the developer.

No, I think I think that about covers it that there's a lot of uncertainty, but it's um just to clarify what you're saying is I mean, it's a it's a two-year ENA period, but it's quite possible that it could the negotiation could be completed within six months.

Is that what you had said?

Um, no, sorry.

Uh, to clarify the ENA period is for two years or 24 months with an administrative option for an additional six months.

So at this time, what council will be authorizing is essentially up to 30 months of negotiation period.

Um, if the negotiations uh take longer, so if it takes longer to let's say get the full community input, uh have the the actual project that best fits uh for the city and for the developer to to go at that site.

If it takes more than 30 months, then we would come to council for uh an extension, but um we're in no way guaranteeing uh that things will uh that this process will be completed, definitely not in in six months.

Um, and we're just allowing for flexibility through the 30-month period.

Is that more clear?

Yeah, thank you.

Okay, all right, thank you.

I believe there was a motion in a second.

Thank you.

That was a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Chair Brown to approve the recommendation of staff and to forward this item to the September 16th, City Council September 16, 2025, City Council agenda on consent on roll.

Councilmember Fife excused, council member Ramashandran.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye, and Chair Brown.

I thank you.

Motion passes with three eyes, one excuse five, uh, to forward this item to the September 16th, 2025 city council agenda on consent.

Reading in item five, receive an informational report regarding the fiscal year two thousand twenty-four-twenty-five, quarter one and quarter two update on the planning and building department's code enforcement activities.

And there are two speakers that signed up for this item.

Excellent.

Um, and so for this item, we will be hearing a representative um from building and planning.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Brown and esteemed members of the committee.

My name is Cecilia Muela, and I am currently the acting building official representing the planning and building bureau.

K-Top, could we please load the presentation?

Thank you.

As I already as already stated, I am here to present before the committee the first and second quarter code enforcement informational report.

As per the meeting held September 10th, 2024, this committee provided direction to present this report biannually, and this was this represents the second report that combines two quarters into one biannual report.

As we see here through our table of contents, we're going to review today the complaints received quarterly by category, first inspections and follow-up inspections by category, case management duration, enforcement actions, enforcement fees assessed, abated and closed cases, the total open cases, and the end of quarter, additional online resources that we also provide to our constituents.

As we see here, we review our top complaints by category.

But before I begin to go through this table, I want to add that the goal and purpose of the code enforcement program is to increase the safety, habitability, and livability of the built environment in the city of Oakland.

And we do this by um aiming our enforcement to be able to maintain safe and healthy living conditions by addressing issues like dilapidation, preserve property values and community appearance by enforcing codes related to building maintenance, signage and landscaping, preventing blight and urban decay by ensuring properties are properly maintained, protecting the public safety by addressing issues such as zoning violations and unsafe structures.

Keeping in mind that these conditions can equally become anathema to neighboring property owners and the public collectively.

So as we go through the report today, it's important to note that while there are other departments within the city of Oakland that have enforcement capacity, such as the Oakland Fire Department, Oakland Public Works, Economic Workforce and Development Department.

We are only focusing on metrics as per the planning and building bureau.

So as we see here, blighted property maintenance top cases were on trash and debris, graffiti being the second, and the third being overgrown vegetation.

Moving on to our housing maintenance code and complaints thereof.

Our main goals or our main complaints were unpermitted work, complaints regarding mold, and complaints regarding plumbing.

Moving on to zoning, we saw a lot of complaints come in through business and residential zones, so businesses operating in residential areas, noise complaints outside of the permitted hours, as well as fencing heights that are over the approval limits or the limits as provided by chapter 17.

It's important to also know that these are only top complaints, but not all of them.

And as we go through the complaints, roughly 1,716 complaints were received per the quarter over the last fiscal year, over the last four fiscal years, I should say, with the lowest in 2022 and 23 fiscal year, where we received 1,330 complaints, and in the highest seen in 2024 and 2025, where we see an increase of 2,314 complaints received.

And you could see that throughout the course of time in this particular slide.

Moving forward to our first inspections, here we we see the difference and the escalation between or fluctuation, I should say, between complaints received in quarter one of fiscal year 2021, and quarter one fiscal year 2025.

We see that our blight complaints tripled, our housing complaints doubled, as well as our zoning complaints equally doubled for this quarter.

Moving on to our inspections and site visits thereof.

For each category, for first inspections, we completed about a thousand twenty-six blighted property inspections, and these also include complaints of graffiti, 674 housing maintenance inspections, 159 zoning inspections, and re-inspections for blighted property were at 1,447, with an increase of re-inspections and monitoring inspections for housing of 2,395.

And this is pretty significant because it shows that our compliance rate when we see a high number of reinspections has gone up.

So it's it's pretty positive for us at our end.

Moving on to our case management for quarter one July for the time period of July through September, we see that our case intake was about four and a half days, with our first inspection being scheduled roughly 3.8 days after receipt and a notice of violation being sent within that time period that led to abatement of 26.1 days in between with an overall compliance period of 33.6 business days.

For blight case management duration, for quarter one, July through September, we equally see the case intake at five days, which is right at our mark.

For first inspections, 3.3 days, our first notice of violation and abatement, 23.3 days, also at about 31.8 business days from initial to compliance.

Moving forward to our housing case management duration for the same quarter, our intake was completed at about 2.8 days from receipt, our first inspection being scheduled within our threshold of five days, and our notice of violation being sent with approximately 32.6 average time that led to abatement, this leading to about 40 days for compliance.

And it's important to note here that sometimes when we see days of compliance leading up to 40 days, that could be because of a number of things.

If we have, for example, on a housing complaint, something that requires a permit, let's say there's lack of heat, and we need to pull a permit for heating, or there's a plumbing deficiency and we need a permit there as well.

That would be why the compliance time frame would lead to about 40 days because it allows for time for somebody to come down to city hall and obtain a permit or pull their permit online.

Moving on to zoning case management duration for the same time period, our case intake was at about five days.

Our first inspection completed within our threshold of five days at 4.3, and our notice of violation and abatement roughly up at about 24 25 days per se, bringing us to a from start to finish compliance of 34 business days.

Um, our medium numbers, which are equally important, our case intake was at four days, our first inspection is three days, and our notice of violation is at 24 days.

Now, these are the truest numbers that we have, which really give us the metrics that we need so that we can generate you know more efficiency as we are responding as we are following up on cases and finding modes of compliance or solutions for compliance for our constituents.

For blighted case management duration, we are at about 4.5 days for case intake, our first inspection being at roughly two and a half days, and our notice of violation and abatement time frames being at roughly 24 days, again staying within that 31 day marker of business days for compliance from start to finish.

Going into our housing case management duration for this time period, our median numbers are at three days for intake, our first inspection roughly three days, and also about 26 days for full compliance and/or abatement of that particular complaint.

And equally, as you see here, we are within our threshold for case intake for zoning complaints at two days, first inspection response within four days, 25 days to full compliance from notice of violation being sent out.

Some of the steps that we've taken for compliance and abatement, as you see here, we've had a total of four cases with cleanup contracts where the city took action on a property to ensure that the property was abated of its nuisance.

We issued two repeat offender violations.

This is a violation that perhaps a property owner may have had within the course of 24 months, one or more times.

So let's say somebody calls a complaint on property one, two, three, four happy lane, and then within eight months, we receive a secondary complaint of the same type.

This is where we would receive or issue a notice of repeat violation for that property.

Stop work orders issued for non-compliance were 30.

This reflects unpermitted work throughout the city, or going beyond the scope of work on active job sites.

And we entered into 12 compliance plans, which again, this is another mode of being able to create a pipeline for property owners to bring their property into compliance.

This is a tool that we use that really allows us the ability to create some time buffer and timelines by means of milestones that assist us in guiding the constituents of the city to bring their property into full compliance.

The total open cases for quarter one for this time period, we see 3,099 open cases in the previous quarter with 1,334 cases for this quarter.

So we do see a decrease of 232 cases for blight, as well as we see a decrease of about 37 cases for housing or habitability maintenance and an increase of seven cases for zoning violations.

And these zoning violations could be again noise complaints, home occupation, offenses over height.

Our complaints received by category as you see here.

This is representative of quarter two, fiscal year 2021, quarter two, all the way to fiscal year 25, quarter two.

We see a light increase of about 300 give or take cases, a minor increase in our housing complaint cases, and almost doubled in our zoning cases.

Now, this sometimes leads to climatic changes, right?

Things that have changed throughout the course of time, dilapidation or deferred maintenance.

So when there's a lot of deferred maintenance, we do see a hike in our housing habitability cases that come in for code violations.

Our first inspections for fiscal year 2021, quarter two, and fiscal year 2025, we see here that we've had a slight increase, but not too much.

Our primary housing maintenance, which is kind of the most cases or the most complaints that we see that impact on a variety of different levels.

Our constituency did increase somewhat there by double.

Well, it did double, but we do also show that we have been consistently maintaining through modes such as compliance plans, such as stop work orders to be able to address those specific complaints.

Going into site visits and our inspections for quarter two for the time period of October through December.

Our first inspections for blighted property, we conducted about 598 inspections.

Our housing maintenance inspections were at 736, and our zoning inspection or site visits were at 153 for first inspection.

Now here we also see that our reinspections and monitoring inspections have also increased quite a bit.

And again, this just kind of tells the story that because they're increasing, we're getting a lot more done on these properties.

We're getting more of a connection with property owners or stakeholders that have a vested interest in the property that are trying to bring the property into compliance.

So when we do see that re-up and reinspections, it's always a positive sign for us versus not getting any type of connection or compliance from property owners.

Now moving into our case management duration for quarter two for the time period of October through December.

Here we see our case intake overall at 1.4 days, with our first inspection being scheduled within 2.3 days time, our notice of violation being sent and abatement within a 26-day period, bringing our compliance period from start to finish to about 29.7 business days.

Moving into the blight case management duration, equally for this time period of quarter two, we see our case intake at one and a half days with our first inspection at roughly just under one and a half days, and our notice of violation at about 22 days for full abatement.

And housing cases, our initial intake, one day, our first inspection 11 days, and our notice of violation was sent within 27 days, bringing our total to about 39 business days from uh onset to full abatement.

Going on to our zoning case management, we see an increase here of 45, 7 days compliance.

Our case intake was at one day, our first inspection at six days, and our notice of violation sent was within 40 days.

This again speaks to any time there's a zoning case that might need review, it might need more than just you know season desists, but rather providing a pathway by which constituents can bring their property into compliance.

So that increase in business days really speaks to being able to come in and speak with different departments to gain that compliance that's needed.

And our case management duration for quarter two from October to December, going through our median time frames, we have about one business day for case intake with our first inspection also being about one day overall, and our notice of violation being mailed out within 24 and a half days time, bringing that to abatement.

And for our blight case median time, one day, also for case intake, one day for our inspections to be completed, as well as our notice of violation being sent in about 23 and a half days and leading to abatement.

Going into our housing case management, equally, we're at one day for case intake, so it's really great to see how great we're doing with making sure that those cases are getting assigned as they're coming in, and their first inspections also equally staying within our threshold.

Here we see an 11-day increase for first inspection.

This would account for the October, December time is a bit challenging.

We have people's schedule time off, we have illnesses because it is the fall winter months, so it's not um it's not as terrible as it may look.

It's just really accounting for those specific instances where we may not have enough staff readily available to be going out to these inspections.

However, our notice of violation that's sent out leading to abatement of the property is still at 27 days, so it's pretty positive to see that even though we had that little uptick there, that we are still staying within our threshold of time frame for compliance, and our zoning case management duration or case intake equally at one day for assigning to an inspector and the first inspection being conducted by six days' time, with our notice of violation being sent out about 40 days and then leading to full abatement.

So our enforcement actions for compliance for this second quarter.

We issued a total of three cleanup contracts.

We didn't have any repeat offender violations that were issued.

We did issue 34 stop work orders, and we entered into roughly five compliance plans.

Again, which is pretty positive as far as trying to get these properties into compliance.

Now going into our fees assessed, as you see here, we have our different fiscals fiscal years for comparison.

So for fiscal year 25, quarter two, we had about 349 cases that were invoiced, leading to fees and including bonds of 804,657, taking in a total of 23,000 for compliance plan bonds.

Going into fiscal year 25, quarter one, 370 cases that were invoiced, taking in fees at 721,834, bringing in a total compliance plan bond to $64,000, which are increases from quarter four, quarter three, and quarter two.

The compliance plan bonds, again, speaking to the compliant compliance plans that we entered, are that pipeline by which we allow constituents an opportunity to bring their property into compliance.

So these bonds are returned to them once full compliance is met.

As you see here, our blight cases again increased or took an increase from 2024 to today's state.

Our housing maintenance has remained pretty steady over the course of the last uh four quarters, with this specific quarter having an increase, and that usually is because climatic changes.

So it could have been because of rain in the fall, could have been because of rain in the springtime, cold weather, lack of heat, perhaps leaks, things like that that would generate additional code complaints to come into our office.

And as you see here, throughout the course of time from fiscal year 96 through fiscal year 25, we are at about uh 1,426 cases that were distributed with an increase of 48.5%.

Now the total open cases for quarter two, October through December.

We had a total of open cases from the previous quarter of 2,867.

Our current cases per this quarter 908, abated and closed cases at 1,643 for a total of 2,132 for blighted property, 3,082 for maintenance, and 672 for zoning, as we see here.

Additional information that we provide our constituents, anyone that has a vested interest on property is how to obtain a notice of violation.

These are available to the public, located on the links as you see here on the screen, and as well as how to collect any previous code enforcement reports that they may want to reference review before they come in and speak to us for finding a way to comply for their property.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you so much for the comprehensive report.

We can hear from the public speakers first.

Calling in the names that signed up to speak on this item.

Ms.

Taneas Scott Smith and Mrs.

Ada Olawala.

I am happy that I don't even have to read what I wrote because a lot of the questions were answered by the report.

Having formerly worked in building planning code enforcement in San Jose, I know the ins and outs, and code enforcement is one of my least favorite departments because of it, mainly because of RBC, but that's a whole nother argument.

What I'd like to see is while we're in a deficit financially, is that there is some way to streamline enforcement of deadbeat landlords to get them to comply, some way to make stricter um penalties upon landlords and developers who it's more cost effective for them to pay fines than it is for them to make repairs and obey laws.

And I know several that I work with in advocating that's a major contribution to the fact that we have this unsheltered crisis here in the city of Oakland.

People cannot afford it, and a lot of landlords will illegally evict people when they complain about circumstances instead of fixing their property and then up the property rents and put somebody else in there with the same problems.

Code enforcement will come out and they just ignore the employees, they just ignore their calls, ignore their emails, don't fix anything, and then illegally evict the tenants because it's more cost effective to pay the fines, and we don't have enough staff really to implement.

So, in order to um deal with the issues of enforcement, we uh working with a complaint-based system, so we don't respond to an issue until a complaint is received.

The other thing that's important is there's a backlog of cases because you need more inspectors.

You have in this presentation so many different areas that come under this banner, uh, business residential zone inspections, fencing inspection, construction inspections, uh you have graffiti inspections, and then I'm not gonna go through a whole, but you got a lot of different ones.

Then you got code enforcement that is targeted to private property, and code enforcement that is targeted to public property, and I didn't get the difference of how that works, what if any differences working?

Uh the biggest issue that I have is blight and nuisance issues, and you can't wait for a complaint, you have to be able to have some way of identifying the need.

You had 1,716 complaints uh regarding strip vehicles, but related to that is that uh vehicles that have been stripped, you have illegal um business owners selling those parts.

So it's not only that you're stripping vehicles, but you have business participants who are illegally selling them.

Um what is the neighborhood enhancement service team in east and west Oakland?

They are they were identified in the report, uh, but I didn't I didn't see what what the what they actually do.

Then you have the abandoned auto task for now.

Remember the uh grand jury is saying that we are ticketing abandoned cars when they've been stolen, and we all.

Thank you for your comments, Chair.

That concludes our speakers on this item.

All right, thank you so much.

Um, colleagues, any questions?

Um, Councilmember Unger.

Um that can you tell me what that first inspection looks like?

Or are you actually going out?

Is somebody driving out to every complaint to put eyes on it?

Yes, through the chair.

Um, to Councilmember Ungar, yes.

Okay, and so every single like that's 7,000 trips a year that our inspectors are going out to to put eyes on.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay, that's a lot.

Thank you.

Yes, and so I would like to kind of ask an additional question kind of in that same category.

I believe it's on page eight of the report.

Um, it states that you know there is ongoing um recruitment to fill some of the vacancies.

I did want to get an understanding of, you know, what is the current total of inspectors that we have kind of fulfilling these roles, and how many, I guess, in this current but budget cycle, um, how many are uh currently how many how many positions are you currently um you know um trying to fill.

Yes.

Um thank you, Chair Brown.

We currently have uh roughly about 22 inspectors dedicated to the code enforcement unit.

We are actively um looking to add three ELDE uh code enforcement assistant inspectors to assist us with uh our lower level cases such as blight nuisance, things that um they could put an autofocus on so that we can tackle that that workload.

And are those um positions only um funded for a short period of time?

They are not.

Actually, we've been working um quite a bit at making those permanent positions.

There are a total of five positions.

We are bringing in three in the interim to get them up and running with the goal of getting the full five on staff.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much.

Um does Councilmember Ramachandran have her hand up.

Yes, um, thank you.

That you did ask uh ask my question already about uh hiring and staffing.

Um, just one additional question about um enforcement fees.

Do you have an estimate of the percentage of fees that are assessed that are actually collected through the chair to council member Ramashondrin?

Uh we we do, we can provide that information, so I can have my office put something together to provide that information to you.

That would be great.

Um I would be interested.

Well, it depending on the will of the body, if that could be included in a supplemental um when this is forwarded.

Well, actually, this may not be forwarded to council, I assume.

So I I would love that information in an email to my office.

Um, and then uh actually, yeah, that's it.

That was that in hiring was it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Excellent, thank you so much.

And I um thank you so much, Councilmember Ramos Chandran.

I think that that's an excellent um addition.

Um, that potentially, as we receive this report in the future, maybe we can just kind of add that as something that's you know added to the report if that's possible.

Um, so at this time, thank you so much.

Um, at this time I don't have any further questions, um, so I'll entertain a motion to receive and file um this in committee.

So moved.

Second.

Thank you.

That was a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Council Member Ramachandran to approve the recommendation of staff and to receive and file this informational report in committee on roll council member five is excused, council member Ramashondran.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

Thank you.

Item number five passes with three eyes, one excused five to receive and file this informational report in committee.

Moving on to open forum, we have two people that signed up.

Ms.

Tania Scott Smith and Miss Asada Olavala.

I don't have to come back here until September.

Give me be ready for y'all.

So I gotta say this.

Um, head start is in big trouble.

I know Bonta has a lawsuit, but that Crazy Man has uh implemented that uh children who are not here legally will not be able to be a part of Head Start.

That's very serious.

Plus, we got all these issues going on with head start with leadership and with fraud and lawsuits.

So y'all got to get on board to fix head start.

Uh I'm concerned.

You got a non existing nonprofit that you just bounced into getting a contract.

And I remember a couple of months ago, it might be as much as a year ago.

You had to come back and redo a contract because it was written up as the unity council, and you had to resubmit it as a Spanish-speaking unity council because you couldn't use unity council on a legal document.

The city attorney knows this.

Don't never speak up for anything.

Uh lastly, when you're talking about permitting, and what you did to the black Lake Merit vendors, and how you specifically target them to be fined because they didn't have permits.

And you have all over the city, people who are setting up.

I got a man who on Kellen Mountain parks his car, pulls up his trunk, and sells food out of his trunk.

We got some other guys that come with a truck and sell big barrels for flowering.

And we got people that sell flowers, they sell foods, they're blocking the sidewalks, and they're not getting ticketed.

And I don't have any problem with anybody trying to make a living, but don't target African Americans for the same thing other people are doing, and they're not being held responsible for not having permits to do this business.

Thank you guys for supporting us.

Thank you for taking care of that non-Hed Start employee who was committing fraud and is no longer employed by the city.

Thank you.

Our leadership team is amazing.

I appreciate each and every one of those overeducated black women who are in this for the heart work, not for the salaries.

And I hate that a noted, bigoted, internal racist walked out instead of hearing truth.

Now I'm speaking as a citizen.

We could have those tiny homes on wheels.

We have artists here in West Oakland who are creating tiny homes for our unsheltered citizens out of recycled materials.

They are safe and in many times green homes are safer and more structurally sound than homes that follow the IBC.

We need to make processes simpler and more affordable for those that are most in need.

It does not need to be some boutique option for the wealthy who already have infinite possibilities.

It needs to be an option for those who are in need.

We have too many people who work here and want to stay here because they're from here, but they can't afford it.

Thank you, Chair.

That concludes our speakers for open forum.

Excellent.

Well, thank you so much, everyone.

I would say it's not quite goodbye yet.

I will see you at the rules and legislation committee on Thursday at 10.30.

And then kind of following that, our next meeting of the body, I believe is September the 16th for the full city council meeting, and then our committee meetings will resume Tuesday, September the 30th.

So thank you so much.

This meeting is adjourned.