Do they have one archive or something?

There's a need general screen.

I didn't know.

Recording in progress.

Okay, I'd like to announce the uh beginning of the meeting of the South San Francisco City Council for this Wednesday, April the twenty second.

And uh we will begin with uh the roll call.

Councilmember Clint.

Here.

Councilmember Flores.

We'll let the record reflect that Council Member Flores is absent.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Uh pressing.

Vice Mayor Nogales?

Here.

Near A Diego.

Here.

And next I've asked um this is gonna be an all uh genitech evening, I suspect.

So I've asked um Arian Hogan, who is the government affairs representative, um, to lead us lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance from the podium.

And if you could all rise.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Aaron.

Moving along to Living Act Disclosures.

Does the council have any reporting?

No reporting.

Now we can move along to announcements from staff.

Okay.

From this Friday, April 24th, through the through next Thursday, the thirtieth, South San Francisco will be hosting the American Revolution Experience, a pop-up exhibition that includes display panels and interactive digital kiosks telling the story of people and places that shaped the birth of our nation.

This is a collaborative project of the American Battlefield Trust and the San Andreas Lake Chapter, our local chapter of the daughters of the American Revolution.

The exhibit has been produced in celebration of America Two Fifty, the two hundred fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Please join us at an opening day reception this Friday, April 24th at 4 p.m.

Thank you.

And our second program.

Our second program honoring the America 250 celebration is a film screening next Wednesday, April 29th, when we will be hosting an encore screening of Hamilton.

We've already screened it twice, and we've been asked for one more or at least one more screening.

Hamilton, an American musical, will be here in the City Council Chambers.

It is the 10th anniversary of Hamilton on Broadway.

This is a live action film of the play.

The special screening starts at 5 p.m.

next Wednesday, and the seating is on a first come basis.

And I for also want to give a big shout out and thank you to the South San Francisco Friends of the Library who generously support programs such as these and City Council, of course, as well.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Bill.

Mr.

Stanhouse.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members.

My name is Devin Stenhouse.

I am the management analyst too for the city manager's office for the City of South San Francisco.

And I have one announcement.

I am here this evening to invite you all, along with the public to the city's first South City Centennial Cruise event in recognition of National Bike Month.

We are inviting residents, friends, and families of all ages to bring their bicycles to Centennial Way Park on Saturday, May 9th, where we will take a community cruise from the park all the way down to South City Bar Station and back.

The purpose of the cruise is to celebrate our city's community, enhance South City's bike culture, and promote bike safety.

Come as early as 9 a.m.

where Chris from Six Cycles will perform complimentary air brake and chain checks on bicycles to ensure each is safe to ride, and children are welcome to learn how to ride their bikes safely in public in the bike rodeo that will be hosted by Safe Moves courtesy of San Mateo County's Safe Routes to School program.

Finally, free giveaways will also be provided while supplies last.

Be sure to let us know you're coming by pre-registering on Eventbrite.

And more information is available at SSFCA.gov.

Thank you.

So I'd like to thank you, Devin.

And I'd like to note that the vice mayor is actually going to be uh joining you for that um centennial cruise.

And um, you know, around town, um, Mark is known as a bit of an animal on his electric bike.

So we've asked him to kind of like tone it down, you know, be a good example for the young people.

I promise.

Mr.

Nagales.

I probably have example.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay.

Moving along.

We'll move along to presentations.

Item number one is a proclamation celebrating genetics 50th 50th year in South San Francisco.

So this is uh a tremendous uh um year and month for our nation, uh, 250 years, but for a local industry that um has already celebrated earlier this month 50 years in South San Francisco, and uh we have a number of people uh from uh Gen Antech and most um uh nota uh most important.

Um their CEO, who I just had the pleasure of meeting this evening for the first time, Ashley McMagarge.

And um, we're going to ask her to come to the podium, and we have two council people that would like to present this proclamation to you, and they both are um uh in the business, so to speak.

So um, the youngest member of our council, somewhat recently graduated from Harvard with a degree in human development and regenerative biology.

Did I get it right?

Yeah, okay.

And for some reason, he chose to put that aside for the moment, and he's concentrating on politics.

I've tried to talk him out of it, but he's concentrating on politics.

And uh so he'll lead off the proclamation, and then um uh a somewhat more seasoned member of the council, uh Councilwoman Flora Nicholas is in the industry, and uh she'll be uh presenting the second half of the proclamation.

So if you would both um join um at the podium and present, Ashley, if you could uh accept the proclamation.

You know, some of us remember the very beginning.

Um we've all heard of her boyer and Bob Swanson, and I was never able to meet either one of them.

Um, but um Bob Swanson uh is no longer with us.

And uh do you ever see Herb Boyer?

Uh yes, we saw him actually uh on April 7th, which is our founder's deck, and he came back to celebrate with us.

That's great to hear.

Okay.

All right.

Um Mr.

Coleman.

All right, great.

It is uh an honor to present this proclamation and um you know being born and raised in South San Francisco and really living in an environment of biotech is something that is really to be proud of.

And what inspired me to um get into biology is you know, my mother worked at Kaiser, she's a lab tech, and my father suffered a traumatic injury when I was five, um, and was left paralyzed for around 10 years.

And so that's you know, when you hear the mouthful, uh human developmental and regenerative biology, that was what I wanted to help with folks heal, uh, especially those with traumatic injuries.

And you know, as as I aged and and did biology and and come back, I see so much of the work that Genentech and so many of the other biotech companies are doing.

I see how Genentech came here 50 years ago and really was the seed that has blossomed into what the our biotech industry, ESA 101 is, and that's something that uh we should all be proud of.

So, with that said, um, I will read the proclamation.

Uh from the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, we are honoring Genentech on its 50th anniversary.

Whereas the founders of Genentech, Bob Swanson and Erb Boyer chose an industrial warehouse in South San Francisco to establish the world's original biotechnology company, marking the beginning of South San Francisco's third great evolution from meat packing to steel manufacturing into the global hub known as the birthplace of biotechnology.

And whereas for five decades, Genentech has been fueled by an unparalleled passion for science and a pioneering spirit, driving groundbreaking discoveries that have fundamentally changed patients' lives and reduced the burden of complex health challenges on society.

And whereas Genentech's scientific excellence has produced pioneering therapies, including the development of the first targeted antibody for cancer in the US, Rituxin, and the first medicine for relapsing and primary progressive forms of multiple sclerosis.

Whereas Genentech is now leading the next revolution in human health by pioneering the integration of AI and data science into every facet of drug discovery and patient care, backed by one of the industry's largest pipelines with 72 new investigational medicines and clinical development and a commitment to deliver 20 transformative medicines by 2029.

And whereas Genentech has grown from a handful of employees to become the city's principal employer, maintaining a campus of 63 buildings and over 10,000 workers, seem to be many more, right?

Uh, while also committing to the next 50 years of healthcare innovation through a major campus transformation, which is expected to create approximately 4,000 jobs.

Whereas Genentech is steadfastly focused on leveraging science, evidence, and community partnership to close care gaps and improve health outcomes across diverse communities by advancing inclusive research, championing health literacy, and removing barriers to breakthrough medicines and timely health care.

And whereas the company maintains a deeply committed to the community of South San Francisco, pledging millions towards housing, transportation, and local programs, such as Genentech Goes to Town and Genentech gives back, and actively supports K to 12 students through its future lab, a 10-year partnership with South San Francisco Unified School District that has touched over 8,000 K to 12 students.

And now therefore, be it resolved that the City Council of South San Francisco declared Tuesday, April 7th, 2026, as Genentech Day in South San Francisco on the occasion of Genentech's 50th anniversary, and thus hereby commend Genentech for its enduring commitment to scientific excellence, its pioneering dedication to patients, and its invaluable partnership and investment in the community of South San Francisco, and looks forward to continuing the successful partnership for decades to come as Genantech leads the next era of biotechnology and innovation signed by all members of the City Council given today.

And join like everyone.

This is lovely.

The mayor of Dac and Phoenix Ashley.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We have more presentations.

Item number two, Sam Trans Connects Bay Area Local Investment Plan Presentation.

And I use this.

Okay.

Good evening, Mayor, members of the City Council.

Thank you so much for having Sam Trans present to you tonight.

My name is Michaela Wright Petrick.

I'm a government and community affairs officer with the San Mateo County Transit District.

And I'm here to share some information on a potential revenue measure, which could be on the November ballot.

We are sharing information for what this potential measure could mean for the county and how you and the community members can engage in the process.

So the main issue at hand today is that transit agencies that carry millions of passengers throughout the Bay Area are facing major operational deficits.

These agencies are sharing with the public this reality and a few right reasons for why that is, which you can see up here on the slide.

If the ballot measure doesn't pass, BART, MUNY, Caltrain, and others will need to make large-scale service cuts.

You'll be hearing or may have heard already from them about how the ballot measure, if successful, could help them stabilize and maintain their service.

That is actually not the focus of the presentation tonight.

I'm here to focus specifically on San Mateo County and Sam Trans.

Some background measure, background information on the ballot measure.

There is state legislation that passed last year called SB63, the Connect Bay Area Act.

It may reach the November ballot via citizens initiative, which happens through a privately funded and administered signature gathering campaign that's underway right now.

If the measure qualifies on the ballot, the passage would require 50% plus one of total votes in five counties: San Mateo, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa.

If it makes the ballot, voters will decide if they approve a half cent sales tax for 14 years and a full cent in San Francisco only.

It would provide nearly a billion dollars to transit in the Bay Area.

And approximately 63% of the funding would go to preventing major service cuts on Caltrain, BART, MUNI, AC Transit, San Francisco Bay Ferry, and some smaller agencies, which you can see up here in the pink slice of the pie.

In San Mateo County, there would also be locally administered funds to support local transportation improvements.

You can see that slice is blue up ahead.

And that's really why I'm here today is to talk about that local pot.

SAMTRANS would allocate approximately 50 million dollars annually for 14 years if the measure passes.

There are some limitations on the funds.

They have to be used for public transit in one way, shape, or form.

We need your input and the community's input to help develop a plan for how we would put these dollars to work, and that's why we're getting out in front of you and all the city councils across the county.

The purpose of the planning effort is to help the SAMTRANS board determine how the approximately 50 million dollars in annual tax revenues would be invested in the county.

So how are we doing this?

We have pre-existing strategic planning documents to help us.

Okay.

Um we have done a huge amount of outreach in the past several years to understand our writers and the public's priorities.

I want to thank your deputy city manager for being an active participant in both meetings.

South San Francisco is very well represented.

Our stakeholder group has business, nonprofit, labor, special districts, and other community groups.

And I want to thank you for giving the opportunity tonight to present to the city council and the members of the community presenting, watching today.

We are also conducting a public survey to gather input, and at the end of our at the end of the day, the board will decide the plan for the money if the measure qualifies and passes.

Taking all of these inputs, we put together 10 categories for funding consideration.

You can see them up here on the slide.

We are also surveying these different categories and asking people to prioritize them.

We need to hear from people in general, and we need to hear from you specifically on how you value them.

We have an online survey available in multiple languages, and we're leaving tear-off surveys in paper form around the county.

Um, there, if you look at the brochure, there's a couple in the back tonight.

People can fill out their preferences here and send it back to us.

We also have a QR code where people can take the survey online.

We're doing all of this public engagement on a short timeline.

We have only about 10 weeks for engagement.

We're about to wrap up, and there will be a discussion at the SAMTrans board meeting on May 6th, and we invite you to participate or tune in.

Our goal is for board adoption in June, and we're doing this now so that residents have information on how the funds would be spent if the ballot measure qualifies and passes.

So our ask of you is we need your help.

The survey closes on April 30th, and getting information sooner rather than later is really helpful for us as it helps shape the conversations that we're having.

We've given your staff a toolkit for social media, press, and newsletters, and we ask you to amplify this on your constituent communications and through the city uh accounts.

And please do take the survey yourself.

We want to hear from you as well.

So that's it.

Um, I'm here to answer any questions or hear any feedback that you might have.

Thank you, Ms.

Petrick, for sharing with the community this evening.

Any questions for all up on this, so thank you for your thank you.

Moving along to item number three is a presentation from Peninsula Energy.

If sorry, if I may, um, the uh CEO of Genetech would like to say a few words from the previous item.

Oh, definitely.

Sure.

We rolled right into the regular media.

Well, um Good evening, and thank you to the mayor and to city council for having me here.

What an honor, really, to be able to accept the proclamation uh as Genentech does celebrate 50 years.

South San Francisco isn't just where we located, it's where our story began.

From a single rented windowless warehouse at the end of Forbes Boulevard to now a 225-acre engine of innovation.

The city helped give rise to an industry, and together we have built something extraordinary in the birthplace of biotechnology.

It's also a moment for us to look ahead and to think about how deeply committed we are to this community and to California.

This is a place that has unparalleled talent, the spirit of innovation, and a collaborative ecosystem that is unmatched anywhere else.

It's why we plan to be here advancing science for patients and their families for the next 50 years.

That commitment is reflected in our continued investment in this community.

$5 billion of economic investment in California through our campus redevelopment plan, which starts with the construction of a new state-of-the-art research center.

We also have our continued investment in the next generation of scientists through programs like Future Lab, which connects students right here in South San Francisco to very real opportunities and STEM.

We like to uh acknowledge our the 8,000 K through 12 students in South San Francisco that benefit from Future Lab each year, and the 4.5 million in Future Lab scholarships to almost 100 college-bound South San Francisco students.

We are so proud to call South San Francisco our home, and this community is the heartbeat of our industry, and there is no better place to build what comes next.

On behalf of everyone from Genentech, and many of them are here tonight, and the millions of patients we serve.

Thank you for 50 years of support and collaboration.

We could not do this work without your support.

Thank you.

And so I'm of an age where I have to make sure I'm hearing correctly because I am a numbers person.

So did I hear five billion dollar investment?

Five billion with a B.

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

Wonderful.

Um we're working on those plans as we speak, and um some of our buildings are really at the end of their life cycle, so we need to do this, but it's very exciting to see how state of the art this research center is gonna be.

Wonderful.

So Kendall Square will be envious.

They'll all be coming out here to do the tours here.

That is the hope.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, so we were about to go to the third presentation.

Yes, I'm gonna be able to do that.

Presentation from Peninsula Clean Energy on services provided to the South San Francisco community.

And Mayor, I do want to note that we do have a public comment for this item.

Okay.

Hello.

This is on.

I'm Shalini Swaroop.

I'm the COO of Peninsula Clean Energy.

Thank you so much for having us tonight.

Thank you to Mayor Adiego and obviously our board member.

Councilmember Coleman and our alternate council member Nicholas.

So Peninsula Clean Energy is a joint powers authority that serves 21 cities in San, including San Mateo County, as well as the city of Los Banos.

And we have a simple role to help cities meet their climate goals while providing clean, cheaper electricity to your residents and businesses.

We serve 97% of San Mateo County.

We've taken on the complexity of energy procurement, compliance, power purchase agreements, and capital.

So cities don't have to while still moving local climate goals forward.

So we provide the generation and sources of electricity.

It gets delivered over PG ⁇ E poles and wires to the customers who receive savings.

All right, we have lower costs, cleaner energy, and a lot of community investment.

So I do want to note we've um invested about 1.1 million dollars in local infrastructure in South City.

We have a solar project carport at the core yard, which will uh yield 400,000 in savings over the lifetime of that contract for the city.

We also have 125 EV chargers mixed at multifamily locations and private locations, and the eight EV chargers in South San Francisco's Unified School District.

We are also engaged with a number of our member cities to help with the adoption of model building codes, including REACH codes.

So reach codes are essentially local building codes or local building rules that go a step beyond the state with the state mandates.

So so far we've helped Menlo Park, Portola Valley, San Mateo, and East Palo Alto with those reach codes.

And PCE can provide technical assistance, model staff reports, and cost effectiveness reports.

So please do not hesitate to reach out if we can be of assistance if this is of interest to you all.

Moving on to the to the last decade, we have an um done 28 million dollars in savings for your community.

So that's the equivalent of seven free days of electricity per year for each household.

We also have 3.6 million dollars in community reinvestment, and I do have the receipts for that.

So we have done 1.5 million in direct savings for um a $300 bill credit in December 2024 to income qualified households.

We've given approximately $920,000 in credits for customers with solar systems, about $180,000 in bill discounts through participation in our disadvantaged green tariff program, about $20,000 in community sponsorships, and a little bit over $1 million in customer rebates and zero interest home loans for home appliances, e-bikes, and electric vehicles.

So our role has expanded since Peninsula Clean Energy was formed 10 years ago.

We've gone from providing the clean energy to really coming into people's homes and businesses as they try to decarbonize.

And that is really a shift in the mentality of what we provide to customers and what customers expect to see from their local utility company.

So what's ahead?

We are doing solar on the roof of the wellness center as well as the Orange Memorial Aquatic Center.

We are going to be installing 209 EV chargers at Peninsula Pines.

This is the largest installation in the state.

We are so excited about this.

And this is a existing building.

And they're the most underserved for EV charging.

So we're really excited about that.

We hope to begin a solar and storage project right across the street on your police department.

And we will have continued rate savings of 10% for um, which are currently at 10% for our customers.

We are also partnering with El Concilio of San Mateo County to conduct bilingual community engagement in partnership with South City's Promotorist team.

So as I said, that we are evolving, and that comes with a new name.

And so the name ref the new name reflects not just what we provide, but how we work, which is in community.

So our original name, Peninsula Clean Energy, helped people understand who we were and how we serve them, but it's long, it's hard to remember, and the acronym PCE sounds a lot like PGE, right?

So sorry.

So West Light Energy is easier to remember.

It's more inclusive of our entire service area, which does include the city of Los Banos, and it sort of better reflects the spirit of optimism and progress and partnership as we work within people's houses and business businesses to decarbonize.

So a couple of asks tonight.

We're um asking that you support our JPA amendment, changing our official name in RJPA agreement that's on your consent calendar shortly.

And we'd love to get your help in helping us clearly communicate this to customers.

So we'd love to send out a joint mailer with our logo and your logo, and we'd love to have you join us for our 10-year anniversary celebrations, and we'll send that information to your staff.

So with that, thank you so much from the PCE team, and I'm happy to provide any information.

And yours for you, so that's that's great.

It's all anniversaries uh lately.

So does any member of the uh BCE have any comments or uh sure?

I feel like um Peninsula Clean Energy is probably one of the most rewarding boards that I serve on outside of the city council.

Um and the team that you have at Peninsula Clean Energy right on the screen is is incredible.

Um and one of our commission our BPAC commissioners is is there as well, Carlos Um Moreno.

Um and just looking at you know all the impact that you have done in South San Francisco uh Peninsula Pines apartments.

Do you know what that is?

It's right across the street.

Uh it's right over there.

And just you know, the largest EV charging uh project in in the entire state um solar system at our new pool.

Uh solar and storage right over there at the at our police department.

I mean, the and also uh offering rates that are lower than PGD and saving our working families who are are really struggling right now, but saving them dollars that that they say that they so desperately need.

That is incredible work.

Um, and um what folks don't know is you know, back when I was in high school in 2016, I was involved in some climate activism, and one of the things was actually knocking doors for Peninsula Clean Energy to establish it in the first place uh in the city of Menlo Park.

And so it really is you know come full circle, and um I'm very much excited for the the chapter that has to come.

Very good.

Yeah, it's just been wonderful the support that we're getting from Peninsula Clean Energy, and we look forward to having the same support when it becomes Westlight Energy.

Thank you.

Uh and I think you mentioned there was a member of the public that would like to speak.

That's correct.

We can have our public comment, Robert White here.

Good evening, members of the council and Mayor Audiego.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak on the importance of building electrification, especially residential construction and reach codes.

I've been a beneficiary in my town.

I live in San Mateo.

I've been a beneficiary of the PCE grants, and we've been able to remove the gas meter from our home.

And I'm going around the peninsula trying to help other folks do the same thing.

The climate crisis is as a background is that it marches on.

There's so much coverage of the issue.

And each of us has our own perspective of the dangers that loom over the horizon.

On October 27, 2025, the Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres said humanity has failed to limit global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius and must change course immediately.

So I just want to briefly, real quickly, what other cities are doing.

What are the cities of the peninsulas in California have adopted the round reach codes?

There are four areas: cooling upgrades for residential, cooling upgrades for non-residential, what they call flex path and electric readiness.

This other cities that have adopted this in San Mateo County have adopted some form of that.

This is an educational process and inner relationship with the uh members of the public who are able to understand how these things are done.

Um what you'll be considering.

I don't I don't won't get into the details.

So I just respectfully ask that the South San Francisco City Council to consider adopting REACH codes as other cities have done along these lines in a form that's appropriate for your city.

So thank you for your support.

Thank you for sharing.

And uh with that, I thank you for the presentation, and uh we'll move the agenda along.

Thank you.

We'll now move along to council comments request honoring the life of requests.

So um this evening, um, I think I'd like to go first.

I've um asked our IT department to um share with you um a um a banner poster that we'll be putting up on City Hall tomorrow.

So as far as anniversaries, um this is the 40th year of the sister city relationship between South San Francisco and our sister city uh Atolta Nilco El Alto in Jalisco, Mexico.

Um I was there slightly before it became an official sister city, and it's just remarkable to see um how the relationship has grown and and and now we're adding sports to it.

So a soccer team from Atloto Nilco will arrive here tomorrow.

They will play a game at South San Francisco High School on Saturday in the morning, and all are invited.

Um there is no charge.

Um it's a local team, uh, the SSF Soccer Club uh will be uh uh defending our honor.

Um, but the Atonilco group is is very talented.

So I don't know if you're a betting person where I recommend you put your money, you might want to be careful.

So um uh I encourage uh everyone who is uh interested in this type of an exchange, uh so very important nowadays with so many harsh feelings being demonstrated and encouraged at different levels uh that we remember that we're all one people.

And uh, if you've ever had an opportunity to uh go to a little community like Teltonilco um and really meet the people of Mexico, um you recognize that we're all very much the same in what we're trying to accomplish as people.

So uh that's all I have.

So let's turn to the council now and see what um ideas or thoughts.

Councilwoman Nicholas, would you like to start?

Sure.

I would just like to request that we had joined this meeting in memory of Christopher Benabides, who recently passed.

Um my heart goes out to the benevides family, and may his soul rest in peace.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Coleman.

Sure.

Um had the opportunity to attend a few events over the past couple weeks.

One was the Bow Gen Ribbon Cutting.

Um they're expanding their presence in in South San Francisco.

Uh the second was the progress seminar, which is an annual retreat um where we talk about where many leaders in San Mateo County go up and have a weekend long retreat and talk about various issues.

And the topic of discussion this weekend really revolved around housing, of course, is an issue that we all continuously face year by year, but also transportation with the with the regional transit measure, um, the rise in AI and what that means for our workforce and for technology as well as there's a panel that was a little vague.

It was it said the issues that San Mateo County was facing, but then we attended, and it was focused on child care, really, um and and our growing families.

And so that was a great um event, uh connected with with many other elected and business leaders, and uh I hope we can continue to make progress in our county and our city.

Vice Mayor.

Mr.

Mayor, I also uh join my colleagues in in during a memory to Mr.

Christopher Benavides.

Um I joined the mayor at the funeral service, and um my heart goes out to the family.

Um I did uh also attend the ribbon cutting for for biogen.

Uh joy was joined by my colleagues there.

Um they're now one of the leading biotech companies in terms of pioneering innovative science that delivers new medicine.

They were actually established in 1978, and we were doing a celebration of their expansion on the West Coast.

But what I really really appreciated was I appreciate that mayor his historical knowledge in terms of South San Francisco.

He shared a story with the CEO, which he then relayed, that um, I guess when the biotech industry was trying to start, um it was I think her boyer who met with the city manager, was it Walter Burklow?

Okay, who I think as you said, didn't understand the science.

Right.

But he said there is something there.

And look where we are now.

And so uh I I would really really appreciate just kind of hearing that story.

Um if I can also just talk about progress seminar, I think it's just important for me to kind of just provide an overview report.

Um so I I joined many of my colleagues there.

There were over 300 regional leaders, uh, policymakers and community stakeholders uh to discuss as the Council Mer Coleman mentioned, focus on challenges and opportunities facing San Mateo County.

Uh there were breakout discussions addressing key barriers to uh to progress, including as the uh the regional transit measure, obstacles to housing development, roadblocks, innovation, and an evolving role of AI in their workforce.

Uh then we had a general session that reinforced broader themes uh like rebuilding trust in public institutions, sustaining San Mateo County's leadership in biotech innovation, and strengthening collaboration among San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, and San Francisco, the show the share support uh shared economic prosperity.

Uh across the program, speakers emphasized the importance of regional coordination, modernized policy frameworks, and renewed commitments to long-term uh resilience and growth.

What I also wanted to mention was South San Francisco was highlighted numerous times throughout uh progress seminar.

In fact, um uh they were talking about the advances we've done in affordable housing and in child care, and I really wanted to highlight our very own Nell Sealander, who was actually uh a featured panelist uh at Progress Seminar who did a phenomenal job.

So I wanted to report that out in terms of uh Progress Seminar.

And then lastly, um colleagues, I know for the the over the past year we've been discussing a topic of a project labor agreement versus pre-qualification.

You've had several individuals come for public comments, and we've even identified this as a topic as one of our shared priorities during our council retreat.

Um I think it's time for us to take the next step to ensure that we have the information analysis and the structured discussion needed to make an informed decision.

Um both have implications of for how we manage public projects and how we support workforce development.

It's an important, it's important that we bring this matter forward.

And I so I move to direct staff to prepare an agenda item regarding this topic, um, including a recommendation on specific steps for city council discussion prior to the end of July.

And do I need discussion on that, uh Mr.

City Attorney or under the Brown Act, um, because this is not an agendized item, um uh there can't be substantive discussion of it, but council members can make a motion um to direct staff to agendize future items, and um the motion would require a second and then a vote of council to to provide that direction to staff.

So I guess I'd be the the motion if I have a second so we have this conversation.

We have a motion on the floor.

Do we have a second?

I second.

Okay.

Let me just say I'm I'm a little uncomfortable because the city manager is not in attendance.

And I know that uh this is one of many projects that we put before them, and uh I'm not going to support putting that kind of a timeline unless I can hear from the city manager.

Uh, because it's all about staff time and what they're able to deliver um in a meaning meaningful and appropriate way.

So I would encourage to not not support this motion.

So with that, um let's have a roll call vote.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Nicolas.

Yes.

Mayor Adiego.

No.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Okay.

Moving along to uh public comments, right?

That's correct, Mayor.

We'll move along to our public comments.

Our first speaker is Sonny Koya.

Mr.

Koya, how are you this evening?

I am well.

How are you?

Thank you.

Um Diego, um, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council.

Uh you all know my name, Sonny.

I'm a long-term South San Francisco resident.

Um, I came here today to acknowledge an excellent job recently done by our Department of Public Works on Hillside Boulevard.

Last year, I had brought to the attention of our DPW engineer, Yoon Jun Kim, about the striping issue on Hillside Boulevard.

Now, this is northbound between South San Francisco Drive and Lincoln Street.

We've we have our South San Francisco Fire Department Station 65 on the right, right next to South San Francisco Drive.

Now, this is at the top of the hillside.

Uh this Lincoln Street is at the top of the hill on Hillside.

This is opposite the um Mills Montessori school.

So I'm talking about that strip only.

Fact.

The way this piece of roadway was originally striped after the road was repaved, the two northbound lanes suddenly became a single lane at the brow of the hill.

So vehicles on the right lane would suddenly merge into the left lane at the top of the hill, creating a situation for side collisions.

This was a dangerous condition.

Suddenly, they're merging, and some of those drivers on the on the right lane realizing that they have to merge, would speed up to beat the guy on the left, and at the brow of the hill, there's convergence and they can collide.

I had two occurrences which I pointed out to uh Mr.

Kim, where I felt uneasy that I could have been swiped.

So here's the good part.

The action taken, our engineer, Mr.

Yunjoon Kim.

He took time out and inspected the location and agreed that the right lane in question needed improved striping, so that vehicles in the right lane would get a much earlier warning of lanes merging well before they reached the top of the hill.

So instead of last minute, they would be getting warnings from the bottom.

I'm very happy to say that DPW added more left merging arrows starting right after South San Francisco drive, giving traffic an early opportunity to merge.

The end result of this new striping are two.

Traffic merges into the right left lane very early instead of the last minute.

Furthermore, it is also a traffic calming measure.

Okay, so Sonny, um it sounds like you're happy, and Yun Jun Kim's solution was.

Well, just one last sentence.

Big kudos to our wonderful engineer Yoon Jun Kim, and his very capable staff.

Okay, Mr.

Kim, would you like to stand up to take a bow?

Oh, I didn't realize he was here.

Okay.

Well, thank you very much.

Thank you, Sonny.

Okay.

Next.

Our next speaker is Annie.

Ms.

Lowe, how are you this evening?

Good.

Thank you.

Good.

Good evening, Council and Mayor.

I see that on the agenda today.

Consent item number four is the recognition of the municipal clerks.

There's a proclamation.

And I personally really feel that this is very important because obviously the clerk's work is very important.

Not only for the council, but for all of us, the residents, the public, because the clerk is supposed to keep track of all the you know important documents and all the meeting minutes and everything that we care about.

So, you know, that's the reason why I come forward with my comments tonight.

Um, as you probably remember, the last few meetings we had a few comments on the handbook.

And you know, I really very, very concerned about the handbook being approved last at the last meeting, despite the fact that you know, we clearly saw that you know there were verbiage in the previous um version, and that's that stated clearly that the clerk is supposed to record the list of public comments made.

And of course, the last few years, all those comments were never recorded.

It was only the names of the individuals.

Um, so I feel that as a person who has been coming to these council meetings to share my concerns, as well as others who have been doing the same thing.

I feel that, you know, our voices are lost.

I know there's a video recording, but it's not the same because I to me I worked in the industry for many years in finance investments, and I was also at one point in charge of leading the you know, the a global investment standards around the world in drafting that standards, and we know when we draft standards, when you put something out there, as well as you know, working in the industry, every year we have to update our you know, policies and procedures within our department that rolls up to the overall company, and we have internal auditors to come in to audit us just to make sure whatever you state in your policies and procedures, whatever you're performing.

And you know, you get written written written up, basically, and you will get in trouble if you're the like me as a department head, and I will get be in trouble if I my staff are doing exactly the opposite of what is stated in the policies.

So it really troubles me that you know it's totally visible and clear that the past few years, the handbook is not being followed, but nothing is being done to rectify it, and it's deeply concerning to me because as someone who worked many years in the industry, that should not be the case.

And I know this is not the right thing to do, and so I'm hoping the last time I'm gonna put this forward.

Hopefully, something could be done with that.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Our next speaker is Leslie Fong.

Good evening.

Vice Mayor and City Council.

I have something I want to showcase, which is the um folk jam session, which I'm not sure whether you're aware of.

I attended that one on April 17th from 11 to 1 at room 235.

And you could visualize almost like a come by eye in the ground, because they have a page of 90 song in the booklet that you could choose, and you get to sing along.

It does cost six dollars, but everybody that participates the decision, they pay as well.

So come and join them.

They're really great.

Relaxing, get your stress out.

And the last one, it's not in South City, but I thought you guys want to try a new place to eat.

It's called Cafe, Z-O-R-E-K of uh El Camino and San Bruno Avenue.

It's a Turkish um cafe with great Turkish life, which I actually noticed from a hallmark movie.

I didn't know what that was.

So I went to see it and need it.

Great.

They have flatbread that has like lamb on it, and also sausage, and on the side, they have cucumber, pickle, and also pitted olive.

It is excellent.

You gotta go find it.

Check it out.

It's really great.

And they just started, so I'm hoping they'll expand to you know South City in the future.

And also, too, is the Ubi Macha tea.

Oh my God, everything's great.

I'm like Julie over, and every greedy is fresh.

So thank you so much, and thank you for the indulgence.

Okay.

Leslie, thank you for the update on the food scene.

And it's so good.

It's so good to hear that she's venturing outside of South San Francisco.

So Cafe Zork, the owners actually live in South City in Mark's district.

Mark Mark Nogales' district.

And they're also the owners of Mazra.

No, they have another business one called M was it?

M-A-C-O-A.

Mazra.

Yes.

I didn't know about that you do.

Check it out.

Now we all do.

If you want to treat you one.

Okay.

Okay, more.

Next speaker, Fiona.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Um I understand there were proclamations and presentations here earlier.

I just got in.

Um public records show facts and data show that the in-sovereign city of South San Francisco is owned by its benefactor, the state of Israel.

The true and principal chief executive officer of both South San Francisco and Genantech is Roche Pharmaceuticals, owned by the state of Israel.

And as a chief shareholder of Roche Pharmaceuticals, along with Prince Philip, Prince Bernhardt, Julian Huxley, the Rockefellers, Luke Hoffman LaRoche, father of Andre Hoffman, hired Madison Avenue advertising agency in New York City to invent the terms.

Global warming.

Before that, it was global cooling, which has now morphed into climate change, which you are all following as followers without facts and data.

So you are illegitimate representatives of the people of this city.

Each one of you and Mr.

Flores.

And you likely know it, but you pretend otherwise.

The data, the facts, and the research that has been conducted.

Prove what you are and what this city is.

It's a proxy for the state of Israel.

That is who Mr.

Woodruff works for, too, and his law firm.

And his partner who sat on the commission of the FPPC.

So there is no hope of ever you guys being held to count for your wrongdoing.

You never excuse yourself from this dais when you should.

But don't worry, Mr.

Woodruff will come to your aid because his partner at Redwood Law has a backdoor entry to the FPPC.

Fact.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next speaker is Tony Allen and Trish Alfos.

Good evening, Mayor Adiago and Vice Mayor Nogales and City Council members.

I'm Trish Althouse, and this is Tony Allen.

Tony Allen.

We're both long-term life-term members of South City.

And we're curious to see if South City Council has had any discussion about the upcoming May Day, where many countries around the world celebrate May Day.

People in the United States are a lot of people have been discussing the idea of observing May Day this year as an international workers by not going to work, not going to school, not shopping.

An event like this where residents might exercise their First Amendment rights by not engaging in commerce.

It can be quite impactful in a lot of ways, right?

Like we can be making a statement about you know people over billionaires and things like that, right?

But it can also be impactful to our community, our businesses.

And Tony's going to go.

So we were wondering how a large action should this you know become larger, right?

Um would impact South San Francisco.

We're a small town.

We saw the high school students exercise their rights, and it was really well attended walkout.

Uh that demonstrated there's an appetite uh among our residents to speak up.

So we were talking about it and we were concerned about our small businesses.

We have a lot of small businesses in South San Francisco, and maybe they're feeling a little uncertain on how they may look at May Day.

Um, and so we thought maybe as a community, South San Francisco community, we could support our small businesses by encouraging a small business Saturday on May 2nd.

So that way folks can make the choices they need to make, but we are supporting our own.

And we have a flyer.

So we thought we'd share that with some businesses downtown just so that they know if they chose to you know have May of first off and close, or if people less people were shopping that day, that maybe we can also encourage people to do more shopping in our small businesses on Saturday.

I'm sorry.

Very good.

Thank you.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Mayor that concludes our public comments.

Okay, Jasmine, so then we can move along to the consent calendar.

That's correct.

We can move along to the consent calendar.

Do any members of the council wish to pull any of the items?

Oh, that's right.

We don't read them anymore.

That's great.

Uh let me see very quickly.

Anything to pull.

Mr.

Mayor I like to pull item 11.

11.

Anyone else?

No, just item 11.

Yeah, just item 11.

Okay.

So um why don't we make a motion and approve items one through help me out?

That would be one.

Four to ten.

Four through ten and and okay, just four through ten.

So moved, councilwoman.

I'll second in a second.

Um roll call vote on the council member Coleman.

Yes.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Nicholas.

Yes.

Mayor Adiego.

Yes.

And now back to 11.

So um, Jasmine, would you read it?

Yes, item number 11 is a report regarding adoption of an ordinance, amending and restating in its entirety, Chapter 8.70, property owner obligations with respect to tenants displaced from unsafe or substandard units of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, with item 11A being the ordinance.

Thank you.

Uh, the reason why I pulled this item is um I know that uh additional stakeholders reached out to us uh as they had some questions and concerns.

And I was just wondering if staff can provide an update in terms of how that meeting went and what progress was made.

Yeah, of course.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members, Elliot Moreno.

I'm uh housing management analyst for the city.

Um so as you know, on April 8th, we as you are aware on April 8th, uh, we had the repeal and replacement of Chapter 8.7D of South Sam of the South San Francisco Municipal Municipal Code, um, and it was introduced by council vote.

Um following the introduction, staff conducted additional engagement with property owners and property management representatives.

Um, during this meeting, uh stakeholders did mention that they had two main concerns regarding the ordinance.

Uh, first, stakeholders expressed concern that the increased relocation assistance amounts could create financial um burdens and potential incentives uh potential incentives to misuse of the ordinance.

Uh second, concerns were raised about landlord tenant communication, particularly that tenants may contact city code enforcement before notifying notifying the property owners of needed repairs.

Um stakeholders request requested that um property owners get an advanced notice uh prior to inspections.

Staff carefully reviewed these concerns and determined that no additional modifications to the ordinance that was presented were needed.

Um existing safeguards, safeguards are already in place.

Uh, all code enforcement cases are subject to inspection and verification before any enforcement action is taken.

And if they do require relocation assistance, additionally, the municipal code already requires notice to property owners prior to inspections, except in emergencies or when consent is already given.

Property owners also retain the right to refuse entry and require the and may require the city to obtain a warrant if needed.

One correction I did want to note on the staff report, Britain notice must be actually given to property owners in 24 hours in advance, not 12 hours as stated in the staff report.

And yeah, as I mentioned, uh we we discussed it internally, and we felt that all of the concerns that were brought up by stakeholders have already been when we explained to them, you know, that we're not just arbitrarily giving out uh citations or notice of violations.

There's the whole internal process where we conduct the inspections and where we we also provide notice to the property owners when we feel it's necessary.

Great.

I know I really appreciate I I wanted to thank staff for doing that as I think there was some concern, and I wanted to make sure the stakeholders got together with staff.

I think there was a lot of misunderstanding in terms of what was trying to be accomplished.

And so I really want to thank all of you for doing that.

So the questions I had.

So I guess one of the concerns was there were concerned that a tenant could take advantage of this, but in terms of what we found, there wasn't a lot in terms of the number of cases that we've actually used the ordinance, correct?

Yeah, so additionally, since the initial uh ordinance was adopted in 2019, there has been no history of their so it's just the most extreme situations when we've actually had to use this.

Yes, exactly.

And then the the notification portion, and and I'm gonna look at the city attorney, because there was something about clarification in terms of language that I'm asked the city attorney to help me with about notification between the tenant and landlord.

It said and or in terms of notification.

Can you just clarify in terms of our current ordinance that it does allow for notifications for the landlord?

It does.

Okay.

Section 1.12 2.010 of the municipal code as it exists today, requires notice to both the tenant and the landlord.

Um, the and or can be confusing, but in context, it does require notice uh to the owner.

Um, and uh that has been that is staff's current practice, it's embodied in a in a code enforcement handbook that that staff uses that was developed in coordination with my office.

So um not only is it in the municipal code, it's it's also part of um current practice.

Great.

Again, thank you to staff, thank you to the stakeholders.

I'm glad we were able to kind of come together amicably to each other move forward.

So with that, I'm happy to make a motion to approve this item.

Okay.

Um motion on the floor.

I'll second.

And a second, and vice mayor, thank you for clarifying that.

Um are there any public comments on this side?

No public comments.

Well, that's a good sign as far as the stakeholders who were involved.

So with that, we'll have a roll call.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Mayor Adiego.

Yes.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Nagales.

Yes.

Thank you.

Good.

Thank you, Leo.

So we will now move along to our public hearing item number 12.

Is a report regarding consideration of proposed amendments to the existing development agreement for 1051 mission road to revise the economic terms to provide support for the affordable housing portions of the project, extend the term of the development agreement and related resolutions to facilitate project financing.

Items number 12A through 12E are the ordinance and resolutions.

Thank you, Jasmine.

Um, so I'll go ahead and open the public hearing and we'll begin with a staff report, Ms.

Sealander.

Great.

Um, good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members.

I'm Nell Sealander, Economic and Community Development Director.

I'll be providing you with a presentation on this public hearing item regarding 1051 mission road, um, also known as the PUC site or the PUC project.

Um, to help hone in the conversation.

I thought I'd begin with a brief list of the items council is being asked to consider this evening.

There is one ordinance approving a first major amendment to the development agreement with the project developer, SSF PUC housing partners, which is primarily made up of a market rate development team with two firms, L37 and CASA.

Items two through five are resolutions approving various project components, including a fourth phasing plan outlining the revised project schedule, an assignment of bridge housings interest in the affordable housing portion of the project back to the original development team, SSF PUC housing partners.

There's also a resolution supporting an affordable housing and sustainable communities grant application, and then a pre-commitment of last dollar funding for the affordable project if certain funding sources are not secured.

As a refresher for city council and also the community, the PUC project is an 800 unit project approved in 2019 on roughly six acres of land originally acquired by the city's former redevelopment agency and then transferred to the city for redevelopment.

Following approval of the project, which includes 158 affordable housing units in a standalone building, a 100 head child care center in the large market rate building in the middle, public parks and open space, and a new bridge over Colma Creek, the property was then transferred from the city to SSFPUC housing partners.

Subsequently, the affordable parcel, C2 on this site plan, was transferred to bridge housing as the selected affordable housing developer.

Since the project was approved in 2019, the market rate development team led by L37 and Casa worked with FEMA and the city's public works department to go through a lengthy mapping process to remove the site from the 100-year floodplain.

And that was a precondition to actually closing escrow and transferring the property to the development team because that really sets the stage for any development on the site.

And this is a benefit to any subsequent developer, really in this area.

They also obtained Army Corps approval to cover the culvert that runs the length of mission road on the project site, secured a $2 million loan from the Bay Area Housing Finance Agency, and that was to advance infrastructure design and the design of the project in the absence of a larger equity partner for the project.

And they also assisted Bridge with several funding applications.

Bridge, for their part on the affordable piece, assisted with the city's application to the state infill infrastructure grant program, which was awarded.

That's about a 28.8 million dollar award.

Bridge also secured $9.5 million in county funds and undertook three ASIC applications.

That's that grant program I mentioned a few minutes ago.

All of those applications actually missed the mark very narrowly.

And then both projects submitted for building permits at the end of 25.

Unfortunately, economic conditions are preventing this project from moving forward at this very moment.

Affordable housing funding is scarcer than ever given the state's budget condition, and bridge housing has withdrawn from the project.

In response to these factors, L37, is the sort of the primary market developer on the development side team side, has requested a first major amendment to the project's development agreement.

With these changes, there is a better chance this project will advance to construction in the next 12 months.

Again, it is market dependent and there are risks here, but staff believes these proposed amendments are bringing the project to a place where it is much more feasible to move forward.

All right, so now getting into the actual documents prepared for council's consideration this evening.

The ordinance before you contemplates approval of the first major amendment to the development agreement.

I have two slides with the various components of the DA amendment.

The first thing it does is make last dollar funding available to the affordable project if necessitated by the funding that they're able to secure in three large funding applications due in May.

May 4th is the Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities Grant application, state tax credits May 19th, and then the county funding application on May 20th.

The DEA amendment modifies the impact fees and off-site improvement fees that are built into the development agreement to be directed at council's discretion as a community benefit fee.

This would come forward as a future loan agreement to council.

So while the DA amendment does make this change, the actual act of committing the funds to the affordable project would need to be contemplated by council in a loan agreement.

The DA amendment also provides fee waivers for the affordable housing project, again, if needed based on those other funding sources and at the city's discretion.

Additionally, the DA amendment affirms that prevailing wage is required for any portion of the construction of the project when required by state law.

And the development team has agreed to enter into a project labor agreement for the site work.

So that's the infrastructure work that is funded by the state infill infrastructure grant that the city has received for this project.

That's about 20 million dollars of work.

Finally, the amendment requires modest participation for the city in profits generated from the smaller market rate building and extends the development agreement to the end of 2032.

Currently, it's set to expire at the end of 2029.

So the first resolution for council's consideration approves the fourth phasing plan for the project.

The schedule reflects a realistic estimate of when this project can move forward under that first amendment to the development agreement.

So this fourth phasing plan brings the project timeline together with the DA amendment so that they're consistent with one another.

The second resolution consents to bridge housing, assigning their interest in the affordable sort of single purpose entity.

So that's 1051 mission affordable LLC.

So the second resolution consents offers the city's consent to that assignment back to the market rate development team, SSFPUC housing partners.

And this is important because for all of these funding applications, there needs to be a consistent chain of site control.

So we need to make sure that that single purpose affordable LLC remains in control of one of the development partners.

And right now, this sets the stage for allowing the assignment of that affordable LLC to a new affordable housing partner, which at this point we anticipate to be related affordable.

They're a well-respected national firm with substantial development experience and a very strong track record in securing ASIC funding.

So that's a big deal for this project because ASIC, as a source of funding for this affordable project, means the city would not be providing more gap funding.

There's a lot less participation needed from the county.

And so it would really be a the best path for this project to move forward is really to secure ASIC and related has experience in that.

And that portion occurs without the city's concurrence.

There would not be a separate council action from that.

I would say unless there is interest in scheduling a special meeting in the next week, would be the way to create that opportunity.

Now that's all crumbled away.

Go ahead, finish your report.

Okay.

All right.

So the third resolution sets up the next ASIC application.

Again, that's due May 4th.

It includes a cooperation agreement with the city to provide that ASIC funding directly to the city to complete transit improvement.

So these are bike lanes that are already contemplated in our bike and ped master plan.

It includes electrification of the city's commuter shuttle, the free shuttle, and also contributions towards our citywide transit signal prioritization, which came to council, I want to say in the last month or two.

John Wilson from the public works department is leading that project.

So this is really an opportunity to get some transit improvements for the city, and it is a required portion of any ASIC application because this funding source is really geared around combining housing with greenhouse gas reduction activities.

We did make some slight tweaks uh in an errata provided to council and the city clerk this afternoon that changes the lane miles of bike lanes that we refined with the public works department and the um consultant working on the ASIC application to really improve its competitiveness.

The other um action that this resolution takes is approving a scope of work for what ASIC calls an anti-displacement activity, and for us that is simply replacing the city's funding in our emergency rental assistance.

So the state would come in and pay for our emergency rental assistance program um for a couple of years, so then we could save those dollars and use them in the future for other affordable housing projects.

I will say this action, this resolution is nearly identical to the resolution that council adopted last year when the project team was applying for ASIC then.

So almost nothing has substantially changed from then.

Just some tweaks to the competitiveness of the application.

The last resolution uh pre-commits funding if the affordable housing project is not able to secure the funding that it is seeking through these various applications in May.

This pre-commitment is needed.

So this is the 14.6 million that the development agreement amendment really frees up and and makes more flexible.

The pre-commitment is needed at this stage because it allows the project team to apply for state tax credits in May, as well as shows potential additional commitment to close the funding gap for a county application.

Um, this funding and the way it is worded in the resolution as well as in the DA amendment is last dollar funding, so it is the last money needed and only to close a gap in the funding stack as determined by the city.

So it does still provide the city discretion over how and when it is used, and as I mentioned previously, these types of funding sources would also come back to city council for a loan approval in the future.

The last thing I would mention about this is it really is staff's goal to not use this funding.

Um we had some initial really positive conversations with Sabrato, and there are other funding sources that um related the potential new developer have identified that could help close this gap, um, and that we will remain actively seeking those funding sources because the the 14.6 million dollars contemplated in the development agreement had other uses, it had real purpose behind it, and so it is it is obviously not the city's goal to use those funds purely for the affordable housing project, but rather to bring in other outside funding because the actions considered by council tonight include an ordinance and a development agreement.

This item did go to the planning commission last week.

Um the planning commission adopted a resolution recommending that the city council adopt the ordinance approving the first amendment to the development agreement, and city staff did brief the planning commission on the other resolutions, though those were outside of their purview, so we don't go into a great amount of detail and really focused on the DA amendment and the project status overall.

Um so at this point, staff is recommending that city council consider introducing the ordinance for the first major amendment to the development agreement, adopt the four related resolutions.

We are available to answer questions, um, as is the development team.

We've got Eric Tao and Brian Baker from L37 and James Sa from CASA here available for questions this evening.

Thank you.

Okay, let's see if we have any questions from council for the staff or developer.

It's been a while since we had Eric.

Uh some questions to the developer if you don't mind.

Mr.

Barry Mr.

Tao, good evening.

Hello.

Councilmember Mark.

Um you applied for ASICs.

ASIC's been three times now.

And it's been denied each time.

And so I'm just trying to understand why do you feel confident this time that the ASIC grant's gonna be approved?

Because that's that major funding, at least for the three of us, was a big portion that's gonna pay for in terms of what's what we wanted to do in terms of Oak Avenue.

And so I just I just wanted to hear from you why you think that this time is going to be different.

So I I want to say that our applications in the past three years were very strong applications.

I can I don't want to disparage any party, but I want to note that the one difference in this fourth application is that one of the parties to the other three applications will no longer be participating.

And I think I have greater confidence because frankly, we had the points scored to have an ASIC award at the last round, but for negative points caused by actions of what is now a former party to the ASIC.

So and I think I want to address uh Mayor Adico's uh comment about the crumbling of the L37 Casa Bridge partnership.

South San Francisco is not alone.

It is completely their prerogative, but Bridge Housing has decided to pull back from its original mission of affordable housing development and putting all their resources in securing ASIC funds, securing subsidies, being entrepreneurial and building housing, affordable housing in communities.

North Berkeley, El Sorrito, others, this is all public record, are experiencing the same of what we are experiencing here, which is Bridges decision to not put as much resources as it probably needs or has in the past, including participating in ASIC applications that we witnessed by the fact that we had negative points.

So one of the reasons why I'm confident that we'll be have a better chance than before is because I think we will have a better team.

I guess we'll find out soon in terms of the case.

Yes, we are I mean our fingers are crossed for this, obviously.

You know who that team member might be, but maybe a better team.

So speaking of the team, uh I I think I kind of heard in terms of the affordable housing developer that there might be a selection.

Am I saying that correctly from Nell, or uh maybe I misheard that?

It's it's um I guess fortunately we have a wide network.

I I'm also uh chair of the Urban Land Institute in San Francisco, so I've reached out to all of the principals and um uh managing partners, executive directors of Mercy Housing, TNDC.

Um, through staff, we've been talking to Beacon.

Um let's see, who else have I spoken with and actually sent this package to um escapes me right now, but the fourth is related affordable.

Related is a national company.

They have they're one of the few for-profit companies that has figured out how to do both for-profit and affordable housing very effectively at scale and successfully.

They partner with different nonprofits, 501c3s, but they're affordable arm under um Ann Silverberg, who used to run development at Bridge Housing, and now she's running affordable housing development for California for a related.

She's on my board at Urban Land Institute.

Um they're incredibly capable, I would say, as capable as Bridge, um, but they're still very invested in doing affordable housing development.

So they are, as Nell explained, we are working through our letter of intent right now.

They have gone through all the documents and they will be for all intents and purposes our partner.

Okay.

I'm gonna hold off my additional questions.

I want to make sure my colleagues jump in.

So floor, any questions from staff or the developer.

Okay.

Sure.

Um I mean, 14.6 million dollars is is not a small number.

And I mean, I wasn't there on the council back in 2018, 2019, but I mean, there was there's quite a deal struck and and a lot of infrastructure improvements and impact fees that the city can use.

And and I understand you know, construction costs are going high.

The the financing market is um it's not easy right now, but what what have you done on the developer side to to lower costs or or to try to reach that financing?

We've actually cut costs by close to 20 percent through years and years of value engineering.

I I share the council's frustration.

You know, when we started this thing, you know, I we were testifying and meeting with you in this in a room with a tree in the middle.

Um it's I love this new facility, I appreciate it.

Um but we have been spending millions and millions of dollars on redesign on pricing, on trying to find ways to make this less expensive.

We've we've removed uh a lot of the underground, we've addressed much of the um moisture water issues.

Um there's so many engineering findings and improvements that we made to lower the costs, and so we think the market rate project is ready to be financed.

We're talking with and this we're talking to three major development partners.

So again, bridge is gone, Brookfield, one of the large one of the reasons you chose us to, it was Brookfield.

They abandoned us, they made some bad investment decisions.

Many um many people have abandoned new market rate development.

But what we have done is we've we've stuck to it and we've continued.

So what the 14 and a half million, our project is almost ready to go.

We're getting two or three major investors interested in a project, but they need to see that infrastructure in Fail grant money come and help pay for these horizontal improvements.

So it's not for our project, it's for these improvements that is unlocked.

Only the affordable housing project has financing.

So we are obviously plan A, ASIC money that covers it.

It finances the affordable, it unlocks the infrastructure to field grant that we all work so hard on, and we can start both projects.

The reason why we're coming to you with plan B is because yes, we we we don't know for sure if the fourth time is the charm, but then we give council the opportunity for a plan B.

So without ASIC, can we do it with using the development fees that impact fees that we will pay?

And then we unlock the affordable housing project financing, which unlocks the IIG, which starts the whole project, horizontal costs, sidewalks, underground utilities covering, you know, the culvert.

And then both projects can go forward.

So it's a plan B, but it's it's really to share benefit of the IIG grant.

Thank you.

If this doesn't work, this um ASIC, what will happen?

So if ASIC doesn't work, we will try to implement plan B.

We will apply for the normal low-income house, low-income housing tax credits, who apply for tax exempt bonds, we have the county money, and then we'll have this money, and then uh put it all together for a new financing package, so apply for again low-income housing tax credits and tax exempt bond financing, which we are very, very competitive for because this is a highly desirable low-income, uh, very low-income housing project.

And with that, we believe then we go forward, and then again, we unlock ASIC, I mean we unlock IIG, and both projects can go forward.

So that's that's why we have a plan B.

And again, I know the city does not want to spend the impact fees on the low-income housing project if it doesn't need to, but it is an option that we're trying to present to city council to add its discretion make happen so that we can execute plan B.

Because I know nobody wants to keep looking at that grass meadow.

I'm not sure about that.

Yeah.

Mr.

Mayor, uh, if I can jump in again.

It's I hear a lot of ifs, and that's I think my frustration is like we've we've heard something like this before.

Well, you know, if we get this grant, if we get this, if this goes forward, if we and that's the three of us, we've been waiting eight years for this project.

Yes.

And uh the frustration that I have is we're still waiting.

And I feel like we're kind of pushed in the corner to make this decision to prove it, because if we don't, then the money that we were able to obtain for this project, we're gonna lose potentially.

And then I think it would be pretty hard for any other developer to come in to potentially build affordable housing on that site.

And we all have said we need affordable housing.

My frustration is that I feel like we have to move forward with this project based upon the alternatives.

And I wish we had a better way of moving forward.

And that's where my frustration is, Mr.

Mayor.

Yeah.

Well, I I certainly agree with the preliminary assessment, but um where you find yourself is not where I find myself.

Um are we going to have any public comments?

There are no speakers at the public comments.

So um the problem for me is I vividly remember what we all went through.

Mr.

Tao was not the only one that was making presentations.

We had, I think, did we start off with half a dozen different developers?

And um, and I wasn't on um having looked at the proposal on paper.

I wasn't interested in what were you called back then?

Was it L 37 costs?

We were you know, AGI costs, and then we became L37.

AGI, yeah, it was AGI when you first came uh to us.

So um I have to tell you that um Mr.

Tell, you are a most gifted salesman because you convinced me during those hearings that your equity park partner was the supreme player.

Yeah, I was always convinced of bridge housing because we had had experience with bridge housing, and and now everybody has run away from your project and others.

Um I'm finding it very difficult to be um uh well, I guess bamboozled would be too strong a word, but I'm finding it difficult to hang my hat on your words and your ifs and your assurances.

Um I think that um uh I won't be here for your project.

Um I'm a short timer, um, but I've lost interest in you and L37 and Casa.

And I am greatly disappointed in myself because originally you were to pay 10 million dollars for that property, and one councilman realized that it was redevelopment property, which means the bulk of the 10 million dollars would go to all the other taxing agencies and leave South San Francisco with a pittance.

So I thought it might be best.

And I I don't know why the councilman had to come up with the idea that infrastructure is important.

You know, I read in the local press that Nell Sealander was talking about the infrastructure that this brings, because we have a new you we have a new um we have a new neighborhood, and certainly we do.

We have a neighborhood that's almost the same size as the existing one, Sunshine Gardens, but there's no meaningful infrastructure to solve some of the problems that we staff and the council has created in this immediate area.

How often do we have to hear about chestnut and Westboro and the disaster that is every morning and every evening?

And the plan was five million dollars instead of taking money for land, five million dollars that it would all come into the control of South San Francisco to be used to solve that problem by having an alternative route besides just chestnut and Westboro and El Camino Real.

And now that's all gonna go away.

I I guess I guess I was really played the fool.

And and um I'm not on board this time at all, and I'm really disappointed in the staff.

Did we look at anything else besides just giving up all the impact fees?

I mean, are commercial linkage fees something that could be used to solve this um mysterious hole?

And and and the other problem I have with this now, please tell me why we have our backs up against the wall as far as the time frame of this, and and there's no time if we have to act tonight.

There's no additional time.

How did that happen?

So in um I'll I'll answer the the structure of the commercial linkage.

Wherever you like, I'll follow.

So commercial linkage fees right now, we have a balance of about 11 million dollars in unencumbered cash.

So yes, that funding could absolutely be used.

But why are we using that instead of the money that was for a partial solution, the beginning of a solution for for a roadway?

That would absolutely be at the council's discretion when a loan agreement comes forward.

So what we've heard from council and other contexts regarding affordable housing funding is that we have many projects that need affordable housing funding and to conserve those resources and use them on multiple projects.

That's sort of been the city's philosophy about affordable housing until we found ourselves in a situation that's very constrained.

You may recall the Rotary Beacon project that came forward at 500 Linden just a couple of months ago for an additional funding award and also a waiver of impact fees.

That was sort of extraordinary for the city at that time because it was in excess of our typical award for an affordable housing project, and really due to a constraints at the state level with affordable housing funding.

So the number of grant sources and loan sources at the state has been reduced in this last year's budget as well as the next year's state budget.

And so you're seeing affordable housing developers need more hyper-local funding.

Um so absolutely, if the 1051 mission affordable project came forward and said, look, we've secured state tax credits, we've secured additional county funding.

They will be applying for additional county funding in May.

Um they think that a reasonable additional award from the county would be about five million additional dollars, so that would bring the county award to closer to 14 million.

And then they came back to the city and said we've closed this gap, but there is a gap remaining.

We need 10, 12 million dollars.

City staff would say, here are our sources of affordable housing funding.

We'd say here's your linkage fee balance, here's our former RDA housing dollars, which we still have a million or so of those dollars.

Um, here's our housing trust fund, which has about a million dollar balance, and and then we also have these more flexible fees from the DA.

Which of them would you like to use?

Staff would probably make a recommendation, honestly, to spend those commercial linkage fee dollars first, as you suggest.

But we have all of those sources on the table instead of having to constrain ourselves just to what's in the commercial linkage fee um account today.

Um that's one part of the question on the timing part of the question.

The development team was not in default of their agreement until December, and Bridge let us know.

It would start to be clear in February, March that they were going to withdraw from the project.

So we had started having a conversation with the developer in December saying, You're in default.

How are you going to remedy this default?

How can we move forward?

And at that point, Bridge withdrew from the project.

Um, and count and staff began coming forward to council to discuss brid bridge withdrawing from the project and other amendments that could be made to the deal to help it move forward.

Um the developer, the developer had to know what would he would he mention that bridge was making changes all over the place and and what they were willing to invest in.

That they were changing their their scope of activities.

And and that only happened when he was on top of default.

So Bridge actually announced after they withdrew from this project.

There are a number of press releases from Bridge about their new commitment to acquiring existing market rate buildings and converting those to affordable housing, and that's their new big push.

So there were like subtle cues to us and less enthusiasm for grant applications, but they still have working so much on the grant application.

Well, they still had project managers invested, they were still bringing on consultants to put these applications together.

So until this round, this fourth round, until this calendar year, that's when bridge actually told us, hey, we can't do another application round.

We don't think that this is for us moving forward.

Um, but last year they were in it.

I mean, they had a new project manager, we came and we toured the whole site.

There was a lot of enthusiasm last year.

Um, what happened with last year's application, and we had a killer application last year was really competitive.

Um bridge had three negative points from a tenant income certification issue on an Oakland property, and that is a discretionary action by state housing community development department to assess those negative points.

Um Bridge appealed that the staff sent a letter on you know saying we support this, this project is important to the city moving forward.

You know, we went and gave public comment when the at the um ASIC hearing for the strategic growth council.

So it's not as if there wasn't enthusiasm last year for the application, but the the year it's a whole year later, and Bridge has shifted what they're investing time and resources in.

We apologize for the short nature of this.

It's not it was not the intention.

I just you know, uh sometimes when I look at this um in and I can be very cynical, admittedly.

Um this is this is how you would play the game, so that the city does have their back up the wall, and there's so much at stake here that that you you will lose.

Um I I understand why you know um why a majority of this council is most likely going to accept this, and um to be honest with you, I don't know if if my one vote would kill it if I would be willing to vote against it, but I think that somebody has to vote against it.

Everything that we went through, I think choosing L 37 Casera AG or whoever they really are was a mistake.

It was many years ago.

There were um other players that um I think had uh uh more um uh more financial solvency um even internally, and uh we picked the wrong man.

But we've run out of time, and I don't want to belabor this.

So um what does council want to do?

Oh, we have are we going to do four different uh four different motions?

Um I think two is sufficient, one for the ordinance and one for the four resolutions.

One for the ordinance, one for the four resolutions.

So let's start with the ordinance.

Gentleman and lady who would like to make I guess I'll have to do it.

Um I I'll move to the approve the ordinance.

Okay.

Motion.

Off second.

And a second roll call vote.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Nogales.

Yes.

Mayor Adiego.

No.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes.

Okay.

So then a motion for the other four items, Councilman Coleman.

Would you like to make that motion?

So moved.

Okay.

A motion on the floor.

Second.

Second by councilwoman Nicholas.

Roll call.

Mayor Adiego.

No.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Navales.

Yes.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Okay.

Where are you going?

Oh, next item.

I don't know if I'm ready.

You ready?

Okay.

Oh, next item.

We'll move along to our administrative business.

Item 13 is a report regarding introduction of an ordinance.

Amending chapter 9.08 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to reassign the site inspection authority for animal permits from the county health officer to the city code enforcement officer.

Item number 13A is the ordinance.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor and City Council.

I'm Sky Woodruff, your city attorney.

This is a very brief report and item.

The city has somewhat unusual process for approving permits for unusual pets, such as monkeys or peacocks.

And that process is that the permit application comes into the city clerk's office.

It is referred to the county health officer who inspects the site where the animal will be kept to ensure that it will be an appropriate facility for keeping the animal, and based on the health officer's report, then the clerk's office issues the permit.

This is completely separate from other county animal controls that will remain with the county.

But they have told us that South San Francisco is the last city where the health officer is doing these types of site inspections, and they are going to discontinue providing that service.

An internal discussion occurred.

And so the ordinance before you tonight would effectuate that change so that the site inspection process would be conducted by the city's own code enforcement division and it would remove the county um health officer from that that process.

Okay.

Any questions about monkeys or peacocks?

Is there an inventory of how many monkeys and peacocks have lions or bears?

I'm sure the clerk's office could produce one for you of how many permits are currently available and what animals have been permitted.

Um but the the if you read the provisions of the municipal code, it's a very interesting list of example animals.

I thought monkeys and peacocks would be illustrative of uh what we're talking about.

Is there a special training that our code enforcers has to go through?

Um they are they will have to be going through some additional training for this because it's not part of their normal process.

Um not they they normally are um inspecting human habitations, not animal habitations, so they will be gaining um going through additional training to ensure that they have the necessary knowledge to ensure that the type of um uh facility is appropriate for the animal that that's the subject of the permit.

Yeah, we just want to make sure that we support them.

Yes.

So sometimes I get the impression that the the code enforcement officers are spread a little thin, that there's a lot of ground to cover.

And so um maybe the assistant city manager can tell us how impacting this might be to the code enforcement division.

Mr.

Mayor, um I have spoken with the city clerk's office about this, and my understanding is that there are uh very few um exotic animals in here in South San Francisco.

Okay.

I've also spoken with the Department of Environmental Health with the county, and they have committed to providing some uh transitionary um training for our staff.

Okay, all right.

Good to hear.

All right, at no cost I'll let that there is a meeting soon between coat enforcement and the county officer inspections.

I'll let that there is a meeting soon between co-enforcement and the county officer inspections.

Um and for the record, there's also no monkeys approved for permits at this time.

Good to know.

Is there a reason historically why the county wanted to push off this responsibility to the cities?

Well, I think it's it's the permitting process was probably appropriately with the cities.

I suspect it was more the reverse that the county stepped up to um to offer the as part of environmental health to ensure that the the um the facilities for the animals were appropriate.

Um I don't I don't have knowledge about what is going on with the county that they're stepping back from from doing this, but um as I said, what they've communicated to us is South San Francisco is the last city where they're doing this, so it's obviously not part of um functions that they intend to continue providing going forward.

All right, thank you.

Okay, with that, it's the pleasure of council on moved.

A motion all second and a second and roll call.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes, Mayor Adiego.

Yes, Vice Mayor Nagales.

Yes, Councilmember Nicholas.

I thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Wood.

Well now move along to item number 14 is a report regarding a resolution awarding a construction contract to JDB and Sons Construction Inc.

of San Francisco, California for the Mission Road Underground Utility District project and an amount not to exceed six million six hundred and eighty-eight thousand dollars in related actions.

Item number 14A is the resolution.

So uh Mr.

Chaw, I'm eagerly awaiting some good news for this portion of our community.

So no, I'm happy to share this good news.

So good evening, uh Mayor Audio, Vice Mayor Nogales.

Council members, my name is Jeffrey Chow, one of your senior engineers.

So I'm excited here to uh to present tonight the uh mission road underground utility district project.

I'm also joined virtually by uh PE staff.

Um so tonight next slide.

So tonight I'll be covering the following topics.

Um we will go over the project overview and benefits, some of the project limits, the rule 28 program itself, the bit results and cost allocation, project funding and budget, and as well as the construction schedule and next steps.

So, first off, what is an underground project, right?

Underground involves removing overhead electric telephone and cable wires and relocating them underground using conduits, vaults, and uh and surface mounted equipment.

This in this enhances safety by reducing wildfire risks and public exposure to overhead wires, while also improving overall system reliability during severe uh weather.

Also enhances the visual character of the corridor uh while making sidewalks more accessible for pedestrians and transit users connecting to BART.

Before you go off that slide, yes, before you go off that slide.

Um I just want to point out because um, you know, this this is kind of um the middle of district one, so I'm very familiar with this stretch of mission road.

And you know all the efforts we make in South San Francisco for ADA improvements.

How can the pole in the middle of the sidewalk be okay?

So, anyway, that's that's one of the real upsides to thanks for pointing that out picture out.

No, okay.

Moving on to the next slide.

All right, so let's see.

All right, the city established uh this underground utility strict back in 2018 along this section of Mission Road between Grand Avenue and BART, as shown on the map on the left.

And Mission Road qualified as a Rule 28 Underground Utility District as it is a roadway carrying high traffic of volume to and from BART and is adjacent to a public recreation area, which is the Satana Trail.

This project span is approximately 2,500 linear feet, serving 15 parcels and removed 19 utility poles.

The joint trench includes four agencies.

Uh we got PG ⁇ E, ATT, Comcast, and the city.

So just looking at the map to the right, the underground work has already begun, uh complete has already been completed just north of our limits near the bar station.

And just as discussed, uh, there's a feature PC at development project that on the ground is fronted as well, kind of uh showing on the yellow.

So once once everything's complete, the entire mission roll corridor will be fully underground.

Okay, so hopefully these photos look familiar to everybody.

This is right outside uh this building.

These are photos of Civic Campus Drive, uh, formerly known as Antoinette Ling.

So back in 2020, the city completed a similar rule 28 project.

Uh here are just some before and after images just demonstrating the undergrounding improvements and impacts.

All right, just uh switching gears to the funding.

Uh the Rule 28 program was established by this California Public Utilities Commission and required larger utility companies such as PGE to allocate annual work credits for undergrounding projects.

Uh these credits help fund PGE's portion of projects such as Mission Road and Antoine Lang.

So the city serves the lead agencies in these projects and currently has approximately 6.36 million dollars in available rule 28 credits.

In recent years, the CPUC has taken steps to uh phase out the rule 20 program with no credits being issued, and all existing credits must be used uh before December 31st of 2033.

Keep that please keep that uh credit balance in deadline in mind while we kind of move along with this presentation.

So all right, so we we uh we advertise this project for construction and receiv seven great and very competitive bids ranging between six point six to seven point eight million dollars.

Lowest bid was submitted by JDB and Suns Construction, which is uh approximately six percent above the engineers estimate.

Uh city staff and design team reviewed the bid and found it consistent with current market prices considering the current uh construction climate and rising costs in labor and material.

So the bid met all requirements, and staff is uh recommending awarding the construction contract to JDB and Sons.

With the low bid and kind of receiving the updated construction costs, the total pro uh total project costs that includes the design, construction costs, and contingency are allocated among the joint trench utility companies through something called a form B.

Uh the respective shares of the costs of the joint trench costs among PGE, ATT Comcast in the city are as shown on the slide.

Cost sharing is based on each utility's relative use of the trench, so including number of conduits, the depth of the conduit itself, and other direct costs.

ATT and Comcast costs will be reimbursed directly to the city, while PGD costs will be paid with the available uh rule 20 credits.

So kind of as mentioned in the previous slide, uh PGE has about $3.8 million of the joint trench work that'll be performed by the contractor, and they also have another pot of money, uh, another 4.6 million of PGE, which is direct in house costs.

This includes the installing the wiring, the electrical materials, service convert service convergence and inspections.

So bringing the total PGE costs to approximately $8.36 million.

Uh with only $6.36 million is in the available credits, there's a shortfall of approximately two million dollars.

So to move the project for staff recommends funding this gap through a work uh work plan agreement with PGE.

This approach will allow the city to fully utilize the available rule 20 credits before it expires and avoid future um construction cost escalation.

Okay, and on this slide I have two tables.

Uh the table on the left summarize the estimated project costs, including design, construction contract, a 15% crop construction contingency, and other associated project costs.

The table on the right shows the uh project budget.

The funds and amounts highlighted in orange, kind of on top of the table represents kind of existing funding that's in the project, while the yellow highlights show the proposed additional funding resources, including the remaining PGE Rule 20 credits uh and reimbursement from P uh 18D and Comcast.

And we also introduced an unaccounted fund um unallocated funds from the bicycle and pedestrian impact fee fund, which will support pedestrian safety improvements with this project, such as corner bowl-bouts and sidewalk these sessions.

So with the proposed budget amendment number 26.061, we will add approximately six million dollars to the project and we'll have sufficient funding cover to cover the estimated costs.

All right.

So if this item is approved tonight, construction is anticipated is anticipated to begin this summer and will should be completed within one year.

We have a comprehensive public outreach plan that includes distributing construction notices, construction notices to nearby properties, a dedicated project website with real-time updates, and utilizing our many social media platforms to maximize public outreach and ensure widespread of visibility of this project.

So our goals are to minimize disruption, provide clear and timely communication, and maintain open lines of communication to the public.

All right, so in summary, uh stack remote recommends the following actions uh awarding the construction contract to JDP and sense construction, approving a work plan agreement with PJE, and approving budget number 26.061.

And this concludes my presentation, so happy to answer any questions.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Chao.

Any questions for I commend the public works for initiating this because Rule 20A is initiated by the local government.

So thank you for doing that.

Um the prioritization, because it says that uh we were not prioritized because communities with high environment burdens or low income census tracts was not in that area.

Is that true?

Because it seems like that area also has low income tracks.

Because we looked at our low census tracts recently, right?

Did we appeal or did we double check that uh prioritization?

We can double check that for the council.

So yeah, uh, I think you're referencing.

So thank you for uh the question, Councilmember Nicholas.

So thank you.

So thank you for the question, Councilmember Nicholas.

Um the thing you're referencing um kind of in the staff report, we were uh actually kind of looking to for PGE to see if there's any available credits that we could actually add to the project.

Um because of the kind of phasing out uh process of uh the CP CPEC.

Um there's certain criteria that the city then meets.

Uh one of the criteria was you mentioned the underserved communities.

Uh yeah, the the low-income census tracts or the high economic uh high environmental burden, right?

Would you like to step in?

EJ?

Okay.

Um councilman uh Nicholas, that's a very good question because that's this reallocation of unused credits.

Many communities were too small to have a an established underground district, so they had a lot of rule 28 credits that were not being used.

Um the communities that were prioritized for redistribution of the excess credits were based upon um equity and like wildfire prevention.

Our our community was based on our established underground districts, was not uh a priority to PGE by PGE, correct.

Okay.

Um so a stown opt out on this, so that means to say they cannot provide service in the future in that area, right?

Correct.

We brought this project to the sound throughout the whole design process.

Um it didn't make business sense for them to join the joint trench.

That's what they told us.

So it seems like they will continue not to provide service in that area, and also I noticed that the contingency is only 15 percent, but knowing how when you dig, you discover a lot of things.

Why did we only allow 15 percent contingency for this project?

That's great question again.

Um 15 percent.

Um we felt appropriate with this project because um of how detailed uh during design we went through with this whole process.

We did a lot of potholing to identify a lot of the unforeseen issues uh along this trench that we're gonna dig.

Uh so I think we've we've uh we found sometimes I see 20 percent contingency for some of our projects, right?

Correct.

We depending on the project, we we kind of vary between 10 and 20 percent.

Uh so 50 percent was also kind of agreed upon with all the utility stakeholders, the ATT, PG, and um Comcast.

So that's kind of how we landed with the 50 percent.

Oh, so we we need their approval on that 15 percent, yes.

Yes, because you know, if we do 20 and maybe we'll just return or refund them, should there be only 15 percent?

Do we do we do that or uh this is or is this the the maximum that they will go for?

It's it's a contingency.

It's a contingency so if it's not used, then yeah, yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

So do we do we refund them?

Because for the uh allotment of what they're we're charging them, yes.

So we invoice them to for whatever is the actual yeah, for whatever's built on the road, yeah.

And if it uh goes higher than 15 percent, do we invoice them higher?

Well, yeah, we will have to have a discussion with uh the visitor.

I was thinking maybe we should get the 20 percent instead of the and then you know return to them if ever, because usually we have projects that's 20 percent contingency.

Very true, and in this you know, process wherein we don't know what's going to happen when we dig it it's I think for me it's safer to do 20 percent.

Just but I'm not a civil engineer, I'm a chemical engineer, so that's really far from my purview.

So so um uh can we back up because I've been having discussions over the many years with uh with Mr.

Ruble.

Um when did when did this project start well?

I mean, when we were when we were trying to put it together, how how long ago?

This under uh thank you, uh Matt Ruble, your principal engineer.

This underground district was established in 2020.

So it's been quite a process to work with the various utilities to identify who wants to participate, start the design process, realize that the amount of PGE allocation was not gonna cover the uh ever rising cost.

So we had to go through a value engineering process where we looked at what could be reduced out of the project.

Um it's just a long process given the number of players, but we're pretty grateful to have it here tonight and then be able to move forward with council's permission and utilize our full balance.

You're pretty grateful, and I'm extremely grateful that you almost brought it to the finish line, so it will uh begin.

I just wanted to thank um the entire staff, Mr.

Chow, Mr.

Ruble, and the man who's the hero tonight is the director.

Director Kim, he just keeps batting a thousand.

It's wonderful to see.

Any other questions for the staff?

Okay, what's a pleasure of the council?

Don't monkey with the numbers.

Let's make a motion.

So moved.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

No.

Okay, all right.

I'll second.

And a second on the floor, roll call vote.

Mayor Diego.

Yes.

Councilmember Nicholas.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Nogales?

Yes.

Councilmember Coleman.

Yes.

Thank you.

We'll now move along to items from Council, committee reports and announcements.

Anyone?

Okay.

Seems to be a little quieter group tonight.

If there are no reports, we can now move along to our closed session item number 15 is conference with rural property negotiators, property.

220 Linden Avenue, City Negotiators, Mike Noche, Housing Manager, Nell Sealander, Economic and Community Development Director, and Skye Woodchuff, City Attorney.

Negotiating Party, a Synergy Community Development Corporation, and 220 Linden Ave LLC.

And in negotiations, price and terms.

Item number 16, conference with labor negotiators, agency designated representatives.

Rich Lee, Assistant City Manager, Leah Lockhart, Human Resources Director, Employee Organizations, Teamsters Local 856, Confidential Unit and Mid Management Unit.

Thank you, Jasmine.

So the council will now enter closed session.