Good afternoon everyone.

The Second Minister, Council, please come to order.

Would the clerk call the roll please to establish a quorum.

Thank you, Councilmember Kaeplin.

Councilmember Tau.

Mayor Pro Tem Telemontes.

Councilmember Valenzuela.

Vice Mayor Maple.

Councilmember Gatta.

Councilmember Jennings.

Councilmember Vang.

Mayor Steinberg.

I am here.

Councilmember Tau, would you please lead us in the land acknowledgment in the pledge

of allegiance?

Dr. Minnows indigenous people in tribal lands.

Through the original people of this land, the Nisanan people, the southern Maidu Valley

and Plains Mewalk, the wet wind to peoples and the people of the Warton, Rattoria, Sacramento's

only federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside

us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today and the active practice

of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples history, contributions

and lives.

Thank you.

Please remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the problem for

which it stands, formation and our God, indivisible, and the regime just for our own.

Thank you, Councilmember Tau.

Good afternoon, everyone, colleagues, members of the city staff, members of the public in

the audience and those watching from other places.

We have two important items here this afternoon.

And let us get right to it.

Number one is the proposal for a cannabis social consumption pilot program.

And let us begin with a staff presentation.

We'll then take public testimony of which I think it's extensive.

I know the city clerk is counting.

Thirty-seven.

And then we will have a discussion and debate and maybe some action by the city council.

Right, please.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Fiona Matson.

I'm the program specialist for the Office of Cannabis Management.

I have a brief presentation as Council considers establishing a pilot program to permit cannabis

social consumption lounges.

This is an abbreviated timeline with some key meeting dates of the development of the pilot

social consumption proposal.

Staff engage the community and other jurisdictions to gauge community preferences and best practices

and work through the law of legislation committee to develop this proposal.

On September 17th, the law and legislation committee advanced the pilot program to

council with the direction that staff have a public health expert present to the full

council about statewide cannabis health impacts prior to council considering the pilot

program.

On October 22nd, council heard from doctors, Ryman and Shik.

Staff is proposing two permit add-on types.

Type 1, ingestibles only and type 2, inhable and ingestibles.

The permit add-ons will only be available to a permitted storefront dispensary and type

2 permits will need to meet additional ventilation requirements.

Staff is recommending a five year pilot program to enable the city to evaluate the impacts

of social consumption including the impacts on the local cannabis industry and surrounding

businesses, public safety and transportation.

The goal of the pilot program is to provide permanent places for people to consume cannabis

in a way that does not impact the non cannabis consuming public and is away from those who

are 21.

Health and safety standards for social consumption of cannabis have minimum standards set

by state law.

Some of the key state standards restrict where social consumption can occur.

Gives rights to employees to use PPE and requires employers to provide California Department

of Public Health information to employees.

In addition to the state requirements, we have added local health and safety mandates.

Any smoking lounges or type 2 permits must meet additional ventilation standards.

Consumption lounges must submit an operations plan which will outline timing and dosage limitations

for patrons.

Time and lounge for employees.

What PPE will be available for employees and other operational information?

PPE are also requiring lounges to develop plans to prevent impaired driving.

In response to the presentations by doctors, Ryman and Shik, the city will also require

all consumption lounges to display a health warning with standards and location to be determined

by the city.

Should council approve the proposed ordinance today, the city will need to do the following

to implement the pilot program.

If he study, which can be included in the comprehensive cannabis fee study and resolution

will be brought back to council for consideration.

Solicit and implement a request for proposal for an education outreach campaign to engage

the public on cannabis safe use.

Additionally, the program will include a harm reduction model for youth 21 to 25 years

of ages and will provide education materials and signage on how to reduce or responsibly

use cannabis.

Furthermore, the planning division is preparing a draft ordinance relating to Title 17,

cannabis zoning amendments for all cannabis land uses.

The public review process of the draft ordinance is anticipated to begin in January 2025.

That concludes my presentation and I'm available for any questions.

Thank you.

I'm sure there are going to be a lot of questions.

I know I have a number of them, but I think protocol and our tradition here lets hear from

37 members of the public and then we'll turn it back to the city council.

Excuse me?

Okay.

Two minutes each.

Thank you, Mayor.

I'm going to read off a few names so please feel free to line up in the middle aisle so

that we can expedite the process.

What is Don Whitney, Nick Carras, Maisha Bajiti, Christine Trimble, Donald Lyman?

Please proceed.

Don Whitney.

Hello, good afternoon.

I'm here to thank Councilman Guerrero for opposing this proposed study.

I live in 12th Avenue.

I understand Pod is legal and it does have legitimate medicinal uses but it should not

necessarily be a storefront lounge.

Alcohol is legal.

I certainly don't want to look or start the end of my block.

There was a Pot Fusion facility at the end of my block for several years.

It was surrounded by garbage.

There were needles at times and there were people, men that seemed to be on-house but maybe

up to other nefarious activities.

It was great when it was gone.

If this does go forward, let me say I'm a nifty, I don't want the thing in my neighborhood

and I assume I'll have a chance to object if this thing does go forward.

I think we all acknowledge that if it's inhaled, it smells and produces second hand smoke.

That can be mitigated and I understand that's the idea but it can't be eliminated so

I don't know why we're doing it in the first place.

I understand people want to use it recreational.

I just think it should be in their own homes.

It's going well so far.

There's often a misunderstanding in my opinion that medical use means it's okay because that

just means it's okay for a specific medical condition.

It doesn't mean it's healthy for somebody without that condition.

There's more things to use and extreme is great if you're suffering from a lot of pain.

You don't use it if you're not.

It is a naturally occurring substance but there are a lot of naturally occurring substances

that are poisonous and I think that California's kind of gotten away from those notions.

And lastly, the THC cannot be measured.

When I was in a confused high school, it was a lot of fun.

Giggled and ate a lot of Doritos.

That's not true.

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete.

Next speaker is Nick Caris.

Good afternoon, Council Mayor.

I'd like to express my support for the cannabis lounge.

I'd like to express how happy I am to be here in this epoch of time.

We can unburden ourselves from what has been.

I'd like to thank the Council for having the guts to pass the core program.

It's been a pleasure for me and my family to see this go forward.

I think it's a great thing that we've all come together to realize that we can do many things.

We can allow, you know, it is different.

We can allow a casino for cigarette smoke.

They passed the laws.

We're talking about compliance here.

What we're talking about is letting people enjoy themselves.

I was fortunate in my life to be friends with Mr. Russellman.

He was a great person.

And one thing that he said to me, which was remarkable, he said, I got lucky in my life.

I was able to sell something that made people happy.

And that's what I think here, because we're talking about people enjoying themselves.

I'd like to express my personal thanks to Ms. Valenzuela for helping us move forward.

I truly think that this is the right thing to do.

We are here.

I know time is short.

I know you're leaving soon.

Mayor Steinberg, I hope you would consider this.

And I know there's some opposition.

I know there's some opposition from District 6.

Thank you for your comment.

Please.

Thank you very much.

Next speaker is Maiysha Behiti.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Good time is complete.

Maiysha Bahati.

Following Maiysha is Christine Trimble, then David Lyman.

Good afternoon, council.

My name is Maiysha Bahati.

I am the CEO of Crystal Nogs, the first black woman owned dispensary here in Sacramento.

Mayor Steinberg, I had the privilege of meeting you back in 2019 when you intedent the core

graduation for the first cohort class at the Greater Sacramento Urban League.

And you all approved core to become a permanent program.

You gave me the hope that I would have an opportunity to succeed in this industry.

Well the opportunity is now.

This is the opportunity to take a business like mine, someone who has broken barriers to

get to this point.

And move me to the forefront of this new industry.

Our city is evolving to this amazing destination where we're getting hotels, we're getting sports

teams.

We're getting to revitalize waterfront.

Sacramento made history by allowing consumption at the fair this year.

We're rezoning and adding more storefront dispensaries, allowing more people to purchase

cannabis, but yet we're hesitant on opening a pilot program for unsight consumption.

Don't you want the cannabis industry to align with the city's growth?

We contribute 40% of our tax dollars to measure L.

That means you're relying on our success to fund that program.

You've invested in me as a core business and I've worked very hard to make it a return

on that investment.

So why would you not push me to the next level as a core business?

I hear the concerns of the second hand smoke, but the logic does not hold for me.

Because the cannabis is so horrible, why is it medicinal?

If cannabis smoke in a regulated room where there's ventilation and there's safety requirements,

if that's so harmful, why do we tolerate children being in homes where people are consuming

smoke?

Why do we tolerate that?

Let's work in partnership.

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete.

Christine Trimble and David.

Testing.

Hi, I am here today asking for off-site consumption.

I've been coming here for the last few meetings, fighting for this and we keep getting shut down on the subject.

Including being told why don't we just open fentanyl lounges?

I'm sorry, but there is no comparison.

Although on the times that I'm outside with my cannabis walking, we pass city hall and I guess it's not against the law to smoke fentanyl

or to shoot up drugs in front of the city hall because you see it every day.

One of the things that your council keeps bringing up is second hand smoke.

In the time I'm outside trying to enjoy my medicine, I probably pass 20 people smoking cigarettes and blowing it my way.

Now that is second hand smoke, but it is not allowed to smoke.

But it is not outlawed to smoke a cigarette, but it is against the rules of smoke cannabis.

Go figure.

I will continue fighting for the lounges.

This won't be the last time that I'm here.

I'm sure.

Thank you.

Thank you.

comments.

Next speaker is Donald Lyman, then Kimberly Baskinley, then Adela.

I'm Dr. Donald Lyman.

I'm a part of the Sacramento, Sierra Medical Society, and I'm here to represent the physicians of this community, mostly the city of Sacramento.

We are opposed to this ordinance and urge you to vote against it.

I ran both the tobacco control program and I was the proponent for Prop 64.

This audience will be happy to know.

I authored it.

That's why you're here.

You need to speak to the council police.

I authored Prop 64.

That's why these people are here.

We enjoy that.

I remember at the end of the last century we had a problem with tobacco smoke in bars.

We went out to do a video with a woman who worked there.

As the video shows her coming up toward the camera through a smoke filled room.

She comes up to the microphone.

She looks the camera.

She looks straight into it and says, I work here.

I work here for eight hours shifts and five days a week.

After each month or so, I have inhaled the equivalent of a carton of cigarettes.

We don't want to go back to the smoke filled rooms with employees and other people who come in and are exposed to stuff they're not supposed to be exposed to.

This regulation follows the same path as tobacco control.

And being primarily a social marketing effort strongly tied to rules of discipline and often mandatory group behaviors.

That means no smoking.

Most communal gatherings where non-smokers are likely to be present.

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete.

Kimberly Baskinlee.

Then Adela Adepi.

Afternoon, Kimberly Baskinlee.

I'm a resident of District 7.

And I come to you as a resident.

I am opposed of this ordinance for the lung health of the community.

However, I'm not opposed to decriminalization of marijuana cannabis.

I'm opposing this ordinance because of the dangers of secondhand smoke exposure in the lounges.

If you allow this ordinance to pass with smoking the lounges, you'll be subjecting patrons and employees to the dangers of the smoke.

Why is this product's smoke so different than other smoke?

And why would we segregate cannabis smokers from tobacco smokers?

We don't allow tobacco and vape lounges.

We have laws to check before we burn because that protects us from wood smoke.

We have laws of not smoking tobacco and vape in public spaces.

Marijuana smoke is no different.

Cannabis can be chewed or strength.

It does not need to be smoked from medical or medicinal purposes.

Smoke is smoke.

It doesn't matter if it comes from wood, tobacco, cannabis, cloves, the science is clear.

It's the smoke from anything that is burned that harms the users and bystanders.

That's why we passed smoke free laws.

I was a part of this work in the late 90s with some of you on this council before when we work together at the county public health department.

When we worked at Breathe California, when we did sessions at the legislature.

This is still a smoke issue.

Smoke is smoke and the public should be projected from cannabis smoke just like from wood smoke, just like from tobacco smoke.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments, Adola, and then Kimberly Cargaiel, then Diana Garcia.

Good evening, Council.

I just want to say thank you for allowing me the space to speak on the behalf of cannabis consumption lounge.

I am in approval of this bill.

I am here as a parent and I'm also here as a cannabis legal operator in manufacturing.

As a parent, I would like to see more safe cases, safe for access for parents as they are smoking in their homes or on their children.

I just witnessed going out to lunch, people engaging in a nice alcoholic beverage that is very close to the streets.

As a parent and cannabis operator, it is very disheartening that I continue to feel like we are the cockroaches of every industry.

We pay our taxes.

We are professionals. We're educated.

But we continue to have to address our field issue of the stigma with cannabis.

I am here as a parent.

My child was diagnosed with T. Celalukemia and given three days to live.

I was very conservative on cannabis prior to this.

I am here to say that with cannabis and chemotherapy, my son who was two is now 10 years old and he is a cannabis.

He is a cancer survivor and I believe that cannabis was very medicinal in his treatment.

So I am here advocating for a safe place for a place for people to consume.

If you Google, there are nine different cigar lounges within a four mile radius from here who are operating and who are able to smoke and consume and be able to run a business.

But we continue to fight.

And so I am here to fight as a taxpayer that we are just here to basically just be seen as equality.

You are only in a business. We are paying our taxes.

This is an opportunity for us to be treated like everyone else.

We want to work with you. We want to compromise.

We want to be a part of the pilot program.

But I want to eliminate all the red tape and the red barriers that continue to make it hard for us to survive.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, staff, council, and mayor.

My name is Kimberly Cargill.

I have been operating storefront cannabis dispensaries here in Sacramento for 17 years now.

I have been the CEO of a therapeutic alternative in East Sacramento since 2013.

ATA is a unique in that it is specifically tailored for medical patients and seniors.

I am here today to ask for a change to the ordinance.

At the last city council meeting on this item I explained that I am looking forward to providing a beautiful healing garden in the backyard of my dispensary to provide teas and tinctures like this one that I accidentally just took in council.

I'm sorry.

I needed it.

I'm so sorry.

And I'm not proposing smoking outside.

I'm proposing the grandmothers coming together and having tea or us doing yoga or massage.

Like this beautiful healing garden with lots of beautiful flowers and fountains and tinctures and teas.

That's it.

Maybe some massage lotion with cannabis in it.

I didn't hurt anyone today in the council's chambers by taking my tincture.

My patients will not be hurting anybody in the backyard that is completely off the street by taking their tinctures and their medicine.

I'm proposing this and I'm just saying that just like the last person said you can drink alcohol directly adjacent to the street to the sidewalk.

And nobody says anything all over town.

There's a place to drink alcohol next to the sidewalk almost in every corner.

I am asking to be hidden away in the back fully enclosed within a fence and not to be viewable by the by anyone from the street.

My patients have been good patients in East Sacramento for many many years now we've had no incidents.

If you do not let me get licensed there will not be any safe place in East Sacramento for patients to use cannabis.

We only have 40 people who are going to be able to go for these license as it is in this very large city.

Thank you for your comments your time is complete our next speaker is Deanna Garcia.

Good afternoon.

I'm very proud to be up here in front of you today.

It's been a long road that got us here and I thank each and every one of you for all your hard work and dedication that you put forward in bringing this pilot program to the city.

I am also a core member.

So it's very nostalgic to be here.

We've broken so many glass ceilings in the last two or three years here in the city of Sacramento.

I understand that an ordinance is very hard to amend once an ordinance is set in stone and in writing.

And so I ask you today to make very good judgments and allow both of the pilot programs to move forward and to allow this pilot program to become its fullest that it can show the city of Sacramento and then it can be a pilot program for other cities and other counties that consuming cannabis is not dangerous.

It's safe and it's healthy and that consuming secondhand smoke like everyone's been speaking about today is a cure for symptoms not a cause of symptoms.

I would also like to ask about the outdoor consumption lounge to to be permitted and I would ask that we allow outside consumption lounges for the fact that you need vitamin D you need sunlight you don't need to be inside and and fluorescent lighting all the time.

You need fresh air you they put these ordinance that is written as it's written right now has speaking about how long staff can be in the room and and there's guidelines already in the ordinance to to protect the staff and I thank you for your time.

I see my times up your comments Kathy bad away.

Next speaker's Kathy bad away then Chris Chilton yes and you mark is Regina Mary Mindy Galaway Cassandra Fingold.

Good afternoon I'm Kathleen bad away I go to alternative treatment I'm also from district six and I would really love to have the outdoor garden for the massages for the tea and also for the fresh air which we all need.

I truly believe that being a patient there for several years now that it's only helped me I have arthritis in my wrist in my right knee and my lower back and if it wasn't for the consumption I don't know what I would be doing right now I'm also 81 years old and I feel great you know and I and I contributed to God and also for the cannabis that you've allowed us to use and I think that's the best way to do it.

Thank you.

Thank you for sharing your secret to a rejuvenated life that's wonderful all you the great.

Chris Chilton.

Good afternoon council in California obtaining an M.M.I.C. or medical marijuana identification card is a rigorous process.

Patients must visit the department of public health meet with a state license physician and be approved by the state to use cannabis as medicine today there are about 3200 M.M.I.C. members in California individuals whose doctors have put their license on the line to affirm that cannabis is essential for their comfort the quality of life upholding their rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness yet half of these patients in the states capital have no word legal to consume their medicine.

Safe consumption lounges are vital not just as places to medicate but also as spaces for education community and support dreamland a concert and music festival provided a safe controlled environment for all types of cannabis consumption including smoking vaping and edibles by working closely with the DCC and state authorities the event demonstrated that type 2 lounges can operate responsibly with thousands of attendees over 8 hours no medical incidents fight or police involvement.

Across hundreds of similar events data consistently shows that safe consumption practices work air box data has proven that second hand smoke levels remain well within California safety standards establishing safe consumption lounges is the logical next step but this must include type 2 lounges spaces were smoking not just edibles is allowed for many patients smoking or vaping is the preferred or most effective method of medicating these lounges would ensure that all patients have access to the

legal secure and supportive environment where they can medicate responsibly they represent an opportunity to continue building trust and providing much needed resources for the cannabis community thank you.

Thank you.

chemicals and ingestible such as edibles all of these have different physiological metabolic pathways of ingestion and processing for medicinal benefits I recognize my privileged position in pursuing a higher education on these topics which is why I'm here to offer and collaborate in support of solutions for cannabis consumption lounges such as educational workshops that share these information of the various metabolic pathways.

I'm going to say fair was the first in the nation who allow regulated on site sales and consumption this past summer I worked 14 of those 16 days in the summer of the cannabis exhibition my fellow bed tenders and I had an amazing time and despite the 11 day of a triple digit heat wave I believe it was a success and the feedback was very impactful we had grandparents ecstatic that for the first time they could enjoy the long days of the fair with their families without having to leave mid day I I had a safe space to medicate.

We had people that do not consume that were fascinated to learn the history and scientific information on the walls with questions eager to be asked they had a safe space to learn the normalization of cannabis is a multifaceted issue that has profound implications on health society and the economy by embracing normalization communities can move forward towards sensible drug policies promote social equity and harness the benefits that cannabis has to offer thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Regina.

Regina.

I am a standing in support of consumption lounges and in the type of actual smoking instead of just edibles.

I myself cannot consume edibles or tinctures as they do not go well with the medicinal reasons why I consume cannabis.

I do not have a zanx receptor.

I do not have any other kind of alcohol receptor to work with our bodies while we do have a cannaboid one.

I know that is in regards of second hand smoke and everybody is worried about that but we are already exposed to have cannabis in our system.

I do not have any other kind of alcohol receptor to work with our bodies while we do have a cannaboid one.

In strong and support of consumption lounges and especially everybody in the core who has been fighting we all pay the taxes.

We all make sure that this is legal and this is right.

So it is the right thing to do and thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Mayor, council and staff.

My name is Minnie Galloway.

I am a licensed holder and owner for five.

Out of my shared manufacturing I have four core businesses fully secure their license and have three licenses of my own.

This is seven out of the 42 core licenses that are in the city of Sacramento.

I say this because I am not new to industry change, growing, adapting and understanding how to completely follow regulations.

This is a pilot program which means that we can work together to make the best decisions for public safety and public health concerns.

Please give us a chance to show you how Sacramento can make it work just like many other cities in the city, the state of California which you guys have all done a lot of research off of as well.

It is more concern to have people smoke at home.

At my dispensary we will have a controlled environment to mitigate smoke.

We will have education on second hand smoke so people understand why not to smoke at home in their apartments.

We want people to come to the lounge for safety.

We will provide cannabis education and wellness to target specific dosages.

I have seen so many people with chronic health conditions with cancer, with medical conditions that have been helped by cannabis and they are smoking cannabis.

They are doing everything but 80% of the people that come into my spot smoke cannabis.

This is a plant with no added chemicals. What is the difference between cannabis smoke and incense? A plant with no added chemicals?

We need to find a place for people to smoke because they are going to do it anyway and they are going to do it everywhere.

I myself smoke cannabis every day, probably once to three times a day and where am I supposed to smoke?

Let's go!

Thank you.

Thank you.

Cassandra Fingall, then Sean Raycraft.

Good afternoon, City Council.

I am here today as a community member to express my strong support for cannabis launches that permit on site consumption.

I have been an active participant in the cannabis industry as a cannabis consultant for over four years and during this time I have made it a priority to give back to my community.

I assist individuals in managing chronic conditions, individuals dealing with radiation side effects by providing valuable knowledge about safe cannabis use and its potential health benefits.

It does not aid a space for onsite consumption, which would offer great benefits to the city, particularly individuals who live.

In apartment buildings, our household with families where smoking or consumption at home may not be an option.

A cannabis lounge will provide a safe and welcoming environment for those who greatly benefit from responsible consumption.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Cummins, Sean Raycraft, then Colin Brandt, then Sierra Gonzalez.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Mayor, my name is Sean Raycraft. I am a union representative with the USW local late.

We are proud to represent thousands of cannabis workers throughout the state of California and the country.

We are here today in strong support of the proposed pilot program.

We think that it is a good opportunity for our members to work in a safe environment and better opportunities for the public to consume cannabis in a safe environment as well.

So we are strong support. Thank you for your time.

Next speaker is Colin Brandt, following Colin to Sierra Gonzalez, Justin Jacinto, Christian Abara.

Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Colin Brandt and I am here as a proud member of the Sacramento community advocating for the pilot program to allow type 2 cannabis consumption safe spaces.

I grew up deeply and I draw shaped by the pain of seeing my mother's battle with addiction and my brother's journey through rehab.

For years, I equated all substances with destruction.

That perspective was reinforced by my time in the US Army, where I served proudly until an injury left me medically retired and reliant on the VA's cocktail of pills.

Then I was introduced to cannabis. Within six months, I had replaced the VA's multiple narcotics with cannabis and my life was transformed.

I am now a husband, a father, and someone who believes deeply in building a healthier, safer community for everyone, including those who want to choose to consume responsibly.

Today, I urge this council to see the importance of providing safe, regulated space for cannabis consumption.

As a father, I understand the need to minimize secondhand smoke in the homes with children.

That's exactly why consumption lounges make sense. They provide a safe space away from non-willing participants to proper safeguards like age restrictions and air filtration systems.

Let's also address the misplaced comparison between cannabis and more dangerous substances like fentanyl.

It would be better to compare cannabis to hookah lounges, which there is no age limit to enter and only to consume, and there are several located just a few blocks from here.

It is the same with the 50 breweries in Sacramento.

Cannabis isn't a crisis. It's a solution for many from veterans like myself to other seeking relief. It's time to move beyond the stigma.

In fact, we already allow substances like alcohol and tobacco that are scientifically proven to be far more harmful with little to no such safeguards in place.

Consumption lounges give us the opportunity to regulate, educate, and ensure safety.

With your support, we can create a pilot program that prioritizes safety, innovation, and community well-being.

We are in the front lines of history in the middle of this cannabis revolution. The question is, which side of that change will you stand on? Thank you.

Amen.

Thank you.

Viara?

Gera Gonzalez from getting it right from the start of the public health institute in opposition.

Based on our project's cannabis policy tracking and research in California as of 2024, three quarters of the 195 jurisdictions that allow store for retailers to seriously prohibit it,

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is Justin Jacinto, Christian Ibarra, Max Schmidt.

Excuse me, excuse me one second.

Excuse me one second.

These are the rules of the chamber.

This is a proud democratic institution, the city council here.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Whether you agree with it or disagree with it, everyone who signs up will get their turns.

We ask that everyone please show respect to the speakers no matter whether they agree or disagree with you.

Thank you so much.

Excuse me no shouting out.

No, no, wait a minute.

You shed out again.

I'm going to ask you to leave.

That's not what you do.

Whatever side you're on you're not furthering your cause.

So go ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, city council and mayor.

My name is Justin Ascinto and I'm a core graduate.

I'm extremely grateful for the city's piloting of the core program and for continuing to help our community break the stigma.

To start if a carcinogen can be legally smoked in club, what are we still doing here?

There are bars and venues with outside designated smoke areas where second hand smoke can travel.

There are areas that exist all throughout the city.

But we're trying to compare these controlled outside areas against actually controlled facilities that are designed with special ventilation to help navigate and mitigate the risk of the second hand smoke concerns.

And if you're still suspect of these ventilation systems, just simply not walk into the building, just as you wouldn't come mingle in these outside smoking areas.

As humans we are social mammals and we don't always want to drink and smoke at home.

If these consumption lounges only consist of edibles, these business owners in the city will be losing out on a great deal of revenue because people aren't going to sit for 30 minutes to an hour and wait for their high to kick in.

Especially when there's no other combustible options.

You're either informed and educated on the topic or your pockets are aligned from opposing interests.

I would like to commend the support of the council who are looking to pilot this program.

And I do appreciate the courage to do so by allowing the safe and accessible area for us to consume.

Like Maisha said, safe consumption at the state fair proves that we can do this as long as we work together.

I have 22 more speakers. Christian Ibarra, Max Schmitz, Marcos Serita, Bruno Van Holland.

Christian.

Hello, so do council. I come here from district three. I've worked in cannabis and it's been my main source of income and I have worked hand in hand with some of these pilot programs and have been around these consumption lounges and have seen that it is possible to have

available consumption and still have people conduct themselves correctly and not be a nuisance to the community specifically with the ventilation situation.

We've seen as Chris had said air box data that shows that we can actually do this and not provide you know a space where workers are there and are being exposed to smoke unnecessarily.

We already have places where you can smoke tobacco inside as people have said and I feel that we need inhalable consumption in particular because I've worked with edible companies in the past and I know that education on edibles is important and I think that dosage can be a little bit you know high for certain people.

It is smarter to have inhalable consumption just purely because of dosage because sometimes people can't handle an edible and go home afterwards so I feel that type two is a little bit more important especially when people are maybe not as experienced users and are a little bit more casual.

So I would like consumption lounges I am in favor of that and I think that we need type two in particular because people need to be able to smoke I am a renter and I feel that I have pressure on me to not really smoke at my home and I have had younger siblings as well that I do not want to smoke around at certain times and I know there's people that have children and all the above I do not drink as well and I feel that is important to have space space to inhale my cannabis.

Thank you.

Max Schmidt, then Marco Serita.

Hello my name is Mac I just want to say hello and hope we can come to a positive resolution on this decision regarding consumption lounges.

I mainly want to address your second hand smoke concerns let's just talk about the tobacco smoke lounges within Sacramento downtown area.

When was the last time you guys have checked on their air purifiers or check their mitigating their smoke or the way they're mitigating their second hand smoke.

We have two known consumption tobacco lounges within Sacramento and the grid one being Casbah which is a hookal lounge I don't know if you're familiar with hookah but it contains high levels of carbon monoxide in fine particular matter which can exceed EPA quality standards air quality standards.

In fact a study that found that carbon monoxide levels in rooms where she should were smoked were five times higher than in rooms or cigarettes were smoked.

In fact hookah can also build up indoor spaces as a third hand smoke residuals on walls furniture windows and floors and I could go on and on.

Now let's just talk about the cigar lounges cigar smoke contains the same toxic chemicals cigarette cigarette smoke and there is no safe level of exposure to second hand smoke cigar smoke can also worse in lung cancer heart disease childhood asthma.

Ear infections and upper lower upper and lower respiratory infections cigar smokers have four to ten times higher risk of dying from oral isophagal or cancer than other non smokers.

All in all please think about what I have said regarding second hand smoke I think you guys should at least give us a chance to and I can guarantee that the lounges will figure it out and fast.

I mean we are the capital of California and we should be leading the rest of California not behind it.

Thank you.

Marcos and Bruno Vendhaland.

Hello my name is Marcus Rita as a lot long lifelong Sacramento resident and a cannabis business owner I've seen firsthand how our city has embraced the cannabis industry however Sacramento lays black safe designated spaces for a consumption by creating cannabis lounges we can ensure that consumption happens responsibly.

We are reducing public use and impaired driving while fostering a sense of community these spaces would also bring economic growth through tourism and local partnerships through other progressive cities like other progressive cities like San Francisco and West Hollywood have successfully implemented lounge is showing it's possible to integrate them into the fabric of a city responsibly Sacramento's rich cannabis culture deserves this step forward to enhance safety equity and economic growth.

Sacramento has always been a child blazer and it's time we lead in providing a safe inclusive spaces for cannabis users and enthusiasts you know we're in basically you know the way I look at it is there isn't really too many safe spaces for Californians and Sacramento residents you know people that come and visit us from all over the world there are people out here you know looking at California but not just California but Sacramento because Sacramento or

we are the I would you say it like the trouble is we are the people that the world's watching to see what's next what's going to happen with the cannabis industry because like I don't know how to explain it but you know it's it's to the fact where everybody's watching us and we have to leave by example you know and I really appreciate you guys as time considering this you know type two consumption is something we really need you know you know just along with number one but number one

but number two is really what's important thank you for your consideration.

Bruno Van De Holland and Isaac Altamorano.

Hi my name is Bruno I didn't prepare any speeches but I did want to say that I am in favor of the type two consumption lounges my job I'm a professional joint roller and I traveled the world and talked to the cannabis communities around the world and we've

all agreed that having a safe place to consume cannabis makes us not criminals and I think that the people in this room are not criminals I don't want to be treated like a criminal and I think that's really messed up you guys keep

treating us like criminals and not giving us like a safe place to consume cannabis because it's just not fair if we're not allowed to go someplace and smoke weed where can we go and smoke it's it just doesn't seem right I think that in other countries like in Berlin or Spain they seem to be

to handle it very well I've been to many of these these social clubs and they'll I hear something about secondhand smoke and the ventilation in these places is amazing and so you could be sitting there and the

smokers goes straight up it's very impressive you wouldn't have any problems with outside smoke because of the carbon filters that they're using other countries are they seem to be like way ahead of us and in California I think that we're falling

behind in in that aspect so yeah I really hope that you guys pass these these lounges so that we have a safe place to go and consume cannabis I'm not a big fan of the bars and like people smoking cigarettes as I'm

like walking down the sidewalk so having a nice place to smoke cannabis would be great thank you for your time

Isaac Ultamerano Flavio Boizar Mira Ultamerano

then has Mean Hernandez

I think I mayor council has everybody doing thank you staff for everything that you've done so far we've heard a lot of different things opposing and in favor I'm here to remind you that the city's

growing there's new developments coming a lot of different things are happening that are big and we don't want to be left behind we want to be part of the

economic development of the city he's going it's going to bring and we keep getting pushed in a corner like comparing scientifically tobacco and other substances to cannabis when it's simply not

chemically not the same substance not the same chemical components and we reach out to you Eric and only we got a staff member that said that they're in email got stuck in their inbox and a Thursday night on

on a Monday we we have data from air box we did over 220 events here in downtown without any permits we didn't without any fights without any

arguments without any incidents and we have data to prove that the air can be cleaned up and it can be a better

alternative lastly it's just frustrating that the people that is opposed to this is people that it's never going to be in

this locations and additionally to this the people that is opposing to this it's painting a refer madness propaganda that in all

realities not what we're living right now we have people that cannot smoke at home I know you don't buy the argument but it is true there's people that cannot smoke at home

and if we provide an outlet for this people to smoke at home I mean sorry in in a location instead of at home it's inclusive

inclusive for everybody once again it's our plea it's our livelihood I represent a company that has been embedded in the fabric of the city

and we really care for the this to happen so we we will appreciate that and in your support thank you for your comments

love you

all right guys here we are again so I represent my community I represent myself and I represent my industry

I work at a local cannabis club and I sell tons of products I sell tons of edibles I sell tons of pre rolls I sell tons of flower more like it so

the type one it just doesn't work because there's just not enough people that are buying edibles that actually feel comfortable like actually

consuming on-site and staying there until the edible hits so it just doesn't make sense for a type one you know even

night type two it makes sense because everyone's consistently picking up flower edibles dabs people are doing that

consistently so it just makes more sense for a type two now we've already made it this far we're almost there

we're almost at the finish line I feel like if we have the type two we will have the spaces we will have the right

technology we will have the right people working these right spots so we can ensure quality we can ensure safety

we can ensure outside smoke isn't going to leak out it's a pilot program so we need it to actually try it so we can

actually make sure that the data matches we need to have these safe space so everyone's not just outside

smoking we need to have somewhere to smoke so I'm not just outside smoking wherever I want because I'm going to

continue smoking wherever I want and that's just how it is that's how it's been and until you we actually have

these safe spaces people are going to continue to smoke wherever they want look how many people we have here

today you guys need to be able to let us smoke in a nice space where we can educate we feel safe and where we

can leave and not worry about something happening I appreciate your guys' time I actually made this a lot

faster than I planned it but I hopefully you guys get the point that you know all of us here we're going to keep

you know being here until we actually see a positive result so thank you guys my name is Flavio

Myra then has me. Hello everyone thank you again for the opportunity to speak here

I'm a mother have four children believe it or not I have a 2018 and 14 and 13 year old

they are educated because I educate them about cannabis why is that why can't I be the one

educating it in my household and they are accepting it how come you guys are not accepting the way that

we bring you guys the knowledge and also all of the data behind all of the negative thoughts and

comments that everybody has why can't we put that much effort on getting all of this right information

for everybody to be in the same page for us to move forward for us to have businesses here

mayors like for we want you to give us the opportunity to move forward with cannabis launches

we want you to go up in history to be the first one here in the Sacramento in this capital

for you to have the opportunity to let us lead the business we want this

for everyone for a community we need the network you guys need the education because obviously

you guys are not allowing it and you're just allowing the negative thoughts the negative

outcomes of this industry when we should supposed to be looking to the positive we need to look

into the education and you if you guys don't allow this is just going to be harmful for everyone

and more bad things are just going to continue to come forward we don't want that we want to

people to move forward please give us the opportunity

has mean Hernandez then Chris Tao good afternoon my name is Husmin Francesca Hernandez and I am in

support of the pilot program because like other parents I would like a safe place to consume

away from my child I have four years of experience in the cannabis industry which includes product

development where I focused on the science of how cannabis interacted with the brain in order to

maximize targeted benefits our districts are home to numerous schools but they're also home to

bars smoke shops liquor stores and they're located close to campuses through research I estimated

district six to have 11 locations district eight to have 13 locations two within a three minute

drive from Elk Grove High district twelve had 18 locations yet cannabis lounges which provide a

controlled and health focused environment face scrutiny if we're comfortable allowing alcohol

and tobacco sales near these schools why are we so hesitant to establish regulated spaces for cannabis

a substance that no matter how consumed has proven medicinal benefits your best arguments often

stem from outdated or irrelevant data and while secondhand smoke concerns are valid cannabis is

not tobacco it should not be judged by tobacco and nicotine driven studies this is an opportunity

to gather cannabis specific data to provide accurate insights rather than relying on corrupted

data and misconceptions in order to create a false equivalence this pilot program can be a

foundation for an academic partnership to be created with engineers and sac state students pursuing

environmental engineering where they can develop a system that filters PM 2.5 particles from industrial

or vehicle emissions and natural resources this could be a revolutionary this could be revolutionary

for buildings beyond cannabis lounges with systems that could be adapted in schools housing units

and other public spaces I'm asking you all not to be limited by your fears but ignited by curiosity

this program is a chance to drive rural progress for health and safety but also innovation in Sacramento

it's an opportunity to approach cannabis in a way that we have never been able to do with alcohol

with intention responsibility and community oversight thank you for your time as

I miss you thank you for your comments

Chris Tao then have your Hernandez thank you mayor counsel and staff for your time and service today

I'm a core business owner and a resident of district eight my people in district in district eight

do not own their own homes and many lease agreements prohibit the use of cannabis this forces

voters to normalize less than appropriate places to consume you have a unique opportunity today

to generate a new upward momentum for many in your community to build progress in the cannabis

community and our hinder development so let's break the stigma and pilot this program let's help

educate the new wave of recreational users to consume safely I support type two thank you

have a year Hernandez then Sherry Martinez then Richard Miller

good evening counsel and mayor my name is Aviar Hernandez and I'm here to support the passing

of the Hillble consumption lounges from allowing medical dispensaries to pay in a key role to

allowing standalone delivery Sacramento has always been a forefront of progress for many years

even before Prop 64 passed cannabis consumption lounges is the one area that we fall in behind

ocean themselves has visited many cities like west hollywood Oakland and San Francisco which all

have provided frameworks that are proven to be workable and supported by the community with no

major incidents to report even the consumption area the state fair was enthusiastically

received and went out went out without incidents all of these faces here all of the people here

from OCR to the people that are speaking here today are the people that have put in the years

of thought work and research and to make it in this safe and successful for everyone so let us

be led by that not by misinformation thank you

hello good evening take a deep breath wild um I fought for patients rights I've already been

up here talking about this Darrell when you were um an assembly I believe I wrote you a letter

with heart stickers and star stickers telling me that you telling you you were my hero I believe

it was the organ transplant um bill that we were fighting for and then we were coming here

at city hall and fighting for more patients rights and so I've never been against patients rights

and I see like we've been to the state fair before it was legal consumption we were passing out

study cases with presuitors for patients rights and all of this information is already out there

it seems like we're going backwards um patients need somewhere to access their medication whether

they're traveling two towns away one town a different state wherever they end up going they need

to consume their medication you take it on a broader range now it's legal consumption for everyone okay

well where are these people going to go I think if you're going to be progressive and stay on this path

you need to move forward and do what's right and these consumption stations these places for

consumption type one and two are both necessary not just for patients but here you have people

smoking it for their smoking it or ingesting it however they're taking it and they need somewhere

to go like the alcohol bands now we have bars and you know same argument kind of keeps coming up

and I don't think that it should be on the backs of patients because right now the patients are the

ones really suffering thank you

and afternoon mayor Steinberg and members of the city council Richard Miller on behalf of

Americans who are safe access and American Alliance for Medical Cannabis thank you for the opportunity

to speak today and thank you for creating a robust cannabis program here in the city however this

program does have its setbacks and although it is robust robust many Americans do not have the

ability to medicate and associate safely without consumption lounges Iorgy just support the

establishment of a cannabis consumption lounge here in the city a step that will promote safely

inclusivity and fairness for far too long cannabis has been stigmatized leading to unnecessary

discrimination against medical patients and consumers now with legalization we must ensure cannabis

users have the same opportunity to gather in a safe regulated space as those who enjoy alcohol and bars

clubs cigars and hook lounges these lounges not only provide a venue for responsible

consensual but they also provide an environment for education social connection and cultural enrichment

does ignited spaces keep cannabis use a public streets and neighborhoods ensuring public safety

while creating jobs boosting tourism and creating generating tax for the city these lounges can host

events workshops entertainment fostering community engagement and reinforcing responsible use by

allowing cannabis lounges we treat consumers with dignity and respect and end the double standard

everyone deserves a safe place to enjoy legal activities free from judgment misinformation and

discrimination let us lead with fairness innovation and equity and sharing our city remains

inclusive and forward thinking thank you for the time and consideration we respectfully ask for

your support and vote aye on type one and type two cannabis consumption lounges thank you for your

comments next speakers angelica sanchez and cell c haskins and dianna hang

good afternoon mayor and members of the city council my name is on helica sanchez and i'm here

representing perfect union we've been a cannabis retailer in the city of sacramento for the last

14 years and today we ask for your support in improving on site consumption lounges type one and

type two sacraments cannabis industry has grown significantly but it lacks legal regulated space

for adults to consume cannabis safely and responsibly is illegal to use cannabis in public places and

many consumers cannot smoke at home due to landlord policies without legal options consumption is

often pushed in unregulated areas raising potential safety and community concerns this proposal is

not uncharted territory cities like san francisco oakland and west hollywood as well as others have

successfully implemented on site consumption lounges demonstrating their ability to operate responsibly

while bolstering local economies and creating jobs these spaces attract cannabis tourism support small

businesses and contributed tax revenues that strengthen our city services the ordinance before you

is the result of thoughtful planning city staff and the law and legislation committee have spent

countless hours researching and discussing best practices consulting with other cities and addressing

key concerns their work ensures this policy is comprehensive with safeguards that prioritize both

community and worker safety concerns about air quality have been carefully addressed the proposed

lounges will require robust ventilation plans compliant with california mechanical code standards

including advanced hvac systems and filtration measures to ensure clean air for both employees and

customers the united food and commercial workers union representing thousands of cannabis workers

across california strongly supports on site consumption they played a pivotal role in passing ab

1775 which allows cannabis lounges to prepare food and control environments while ensuring worker

and consumer safety by supporting this ordinance sacramino can reinforce its role as a leader and

progressive and equitable cannabis policy vote yes and give our community safe and regulated spaces

it deserves thank you good afternoon mayor steinberg vice mayor maple and council members my name

is Chelsea haskins i'm the director of state and local licensing with perfect union and i'm here

in support of type one and type two consumption lounges and sacramino sacramino has been a leader

in cannabis policy the city has wholeheartedly embraced the economic benefits collecting millions

in cannabis tax revenue however sacramino has failed to provide equitable access for all residents

to safely and legally consume these cannabis products especially those who are renters living in

apartments or otherwise lack private property for consumption or otherwise can't afford to own a home

here this is a glaring oversight while the city profits from cannabis it effectively excludes

non home owners from consuming it legally renters are often prohibited from using cannabis in their

least homes and public consumption is outlawed this leaves countless residents including our medicinal

patients with no viable options to consume a product that is legally sanctioned in tax under city

and state law the solution is simple consumption lounges these venues will create a safe and controlled

environment for responsible use alternatives to public or prohibited consumption so this is going

to reduce the likelihood of unregulated or unsafe use in spaces where it doesn't belong such as

parks or streets and this is an economic opportunity including job creation business development and

even more increased tax revenue for the city i recognize that concerns may arise regarding

health risks associated with smoke however the national academy of sciences and engineering found

there is no statistical association between cannabis and lung cancer it's time to align our

policies and values by embracing practical solutions that promote equity safety and economic

thank you for coming

i have eight more speakers dianna thin tipney burcat hello council i think you offer being here

today thank you so much kelly bail and swell up or even getting us in this position today really

appreciate you i'm d i am a core member and currently served on the dcc's cannabis advisory committee

i understand the health concerns and i agree there are risks to smoke education is harm reduction

studies have shown that tobacco smoke contains carcinogens and toxic compounds particularly

night shows it means such as nicotine these nitrogen containing compounds produce highly toxic

molecules that increase the risk of cancer and they are not present in cannabis smoke cannabis

smoke does contain harmful compounds including poly aromatic hydrocarbons but those are also found

in certain food preparation methods like grilling are you going to ban grills from restaurants are

you going to ban hookal lounges cigar lounges while cannabis smoke may pose health risk they do not

contain the same high risk carcinogens why do people prefer smoking cannabis studies have shown

that cannabis has a branch of the dilatory effects which are currently available in inhalers

meaning that it can help open up airways in the lungs making it easier to breathe cannabinoids

like chc and cvd reduce inflammation and relax the muscles around the airways which help improve

airflow cannabis can help calm the nervous system by promoting slower and deeper breaths

we can reduce anxiety and indirectly become pain and crisis management and the last six years

I have lost my partner of 10 years my pup of 15 and my father all while living with a raging

alcoholic I cannot explain the unbearable pain that I endured when I woke up in the morning I felt

like I was living a nightmare when you cry your heart out it can be really hard to breathe I needed

something quick something effective and something that wasn't natural my health and that was cannabis

it healed me and I found this community and we found each other and we want to help

people find that too thank you

hiphanie burkats and mcayla piercine

nice start

thank you for letting me be here as a female stigmatized in many forms as a woman mother entrepreneur

business owner and healer I am here to speak on behalf of my fellow community sisters

facing mental health challenges and seeking alternative treatments and therapies asking in support

of type 2 consumption lounges having a safe space to recommend to my clients where they can not

only consume away from their homes and children eliminating second hand smoke misinformation and

mental health concerns and promoting a healthier outlet deferring PTSD postpartum social

mental anxieties and depressions consumption lounges and consumption friendly events can lead to

resources and solutions within our community to those who need to medicate but can't simply

smoke at home the success of this pilot can lead to the direction of progress where I can

eventually create my own safe space practice specializing holistic health medicine when

California passed prop 215 I earned a degree in alternative medicine and I'm now working on my

masters and trans personal psychology I made history at the state fair with opportunities you

approved and the help of this community behind me I'm a personal trainer and health coach you

mentioned second hand smoking is health effects I consume personally smoking before during and

after my three hour a day workouts I lift more than joints I promise you I'm the healthiest I've

ever been in my life in quote by my personal primary care physician one of the healthiest people

they have ever seen healthy lifestyle creates healthy lungs but I wish you cared more about their

mental health as you do they're consenting adult lungs might I add I have never hit a cigarette

a day in my life nor do I consume using tobacco I create healthier turn to ways of living for

women stepping into sobriety eliminating one more death due to Sacramento opioid and true drug

problem I have seen women on fentanyl and the comparison to the women who consume cannabis is

not existing thank you for your comments good afternoon members of the council my name is

Michaela Pearson I am a member of the greater Sacramento smoke and tobacco free coalition I also serve

as the tobacco free programs director at breathe California Sacramento region for years breathe has

been a leading advocate for clean air healthy lungs and tobacco prevention in the Sacramento region

our current efforts focus on advancing smoke free policies across Sacramento County including

outdoor work sites smart parks and multi-unit housing California's legacy of smoke free indoor

spaces has long served as a model for protecting public health particularly for workers in enclosed

environments decades of research have demonstrated that inhaling any form of smoke whether tobacco or

cannabis poses serious risks for lung health our primary concern lies with the increased exposure

of workers to second hand and third hand smoke and cannabis lounges allowing indoor cannabis

smoking undermines decades of progress in safeguarding indoor workers health cannabis smoke much

like tobacco smoke contains harmful chemicals including carcinogens and fine particulate matter

that can damage that can damage respiratory and cardiovascular health scientific evidence confirms

there is no safe level of exposure to these toxic substances and ventilation systems cannot

fully mitigate the risks associated with second hand and third hand smoke given our long standing

work in tobacco prevention reerge to approach this public health issue with the same caution and

consideration as tobacco related risks thank you for your time thank you for your comments

Eliza Tong Kyle Nice Marbella Sala Zayan-Karis and then Pam Lopez

hello my name is Dr. Eliza Tong I'm asking for the Sacramento City Council to oppose this pilot

proposal with smoking inside cannabis cafes for identification purposes I'm a professor of

internal medicine at UC Davis Health but I'm representing myself as an individual I'm also

the cessation task force chair of our greater Sacramento smoke and tobacco free coalition which

sent in an opposition letter smoke free workplace policies including bars have protected the health

of workers and patrons in Sacramento since the 1990s there is no safe space when you cannot meet

clean indoor air quality standards with expensive ventilation or public health standards with masks

the heart and lung health risks are immediate with inflammation from fine particulates

gases and vapors so what happens to the worker or customer who doesn't realize they have asthma or

COPD or heart disease until they get sick cleaning up indoor toxic residue of third hand smoke is

also very expensive the toxins accumulate and continue to react in off gas as any property manager

will tell you you have to replace carpets and chairs etc and deep clean surfaces and walls also

what happens when you turn off all the smoke alarms and increase your fire risk my health care

colleagues and I take care of patients who are at risk for getting sicker from indoor smoking

smoke is smoke and we are learning that things that can be eaten like flavors make a sicker when

it is inhaled my research colleagues are publishing more about mental and physical risks with cannabis

including cancer a recent jama article showed that there's an eightfold risk in laryngeal cancer

with cannabis related disorders so heavy exposures and that is something where the UC San Diego

Cancer Center director said this is deja vu again with tobacco for cannabis so there are risks and

this was controlled for alcohol and tobacco so what happens to our health care risks and emergency

room wait times when we all have to pay more as people get sicker let's not turn back time let's not

make Sacramento workplaces smokey again thank you thank you for your comments hi all news

it does not help it does not help the debate or anybody's caused to boo a speaker respect everyone's opinion please

hello my name is Kyle Nase I've been here a few times but there's a few new faces so I just

want to start out by saying I grew up my first 17 and 17 years on the east coast so it's a

pleasure to be even having this conversation in front of the city council like Sacramento somewhere

that is so forward with cannabis but I am urging that we can continue to move forward with not only

type one but type two consumption lounges because of not only the reasons that were stated before me with

edibles consumption not really fitting the lounge as well as a full type two where people can consume

edibles as well as in in hallowles I feel this way because as not only a consumer I am also

somebody that is hopefully one day going to be a homeowner and until then with me and many other

people that are living in an apartment we have nowhere to safely consume it would be a lot better

for a place that is a private place for adults only where you get ID on the way in not like bars where

you can walk in and get ID later but to get ID right when I walk in I can walk into these places

and know that I can consume safely I don't have to feel like a criminal consuming and that's the

biggest concern I feel like for most of these people is you're allowing us to purchase this cannabis

but you're not allowing us to consume it and that's where this divide really I feel like splits and

for a lot of the misinformation I feel like a lot of that can get educated I feel like

lounges are a really great place for education but not only lounges but private events as well

are a great place for education because people can come together and finally know how to consume

the right way or know what not to consume so this type two would be an amazing first step towards

legal like consumption and legalization but I hope to an urge that we can do private events.

Marbella Salah, Thanzion, Than Pam Lopez. Good afternoon. First I want to thank all of you for

allowing this very lively discourse. I've been sitting here for the last hour I've heard some very

interesting opinions. That being said as the president of Garland Northgate neighborhood

association I must ask you you oppose this pilot program and let me tell you why. It's not

that I don't I think the core program is an amazing program and I don't oppose that. What I'm

concerned with is I remember when we had the whole campaign against smoking over 40 years ago

and the tobacco industry said it was healthy it's okay second-hand smoke doesn't hurt it's okay

that Latinos and African Americans are smoking at higher rates than other communities and then

there was a shift and a public health shift and said no it's not okay and Latinos and African

Americans are smoking at higher rates they help health outcomes that's affecting them and we did

a campaign to stop smoking and we reduced that now we're saying okay it's okay to smoke marijuana

and I know that it's you know there's protection under 18 but we all know that our 18-year-olds

or 15-year-olds or whatever they're not abiding by the law they smoke so I think that we should not

be encouraging smoking periods we know smoking hurts and it's going to hurt our young people and

I'm just like why are we going backwards and start going forward we don't allow smoking in public

spaces for a reason and this should not because it's marijuana it should not change

and then the last point people say it's medicinal and it is medicinal but many people are not

using it for medicinal reasons are young people think if your comments your time is complete

Zion Tattas and Pam Lopez will be your final speaker

everyone thank you for having me I'm Zion Tattas said the founder of Shashima in Institute is an

alternative natural holistic medicine so for me it's a common sense I don't even know why we

comparing carnivus to cigarette smoking and alcohol because there is no study that shows carnivus

ever ever hurt anybody whether children or adults is all that nobody had died or got diagnosed

from sickness from carnivus so if you guys can show me the study that really hurt anybody then

we can start from there and then the thing is we obviously we don't want the carnivus

launch and every corner like you putting the alcohol liquor store in our neighborhood so it is

going to be watched and you know how hard it is even let alone to open a launch a carnivus

launch even so hard for us even to operate as a business carnivus business owners so there's

going to be so much regulation in so much study has to be that where we are right now it took

over whatever years so for me as a Shashima in Institute business owner I've already have a

CUP for a event to have in my land which is going to be regulated also get it in membership so

I would love for this to be passed because this is what I thought from the beginning not because

so we we can be here and say no you can't do this you can't do that so until you show us the study

that somebody actually lost their life or their health through carnivus which there is no study

thank you for your comments your comments

Pam Lopez on behalf of California Normal I was asked to speak briefly about AB 1775 but I think

your staff did a great job covering that legislation in their analysis thank you for your

excellent work California Normal is the state's consumer rights and consumer safety organization

we care deeply about the health and safety of cannabis consumers as well as their education

and we care deeply about the safety of workers in cannabis consumption lounges our good friends

which is why we worked in co-sponsorship with UFCW on AB 1775 last year we hope that bill gives local

governments like the city of Sacramento the tools that you need to ensure that workers are kept

safe in cannabis consumption lounges and also to ensure that you are able to require ventilation

systems to meet your city's worker safety and also consumer safety priorities thank you all for

your time today thank you Mary before you move I have no more speakers

before you move on in lieu of pass for publication should this ordinance move forward it will be

published in full that language was omitted from the agenda what can you just explain what that

means exactly thanks you to so when an ordinance moves forward now we we publish it in the newspaper

so prior to it coming for adoption we do what we call a pass for publication which would have been

on the previous agenda you would have approved that I would have published it in the newspaper of

general circulation and we did not do that pass for publication so in this instance we will print

the entire ordinance not just the title in a newspaper of general circulation it doesn't have to

be voted on again correct it does not okay that's what I was trying to understand instead of just

publishing the title I'm publicly published the full ordinance okay thank you all right thank you

very much to the members of the public for coming out and expressing yourselves and your passion

and strong opinions and now we turn it over to the city council for some discussion deliberation

I have up first council member Katie Valenzuela thank you mayor and thank you everybody who came

to testify today this has been a long haul I put this on the agenda back when we had a log

mr. mayor and you could just say you want something on the agenda and half the council said yes to

staff looking into this over two years ago and so I do want to thank the staff for all of your work

on this in my four years on this dius I've never seen an ordinance take this long or be this well

researched or heavily discussed at long ledge is your timeline pointed out we've discussed this

numerous times we've looked at other cities we've analyzed the data so I just want to thank you

for getting us to this point a simple statement to start off here is that if we believe cannabis

should be legal then everyone should have a legal place to use it I want to say that again because

if we believe cannabis should be legal then everyone should have a legal place to use it I say that

twice because that is not the case today cannabis consumption is only legal for some we have only

partially decriminalized cannabis consumption and approximately half of our city population including

myself or renters who are not allowed to smoke in their homes so yes this ordinance will help them

it will also support first time in medical users who want to ensure that they're being safe

it will help parents and caregivers like we heard from to net today who don't want cannabis in

their homes and don't want to consume around their children or families and yes this will definitely

support the businesses who are not just major employers and revenue generators for this city they

are the sole source of income for the Sacramento children's fund so I say all of that to articulate

why I feel this is very important and why I'm supportive of taking this step today so I would like

to move the item as proposed by staff for a pilot project for type one and two permits with one

change and I want to thank Kimberly Cargill for your studio's review as always of all of the

ordinance language that comes forward I would like to say that under cannabis consumption lounge

premise restrictions that section there is a subsection A and E that requires spaces to be indoors

fully enclosed and soundproof I think those restrictions should only be a subject to type two

permits so type one permit would not have the indoor enclosed soundproof requirement but type two

permits would because to miss Cargill's point you know type one is just ingestible we already

have code in here that says it has to be not visible to the public it already has to be tied to

licensed dispensary so I'm not changing any of that I'm just saying the indoors the soundproof

the fully enclosed and our existing law regulates outdoor noise so today I could invite people

over to a yard and have a yoga party or whatever and our existing zoning rules already regulate how

loud those things can be and how many people can be allowed there so I think that makes sense and I

just want to say to my colleagues that I'm actually okay with whatever outcome happens today we've

done this for years now it's been old I didn't think that when we put this on the agenda it would

have taken almost three years to get to this point and I frankly think it's time for us to just

make a decision one way or the other if we're ready to proceed but I do want to encourage my

colleagues who might be hesitant to remember that this is a pilot so let's talk about what it would

look like to try this out let's talk about what data and outcomes we want staff to track so that

we understand the impact of this pilot and council is aware of any alarm bells or any issues that

might be arising and let's really let's follow the examples of other cities right here in California

already doing and show what it looks like to do this safely thank you

I'm going to ask people to not cheer and clap after every speaker this is it well it just

slows us down it's a serious debate and we want to be able to engage here and and I know we don't

debate in the normal way but I'm torn on this and so I want to ask council member valence

whether that question or one thing that you said just will help me as I make my decision here

you said at the very beginning and it was your main argument that if we believe it is legal

everyone should have a legal place to use it can you contrast that please with the

with the state of cigarettes and tobacco as far as there's not supposed to smoke indoor and public

places correct but as far as I'm aware there is not a blanket prohibition on smoking cigarettes

in public places but there is for cannabis so I can't walk down the sidewalk and smoke cannabis

I can't be in a park and smoke cannabis I can only smoke cannabis in private space which is the

distinct difference between tobacco and cannabis thank you okay vice mayor maple thank you mayor

and also I just want to build up on that a little bit it's you can only legally smoke cannabis

on private property and so with that obviously can't be a government building can't be a public

space where other people are which literally means if you happen to own your home then you can

smoke there whereas if you're a renter you probably have something in your rental agreement that

prevents that so it's it's truly there if you're a renter which we think which is about 50%

of the city of Sacramento then you don't have a legal place to smoke so I just want to to further

build upon what council member valence will have said and I want to say I want to start by saying

that when this conversation was first happening in these chambers I was sitting over there

advocating for this along with many of you in this room and it is kind of jarring that now I'm two

years into my job and we're just we're having this conversation still so I would just really echo

council member valence waila's comments about let's just make a decision I think now it's the time

whatever the outcome is I think you will all accept and move forward with but it's it's time it's

been a really long road and I really want to thank you council member valence will have probably

your advocacy on this over over several years thank you um I've said my I made my stance on this

known so I'm sure it's pretty clear that I support this um but I do I just want to point out a few

things that just came from comments that were said today um things that are just floating around

my head first and foremost um and with Proposition 64 in 2016 the people of California voted to add

to the constitution of California it's a constitutional right for every person who's over the age

of 21 to be able to access and consume canvas it's just the facts and so people can have whatever

opinions they want about whether they should or should not do that whether they should or should

not drink alcohol should or should not do any other thing if you're over the age of 21 that is your

constitutional right in the state of California and so the question before us really is in what state

do we want to allow it and that is where the local governments come in and the state and so it is

our right as a council to have a discussion about whether or not we want to allow this but you know

in the context of the comments that councilor Valenzuela just made which is how do we ensure that no

matter what your status is whether you're a home or a renter that you have the same rights and

right now that's not the case so that's that's a key for for me and the other thing I was really

compelled by that I didn't think about because I don't yet have children though I plan to is

I consume cannabis and if I have my children at home and that's the only place where I can legally

consume cannabis because I'm a homeowner uh what do I do if I don't want to do it around my children

you know at this point that's not really an option right and so there are we know that there's a

lot of parents that that choose as is their legal right to consume cannabis and so I think it's

incumbent upon us to create opportunities for them to do so in a way that not only puts

doesn't put their children at risk but allows them a safe space to do so so I want to point that out

something else that um that popped into my head is this the state currently views this if

you're a medical patient which you are there are many um the state provides incentives for

medical patients to access cannabis out with remedies from the tax from taxes that means that the

state recognizes that that there are medical cannabis users that use this as a remedy as as an

intervention um and they they subsidize it so that's something that we should think about right this

is not just people who want to use it recreationally though that is their right um this is also

people that are doing so for medical purposes so I think that's really important important to point

out and a lot of those people happen to be renters may not have an opportunity to do so legally um the

other thing that that I was thinking about is this has been around for years I mean there have

been consumption lounges in other cities in the state of California for many years now there is a

lot of data for us to look at and see and see did it work did it not um and I know our staff is

an incredible job and they've done that research thank you um and so you know we know we know that

it does work while in other places and that we can do it here um this has been brought up but

measure all our children's fund is funded through cannabis tax revenues we should be trying to

support the industry and everywhere we can if we want to support that fund I think about that

all the time because I supported measure all and I really want to see our youth programs be

successful that means we have to make our help our legal industry and Sacramento be successful too

you'll see w I mean when I see you know our our labor partners here advocating and support of this

they're saying hey our workers we the unionized cannabis workers in Sacramento uh they want this

this is good for them and it's good for us and so I'm I that's something that is very important to me

um and then you know this was point out for several speakers but there there's a double standard

right if we don't have this there's hookalanges I've been to them and I prefer them but I've been to

them there's definitely cigar launches and so whatever decision this council makes we need to make

sure that we're we're applying this across the board equally because otherwise that does create

a double standard depending on what type of business you're in and that's not something that I support

um and then the last was I think it was mr. Hernandez who said Sacramento is always led

and that's true I mean we we had um we had legal cannabis dispensaries and other businesses in

Sacramento long before even 2016 right so we have always led on these issues we've always been

pretty progressive um but those were pilot programs too that's what this is this is a pilot program

let's try it out let's see how it works for us let's test it let's make sure that we have the

right measures in place and we're really seeing what what's going to work for us and then we can

use that data to inform future decisions but um I will be supporting this today I'll be seconding

the motion on the table and thank you thank you very smayer council member vengue

thank you mayor I have two colleagues that are incredibly passionate council member valence

well and council woman maple I want to thank them just for their hard work and city staff for

bringing this item I am not part of long ledge so everything that I'm hearing is when it comes

to the full council so just want to give kudos to the long ledge committee members that sit on

long ledge that did all the work to get us here and really just wanted to take this time to

think all of the speakers from both side those that are in opposition and those that are also

in support some of my comments are going to be very similar to when we had our discussion

earlier this earlier this month or last yeah earlier this month a few weeks ago

and then also just my position on on this ordinance in particular as I've shared

during the last council meeting when we had this workshop you know cannabis the topic of cannabis

and debate isn't something that's new right in oakland in san francisco now in sacramento and as you

heard from both of my colleagues it's something that councilman valence well has bought forth a couple

years now we're finally here at this moment and so appreciate that now this is a moment that

sacrameno is going to debate it and have a conversation about where we want to take this city

you know as for me as policy makers we have the responsibilities of having to navigate the

benefits and the risks associated with a policy right and so I just want to acknowledge a few things

and I've acknowledged it at the last meeting but also I know there are some new folks in the space

so want to just reaffirm just kind of where I'm at one I think two things can be true at the same

time right we know that cannabis is used by adults for medical reason folks have spoken

during public comment today about its benefits for certain conditions and especially for those

individuals I have family members who are adults who use it because they don't respond well to

traditional to traditional medication right and it is another alternative form so I want to hold

space that that is that is a truth at the same time we also know from a public health perspective

and even those that are in support of the policy have acknowledged publicly the harm that it does

on young people as well right and so I appreciate folks also acknowledging that as well and the

research is there it does show whether you're an adult you know you make your decision whether

you're going to use it or not before young people we know that it has a harmful effect and there's

even recent studies that we're seeing increase of use in marijuana among pregnant women

especially among a woman of color and black women so I just want to acknowledge that I think it's

important to acknowledge these things that both can be true at the same time public health for me

is about creating the condition so people can make healthier choices right at the end of the day our

job is to create a healthier environment so people can change those conditions they can change

their behaviors I think where I'm struggling right now and I also want to appreciate folks saying

if this is about creating safe places then we need to make sure that there are safe places for folks

to go to I think for me that's where my struggle is right now where I where I'm like okay what is

the alternative right and so I appreciate councilman valence wella and councilwoman maple really you

know echoing that because I think that's the piece that I'm trying to sort through as the policy

makers I do want to say you know as I'm listening to both side like this issue of cannabis and the

health risk is multifaceted right I want to acknowledge that yes on one hand legalization has had

its benefits it's increased tax revenue for the city I'm going to name that it has reduced our

criminalization and good impacts for some adults who use it right on the other hand and this is

real too the challenge is that we see young people accessing this right we also see impaired

driving and we see long-term health effects I also want to note because I think several folks have

reached out to me about and I heard a speaker saying well you have cigar lounges and there's

tobacco lounges I just want to to put on the record I don't know where my colleagues are but for me

and I've been pretty vocal about this but I don't support tobacco or cigar lounges just period

that's just me right I've always been opposed to that I've also always been opposed to like cannabis

tobacco and alcohol ads as well because for me I've always done a lot of youth engagement

youth education and that's always been a passion in mind is something that I that I really care

about deeply because I've seen the usage in alcohol and cannabis among young people and even

right now there's been conversation with me and Mayor prototype tala mantis because in district

three and in district eight I see tobacco ads up in my district right right right around liquor stores

and I'm not in support of that right so for me it's not about cannabis like I support the core

program but I've never been supportive of cannabis tobacco or alcohol ads just straight up all

all all legal substance so I will always be honest and upfront with my people with with everyone

like that has always been my position I really am thinking about the young people and I know before

my colleagues mentioned mentioned measure L yes absolutely 40% of cannabis revenue does go to

measure L but the reason why that is is because when I was one of the one of the many folks that

worked on measure L youth included we went after the cannabis revenue because we also knew the

impact that it had on young people because we could have gone other against other we could have

gone towards other revenue but there's a reason why we went after cannabis because we wanted to

mitigate the harm and so I just wanted to acknowledge that to both of my colleagues absolutely

it's a huge percentage but we were intentional about that because we knew about the harm that

it calls young people and so I just wanted to acknowledge that I think no matter out the

no matter the outcome if this does pass it will also give us an opportunity to kind of study and

to see how how it does in Sacramento and so I don't know where the votes are if you're counting your

votes on the on the dias but for me even though it's a pilot it's going to come back again right and

if it does pass I wanted to be successful too I wanted to make sure that we don't have harm on our

you know on our workers right those who are working in the in the smoke lounges and so I don't

know I'm not right now I'm kind of like I want to have a conversation with my colleagues I want to

talk about the alternatives I want to talk about you know if this does pass is what are some of the

the key indicators that we want to look at as a council right because it's a pilot program so this

council should also be making suggestions on what we want to see after we're done with the pilot

because that's that's going to determine if we want to continue and so I that's the piece of the

conversation I actually want to have dialogue in and so with that I'll pause there because I

really want to hear from the rest of my colleagues and if this item does pass that's where the bulk

of the conversation that I really want to have in terms of the pilot in itself thank you so much

thank you so much councilmember tau thank you mayor for stuff I like to think my fellow council

members on the long ledge for taking up the discussion for the past couple years one of the

newest members on council however I do feel strongly against about this industry I am supportive

of the cannabis industry but I run a youth organization and I've been working with youth for

the past four or five years and I've seen the impacts of of access and low income neighborhoods

especially district two echoing what councilmember vanciss with cannabis ads tobacco ads I on the

hand is you know I'm supportive of the type one I am really on the fence on the type two and

supporting that because also with the second hand smoke and re legislating you know and re-allowing

from a land use perspective as policymakers to really allow a smoking industry back into our

city ordinance I know we work hard to address second hand smoke with a lot of others just as

tobacco and issues and so my heart is I really don't want to see us have legislation to reopen

up our land use and allow smoking back into our bars in our public spaces I do hear the community

and I do understand that yes we need to look at how we can discuss furthermore with access to

smoking for the public use or for the for the people because this is the topic which is I think

it's really tough moving forward with not having enough public spaces or private spaces for

individuals and folks and who's using it for the medical side to really use be able to have

access to smoking and so I think I I I would love to hear from my colleagues for the more of this

discussion but then at this moment I'm very adamant on supporting a type two you're very what

adamant not supporting the type not supporting it okay okay council member Kaplan and get on

and we're right back thank you mayor I really want to thank staff for their hard work to getting to

this point you know it almost as you said valensweil it took a long time it's the unknown sausage

making with legislating I'm just going to say quickly my position hasn't changed I am supportive

of expanding our current permitting process to allow for consumption of state licensed events

and creating a pilot program that is focused on best practices as well as how we educate our

youth and parents for type one and type two even supporting the amendment as I was conferring

earlier with our city attorney I think we need to look at section 5.150.1380 and amend it so that

it sets out what type one is allowed and type two because honestly I'll come and have yoga they the

I mean if but that goes to being supportive innovative small business ideas and we should not have

our zoning restrict in certain areas but I do believe in the keeping the not visible to the public

but if it's open air so you can grow a garden and have private spaces on an already duly licensed

area I am fully supportive of that so as we as we go through and talk about this I almost want

to remove that we're talking about cannabis and go to as a city we constantly put forward that

we're addressing how do we address equity in the city how do we address disparity so I want to

talk about those two items it's in light of that we're talking about cannabis but we constantly

have the conversation of how do we create equity in our city and eliminate disparity prop 64 pass

so whether you like it or not as the vice mayor indicated when you're 21 you get to make the

choice whether you're a parent and you agree with that aunt uncle grandma guess what too bad

so sad they're 21 and they get to make choices I think what's incumbent upon us as policy makers

in the greater community is the education and information that is put out and that's where I

know measure L and I trust the work that is already being done by many organizations for that

education and how do we even partner with our schools studies are showing younger kids are not

um imbibing and in not participating at a rate that they used to but I think where we have to go

to and I said this I walk into my third graders classroom I know the two kids who live in a household

or an apartment where cannabis is being smoked those children do not have a choice and if we're

talking about equity is what we're doing is we are discriminating impitting renters against homeowners

we embody we even have an equity subcommittee if we're talking about it I don't like I have to

remove how it might feel personally personally about a subject matter and that's with my colleagues

we look at where we talk about it you know um vice mayor is correct somebody can walk down

the street and smoke a cigarette sure you can do that with cannabis but you will be stopped

and find and you'll have a record let's speak common sense have you ever been to city hall on the

weekend if I come on the weekend and come into my office I'm watching people do fentanyl right

out front out here yet they're not being held accountable for Kaplan I'm sorry respect this chamber

please do not shout out sir thank you I just want to thank you mayor I just want to create equity

because if we're going to go after people smoking cannabis we should go after people smoking

fentanyl and fentanyl is killing people at a rate that we absolutely know and if we're talking

about like disparity there is disparity because you can go to a bar and drink alcohol you can't go

to a bar and imbibe right now or eat cannabis we're treating it as separate and that's not the

core of who we are as a city as a city we are talking about how do we create that equity and I

got to tell you it's a choice if you are a homeowner and you smoke at home I will tell you my

neighbor across the way tried to put their house on the market for a year I walked in just to

check it out and I got high just by walking in um it was so steeped in their walls that they

would have to strip the paint and redo it but that is a choice of the homeowner and guess what as a

homeowner nowadays you need money to buy it again creating a disparity that if you have a home

you can make that choice and rightfully so for the landlords who are renting you do not want

people smoking inside because it sticks to the walls and you have to repaint so we have a system

that is already set up for inequality and equity and I agree with council member my van

two truths can be true at the same time and that is an absolute truth and I think you know we as a

city guess what we don't if this doesn't pass people are still going to be doing it we're not

making it safer for kids and renters um they may just start going to the parks if people aren't

being held accountable for smoking fentanyl why should then people fall the law and not smoke in

our public parks and our public places it's it's I just want to infuse some common sense because

guess what it's already happening so why not use this as a way in a pilot program to how to

instill in a limited pilot program best practices if we do prove this with type one and type two I am

open because I think in a pilot program we should not have them all within the same vicinity should

they be a half a mile or a mile apart because there shouldn't be concentration in one area I

believe you have to look at at a balance with with a with a pilot key indicators if this does

go through we do need to start gathering the data and what is that data and I would want to hear

that come back when you come back you complete the fee study then we should come back with key

indicators of looking at crime and public health and how do we partner and as there been increase in

usage what educational features have worked I am appreciative of knowing with the state law that

our union partners would be employees but we have to realize when you are 21 it is a choice

we can talk about good behavior bad behavior but it is a choice that is going to exist no matter what

and by the way we're not the first one and Sacramento likes to be a leader so I think it's time we

try this out knowing that we have the power that if something really bad goes wrong we can undo this

as a council so once again I am supportive of the pilot program and the next steps I think we have

to listen people are doing this so let's provide them a safe space that is now equitable.

Thank you very much council member Gettah thank you Mayor appreciate the time first I do want to

thank everyone who has spent the time to participate and be engaged in this conversation and I never

thought I'd spend this much time when I first ran for council in 2015 discussing cannabis because

it has been a big issue and frankly you know if when I look at this of the 215 permits that are

in the city I think 146 are in my council district and so I've worked very much in detail in this

whole process about how the industry evolves and safety and thinking about this in a rational

way has been the constant issue about how we move forward so bottom line one I do want to thank

the folks here who came here as patients who see this as an opportunity for them to address

their needs and I have a lot of sensitivity to those needs but when I look at the testimony and we're

supposed to make a decision based here on the testimony of what we've received the common theme comes

to two things number one those that have been pushing in support and I rank through this are

business owners who want to see their business grow it's and it the list is long and they see this

as an opportunity for their growth in fact that was the the common theme this is our way for our

industry to grow this is a way we can make more money we can't make more money during the other way

and so it's a financial choice it's a financial decision and those who came into the industry made

a decision to go into it before we even had the conversation of consumption loss the opposition

primarily primarily has been from those concerned about public health and let's talk about I think

the facts here the facts that I meant proposed and I want to go back to Dr. Schicks from the the

School of Medicine of the University of California San Francisco which is the leading premier

institution UC Davis Medical Center would probably argue that as well who's in front but

but mentioned the the rates and how different cities have different rates of smoking and what they've

done for those rates of smoking and those have to do with the actions of the city

we've taken a bit a significant action to address that to address the issues affecting with how

we encourage or normalize or not normalize smoking period and the the issue about a pilot program

whether it's three years we know that public health we don't the that those health effects aren't

in a three-year period or five-year period in fact it took us decades to address those issues

and bottom line today's action and ordinance is about whether the city of Sacramento moves forward

with recreational smoking lounges that's that's what we're discussing here and recreational

smoking lounges under the restrictions of the state which are in dispensaries and when you look

at where dispensaries are let's talk about equity they're in South sack and in North sack

there are some in district four and only recently and the restrictions there's none in the Thomas

there are none in the pocket there's none in the Sacramento there are the reality is that

that this is where when we talk about equity and distribution please

and the majority correctly so you know so we so if we want to lay those issues but I want to I

want to circle back to again what we've heard from Dr. Donald Lyman I think who was an author

and prop. 64 I think the efforts that we've done is to address criminalization and to make sure that

we remove that stigma but it's the issue here about smoke lounges which is the the most concerning part

I mean you heard in the testimonies from the last two hearing hearings Dr. Lynn Silver from the

public health institute say this is sending the wrong signal after many years of encouraging

not only youth but adults to make good decisions now local governments and state governments have

taken that action to say hey we need to do that to make good decisions we heard from Dr.

Lyman from the American Academy of Pediatricians also pediatrics the people the doctors who take

care of our kids say this this is sending the wrong signal and creating the wrong encouragement

to create healthy habits second Jamie Morgan for the American Heart Association also

said that this is sent going in the wrong direction for Sacramento none of them opposed

of said that they opposed prop 64 auto magden for the American Cancer Society also testified

in opposition clearly smoking of any time smoking whether it's from you know forest fires cigarettes

or cannabis becomes an issue and even first five first five who is helping our kids has come out

and testified and rent a rental letter saying you know even though they're tied to revenue that affects

their their way to support children that that they oppose also the issue of smoke lounges again why

because even the American society of of of heat and heat and air and refrigeration work engineers

the people who actually designed these systems have said in in their letter and in their research

that there is no safe level we heard from the doctors yesterday who work at hospitals and use

negative pressure they use those systems again and testify that you'd have to have a multi-layered

level system to be able to address those impacts again we're looking at a pilot program to allow

and continue the move of smoking and yes there have been issues about you know well you know

there whether or not someone who rents can't smoke well we don't allow many many many places we

don't allow in hotels now smoking in hotels that's a state law now that was recently passed for a good

reason not only because it affects other people who don't want to be exposed to smoke and that's

why we we received the letter from Americans for non-smoking rights people who are affected by people

who are walking around but because smoke is so damaging it's damaging to the point where you have

to have experts to come and clean up smoke that's why you can't sell a home from a someone who is

smoked and we know that that because it's dangerous and it's and it and it creates harmful effects

to the lungs so it goes back to the point about what message do we want to send do we want to

normalize smoking or not now the concern was well maybe well we can't smoke outside or walk around

in parks well that's clearly because THC is also creates impairment to people and that and in

an essence it's different there's no question that tobacco and cannabis are two different things

there's no question about that the question that we have as a council is do we want to allow a

pilot program that normalizes smoking a pilot program that when Sacramento in our in our area as

we drive the numbers down of people smoking of any kind and in fact those cigar lenses I agree

with councilmember vang I'm they're they're non-conforming uses and and I and if they were to close

I don't see us ever opening another cigar lounge in Sacramento now if they're done in Cassino's

in sovereign tribal land that's their prerogative but in Sacramento you know I don't see us opening

another smoke lounge like that so it comes down to the point here about what is our what is the

message that we're trying to say send and that is that smoking is dangerous we spent 40 years and

I appreciate you know those that have testified that have said that you know we spent 40 years

dispelling the myths and we heard them today again today this is natural this is okay no there's

there there are uses and applications for everything but one thing we have known over and over again

and particularly Sacramento that it's a federal line of team and zone we've known over and over again

is that smoking and second hence move and even third hence move is detrimental so should we be the

ones to pilot public health or the danger to public health that is the big difference the

constitutionality of of it what and Prop 64 passing was to address the criminalization of it

but as a city should we be going back on our efforts I'm very proud of the work that we've done

as a city in our staff and our co-offices to to look at you know those who have been going after

in selling cigarettes or you know to minors and getting rid of all of the you know flavor tobacco

that was targeting our community and targeting Latino and African American communities but we

see those again downstocked in Boulevard you'll see a big sign that says you know can'tine

cannabis again it's the issues of targeting specific communities I don't see them on full

some Boulevard in East Sacramento I do see them in the South area I will end by saying that

you know the facts are clear I mean we saw testimony from what is happening inside a cannabis

lounge that was the the data that was presented to us the dangers of that and people who are adults

and choose to go to that that's you know as one thing but you even heard from folks that someone's

got to go in there and deal with the residue and then the city after that has to go out on

an enforcer and to my understanding we don't even have staff on our city that can that manages

air quality that's an entire purview for another area is that correct the assistant city manager

that is correct so even with the the lack of personnel lack of enforcement so when we made the

decision and this is how again it goes back to the issue of smoking not the issue of cannabis when

we made the decision to ban to ban flavor tobacco in Sacramento we made it with a conscious decision

that it would cost us tax revenue the argument today of something that we're not even collecting

is that oh we're going to miss out on tax revenue we took a tougher stance against smoking

when we knew it was going to affect our general fund because we knew that the public health

was a major priority I ask my members of the council to think about that message that we're

sending today as we regardless of what happens today I think what's important is that we take

every safeguard moving forward to ensure that that's the first thing that we that we protect

the safety of the public that's our bottom line of our of our city and they shouldn't be driven by

whether or not it's a deficit or whether some business needs to make money it needs to be made

by the decision of what message and I hope that in the future when they when we look at the statistics

of smoking rates in different cities that our city is in the smallest area the smallest number

of percentage of people who are smoking because it is detrimental to public health so I'll stop

there and say I want to thank everyone who who testified and who's participated in in this conversation

and I urge my colleagues as I've made before that as a matter of public health I urge a novo.

Thank you so much council member Gettin for all the time and effort

thought you put into this Mayor Pro Tem Telemontis.

I just thank you so much to all the speakers that came out today I'm really enjoyed hearing

what you have to say and to my council colleagues like a robust discussion and I mean a really

good one to have for me I mean I just want to say we we banned smoking in businesses because

secondhand smoke causes cancer and other diseases public health experts are telling us that

smoking cannabis produces many of the same toxins as smoking tobacco and for that reason I will

be voting no today. Thank you council member Jennings. Thank you Mayor and thank my colleagues for

their comments on this and all of you in the audience who have come and spoke out on this

overwhelming number of people who wanted to voice their opinion and we heard everything you said

and so I thank you for coming out today. I'm in support of a pilot program for on-site consumption.

I sat here for a long time trying to figure out whether or not the five-year period of time

was too much for a pilot program and I tried to figure out whether she'd be less or whether she'd be

more or whether it was the right number and I think in listening to the entire discussion between

yourselves and my colleagues appear I came up with the fact that it is the right number because

when we decided to go to the core centers and to legalize marijuana I mean cannabis when we

decided to do that we also needed to make sure that there was a legal place to be able to smoke it

or consume it and never whatever way you wanted to do so. So a lot of the conversation that we're

having today I'm sure we had when we first talked about legalizing cannabis but we didn't think

it all the way through to the fact that if you have a business and you're selling cannabis and

you're selling products of cannabis that you should be able to expand your business in any way

necessary and if I were in the business right now I would make sure that we expanded it to

the lounges because that would give the people a place to be able to smoke without having to smoke

at home and in front of their kids or maybe they couldn't even smoke at home because they lived in

an apartment that doesn't allow you to smoke and so we've already many of us have already had that

conversation but I'm very much in favor of the five years now because it gives us the ability to

study the impact of what we're doing it gives us the ability to make sure that the ventilation systems

are the right ventilation systems to control the smoke it gives us the ability to create a safe

place for people to smoke and they don't have to feel like they're being criminalized

for smoking they have a safe place to go it gives us the ability to educate and create an education

system so that the next generation maybe makes a different decision than the current generation

is making or makes the same for that part it gives you a safe place to medicate and so

I'm not a user of cannabis it's not something I do but if I were it would put me in

odd situation as to where I'd be able to do it and do it comfortably and so for that reason I'm

support of the pilot program and making sure that the pilot program for the next five years gives

us enough education in order to be able to go forward thank you councilmember Jennings

those of you who are counting votes at home

you know that it comes down to the man in the middle seat here so before I express my opinion I

actually want to ask a couple questions I don't want to ask them through staff and also through

vice mayor maple and councilmember valance wail I think you know for the two sort of been the two

lead proponents here when and you've been working on this for several years but as you have

tried to define the scope of a pilot we have up to 40 dispensaries correct that would be eligible

for for for this quote pilot was there any excuse me was there any thought given to potentially

starting with a smaller pilot like ten of the dispensaries instead of all 40 because if we are

trying to assess as councilmember getta said the benefits and the risks why not start smaller than

opening this up to 40 dispensaries all at one time so there's two factors around not having a

number limit one is that a lot of dispensaries won't have space to do this onsite so by limiting

it to onsite we're already naturally limiting the number of dispensaries who would be able to do it

you know what I'm sorry do we know I will have to defer to staff if they have any deeper analysis

on that the other point is that most dispensaries are probably not going to do type two because that

ventilation requirement is quite expensive and so we didn't want to get too particular because we

thought about maybe by district maybe total number like that's all been discussed and it was such

an imperfect that we said well why don't we just see what happens and both in reason within these

parameters of the ordinance but yeah right well councilmember bill did you want to add anything to that

so let me ask that question then of staff how many of the well how many dispensaries do we have now

I know we permitted we have 40 slots but 30 slots and 35 you need to put on your right 35 are currently

permitted 35 and other the 35 and even taking the next five up to 40 how many of them have the

space for the type two permit we haven't done that analysis so we don't know but the type two they

would also need the ventilation as well I understand we don't know how that's another requirement but

you don't know the space okay well again I'm no criticism I would appreciate I would love if we

had that information because I would actually love to know the scope of the pilot here because I

am sensitive to what councilmember getta and vang and Tao have expressed about geographical equity

here right so if we were to say for example that in district six and I don't know how many dispensaries

do you have Eric ten third of them well little less now at 40 so you know you wouldn't I know what

your position is in respect it but I might feel a little bit better here if we were to say that

okay in district six where there's a disproportionate number that the pilot is limited to x number

out of the ten I mean I so that's what I'm trying to explore here whether or not there is a match

between who might be ready to do it and and what it is we permit here's the second question

which you're going to comment to your question on the dispensary issue in the permit go ahead

sure yeah so the here you know having had so many dispensaries yeah and and been through this

process I want you to also take into the consideration the staff is proposing you know going changing

the permitting process so that we don't have CUPs and changing title 17 means that it becomes

administrative a lot of the dispensaries when they were approved there were people who didn't like

cannabis but said hey look people are adults if they want to purchase it at a dispensary and go

home and use it that's fine talk to a lot of neighbors who that's not their cup of tea but you

know people are adults what they do at their house is they don't think the issue here becomes if

the process moving forward does a bait and switch where it's an issue of transparency for the

neighbors who were not objecting to a dispensary because it was in a place of consumption with there's

a reason why we regulate bars and liquor stores differently what we're doing now here is we're

creating an opportunity to marry those two positions now it's not unlike you know I'm not saying

that it doesn't occur but it's not unlike say a vineyard or even a brewery that produces

in cells and does that but during the permitting process of of allowing those dispensaries that was

not open to the to the public to weigh into those considerations so take that and do I do take

that and I you know I know that the old call-up provisions were controversial maybe didn't work so

well for an individual council member to be able to call something up but I'm just wondering

and I said this is the way again democracy works everybody we have these public discussions we don't

have a vine closed doors here this is the way it it really works so I hope you appreciate it and

this the only opportunity I have to talk to my colleagues and I guess I'm kind of the deciding

votes I want to be I want to be very thoughtful about what it is I do so thank you for your

patience is there any analog to a call-up that would allow for example a council member getta to

be able to say well in my district it's not fair to have 10 consumption lounges by virtue of

the way it works versus another district is there a way that you can think of to at least give

any of the council members who have expressed their reservations some limit on the number of

consumption lounges that's an interesting question the changes councilman Rivera are referencing

haven't come to this body yet and so I think the whether or not we moved to staff level what sort of

call-up there are could be a discussion when those changes come forward because I think the

disproportionality and concentrations in district two and six are concerning to all of us I think I

have five dispensaries in the new district four if I'm counting in my head correctly and so I

yeah I mean we talked about whether or not there should be a cat like I'm fine with all the

dispensaries in my district doing it frankly because they're spread out enough but I yeah I mean

I'm worried about us putting adding an additional requirement on top of what will already be a

costly temporary program so I don't they wanted to discuss like reasonable caps or something like

that I mean I know council member Kaplan suggested the court half mile buffer idea of like if

somebody else does it I mean obviously then it would just prefer I mean then you're balancing

the equity concerns right and it might not be as quick as like a traditional participant to

apply and so would they lose out just because someone else got there first I mean it's hard to

know how to cut this you know so let me ask another question where there may be an obvious answer

here but I want to put it out there anyways which is that you know the difference between type one

doesn't seem controversial I understand type one in and of itself isn't of interest to

the community I understand that I heard that through the testimony but has there been any

exploration of whether type two could be permitted in an outdoor space adjacent to adjacent to

the dispensary itself as opposed to an indoor space it was discussed I believe some cities and

I'll let staff some other cities in California allow that but I think the concern was again because

some of these dispensaries are in residential areas you wouldn't want you know drift smoke to be

happening into the nearby area which is why we kept the enclosed indoor type two but as far as I

know the negative pressure the negative pressure stuff works pretty well on this changing so that

was the idea anything you want to add on that I just want to I just want to speak careful

one of the issues that we've run into in general we discuss this a lot in line ledges it relates

to the cannabis issue but I think it might be true of other policy areas in the city is when we

create arbitrary restrictions so like let's pick an arbitrary number or a space requirement it

creates other challenges and some of those are equity challenges and so I you know I'd really

just caution against that for for almost anything that we need to be really tight to something concrete

I think we already have well I guess I have a question for staff if we were to move forward with

this today there would be a process by which those who are interested in pursuing a cannabis

consumption knowledge that they're already licensed to spencery that's apply for it is that correct

that's correct and what's the approval what's the excuse me I'm sorry what would be what would be

the approval process for the individual dispensary so they would be so they would be looking at

a modification so we would condition the storefront permit so they would apply for a modification

and they meet specified requirements and that is something in the staff report that we've outlined

of what those requirements would be okay here's the key question under what you contemplate

would a council member or the full city council have the ability to review that that decision to

grant a permit I think I would ask the city attorney to comment on that

with the council be able to comment on whether not not comment to prove in other words is this a

perm is this a discretionary permit of some kind that that would like do you need like a CUP

right mayor we're asking like well as you have a dispensary they already have a conditional

use permit on the property it's I understand with the modification with the

not not that it automatically comes to the city council we're not trying to put more process

for process sake but would a modified permit process allow a city council member who did not want

this in his or her district to to have it be reviewed there isn't anything like that in the ordinance

right now yeah that that's not how it's set up in the ordinance right now I guess my question so

from the staff perspective we're going to regulate however council wants to regulate it my

question would be if that's if that's legal then that's a policy decision for the council

okay I just don't know that so let's acknowledge that in three weeks there's going to be somebody

else in the seat and he or she may or may not have a different opinion than me and there will also be

other new members here too so when this comes back with the regulatory process that will be a

new question for a new city council so here's where I'm at okay and and the makers of the motion

can can consider my point of view on this usually in public life my heart and my head merged

together pretty well and and this is one of the rare instances where they where my heart and head

are not are not together and this may not be the most important thing we've considered over eight

years but I've been one of the most difficult decisions that I face because I because I want to do

the right thing and here's what my heart says to me my heart says my heart is sort of with council

member Gatta which says that every public policy move decision we make ought to further restrict smoke

that's my and I have been if you look at my long public record with the Lung and Heart Association

be the California my entire life I've been at so many rallies and so many taken so many votes

limiting and restricting and prohibiting tobacco that's and so that's where my heart is at

and here's where my head is at when I actually take the arguments that the opponents have made

here which have been very good arguments and then I and I and I rebut them in my own head

the no argument does not stand does not stand up for me and I'm not done

it it it just doesn't and it's I'm I'm really torn about it and the reason is is actually the

inconsistency in the way our society treats different substances in our city of course we it's

true we we prohibit flavored tobacco and and and and the selling of of other tobacco type products

we allow cigar lounges which I think occurred before before I got here so we're inconsistent

and so there's no way to really apply then a consistent standard and I'm compelled by something that

vice mayor maple said which is that in 2016 the voters of California right wrong or indifferent

and people have obviously different opinions of them this but by a pretty overwhelming majority

said that cannabis it should be legal they even elevate to a constitutional right and yes

one of the main motivations behind that was to decriminalize it that's true but it was also to

allow it to be used not just for medicinal purposes but recreationally and then the city of

course took the next step and before I got here and began the process of regulating and legalizing

cannabis and there are a lot of challenges here including the taxation and all that

but that's the road that we've taken and and yes we have positioned some of our significant

public policy around youth investments on on growing this fund and so when I think about it

the way that our current law is applied and I think the thing that maybe convinced me the

convinces me the most is the differentiation between renters and homeowners how is it that how

is it that people in one type of housing are restricted in many instances from being able to

consume a legal product when those who own homes are not and then you get to this issue of you know

we know that there's a huge underground economy when it comes to cannabis grows and and and sales

and all but what about the underground economy around consumption the fact that people are doing it

as somebody said and what about the anomaly of a renter who has kids at home being legally allowed

to smoke the product but not obviously for obvious reason not wanting to do it in front of their

young children and so I don't really like my position here because it doesn't feel that comfortable

to me but when I think about it intellectually it's like the only place I can get to and maybe the

first time in my life or career that I will have gone against any of the public health advocates who

are fighting for a cleaner and safer city but I want a condition here and I'm not going to

pre suppose what that condition should be vice-mier maplett because I don't want to do that on the

fly and by the way the next mayor may have a completely different opinion and want to go yes

no or otherwise and so my condition may be meaningless but for today in terms of my vote to move

this forward I would like the intent to be that when the when the staff brings back the regulatory

structure for this that they include some conditions that allow a council member some ability to

call this a particular a particular application up to the city council and for there to be some

limitation not the full 40 but some limitation recognizing some of the geographic equity and

inequity issues that at least four of my colleagues have raised here today I'm not going to

pre suppose what those should be but that's that would be the intent of the motion and the intent

of what ought to come back if you're willing to add that to the motion and the second

I'm willing to vote yes on on on today's action

oh thank you but I don't you want to gather don't want any of that thank you we're just we're

all just trying to do our jobs the best that we can thank you mayor since you so clearly articulated

your point I'm happy to accept that as part of the motion accept as well thank you

mayor of a clear frank question please and this is for the city attorney is is there

can in the because this is in ordinance form can or do you see a real way to add the call-up provision

in this motion here now or as you've heard the motion as I understand the motion it's direction to

staff to include that when they bring it back with the regulatory aspects that's that's the motion

not we're not adding anything to the ordinance today it is not today no but I do want but I do want

and again it recognizing new council may change it all but for this purpose of this motion the intent

is the record will reflect that the staff is to bring back some provisions that address the equity

in terms of less than 40 that's clear in my in my my amendment to that there be some

limitations based on geographical equity with under 40 and three what was three

and that there's and that there be some ability for a member to call the application up those

are my three there's are my three conditions to clarify this as I understand it again because two

times is better than one so we did in the original motion we did make a change to the ordinance

language regarding some conditions for premises but now what the motion includes is when you

come back to us because you have to come back after the fee study before you can start charging

people to do this that you would include the provisions that the mayor has named um yes thank you

and that the future council will decide what that looks like we get it okay I think we have a motion

amended motion uh and a second please call the roll thank you council member Kaplan

council member tal mayor pro tem telementes no council member valanceuela yes vice mayor maple yes

council member gatta no council member jennings yes council member vang no and mayor steinberg yes

we we still have we still have more city business here I would ask everyone to please

if you not here for the next item to please leave quietly

the motion that

we're going to take three minutes three minutes

the

Okay, let's get to the next item relatively quickly, which is the tenant protection ordinance.

Please.

Need everyone?

Go ahead.

Peter.

Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council.

I am Peter Lee.

I'm your code and housing enforcement chief.

Today I would like to present on the tenant protection and relief act and staff's recommendation

for minor modifications to the ordinance.

On August 13th, 2019, City Council adopted the addition of chapter 5.156, the tenant

protection relief act.

The program was established to assist residential tenants with increased rental rates by establishing

set limits on annual rent increases for certain properties and to provide protection from

unwarranted lease term nations for long term tenants, also known as just cause evictions.

Following the City's housing element, H2 5, to raise awareness for tenants and landlords

of the requirements, the rights to afford it to them under the program.

The City collected data to review the effectiveness of the program, staff conducted outreach

and interviews with interest groups along with surveys.

And we'll use this data collectively and considering any future changes that would strengthen

the effect of effectiveness of our current ordinance.

So on October 15th, 2024, the law and legislative committee reviewed suggested minor modifications

to the ordinance and improved bringing the minor modifications of the ordinance to the full

council for review and adoption.

Staff is recommending three minor amendments to the current ordinance.

These amendments are reflected in the sub-nob materials for your today's agenda packet.

These are to define the substantial repairs and to be consistent with the state law.

Number two, to clarify the requirement to complete an annual registration and pay the annual fee.

And number three, to extend the sense date of the current ordinance of December 31st, 2024,

to December 31st of 2029.

The five year extension will allow for the implementation and education programs for tenants and landlords,

consistent methods for data collection and reporting of additional time considered further amendments

to increase the effectiveness of the ordinance.

If approved today, the effective date of the ordinance will be December 19th, 2024, before our

sunset date, which will change ordinance five dot 156150.

That concludes my presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Obviously, we got testimony.

Go go.

I have three speakers on this item.

Aaron Teague, Kaylee Olgerson, and Matt McDonald.

Good afternoon, Mayor Steinberg and Council.

Aaron Teague on behalf of the Sacramento Association of Realtors.

Kaylee supports staff's recommendation to extend the program for five years to collect additional information,

collect more data, and provide more education for the tenants and property owners.

This new extension allows a local ordinance to align with state law while providing some stability to the current program.

We appreciate working with staff to find a balanced approach to continuing this ordinance.

Realtors are committed to our ongoing partnership with city staff to provide education for our members

on both the tenant protection program and the rental inspection program.

As a community, we want to balance tenant protections with the well-being of the housing market.

Notably, the survey indicates that most property owners in our city own between one to three properties,

underscoring the local nature of these investments and the role in supporting our local economy.

Please remember that costs associated with housing such as property taxes and insurance continue to rise.

It is imperative that we create an environment where our local housing providers can continue to operate.

The balanced approach that we have achieved here today is crucial.

The regulatory environment becomes too onerous capital investment and housing will decline adversely impacting the market.

If landlords are unable to afford their property maintenance, they will refrain from investing in their units and surrounding communities.

This can lead to a decline in our overall quality of life for all residents.

Ultimately, we must continue our efforts to create more housing and create a feasible pathway to home ownership,

and we look forward to working together with you on that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Aileen?

Good evening, Mayor, Council members and city staff.

My name is Kayleigh Olderson, and I'm here on behalf of the Sacramento Metro Chamber and the member businesses that we represent within the city of Sacramento.

We applaud the diligent work of the city and the council on ensuring that there is a robust and balanced tenant protection program in place.

We support staff's recommendation to extend the sunset date of the tenant protection program by five years to continue to use generated data for supporting residents and businesses in our growing community.

The current program has seen success in allowing additional housing to be built in an in demand with the growing region, which in turn has been working to stabilize the Sacramento rental market.

Additionally, creating an opportunity for educational efforts will be greatly beneficial in aiding the communities understanding of the program for both tenants and landlords.

We urge the council to approve the staff's recommendation today, and the Metro Chamber is eager to be a continued partner to ensure the success of the tenant protection program.

Thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to comment today.

Thank you, your comments. Matt McDonald, is there a final speaker on the site?

Good afternoon.

Matt McDonald with the California Department Association, representing over 60,000 members statewide in more than 3,000 in the Sacramento area.

As we said when TPP came before the Law and Legislation Committee, our preference is that TPP would expire at the end of the year and let the city fall under the common statewide standard set by AB 1482.

However, we also recognize the City of Sacramento has invested a great deal of effort and energy into the creation and maintenance of TPP.

We also appreciate that a five year extension aligns with the expiration of AB 1482 and that there will likely be a wholesale reassessment of the state of rental housing leading up to that.

The council does extend TPP for an additional five years.

We reiterate the need for additional public education on renters rights and the gathering of statistically reliable data.

We stand by what we said on repeated occasions that CAA will assist the city in renter education wherever possible.

We look forward to working with you to expand education on the issue and work in cooperation with city efforts.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments, Mary.

I have no more speakers.

Thank you so much. Turned over to the members. Councilmember Valenzuela just went through the long-ledged.

It did. And happy to see it here today. Have a lot more we'd love to do, but I will take a five year extension. So move the item.

Moved in second to Councilmember Getta and then Councilmember Tao.

Great. Thank you very much. I just wanted to thank staff and all the partners for working on this and, you know, and for my colleagues on the, on the long-ledged committee for extending it to five years.

I think that sets us up in a good position to also be very vocal when the state timeline comes back as well.

And I wanted to also with this motion, little direction to our staff, I guess, when an SHRA comes back and when we meet it as a housing authority, I want to bring up the issue of education and renters education.

The 2-1-1 program now is become our hotline. So, but I know that program is limited. We're throwing a lot on 2-1-1. So I need to, I want to figure out how we do the hotline issue as well.

So if we could add that to our next upcoming issue and then finally appreciate moving this forward because it does provide staff that's been working on on the TPP some stability.

I know the 1-year program gives a little bit of hesitance for staff that are there, whether their job is going to be here for another year.

But the fact that they were able to be able to go after some really bad landlords and provide some relief and stability for the renters in a number of cases.

I just want to thank your team, Peter, for going out there. And I'll take up CAA's offer and the realtor's offer to work on education, both on renters, rights and responsibilities.

And also landowners rights and their responsibilities. So thank you, Mr. Mayor. Appreciate the supporting.

Thank you. Of course, Councillor Patel.

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to thank Peter and a long-life committee for bringing this forward, again, this renewal. I just wanted to share a success story of TPP and my district.

And it does go in their favor so that they know how to seek assistance when that's needed. And so I would just like to know that in there. Thank you.

Thank you. You know, this one probably deserves a lot more time because it's really that important. And you know, it's a lot that went into it.

Members of the public, we are going to clear chambers.