Good afternoon, and welcome to the community and economic development committee meeting.

For today, Tuesday, December ninth.

The time is now one thirty, and this meeting has come to order.

Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit a speaker's card for items on this agenda.

If you're here with us in chambers and you would like to submit a speaker's card, please find out, please fill one auditor into a clerk representative before the item is read into record.

Allow our speaker requests for due twenty-four hours prior to the meeting starting.

This meeting came to order at nine thirty one thirty p.m.

Excuse me.

M.

With that, we would now proceed to take roll.

Present.

We have four members present.

And before we begin, Chair Brown, do you have any announcements for us this afternoon?

Yes, thank you so much.

Well, good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to our last community and economic development committee meeting of twenty twenty five.

It's truly been a pleasure working alongside all of the amazing departments that present to this committee.

So housing and community development, economic and workforce development, planning and building, as well as the amazing partnership of our city administration, um, Betsy Lake and team, as well as the city attorney's office.

And so as a first-year council member, your partnership and professionalism has really made this first year both productive and impactful.

And so as we're looking to 2026, I'm excited for the work that we'll be able to do around anti-displacement implementation, the city's economic action plan, as well as continued exploration on how we use Oakland spaces and land for public good.

And then lastly, I did want to make the announcement that in order to ensure that we complete uh conclude our meeting on time today, we will uh be limiting uh public comment to one minute per speaker.

And so thank you all so much, members of the public for being here, and so we can go ahead and get started.

Thank you, Chair Brown, for your announcements and noting one minute for all public speakers for every item, including open form.

Moving to item one approval of the draft minutes from the committee meetings held on October 28th, 2025, and the special meeting on November 18th, 2025.

And you do have one speaker for this item, um we can hear from the public speakers.

Moving to our public speaker.

If you're here with St.

Chambers, please approach the podium.

If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands.

You're easily identified.

Blair Beakman.

As I don't see Blair, that concludes your public speakers.

Excellent.

And I'll entertain a motion.

Councilmember Unger.

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember 5 to accept the draft minutes from the committee meetings on October 28th, 2025, and a special meeting on November 18th, 2025, as is on roll.

Councilmember 5.

Aye.

Councilmember Rama Chandran.

Aye.

Thank you, Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes of the committee meetings held on October 28th and November 18th, 2025.

Moving to item two, determination to schedule outstanding committee items.

And this is also known as your pending list, and you do have one speaker for this item as well.

Okay, excellent.

Um, and so to the administration, um, any um items for our consideration.

Not through the chair, then I just time.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um, and so I'll make the motion to move this item.

And is there a second?

Second.

Excellent.

And we can hear from the public speakers.

Thank you, Miss Asada.

So the upcoming uh World Cup is supposed to be an opportunity for us to benefit economically.

But as I stated in the finance committee meeting, uh, we as public members were not given correct information related to how we would share with the other cities and county members the responsibility for the $700,000 that was submitted to implement the facility needs and hosting the team.

Uh in a meeting in July, the Alameda City of Alameda agreed to come up with 150,000.

The responsibility for this project is totally with Oakland roots.

We should have gotten some commitment from the city of Berkeley, the county of Alameda, the city of uh I'm sorry.

So you'll also have me to stand by uh.

Thank you for your comment, Mrs.

Sada.

We do have a motion made by Councilmember Brown, seconded by council member five to accept determination to schedule outstanding committee items, also known as your pending list, as is on roll.

Councilmember five.

Aye.

Councilmember Rama Chandran.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to accept the termination to schedule outstanding committee items as is.

Moving to item three.

Adopt a resolution authorizing a city administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city of San Leandro establishing that the city of San Leandro will process planning and building entitlements for improvements on the existing structure and parking lot at one East 14th Street, 107 01 International Boulevard, a property property located within their both jurisdictions and act as a as a lead agency for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act, and you do have one speaker.

Excellent, thank you so much.

And so I believe for this item, we can put five minutes on the clock, and then we'll hear from planning and building.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Jana Wismer.

I am a consultant for the planning department, and I've been working with the City of San Leandro and our city attorney's office to bring this to fruition.

And could we have the PowerPoint, please?

As was mentioned, this is a memorandum of understanding between the City of Oakland and the City of San Leandro.

The project location is located right on the border of San Leandro and Oakland.

This is a map showing the parcelization.

And to the lower side of your screen, that is the portion that was within the city of San Leandro.

The three parcels to the north of that border are all within the city of Oakland.

And here's an aerial view.

All of the area that is within the city of Oakland is just a bare parking lot.

There are no structures currently on this on the Oakland site.

As I mentioned, it's comprised of four Alameda County Assessors parcels and straddles the border between the cities of San Leandro and Oakland.

Again, there are three on the Oakland side, one on the San Leandro side.

And the majority of the properties, the parking lot is in within the city of Oakland, 58%.

42% of the property is located in San Leandro.

And there's an existing structure on site, a little over 28,000 square feet, again located entirely on the portion within the city of San Leandro.

The building is vacant, and I believe in former years it was used as a towing company.

And the project will not include the construction of any structures on the existing parking lot.

So there will be no structures proposed within the city of Oakland limits.

The project would be required to apply for a conditional use permit through the City of San Leandro.

However, if this were going to be the opposite way, if the um if Oakland were to maintain jurisdiction over both properties, it would also be a conditional use permit.

And through the conditional use permit process with San Leandro, the City of Oakland would have the opportunity to comment and make suggestions.

And with this memorandum of understanding, San Leandro will be the lead agency for all land use approvals, including building permits, plan check, uh certificates of occupancy, building inspections, and all the fees to be paid for the city of San Leandro.

And emergency services to the site will also be provided to the City of San Leandro portion and all also the area located within Oakland.

And with that, we recommend that the City of Council adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the City of San Leandro, establishing that the City of San Leandro will process planning and building entitlements for improvements to an existing structure and parking lot at one East 14th Street and 10701 International Boulevard, a property located within both jurisdictions and act as lead agency for the purpose of review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

That concludes my presentation.

I can answer any questions you may have.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um any questions or comments, colleagues, and then Councilmember Mashandrin?

Does she have her hand up?

Okay.

Okay, excellent.

Thank you so much.

We can hear from the if there's any public comment.

Thank you, Ms.

Lassada.

So with the majority of the property being in Oakland, why is San Leandro taking the lead on the property?

And with a property like this, do the owners of the property pay any assessments to the city of Oakland?

Or do all of it goes?

Does it all go to the city of San Leandro?

Is it split?

How does that work?

So do they pay uh partial taxes or what do you vote?

Uh with the city of land, San Diego, the city of Oakland.

And it just leads me to my final comment.

You have the need to have a contract with the city of Piedmont as it relates to the city of Piedmont being able to use Oakland libraries that has been without a contract for over 20 years.

And they have had access to our libraries.

They give us money, but they give us the amount of money they want to give us every year for that.

They don't you have to have a contract, and you don't, and I've brought this to your attention several times.

It also is the city of the basic city of all right.

Thank you so much for your comments.

Um, I do think that the um report was uh very clear um given that this property is um a parking lot, um, a part of the parking lot, and so um colleagues, I'll entertain a motion on this.

Councilmember Unger.

So moved and council member five.

Second.

We do have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Councilmember Five to approve the recommendations of staff and this to be forward to the December 16th, 2025 City Council agenda, and that is on consent on the roll.

Councilmember Five.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran, aye.

Councilmember Ungar.

I and Chair Brown?

Aye.

This motion passes with four eyes to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the December 16th City Council agenda on consent.

Moving to item four.

Through the chair to the public speaker.

Um it is past the time to sign up for public comment.

I want to be more like this, I want to do it by the way.

Yeah, just emphasize that the time is expired.

Okay.

Read it in item four.

Adopt a resolution.

One authorizing the city administrator to negotiate terms for the exclusive negotiating agreement with Costco Wholesale Corporate and DECA companies.

The develop to develop at Costco Wholesale and Retail General Merchandise Facility and the North Gateway Development Area of the former Oakland Army base into declaring the property exempt surplus land.

And you do have 19 speakers for this item.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um, so I believe for item four, um, council member Fife, you will be presenting on that, and then for um my colleagues.

Um, also available um to answer any questions on this item would be Brendan from EWD as well as Administrator Johnson.

Um, so councilmember Fife, um, does uh eight minutes work for the presentation?

That is fine.

Is staff here?

Is Brendan here?

Oh, I see him.

Um, and if there's not an opportunity, I know we're well, I I just want to articulate to the public and um to Mr.

Kidd who came to speak just on time.

I will definitely make space for you to have those comments that you wanted to share uh in a public forum when we come back to this this location to have our our greater community meeting.

So I want you to understand that your voice will be heard on this topic.

Um that said, I I do want to share a little bit about this opportunity so you can start my time.

Um, to explore the possibility of developing a Costco warehouse in the city of Oakland.

Today's resolution is preliminary step that will allow the city administrator to begin discussions with Costco Wholesale Corporation and DECA companies LLC around terms for an exclusive negotiating agreement to develop a Costco facility in the North Gateway development area of the former Oakland Army base.

This large parcel has remained undeveloped for far too long, which is a loss for the city of Oakland on many fronts.

The city must explore all avenues of opportunity, and bringing a warehouse has the potential to generate significant tax revenue, jobs, and easier access to goods for residents.

Additionally, the resolution also makes findings that the property is exempt surplus land because a property is subject to a valid legal restriction not imposed by the city, which prohibits any residential housing there, and there's a feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the prohibition on the site.

And I want my colleagues and the community to understand that this item opens the door for discussions, but it is not a binding agreement with any party to any project.

An actual ENA, if terms are agreed upon, will have to come back to the full council for a vote, and there will be extensive community engagement before a formal agreement is established.

So people are asking why Costco, and I want to give a couple of facts.

Costco is the third largest retailer in the world with over 800 warehouses and over 300,000 employees worldwide.

Significant new sources of annual tax revenue will be available to the city.

There would be hundreds of jobs with competitive wages in West Oakland.

There will be localized spending as residents will be more likely to shop in Oakland.

A membership warehouse with a diverse selection of goods and competitive prices is something that hundreds of Oakland residents have asked for.

And this opportunity has the potential to fill the gap for affordable groceries and essentials for our impacted communities.

Why this particular parcel?

This large undeveloped parcel is situated at a location that will have minimal impact to residential communities close to freeways, and any mitigation that comes with transportation impacts will be done as a part of this process if approved.

Who is DECA?

DECA is a real estate investment and development firm with a proven track record of major development projects across California, as noted in the agenda report.

DECA currently has 15 active projects with a total of to a total development value of 10.15 billion dollars.

DECA has approached the D3 Council office, expressing an interest in developing their experience, leveraging their development experience to help bring a Costco to Oakland.

And there are several individuals in the exact community in the neighborhood where Costco would come that have expressed concerns about other uses, and I want those to be on the table for discussion.

As noted in the agenda report, two recyclers were meant to be relocated to the North Gateway parcel within the city and entering multiple agreements with the parties as far back as 2012.

However, these recyclers have not met the requirements needed to move their operations to the site, and currently there is no agreement in place with the two entities.

There's also been a concerted effort led by my office to use this parcel for the purpose of addressing our very real crisis of homelessness.

Unfortunately, due to legal restrictions around residential use of the site, the resources required to get a waiver from the Department of Toxic Substance Control and the extensive environmental remediation needed, not to mention the funds needed to actually pull something like that together, is neither feasible nor timely.

And it is also important to mention that this location has been discussed within the city of Oakland for over 20 years, and the issues that were a problem for moving forward 20 years ago have been rectified over time in the city of Oakland.

So I want to reiterate that this resolution will only allow for discussion of terms and is not binding.

Additionally, I'm committed to ensuring community engagement at every level, is central to any formal agreement that comes before the city council should discussion lead to an ENA.

In fact, our first community meeting will be on December 18th, and I encourage everyone interested to come.

It will be 6 p.m.

right here in the council chambers.

So please join us.

We'll have information on my social media for uh the details.

And with that, um, understanding we have public comment, I'll entertain a motion on this item.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Fife.

Um, I would like to hear from the public speakers first, and then we can open up the questions to my colleagues.

Thank you.

Want to call your name.

Please approach the podium, state your name for the record, and as reiterate it, you do have one minute.

If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.

We will take public speakers in person before Zoom.

Sanford Forte, excuse me.

Kevin Dolly, Stephanie Tran, Petra Brady, Raymond Gallagher, Kathleen Tribe, Philip Tran, Sean Granberry, excuse me if I'm mispronouncing your first or your last name.

Christina Tostada, Alex Ishuron, Derek Barnes, Rodolfo Bacrizio, Travis Duncan, Tony Bethley, Stephen Labange, Isaac Kesreed, Kesrod, Miss Asada, David Boatwright, and Prescott Chair, and lastly, Derek Barnes.

We have you for twice.

You can sign up, no particular, or you can approach the podium.

Thank you.

The ENA will weaken any leverage with two major pollution polluters in West.

Okay.

Sanford Forte.

Thank you.

The NA will weaken any leverage with two major polluters in West Oakland who have prior indicated strong interest in the North Gateway location.

Claims that those polluters are no longer interested in the North Gateway are unfounded.

How do I know?

I've asked.

Costco will bring tens of thousands of additional car trips through West Oakland every week.

Consider the human cost of increasing microplastic and air pollution caused by Costco traffic.

Tens of thousands of trips a week.

Microplastics from tires are the major source of urban microplastic pollution.

Already we see care for community spreading the lie that this is an environmentally neutral development.

Projected tax revenues and employment from Costco do not take into consideration loss of tax revenue and local jobs when consumers shift their purchase patterns from currently existing West Oakland businesses to Costco.

How many local jobs will be lost versus gained?

How much tax revenue lost versus gained?

I've spoken with Costco's real estate division.

East Oakland citizens use the San Leandro location.

North Oakland drivers are a mere 12 minutes away.

Thank you for your comment.

Hi, Council members.

My name is Stephanie Tran.

As an Oakland resident and small business owner, I am in support of bringing a Costco to Oakland.

I want to see our city invest in projects that deliver real value, projects that create long-term economic activity, drives revenue, provide stable job opportunities, and serve everyday families and small businesses.

As a small business owner, I also rely on Costco for basic supplies.

Having a reliable, affordable and efficient place to purchase goods in bulk, help entrepreneurs like me stay competitive, keep costs stable, and continue serving our customers.

Costco also has a track record of contracting with local suppliers.

I hope this project will create opportunities for Oakland businesses like myself to become part of these supply chains.

So thank you, Councilmember Fife, for bringing this forward.

Let's keep moving this along so that we can negotiate a strong community benefit that will strengthen all of Oakland.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Council members.

I'm Petra Brady.

I'm here representing the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce.

I wanted to say thank you, Councilmember Fife, for presenting this uh idea to bring Costco to Oakland.

I think it's a wonderful thing personally.

Personally, I think it's a wonderful thing for our businesses.

I want to do whatever I can as myself and as an organization to support this because it is another way to improve the narrative around Oakland.

We support it wholeheartedly.

Thank you.

My name is Ray Kidd.

Thanks to Miss Asada for seeing me here at time.

Um I live in the uh Claus and McClymus neighborhood of West Oakland, which is the same neighborhood that Cass Metals is in.

Cast Metals is one of the entities that was going to be moved, should be moved, and hopefully will be moved to the North Gateway.

It is a very polluting industry.

It will have it at the North Gateway.

It will have very updated all to the all to the current regulations, environmental requirements met, and it will be a much less environmental impact on the community.

Currently, it's the um the pollution that comes out of that, the air pollution, the particles, the fumes, all of their all of their operations are open or unshelted or have no roof on them.

They will that this will be remedied.

It would to leave them there now would be a situation of environmental injustice.

And if Costco, if Costco in the North Gateway preempts cast from moving there, we will we will be living with that pollution forever.

So hello, I'm Travis Duncan, and I have uh three people who are ceding their time to me.

Uh Rodolfo Baccarizzo, uh Tony B.80, and Steven Labangay.

Are they in the chambers?

Please identify yourself.

Thank you.

Great.

Uh again, so thank you.

I'm Travis Duncan.

Uh, I'm here representing DECA, the proposed developer of this potential project.

Um I want to say, first off, thank you, member to Council Member Fife, for your leadership and your commitment to your constituents.

It's very noble.

We really appreciate it.

Um, and thank you for all of you for taking the time to chat here today.

Um I thought a little bit about us, um, DECA.

Um, we're based in San Francisco, we're a California-focused mixed-use master plan developer.

This is exactly what we do.

Um, we search for opportunities that are steeped in complexity, and then we work with leaders like you all with the community to try and craft solutions that ultimately result in win-win solutions.

The council member did uh a phenomenally good job sort of outlining where we are in the process here.

It's early in the stage.

This is an opportunity to have a discussion about a maybe uh deal.

Uh we're really excited about that potentiality, and we think this is an amazing location to do something that could be transformational.

Um, opportunities for cheap groceries in a food desert is an opportunity that we're really excited about.

Um, and we think that the jobs and the tax revenue associated with that are very uh interesting, exciting, articulate this moment in a challenging uh economic climate.

Um, we have other projects that we're working on that might be helpful background.

One of them in Southern California, the redevelopment of a Philip 66 refinery.

We're in active negotiations with Costco on that opportunity involves industrial and retail and a similar configuration of what we're talking about here.

We have other mixed-use master plans in the city of Paris and the city of Bakersfield that are conceptually similar, you know, industrial type districts, but retail components, and how do we balance those competing priorities in a very similar way to this?

Um this is what we do, um, and we're really excited to do it here.

Um of the things that that you hear from people in our industry uh is time kills all deals, and we really appreciate you all considering this item today to move forward with the discussion and see if we can craft um a project that has broad based community support that um folks from all parts of Oakland and uh walks of life can comment on and and participate in the process.

We're really looking forward to the meeting in a couple weeks with the council member.

That's just the start of a very long process to maybe get to an agreement and then bring forward a project that we can all support.

So um I'm here to answer any questions if there are any.

I would love to answer them.

Um this site has been vacant and unused for a long time and is amazingly well connected to regional transportation in a way that is very hard to replicate.

I appreciate the gentleman's comments about additional trips.

Trips means people are coming, that's a good thing.

Parking lots are full, people are spending money, that's a good thing.

Uh this location allows for those people to get in and out of a very heavily trafficked transportation corridor and spend money in Oakland, which is a phenomenal opportunity.

Um, I'll just conclude with saying thank you again for taking the time to review this to talk about it and to hopefully give us the opportunity to talk formally with the city administrator and staff about this.

If you're participating via Zoom, once again raise your hand so you're easily identified.

David Boat Rod District 4.

Some rhetorical questions here.

Who has indicated current interest in this site?

If Costco indicated interest in this site in the early 2000s, what happened then?

Was San Leandro Costco built after Costco indicated interest in this site previously?

Sean Granberry, Oakland resident.

I'm just following up on something we've been working on for us born and raised in Oakland, about showing up and stepping up.

So I'm here today.

Thank you, Councilmember Fife.

We know Oakland needs this.

I mean, we could argue about uh, you know, pollution and all this kind of stuff, but we need jobs in Oakland.

We need a Costco in Oakland.

I was there on some of these negotiations with IKEA and with Costco when it went to San Leandro.

So I'm old enough to have been a part of some of the some of those talks back then.

So I support this 100%.

Uh and I will rally all my uh crew to support this 100%, and I just want to say thank you.

Let's keep moving Oakland in the right direction.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

I'm gonna be using Isaac Cause's time as well to be added.

Isaac, can you please raise your hand?

Thank you.

I'm a shorty.

Good afternoon.

My name is Christina Tostado, but most people know me as Tina from the town.

I'm a proud daughter of the city of Oakland, born and raised in East Oakland.

I am currently an Oakland Library Commissioner, a mentor for Life Goes On, where we're trying to end senseless gun violence, a board member for reading partners for the Oakland Ed Advisory Board.

I was a former board member of the Oakland Latino Chamber and volunteer liaison for Mayor Livy Schaff.

I pour so much time and energy into this city.

Most people actually think I work for the city of Oakland.

But I am actually a supervisor for Costco Wholesale.

I have been working for Costco for almost 20 years.

I started at the Costco San Leandro in May 2006 as a part-time employee while attending Cal State East Bay.

The company works for the employees with their school schedules, and because they supported my goals, I was able to earn my bachelor's degree in communications and advertising.

Costco also, they have strong wages, meaningful benefits above minimum wage.

We have a 401k with Com Company Match, Costco stock, and twice a year bonuses, time and a half pay on Sundays, paid sick leave, paid holidays, paid bonding time for new parents, comprehensive medical dental vision coverage, including 150 dollars a year for glasses and contacts.

We have access to SmartDollar, Financial Leader Literacy Program.

Because of the financial literacy my father taught me combined with Costco's strong wages, I was able to purchase my own home in the Bay Area over 13 years by myself.

This is the economic stability.

Costco every year donates this year.

Last year they donated three million dollars to our town babies in North Oakland.

Um I just want to say that I would love to see Costco and in the greatest city in the world, any hello, my name is Kathleen Uribi, and I am uh Oakland resident, District Five.

I have a background in being a chef for production companies, and I have uh currently transitioned into being a wealth management uh professional for seven years now.

And I want to say that um, oh, I'm also a Rotarian and I love being on the Oakland Rotary Club.

And what I would like to say is I love Costco's ethics, politics, policies, everything this wonderful woman just said before me went into detail of what I thought I knew, but I did not know.

I just think this company offers amazing uh jobs and resources to the community, and uh like I said, I love their politics.

I love shopping there.

Um, my sister and other uh parts of my family live up in Seattle where Costco is like their corner store, and I would love to see that happening here in the Bay Area because I love everything Costco provides.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, committee members, Derek Barnes, T3 resident um and a property owner.

I'm here to support moving forward with the resolution authorizing the negotiation for potential Costco in West Oakland.

Let's be clear about what this vote is.

This is not an approval for a project, as Councilmember Fife said, is a decision to finally explore a viable use for a long neglected site that has sat dormant for two decades, as a council member said through multiple failed proposals, scandals, and missed opportunities in Oakland.

West Oakland has lived with the consequences of uh disinvestment, environmental burden for generations while also being asked to wait patiently.

That time is over, it's time to move.

The proposal offers a realistic path forward, hundreds of permanent jobs, as we heard, construction job site, uh significant tax revenue for the city that is needed desperately.

Saying yes does not lock us in.

It is just the beginning.

Thank you, Councilmember Fife, for bringing this to our attention.

Moving to our Zoom speakers, Marcus Johnson, please identify what name you signed under to speak.

Please identify what name you signed under to speak.

The Prescott chair, PNC chair.

Okay, thank you.

Please begin your one-minute comment.

Yes, Costco is great, but I'm not reading any language that suggests Costco has committed any interest in this site.

Therefore, in absence of that, and since we're in a discussion only phase, I respectfully request that the resolution for the non-binding ENA with DECA Costco be amended to instead authorize a request for proposals that would allow other real estate investment firms, including DECA, to submit competitive proposals that must be robust and transparent, in their process.

CWS and Cass Meadows would also be able to re-engage.

Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for item four.

Excellent.

Um well thank you so much for the members of the public that were able to come and speak um on this item.

Um and I think that it's um been presented very clearly that um that we're really this this resolution is uh you know clearly to uh begin those conversations.

Um and so I think also at the same time um the feedback that we've received as a body, both via email and even today um from the public speakers, um kind of voice a couple things.

Um and so I think it is uh you know to council member Fife, um, you know, uh I just want to uplift a couple of the things that I heard.

Um, that as we begin these, if we are successful in passing this through the committee, as we begin to have those discussions, you know, what will be um the impacts to the West Oakland community around the traffic of the trucks kind of coming in and out of West Oakland.

That's kind of a concern.

So just overall environmental impacts.

Um, um and then a couple questions that I did have is around um, I I think you answered that the first community engagement on this item will be taking place uh December 16th.

Um I am curious if there will be um any other larger discussions uh outside of just this one that's in December, given that it is the holiday season and people may not be available.

Um, and then my other question is um I am curious if there is a projected timeline for this um, you know, bringing this to fruition.

I just want to point out, um, I it I will get to your questions.

I was at McClyman's high school last week meeting with a group of young people who were um continuing their credits to um graduate.

It was juniors and seniors, and there was a great deal of depression with that group, but they came alive when they talked about opportunities for employment, and they were even looking for opportunities to do paid internships, and they were like, if we could just make $16 an hour, that would make a difference between kids who are out here robbing and bipping and kids who are trying to do something positive because they don't see any opportunities.

And I'm raising that because we don't have enough opportunities in West Oakland for our young people, and I see this as a potential, and this is just a conversation to start a conversation.

There is no elected official in the city of Oakland that has done the type of community work and outreach that I've done.

So to even entertain a possibility that I would not have community engagement on this process, I want to just put that to bed because that is what I do and that is who I am.

This is one of many conversations I'm having with the public that will continue throughout this process.

I'm also deeply engaged with um environmental justice groups to the point where I'm classified as in just incorrigible because I'm supporting uh clean air and water in my district.

So that is also something I want to put to rest.

That was it's something that I'm working with our real estate department and our city attorney's um office to address the polluters that have been in West Oakland for decades.

We're going to address that too.

So I want to be clear to those who are my juniors in this work that I'm going to continue being Carol Fire in my district to support what the majority of my district needs, not a vocal minority.

Um that said, the timeline will depend on the city administrator's office and and city administrator Johnson, I welcome you to weigh in with your perspective because you've been integral to moving this forward and supporting my office with this work and conversations with DECA.

Um, but it will depend on the city administrators' office and how discussions pan out from there.

But I will continue to include my residents, my constituents in this process as we move forward.

Uh through the chair, Council Member Fife One, thank you uh so much for your comments and feedback and our staff, me personally, and the team, we are very supportive of your legislation and the Costco item that's being brought forward.

Um significant tax benefits to the city as well as high quality jobs.

And quite candidly, I know one of the things that we consistently talk about is the need to be aggressive when it comes to economic development.

And if we have opportunities that present themselves, well, we're gonna take advantage of it and we're gonna push hard in ways that we haven't in the past.

And so I certainly want to welcome the opportunity for our staff to come up with their any technical questions that that may come up.

I know one of them is sort of a timeline.

I think it's probably uh mid-Q1, end of Q1.

But if Mr.

Moriarty is here, he can certainly, you know, color give me a little bit more context with some more specificity.

But I really appreciate the fact that we're here and we're having the public discussion and debate and also the community engagement aspects of what's being presented.

And again, to have a conversation is where we are, and we look at competitive communities around us that we aspire to.

Well, quite frankly, this is what they do, and we have to move forward as an organization because like you, we get the same calls about employment opportunities and and the fact that many of our residents are spending their their money in other communities are taking advantage of the tax dollars that could be coming into Oakland.

So I appreciate the opportunity for us to do the work, present all the facts so that you all can collectly make an informed decision.

And so um I'll defer to Ms.

Rarotti who can um certainly provide a little bit more context with respect to the question that you that you asked.

Thank you.

To the chair, Brenda Moriarty, Director of Real Estate, and just on the question of timing.

Um can't make total total commitments because there's two parties involved, obviously.

But um that we're not negotiating the deal as a result of this were to pass, we would simply be negotiating the elements of an exclusive negotiation agreement, which then that's really the time to negotiate the deal.

So there's not that much is my point that needs to be negotiated, uh, as a result of the resolution.

I don't imagine we'll take that much time.

Uh you know, I think what the city administrator said about Q1 is probably the right time frame to have in mind.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um, colleagues, Councilmember Unger.

So I I support this idea of bringing a Costco to West Oakland.

I think it's the kind of jobs and retail that we need, and and I appreciate Councilmember Fife for her hard work in trying to make something good happen at that spot that has been fallow for so long.

Um my only question is um if somebody could make the case for me about why we should be exclusively with DECA at this point rather than doing um an RFP for somebody else to perform this work.

And I don't know if that's for for council member Fife or for Mr.

Moriarty, or you through the okay, go ahead.

Um, through the through the chair, I can take one um stab at that, and uh in addition to others if they want to.

Um, I mean, I think you know the OMC does uh generally require a competitive process for the disposition of property for development.

However, you know it's also uh I think mindful of the fact that the market is what it is, and you have to seize opportunities at times.

So there is a process described in the OMC for waiving the competitive process if it's in the best interests of the city that does require um analysis and a um and a finding by the city administrator, and so as part of the process uh you know of responding to this resolution and coming back with terms for an ENA, we would do that analysis and be able to provide that uh at that time for city council to consider is is it in the best interest of the city?

What are the considerations you would want to have in mind at that point in time?

So you're you're still undergoing the process of figuring out the elements of why we don't need an RFP?

That's right.

If this passes, we would then do that analysis to give you the information so you could see as the decision-making body, is it in the best interest of the city to accept these the to proceed with the ENA as now presented, or actually are the other considerations?

Should we pump the brick, should we do something else?

At this point in time, we don't have that analysis done, but we do it as a result of this.

So you could come back with uh a desire to broaden the field.

Yeah, I think we were to do that analysis and find that oh, actually, this is maybe not in the best interest.

There's some compelling things that need to be considered, we would we would raise those uh considerations for you.

Okay, that makes sense to me.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Unger for the question.

Uh, Councilmember Ramachandran, any questions?

Um, not at the moment.

Okay, excellent.

Um, and Councilmember Five, did you want to make the motion on this?

I made the motion earlier, but I do want to uh just comment briefly on the retail and um estimated economic loss that the city of Oakland experiences from uh retail dollars going to other cities.

There was a um a consultant that the city hired in 2008 to do a study uh, and I I will bring more of this information to the public once we go through this process.

But um Conley estimated that Oaklanders should be spending 1.5 billion dollars in the city of Oakland.

1.5 billion dollars, and this was in 2008, and a lot of that retail leakage was going to cities like Emeryville and Berkeley and San Leandro, and with all of the legislation that's moving forward next year from a ballot initiative to several other uh things that have recently passed through CED.

If we are going to be aggressive about holding those dollars in the city of Oakland, I think this is a first step uh towards that process.

And in terms of the the issues that are faced by West Oakland residents and what we need, this is something that is desperately needed as been has been commuted to me, communicated to me by by several individuals, and we will do our due diligence as the city of Oakland comparing uh the different proposals that have come forward, but I want to state for the public, no other organization, no other company, no one has reached out to me outside of DECA for Costco.

There have been no phone calls, no complaints until um recently people talking about truck traffic or car traffic, which will be mitigated in any analysis that the city does.

So I wanted to state that for the record and reiterate that I personally believe that this is in the best interest of my district and in the best interest of the city of Oakland to have a Costco warehouse inside of our city limits, and I will reiterate my motion to move this item forward.

Excellent.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Fife.

Uh Councilmember Unger.

I'll second it.

We have a motion made by Councilmember 5, seconded by Councilmember Unger to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the December 16th.

City Council June, and that is on consent.

Well, I am suggesting that it be on consent, but that is up to the body.

It's this way.

On roll, council member five.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

This motion passes with four eyes to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the December 16th City Council agenda on consent.

Moving to item five.

Receive informational report on the city of Oakland's cannabis equity program.

And you do have two speakers for this item.

Okay, excellent.

Okay, thank you so much.

And so on this next item, um, we will hear from Kat Torrio, and then also online to answer any questions is also uh Darlene Flynn from the Department of Race and Equity.

Excellent.

Um, and will eight minutes be good?

Yeah, it might be less than that.

Okay, excellent.

Thank you.

So hello, thank you so much for um taking the time.

I'm Kat Torrio.

Um managing the special activity permitting division, which houses our cannabis um program.

Um, this is a report, um, an informational report on the city's um cannabis equity program, which um was asked um that we would bring this forward to um before we start spending any of Go Bus Six.

So I do have a short presentation that we'll just work through.

Can move it forward to the next one.

Thank you.

So on March 18th, um city council accepted um the um 2,074,369 of the GOBIS grant funding from the state to support the city's cannabis equity program.

Um, as part of that, um, there was a provision added to the resolution that requested that we come with um should we turn to city council with an informational report on the status of the equity program?

This report serves to honor that request.

Um, a little history.

We'll go to the next slide.

The equity program has to be um we started um the city of Oakland established it, and this is the nation's first cannabis equity program in the spring of 2017.

Um, our pioneering efforts and equity analysis that um was done by the um Department of Race and Equity here at Oakland created the cannabis equity program.

Um, it also inspired jurisdictions across the country to pursue and support similar programs.

In 2019, the state of California set aside annual grant funding to support local jurisdictions, cannabis equity programs, and as of December 2025, we have 211 equity cannabis businesses in Oakland.

Next slide.

Thank you, darling.

Since uh 2019, we have come in first and second.

There is a matching requirement for these funds.

So coming in third in the 25-26 year, which is the just over two million that we were awarded for GoBiz 6.

And that is due mostly because we have matching requirements, those matching requirements were put into place starting with that grant.

So we are really hoping that we can get this money out the door quickly, and we can move to the next slide.

We do an annual survey for our equity program.

We got 52 responses in 2024, and just wanted to go through some of the points that we asked on that survey.

So there's 41 currently operating businesses, 11 are pending working through the permitting process.

34 identify lack of capital as a barrier for operating.

And we know this, we know it's very difficult to do business in general.

It's even more of a disadvantage to do cannabis business as there are many barriers, banking and a few other things, and it's federal, you're not able to write off taxes, so we're asking operators to act as regular businesses, and they are truly at a disadvantage.

There are 45 prior recipients to either a grant or a loan from the city.

So we are actively getting this money out into people's hands.

32 stated that funding made it possible for the business to continue operating.

These grants cover a lot of expenses, and we'll go over that a little bit later in some of the slides.

But first, I wanted to just talk about who the program serves.

Next slide.

One of the application survey questions for applicants is has any owner, partner, board member, or your business or any immediate family members, parents, siblings, spouse, child, been convicted or incarcerated for any cannabis-related charges.

This is one of the key elements of the equity program.

We wanted to target and make sure that people who had been put through the system before because of cannabis violations of some sort that they had an opportunity to have a business.

And so you can see here it's 25.48%.

Yes, they have experienced this in their time and now are able to have participate in the legal market.

Next slide.

As far as the demographics, we do ask that.

Of course, it's optional, so but you can see most of about 38 of our applicants on the again 51 that responded are African American, nine Hispanic Latino, nine white, eight Asian, and declined to state six, and so on and so on.

Native American three, Hawaiian one, and others not listed.

So we have diversity as Oakland is very diverse, and we're very happy that we are targeting and getting new people in every year.

We're hoping to continue to grow this program.

I just want to shout out, I'm not sure if everybody's going to be able to speak, but we do have two operators that have been very successful stories here.

We have Josh Chase from O'Connor here, and we also have Ricky McCullen from Rooting and the 510 here, and they are equity operators doing their work here in Oakland and have great businesses and very much are very proud of the work that they've been able to do here and the people they've kept employed in the businesses that they have.

So just wanted to make that point.

Next slide.

We are expanding some of the uses of the grant funding.

We've listened, we recognize that cannabis is a difficult business in general.

It needs every year to be kind of looked at to see what is changing in the industry and how we can meet those needs.

So we have listened and we have set aside some money for startup grants to encourage some new applicants to come to the table.

We're giving out $15,000 for new equity businesses, and this would go to applicants who haven't received any grants in the past.

So truly, we want you know some grassroots new businesses to come to the table, and we hope this will help them.

We also have grants to support conversions or creation of cannabis cafes.

We so far do not have one.

There is models that we can copy that are in San Francisco.

We're hoping that we can encourage with some of this funding to have dispensaries that have on-site consumption lounges if they can convert into a cannabis cafe, which allows food and entertainment.

We think that will really help our industry and kind of help um lessen the stigma that cannabis has.

We also have grants to support cannabis special events.

We've heard from a lot of operators that they just don't have enough opportunities to sell to the public to be public-facing, and so we're hoping that these special events that will, of course, be in conjunction with the state as far as following their rules and their regulations for that, and the local jurisdictions, that we can have more events happening in different locations throughout the city and encourage those types of sales.

The rest of the items that are listed on here are items that historically we have supported with grant funding, and we will continue with GoBiz 6.

The last slide, we have supporting equity ownership.

We have also heard that it's difficult for folks to stay in business.

A lot of times they take on partners.

Of course, the city can't monitor always what those agreements are with partners, but we do have technical assistance, and we also have legal assistance that are eligible expenses for grantees.

So what we have changed and what we can offer to kind of help with this is that if application is 100% equity owned, 100% of the city permit fees will be waived.

That's something we've had ongoing.

We'll continue to do that serves for our matching portion, which we're able to submit to GoBiz and get those matching funds as far as how much we can get for the grant.

Applicants, what we're moving to forward to do, is to require annually that applicants must provide copy of the business agreement reflecting the current percentage structure of the partnership.

So we want to see that on an annual basis, make sure that it's not changing and that we haven't been notified.

Applicants will maintain correspondence with City of Oakland through the equity applicant.

This is really important.

We want to make sure that we're having conversations with the equity applicant on a regular basis, that they are actively involved in the business, and that there's plenty of opportunity for them to tell us any changes to the business and report any things like that.

So if there are reported changes in the business, we ask that our department is notified within 30 days.

We do have a transfer process for any equity business to sell to a general or any transfer of any business in general.

They do have to go through that entire process through our department before it's finalized, and we also notify the state of that.

So that is all I have for this presentation.

Happy to take any questions.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um we can go to the public speakers first, and then I have a couple questions.

Thank you, want to call your name.

Please approach the podium.

Ms.

Sada and Ricky McCullough.

And please state your name for the record.

Absolutely, Ricky McCullough.

Ricky McCullough.

Um, today I'm here to speak on behalf of the equity uh grant program.

Um, one of the first equity recipient equity lottery recipients of 2018.

And my experience with the process uh has been very undaunting.

Um, they made it very easy for you know all equity applicants to be able to receive these funds.

Um, a very easy process.

I'll explain my process here really quickly.

Um they send out emails uh notifying all applicants that uh there's funding available coming from the state.

After that, there's some subsequent uh emails come out uh sending out surveys to all equity applicants to get feedback once the data is received.

Uh, then they will then send out another email notifying what funding is available along with the application process during the application process.

Uh, there's a uh grant schedule that notifies our obligations as an applicant to be able to.

Sorry, can I get you can continue?

Okay, thank you.

Um notifying our obligations and responsibilities for that grant.

Um, application is really easy, as I mentioned before.

Um, it's meant to for an applicant like myself or owner operator to be able to uh process this application without any professional council.

Um, we have a wonderful department here that also supports us uh all equity applicants.

Nancy uh really does a great job with helping us with this getting through these processes once there's multi-tier process as well, for the grants.

So you don't have to be fully operational to be able to access these funds, which is a really great thing.

It's multi-tiered, that coincides with multi-uh tiered uh funding.

So it allows for multi-entry points.

Once you completed the process, the city will notify you if there's any things that you need to submit.

But it's pretty easy.

Submit your your documents and they'll notify you, you get your check, and you're open.

Thank you so much for your comment.

Unfortunately, we have we have a lengthy agenda.

So I gave you an extra minute.

Thank you.

I remember very vividly when this process started, the room was full with opportunity and anticipation, and something says, Oh, I got a chance now.

And then little by little, as the process was being reviewed, people will come in and saying it's not working for them.

It's not working.

The struggles, the competitiveness of the bigger uh cannabis groups, they were being pushed out, and they needed help and they weren't getting it.

So I don't know how this is considered successful when I need to see the evidence and the data that says how many people started and were able to maintain over a substantial period of time being in business, and I don't think it's that many, and um I've seen people come here and say, Well, we really want this, and I'm gonna have a change to our concludes your public comment for five.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much.

Um, so um thank you so much for the presentation and the information report.

Um, I know that when this item came before us earlier in the year.

Oh, is there still another public comment?

Did were you able to sign up to speak?

Or that's that's fine.

And through the to the public speaker, please state your name for the record.

Joshua Chase.

So my name is Joshua Chase.

I uh went to Oakham Public School District my whole entire life.

I've been in the city for most of my life, and I just want to say just for the record that this grant program has been great for most operators in the city.

I would not be where I am today without the city of Oakland, without Nancy Marcus, and without this grant program.

Um life is full of optimistic and pessimistic.

You can see opportunities at half being full or half being empty.

Anything given to an entrepreneur that is not earned by himself particularly or herself particularly is a positive.

And without this program, I wouldn't be where I am.

I'm an operator owner, I own 100% of my business, I do not have partners, I do not have anything like that.

I'm able to do that.

I su I employ uh 20 local people, um, people that are um one third of our staff is LGBTQ, half of them speak Spanish, and we are Oakland operators.

I just want to say that the city of Oakland has the best program in the nation.

Thank you so much for your comment.

Um very um nice feedback.

Um and so kind of as I was mentioning, I know that um this item is before us today because when you all came and I believe presented the grant to us earlier in the year.

Um I think um some of my colleagues have requested that we um do our report back.

So some of the specific questions that I had, um, I think maybe one of the maybe the easiest one here is um do you know offhand how much of the grant funding will be going to support um the cannabis cafes?

Well, it's tied in with um operator grants.

So anybody, there's only a few that actually have to have a cannabis cafe, you have to have an on-site um consumption, so you have to be dispensary.

So um I think we have four total um that are equity owned.

So if any of those wanted to transition, we would move them, we would move funding to support that, but it's really up to them.

So um, if there's a new dispensary that wants to open up, I don't think we have that process open right now, but we are talking about looking into how we can open up to have more dispensaries and seeing if that's a possibility.

If that's you know even feasible and how quickly that could be.

So there isn't a specific amount, but any any qual any eligible dispensary that wanted to turn into that was equity would be eligible for these funds.

Okay, excellent.

I see.

And so um on page eight of the report, it outlines um just some of the um goals of staff around implement um implement implementing um to you know help prevent some of the predatory partnerships that were occurring.

Do you know offhand which one you know staff is you know, I guess focused on implementing right away?

Um both we only have two um uh technicians that are are focused on cannabis, and both of them will be involved in that process.

Of course, Nancy Marcus leads um that section of the division.

Um every situation is different, every owner agreement operator agreement is different.

So we're really um have to get into the weeds and kind of case manage a little bit on this, which we're willing to do, but it does take time.

Um so right now the state has changed some of their rules.

They are eliminating provisional licenses.

So anybody who hasn't transitioned to an annual license, um, their provisional will go away.

Um, so they will really have to work with local jurisdiction to um get they have to get to their annual license in order to stay within our permitting division.

So we might have less folks, the folks who are deciding to leave the table, they're not going to continue to pursue trying to open up, and so we're hoping that as we we see how um these changes at the state affect how many applicants we are dealing with on a daily basis.

We're hoping we can do more case management for the ones that are staying on.

Excellent.

Um, thank you.

And then maybe the last question would be um, are you all collecting um geographic data as to um to understand where in Oakland applicants live so that we're ensuring that we're actually reaching some of these priority like neighborhoods and communities?

Yeah.

Darlene, I don't know.

Did you want to talk about the the zip codes and any of that um portion of it?

Um, uh, sure.

Uh Darlene's group really put together how they they um worked on the the different zip codes and what qualifies as um as um eligible for equity, and I I think that that we are tracking those and we do we definitely have an idea.

So from the beginning, eligibility to participate in the equity programming required geographic uh connection to Oakland and and proof and and this was one of the barriers in the beginning as well for some people who couldn't necessarily document their history of residency and that you know, people move around, they come in.

We we made it as broad as we could so that people could get in.

It was like 10 years out of the last 20 or something like that, but uh we required we required documentation, and Nancy, as far as I know, we're still doing that.

The qualify it it's still the same guidelines to qualify for these supports, and so yes, we do have those records because it's part of the application process.

And so, so I guess you know, maybe when we come in present um in the future, maybe we can have uh um you know a graph that outlines where we're where we're hitting in some of those zip codes just to where people came from, yeah, not necessarily where they are now, but where they came from.

Sure.

I think that's probably possible if you'd like to have that kind of data displayed.

It could be done because it is part of the process.

Um and that's just mostly, you know, really being interested in, you know, how this program um how we're reaching, you know, some of these key zip zip codes across the city, and if we're, you know, how we're doing with that.

Yeah.

Can I just add one thing about the program itself and how it's developed?

What you see now is a program that is built out at an extensively higher level than it was originally.

When we began this program, we had zero dollars, and we knew that capital was critical, it's critical to any new small business.

Um, and so um a lot of creativity went into how to create opportunity for marginalized entrepreneurs to get into the business before it got absorbed by more dominant groups, right?

And it was a very creative approach, you can read about it.

It was very cool.

It was temporary, and eventually we were able to phase it out because we knew that as cannabis revenue came in that we would be able to fund some of the kinds of programming that we have now through cannabis revenue through new revenue, basically.

And fortunately, the state of California followed our suit and started their own program where they pushed revenue down from the state, and they're still doing it, as you saw in the report.

We were already established as an equity program.

So we got the bulk of those first grants because we were the only city at that time set up to get them.

Now we compete for them with other cities, but um I just wanted to highlight what an incredible um leading edge thing this was for Oakland to do for the council at the time to do.

And it was the first project I got to work on when I got here nine years ago.

So I'm particularly proud of it that it's still going and that it has had the impact it's had.

That being said, starting a small business is no small thing.

50% of all small businesses fail.

Uh, and so the idea that we would have had the audacity to say we're going to make a pathway for people who are least likely to succeed because they don't have the community resources, and basically you can't go to the bank to get a loan for a cannabis business for obvious reasons.

So if you don't have community resources to draw on to start a dispensary or a cannabis business, then you're kind of out of the market and out of the competition.

So we didn't eliminate all competition.

There's plenty of competition out there, it's not all equity businesses, but we know that we created a meaningful on-ramp, and the program continues to improve.

So it has changed greatly over the years, it's been expanded.

We do listen to the feedback from the from the um businesses, whether they succeed or not.

We we take that in and have been able to fill more and more gaps as time has gone on.

I don't expect that that will stop.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Well, thank you both for your leadership on this item.

And then I also in Nancy, and then I also believe that um one of the trailblazers in this space was Greg Minor.

I could not have done it without Greg Minor.

I was brand new here, Greg Minor had been working here for quite some time.

He'd been working in the cannabis space, and when it was medical cannabis before it was um recreational, and we formed a great partnership.

He had the you know that that sort of cannabis um awareness, and then we were able to put the equity analysis on it, which untangled some problems that the legislation had run into.

We were able to fix it and get it passed and get it rolling with no dollars in the beginning.

So yeah, thank you for bringing up Greg's name.

He's you know, he's gone on to another city, but but uh without him, I don't know, but between he and Nancy, I don't think this would have happened.

Excellent, thank you.

Council Member Fife.

I I just have a couple questions and thank you, Director Flynn, for bringing up the origin of this program, and thanks, Kat, for just all your work.

I know you're real you really want this to be a successful program, and I think pointing out some of the challenges doesn't mean we don't understand how this program is moving forward, but there's still some things that we need to address.

And I can't talk about cannabis equity without talking about the pioneer in Oakland's cannabis equity, and that's council member Desley Brooks for creating this program in the first place.

So shout out to her.

Um, but I I want to understand the staffing needs for the department to effectively manage this program.

Um, and I want to understand what interdepartmental coordination looks like to support uh cannabis equity in Oakland.

Yeah, okay.

Well, one thing that we're doing that's gonna help a lot, especially with record keeping and being able to spit out really clean reports quickly is a seller moving this all into a cellar.

This has been a huge lift because comp um cannabis is so complicated and it it's got fingers in every single department.

So we've been working with the seller for almost two years straight to get this up, and we are in the last phases of testing it before it can completely we can migrate all the applicants over to it.

And again, with um the the changes in the state law, seeing who's really on board and who's really moving forward, and um then we can look and see if we can grow and open it back up for dispensaries and other businesses to have opportunities in cannabis.

So that's one thing.

Um we're hoping that that's really gonna be in full effect by um spring migrating folks over, and um, in the fall, we're hoping that we've vetted and tested all the the hands that go into the other departments as far as fire and planning and building and making sure that those systems all correctly work.

Um the other thing we're doing is we've proposed that we want to get a program analyst for the cannabis for strictly for the cannabis program to really help us with um the grants.

Um at one point um we had three grants running at the same time, and poor Nancy was doing it all, and it's a nightmare.

If you're you're trying to keep track of that many things, that many reports, each grant has its own eligibility and criteria and and and things that um the budget allows.

Um so we really need um one person, one staff member focused on that.

Um, it's also a lot of case management.

You you don't just you know, it's not just a couple emails, you're talking with um applicants constantly, getting other information, letting them know that this what you submitted isn't correct.

I need this instead.

Um, there is a lot of interaction.

Um a lot of the equity applicants don't aren't necessarily so business savvy, they're they haven't had businesses before.

This might be their first venture.

So there is a lot of hand holding as far as like what documents are required and and what types of insurance are required, what levels of insurance.

So those types of things we're hoping if we have one person focused on this, then it will make it much easier to track, much easier to get the reporting done effectively, and it will allow us to look and ask for more money.

Um so those are some of the the changes that we're looking to implement in this next year.

Thank you.

Uh my last question is um earlier, I believe it was earlier this year.

Uh I worked with council member Kaplan to bring forward on-site consumption permits, and you you said that there were four.

I believe in your presentation you said that there were four equity ones.

I believe there's only four that um are equity.

There's other consumption uh dispensaries that are non-equity that are general, but yeah, four that are equity.

That was my question.

Or were they equity or um just overall?

So there are four that have applied for this particular license in our they haven't applied.

They just have they are dispensaries with um on-site consumption, so they are eligible to become a cannabis cafe if they choose to.

Understood, thank you.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much.

Um, Councilmember Ramashandran.

Um, any questions on this item?

No, I'm just really glad to see the program success continue and knowing that we are one of the strongest in the state and continue to get funding for this, you know.

Just um excited to see it grow and for other cities to take our lead on something like this.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

Um, and so for this item, I believe that we just um so thank you so much.

Um I believe that we would just um I'll make the motion to receive and file this in committee.

Is that right?

Do you think that's the one it's um unless staff wants this item forwarded to the council meeting?

I'm sorry.

Um, so we can either just receive and file this report or um does staff uh want this item forwarded to the city council.

Um just receive and file this file.

Excellent.

Um do we have a second on that motion?

I'll second that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by councilmember Brown Chair Brown, seconded by Councilmember Unger to receive and file this in the CED community economic development committee on role, Councilmember Brown.

Councilmember Five.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachanjaran.

Aye.

Councilmember Ungar.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

The motion passes with four eyes to receive and file this in a CED committee.

Moving to item six.

This item requires an urgency vote as this item was placed on a three-day agenda.

I would just see the motion.

And at the presence of Councilmember Wong.

Give me one second.

Um so I believe for this item, um, we would hear we can hear from Councilmember Wong, but then also on hand is the sustainability team, right?

Yes.

Excellent.

This item also requires an urgency vote.

Okay.

Excellent.

So we just need a motion.

At the presence of Councilmember Wong.

We just need.

We would need to convene.

Yeah, the urgency finding on this one was made in rules, but we need to adjourn into a special meeting.

Councilmember Unger.

So move that we adjourn into a special meeting, please.

Second.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Unger, seconded by Chair Brown to adjourn the committee economic development committee meeting and to convene into a special meeting of the full council at 2 50 p.m.

On roll.

Council member.

Aye.

Thank you.

Councilmember Ramachandra.

Hi.

Councilmember Anger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

This motion will pass this word for eyes.

We're now.

We are now into a special committee meeting of the full council.

And I will also need a motion for the urgency finding.

Um it's my understanding that the urgency finding was made at rules.

And it's I can I make comment around the urgency.

I'll go ahead and make that motion.

Second.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion made by Chair Brown, seconded by Councilmember Five to approve the urgency finding on role.

Councilmember five.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

Councilmember Unger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown?

Aye.

The motion passes what four eyes.

I will now proceed to read the item into record.

Adopt a resolution in support of the Bay Area Air District timely implementation of rules 9-4 and 9-6 to establish a zero emission building appliance standards with the appropriate flexibility to ensure equity equity and business development.

And you do have three speakers for this item.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

And so now we'll hear from Councilmember Wong and I guess the team in sustainability as well.

Sounds good, yes.

Nick is uh Courtish is here to answer any uh questions, the subject matter expert.

Um but today I am bringing forward a resolution in support of the Bay Area Air District's timely implementation of rules 9 4 and 9 6, uh the rules that establish zero emission building appliance standards with the appropriate flexibility to ensure equity and protect our residents and small businesses.

So let me begin why this matters.

Across the Bay Area, gas burning appliances, the water heaters and furnaces inside our homes and apartments are a major source of harmful air pollution.

They emit nitrogen oxides, fine particulates, carbon monoxide, even benzene.

These pollutants contribute to asthma, cardiovascular disease, and they shorten lives.

Every year in our region, this pollution causes an estimated 85 premature deaths and 15,000 asthma attacks and nearly 890 million dollars in related health care costs.

And we know who bears the brunt of this harm.

It's black immigrant and low-income communities who already face disproportionate proportionate pollution sources, it's the appliances burning inside these buildings that threaten our commitments to public health and environmental justice.

And we know that climate change is not abstract.

Burning fossil fuels in homes accounts for roughly 11% of our statewide climate emissions.

Heat pumps, which are clean, safe, and farmer efficient, reduce lifetime emissions by up to 93% compared to gas systems.

And this is also about basic public safety and fire risk.

Gas lines are prone to rupture during earthquakes.

I don't know if you've all noticed we've had a couple of earthquakes in the last couple of months.

Fires often follow earthquakes when gas infrastructure breaks, and we need to be preparing for the worst.

So that's why in 2023, the Bay Area Air District adopted groundbreaking standards to gradually phase out the sale of gas water heaters starting in 2027 under Rule 9 6 and gas furnaces starting in 2029 under Rule 9 4.

These standards only apply when appliance is already broken or being replaced.

No one is being forced to remove working equipment.

This timeline is deliberate.

It gives our residents time to plan, it gives the trades and industry time to train workers, explain expand supply chains, and build capacity.

Immediately after adoption, the air district, in recognition of the practical challenges associated with this transition, began working on 2026 flexibility amendments to ensure that these rules account for individuals like low-income homeowners, including convening an implement implementation working group that includes cities, environmental justice working groups, environmental justice groups, and economic justice partners to ensure that this transition is fair and practical and takes into account exemptions for low-income homeowners, small businesses, and homes that would need major upgrades to accommodate the transition.

So tomorrow, and this is why this was urgent, uh, the air district is uh achieving a major milestone in this rulemaking process with the December 10th hearing regarding these so-called flexibility amendments.

The rulemaking, while slated to continue, uh we have the fossil fuel industry and its allies exerting enormous pressure on this regulatory process to go back on its 2023 decision.

And so it's important for Oakland to join cities like San Francisco and Berkeley to make clearer stance at this critical milestone early in the rulemaking process before it reverses.

Passing this resolution ensures that Oakland makes clear that we support timely implementation and not only the original standards adopted in 2023, but we support the process to adopt amendments that ensure that this transition avoids undue burden on low-income homeowners and renters, small businesses and building professionals, and it includes flexibilities that really prevents unintended harm while also advancing clean air, climate, and safety goals.

This is exactly why, with our equitable climate action plan, the ECAP adopted unanimously in 2020, which sets a target for all existing buildings to be efficient and all electric by 2040.

Rules 9-4 and 9-6 are the policy tools that make that possible.

We provide the market certainty that contractors, manufacturers, and workforce partners need to prepare for this transition.

And as for Oakland residents, this is an opportunity.

Heat pumps save energy, they lower utility bills over time, and when paired with solar and weatherization, they make homes safer, healthier, and more comfortable, especially during extreme heat, wildlife smoke events, and also, as I mentioned, earthquakes.

So today we are not simply endorsing a regional policy.

We are advocating for Oakland's public health, climate safety, and economic future.

So with that, let's show that Oakland stands with science, clean air, equity, and with our regional partners.

I respectfully ask for your support.

Excellent.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Wong, and for your leadership on this item.

And so I'm definitely in support.

Um I just had one, I guess, technical question.

Um, do you, you know, I know you mentioned that there's the meeting on December the 10th.

Yeah, but do you have more insights into the Bay Area Air District's um timeline for implementation?

I believe that maybe the meeting on the 10th is more um as a like maybe an informational, and there will be a series of meetings before actual implementation.

Yeah, it's uh it's a major milestone.

It's kicking off this process.

Um, there is the risk, as I said, given some of the pushback that, and which is why we should weigh in now that um rulemaking could be uh reversed, things like that, and so we want to make sure that doesn't happen.

Uh Nick, do you want to comment on uh more on the timeline that's ahead of us?

Sure, uh Nick Kordash from the Sustainability and Resilience Division of the Zid Administrator's Office.

The timeline we're looking at uh starts in 2023 when the district first uh passed the this uh this legislation, and then they're looking at the first bit of implementation in January 2027.

So between now and then, it's a rulemaking process where we as staff will provide letters, comments uh to that committee.

Excellent, thank you so much.

Uh Councilmember Fife.

I just want to say through the chair to Councilmember Wong, I really appreciate your thorough um laying out of the information here and re appreciate your expertise with your background in the EPA and all your other environmental work.

I'd be happy to support and champion this.

I know it was discussed in rules about the urgency and how it was moving forward with the air district.

And I wanted to know if through you if there will be any other requirements from the council other than a vote in order for you.

Well, I want to know how you plan on representing the city on this item, if at all, when it comes forward there, and um I'd be happy to make a motion to accept.

I just wanted a couple answers to those questions.

Yeah, no, I that's a great question.

Um, so assuming that we pass this today and then goes before the council, I think with that I noticed there's a number of cities who've submitted comments, and that we could use that to then submit a letter of support where the rulemaking is collecting uh comments from the city.

So you'll notice uh a number of letters of support submitted by um I think it was City of uh San Francisco, Berkeley, and probably some others that I'm missing.

Okay.

I made the motion, so we can go ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you for your responses.

Excellent.

And I'll second it and council member Unger or Ramachandran, any questions.

Uh, just a quick comment.

Um, thank you for bringing this forward.

I did already send a letter of support on this item from my district for office, and happy to move this and signed a petition as well, and happy to move it to that.

It's it is moving forward.

Thank you, Council.

Did notice your letter in the comments as I was as I was reviewing that today.

Excellent, thank you.

And then we can't hear from the public commenters.

Thank you.

Want to call your name.

Please approach the podium.

If you are participating in the Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified.

Derek Barnes and Missisada.

And Sam Fishman.

I'm almost sure this is a noteworthy pursuit, but it frustrates me as it relates to environmental issues in this city.

How you keep identifying things, but you never complete anything.

So you have lead paint that's been spoken about over and over again, and how uh Oakland has the highest risk for children being exposed to lead paint, and we haven't worked through that issue.

We have the police administration building, and we have several buildings that are seismically unfit.

That building has got to be demolished.

You haven't done anything.

I'm sure you're doing the same thing, uh going through the same thing, lead in the water, uh, in these pipes.

OUSD has exposed that problem.

You haven't even brought that problem up.

My point is you're bringing up so much stuff, even like with uh over at the army base, there's so much pollution over there, and you're having a free discussion and eliminating, you're not serious.

Thank you for your comment, Ms.ada.

If I called your name, you can approach the podium, state your name for the record.

You do have one minute.

Thank you.

Hello, council members.

Uh, my name is Sam Fishman.

I'm a sustainability and resilience policy manager with Spur, the local public policy organization in the Bay Area.

We've been working on the air district rules for many years now.

We're part of the implementation, we were part of the implementation working group on these rules, and I just want to emphasize how broad the engagement and how deep the process that the air district is going through to ensure that these rules are equitable and affordable for Bay Area residents.

Um a number of exceptions to these rules are being proposed right now to ensure that they're that no one is um that folks are able to adopt clean equipment and that folks who are struggle have additional time.

And we're really um just thrilled to to see support from cities at this moment.

We really are seeing last minute actors jumping in and threatening to undo these rules that are really historic and are putting the Bay Area in a in a position to really influence the rest of the country to adopt similar standards.

So it's really uh a critical time for cities to jump in and show that they support these rules.

Thank you for your comment.

Well, thank you so much.

Oh, one more.

Last but not least, Derek Barnes.

Good afternoon, City Council members again.

Uh I just wanted to say most support uh Oakland's climate and clean air goals.

I think they're great.

The support and transition to zero emission buildings, fantastic.

Reducing air pollution saves lives as we know.

But I want um to offer a note of caution.

I think some of these items were brought up before from a housing and community development perspective.

Uh most of Oakland's naturally affordable uh housing is old.

Um multifamily buildings on average in Oakland are like over 70 years old.

And so just know that there is significant retrofitting that has to happen in those um environments.

And so when there's a failure of a of an appliance, uh it's usually an emergency, and sometimes that takes time to resolve itself.

So I think we're all supporting uh most of us support this, but we want to make sure that there are guardrails that allow uh owners that um may not have the resources of the time uh so that there's a level of flexibility so they can work through the issues that are going on.

Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for item six.

We have a motion made by councilmember five, seconded by councilmember chair Brown, to approve the recommendations staff and to forward this item to the December 16th City Council agenda, and that is on consent on a roll, Councilmember 5.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachandran, Councilmember Uger?

Aye and Chair Brown, aye.

This motion passes with four ayes to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the December 16th City of the Council agenda, and that is on consent.

Moving to item S7.

As this item what needs an urgency vote, as this item was added at the three-day agenda as well.

I just need a motion.

I'll make that motion.

Second, thank you.

We have a motion made by Councilmember Chair Brown, seconded by Councilmember Ramachandran.

To approve the urgency finding for this item on roll, Councilmember Five.

Aye, Councilmember Ramachandran.

Councilmember Ramachandran.

Aye.

Councilmember Ungar.

Aye.

And Chair Brown?

Aye.

This motion passes with four eyes.

I would now read the item into record.

Adopt emergency ordinance.

One reappeal repealing current Oakland Municipal Code Chapter 1512, the Oakland Fire Code.

Two, adopting and making local amendments to the 2025 edition of the California model building code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9, also referred to as the California Fire Code.

Three, recoding said code as an Oakland Municipal Code, Chapter 1512, and four adopting qual California Environmental Quality Act finding.

Excellent.

Thank you so much.

So I believe on this item we'll be hearing from our fire marshal White White as well as Assistant Fire Marshal Smith and then Michael Hunt is also on here as well to answer any additional questions.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the community economic development committee.

My name is Darren White.

I'm serving as the current interim fire marshal for the Oakland Fire Department.

And it's our pleasure to be here with you this afternoon and thank you for giving us the opportunity to present and share some information about the adoption of the 2025 California Fire Code.

Um we have uh proposed amendments, and I'm just gonna briefly speak to you about a couple of the benefits of the 2025 fire code adoption, and then I'm gonna turn it over to Assistant Fire Marshal Javen Smith so he can do the bulk of the presentation.

But the first thing I want to emphasize is that the Oakland Fire Department is seeking to ensure that we can continue to provide for public safety by preserving our operational necessity as outlined in some of the code amendments that were proposing to be adopted.

I also want to stress that we've actually been working closely with the Oakland Department of Transportation going back a few years now.

And my predecessor, the former fire marshal Felicia Wands O'Brien, along with assistant fire marshal Smith and others have been working collaboratively to review the design and the proposed projects that have been coming forward for the safety of our community in our streets and the general public and their goals of reducing risk and potential injury to that public.

And then lastly, one of the benefits is that we're seeking to provide the guidance necessary to ensure that we reduce any potential delays in our permitting processes by ensuring that uh developers and others can rely on the fact that we have uh standards that have been adopted in certain provisions of the code that have been adopted.

This is supported by not only the Oakland Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau, but also the Oakland Department of Transportation as well as our planning and building uh partners.

And then lastly, I want to just give appreciation to the bicycle pedestrian, bicycle and pedestrian committee and their willingness to uh listen to us to share their concerns with us as we continue to try to design and do the things that we believe achieve as much flexibility as we possibly can while preserving our operational necessity.

And so at this time, assistant fire marshal Smith will give an overview of the importance of the adoption of the code that we're requesting.

Good afternoon.

Uh my name is Javen Smith.

I'm the assistant fire marshal uh for the city of Oakland, as mentioned.

Um we have a slide presentation that we'd like to share with you.

Uh PowerPoint that will help describe uh our situation.

Um this is as was mentioned the 2025 California Fire Code amendments um presentation.

If we go to the first slide, we'll talk really about what it is.

Just so we have an overview.

So the California Fire Code is part of the California Code of Regulations, triannually, it's published and updated.

We must adopt it.

That is a fact, and so we do.

However, this document is a statewide document and therefore is intended to be modified for specific jurisdictions because every city has different issues, uh problems to face, and so built into the code is this ability to amend it, and that's why we're here.

Um, we're on that three-year cycle, and so we're going to need to make the amendments.

The majority of the amendments carry over from previous cycles.

If we go to the next slide, you'll see there's really only there's four uh uh new things to discuss.

The first two uh bullet points you notice there.

Um, I won't get into the weeds too much about them.

The first one is just color-coded fire department connections.

What that just means is we're requiring the connections in buildings, allow us to pump water into them, will be color coded so that our responding um uh apparatus and members, a very clear understanding of what they're pumping into.

That's all it is.

Very minor change.

The second one there you see is inspections of smoke dampers in commercial buildings.

Um, this is uh already in the code that are required to inspect these dampers.

However, the language is vague as to who should do that and um how is that presented to uh the jurisdiction that has authority, which would be us.

And so all we're doing is just modifying the existing code to require certification by someone who um is in a position to make this examination, which we already do in other areas of the fire code.

For instance, fire escapes have to be certified every five years.

Stamp pipe systems, sprinkler systems, every so many years.

In a very similar way, we're just requiring that there is inspection of these smoke dammers in commercial buildings.

Smoke dampers control flow smoke in the HVAC system if there was a fire.

The second two items on this slide um are topics that have come up before that we've had part of the code or proposed to be part of the code.

That's section 503, which talks about the minimum width of fire access roads, it defines it as 20 feet, um, and then appendix D, which adds to Section 503 with more detail and talks about the need for even wider widths for some streets where um buildings are tall and therefore require taller ladders.

So the next following slides are in there to discuss these two amendment changes.

So Section 503.

Chapter 5 of the Fire Code is adopted by the state, except for one section, which they leave to every jurisdiction to decide if they would like to adopt or not and amend or not, and that's section 503.

You'll find it in previous amendments of Fire Code 2022.

Section 503 was there.

However, if you just go back one slide, that word adopt, we've included in the language because the language is a little vague.

It showed that we amended 503, but we placed adopt an amend to clear up any misunderstanding to show that yes, we are adopting this one particular section that the rest of the state has to adopt specifically.

It's not done automatically when you adopt the code.

So we just want to show that word, it's important.

Small but important.

The next slide talks about a specific area in 503 that is very important, and this is the width of roadways.

Fire apparatus access roadways.

How wide should they be?

Well, the code dictates 20 feet, and there's a reason.

This has to do with the ability for apparatus to park at a scene, operate at a scene, and still leave room for other emergency vehicle apparatus or other vehicles to pass.

And in some slides coming up, we'll see why that's very important.

So that's why this dimension of 20 feet is a very important number to have.

It gives us a minimum width that would allow us to operate in a safe manner and access buildings throughout the city.

And that is that is we are adopting that section 503.

Now the next slide moves into Appendix D.

And I just copy and pasted this language from the first paragraph of Appendix D to show that what Appendix D really is, is it just adds more detail to Section 503?

It gives a little bit more direction.

Now, specifically, appendix D, its major use, not its only use, but its major use has to do with planning and developing multifamily residential developments, large subdivisions, we're building bigger buildings.

What do the roads need to look like in these areas?

Brooklyn Basin, Wood Street, right?

We're large buildings with large amounts of population require access roads that are wide enough.

And in times of emergency, these large buildings, and appendix D talks about buildings that are 30 feet in height or larger, require access by aerial ladder.

Therefore, we need 26 feet, a little bit larger to access these buildings.

If you go to the next slide, that's the section of appendix D that we feel is very important.

An unobstructed width of 26 feet because of the need for aerial apparatus access.

When we deploy uh the outriggers which stabilize our aerial trucks to then throw a ladder to a building, that takes up some space, and that's why appendix D prescribes 26 feet.

So these are these are two uh amendments to the code that we we feel are absolutely necessary for our operational needs.

If you go to the next slide, you'll find this is not unique to Oakland.

Around this region, fire departments adopt 503 and appendix D because of the operational need that exists for them as well.

So you'll notice cities surrounding us, out in the county, Berkeley, Fremont, Richmond, Santa Clara.

We took, you know, a heat map kind of the Bay Area.

This is a this is a general practice.

So this is not something unique that we're proposing or an amendment that is out of the norm.

This actually is the norm.

Um, and if you go to the next slide, you'll see visually what we're talking about.

So on the left side of the screen there, you'll notice there's an aerial truck, its outriggs are extended, um, but we still have room for an engine, which you know has hose and water and equipment to operate at the same scene.

And this becomes very important.

What it's you should notice about this picture also, there's still room for parking.

You notice there's a white vehicle parked there on the right side of the screen.

But this is not a high rise.

This is a one-story warehouse in East Oakland.

Sometimes there's this misunderstanding that the only need for an aerial ladder is to get to a tall building, and that's not true.

We raise these aerial ladders for all types of operations, and one of them is defensive operations, like you see here in this picture.

And having room to do that is very important.

If you go to the next slide, it's a fire from Chinatown a few years ago.

Um you'll notice that yes, aerial ladders are thrown, but there is room for our engines to operate within that space next to the to the trucks, and and again, this is not a high rise, but this is a building that requires quite a bit of personnel and equipment to be brought to the roof to do a large amount of work, and for our aerial apparatus to get to these places, we need the room to work.

And so 26 feet is what is required by the code to make that happen, and that's what um we plan to follow.

The next slide takes us into that high-rise environment.

Again, this is West Oakland two years ago.

Um, and the reason we wanted to show this slide is oftentimes the focus on this 26 feet or the 20 feet has to do with oh, can a rig get by?

Yeah, fire can a fire truck get by.

But that's really doesn't encapsulate the whole complexity of of what we're trying to accomplish on these streets.

What you'll notice there in the foreground of that picture is the number of apparatus at this high-rise incident.

It's over a dozen engines, trucks, medical um apparatus, supervisors, battalion chiefs.

So the space to operate is not just about a lane, high-rise response requires quite a bit of space, and this picture is very telling.

And the importance of this kind of operation is seen in the next slide, where we come to understand why this is this is not a light issue, or this is not something we can kind of shove to the side.

This really involves the lives of individuals who, because of the ability to operate and throw these aerial ladders, we're saved from what could have been tragedy.

So we wanted to see these photos to understand the space that's required to do the very important work that we're doing.

Um, so then that that leads a question though: you know, is this everywhere?

Are these street widths, you know, just kind of blanketed across the city?

We're supposed to enforce these, and the answer to that is no.

The reality is there are needs of many in this city, our bicyclists, our pedestrians, our motorists, of course, emergency response, and so how do we know where we should enforce uh the code strictly, where we have room for latitude, and if you go to the next slide, you'll see that really the the beauty of what we've developed is the collaboration between Oakland Fire Department and Oak Dot.

The work that we've been doing over the last few years really has been massive because by putting us together in the same room and developing the relationship that we've developed, we meet regularly, we exchange data, we talk about what's needed, we go out into the field, as you can see there, look at the streets, look at how our apparatus will operate in those streets, and that allows Oak Dot to come up with designs that meet the needs of whether it's BPAC, other entities in the city, but takes into account the org uh response needs that we have, and so this collaboration has been very effective, and we're very proud of the work they've been able to do in designing streets that really are holistic and encompass everyone's needs.

If you go to the next slide, um you'll notice that this collaboration isn't just in the field, it's in the design process.

So as projects are put on Oak Dot's desk or come to fruition, we discussed them with them, and we've done multiple.

Um it mentions here 33 projects to date, but this slide is some months old, so it's quite a bit more than that.

But we all come to the table to make sure that our plans really include the needs of everyone.

Now, I want to just back up a little bit and the next slide kind of back out kind of wide angle a little bit because it's not just about, you know, appendix D, Section 503, and the fire code is not just about Oak Dot and Oakland fire.

It's much bigger than that.

It's about the city as a whole.

And because of new state laws that have really increased housing development and has lessened the opportunity for uh fire, I mean planning and building department to place conditions on approval of these projects on a case-by-case basis, having the fire code, sections like appendix D and 503 as part of the fire code is an absolute necessity to answer the development questions that come up.

Um when planning uh construction and building, where these buildings gonna go, what's the density like?

Is this something that the city of Oakland is going to benefit from or be harmed by?

Having these regulations are very important.

Um appendix D and 503.

And additionally, and this is what I think we're for this particular committee, I think it's an important point, you know, development and building and seeing Oakland grow is extremely important, and streamlining processes, permitting processes, and make sure that businesses and developers can actually successfully work here is an extremely important point.

And having regulations like 503 appendix D does that, it streams lines it.

It gives us minimums that they have to work within, and they can go ahead and and plan and build as opposed to let's leave out, let's say a minimum number and let it be a discussion.

Well, now we've just extended our process of plan review by weeks where we discuss and talk about on every case by case basis how wide the street should be.

It's very frustrating for developers and it's very difficult for um us as a city.

And then finally, you'll notice the very high fire hazard severity zone is listed as a point here, and this is where especially when it comes to planning and building, these fire codes become very, very important because with the state laws allowed to increase housing development, overpopulating certain streets, dead end streets, tight streets in the Oakland Hills, and the very high fire severity zone poses a very very serious emergency issue and evacuation routes and ingress and egress and our ability to uh work in those areas is of high concern.

And so having appendix D and 503 as part of the fire code really just allows us to do that job that much better, allows planning and building to uh um do their job much easier and allows us to work with Oak Dot and plan the street design that's really gonna be best for the city as a whole.

And so that's why the last slide you'll notice is our recommendation to just adopt the uh 2025 California Fire Code amendments as we've proposed so that we can get to the business of uh making the city safer.

And so I appreciate your time.

And if you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.

Excellent.

Um, well, thank you so much for the comprehensive breakdown.

Um, really appreciate it.

Um we can hear from the public commenters first.

Thank you.

Want to call your name, please approach to podium, state your name for the record.

Kevin, Dolly, George Spees, and Miss Asada.

Hello, George Speeds with Traffic Violence Rapid Response.

I want to thank the fire marshal's office for the uh their engagement with Oak Dot on developing um the appropriate per project requirements for uh traffic safety balanced with um emergency response.

And in fact, I like it so much that I'd like them to continue in that process primarily focusing on what does this project need here?

What about this block right here?

Because as we as we go through this process, we see that each location offers its own unique necessities, and so codifying these specific requirements into the rules that um that um Mr.

Smith has been talking about um gets us to a place where um that flexibility kind of comes off the table.

I don't want to get it in the way of doing what is necessary for making the city safe and for allowing the professionals in the fire marshal's office to do their jobs, but I also want to make sure that um, thank you for your comment Kevin Daly Transport Oakland 60 seconds is tight for 150 page document uh but this is not an emergency these amendments encourage wide streets which lead to speeding which lead to death and injury let's pull out appendix D and ICC section 503 three years ago with council member fife's uh help we pulled out appendix D and sent it to public safety committee it was to be heard early 2023 OFD decided not to hear it they decided appendix D was not necessary and they could function perfectly fine for the last three years without D.

Why do we need it now and why is it an emergency when it wasn't an emergency three years ago ICC section 503 20 foot width state code already requires 20 foot but allows shoulders to be included when it is safe.

Thank you for your comment does that conclude oh one more oh sorry Miss Asada.

I know over at St.

Benedict's there was a consideration of the width of the fence had to be a certain uh width for the fire truck to get into the property because the property is completely surrounded so within the code is there identification so the width of the if in the case of a fencing okay okay all right so I guess we worked that out the other thing I'm concerned about is gated communities I used to live in a community in order to access the property you had to put in the code and we called the fire department and they had to wait for somebody to let them in.

So is there any guidelines for gated community where you have to have access to all codes don't answer me because you're not supposed I'm gonna act like you're supposed to answer me but you're not you don't have to uh the other thing is the uh the ADUs that sit back properly accessibility to our thank you isada yeah um thank you so much Ms.

Asada and the public commenters um you know hopefully um the leadership from uh Oakland fire department can stick around and maybe ask answer some of those specific questions um so council member unger um I'll call on you uh a couple things first um I know most of the discussion here is around the uh bicycle stuff I wanted to introduce a quick amendment that I passed around around what you were talking about the fire smoke damper certification um this is a central piece of of life safety um equipment in in buildings to to prevent smoke from getting from one part of the building to another and I just wanted to I don't know K Top do you have it yeah um I wanted to add in two places um just to make sure that we're using properly supervised and licensed contractors um otherwise the the risk is you know it's it's gonna be like building owners getting my my cousin Joe to certify the smoke dampers and he owns a bowling alley but he can do this so um just like to introduce this amendment to certify the contractors.

Excellent um thank you uh council member Unger um council member Ramashandron do you have any questions or comments on this item?

Um no thank you excellent um well I really appreciate the briefing that I received um prior to answer um any of the questions that I had um and so I will move um this item with the amendment.

Amendments um to I have a couple of other questions as well.

Okay, go ahead um so do we need a second on that amendment and to vote on it?

Yes.

Should we do that?

However, you want to do it how however go go ahead with your questions my my other questions are going to be about the bike and pedestrian stuff.

So if you want to finish this off, we can just so I have a motion to adopt those amendments.

Excellent.

Okay.

Second.

You can go ahead and answer.

Okay.

So this doesn't require that every street have 26 feet near high rises or 20 feet.

This is just a starting point for discussion.

Correct.

It's a minimums that is set forth to start the discussion, but what we found best practice is working with Oak Dot is to look at their site-specific street plans and then make decisions based on the operational needs of that specific site.

So no, it does not mean a blanket requirement for street width throughout the city.

That would be impossible.

Is that your understanding?

No, quite the opposite.

Actually, the collaboration between us and Oak Dot has done nothing but increase, and the relationship has gotten um better um than it has ever been, and we can plan to continue it.

We have plans for projects in the future, and those plans will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and the collaboration between us will do nothing but increase as far as we can see.

Through the chair, Darren White, and to further um ensure that the collaboration in a collaborative spirit continues.

We've discussed recently an invitation to the BPAC for some of our training so they can see firsthand why we're requiring and requesting certain things for our operational necessity.

And so we have a recruit academy coming up in 2026 as an example, and so we're hoping that members from the BPAC can come to some of those drills and see firsthand in a sterile environment, and then perhaps later on in a more um uh realistic environment why we operate the way we do and what the clearances that we need are for that very reason.

So we're hoping to incorporate them into some future activities as well.

Great.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Um council member Fife.

Yes, I um know that there's a motion and a second on the floor.

Uh, but I'm I'm a little confused because you all sound so positive about the relationship with BPAC, but I heard them publicly ask for this item to um to pull a section out.

It have has there been conversation through the chair um to either of our fire representatives.

Has there been conversation about that specific aspect about the uh width of the streets and where did that end?

Yes, so madam chair, the the the relationship that that we'd like to highlight that the the the great relationship that we really appreciate um first of all is the the relationship between Oakland Fire and Oak Dot, Oakland Department of Transportation, because it's our two entities that really collaborate to make street design possible.

Now BPAC is a component in that relationship, and we've made it a point to attend BPAC uh committee meetings, collaborate with them, listen to them.

Uh they of course also communicate with Oak Dot.

Um so we're we we are all involved.

Uh BPAC has voiced some concerns about certain parts of uh appendix D and 503, and their concern is that it might hinder the um the work that's been done to ensure that there's protected bicycle lanes, uh pedestrian access, and so it's been our goal to reassure them and communicate with them that that is not the case.

We will continue to collaborate.

We want there to be protected bike lanes, we want the city to have um a healthy safe environment for everyone to get around.

We just want to ensure as well that emergency response is not hindered.

So the relationship um that we've had with BEC has been actually very good.

We've had open conversations, we attended their meetings, and we want that relationship to continue, and that's why the fire marshal brought out we have reached out to them to have them come and look at some operational, you know, exercises that we're doing so they can kind of understand our point of view.

So is it possible through the chair um to pull that part out?

Does it is there an emergency right now that requires a decision be made on this because I'm hearing from the members of the public that there is not an emergency, but I'm hearing I I want to get an understanding from you because I am deeply concerned about speeding and how the width of our streets contributes to so many of the settlements that we have to approve in our closed session and how many accidents occur because of speeding, and I do see environmental design as a way to mitigate the the challenges that come from reckless drivers, like create the environment where they that can't happen.

But I want to understand from OFD's perspective, um, just more on that because I didn't hear much about the the width of streets in the presentation in a way that could have me support this with that particular clause in there.

Excellent, understood.

Excellent question.

So, madam chair, yes, the the I'm gonna speak first to the emergency clause.

So, is there an the emergency liter literally just lies with timelines?

So come January 1, the new 2025 uh California fire code must be adopted, and so the goal is to have the amendments uh prepared and agreed upon prior to that January 1st date.

And so the last council meeting, I believe is December 16th.

Um, therein lies the emergency, it's a time constraint so that these amendments are ready to roll January 1st when uh the 2025 code comes into effect.

Um, and then as far as the you know street design and using street design to mitigate speeding and and you know dangerous behavior in vehicles, fire department 100% agrees.

Um, in fact, you know, we're we're the ones that respond when there is a vehicle accident and there is you know vehicle violence, and so lowering those numbers absolutely is a priority.

Um the concern is how we do that, and while it may seem that maybe pulling a section of the fire code might aid in that endeavor, the opposite is actually true.

It limits the fire department's ability to weigh in on and help design these streets.

It also then has a greater impact on planning and building development, um, densities of population.

There's so many other uh nexuses to appendix D and 503 and other parts of the fire code that even go beyond the street planning portion, that removing it would be irresponsible.

It would not be in the best interest of street design or uh mitigating some of the issues we have.

We want to keep having those conversations and in a more fine-tuned approach, make those right decisions.

So, can you say just and this is my last question because we do have another committee, and I I want to hear, um, I think we have more speakers, um, why did it take so long for this to come forward?

So the the fire, the the fire code, so 2025 fire code was released mid-July.

We got physical copy of it end of July, beginning August.

Then we had to start the tedious process of reconciling the new code.

I should have brought a copy of it with me, it's very large, but madam chair, we have to make sure that our amendments match the new code, and where that becomes a problem is each code adoption changes um the the framework of the code.

So, what used to be an amendment that referred to let's say chapter 115, that's now chapter 116.

So, what they required was for us to line by line go through this code and literally make sure that the referenced amendments match what's in the new code.

To add to that complexity, um, and we did not bring this forward at this time, we will bring it later.

A whole chapter of the 2022 fire code was removed, chapter 49, which deals with wildland urban interface.

That chapter was removed, and a whole nother document, a standalone uh code, the WUI code for 2025, was created, which required us to now examine the pages of chapter 49 amendments that were on the books here in the city of Oakland and find them in the new Wuy code line by line.

So the body of work that it took to bring these amendments forward, just to bring the already existing amendments up to date with the new 2025 code, as well as match those with the reference documents from NFPA, uh UST, a number of documents, and make those all correlate.

So the references are correct, it was an undertaking.

So we apologize for the the time it took, but to make sure we got it right, we wanted to take the time.

Um could this pass without all of those amendments legally if amendments were to be made early next year or no?

Well, madam chair, the the the come January 1, the 2025 fire code is law and must be adopted.

That that's so if if we didn't pass the amendments at this date, then we we would not be able to enforce any of the amendments that are already on the books.

We'd have to go by the standalone California 2025 fire code as written until those amendments are passed.

So that would provide a problem for even past amendments that that we have on the books.

Excellent.

Um, thank you so much.

Um, and so thank you.

Um, just kind of hearing the all of the work that went into actually getting to this point, just really want to um applaud you all for for that due diligence.

Um, I think you know, there's a couple things that I really heard in your presentation, right?

Um, on one of the slides, it outlines how regionally um our neighbor neighboring cities have already adopted both appendits uh D and Section 503.

Um, so it seems like we'll be kind of following suit um as far as adopting those.

And then I think also the most important thing that I also heard was that even in this moment with the adoption, you know, with the adoption of these changes, um, what's most important is the continued partnership and collaboration with Oak Dot for all of the future projects to come.

And that's really going to inform a lot of the decisions around street safety, slowing cars down, and those are all things that are actively still taking place.

If that's correct, yes, ma'am, 100% correct.

Yes, all right.

Um, and so I think uh there was both a motion motion and a second to um adopt um the amendments um including council member unger's amendment amendments, and if you um want to just confirm it, looks like that's in section 90909 of the code, um, section G1 and two, and the amendment just states is employed and supervised by a license C20, C61, and D62 contractor, and then that exact same language is in G2 as well, and so those are the two amendments.

Correct, thank you.

Okay, thank you, Chair Brown for the uh the clarity of the amendments, we have a motion made by Chair Brown, seconded by councilmember Unger to approve as amended the recommendations of staff at the fourth decide until the December 16th, city council agenda on consent.

Whoop the amendment stated by Chair Brown on roll.

Councilmember five.

Aye.

Councilmember Ramachanjarn.

Aye.

Councilmember Onger.

Aye.

And Chair Brown.

Aye.

The motion passes what four ayes to approve as amended.

The recommendations of staff and the fourth decide onto the December 16th, City Council, and that is on consent.

Moving to open forum.

Want to call your name and please approach the podium, state your name for the record.

If you are participating via Zoom, raise your hands, you're easily identified.

We will take in person before Zoom speakers.

Blair Beekman, Prescott Chair, Derek Barnes, Kevin Dolly, and Mississauda.

Transport Oakland.

Didn't give me enough time to say everything.

It's misleading to say that appendix D has been passed by a lot of other districts.

Many cities are removing it.

I believe as San Francisco already deleted, I have to double check.

I think Berkeley is removing it for this cycle again.

I need to double check.

It is many, many places are removing it.

We have we've received presentations at the BAC committees on best practices, which is remove the fixed hard-coded limits and have fire department and DOTs work together.

Give them a lot of credit.

And I think whether or not it passes, they'll continue working together, but it's better to not have street widths hard coded.

They can work together with or without the code with with or without the hard limits.

Thank you.

Moving to our Zoom speakers, Marcus Johnson.

Please identify what name you signed under.

Thank you.

Please can start your one-minute comment.

Thank you.

Earlier there was a mention of a meeting held in in council chamber, I believe, coming up with the ENA Costco DECO discussion.

And it was stated, I believe, that the details will be written on social media.

Since I'm signed up with on the newsletters of the council, and they also have my email address if they could forward me that detail of the meeting because I don't do social media.

Thank you.

I was just asking the fire department if they're responsible for the mandated uh requirement that the fibulators be available in certain public buildings.

I know they required in uh athletic uh gyms and some other places, and I don't know who's responsible for the implementation of that requirement.

Uh I just want to remind you again that you are not responding to the request that being a sanctuary city, what is the economic impact of that?

Because you go more than just protect from ice, you provide services and resources, and unemployment for African Americans is close to nine percent.

Uh gentrification is another you know I see people talking about gentrification, but you never put it on the table to discuss the impact of gentrification uh economically and related to housing as well.

So the fact that you avoid this means that something is is being done or not done that potentially really impacts.

I apologize, and that concludes your public.

Excuse me, moving to our Zoom speaker once again, Blair Beekman.

Please unmute yourself and begin your one-minute comment.

Hi, thank you.

Thank you.

You saw my hand very much.

Um, yeah, I wanted to quickly comment in San Diego.

Uh, the city council meeting right now.

Uh they have an overflow of people talking about the uh future of Flock in San Diego.

They're having the same issues of Flock on how to uh if we should be supporting it in the future of San Diego, or if we can look for a new uh vendor.

Uh the choices are possible, and um, we're asking the questions in San Diego, the same as in Oakland.

So really good luck that this item is actually becoming um that we can talk about it openly and question, and uh that is the key first step.

If we can do that, well, that's half the uh argument, half the battle.

Um that that invites dialogue and questions, and I think we can ask good questions.

So good luck how we can be continuously doing that in Oakland and and working with San Diego on these issues.

Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for open forum.

Excellent.

Um, all right, thank you, everyone.

This meeting is adjourned.