All right.

Now call this meeting of the Sacramento City Council, a law and legislation committee

to order.

Clerk, please call the roll to establish a quorum.

Thank you, Chair.

Member Maple.

Here.

Member Gera.

It's currently absence.

Member Jennings.

Here.

And Chair Valenzuela.

I'm here.

Vice Mayor, would you like to lead us in the Land Acknowledgement and

Pledge of Allegiance, please?

Yes.

Please, my honor.

Please stand if you are able.

Please rise for the opening acknowledgments and honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and

tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nisanan people, the southern Maidu, Valiim

planes me walk, put to win two peoples and the people of the Wilson Rancheria, Sacramento's

only federally recognized tribe.

Maybe acknowledge and honor the native people who 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, contribution, and

lives.

Remain standing, salute and 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, Vice Mayor.

All right, we will start with our consent calendar.

We have three items on consent.

Do any of the members have any questions or wish to pull an item for a discussion?

All right.

All right.

All right.

It's moved and seconded.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed abstentions that passes unanimously with the members present.

All right.

Moving right along to our discussion, I a calendar item four related to density bonuses,

who is presenting?

Aye.

Okay.

Good morning, Chair and committee.

I'm Jimmy Mosler, Associate Planner in the Community Development Department, and I'll

be giving today's presentation on Title 17 omnivis ordinances.

As an overview of this presentation, I'll first briefly describe what omnivis means.

I'll then provide a description of the categories of amendments, these ordinances, and then I'll

provide an overview of the amendments, and then I'll describe what review steps are necessary

for these ordinances.

So what does omnivis mean?

You may recall from an omnivis ordinance I was presented earlier this year that it's

a bill as a proposed law that covers a variety of topics, comes from Latin and means two,

four, by width, or from everything.

And these three ordinances cover a variety of topics in three main categories.

The first is state law consistency.

There's many housing and planning laws passed every year, and so these amendments ensure

our code is consistent with state law.

Second is streamlining.

We often notice things that aren't working quite the way we'd like, and so these amendments

allow us to make changes without establishing a new policy.

And then the last category is cleanup, which is correcting a lot of typos and incorrect

references and errors like that.

Before going into an overview, I wanted to highlight the background and attachment, and

the staff report, this goes into more detail in all of the amendments proposed, including

our rationale, the section number for each of the changes.

All right, so the first category is state law consistency.

For accessory dwelling units, Senate bill 477 was signed earlier this year, and it reorganized

state law, but it didn't make any policy changes.

And so the proposed amendments update the government code section references in our code.

For charging stations, it's been a statewide requirement since 2016 to administratively approve

EV charging stations, and Senate bill 1291 placed the same requirement for hydrogen fueling

stations, and so the amendment clarifies that both of these are exempt from our discussionary

site plan and design review process.

For housing, there's a few bills.

The first is a sound loop bill 1490.

This makes adaptive reuse projects with 100% units affordable by right, 100% units affordable

by use by right.

Senate bill 4 makes housing development unlearn owned by a religious and higher education

institutions allowed, and the ordinance for both of these establishes our local processing

procedures.

And then for density bonus, there are a number of bills passed each year that make numerous

changes to this law, and so our proposed amendments create a new density bonus ordinance that is

more resilient to the changes in state law.

The second category of amendments is streamlining.

So there's four amendments in this category that will walk us through.

The first amendment is from an issue we observed in Title 17 where a site plan and design review

application is required to determine what the set box are when there's an odd shaped

lot, even if a site plan and design review application wouldn't otherwise be required.

And so the proposed amendment authorizes the zoning administrator to make this determination

when no application is required.

Our rationale for this is that removes a burdensome costs for basic regulatory information.

Second amendment deals with accessory structures, so there are some confusing standards in our

code for trellises, pergolas, and swimming pools.

There's also currently no standards for arbores.

So our proposed amendment is to clarify the difference between trellises and pergolas, simplify

the wording for swimming pools, and provide a definition in standards for arbores.

Our rationale is to clarify information and increase accuracy provided to the public.

Next one deals with modifying approved site plan and design review application.

So once an application has approved if someone wants to come back and meet changes, even

if it's a minor change, this requires the same fee.

And so our proposed amendment is to, similar to how we treat conditional use permits, it's

to establish a minor and major modification process.

Our rationale is to provide a consistent approach to how our other entitlements are processed

and reduce unnecessary costs for applicants.

The last one is for tentative maps.

So the subdivision review committee reviews, tentative maps, and provides conditions of approval

before they are considered by the zoning administrator.

If a map is nearing expiration and they're requesting to extend the life of that map,

the code currently still requires this map to go to the subdivision review committee again,

though no conditions or changes are proposed to the map.

And so our amendment is removing this requirement for time extensions to go to the subdivision

review committee.

Our rationale is eliminating an extra stop in the entitlement process.

The last category is administrative cleanup.

So I won't walk you through every single typo and error that we corrected, but I did

want to highlight the removal of the ASCHA avenue and labor intensive overlay zones.

So Title 17 was comprehensively updated in 2013 and the standards for both of these

overlay zones were removed at that time.

However, the title was left for both of these in the designation still remains on the

zoning map.

And so our amendment is to repeal both of these chapters, get rid of the title text and

rezone the parcels to remove the overlay from the official zoning map.

And our rationale is to maintain the code from errors and consistent with prior city council

actions.

Time for review staffs.

This ordinance was presented to the planning and design commission in October and they

made a motion for the ordinance to city council.

This ordinance is also being presented to this committee today and it would also need

to go to the city council as well.

So our recommendation is to review the ordinances and move staff's recommendation.

That concludes my presentation and staff is available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Any questions or comments from the committee?

Not seeing any?

Energy and emotion?

Thank you.

The back-hand is from Rcara, seconded by the vice mayor.

All in favor, please say aye.

Opposed?

Oppostain?

That passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Planning staff.

Appreciate you.

And for the record, I had no public comment on this item.

Thank you.

I assume this is much better than I should ask.

All right.

Moving right along to some hazards on a line of people who want to talk about like conforming

changes to the planning code.

All right.

Next item five, permitting requirements for special needs housing.

Go right ahead.

Yeah.

Hello again, Jamie Mosler, Associate Planner in the Community Development Department.

Also be giving a presentation on an ordinance for housing element program, which is titled

permitting requirements for special needs housing.

As an overview, this presentation will first provide some background over this work

originates in our housing element, will then provide an overview of the ordinance, and

then describe the revostops necessary.

So as some background, state law requires every city and county in California to adopt a

housing element as part of its general plan.

Our current housing element was adopted by City Council in 2021.

And this document sets forth several policies and programs to address the housing needs

in Sacramento.

One of those programs being age 15, this directs the city to ensure compliance with state

law and encourage special needs housing through actions pertaining to the five housing types

listed on the slide.

So we'll walk through the direction for each of these housing types one by one.

So first is low barrier navigation centers.

These are defined in state law as a housing first low barrier service in which shelter that's

focused on moving people into permanent housing provides temporary living facilities while

case managers connect individuals to services.

Low barrier means best practices to reduce barriers to entries such as sorts of possessions,

pets or presence of partners if it's not a population specific site.

Assembly Bill 101 from a few years ago required all cities and counties to allow these centers

by right and mixed use zones and non residential zones that permit multi unit dwellings.

And so program age 15 directs the city to amend the zoning code to allow these centers

where required by state law.

So what the ordinance does is it implements this direction by adding low barrier navigation

centers to the zoning code, adding a definition for them since they're not currently in our code.

And then allowing them by right in the zones where state law requires will also be creating

an application form specific to these but explains the requirements.

The second housing type are temporary residential shelters.

These shelters provide short term temporary housing to individuals or families for free

or substantially below cost.

Services may be provided such as the ones listed on the slide.

They're also known as emergency shelters in state law.

This might sound similar to the low barrier navigation centers but they are defined differently

in state law with different requirements.

And low barrier navigation centers are required to be service enriched while services may

be more minimal at a temporary residential shelter.

So program age 15 provides three points of direction to revise the zoning code for these.

The first is to comply with the requirements under state law.

Second to establish a higher threshold for the number of beds allowed by right.

And third to ensure that the zones where shelters are allowed by right provide enough capacity

and appropriate locations.

So the housing ordinance implements this direction by revising the standards to comply with

state law.

State law sets parameters for the types of standards that local jurisdictions can apply

to shelters.

So any standard that exceeded this was removed.

It also proposes.

So right now shelters with up to 24 beds are allowed by right.

It proposes increasing that to 100 individuals which is consistent with Sacramento County

zoning.

And then lastly there's a detailed analysis in the staff report but essentially state

law requires that in those zones where shelters are allowed by right that there are enough

sites in the near transit and amenities.

And so we mapped out and found that there were enough vacant sites in those zoning designations.

That would allow shelters.

Additionally the ordinance also proposes lowering the review level for the shelters that

do require conditional use permit from the planning and design commission to the zoning

administrator level.

Conditional use permits were identified as a potential constraint for larger shelters

generally.

And this would reduce the time and cost for processing applications while still allowing

a public hearing process.

Next housing type are single room occupancy hotels or SROs.

This is a land use with six or more rooms or efficiency units that is the primary residents

of the guests.

Similar to dormitory where they might smaller private rooms where they're be shared kitchens

or bathrooms.

It's also known as a residential hotel and our local zoning.

Historically there are a lot of these in the downtown area and there's a history of that

included in the staff report.

So the direction from the program was to update the zoning code to allow SROs by right

and commercial and multi unit dwelling zones.

So what the ordinance does is it changes the review level right now.

These typically require a planning and design commission level conditional use permit

brings it down to staff level.

An administrative permit to verify compliance with the standards.

We also revise the special use regulations to reflect how SROs operate today.

Next is supportive housing.

This is defined in state law as housing with no limit on the length of stay.

It is linked to on site or off site services and occupied by the target population which

is defined on the slide.

State law requires local jurisdictions to treat this the same as a dwelling.

So meaning if there's supportive housing within an apartment building for zoning purposes

it should be treated the same as any apartment building.

So a bill was passed a few years ago that required cities to allow these by right when there's

100% affordable and supportive housing units where multi unit and mixed youth development

is permitted.

And so program H15 directs the city to develop a processing procedure to comply with this.

So what the ordinance does is it adds a chapter to the zoning code that shows how we'll process

the supportive housing that's eligible for streamlining.

Additionally we'll also be creating an application form specific to these as well.

And then the last type are group homes.

So there's no official definition of what a group home is but there's several land uses

in title 17 that would fall within what could be described as a group home.

And residents me share living cooking, western facilities and the primary activity is dwelling

with persons who are not biologically related.

Services may or may not be provided in these.

And so the direction here was to review and amend the zoning code as necessary to ensure

requirements for group homes with seven or more persons are consistent with state law

and fair housing requirements.

So explaining on this so many of the group home uses that were on that slide if there are

more than six persons living there they do require conditional use permit.

Currently state law does allow conditional use permit requirement if there's state license

facilities or state license services being provided in these facilities with more than

six persons.

But additionally state law also requires that any group homes that fall within supportive

housing and transitional housing are treated the same as a dwelling.

So taking that all into consideration this ordinance implements the direction by revising

the definition of residential care facilities, specify that their state license and then

also revising the definition of many of those group home uses to clarify that they're separate

from supportive and transitional housing and that will follow state law protections for

those.

Additionally, as part of work to bring title 17 into consistency with the new 2040 general

plan will also be evaluating a new land use classification.

But dwelling hopefully simplify all these different housing types and really align with

our policy goals to broaden the rate of housing types and neighborhoods including group homes.

Terms overview stops this ordinance was also presented to the planning and design commission

in October, commuting motion forwarding it to city council.

It's being presented to you all today and then it would also need to go to city council

as well.

And our recommendation is to review the ordinance and move staff's recommendation.

That concludes my presentation or available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you so much.

Any clerk do we have any public comment on this item?

Thank you chair.

I have no speakers on this item.

Any questions or comments from committee go ahead council member Garrett.

Thank you chair appreciate the presentation here.

One concern or a question that I have more than concern is how does on the group home

sides that affect our ability to execute the scattered site housing.

Now the county has taken over much of the housing left over from Sacramento

Self-Fell housing but that was a viable option for us to be able to find opportunities

for folks transitioning into say more permanent housing.

But are there, have we seen any conflict with that or allow us more flexibility?

Yeah, sorry we're looking at each other because the term scattered sites is new to me.

Well, we discussed it for about nine years so I hope we can at least figure out when

we're having our conversation at the two o'clock how we're going to have scattered site

housing then how we're going to put that in our definitions or stop using the term altogether.

Good morning chair members committee Greg Sandlin, planning director.

I believe these regulations would certainly add more flexibility.

The county's program if I understand correctly is more of flacing homeless individuals

and in housing I think group homes certainly could be part of that that's also part of

a public program that's funded so there's even more flexibility with zoning regulations

so I don't think with publicly funded type housing through the county our zoning regulations

would be an impediment implementing that program.

Okay well as this moves council let's make I'd like to make sure that we as part of this

code clean up that we address that component as well.

And if the county and even the city on the housing side of we're using the term and

have used it in the term in the past scattered site housing that at least we take care

of that during this code cleanup.

No more questions here Madam Chair I'll go ahead and move the item.

Do we have a second?

We have a second.

Great thank you Vice Chair.

Any further comments or questions?

Seeing none.

All in favor please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Stain?

Passes unanimously.

Thank you very much.

All right moving along now to item six council member proposal requests.

For committee consideration to declare a state of emergency regarding traffic death.

We have the pleasure of having one of those council members present on this committee so

they get to do a presentation.

So go ahead Vice Mayor.

Thank you Chair and I really just want to appreciate that I have the opportunity to kind

of present here.

I know we have kind of a wonky process here at the city that if you're not on the committee

you can't come present and that can present challenges.

So thank you for that.

I really want to start off by opening this in honor of someone who recently lost their

lives on on streets of Sacramento and that's Muhammad Sidik who died in North and Thomas

on September 9th while walking his granddaughter to school and it's just one example of 29 deaths

so far just this year in the city of Sacramento pedestrian deaths and cyclists.

So I just think it's appropriate to open in his honor and then also in honor of someone

who we actually don't know their name yet has not been released to their next of kin but

I'm fast away on Norwood and Bell Avenue in district one also on November 6th so just

want to start by that.

I want to thank my two co-sponsors are Mayor Gerald Steinberg and Mayor Pro Temcreen

at Tal Montes for their partnership in this as well as the Coalition of Organizations,

many of them are in this room right now who have been thought partners during this process.

Today we're presented with a unique opportunity to take meaningful action on increasingly serious

crisis that affects every single one of our communities in Sacramento, pedestrian and

bicyclists safety.

Traffic violence has claimed too many lives and left many families grieving as I mentioned

29 already so far this year.

Over the past decade with Sacramento's within our city limits there have been over 5,000

collisions involving pedestrians or cyclists leading to at least 264 reported preventable

fatalities so that is striking.

These numbers are not just statistics.

These are real people, children, parents, grandparents, members of our community who

lives have been forever changed and that stays with me and I know all of us care deeply

about that.

Despite our commitment to safer streets like our Vision Zero initiative and the complete

streets projects the reality is that the rate of severe injuries and fatalities is still

increasing in our streets.

High risk quarters remain dangerous, underscoring the urgent need for more comprehensive and immediate

action.

It's particularly important to acknowledge that the burden of unsafe street falls heavily

in the most vulnerable populations.

Our elderly, children and residents in lower income neighborhoods who may rely on alternative

forms of transportation like walking and biking as their primary modes of transportation.

This has exacerbated existing inequalities and put communities at a greater risk.

I want to shine a light on the work of our local advocates and the community organizations

who have worked with us have been steadfast in their mission to push for safer and

more inclusive streets.

They shared stories, gathered data and brought to attention in the areas where immediate

changes necessary.

So many of them are here.

Civic Thread formerly walked Sacramento, Saba, Sacramento area by school advocates.

The members of our active transportation commission in particular, the chair, Allie Doer, and our

commissioner, Jeff Littaker, North and Thomas Jive, the 50-quarter transportation management

agency, Sacramento Metropolitan advocates for rail and transit and climate plan among

many others.

I know I'm leaving people out.

I just want to thank you for your partnership and helping us think through this and create

the best policy forward.

So I believe that our response to this is a city needs to be swift and needs to be impactful.

Backed by meaningful resources.

And before I get into the specifics of the resolution language, I also want to call

out that these proposed actions are in addition to not in replacement of the reports issued

by our active transportation commission.

I believe it's imperative that we as a council really consider that.

All of their recommendations and put some real, real might behind that, including our resources.

So with that, I want to briefly go over what the resolution would do.

One, declare a state of emergency due to ongoing pedestrian safety crisis.

While we have requested a formal opinion from our city attorney's office on the legal

implications of the state of emergency, I want to be clear that the city is not alone in

this.

Both the city and county of San Francisco have passed a similar resolution as well as the

city of Carlsbad.

And so I look forward to hearing from the city attorney's office what this means for

us, but we certainly would not be alone.

Two, it would direct staff to identify resources for public awareness campaign focused on safety,

especially reducing speeding, improving crosswalk yields, and ensuring safer interactions

at intersections.

This isn't necessarily something that we would need to create from scratch.

In fact, there are already similar campaigns that we could tack on to and help support,

including slow down Sacramento.

We work alongside them and our colleagues at the office of traffic safety.

I'll be requesting today that we move forward a version that includes the replacement of

the word funds with resources.

That was a recommendation that came out of our round table that we had last week.

And again, I want to thank the advocates for that.

Two, this would reaffirm our commitment to vision zero.

As a reminder, vision zero is a commitment from the city to eliminate traffic deaths by 2027.

Something that we're not on track to do.

And our complete streets initiatives, which are already making a real difference in areas

like Broadway and Franklin Boulevard.

Four, it would direct staff to expedite safety projects in the most dangerous areas.

And to secure additional funding, including local, state, and federal grants.

Something that I know our team is already working on now, so we really want to call out

the incredible staff at the city of Sacramento who get the city millions and millions of

dollars for these projects.

So this would just ensure that we're ramping that up and continuing to do that.

I have direct staff to identify, fund, and rapidly implement quick build, sometimes called

tactical urbanist solutions in our highest risk areas such as many roundabouts, road diets,

restriping, and other changes to the built environment.

And I want to do a special thank you to Councilmember Valenzuela who has been advocating and

pushing for this for many years in the city.

Sixth, Director City Auditor to prioritize her planned pedestrian safety audit.

Seven, provide regular public updates to council members and the public on the progress that we made

in improving pedestrian and bicycle safety.

Our initial proposal included a clause directed at increasing enforcement.

And I want to thank again the advocates for coming to the table last week and many other

times in sharing not only their perspectives, but the statistical, the data, and the statistics

that come along with this.

And so this has been shown to be a less effective strategy than focusing on the other built environment

changes that we know are important.

And so I would like to request that if this committee chooses to move this proposal forward,

we remove the enforcement clause as stuff works on this.

We know that data shows that traffic enforcement can carry persistent racial biases.

And our path forward should not replicate the patterns that have contributed to these disparities.

And so I do want to call out that out and think those who have been a part of this.

Instead, I propose that we invest our resources and solutions on community involvement and

focus on equitable sustainable changes, community-led planning, and improvements that build trust

in communities.

And so that's something that's really important not just to the advocates, but to our office

as well.

So I'm requesting that this committee vote to allow stuff to devote the time and energy

and resources to develop a pedestrian safety policy and prepare it for full council review.

So I hope I'm to move this to the full council.

And I just want to acknowledge that this is not going to solve everything.

We know that there's a lot that needs to go into this.

Not just as a city, but throughout all jurisdictions.

This is a start.

And I think that if we can prioritize pedestrian safety and safety as a city, it helps us in

not only our upcoming budget conversations, right?

We're going to invest our money as a city to ensure that we can actually reduce and hopefully

eliminate traffic fatalities within our city limits.

But also, what does it look like in the future?

What are the things that we might want to see, for example, on a 2026 ballot that might

come from the community and how can that resources like that help fund these projects?

So I know that I've spoken too long, but with that, I would respectfully ask for your

aye vote to move this forward to the full council and looking forward to your comments and

questions.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Vice Mayor.

City Clerk, do we have public comments on this item?

Thank you, Chair.

I have seven speaker slips.

Our first speaker is Cheryl Crochet, followed by Don Gibson.

Thank you, Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Cheryl Crochet, and I'm the executive director of the Sacramento Transportation

Management Association, as well as the 50-Cord or Transportation Management Association.

These are both nonprofits.

The Sacramento TMA is a membership-based nonprofit.

Both of these organizations help people walk, bike, carpool, and use transit more.

And our member organizations represent some 90,000 workers, mostly within the city of Sacramento.

At some 200 or so workplaces and offices.

So we are in these workplaces every day, helping to educate people about their transportation

options, trying to connect them with resources to help them save money, be more active, reduce

the carbon footprint of their options by choosing sustainable transportation.

When one of our member employees walking back from lunch one day to his office at the Natural Resources Agency Building,

at 7th and P, gets fatally struck by a car.

It has a really chilling effect on his co-workers and everyone who works in that building.

And 7th and P, that block is not one that you would describe as deficient in terms of its infrastructure.

It's not on the high injury network.

So it's not a priority for improvements.

But I think what that particular case points to is a systematic or system-wide deficiency

that in engineering and in the infrastructure that teaches drivers that it's okay to speed.

And so they are accustomed to speeding through our streets.

And then even when they are on the streets that have great bike infrastructure and great sidewalks and bullbouts.

And those kinds of things.

If you're going to answer your time is complete.

They drive too fast.

So I encourage you to support moving this forward.

Our next speaker is Don Gibson, followed by Mark Harmon.

Hello city council members.

My name is Don Gibson and I serve on the Active Transportation Commission for District 3.

I'm speaking on my own behalf.

Myself and other commissioners are deeply frustrated by the lack of progress towards Vision Zero,

which was implemented first in January 2017.

Every time one of us hears or sees a serious traffic incident,

we're often met with the response from the city.

There's nothing we can do.

There's no funding for a fix.

Even though these are often city-owned and managed streets, we're met with a shrug.

We on the ATC understand that we're purely an advisory body.

And all we have is our words.

And at the end of every meeting, I take a moment to acknowledge each individual who was either walking, biking, or rolling.

That died from traffic violence since our last meeting.

Sadly almost every meeting, there's a few people I have to acknowledge.

Even more frustrating is they're the same roads over and over and over again.

Fruit Ridge, Florida, Norwood, ClubCender, and more.

We can fix these roads.

These are solvable problems.

Cities across the country have reduced the amount of traffic violence by fixing our infrastructure.

I hope you all please take that 10 minutes to read the ATC's report.

I was one that drafted the figures for a report highlighting the scale of our problem.

Defs from traffic collisions outnumbered those of homicides by about 45% in 2023.

Since 2014, traffic fatalities in the city of Sacramento have been more than homicides for eight out of the last 10 years.

Sacramento is sadly the highest rate of traffic violence injuries for the top 15 cities in the state of California.

When we first implemented Vision Zero, again, seven years ago now,

we have not seen a reduction in fatalities or serious injuries.

As I end the ATC means I want to acknowledge that at least six people who are walking by

can rolling died since Vice Mayor Maple introduced this emergency resolution and council.

Thank you all for your consideration today.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is Mark Harmon, followed by Dan Allison.

Hello.

Excuse me.

Hello.

My name is Mark Harmon.

I'm just a general member of the public.

I live in District 7 and I just want to let you know that I support the need to issue the state of emergency proposal in Sacramento.

We need long term solutions, not just band-aids and then move on to the next set of problems.

So please direct the city manager to work with staff on quick build and technical urbanism improvements that can be implemented in high risk areas.

These are immediate cheap fix solutions that can have a lasting impact.

And I just want to let you know that I wrote my bike here today.

I almost got hit by UPS truck in a bike lane.

They almost hit me.

So anyway, it's real.

It's out there and I would appreciate it.

Oh, and one more thing, if people are wondering why I don't just drive a car instead of ride my bike, it's because I feel less safe in a car than I do my bicycle because I'm more maneuverable on my bike.

When I drive my car, I was getting in major accidents once a year and none of them, I believe they're not on my fault as people running into me.

So just let me know.

Thank you.

For your comments, our next speaker is Dan Allison, followed by David Moore.

Good morning.

Dan Allison, I'm representing Sacramento Transit, advocates and writers or star, which was one of the organizations that participated in the outreach program.

Our interest in roadway safety is that people need to be able to get to and from transit safely and they can't.

That's a fact.

A number of the fatalities and injuries have been related to people going to and from transit.

We support the emergency declaration.

We support the removal of the law enforcement item.

If there is enforcement, it must be automated to remove the bias that's built into much law enforcement.

The best solution and the thing that should be most prominent is changes to the roadway infrastructure.

First temporary, which is often called quick builder, technical or feminism and eventually permanent.

And I believe that the city must shift away from its commitment to not spending city funds on roadway safety.

The only thing the city spends on roadway safety is matches for grants.

They don't spend any general funds and that must change.

We must change our budget to reflect the reality that the most dangerous part of living in this city is using our roadways.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Our next speaker is David Moore, followed by Melissa Harris.

Thank you committee members.

My name is David Moore.

I'm here on behalf of Civic Thread, who has been advocating for safer streets for over 20 years of our organization.

I'm here with a couple of people from thousands of residents across work both in the city and outside of the city who want safer streets who feel like that is the barrier to them using actor transportation.

And for those who don't have the choice are unfortunately suffering the repercussions as has been pointed out.

I'm also here as a resident of district five who bikes fairly frequently.

I'm here as a parent of two young children, both of which are showing a keen interest in biking and I would like them to continue to do so safely.

I'm going to point out that in a perfect world we would not be here today, right?

We are here today as a result of countless decisions that have been made over the course of time, right?

From the 50s of our road design and transportation and land use policy up until every year of budget that we failed to prioritize road safety in the way that it should be, right?

Before you today is also another point in that timeline to make a decision to change that course of action to choose today to prioritize safety in the way that it should have been in the past and in the future.

Move forward with streets that are not only more equitable, right?

Which is why we address the enforcement component, but that are effective and that is the quick build component as well.

So I hope today you can choose to change the course of action, signals to the city, to other city staff, to residents that the city has taken this seriously and willing to change what has been going on for too long.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Our next speaker is Melissa Harris, followed by Ben, Raider Storf.

Hello, my name is Melissa Harris. I am the District to Active Transportation Commissioner, but I'm here representing myself.

While I urge you to pass this emergency resolution, I have mixed feelings. This is not an emergency.

It's been something we've known for a long time. That's why we have Vision Zero, and it's adopted. It's why the Active Transportation Commission gave your report two years ago, with the same recommendations that we revised.

I have received a report from the City Council's request last year, in which we have submitted again, and you'll be saying before you.

So I urge you to pass this emergency resolution, because I hope that it will be taken seriously.

Every month, people die. People get hurt. We're not even talking about.

And that doesn't include the near misses. And all the people who can't enjoy our streets, because they are afraid.

I live less than a quarter of a mile for the Marconi Light Rail Station, which has no sidewalks for my house to get to it.

Not one crosswalk, an insufficient lighting where I fight against buses that the city put in at that station.

And it's not my personal fears. I've written in Light Rail in Washington, D.C., taking buses in Davis. It feels very different here.

Okay. That station was put in 87. It's been over 30 years. How long do we have to wait? There is a death two years ago around the corner, when someone has hit.

There is a road that says it's 35 miles an hour, but it feels like a highway through my community.

That's what it feels like. I can say a lot of other things, but I want you to know that we are afraid, and people are dying. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Our next speaker is Ben Radarstorff, followed by Isaac Gonzalez.

Thank you, councilmembers. My name is Ben Radarstorff. I'm one of the co-presidents of House Sacramento. We're an all-volunteer pro-housing and livable city's advocacy organization.

Here to strongly support this emergency declaration with gratitude and appreciation for Vice Mayor Maple, Mayor Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem, telemantez, who have all really engaged very productively with community building consensus and more importantly momentum behind these sorts of solutions.

As many have said, including Vice Mayor Maple, that this declaration must be a first step. It must be where we are beginning the hard work of finding the resources to fix this problem.

I agree with others who have said that it has to involve the city putting its own money up to solve this issue.

I know the response is going to be that we cannot afford it. This is the tough austere times. But the reality is we are already paying for this problem.

As many have said, already 29 sacraments have lost their life so far this year and it's only November.

The federal government, even if we look at this problem from this cold hard calculus of budget analysis, which I know is all of your job.

According to the federal government, the statistical value of a human life is just around $11 million right now.

And even though it feels really callous to put the problem in this terms, what that means is that this crisis is costing the city of Sacramento just under $320 million in equivalent cost every single year.

Now I want us to think about how we would respond if every single year there was a natural disaster that caused $320 million of damage in our city.

I don't think we would think about how this has to compare to other priorities. We would find the money. We have to find the money. We have to find the resources. It's not simply the human cost.

It is an issue that we pay for one way or the other. The question is do people have to die in the process? Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Our final speaker is Isaac Gonzalez.

Good morning. My name is Isaac Gonzalez. I'm the vice chair of the Act of Transparency Mission, Representative District 6 and the founder of Slowdown Sacramento.

I'm here today to voice my support for the emergency declaration. I want to thank Vice Mayor Katie Maple and all the other council members have been working this for a long time.

I'm just over a year ago in this 48 right outside of City Hall. We held a kickoff press conference to announce the foundation of Slowdown Sacramento.

I met with not only friends, many people who are here in the room today but strangers from all across Sacramento who all had personal stories to share about how big of a violence had impacted lives either by near misses.

their family members being hurt, maimed or killed,

or themselves experiencing terrifying conditions

on Sacramento's roadways.

And over the past year, if you drive around Sacramento

or visit many corners of Sacramento now,

you'll see blue slow down Sacramento signs

nearly everywhere.

Maybe if we were on the ballot,

we would have beat every single person

compared by lawn signs.

My point being is that across the city,

the moment was ripe and the energy was there

for dramatic change to come to our community.

And every week it's not an email to all of my followers.

And I never get back.

No, never mind.

Let's just keep going as fast as possible.

Let's not do anything to slow down Sacramento.

Every week I get responses to people going,

yes, we're ready.

The moment is now, we cannot wait any longer.

We can't wait for anyone else to die.

And what I'm really hearted to see is that

some of the things that we started talking about a year ago

and that many of the people in this room have known about

in our circles regarding traffic safety

is that now people are using the lexicon of real solutions

that have been used in municipalities around the world.

Quick bill, tactical urbanism.

These are not phrases that you're not understandingably.

Now, this is things like we're going,

why aren't we doing this yet here in Sacramento?

And I believe your constituents will feel the same way.

They'll support you when you move this forward.

So I hope that today you will move this forward

to city council.

Any details that we need to figure out?

Let's figure out there.

Let's get this moving.

We can't wait any longer.

Thank you very much.

All right, thank you everybody for coming

to engage in this important conversation.

We'll start the committee conversation

with Council Member Gara.

Thank you very much, Chair.

And I wanted to first thank all the advocates

that I've worked with here for many years

on bicycle safety and actually the development of vision zero

and then some of the improvements that we've been able to do.

And all of us have known too well

the many of the fatalities that have occurred.

In fact, that's part of the reason why

we started that movement moving forward.

And so I want to thank the long tirelessly hard work

on walk audits, analysis, and advocating to the city

even before my time on the council here.

I want to thank again the authors that have put this idea forward

again, because I do think it helps us in having

a stronger voice as a council while we have a vision

zero policy.

I think when we go to our joint powers authorities,

the council of governments, all of those other entities

that we participate in, particularly when

we've developed a transportation measure,

that it can help send a guiding and strong message about how

our regional funds are allocated and spent.

And the fact is, many people commute to Sacramento

from other areas.

And it is many of us who are faced with the dangers

of those commuters as well.

I bike with my kids in the morning.

That's our option, our cargo bike, with the electric assist

and makes it a lot easier now.

We can do both of the kids and further,

but it is that constant fear of the way that our roadways

were designed, Stockton Boulevard, that we're

trying to convert and now into a much more transit-oriented,

supportive corridor, was old Highway 998.

So we've got decades of structure and development

that have led us to where we are.

Post World War II area, it began the immense car culture.

And so I think that the direction where this is going

is at least helping us guide this conversation

as a county that we need to do.

But I do have one concern here, and that

is the complete removal of enforcement on the resolution.

Because enforcement, not only I think,

when we had four traffic officers, when I first came onto the council,

now we have more motor officers that are helping with that.

But there are other tools that now are coming

to light with technology.

So we see that in the legislature, where the legislature

has authorized some pilot programs on speed enforcement

and speeding, and those challenges of how those policies

get rolled out are important.

But I do think that that plays a role.

Clearly, technical quick builds are an important tool.

We've been using those.

We had a great, during the California Clean Air Day,

we had a great presentation of how quickly that could happen

if we can have a pot of money dedicated

to changing dangerous areas, where it was designed, again,

post World War II, to increase speed.

And in fact, our old policies of a level of service

gave grading an A to F, an A meant an unpeated vehicle

moving through traffic at its maximum allowed speed.

That was what the grade in, and a grade was a positive grade.

And so I think that level of design over decade

has changed where we are today.

And so I think flipping that around and figuring out

how do we make safer roadways, safer speed.

And so that if we're ever going to meet our air quality

numbers here, we have to have a viable approach

for people to walk, to bike, to use, mix transit.

And even if they're driving to, say, the power in station,

and when they get off the light rail,

and they have to face a walking risk when they're downtown,

that's a problem.

So, or vice versa, people who live downtown

are taking it up to Butterfield in the county section.

And they have to cross full symbol of art.

I mean, those are the, we have to look at our roadways

in that context.

So, Chair, I'm glad to move the item forward

where direct staff to work on this item.

I do know that there are legal concerns and questions

that we should review and analyze.

But I think other cities have started that leg work already

to look at those questions and concerns.

So, we can benefit from that early legal work on that.

And my recommendation is at least to keep the enforcement

piece in there just because, as Mr. Allison mentioned,

there are different tools that are available today.

So, those are it, and that's my motion.

Great, and thank you.

And just to be clear, your motion is to have staff work

on this and bring this to council,

or to have staff work on this.

OK.

No, that's correct.

I think, I think, you know, if it was, I think,

if it's a declaration that if it was a deeper ordinance policy,

I would probably say, let's bring it back here

so we can, you know, work.

I'm not fine.

I just wasn't wanting to clarify the motion.

Thank you.

Vice Chair, Jennings.

Thank you, Chair.

I too want to support option two, as far as directing staff,

to work on the issue, and then bring it back

to the full City Council for discussion and action.

And in that whole process, I also want

to thank the Vice Mayor and her staff for bringing this forward.

Very good report, incredible job, a lot of information,

appreciate all the points that you brought out,

because I think it is important that we recommit to vision zero

in this process, and that we also prioritize the communities

that are most vulnerable, that are being impacted,

and take a look at where, you know, individuals are getting hurt

as a result of trying to get to and from,

and the disparities that exist in that,

so that we can focus on those first.

So directing staff to identify, dedicated,

and ongoing source of funding is another thing

that I want to make sure happens, because I think,

if in fact, we keep using the excuse of our budget deficit,

or not having the money, we've got to focus on finding the money,

and making sure that we focus on this priority.

When we're talking about 29 people who have given up their lives

as a result of issues in our, in people driving too fast,

issues in traffic, issues in trying to get from two to from,

for real, we need to make sure that we don't continue to do this

in record numbers that people lose their lives as a result

of those things that we can change.

So the only thing that I want to say as a relates to option two

is that there has to be a sense of urgency,

and this has to come back to us sooner than later.

And so I just really think we need to have a timeline

and give staff direction to develop a timeline

that shows a sense of urgency so that we can save lives

as opposed to additional people getting hurt.

And then the research of the liability issue,

I'm sure we can get that information sooner than later as well.

And is there a way that we can also move forward in the event

that there is increased liability with the declaration

of emergency of an emergency?

Is there a way, is there a plan two that we move to in the event

that there is that issue?

And so can we have that same sense of urgency

without declaring an emergency?

Can we have the same sense of urgency to deal with this issue

and move forward?

And so if legal comes back with that, that's a conversation.

I'd rather have sooner than later.

So I think those are the things I want to say.

I support the effort.

I've got a young lady in the audience today

and I'm not going to call her out.

But she was the victim of a car that hit her on her way to school.

And she has recovered and is doing incredibly well.

And I'm extremely happy for her.

And that we're not talking about her being one of the 29.

We're talking about her going to college,

her being an advocate, her stepping up

and fighting this fight to help us to make our streets safer.

And so I asked her to come here today.

And like I said, I'm not going to call her out

because I don't want to embarrass her.

But at the same time, I'm just so proud of her.

And I just want her and her family to know

that I'm very proud of her recovery

and her pursuit to change what happened to her

so it won't happen to others.

And was that a second on the motion?

Vice chair.

Absolutely.

I thought.

Sorry.

I just got to ask the question in other words.

Yeah, thank you all for those comments.

I do want to start also by acknowledging

all of those who have died in District 4 across the city.

I want to acknowledge the act of transportation, commissioners,

and advocates who do this work sometimes without pay

to raise these issues and have been doing it for a really long time.

And I also want to acknowledge our staff, many of whom

I see in the audience who, frankly, make miracles happen

with pennies.

And I just want to acknowledge the dedication,

because I know it's not from lack of want.

That staff has not been able to make this a reality

in the city of Sacramento, right?

I have to admit, a very strong, like, conflict of emotion

that I feel like I heard in a lot of the public comment today

with both this excitement of wanting to support this,

because yes, it's an emergency, and we need to do more.

And just this absolute frustration that I feel

that it doesn't feel like, again, we're doing enough

and that we had an opportunity to do a lot more sooner.

It's not a mystery why these projects haven't happened.

We don't have the general fund dollars

to pull down the federal and state grants

that we could to implement these projects.

It's just, it's that simple.

We're not allocating the money to the crisis that we should.

And, you know, just the time I've been on council,

we've increased our police department budget by $100 million,

just in the time that I've been in council.

$100 million every year of additional money for public safety.

And every year, there's this call to say,

well, what about the rest of public safety, right?

Like, what about the infrastructure?

What about the crosswalks?

What about the stoplights?

What about the things that prevent the need for PD to come out

and do a traffic investigation and figure out

what happened after somebody's died?

You know, last year council member Vang and I

submitted the entire act of transportation commission

recommendations as a whole, as a council member request.

And it didn't move forward.

It went to budget and audit and we decided

we didn't have the money.

And once again, we made a choice.

We've made a choice every year that I've been on this council.

We've made a choice years before prior to me

or any of us being on council.

Every year we choose other things

to spend our money on than doing this.

And so that's where my frustration comes from right now

as I'm both glad this is happening.

And I'm also incredibly frustrated that just

in the time that I've been in office,

I've tried multiple times to get even just $1 million.

I remember at one point I was like, just take $2 million.

I think we were going to increase the police department's

funding by $30 million in my first budget.

And I said, well, what if we just took $2 million

of this $30 million?

This isn't money they have now.

This is new money.

Let's just take $2 million and give that to public works,

right?

And let them use that as match money for projects.

And they're going to turn that into $10 million.

We know that because they're that good.

But like, let's give them just a little bit of money.

And every year we said no.

And so I don't doubt any of our frustration, our anger,

about the incidents and the death that have happened

on our streets.

But I am deeply, deeply frustrated

with the constant conflict and what we say we value

and what we do at this city.

It's been just maddening.

I will say that San Francisco, that this policy is modeled

after adopted their state of emergency in 2019

and has not seen a reduction in traffic fatalities.

In fact, I found an article from San Francisco Supervisor

this year asking to reintroduce a new emergency declaration

five years later, once again, trying to say,

hey, Supervisor's less prioritized, this is prioritized.

And so I've named that not to say that I don't think

we should do this, but to say that declaring an emergency

is far from enough.

And I hear that acknowledgement up here today.

But I'm worried that we are going to finish this

and then move on with our work as a city and not take

the steps that we know we need to be taking

to allocate the actual dollars to make sure

that this projects happen and that these roads get safer.

I'm really worried about that because we saw that happen

just in San Francisco.

And I don't know how this will be different for us.

And so I'm looking for that when this comes back to council.

I'm also just looking for, I support this moving

to the full council because I think this is a conversation

we need to have as a full council.

Those of us on this body can't decide this.

We can't ask staff to print money.

We can't ask staff to find new innovation.

I feel like every time there's a road repainting,

every time a sidewalk is cracked,

they're looking for every opportunity

to try to make things a little bit safer.

And so I think what our public work staff has managed to do

has already probably reached the limit

of what they can do without us making a change

from the council.

This is on us.

So on the one hand, obviously I want staff's input

on this because I think they have ideas and insight.

On the other hand, I want to accept responsibility

as a council that we are the ones that are going to have

to figure out how we free up the resources

so that they can do what they know how to do really well.

We have to have that conversation.

In budgets are pies, they were not in the federal government.

We can't make more money.

And so that will mean heart choices.

But this is one of the things that we,

as a council, have to accept our responsibility on

as we move this forward.

So I want to appreciate the changes that the vice-mere made

based on input.

I heard a lot about the enforcement issue.

I appreciate the concern with people

who are in the process of making a change.

I think that the fact that we have a really big issue

with bias and traffic enforcement in the city

and the data plays out every single year,

despite the best efforts, the police are still pulling

over brown and black drivers more frequently

despite the fact that there is no evidence

that they're committing traffic crimes more.

So I think we have to recognize the environment

that we're in and shift to approaches

that are proven to be more equitable.

So yeah, I think those are my comments.

I want to thank the work that went into this,

but just express my concern that this won't change anything.

And my ardent hope that it does,

because I'm sick of getting those calls.

We're all sick of getting those calls.

I mean, these are very preventable,

preventable incidents that happen time and time and time again.

And getting those calls is just heartbreaking

because it's something that we know we can change.

And I hope that we have the political courage

to do what's gonna be necessary

to make this emergency declaration real.

And with that, I'll pass it back

to the nice mayor for last word.

Yeah, thank you so much.

And just wanted to quickly close.

And I want to thank my colleagues for all of your comments.

A lot of great insight.

And I share a lot of the concerns too, truly.

And I know also our community members and the organizations

that have been a part of this,

shared them to the round table that we had last week

was not without very, very similar concerns and questions.

But I'm two years into my first term.

And I would feel remiss if I didn't try to do everything I could.

And I know that there's many other people on this

dius and beyond who feel the same.

And so, you know, for me, this is, I want to acknowledge

that this is not, the timing of this is intentional.

It is prior to an upcoming budget process

that we're gonna have to do as a city.

And so I hope that if we're in a space

where we decide as a council to say this is a priority,

this is an emergency that I know it is,

and that I think that many others do too,

that then comes along with those hard conversations

during the budget process, which I'm prepared to have as well.

And so just really want to acknowledge and uplift

what you said, Councilmember Danza,

and just thank everyone for being here today.

Thank you.

All right, that we have a motion in a second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, abstain?

That passes unanimously.

Thank you all.

All right, now we will close out.

Do we have any committee comments, ideas, questions, or reports?

Do you have any public comment for matters not on the agenda?

Thank you chair.

I have one speaker slip for matters not on the agenda.

Kai on.

Good morning, all committee member.

My name is Kai on.

I have filed a complaint against the commentals

city manager and OPEC director, Mr. Washington.

They did not investigate SPD providing me for jury investigation report.

Of my father, Woon Kong on staff, he was hit by a car.

They violated the commentals city court, 4.02, 030,

break the public trust.

However, ethics commission and city court use no jurisdiction

as a reason to dismiss my complaint.

My father was killed in downtown Sacramento.

I got the fourth report from SPD staff inside SPD headquarters

and a email from Captain Bianne Kinney.

Everything will happen inside the commentals city.

House of commentals city,

ethics commission has no jurisdiction for my complaint.

So I appeal the community committee can be real

if ethics commission and city court misinterpret the city court

and make the one judgment.

This is the first page of the fourth report from SPD.

I forward this document to all the committee member

through the electronic comment portal, the web portal.

So if you can please reveal the detailed information

about the fourth jury report that I got from SPD.

Thank you.

All right, thank you for your comments,

seeing them were business before the committee.

This meeting is adjourned at 12.02.

I'm filming the implementation celebration.

Thank you to board member threw voted out.

I'm Evolving the death's right down the cake.

I'm inspired to change my grades

n't бабleven would agree

doesn't have to like the two of her.