Okay, we're going to call this meeting to order of the Sacramento City Council on July 1st,

2025 at 2 p.m. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll to establish a quorum?

Thank you. Council Member Kaplan.

Here.

Council Member Dickinson.

Here.

Vice Mayor Talamantes is expected momentarily.

Council Member Plekibon.

Here.

Council Member Maple.

Here.

Council Member Jennings.

Here.

Council Member Vang.

Here.

I expect the Mayor McCarty momentarily and Mayor Potem-Getta.

Here.

Okay, we have a quorum.

Okay, Madam, Council Member Kaplan, could you help us with the land acknowledgement and Pledge of Allegiance?

Absolutely.

If you're able, please rise.

For the opening acknowledgments in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land.

The Nisanon people, the Southern Maidu, the Valley and Plains Miwok, the Putwin-Wintoon peoples, and the people of Wilton Rancheria, Sacramento's only federally recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people that came before us and still walk beside us today on these ancestral lands.

By choosing to gather today in the active practice of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous peoples' history, contributions, and lives, please remain standing for the pledge.

Pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you so much, Council Member Kaplan.

City attorneys, is there anything to report out from closed session?

There is nothing to report.

Okay, thank you so much.

Moving along to items on consent calendar.

And Vice Mayor, I do have a read to the record.

Item 19 on the consent calendar is being withdrawn and will not be voted on this afternoon.

Okay, thank you so much.

So we have Council Member Vang, what item?

What was the item that the city clerk was withdrawn?

19.

Okay.

I'd like to pull item 18 for comments in a separate vote.

Okay.

Council Member Dickinson?

Oh, thank you.

What item?

Just a brief comment on items 4 and 13.

Okay.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Council Member Maple?

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Item, comments on item 3, item 8.

And then comments and a separate vote on item 18.

Thank you.

Okay.

And then Mayor Pro Tem Guerra?

Thank you.

Brief comments on item number 3.

Okay.

And Council Member Kaplan?

Brief comments on items 5 and 12.

And I concur with my colleagues as separate vote on item 18.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

So we will start with Council Member Maple on item 3.

And then we will go to Council Member Dickinson on item 4.

And once we're done with Council comments, we will do a public comment.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Vice Mayor.

So for item number 3, I'm really excited.

And I want to congratulate staff, as always, for all your hard work and making sure that we get these grant opportunities.

They make a real difference in our communities.

And so this is a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant that's being awarded for a segment of Fruit Ridge Road.

It is one of the more dangerous roads in the city.

I actually live very close to part of this area.

And I can tell you the constituents who live in my area are deeply concerned about the safety of Fruit Ridge Road for themselves, for their children and beyond.

And so I'm really excited about this planning grant and just really want to thank the staff, especially Jennifer Donlin-Wyatt and Jeff Jelzma for all your hard work.

Thank you so much.

Council Member Dickinson on item 4.

Thank you.

I just wanted to make a quick comment, much along the same lines as Council Member Maple, about the importance of this project.

And note that this area is one of the Vision Zero top 10 corridor members and is on the Vision Zero high injury network.

There have been too many pedestrian fatalities and others in this area.

So starting in on this work is particularly critical.

And so I'm very pleased to see this come to us and we'll get the planning done.

Then we'll get the construction done and it'll all be done within I see Jennifer out there six months.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Council Member Kaplan, item 5.

Thank you.

I just want to quickly point out as I've been want to do specifically for liquid chlorine,

which is what we use to disinfect our drinking water over the last three plus years.

We've seen 161% increase in the cost.

It now costs us $2.2 million.

It's absolutely essential.

But in light of how we talk about our budget deficit and what's going on,

I think it's good to provide this context.

And knowing that sodium hypochlorite, which is disaffecting both drinking water and raised water,

has gone up 211% over the last several years.

So just calling out that we're seeing huge amounts of increase in our chemicals and supplies needed,

yet, you know, we're not getting an increase in offset for that,

contributing to part of our budget issues.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

And sorry, Council Member Guerra, item 3.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

No, this item 3 is very exciting.

The Fruit Ridge Safety Improvement Project from Power Inn,

particularly all the way down to the,

I think it goes all the way down to Stockton Boulevard and Lawrence Park,

as well as Fruit Ridge Manor and the Colonial Village Community.

All of those are affected by the condition.

I mean, it's the roads in terrible condition.

This is not only going to make it safer for current drivers,

but more importantly for pedestrians and bikers.

And there's a school right there, Earl Warren Elementary on Fruit Ridge Road.

And, you know, those students have to get to their elementary school by crossing four lanes every morning.

And so I'm excited about the work that's being done here to improve the safety in that.

And with that, Vice Mayor, I'll go ahead and move the item.

And Council Member Maple on item 8.

Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor.

I just, this is probably the third or fourth time I've spoken on this item at some point,

be it in the Housing Authority or here at Council.

But I think it's important to do one last time because I think this shows just how difficult it can be

to get some of these affordable housing projects done in the city and beyond.

And that's definitely by no fault of any of our staff or anyone else.

It's because we have a really complicated process at the state level, the federal level,

and down into the local level to build it.

And so this is a vacant lot that has been that way for many, many, many years, for decades.

And it has served very little purpose for the community.

It's going to be turned into 100% affordable senior living apartments, 67 units in total,

right along, in Oak Park, right along Stockton Boulevard and 9th Avenue.

It's an incredible project.

And given the complexities of the market changes and everything that's happened over the last couple,

few years, it's been kind of a miracle that everything has come together.

But we know it's not a miracle.

We know it's our incredible staff and your hard work.

And so thank you for making it happen.

And this last tranche of money will hopefully be the last thing that we have to do to get this over the finish line.

So thank you.

Thank you so much.

Councilmember Dickinson, no, Councilmember Kaplan on item 12,

and then Councilmember Dickinson on item 13.

Thank you.

I just want to call out an awesome program that the City of Sacramento helps fund.

It is the Splash Education Program, which goes around to our elementary schools

and does an interactive presentation on stormwater pollution and prevention.

I had the chance with Councilmember Jennings to attend one of these at an elementary school.

And it's really important in this day and age to put it in the context for our young kids' truly understanding

of the human impact of putting trash in what happens in our waterways and climate change.

When that happens, I will say they reached 105 classrooms citywide,

eight elementary schools, and approximately 720 students.

And they also fund field trips to the Vernal Pools and Mather Park to help educate.

So this is just an awesome thing to call out.

Wonderful.

Councilmember Dickinson.

Thank you.

I just wanted to highlight this walkway that's going to be built around mostly the circumference of Wood Lake Park.

It's notable for a couple reasons.

I want to be sure to thank the staff for a lot of work to get to this point.

But there is around Wood Lake Park, no sidewalk.

And so this will add a walking path around the circumference of the park that will be a real addition,

I think, to the utility and desirability of the park.

But the other reason I wanted just to mention it is it's actually coming through funding associated with an affordable housing project

being built just across the street from the park by bridge housing.

So out of this, we're going to get more affordable housing,

and we're going to get the walkway around the park among other amenities.

So it is a real asset in addition to the area.

Thanks.

Thank you so much.

So for the record, item 19 has been continued.

There's been a request for item 18, which is passed for publication, to be pulled and voted on separately.

So if Councilmember Guerra has made a motion, so if we can do a motion just on these items.

Do we have any?

Oh, we're going to do that afterwards.

So there's public comment just on this item.

So I do have one item on item 13.

I have one speaker.

The remainder are on item 18.

Okay, then let's hear item 13.

So Lambert is speaking on item 13.

Then we'll take a vote on the consent calendar with the exception of 18 and 19.

Correct.

That is correct, yeah.

Item 1 through 17.

Can I need a second?

You need a second?

I'll second.

Second.

Okay, wonderful.

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Lambert Davis?

Mr. Lambert Davis, I think we need to put a chair closer for you, right?

Item 13, please proceed.

Okay, item 13.

As a native, everybody up on this rostrum should really pay attention because I'm going to find out if you really are sincere about what's going on here.

Woodlake Park.

Woodlake Park.

As a native, Woodlake Park is the only park I've ever been to that doesn't have restrooms.

Now, that might sound odd, but if you go over to Woodlake Park, you won't see any restrooms.

But I'll tell you what you will see.

You'll see two water fountains.

You'll see children's apparatus.

And you'll see a big baseball park.

Now, if you have all of those bodies there, you would think that there would be a restroom.

You have to have a restroom.

And how I know it's not a restroom, I went by there on my way here.

And they have a homeless problem.

And you have people that are using the restroom.

These are people homeless.

Not to talk about the children that are playing there.

I don't think they should receive any money like that until they get a restroom.

And if you don't go by and look at it, you're complicit as well.

That is called, and we learned that in college, that's called a boondoggle.

And if you don't know what a boondoggle is, you shouldn't be sitting up on that rostrum.

This is a boondoggle.

But I'll tell you what's not a boondoggle.

Where I come from is Hagenwood Park.

And Hagenwood Park has everything I just mentioned.

And the money should go there.

And I'll end by saying, as you see, I'm dressed a certain way.

I was on the road.

And the millennials told me that, and I have a copy of it.

I'm going to leave it with the staff.

The people who were awarded those contracts, it's called a contracting routing sheet.

It's not even complete.

It's not complete.

You're supposed to complete it to receive funding.

That's why you're in a quote-unquote deficit.

Thank you for your comments.

So I have no more speakers on items 1 through 17.

We have a motion by Gera and a second by Vang.

Wonderful.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Abstentions, no's.

Seeing none.

Okay.

So next, we have item 18 that was pulled.

So we will do public comment for this item at this time.

And then we'll do council comments afterwards.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I have 14 speakers.

The first is Carly Herron.

Second is Michael and Ruby Hutnick.

Then Robert, Moyes, Grove.

So please line up in the middle aisle.

Carly.

Carly Herron.

Carly Herron.

Carly Herron.

Carly Herron.

Carly Herron.

Hello.

And thank you for your time.

And thank you for hearing.

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Thank you for hearing me today.

And I was coming in representation of multiple different homeless people.

I run an organization called Elevate SAC where I know over 150 homeless people personally.

So I, they're, and they have told me that they're very concerned, especially about the fees.

So when the fees are going to be implemented for them, either sitting in different places,

sleeping in different places, or not picking up trash and so forth, to, we're just trying

to figure out if there's some possible way that it can be not a criminal, like not criminalizing

the situation that they have further than they're already in the, the situation that

they have to not further criminalize and then further cause them to have situations where

they're clearly not able to pay those fees.

And I am interested in offering other ideas and research if possible at a further time.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Michael and Ruby, Ruby Hutnick.

And Michael, you get two minutes.

And Ruby, you also get two minutes.

All right.

Thank you very much.

Michael Hutnick, District 5.

I've, um, I've come to speak, um, as, as, as collected and calm as I can, because I'm rather

charged up about this issue, because what we have here is people who are entrusted by the

public with power to serve the public, using that power to harm the most vulnerable and those

of us that have the least.

And just as a, as a reminder for some people who think this is a problem that needs to be

solved by sweeps or criminalization, like the previous speaker just mentioned, uh, I want to

remind you that these are people like yourselves.

And the only thing that separates them and you is circumstances that led them to the places that

they are.

They are victims oftentimes of circumstances well out of their control.

And you might say, well, they're alcoholics and they're drug addicts.

That's kind of basic human behavior.

When, when you feel like society has cast you aside and treats you like garbage, you kind

of internalize that and you, you, you numb it.

So placing blame on people and pushing them away and sweeping them under rugs is, is an inhuman

way to do this.

And I would, I would, I would, I would, uh, argue that city hall is the most important place

for these community members to be because people that are, are, are employed to serve the public

need to be looking these people in the eye, talking to these people, finding out what they

need, not saying, go away.

I, I, you make me uncomfortable to look at you.

Some of the, the, the, the arguments put forward is, is public safety that your staff need to

be safe.

If they're assaulted, there are laws that will, that are already in place that you can, that

you can deal with those situations.

But please don't punish these people that are good people that I know personally, solid

people.

Do better.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is Ruby.

Ruby.

I just want to say that.

Stand up straight.

I'm talking to that.

I just want to say that.

It is just get a little close to it.

Okay.

If you want to do this to other people, it's not the right thing to do.

It's, it's kind of like punishing other people.

Like they're children and they're not children.

They're human beings that are alive, that are just people that need to have homes and

need to have things that they need to have that they don't want to live on the streets.

They want to have shelter.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is Robert.

And then Moyes.

Hi, my name is Robert Cantu.

I'm homeless.

I'm one of the people that sleeps here at City Hall.

I'm not just homeless.

I'm also a member of the working class because I am employed.

Although City Hall's two hours walk from where I'm employed, I prefer to sleep here because

it's safer at night.

There's cameras and security.

If you take this away from us, who knows where we're going to go?

It's going to not be safe.

I don't use drugs.

I don't have criminal background.

I have a valid driver's license.

I'm just homeless.

I'm sorry.

Thank you for your comments.

Moyes, then Grove.

Afternoon, Council.

I'm speaking from Sunrise Movement Sacramento.

I want to ground us in a little bit of history, a little bit of a timeline.

When this ordinance was originally passed in 2018, the Sacramento Homeless Union fought

hard on ensuring that people could at least stay overnight.

This is the people's hall, and it offers a sense of safety.

As was just said, it is well lit.

It's just people feel that they can sleep and have a sense of protection.

And this isn't just people talking.

This is grounded in life and death situations.

This was particularly informed by women with experiences of rape or sexual assault and why

they need a place to sleep and feel that they have that sense of comfort and safety.

And yet, the streets of Sacramento are still unsafe to live on, including right here at

City Hall.

There's a history of deaths that took place right outside of that door, right outside

of City Hall, including in May 2024.

The Sacramento Bee has detailed over the course of the past years hundreds of deaths that have

taken place on our streets of our unhoused neighbors, and that tally continues to grow.

A few days ago, just this past Saturday, I wrote this letter to you alarming you about

the deaths that we know are going to happen because of extreme heat, the deaths that we know

are going to happen because of lack of water access in this city.

The very next day, a person, according to the Sacramento Homeless Union, was found dead

in South Sac because they couldn't find water.

They were struggling to find water, and they suffered from heat stroke, and they passed away.

These are preventable deaths.

And this effort is an effort to take away shelter, an effort to take away safety.

It's a matter of life and death.

And we know it.

It keeps happening every year.

And you ran on the campaign, Mayor, of agendizing the discussion of homelessness every city council

meeting by providing solutions.

You're telling people where they can't go, where can they go?

Where can they go?

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is Grove, then Ron Hochbaum.

Hi.

Hello.

Hello, Mayor.

I have not met you yet.

But you actually, you just went to China with my mom, Yen, and my dad, Mike.

But I'm here to talk about this potential ban on sleeping outside of city council.

I just want to say that Sacramento keeps getting smaller and smaller for people who live outside.

You know, there's so many ordinances that have been passed that there's really nowhere for people to go.

So, but City Hall is a place where people do regular distros and people are able to get food and water and needed supplies

and have a place to sleep that's lit, that's covered.

And, you know, it's not ideal.

Someone was talking about how it was kind of unsafe sometimes earlier today.

But ultimately, there's nowhere for people to go.

And, yeah, just people need a place to be able to distribute goods regularly, too.

It reminds me of Camp Resolution, who was evicted last year.

And the folks who live there, who used to live there, are constantly reaching out in need of supplies.

And I never got calls like that when they were living at Camp Resolution

because they just had a place to regularly get those things.

And they had community.

And they were able to get their Social Security checks and their supplies regularly.

And it's kind of the bare minimum.

You know, it's just a parking lot.

But really, people deserve housing, ultimately.

But at the very least, somewhere safe to go.

That is not a carceral shelter with a curfew.

So I just ask that you please stop making Sacramento smaller

and give people a safe, stable place to go.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Ron Hochbaum, then Cassandra Trebello.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ron Hochbaum.

I'm an Associate Clinical Professor of Law at the University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law,

where I teach poverty law and the Bacola Family Homeless Advocacy Clinic.

You are an exceptionally well-qualified and educated group of Sacramentans.

Mayor McCarty has a master's from Sac State.

Council Member Kaplan, a JD from McGeorge.

Council Member Vang, a master's.

And Council Member Dickinson, a JD from UCLA.

Council Members Telemontas and Maple, a bachelor's from UC Davis.

Council Member Pluckybaum, a bachelor's.

And Council Member Garam, a master's from Sac State.

Council Member Jennings, a BA from the University of Maryland.

And because you earned those degrees, I suspect at some point in the course of your education,

you had a professor who taught you how to review the evidence and exercise good judgment.

The proposal before you today is not based in evidence and is demonstrative of poor judgment.

Study after study concludes that fining and arresting people for experiencing homelessness puts them in danger,

obstructs pathways out of homelessness, and frustrates the work of service providers.

The Journal of American Medicine, UCF Benioff Initiative, USC School of Public Policy,

UC Berkeley, and San Francisco State, all of these studies agree fines, arrests, and sweeps are counterproductive.

I'm not naive.

I know that you have limited tools before you.

But this city has pursued these policies for the better part of 20 years.

The verdict is in.

Fines, arrests, and sweeps are a failure, and they make it worse.

So for today, I'm not asking you to solve the crisis.

I'm simply asking you to stop causing harm.

Recommit to good judgment, evidence-based practices, and vote no.

I promise you, make that professor, whoever they may be and wherever they may teach, proud.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is Cassandra.

Following Cassandra is AE.

Hello.

My name is Cassandra Tubiello, and I am a law clerk at the Bucola Family Homeless Advocacy Clinic, run by McGeorge School of Law.

The proposed amendment is a direct attack against one of our community's most vulnerable populations.

Rather than providing a solution to our homelessness crisis we face in Sacramento, this proposed amendment would further criminalize poverty and dehumanize our unhoused people.

While those who work at City Hall are absolutely entitled to a safe, pleasant work environment, the proposed amendment further perpetuates harmful stereotypes surrounding unhoused people.

The vast majority of unhoused people are nonviolent and nonthreatening, though the proposed amendment would further the stigma surrounding this group.

The City Hall building provides an adequate level of safety for a population that otherwise has nowhere else to go.

Acts such as sitting and lying down are essential for everyone's well-being.

Criminalizing these actions for people who don't have the privilege of doing these things within the comfort of their own home is counterproductive and harmful to this already vulnerable population.

It is a basic human right to sit and rest without fear of punishment.

Displacing unhoused people and therefore making them less visible by society is not a solution to our homelessness issue.

This proposed amendment reflects the privilege held by certain people in this community to choose to not see our homelessness issue for what it is.

If our efforts were concentrated more on addressing the factors that often lead to homelessness and creating more spaces for unhoused people to go, society would benefit as a whole.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker is AE, then AJ, then less light.

AE.

Kevin, if you could put your phone down, pay attention to comment.

It would be great.

Hello, members of the Council and Mayor.

I'd like to agree with all of the other constituents urging no's on item 18.

If you look at the wording of the item, it seems really euphemistic and like it's valuing city property over people's survival.

Criminalizing homelessness doesn't make any of us safer, and I'd rather pay more attention to people's safety than the security of the building.

I'd also like to look at the way critical infrastructure is being used as a category here.

This is an unstable category that keeps being expanded and expanded to promote the policing of out-and-house people.

The term started being used on the basis of speculative threats during the Cold War, which was formalized in the 90s, and now has been just continually expanded to allow more and more policing of unhoused people.

I'm going to read a quote from a friend who does research in this area.

He says, quote,

There's also an analysis that someone did of the downtown and midtown areas determining that with all of the restrictions on their ever-expanding critical infrastructure list,

there's literally nowhere in those areas where an unhoused person could rest without risk of fines or arrest.

I want to point out one more line from item 18.

It talks about members of the public being able to use City Council in a reasonable manner.

I'm wondering what this means.

I think it's reasonable to sit down, to lay down, to sleep.

These are things we all do.

These are things we should not be punished for doing.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is AJ, then Les Light, then Wendy Fryer.

Hi, my name is AJ.

I'm a volunteer with the Sacramento Ticket Defense Clinic.

We're a group of community volunteers that represent unhoused individuals routinely sighted for simply trying to survive.

They get tickets for things like camping, existing in places like being in a park after dark,

being unable to afford light rail fares, to get to doctor's appointments and court-ordered visitations,

lighting a fire to stay warm during the winter,

using a shopping cart or even their own personal wagon to move their belongings after being told to move their camp,

having a dog in their control but unleashed,

having a dog tied to a tree is also an infraction.

So just having a dog is an infraction.

I could spend two minutes just listing the infractions that people face.

And people who propose these types of ordinances and this type of enforcement,

more sweeps will say that it's not a crime to be homeless.

But I'll ask, what is the difference when nearly every act tied to surviving homelessness is criminalized?

We are often told that the goal of this type of enforcement is to connect people to services,

yet people are arrested for camping near service providers.

And they're being given stay-away orders from those service providers.

I recently met someone who was released from the main jail, which is three blocks away from City Hall,

and they asked me to help them find shelter for the night.

So I called every provider, every shelter, every respite center.

I called 2-1-1.

I asked every individual that I spoke to,

who I can speak to, to see if they had any solutions for this person.

The best that I could get was that they're going to be put on a list,

no clear timeline for a callback, could be weeks,

and the requirement to call back within an hour's time or lose their spot.

That person understandably walked away from me before I can finish those calls.

And my hope is that despite them not being able to find a home for the night,

being able to find shelter for the night, was that they stayed at City Hall,

because that is the safest option that that person had left.

And this ordinance would criminalize their best last resort for that night.

Thank you for your comments.

Less light than Wendy Fryer.

Hello.

I've never done anything like this before, but...

Hold up.

Let you go ahead.

Go ahead.

Oh, go ahead.

Is that all right?

Okay, thank you.

I just became homeless on June 2nd,

and I've been sleeping on the concrete,

and guys harassing me, trying to sleep by me.

I've seen rats on the ground.

Yesterday, I tried to get some water out of the drinking fountain at Capitol Park,

which is beautiful.

All dried up, and the bathrooms were closed.

Then there's a special event for a music concert,

and they bring out all the porta-potties.

But then we have this one metal toilet that has, like, feces around it.

It's dirty.

It's unsanitary.

But money talks, doesn't it?

Money talks!

Because as soon as we have a money event,

we get all the porta-potties out and suck up to everybody.

The poor people, the homeless people, are treated like dirt.

Why don't you look at another state or another country

who knows how to be a good example to you?

Because you're not taking it seriously.

Because California is the number one state for homelessness.

Sacramento is the fourth.

What is wrong with California?

Get it right.

Because you know what?

The Bible talks about people who turn away from the poor.

There are numerous scriptures in the Holy Word of God in the Bible.

And it's not pleasant what your outcome is going to be

when you just look away from those less fortunate.

You don't know what life is going to do to you.

I called up.

I pressed the button for the city hall.

The toilets have been clogged.

The one toilet that we all have to use, male and female,

was clogged up three times since I've been homeless.

I said, I need to go to the restroom.

Sorry.

Sorry.

Can I help you?

What do you want me to do?

Pee in a cup?

Go behind a blanket?

Go behind a bush?

This is...

What is the vicinity of bathrooms that people can use?

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete.

Our next speaker is Les Light and then Keon Bliss.

Okay.

Les Light and from the Sacramento Valley Tenants Union.

The code or statute before us today is an apparent and...

Well, as many of the hostile actions taken towards those who are unhoused in the city,

but also for its sheer pettiness towards the most afflicted and vulnerable members of our community,

who are your...

Who are your...

Who your general housing policy or lack of housing policy have made so afflicted and so vulnerable.

You need to do the decent thing and stop and desist from this malignant and antisocial behavior.

If the sight and conditions of what you and your real estate and corporate landlord overlords

have inflicted on the ordinary people in the city,

if you find that sight and condition so irksome and objectionable,

then why don't you actually do something to heal the ongoing injury you inflict?

Data shows that in this country there are 28 housing units sitting empty

for every human being who must live unhoused,

even assuming that rate of obscure vacancies is not so acute in Sacramento.

We should assume the housing is to be had.

What you must do then is enact vacancy fees.

What you must do is enact real rent control.

What you must do is take an active role with the other municipalities in this country

in overturning the Faircloth Amendment and building public housing.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Keon Bliss, Justine Kanzer, then Mack.

I have three more speakers.

Keon, Justine, then Mack.

Are you all even listening right now?

Doesn't seem like you are.

I know Lisa isn't.

You know, common sense tells us that communities are safest

when people have what they need to live, not just survive.

That means consistent access to food, clean air and water, stable housing, health care, education,

and most importantly, dignity.

When those needs go unmet, people are pushed to the margins,

forced to make impossible choices as you've heard today.

And that's not a crisis of morality.

It's a crisis of policy.

There is nothing that is natural about poverty or homelessness.

It is entirely, 100%, of policy choice.

And this city, along with countless other cities for the last 40 years,

has insisted on simply fining, arresting, and jailing people

for no other reason than they have nowhere else to go.

And you all, as elected officials representing those,

like all of us, including those people that are unhoused,

simply refuse to have an imagination to give them something else.

There's nothing new about this ordinance.

There's nothing revolutionary about it or original.

It really is just a continuation of policies that we've been gauging in year after year.

I remember this very conversation when, like, old Jim Crow, Jeff Harris,

was on this fucking dais talking about this.

It's clear you don't want homeless people in your sight.

Some of you would probably prefer they don't exist.

But you can't say that because you need to appear humane.

This is about actually providing people the resources they need.

And so far in this ordinance, you're not giving them anything else.

You're not expanding access to city services.

You're not giving them any additional resources to survive.

You're just telling them you can't stay here.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is Justine, then Mack.

Thank you for your comments.

Your time is complete.

Please take your seat.

Your time is complete.

Mr. Bliss, you're in violation of Chapter 5 of the Council Rules of Procedure

by continuing to speak out.

Please take your seat or I'll be asked to leave the meeting.

Please take your seat or you'll be asked to leave the meeting.

Justine, then Mack.

Hello.

My name is Justine and I'm from District 4.

Violations of this proposed sit-lie law are punishable by fines ranging from $250 to thousands

of dollars and up to a year in jail, eliminating any chance of any of these folks making a down

payment for housing in the coming year.

A misdemeanor conviction serves as a barrier to securing a lease and stable employment as

well.

We cannot justify fines, tickets, and arrests of people experiencing homelessness in this

context.

They are not having their basic needs met, including hygiene, sanitation, access to water,

which we consider fundamental human rights.

And if you're concerned about the state of City Hall, since these resources are missing,

maybe we can invest in more public bathrooms.

If we continue pushing unhoused communities to the margins and then proceed to sweep any

of the areas they settle in, we are just exacerbating the homelessness crisis.

And this displacement leads to more desperate and less safe conditions for everyone.

We are already seeing high death rates among unhoused folks due to many factors, including

lack of health care access and pre-existing health conditions.

When one doesn't have a safe place to sleep or a consistent place to bathe or even use

the bathroom, they will have a harder time recognizing any health concerns before they

become life-threatening.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Mac is our final speaker on this item.

My name is Mac and I've been a community organizer in Sacramento for almost over a decade.

I've watched anti-homeless mayor after mayor, including the current one, trying to find ways

to punish poor people and disappear people's lack of access to resource from sight.

And I guess I wonder if you all think that we don't pay attention.

This state just signed a budget trying to find ways to close a $12 billion deficit.

And we all know that money for homelessness wasn't in it.

Y'all just passed a budget that tried to close a $62 million gap.

And because half of that was one-time strategies, we know that vital services, including shelter

beds, will be cut eventually because of nationwide fascist policy and our country's looming bankruptcy

and inevitable recession.

And because we see all of this, I'm always left wondering if the best excuse y'all got

is the good old, they know not what they do.

But considering y'all know how broke we all are and that you've read this policy and are

trying to pass it anyways means that's hard to accept.

You read this policy keeps people from resting in public space.

You read that it doesn't allow people to bring food here for them.

You can see that we don't have enough seating or housing for us all.

And we can all see plainly that this policy will absolutely disappear what you don't want

to see.

And all of this is crazy, not only because this is our publicly funded building, but because

people come to City Hall because your systems have told them that this is where to find salvation

and solution.

When you don't pay attention to the fact that all of these policies have made it illegal

to live outside, then no wonder you don't understand why the hungry are outside your door.

When your anti-homeless policies have scapegoated these folks for years, then it is you who does

not understand the fact that safety comes from stability and access and how far your priorities

and policies are from it.

I mean, shit, the city just dedicated an entire public square in the name of a rich developer

as you developed a policy that cruelly treats and displaces out of public spaces our unhoused

neighbors whose names you don't even care to know.

Y'all should be ashamed of this and should always, again, vote no and always do better.

We are paying attention.

Thank you for your comments.

Vice Mayor, I have no more speakers on this item.

Thank you, City Clerk.

Alrighty, so for members of the public and to my council colleagues, this item is passed

for publication only.

So the actual vote will take place on July 22nd.

Your vote today, we're going to need a motion in a second to be able to pass for publication.

Your vote today is not on the contents of this pass for publication ordinance, but on the

pass for publication.

Correct?

City Clerk?

Is there anything I need to clarify?

That's correct.

The action on the table is really passed for publication.

So you're reviewing an ordinance and then passing for publication per the city charter.

And then the ordinance itself will be considered by the city council on July 22nd.

Can I ask for a point of clarification?

Yes.

Council Member Vang.

Am I allowed, even though it's not, thank you, I see our assistant city attorney queuing

up.

Am I allowed to make comments and provide additional direction on the item if I have questions for

clarification?

Yes, you may do that.

Okay.

And the council still needs to vote to pass this to go next week.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

So first, just want to thank everyone who came today to speak and to share your lived

experiences and whether you're in opposition or support.

I just appreciate y'all showing up here at two o'clock to make your voice heard.

That's really important.

Item 18 in particular, the reason why I pulled it is because it is a city ordinance.

That would ban individuals from sleeping and resting outside of city hall at night between

9 p.m. and 6 a.m.

And while I understand that the item today, we're not going to vote on it, but it's only

passed for publication.

I pulled it because I have some follow-up questions for city staff.

For me, in particular, when I took a look at the ordinance and the edit change to the ordinance,

it doesn't solve the issue of homelessness, right?

And one of the rationale, because I watched Law and Ledge, is that, well, there are other

public facilities, federal and county buildings around us that have similar policies, so we

should do it too.

And my answer to that is just because our federal and county buildings do that doesn't mean

that we should do it.

And it also means that it's not right, right?

Just because county is doing it doesn't mean that the city should do it.

And right now, we know that it's one of the safest places for our unhoused residents.

Everyone deserves a right to sleep somewhere safe, to shelter from the rain and the heat.

And for me, in particular, until we actually have a process in place to ensure that there's

a safe place for an individual to rest, I can't support the current ordinance as it stands

in front of us.

But I know that today is not an actual vote on the ordinance, so I do have some questions

and hoping that staff will have, will provide more additional information for the actual debate

that will happen on the 22nd.

There was four rationale that was given for the ordinance update.

One of the rationale was that the change was needed in order to ensure we have a working

environment for city employees that is free from impediment.

I think one of my first questions is to city staff.

The answer could be yes or no.

And if we have data on that, I would like us to share it publicly or share it in the next

staff report is, have we done a survey with city staff to better understand their safety

concerns?

That wasn't attached to the, you know, the package.

And so I think that's important.

If that is one of the main concern, I think it's important to make sure that we actually

survey city staff to see what they say about that.

The other question I have is how many city hall complaints have we received about encampments

at city hall through 911 and 311?

We also don't have that data in front of us.

And I actually like to request that we have this data before us before we take the vote

on the 22nd.

And so those are a few of my questions for city staff.

If we can have this information, I see interim city manager taking notes.

I think that would be important.

For me, at the end of the day, you know, we are policymakers.

And so we have to ask ourselves, what is the rationale for the policy change?

Does this solve the root causes of homelessness?

And it doesn't.

This policy change doesn't do that.

And so for me, while it is a pass for publication, as it currently stands, the ordinance, I can't

support it.

So for today in particular, while it may pass for a vote on the 22nd, I will be officially

voting no on this item.

Thank you.

Council Member Maple.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to say that I want to align myself with Council Member Bang.

And also when this came to Law & Ledge, I shared some concerns with staff.

There are some questions that I have.

I still have those concerns and questions.

And then after hearing some of the speakers today and doing a little bit of my own research,

I have some additional questions.

And I think, as Council Member Bang mentioned, I would need a little bit more information in

the staff report on the 22nd before I can make a decision.

I'm keenly interested in the data that we have.

Do we know the number of incidents?

Do we know what it looks like?

Do we know how our staff feel?

Do they have concerns about their safety or other issues going in, either coming to or

leaving work in particular?

Do we know how to do that more and how to do that?

And then also, I have questions about the individuals who are experiencing homelessness

and living or sleeping outside of City Hall.

In particular, are there locations nearby that we can easily direct people to on any

given evening?

And I think I know the answer to that.

But it would be really interesting to have that information before this Council makes a

decision.

because as I know and many know that when people struggle,

they don't have transportation.

The shelters and other programming that I know about

tend to be quite a distance from City Hall.

And just the practicality of it all, I need to understand.

So in addition to what are the locations nearby,

what are the services that are available,

what will that outreach look like,

I need to understand what the actual process is.

So who's in charge?

Do we have a police officer or someone from DCR that's going out?

What time do they go out?

How often do they go out?

If someone's asked to leave, what happens if they don't?

Are they cited?

Are they fined?

Is there something else that occurs at that time?

What happens if they leave and then come back?

Are we stationing someone out there all night long

to ensure that people aren't camping

or are we just going out at certain times?

None of that information I understand or know.

I think that's really important,

especially as it relates to citations and fines.

Many speakers mentioned it,

but I think it's also common sense

that if you're in a situation

where you're sleeping outside of the city hall,

you likely do not have the resources to pay a fine.

And you certainly do not want to spend the night in jail

as a result of trying to survive.

And so that's something that I really struggle with.

But I also recognize that

if there are real concerns from staff

about safety at work,

I think we have a responsibility as a council

to make sure that all of the employees

that work at the city of Sacramento feel safe.

And so if the solution that this council comes to

on the 22nd or beyond is something like this,

then a key piece of information that I need

or a question that I have is

what are we going to do to participate in transportation?

So I think about our partners.

I sit on the regional transit board.

I know Councilman Jennings,

the chair of regional transit.

Perhaps there's a way that we can partner in advance

to ensure that we have that proper transportation

if this is the direction that the council ends up going.

Because I know that's a really key challenge

that folks have as they're trying to live outside.

One of the things that struck me the most

was a comment from the Sunrise Movement

from ways about women feeling safer

from sexual assault here.

And that makes a lot of sense to me

because we do have cameras.

We do have a police presence.

And there is lighting at City Hall.

I also know both anecdotally from talking to folks

and looking at the data that women who are unhoused

and sleeping outside experience sexual assault

at a much greater rate than women do who are not unhoused.

And so that is, that was very,

that's something that really strikes me.

And so I have a lot of comments that I wrote down,

questions that came out from the speakers.

I want to thank you for coming out.

I know we're not voting on the actual policy today.

I'm going to be voting no on this

because I feel that I need a lot more information.

I hope the staff report that comes forward on the 22nd

includes a lot of the direction that's been provided

and questions that we have.

And then just one broad note,

a theme that I heard from a lot of speakers today

is around what are the actual solutions?

How are we going to come together to provide real services,

real housing, real shelter options?

And for me, that means that we need to work together

with our partners from all across the county.

We need to be collaborating on,

with all of our departments

and making sure that we are providing the right resources

and utilizing our dollars efficiently.

And so I know that Senator Ashby has legislation

that she's introduced on this front.

I hope folks will take a look at that.

And I think that we need to be thinking more collectively

about how we can do this

because we as a city cannot do it alone.

And so I think this is just another example

of how challenging that can be for us.

Thank you.

Yes, Mayor.

I'll go ahead and move the item for pass for publication.

I think this is, again,

if anyone was going to propose an ordinance,

they should have the opportunity to present their item

and have it debated during that time.

So I'll go ahead and move the item for pass for publication.

And a motion to second.

Thank you.

Next, Council Member Kaplan.

Thank you, Mayor.

I do agree we need to have, as I stated last week,

a larger conversation on our list of how we address the unhoused,

what is determined to be a critical item,

be it our levies, our schools, public facilities.

I think is this council, and we know this is the number one issue that is facing the city.

I always go back to, I grew up in the Chuck E. Cheese era.

This feels like whack-a-mole.

Like something pops up and we're trying to whack it.

And we do need to have that comprehensive approach.

And I feel like this is just an attempt at whack-a-mole.

And it's a bigger conversation that we need to have.

Because then I go back to my amazing time at McGeorge and what I learned in law school.

What is the problem and what is the issue?

It's our unhoused.

Is this item that is coming before council addressing that and solving that?

And in my mind, I don't have enough information or evidence to even make a straight-faced argument to answer that.

So I do want to echo the comments by my fellow council members in 8 and District 5.

I want the same information that they do.

I have the same information and want the same information.

And I have the same concerns, especially for women who I have seen outside.

I come to City Hall on the weekends.

I see individuals there.

I've never been harassed.

So if this really is an employee thing, because I take that very seriously of what has happened to our employees, I need to know that.

I need to hear from them what is their concerns, what has happened that I don't know about.

I haven't received emails or information when employees have been attacked.

I think that would be very relevant for us here on the dais to actually know that.

Because if we do this here, well, they're going to go over to Cesar Chavez.

Well, that's a park.

So where are we going and how are we truly addressing the issue?

I also need clarification and want to ask in the data.

The staff report, as printed under financial consideration, says there is no financial impact associated with implementing this proposed ordinance.

Yet if you listen to law and ledge, it said it was going to cost $300,000.

In light of the budget deficit, again, it makes me want to take a step back and say what is our comprehensive approach?

What money do we have?

What money don't we have?

And look at all that we're trying to do to address the hows and unhoused and decide what our priorities are.

Because if we piecemeal this, we're not addressing anything but just putting Swiss cheese, more holes in the Swiss cheese.

Because now we're not addressing the root cause and we're not spending our money effectively as to what can we do with the little amount of money we have to address the issue.

I also want information to come from how are we actually going to enforce this?

I've got critical infrastructure of levies that I know that individuals dig holes into.

Are my levies less important than people sleeping at City Hall?

Are people sleeping next to our schools, is that more critical than people at City Halls?

That's the conversation we as a council need to be having.

Because if we pass this, then we're giving the carte blanche and telling DCR and SAC PD to spend resources here without having a comprehensive approach of where should we spend, what little resources do we have?

So one of the things to consider that needs to be looked at, and I've seen other cities do this.

I don't have an issue, and I've not been presented with information for me to have concerns of individuals sleeping at City Hall.

If it's concerns that they're right near the door, why don't we request that there should be like a five-foot buffer?

If people are concerned, whatnot, they come on the weekends or early mornings.

But I think it's, we go back to, and I harped on this in the beginning when I became a council member,

there isn't enough evidence in the background staff report for me to make an intelligent, educated, and data-driven decision

that we're addressing the issue that's being put in front of us.

And I appreciate that the mayor has special privileges to propose things that come directly to city council for decision,

and he can decide whether he wants to bypass going through committee.

But I think that this is, if this is an ordinance, you know.

We went to Long Ledge.

Oh, that's right.

Yay.

Thank you.

I said that earlier.

But it's a bigger issue and shouldn't have been on consent.

It's a bigger issue that things like this shouldn't go on consent,

that we can have more of a comprehensive conversation in this regard.

Oh, he does all the time.

So we do have to discuss our priorities.

We do have to take a step back and have a comprehensive conversation.

I don't feel that the information has been presented for me to make a decision,

so I will be voting no on this pass for publication.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mayor.

I just wanted to just double check looking at our interim city manager to make sure that the requests that we made regarding the data and the processes, because I think that's really important.

Right.

Poverty shouldn't shouldn't be a crime.

And I think it's going to be important that if this council so choose to pass it, what does that process actually look like?

That is really important.

So I want to make sure that all the items that we requested from the data to the survey to the processes to the how many spaces do we have available for shelter in the surrounding area will be of utmost importance for the vote that will take place on the 22nd.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Yeah, thank you.

I just want to clarify that this is passed for publication, which my understanding is always on consent.

That this was heard in the Long Ledge Committee and that there is savings to this.

It doesn't cost any money.

It will save $300,000.

Just on our lunch break, I went outside and talked to the man out there hosing down the patio.

And he said, you should come on a Monday and see how it smells and feels out here for people coming to work on a Monday.

So every year we spend $300,000 to clean the sidewalks outside.

And we'll debate this at length on the 22nd.

We have a motion in a second.

But there's about 10 people outside who sleep on a daily basis.

And we do have a robust plan coming forward to open more tiny home microsites throughout the city in all districts.

Stay tuned.

And they're about $30,000 per tiny home with a little tiny home, a key, door, place to store your stuff, a restroom.

$300,000 times 10.

That's literally what we're spending every year to clean the sidewalks here for people who sleep a quarter of the day.

So mathematically it does pencil out.

We'll put those monies right back in there to expanding our homeless services.

So we have a motion to second.

We'll have more of a discussion on the 22nd.

Mayor, can I ask for another clarification?

Clarification.

Yeah, thank you.

Just on the dollars piece, you know, before the legislation was passed in 2018, I was not a council member, but a former staffer for Councilmember Carr.

And when I came in the morning, I usually saw staff doing cleanings.

So I would love to know, even if this council so chooses to pass, what is the standard cost for just cleaning around City Hall?

Because I believe that's a standard anyways.

So it would be good to get that data.

And then the other piece is also, if it does currently cost us $300,000 now, and if this council so chooses to move forward with the ban, there will still be dollars associated with enforcement.

And so I think that's also important to make sure that in the report that comes on the 22nd, for us to also share that piece of the budget as well.

Because even if this does pass, there is a cost to enforcement.

And so I want to make sure that we include those numbers.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any no's or abstentions?

No.

Three no's.

Vang, Maple, and Kaplan.

Passes six to three.

Thank you.

Next item.

Our next item is item 20, a public hearing on delinquent charges, special assessment for sidewalk repairs and related costs.

Good afternoon.

I'm Leslie Curry.

I'm with the Revenue Division, Enforcement and Collections.

And I'm here today to present our request for an annual assessment of unpaid sidewalk delinquents accounts.

Currently, we have 149 accounts this year that remained unpaid from 2024 or earlier, totaling $482,620.37.

And I have previously given the clerk a revised Exhibit A broken down by each of your council districts for your information.

And Mary, do you have one public comment on this?

Marbella Sala?

Yes, please.

Did you have questions for staff before we?

Thank you, Leslie.

Marbella?

Thank you.

Hi.

Good afternoon.

And I'm just here just to make an observation.

So I appreciate that staff and the city is in a very challenging space about the sidewalk issue.

A few years ago, I grappled with having to fix my sidewalk and whether I'm going to have the city do it or find an independent contractor, which was a lot less costly to do.

And I also appreciate and understand that the staff is doing everything they can to notify individuals of the potential delinquent charges that will be attached to their taxes at the end of the year.

My only concern and what I really want, and I did ask this, and I was very happy to hear that for Spanish-speaking property owners,

we have code enforcement officers that speak Spanish and they'll bring someone Spanish-speaking to explain to those who don't read English or understand the complexity of a letter in English,

that they may overlook that and may not respond.

Low-income people are trying to survive.

And we just heard that, you know, the challenges of not having money and potentially being homeless.

But if you don't speak English, that's even more challenging.

And so I just want in the consideration that everything be done to ensure those that may be not Spanish speakers,

but we have a lot of diversity of languages in Sacramento that are property owners, that are low-income, that find out who they are.

You have a language manager.

Find out who they are and bring someone or get some way to communicate with them the potential delinquent charges that will be levied to their properties.

I think it's really important and that they not get adversely affected.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Mayor Patemgata.

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk and Mr. Mayor.

First, you know, let me just first say I appreciate all of our city staff and our code officers and folks who go out there

and are executing the work that's in front of them and that, as our good neighbor over here, Marbella Salas, mentioned,

go out there and try to communicate with the property owners and find a path forward here.

But, you know, this issue, since I've been on the council, has continued to be a very sour point in the sense that I don't believe that the city,

and I don't mean the folks who are out there measuring and checking out and whatnot,

but I don't think the city really has taken an active approach at really looking at viable options, I mean real options for folks.

Now, I understand sidewalks need to be repaired, and believe me, I have a neighbor who, you know,

had a terrible accident because of the sidewalks and was hurt, and there's a reason why they need to be done,

but we really haven't given neighbors any other option other than completely replacing a brand-new sidewalk

versus doing modifications and repairs.

And the responses that I've received, I believe, in my opinion, are insufficient.

And, yes, I look at this list here of fines and fees here that we're going through,

and many of them are actually landlords and people who are making, you know, money,

and it's their business because they're renting this house.

And believe me, you know, I have a full expectation that they repair the property that they're using as their business.

But for many folks who are seniors who have paid off their home,

I'm thinking about a neighbor who is a single mother who had two kids and lived on a corner lot

and had the corner marked up, the cost of that when there could have been modifications that could have been reasonable.

And I bring this because we most recently went to Cap2Cap with a number of us,

and there, on their sidewalks, they had multiple options of grinding.

As we walked back, I think it was a lot of us council members were talking about this,

how they had different composites over the roots to protect the trees so that the trees could be long

and not have to cut in the trees.

And it was much more creative.

And so if the U.S. Capitol can have alternatives than replacing the sidewalk,

which we know if we're going to try to keep a heritage tree, will break again anyways,

then why can't our California Capitol have alternatives as well?

So, you know, look, this issue here, we're doing our due diligence in a public hearing on what the staff has done,

but there is much more work that needs to be done here.

And when I look at this, it's not the people who are getting fined are not in new sub-developments in the city.

It's our older part of our city.

It's the area where you have a lot of working families who are buying homes,

older homes in the working part of our city.

So, you know, for this, Mr. Mayor and members of the council,

I'm going to move this, open and close the public hearing, move this item,

but direct staff to propose viable alternatives to grinding, composites, walking, and repairs

that do not involve a complete tear-out and bring it back for our council to review.

I'm fine with it going through the launch ledge process.

I'm not on a launch ledge.

And my staff has provided alternatives to the city staff, the code enforcement staff, to review.

And I've talked to also past retired city employees who also recommended alternatives as well for this to review.

So with that, that's my motion.

And I hope that we actually move forward with finding real alternatives for challenges that working families have.

Motion is second.

Council Member Maple.

All right.

I'm going to get really short and sweet.

I just want to agree with the Mayor Pro Tem that I think it would be a great thing for our staff to explore other options here.

I know this is one of the most complaints that I get from residents in my communities.

We have a lot of aging sidewalks and infrastructure.

We also have, you know, of the parts of my district that have trees, those trees tend to be bigger and older.

And I have a lot of low-income residents that really struggle to afford these fixes.

So anything that can help ease the burden would be great.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Council Member Dickinson.

Thanks.

Well, thank you, Mayor.

Council Member Guerra said much of what I had queued up myself to say.

But I do think that these alternatives are important to explore.

This is one of the most irritating things that people are required to do.

And I don't think it matters where you are in the city or what your neighborhood is.

We can all speak to how unhappy people are when they get these notices.

We obviously have to have safe sidewalks.

One other thing, though, that I wanted to mention, I don't think we need to consider adding it to the ordinance, though,

is I know that in the neighborhood in which I live where last year there were a number of these notices,

the folks who got them got together.

And they were able to retain a private contractor who actually was able to do the work

because it was more volume, much more expressly and much less expensively

than even would have been the alternative under the city's approach.

So I think we might also at least consider when these notices go out advising people

that they may want to, if they see their neighbors also getting the same notices,

talk to their neighbors and collaborate on an approach that then can be much less expensive

than it would be if each one of them does it on their own.

But I do just want to underscore that I think it's important to try to find ways,

while getting the same result, which is safe pathways for pedestrians,

to try to find ways to minimize the intrusion and the expense for residents.

Thanks.

Council Member Kaplan.

Thank you, Mayor.

I do want to concur with what has been said before

and say that this was Council Member Guerra and I having this conversation in Washington, D.C.

on a very hot day that was made less hot by the trees that were lining the streets.

While they were still destroying the sidewalk,

it was pretty cool of the flexible composite that was put around them

that made this sidewalk traversing easy and not dangerous.

I do want to echo as we consider this and as we move forward,

I appreciate you providing the updated report.

I think just for consistency and transparency,

that reports that come forward on public hearings always have what district a property is in.

I think a fair amount of us might know, but let's save the staff time,

our staff time by hunting as to what district certain ones are located in.

This is also a safety reason for me because I have had an individual who is on this lifts

had to have stay-away orders and others because it is a passionate issue for them.

But also, I do want to see alternatives for it does,

a majority of this address our low-income areas.

So how are we going about and actually finding out where sidewalks need repairs?

I think I just want more of an understanding of that background

because it can't tell the rationale.

Currently, the only time sidewalks are gone out to be inspected for repairs

are generally from a report from 311.

They're not going out and just going through neighborhoods

and finding sidewalks to repair.

There's not enough money in the city budget.

Nor, you know, time and effort on the staff's part, the inspector's part,

to look at every sidewalk in the city.

So right now it is on a case-by-case basis,

usually from a report from 311 for a trip and fall

or an inspection that's been requested by the property owner in many cases

or somebody who's walking down the street.

So those is when those cases are the inspectors are sent out

to follow up on the 311 call.

They'll inspect the sidewalk for whatever necessary repairs are, mark it up.

They come back and they notify the property owner of their options to repair themselves

or have the city do it.

Thank you for that background.

I think it's kind of helpful because it also goes into the discussion

and concerns I had with driveways.

You may have an individual in a neighborhood who's really gung-ho about enforcement

and that neighborhood gets everything fined on them,

but there's the neighborhood over that nothing happens.

And, you know, I don't know what a comprehensive look like is,

especially in light of our budget and you can't just have city staff driving around,

but I think it's a question that needs to be asked, you know,

because you could have neighborhoods that are having people constantly go through

who are getting fined where other ones that have the same issues are not

because nobody's making those complaints.

And I don't know what the answer is, but I do think that's something that just we have to maybe take a step back policy-wise

and how do we look at that and how do we address that.

But I really think the time is now to look for alternatives other than this

because Council Member Dickinson, right, we all hear this in every one of our districts,

and to me the hardest hit are our low income that ask, how do I pay for this?

I don't, I can't afford it.

Nor do they have maybe a language barrier to know a contractor who complies with city code to do these things.

So almost as if, like, we have ADUs, approved options, can,

is that something that is reasonable for sidewalk repairs and others?

I don't.

I'll bring that back to the Public Works Department of the Sidewalk Repair Division

so that they can look into that for you.

Thank you.

That's not a part of what I do, unfortunately, but I can put forth that at recommendation.

Thank you.

And going forward on the future years,

I will also make sure the districts are all broken out on the reports for you.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Council Member Garrett.

Yeah, sorry, you know, and I wanted to make sure, and I, you know, thank you so much, Leslie,

because you've been very, you know, your team has been great with people on the phone.

And again, I don't mean this at all for our code officers who are trying to do their work,

you know, but this is something that I think on the management side that we need to figure that out.

And I want to, I forgot on the motion to be explicit to also include the city attorney's office,

because part of this has been about the question about where's the city's liability.

So when we come back on this, what I don't want is public work saying we can't do something because of the city attorney's office.

So I want to make sure that the city attorney's office is engaged in this.

And I do understand that part of it is that once the city is notified of a danger,

that the city is then noticed of a perceived danger and needs to take action.

But that's the next point.

It's like, okay, well, what action is actually necessary?

So, so I wanted to make sure that the motion, if the seconder was okay with that,

Council Member Maple, or was it Dickinson, that we include the city attorney's office on that.

And then, and then lastly, you know, I mean, this is, there's less to do with this,

but I know a lot of us are talking about overall transportation needs and,

and a transportation measure potentially in the future.

You know, the, the old school transportation is walking.

There's no reason why I don't think a transportation measure should have,

should not include a hardship requirement for senior homeowners who aren't a fixed income

and then can't, can, could potentially end up in a lien process because the sidewalk,

which everyone walks through, can't be repaired.

So that's just a crazy idea for another time.

But thank you everyone for indulging me on this issue.

Thank you.

Council Member Talamantes.

I just want to echo Council Member Dickinson's suggestion on getting neighbors to all know

who else has to fix their sidewalks so that they can get the same contractor to save some dollars.

So to Ryan and the team, if you guys can add that to the direction to Council Member Guerra's motion.

I received a notice two weeks ago to repair my sidewalk.

And so now I'm looking at options myself of how I repair it.

And then I was on a walk the other day and I found a city of Sacramento worker who has,

was responding to 311 calls.

And she had a hundred over the weekend.

She came in on Monday.

She had a hundred calls from my neighborhood.

And yeah, we had an honest conversation about how people felt in the community about this.

And she was really nice.

She spoke Spanish.

And she was just really funny to work with.

And I know that like when people call in, if how she treated me randomly on the street is a testament to her demeanor,

her character, to other people calling in and asking questions.

I think it says a really good thing about the city of Sacramento.

So I just want to echo your comments and I have to fix my sidewalk.

I will add that to the, to the direction and to say, but can I add something,

Council Member Talamathas, because the onus on that scenario, and I appreciate it.

The staff had recommended that for, for neighbors,

but it only occurred when I pulled together a community meeting and a lot of neighbors pulled together.

So then it's on the neighbors to know their neighbors.

And if you have, if you're in a neighborhood where you're transitioning, you may not know everybody.

So, you know, one way, one, if the city is going to issue repayments or, or issue where the city goes and does it,

and does, and sometimes they contract with the same actual contractors that they're recommending.

Maybe it's on the city to pull together all those and say, hey, there's going to be a sidewalk build.

If you want to be part of this collective work, because my understanding is that they don't have to be adjacent when they do this.

They can be, you know, in different blocks, but it's one big contract that happens.

So another option to consider in, in that aspect, but, but why is the onus always on the neighbor to go out and search for other neighbors that have to repair their sidewalks?

So I'll leave it.

I'll leave with that.

Yeah.

Thank you.

You're the last one, right?

Yes.

Yeah.

So I know we have a motion to second.

I'll just concur that we all know this is, if not the, one of the top unique city issues that come up just about a quirk in city law and people are perplexed.

They go and read the law.

They don't understand.

And there's frustration.

And I guess the flip side is that, you know, we had to make horrific cuts this year in our city budget.

And if we had to pay for all these as well, that would be even more of an impact on us.

But the flip side is we were here two weeks ago talking about our tree canopy and that was a big deal.

And if we want to promote trees throughout the city of Sacramento, some people have said, well, I'm not going to fix my sidewalk.

We're just going to cut down our tree.

So that's the flip side to that issue as well.

I don't know.

There's a perfect answer to this.

I know most cities in California, we've researched this, do this.

I was asked to write a state law prohibiting this a few years ago.

I called our city and then city manager Howard Chan said, please don't do that.

I had to do this myself and pay the bill.

And I went and asked the contractors, looked around, and there was not any viable options unless you got multiple people that were dinged at the same time.

So I concur that we should be looking for alternatives.

And with that, we have a motion to second.

All those in favor?

Nope, we already did a couple of a comment.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

In those or abstentions, hearing none.

Thank you.

Next item.

We now move to item number 21, establish safe credit union convention and performing arts district promoter incentive program.

Okay.

Good afternoon, mayor and members of council.

I am Megan Van Boris, director of convention and cultural services.

I'm joined by Sid Garcia Heberger, who is our theater and auditorium manager, as well as Jonathan Weiser, who is our interim safe credit union convention and performing arts district GM.

I want to take a few minutes to talk about our approach to increasing activation at two of the city's most important civic venues, Memorial Auditorium and the safe credit union performing arts center.

These are not just event spaces.

These are historic civic institutions built and maintained for the public good.

And they are an important part of how Sacramento gathers, celebrates, learns, and connects.

We're on an upward trajectory in both facilities.

Occupancy at the Memorial Auditorium has doubled since 2023 at 190 days.

And the performing arts center is at its highest level since 2013 at 246 days.

You can see here the portfolio of event types at each facility.

Memorial Auditorium leads on civic events while the performing arts center leads on performing arts and entertainment.

Still, we think there's opportunity at both facilities and we believe with the right strategy and tools, we can further increase activation, increase financial performance, and surrounding area economic impact,

and ensure these venues serve the full spectrum of our city, artists, audiences, businesses, nonprofits, and residents alike.

This work is already underway and we're here today to share a key element of the approach we're building to get there, which focuses on the ticketed event category.

Memorial Auditorium, which is the oldest building in the district, was built nearly a century ago in a time when society gathered in very different ways.

It hosted community clubs, civic meetings, sporting events, concerts, and circuses.

It served as a hub of shared civic life.

But the world around us has shifted.

Many of the civic organizations that once used these spaces no longer exist.

The way people attend and experience live events has been transformed by industry consolidation, led by companies like Live Nation and Ticketmaster,

and the pandemic disrupted everything from event production to audience habits to the economics of promotion.

Even now, as we emerge from that disruption, we're doing so at a moment of economic uncertainty, the tapering off of pandemic-era relief,

and rising costs for both promoters and audiences.

But here lies our opportunity.

Public venues like Memorial Auditorium and the Safe Credit Union Performing Arts Center are in a unique position to be more affordable, more diverse,

and more inclusive than the private market.

We can offer broader access and greater cultural representation if we create the right conditions for events to happen.

And that's exactly what we're trying to do.

Our aims with this program are to increase the volume and frequency of live events, attract regional and national promoters, support local and emerging promoters, and expand access.

Before I move on about this, I'd like to share or remind you of a major structural change that we made earlier this year.

I commented on it when I did my presentation back in March.

Until recently, the Performing Arts Center Memorial Auditorium and Convention Center venues were treated as separate businesses,

with booking responsibilities split among different staff.

In April, we realigned the entire structure, centralizing all sales and booking under a single office across all venues.

We're now actively selling the full campus, offering the right mix of events for the right spaces.

We've created a dedicated sales function separating business development from event services,

and we're building data and feedback loops to understand market needs in real time.

While that realignment gives us the foundation, we need targeted tools to close the gap between venue availability and event activation,

especially for ticketed events.

Not all events have the same kind of ripple effects.

Ticket events, particularly concerts, comedy, and sports, often drive broader economic and social activity.

They bring attendees into neighborhoods early and keep them there late.

They support restaurants, retail, parking, transit, and nightlife.

They create energy and visibility and engagement around our civic facilities in ways that no other event category can.

So if we want to accelerate activation of our facilities and reconnect our communities,

ticketed events are a high-impact area where we need to compete more aggressively.

Like other businesses, promoters are in it to make money, meaning that revenue has to exceed expenses.

Regardless of their size, from a local promoter to the industry giants, the financial piece is real.

At face value, the idea of promoting a concert looks like this.

On the revenue side, the promoter's potential is ticket sales.

Their expenses, on the other hand, include paying for the band, plus also renting the venue, labor, marketing, security,

and a whole host of other costs that eat into the profit.

It's important to recognize that what gives the dominant players the edge is not just their talent network.

In fact, promotion is a loss leader for those businesses.

It's the way they monetize everything around the event, ticket fees, secondary markets, concessions, and more.

Now, here's the most important point.

We have, as a public facility, access to all of those revenue streams.

What we don't have is the talent network.

That's why we rely on promoters, especially local and independent ones, to bring talent into our civic spaces.

But those promoters don't benefit from those broader revenue streams like the big players do.

So we're asking them to shoulder high risk with much lower reward.

It's worth it to note that there is strong demand from promoters to use our facilities,

but the one thing they bring up is the need to mitigate risk.

This is the gap that we need to close, and that's where the promoter incentive comes in.

We're proposing a tiered promoter incentive program that addresses the needs of a range of types of promoters and presenters.

A core focus is commercial promoters, bringing concerts, comedy, sports, and other for-profit shows to our venues.

These promoters, as I said, bear significant risk, but don't benefit from the broader revenue ecosystem that vertically integrated companies do.

To help bridge that gap, we've developed a rebate structure that includes rent rebates, box office and equipment fees rebates,

the ability to add ticket and food and beverage surcharges and redirect them back to the promoter,

and foregoing or sharing food and beverage commission.

Our aim through this program, or through these rebates, is to get $5 to $10 per ticket sold, beginning with the first event,

because we know the incentive has to be immediate to be effective.

Promoters won't stick around for a long-tail payout.

They need support up front.

And we're also proposing a scaled structure that prioritizes local promoters,

those rooted in Sacramento, employing local teams, offering culturally diverse programming that reflects our city.

This is about growing local business capacity, advancing equity, and diversifying the event landscape,

while still allowing regional and national promoters to participate.

Our scaled structure looks like this.

Introductory is for those promoters who might be new to our venues, but still need to be enticed in some way.

Standard is for those who regularly use our venues,

and who, with more incentive, would likely increase the number of events that they do with us.

Premium is for high-volume regional and national promoters.

Local Suite 1 is straightforward.

These are the independent promoters who are in this work for the love of music,

for the development of Sacramento's music scene, and for the vibrancy of our city.

Local 2 is targeted towards arts and cultural presenters, community choruses, dance companies, theater ensembles,

whose events may use ticketing, but who often operate at a smaller scale and thinner margins,

and therefore a rebate program would not work.

Here, we're proposing fee waivers in place of rebates,

emphasis on access, inclusion, and civic value,

and ensuring public facilities remain available to Sacramento's cultural community.

In order to be eligible, you must be paid up with our partners and us,

and have favorable references with ticket sales at 70% of capacity.

On that particular item, we are incorporating some flexibility to modify this requirement

based on the nature of the promoter or presenter event.

You would not be eligible if you have a history of issues like security or policy violations,

or if you're using your own Ticketmaster contract,

because that vehicle already allows you to be able to mitigate the risk.

We are prepared to review and report back on our progress regularly,

as well as make adjustments based on key measurements,

including fiscal performance, activation and occupancy,

attendance data and economic impact, promoter feedback,

and operational costs and strategic priorities.

I do want to pause here again and note that we understand there may be concern

about foregoing revenue at a time when city budgets are under pressure.

That's a valid and important consideration, but here's what we want to clarify.

These incentives are targeted and customized.

We're not offering blanket discounts.

The ticketed event category is only one part of our business strategy.

Even if we book 60 concerts a year, that leaves nearly 300-plus other days

to drive revenue through meetings, galas, festivals, and more.

We're actively managing the portfolio to balance revenue and access across all lines of business.

We believe this incentive program will allow us to track new business we otherwise wouldn't get,

making our overall venue operation stronger, not weaker,

and we know that the economic impact will be significant while contributing to other revenues,

like parking and sales tax revenues, that the city relies on for its budget.

So today we're asking for your support to establish the promoter incentive program,

which would include box office rebates, equipment fee rebates, rental fee rebates,

and the authority to amend existing agreements around ticketing and food service.

We believe this approach gives us the tools to strengthen local business,

bring people back to our city center,

and accelerate activation of our public venues in a way that's equitable,

inclusive, financially sound, and in alignment with the tax-exempt nature of the bonds

that have financed facility improvements.

Thank you for your time and attention.

I'm here, along with Sid, to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor, I have three speakers on this item.

Would you like to take those now?

Yes, please.

Thank you.

Jamison Parker, Lambert, and Madeline Noel.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council Members.

Jamison Parker with the Midtown Association,

our property-based improvement district here in the central city,

representing over 1,300 property owners with the mission of making Midtown

the Center for Culture, Creativity, and Vibrancy.

We're here in support of the intent behind the promoter incentive program

and are excited by the opportunity to better activate

one of Sacramento's most iconic and beloved civic venues.

I want to just appreciate and thank Megan and the rest of the team

for really recognizing the critical needs of this amenity of our community

where the city's poured in more than $16 million of investment

to renovate the Memorial Auditorium with better programming

and use of the building.

We have incredible potential, not just as a performance space,

but as a driver of activity across our central city,

when the lights are on and the doors are open,

the greater neighborhood is going to benefit.

To help ensure this program is successful,

we ask that the city build a six-month evaluation

that looks at metrics like the number of events with the event attendees,

but broader economic impact.

It's essential that we are reviewing how many,

how these events are supporting local businesses,

encouraging longer stays,

and drawing in new audiences into the central city.

We are committed in supporting this evaluation.

We're prepared to share visitor data

that looks at tools like Placer AI

to assess on how programming the auditorium

is impacting surrounding businesses

and where we're seeing the strongest returns.

We also encourage the city to begin identifying further

and alternative strategies now,

rather than wait until a year out

so that we can have actionable next steps,

ready to go if this program isn't generating

the intended results that we would like to see.

We're grateful to be part of this conversation

and ready to partner on implementation and impact tracking,

and thank you for your time

in considering this important step forward.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Lambert, then Madeline.

This is a very interesting number

because, first of all, Megan,

when she was with cultural arts and culture,

you can tell she hasn't worked in Sacramento alone

because her outside-the-box thinking is incredible

because when she was there,

she made sure that the grant drumline was always funded.

And by the way,

they're scheduled to go to Ireland this fall.

I didn't know that until I saw some people this weekend.

The city should have money for that.

Roger should push for that as well as the rest of you.

There should be no scandal of helping them.

In terms of the Memorial Auditorium,

as a native, I know about the Memorial Auditorium.

That's a place that should be supported.

Tremendous memories there.

I'm not going to even waste my time

talking about all the events we saw there.

But one thing that you may not know about,

in April of this year,

at the Safe Credit Union Convention,

because of the saccharine,

shout-out to the Sacramento Better Business Bureau,

California Northeast Better Business Bureau,

they selected to the Bay and Back Cheesecakes

to be there at that convention center event.

It was in April.

It was called the Bridal and Wedding Expo.

That's why I mentioned to Vice Mayor Telemontes

when she was saying she was having difficulties

with whatever related to bridal and wedding,

I'm the guy.

Because I know the person who's the president and CEO

who actually loves our cheesecakes.

And at that event that I just mentioned,

we were contacted by more people outside Sacramento

that we're doing business with than inside Sacramento.

Thank you for your comments.

Madeline Noel.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council Members,

Interim City Manager, and City Staff.

I'm Madeline Noel with the Downtown Sacramento Partnership,

a property-based improvement district

serving Sacramento's central neighborhood.

We're in support of the proposed promoter incentive program.

It's a creative tool that offers a low cost

and high return investment to attract new activations,

the kind of activations that bring energy

and economic impact to our urban core.

This program helps level the playing field

for our local and emerging event producers.

By reducing upfront risk,

it encourages a more diverse mix of voices

and perspectives in our city's event landscape,

which not only reflects the character of Sacramento,

but strengthens our city's identity

as an inclusive, vibrant destination.

Live entertainment is one of the most powerful drivers

of urban vitality.

When events happen, they don't just fill venues,

they fill neighborhoods.

As Megan mentioned in her presentation,

they arrive early, stay late,

spend money at local restaurants,

shops, parking, and transit.

One night of programming can fuel

dozens of small businesses.

But events and live entertainment

aren't good for only spending.

They create shared memories, foster connection,

and deepen emotional investment in our city.

That's the kind of community

that every great city is built on.

So we encourage your support for this program

to help create the conditions for more events to succeed

by reducing risk for promoters,

activating underused venues,

and generating meaningful returns

for both our neighborhoods and our city.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Mayor, I have no more speakers on the side.

Okay.

Council Member Maple.

All right.

Thank you, Mayor,

and thank you very much for the presentation.

This is my second time hearing it

because we heard this in Law & Ledge,

so I won't repeat my comments from there.

I just want to, again,

thank you for all of your work on this

and for thinking outside the box, truly.

I mean, it's,

I think we have a lot of amazing spaces in the city.

I think they're great amenities,

but we have some work to do with the changing landscape

to make sure that we're making them competitive,

that people want to use them,

that they're accessible,

and so I think this is a brilliant idea

and happy to support it,

as I did in Law & Ledge.

And I was compelled by Jameson's comments

around an evaluation with metrics.

I think that's a great idea.

So I'll make a motion to move this forward today

with some direction that we report back in six months,

maybe partnering with our business partners

on that evaluation and metrics

so that we can really take a look at

how well has this worked,

are there things that we need to change or tweak,

or is it working great

and have it continue forward?

So that is my motion,

and thank you again.

Thank you.

Council Member Dickinson.

Thanks, Mayor.

I'll second the motion,

but I did have a question,

and thank you, both Megan and Sid,

for the, especially Sid,

great, great articulation of the event.

I'm just curious whether

anything along similar lines

that you've discovered

has been tried elsewhere,

and what, if anything,

you've found about incentive programs

in other places.

We looked at both Denver and Los Angeles

for similar models,

and those have been successful.

We also know that this is something

that I've been hearing from promoters

for many years,

and so we know that this is something

that is absent in our venues.

We have tried to fill the gap

to the extent that we could

within our authority,

but we're just not moving the needle enough,

and so we really hope

that you'll approve this

so that we can move forward

with getting the word out

to all of the many users

that would be interested

in bringing shows to this market.

In the case of Los Angeles

and Denver,

to the extent that you found

those programs,

have they been at it for a while,

and do they have similar elements?

How would you compare those?

You said they were successful,

but how would you compare those

with a little bit deeper dive, Sid?

Well, again,

they were public facilities,

so that's a similarity,

and Los Angeles dated back to 2015

and Denver 2016.

Uh-huh.

And so have they issued

any kind of public reports

on those or evaluations of those

that you've been able to discover

or look at?

Those programs are continuing,

so that tells me

that they're successful.

You know,

not only is it of interest

in formulating our own program

to see what experience

has been elsewhere,

but it may give us some clues

how to look at

what might need to be modified

or adjusted as we go along,

I suspect.

I think it's always helpful

if you have others

who've tried the same thing

or something similar.

It obviously can inform

what we do

and hopefully increase

our chances of success,

but I certainly think

this is worth trying,

absolutely.

And, you know,

we have some beautiful facilities,

and certainly in Memorial,

we have a historic

and gorgeous facility,

and just love to see it

used even more

than it is today.

Well, I would like to mention

also that we did

kind of a small pilot program

with Outback Entertainment

specifically,

and we saw them presenting

a show once a year

to I think they're at seven

for this year.

So that was with a smaller incentive

because that was within

our current authority.

So you know that there's the ability

to grow that even more.

I mean, just that,

just seeing, you know,

a single show a year

and seeing that steep climb

gives me great hope

that this is going to be a year.

You know, one thing

also occurs to me,

and this is completely

to the side,

but have you spoken

to the airport,

the county airport authority

about promoting

what we're doing

either at safe

or at Memorial

for folks coming into town?

Because I know

I've gone through,

and I'm sure we all have,

other airports especially

where they feature things

going on and, you know,

within their jurisdiction

as far as artistic

or other performances

are concerned.

So I just kind of,

I tend to think about

county facilities

from time to time.

So I'm just wondering

if there's ever been

any collaboration

with the county airport authority

on that kind of thing.

Well, it's certainly

something that we can explore.

Perhaps we should speak

to our friends

at Visit Sacramento

to find out

what kind of programs

they already have in place

with the airport

and maybe add

to that effort.

Yeah, okay.

The other thing

that I'll add to that

on the marketing question

is that we did receive

$250,000

from Senator

as part of the

California Natural Resources

Agency grant

sponsored by

Senator Ashby

who that will allow us

to further invest

in marketing activities

associated with

these two things.

So it's a good time

for us upon the introduction

of a promoter incentive

to begin doing that work

as well.

So that creates

some good opportunity

for us.

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Council Member Plucky Baum.

Thank you, Mayor.

I support this item

and call the question.

Thank you.

Very brief

from the member

who represents

the Memorial Auditorium.

With that,

we have a motion

and a second.

All those in favor,

please say aye.

Aye.

Any no's

or abstentions?

Seeing none,

pass it unanimously.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next.

Mayor,

that concludes

the city's business

this afternoon.

We move now

to Council Comments,

Ideas, Questions,

and AB123 Reports.

Council Member Maple.

What am I doing?

Thank you, Mayor.

I would like to invite

the community

to come join us

at our,

I don't know which annual,

but it might be 10th,

but our annual

Hollywood Park

Fourth of July Parade.

So this year,

it's going to be

taking place

for meeting

at St. Robert's

Catholic School

on Irvin Way

at 9 a.m.

The parade

will take off

promptly at 9.30 a.m.

and to walk

around the block,

you can find

the schedule

on the Hollywood Park

Neighborhood Association

Facebook page

and other social medias.

We'll also have it

in our newsletter.

It's a fun time.

We have snacks.

We have waters.

We are going

to be corner captains

this year,

me and Sam,

so we're going

to have a table

out there

where you can

get information

about different

city programs

and it's going

to be a lot of fun.

So please come join us

on Friday,

the 4th of July

at 9 a.m.

at St. Robert's.

Thank you.

Thank you,

Council Member Dickinson.

Thanks.

I just wanted

to note

that Shadahi Rowland,

did I get that right?

Close?

Who we confirmed

earlier

as a District 2

Sacramento Youth

Commission member

is here with us

this afternoon.

I wanted to welcome him

and express

my gratitude.

My thanks

that he's willing

to serve on the

Youth Commission.

We think he's going

to be a terrific addition.

So thanks, Mayor.

Thank you.

Council Member Guerra.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want

to invite everyone

out to our annual

Sierra Oaks

Neighborhood Association

4th of July parade

and where you can join

our local fire department

there as we do

our walk around there

meeting at 930

over at 2500

Morley Way.

So we'll see you

at the annual

4th of July parade

at the Sierra Oaks

Neighborhood Association.

And then after that,

you can jump across

the river there,

American River,

and go to the

Neighbors of College Glen

6th Annual 4th of July

Festival

that will be

starting at the

College Greens

Cabana Club

as we walk

up to Oakey Park.

and we're going

to have a lot

of vendors

and good excitement

and also with

Fire Station 60

leading the way.

So with that,

thank you

and hope everyone

enjoys a wonderful

4th of July weekend.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to invite you

to another parade

after you've gone

to all the other ones

in the City of Sacramento.

You want to come

to one of the ones

that I think

is the largest

and best parade

in the entire

City of Sacramento.

and that's the Pocket

Greenhaven

4th of July parade.

It's going to take place

this Friday

at 10 a.m. sharp

right in our district.

Get a chance

to wave your flags,

put on your red,

white, and blue,

and join the neighbors

and friends

in celebrating

Independence Day.

There will be

marching bands,

there will be

festive floats,

local leaders,

classic cars,

and much, much more.

And I hope to see

all of you there

for that.

Once again,

that's July 4th

at 10 o'clock

in the Pocket

Greenhaven area.

And then,

my final announcement

is Jazz in July.

That's right,

Jazz in July

starting up.

That means every weekend

in the month of July

we have a jazz concert

and it's going to start off

on July,

Friday the 11th

at the Panhandle

in Williamland Park

and it's live jazz

that starts at 6 p.m.

We encourage you

because it gets cold

during the night,

bring your blankets,

chairs,

and a picnic

and enjoy

the smooth sounds

of Jeff Miniweather.

After Jeff Miniweather

on other concerts

that will happen

in July,

you'll see

on the 18th of July,

you'll see Vivian Lee,

the smooth sounds

of Vivian Lee.

She'll be at

Garcia Bend Park

and then on July 25th,

you'll hear

Carrie McCoy

at Bell Coolidge Park

on 5600 Southland Park.

All the concerts

are from 6 to 8 p.m.

and come on out

and have a good time

at Jazz in July

and the 4th of July Parade.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Council Member Kaplan.

Thank you, Mayor.

I look forward

to joining you,

Council Member Jennings,

for the 4th of July Parade.

It is a favorite

that my daughters ask

that we join you

every year,

so it is a pleasure.

And then also,

as we're heading

into Council Recess,

put on your calendars.

I also have,

whether you live

in the south side

of the city

or the north side,

on Friday, July 11th,

from 6 to 9 p.m.,

we have our

Latino Chicano celebration,

live music

by Mayan Latin Roots,

as well as Aztec dancers,

local food and vendors,

and more.

So come join us

6 to 9

at the North Natomas

Regional Park.

Thank you.

That concludes.

We have several

public comment.

Yes, Mary,

I have six speakers

for matters not on the agenda.

The first is Lambert,

Kyle Williams,

Pamela Freeman,

Yolanda Villanueva,

Sonia Karabel,

and then Anthony Uribe.

First of all,

I would like to give a shout out

to Senator Angelique Ashby.

I think she's a wonderful human being.

Also,

Katie Maple

and Karina Telemontis,

they actually

were in the Sacramento Beast,

since you can't put it here.

They were in the Sacramento Beast,

and they are

thinking outside the box

on how to deal

with homeless.

Beautiful strategy

by those people

and

Mayor Steinberg.

The other thing

I wanted to say

is I'm hearing

a lot about

parades

and things like that.

I'm wondering,

what does it cost

for a parade?

Because the

Grand High School

Pacers,

who won the

state championship,

they never got

a parade.

And also

on here,

it says

city manager's report.

As a person

who studies

this city,

I have counted

at least

three or four

city managers

in this building

right now.

I want to,

as a native

and a taxpayer

and a business owner,

I want to know

about the city manager's report.

It's on the agenda,

and I took a course

last year

in this place

that talked about

the Brown Act.

You are slipping

down a very slippery slope,

City of Sacramento,

and I think

you have underestimated

people like myself

and Mr. Worthy.

Mr. Worthy

is going to have

to be dealt with

because that man

is starting to turn out

to be a truth teller,

and I support him

100%,

and I'd like to end

by saying

it's the reason

why I'm dressed

like this.

We're on our way

to Southern California

tomorrow,

and our cheesecakes

are going to be featured

in Southern California

for Fourth of July.

They won't be featured here.

We have not received

any money

from the city hall,

and we've received money

from Southern California

because we have

a manufacturer there.

Thank you for your comments.

Kyle Williams,

then Yolanda Villanueva.

How's everybody today?

Good, I hope.

I'm going to give this

in a three-span presentation.

First off,

I'd like to start off

by admitting

how many times

in my life

I've been wrong.

How about you all?

Have you admitted

you're wrong?

Yeah.

Because I've seen

a lot of things

since I've been here.

I was born,

well,

I was born in California

and been in eight cities

all over my,

in my 60 years of life.

Today's my birthday.

I'm 60.

Happy birthday.

Thank you.

What are you doing here?

I know.

I know.

Well,

I like to speak.

And the reason

I bring this in

is that it's a joke.

I don't know

if any of you

have noticed it,

but this is one of the things

that we think

you're wrong about.

Trophies.

So,

and I'd also like

to apologize

for way back

when I used to give

these presentations

that were probably

too intense

because we saw

this so often

that people like me

were too intense.

There's two people

in life.

There's men

and women.

And we're going to share

this over three presentations.

And men were here

in 1900.

And women were down here.

I know you know about it.

Your grandmother

told you all about it.

I know the women

are well aware of this.

Well,

now women are up here.

And I'd like to argue

men are down here.

And I'm for real equality.

I was raised right

by two wonderful people.

A mother and a father

that were amazing

in an amazing town.

So,

I'm for equality.

And I'd like to share

in the next three presentations

maybe to bring equality,

true equality,

back to this town.

I got 10 seconds left.

Because when I came here

in 2000,

it was humming along wonderfully.

And we're not

humming along right now.

I'd like to share with you

part of the reasons

why that is.

Because of this.

Thank you for your comments.

Yolanda's our next speaker.

Then Sonia.

Too many trophies

being given out.

Not enough action.

For the part two and three.

I don't want to hang this

in the room.

Thank you,

Mayor and City Council.

My name is Yolanda.

And I am a railroad resident.

I live at the Wong Center.

On Tuesday, June 24th,

I and 134 of my neighbors

in the railroad submitted format

protest of the city's proposal

railroad EIFD expansion.

because it only provides

for 6% of the 10,000

house units

to be affordable.

And I and many of my neighbors

experienced homelessness.

Unfortunately,

me twice,

but others,

I don't know,

but we've all experienced it

there at the Wong Center.

We have something in common,

all of us.

We found affordable housing,

and we hope this can help others

to escape homelessness, too.

My representative,

Council Member Pluckman,

Pluck,

I'm sorry if I'm

destroying his last name.

Pluckman,

anyways,

called or protest deeply

disappointing

and why we can't have

a nice things.

As a railroad resident

who submitted a protest,

I ask,

who are we?

Who can't have nice things?

The majority of residents

in the railroad protest,

the shamefully small amount

of affordable housing

in the proposed EIFD.

The current proposal

only requires 3.9%

of the remaining housing

to be affordable

for the total of six.

Sacramento deserves

more affordable housing.

One place,

the city should look

as they redo the deal.

Let's go back.

Let's do the deal

in the state Sacramento

regional housing

needs allocations,

which says Sacramento

needs the following.

Thank you for your comments.

Your speaking time

is complete.

Our next speaker

is Sonia,

then Anthony.

Hi, everyone.

I'm Sonia Carabell

with Unite Here Local 49,

the Hospitality Workers Union.

And Local 49

last Tuesday

proudly stood aside,

stood alongside

135 residents

of the Sacramento rail yards

who submitted protests

to the EIFD deal,

which would give

$92 million

in taxpayer funds

to a project

with just 6%

required affordable housing.

And of the remaining

development,

as you mentioned,

just 3.9%

of what would be built

in the future.

With the current state

of Sacramento's

housing and homelessness

crisis,

this deal

to double the size

of downtown

is shameful.

Our members

in the hospitality industry

face this crisis

every day,

whether through having

to choose between

paying rent

or buying groceries,

long commutes

to work downtown,

and walking through

encampments

as they come home

from work.

It has been very

meaningful for us

to build community

with the rail yards

residents,

many of whom

were pushed into homelessness

and only were able

to escape by finding

affordable housing.

We will not solve

the housing and homelessness

crisis by criminalizing

people,

as was discussed earlier,

but through providing

housing and services

for people who need them.

We are by no means

opposed to a soccer stadium

or developing the rail yards,

but Sacramento

is giving in to greed

by subsidizing development

that excludes working people.

There is already an EIFD

over the stadium site,

and we hope the stadium

can go forward

with the public financing

deal that was

previously approved,

but what we're opposing

would expand it

across the rail yards

where developers plan

to build 10,000 units

of housing,

just 6% affordable.

And so as Yo mentioned,

we should look to

the Sacramento Regional

Housing Needs Allocation

as we redo

the affordable housing

plan for this.

That would be 22%

very low income,

13% low income,

18% moderate income,

and 44% above moderate income

or market rate.

So that's what

the state of California

says Sacramento needs.

As we double our downtown,

we should look to that.

And I also want to say

that as of now,

those protests

have still not been counted,

and we will do

what is necessary

to ensure...

Thank you for your comments.

Your speaking time

is complete.

Our final speaker is

Anthony Urabi.

Rebe.

Rebe.

Thank you.

Hello, City Council.

Hello, Mayor.

I'm not here

to talk politics.

I'm here to talk tacos.

Yes.

SAC Taco Fest,

Battle the Taco.

Yeah.

It's happening.

Battle the Taco,

SAC Taco Fest.

So for the last couple

of weeks,

months,

I've been taking nominations

from everybody

in the city of Sacramento,

everybody in the county

of Sacramento

for a competition,

bracket-style competition,

where 64 of the best tacos

are going to compete

against each other,

head-to-head style.

And it's starting.

Today, out of all days,

City Council on,

guess what,

Taco Tuesday.

So it's live right now

at SACTacoFest.com,

and we're really celebrating

some of the best taco spots,

the taqueros that we have

in our region,

SAC County,

City of Sacramento.

So I look around,

and I see our wonderful

city council members here,

our mayor,

and I'm thinking about

Lisa Kaplan,

Council Member Kaplan,

Gondo Fusion.

I'm thinking of Oaxaca,

Katie Maple.

I'm thinking of

Tallick Village.

You have your favorite

taco spot there

in that area,

Corrina Talamantes.

We're going to talk

about Northgate Boulevard.

You got all those

algo bueno.

These places have been

not only nominated,

but they're on there,

and these taqueros

are excited,

and they're already competing

at SACTacoFest.com.

So I'm hoping

that you're encouraging folks

to not only just eat tacos,

but vote at

SACTacoFest.com,

and hopefully we get

to celebrate

these taqueros.

I know we said

no trophies,

but we're going to have

a trophy.

It's going to be

a big trophy.

It's going to be huge.

Battle of the Taco.

And it's going to be,

thank you,

Council Member Roger Dickinson,

on Del Paso Boulevard

to celebrate this.

And I conclude.

Thank you so much.

You guys have

a wonderful evening.

Happy Taco Festival.

You know,

here we go.

Let's do this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mayor,

I have no more speakers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I believe Council Member Dickinson,

you have adjourned memory.

I do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I wanted to just take

a moment this afternoon

to ask that we adjourn

this meeting

in the memory

of Mary Watts,

often known as Mother Watts,

who was a very long time

and beloved community leader

in Del Paso Heights.

She recently passed away

at the age of 81.

She was born on June 30,

as a matter of fact,

1943,

and dedicated more than 40 years

of her life

to serving

the North Sacramento community.

Witnessing a young boy

searching for food

in a dumpster

ignited her lifelong mission,

leading her to establish

what became known

as the TLC,

Soup Kitchen.

This nonprofit

provided thousands of meals

and ongoing support

for those in need

for over three decades,

guided by her motto,

a hand up,

not a hand out.

Mary was such an instrumental

and influential member

of the Del Paso Heights

and North Sacramento communities

that actually,

Council Member Sandy Schede,

when she sat in this spot,

proposed

and executed,

naming a street

in Mary's name

in Del Paso Nuevo.

And under the leadership,

Mary's leadership,

TLC Soup Kitchen

actually expanded

its reach

to include

distributing bread,

organizing holiday dinners,

coordinating community events,

and hosting summer camps

for children.

I can well remember

Mary annually

putting on

a Thanksgiving day

and week

event

for all

who wanted to come,

who didn't have

someplace

and family

to spend Thanksgiving with

to get a good,

nourishing meal

and companionship

at what can be

a very hard time

for people,

a hard time of the year

for people

who don't have,

a lot of us

are lucky enough

to have family

and friends

to spend those holidays in.

She leaves behind