Shit paper on me.

Tell him to quit.

Right.

Lock him over here.

Got it.

Check.

All right.

Now that all the council members are present, I call to order the March 5th meeting of the city of West Sacramento City Council.

The West Sacramento redevelopment agency finance authority and.

We will begin with the land acknowledgement. I would like to acknowledge that the land on which we live, work, learn and commune is the original homelands of the indigenous people of West Sacramento.

We have been polluted this land throughout the generation.

We acknowledge and we thank the original inhabitants who have occupied maintained and secured this place and who still exist on this land.

We respect and celebrate the many diverse indigenous people who still are connected on this land on which we gather.

We need a close session this evening.

Now we would like to invite our guests to join the council and staff in the pledge, which will be led by the river city high school girls wrestling team.

Please stand and lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

We will be the flag of the United States of America.

We will be the republic for which it stands.

We will be the nation.

We will be the nation.

We will be the nation.

Thank you.

It is so wonderful to have you join us here tonight.

Such an honor to have our champions here.

I'm going to go over really quick what we do before item one for public comment.

But what I'm going to do is bring a presentation for our river city high school girls wrestling team before the public comment period.

So once I finish with this will go into the presentation.

Okay, as is noted on our agenda city council is prohibited by state law from discussing or taking any action on items that are brought up under item one for public comment.

But it provides an important opportunity for a public forum.

The public is given an opportunity this time to address city council.

An issue is not listed on the agenda.

And we do ask that anyone wishing to address the council on this or any other item this evening to fill.

Please fill out a request to speak card and return it into the clerk.

We accept the request to speak cards up to the conclusion of the reading of the staff report on any particular agenda item.

And tonight for anybody who's here to speak please fill out a request to speak card and provide it to our clerk.

And once the staff report has been read and we open the item up for public comment the clerk will announce your name for you to walk to the podium to speak.

We maintain a civil discourse here in the chambers. We ask that those in attendance and those who address the city council abide by the code of conduct posted and not speak in loud threatening offensive abuse of other disrespectful language that disrupts disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this meeting.

And we have a presentation under general administration within the city manager's office is a presentation of the proclamation recognizing the women's history month and honoring the river city high school girls wrestling team.

And we have a question to read the proclamation and then ask if anybody from the girls wrestling team I know you weren't given this heads up but if you would like to share a few words we really would love to hear from you about how you know this journey what brought you to this journey and anybody who would like to speak what brought you to this journey.

And we will go down and take a photo.

In the meantime you could just you know just put a few thoughts together and decide who would like to.

Whereas the city council west of city of west Sacramento proudly celebrates women's history month by honoring the achievements and contributions of women in our community.

And whereas the river city high school girls wrestling team demonstrated outstanding skill determination and teamwork throughout the season finishing their league competition undefeated and securing the Monticello Empire League tournament championship.

And whereas the river city high school girls wrestling program has grown tremendously over the past decade expanding from just two participants to 18 dedicated student athletes this season.

And whereas the program is not only foster excellence at the high school level that is also produced collegiate level wrestlers including Mitchell commission who went on to win a junior college national championship.

Maryam Sharik who is currently wrestling at Baker University in Kansas and Noah Arnold who is wrestling at Simpson College in Iowa.

And whereas the success of these athletes is a testament to their hard work the dedication of their coaches and the growing support for women's wrestling which is why we're all here in west Sacramento and beyond.

Now therefore be it hereby proclaim that the city council of the city of west Sacramento hereby recognizes and congratulates the river city high school girls wrestling team for the historic championship.

Commends their contributions to the achievement of women's athletics and celebrates their role in inspiring future generations of female athletes.

Congratulations.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

Hello my name is Lily Dempsey.

I'm a senior at River City High School and I would like to speak on behalf of the right girls wrestling team.

This is my final year as you know and I have been wrestling for three years along with these two over here my best friends sky and Danny.

Over the years there have been a lot.

We've gone through so much together we started out we wrestled and we've grown together as a team of girls we've come to face a lot of adversities.

We've overcome we've challenged and defeated and it's been really amazing.

I've made so many friends I think everybody has made so many friends lifelong meaningful relationships the coaches they've lifted us up further than we could ever have gone before I can honestly say I'm a different better person has a girls wrestling.

Thank you.

Before we go down for a photo with any of the council members like to share a few words.

You go for Sam.

Thank you ladies for being here tonight.

As you spoke I started tearing up.

We've got somebody else crying as well.

This is about community this is about womanhood and it's about facing adversity and doing incredible things together and it is such an honor that this is West Sacramento.

I remember watching the news that West Sacramento wrestling.

I watched it and was immediately inspired posted to social media shared.

To see the strength in all of you today is incredible.

I was chatting with a friend earlier about wrestling and kind of you know how it came to be and with women's wrestling.

Women's wrestling didn't exist at the high school that I went to wasn't even an option.

I was a little bit nervous and I was like, I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do it.

So that was a lot of schools and so women had a wrestle on men's.

And they face discrimination and adversity.

Men, male coaches refused to train them and I noticed you have male coach here tonight.

We're probably love training you.

Oh, and female coach wonderful. Thank you.

Thank you.

And it's just it's incredible to see this.

And so congratulations.

We are so proud that you represent West Sacramento so well.

I could not help like cheesying as you were talking because I remember I played high school basketball and college basketball.

And I am still friends with some of the players I played with in high school.

I was I was local and it just brings back such wonderful beautiful memories of just what it means to be on a team.

I mean, I have a lot of friends to support other girls and other women.

And I am who I am today because of the sports I played in high school.

And so you are one so very fortunate.

But also wow.

Thank you so much for representing West Sacramento representing yourselves.

And I hope that you really are taking in this moment.

I'm really proud to be here on on high school.

And I feel like maybe I just I didn't appreciate it at the time.

What it meant to be a senior and everything.

And so congratulations.

Thank you so much.

And just it's it's really wonderful.

It's really beautiful.

All right.

Yeah.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

No, no, no, no.

Why don't you speak and I will defer.

Please.

Sir.

That looks you gave me.

I've known her for a very long time.

I had the honor of pushing her son.

So, you know, it's been.

It's been truly honored to get the coach.

You know, this.

The team that we have here and.

I want to thank you.

Martha.

Mario.

And.

Rest the council for having us here.

This is truly.

Truly something that I've never got to do before.

So recognize these girls is awesome.

I got the rest of the coaching staff.

You know, I'm done.

This parlor.

Coach Stolpy and coach for any hero.

Young ladies, we've had the ability to coach them since.

They were freshmen.

And they all walked in.

Not knowing what wrestling was.

And so.

After some, you know, we had COVID four years ago.

So you hear some of them like they only got three years because the first was COVID.

And some of these ladies are freshmen.

And we're going to get the next four years.

Women's wrestling is now recognized in 40 state.

And so we're going to get the next four years.

And so we're going to get the next four years.

There's truly an accomplishment.

For the last 20 years, we fought to get here.

To get to where we can have a league and we can have a sport.

And where it's separate from boys and.

This year.

We have a league championship, which is also the first one they've ever had.

So, uh, yeah, you know, I can't say I'm.

How proud I am and the rest of the coaching staff for what they have accomplished.

And five days a week, three hours a day, every Saturday through Christmas.

Giving up their Christmas break, the train.

And, you know, we had seven of these ladies in the championship with the league.

Hey, we had all kind of our athletes make it.

We had read, we had regional champions.

And then even at as the masters, I really dumped the place.

I took seven place.

And so for us to have this level of athletes competing with just four years of wrestling is.

I want to say thank you to all of them and, you know, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

If only you could see what I see right now.

If only I could hold up a mirror and go down the row and show each one of you what it is to look like.

What I see as a camp.

You know, you, you all had to overcome immense adversity and teamwork.

In order to be here tonight, in order to wear those letterman jackets, in order to wear those team colors and on to sit amongst your community and your coaches and the parents who are so proud of you, who drove you to practices, who for went their own plans.

In order to see you, then proud and get honored by your city council.

When I read in the news, your accomplishment, one thing I did was I immediately reached out to our public information officer and he said, you know what, the rest of the count already done this when I love that because we are your biggest camp.

We are rooting you along.

We might be sitting on an elevated platform tonight, but tonight you are the ones that are on a pedestal.

When I, after you leave tonight, after all the pump and circumstance, all the noises and we take in the picture, I want you to remember a few critics can't stop.

You've already broken the mold of what it looks like to be a female.

And people will remind you, well, that's different. No, it isn't you own that power.

You deliver it to others behind you and you show them how to walk a path that's brought with broken glass and hot holes and challenges, show them how you've overcome them.

Tonight I saw our speaker take the podium and after about 30 seconds to a for colleague took her side and that I, that was so symbolic.

I was assigned as I got her back and whether or not she needed that moment I did because I loved watching that sisterhood, that fellowship, that teams, enforcement.

Nobody knows how much darkness you get your status.

Intermediate so much like what would I will say is keep going.

There is something that I would love to read to you strong committed motivated young women.

And that is a quote by Rachel Marie Mark says.

And she felt her heart get lighter that day. She stopped comparing. She stopped letting others put their two small boxes over her potential.

She stopped listening to the critics and started listening to the hopes of her dreams.

She started to see her strength, her bravery and her beautiful heart. And in that moment, the impossibilities felt possible.

Tonight you represent all of that to all of us. Congratulation and women young champions.

I'm not a member of all color. I want to say how proud of you we all are. You heard everyone up here.

And I'm the oldest member here. I'm 64 years old. We didn't have it in our school. We didn't have rest.

But we had great wrestlers anyway.

When I was going to school, I often wondered how some of the girls he said great rest.

Well, someone came from large families like the Cardozo and the Sanches. They could take any guy down.

I was wondering why. And I, and I read up on it once and I did that again when I knew we're going to give you this award. The reason girls are such great wrestlers is one they're more flexible.

They have better endurance and stamina.

They have also a lower center of gravity. That's what they tell us.

But I think most importantly, you have a great passion for what you do.

And I think that's what you do.

I think you're going to have a great chance to make you shine. So thank you so much for being here and for making us proud.

So we'll go down and take this photo. But I just want to say it takes a village for all of us to be where we're at today and to all of those who stood by your side and supported you, your parents, your family, those who cheer you on, your friends.

Thank you. Thank you all for making this historic moment possible. We are so proud of you. So thank you so much. And let's go down and take this photo.

We'll take a few different photos. I want to make sure the family members are in one of them.

Going down and take a few pictures.

Going down and take a few pictures.

We're doing this.

We can't really move back because this is blocking. We got a big group. So everybody move back like four steps.

Thank you.

Now this brings us to item one presentations by the public on matters not in the agenda within the jurisdiction of the council and each person has three minutes to speak.

Yes, ma'am.

Our first speaker is Kimber got it.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm going to send a few pictures.

I'm goingاصly spoke and made participants and we're at the Yarber repeal.

I'm Robin Davis.

Hello, I'm Robin and I live in my 160 square foot semi-off-grid tiny home on wheels on my undeveloped residential property here in West Sacramento.

I don't have many updates just waiting for the tiny home on wheels ordinance to return back to the council agenda and we were able to send the draft ordinance to sack sewer to see if their staff can come up with any kind of proportional impact fee options for tiny homes.

I also got a preview of our new permit pal tool and I'm hoping that we will soon be able to add a tiny home on wheels option to the application. It all goes as planned.

However, while navigating the application, I noticed that impact fees weren't listed and the system instructs you instructs users to call staff for that information.

That process doesn't seem very transparent and could end up creating more work for staff.

We've invested tens of thousands of dollars in impact fee nexus studies to determine specific fees and their purposes yet these fees are still difficult to figure out for some reason.

But the portal is very user friendly and easy to use and provide specific permit costs based on zoning in your area. So it seems it seems like at least an estimate for impact fees could be included as well.

We could include the impact fee reduction pilot program estimated cost to those designated areas as well.

These fees are a significant part of the cost to build in the city. So it's crucial that we inform people about potential costs early in the process.

So just a suggestion, but a great application to implement. So thank you to everyone for moving that forward.

Lastly, we have one of our very very large developments on the agenda today and several other housing projects happening in the city.

It was last reported by our planning department that the average size of the single family homes being built in West Sacramento since 2018 was 2656 square feet.

So I'm curious how that average will change with the new developments coming up.

But as always, please consider joining our West Sacramento tiny homes Facebook group for updates on the ordinance and for more information.

Thank you, Mr. Davis.

Pat Flynn.

Good evening.

Thank you, Mayor, and council members.

There are many events that have happened over my lifetime here in West Sacramento and recent events that you should all be concerned about and at least show care to public members.

I have concerns and I worry not only for my family, but all the families that live in West Sacramento school evaluations are especially.

And I think that the classes are kept north of the barge canal, a concern for me in the event that there could be a flood or any other disaster that could happen in West Sacramento.

Parents work outside of West Sacramento and could have a hard time.

Getting to their children.

So if they are bust to a different area, how will they be notified, you know, and that's the school districts responsibility. I understand that.

I know that I would have to cooperate.

Where will the students be taken.

Is a is a concern.

Will the students be taken outside of West Sacramento.

We have many disabled people that need help.

Are those people being factored into the overall existing evacuation plan non-existent evacuation plan because we haven't seen it.

Students need to be educated and informed to avoid panic because of the development projects that came forward in 2006, which are the very same developments coming forward this year.

A group save our city was formed.

We were advocates for for responsible growth and proper and adequate infrastructure.

We loved our Southport framework plan that won awards for it for its conception or its architectural design.

We know our levies were in bad shape at the time and needed to have repairs.

So we passed flood tax to help repair those levies, knowing that we would also need federal and state funding.

We needed additional fire and police to keep up with growth.

We advocated for public safety.

We're still advocating for public safety almost 20 years later.

We still find ourselves in the same position, except our Greenbelts, Agland, Animal Habitat and Southport Framework plan.

We have all been mitigated and amended a way.

Higher densities, additional cars, more people literally cram down our throats in a 25 miles where bathtub.

We are currently faced with unsafe roadways, major traffic issues, including major accidents, more crime and levies that will not reach flood designations as advertised by the city.

Which has been known by the city all along and not been shared with the public.

I find that very disturbing.

Your decisions are destroying our beloved city.

No major family restaurants, a declining, unkept shopping center, businesses closing and leaving West Sacramento.

We have very high taxes that need to be looked at.

I am so disappointed in your actions.

I think it's a big issue.

I think it's a big issue.

I think we have no additional request to speak on this item.

Thank you, but I'm clerk. I'm closing the public comment.

Moving on to item three, which is a public hearing regarding the appeal of the planning commission certification of the Liberty EIR.

I have a whole list of things to read in case you want to have a seat.

Okay.

And just for the process, I'll explain to you the process.

There's a process.

I think I think he's third, right?

I'm the list.

He's third.

You won't be speaking in.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

I am required, according to this hearing process, who read the following.

And then I will proceed in providing the guidance that we are looking at here for this for today's hearing the Liberty appeal hearing procedures summary.

The City Council's adopted hearing procedure policy.

Roman number three dash a dash number three requires that the mayor read a summary of the procedures into the record.

And the following is that summary, which can also serve as a script for the hearing process.

So we'll open the hearing.

The mayor will ask all members of the council to publicly announce any testimony or evidence received outside of the hearing process, such as exparte communication.

The mayor will ask all council members to announce any conflicts of financial interest with a material effect.

And members shall disqualify herself.

Staff will present the staff report, place relevant documents into the record and respond to questions from city council.

Staff may present any testimony and relevant evidence, not previously presented in the written report.

Evidence is relevant if your proves or disproves a material fact in dispute.

The mayor will specify the time of the appellant and applicant.

Has for his or her presentation and rebuttal.

The appeals will be heard in the order we see.

Mr. Garderd, the appellant will be given 20 minutes present their appeal.

No testimony or witnesses will be heard at this time.

All public comment testimony will be heard during public comment testimony.

The number six.

And the applicant will be given 15 minutes to respond.

No testimony or witnesses will be heard.

All public comment testimony will be heard again during public comment testimony.

See number six.

Six members of the public and individuals in support of either a talent or the applicant will be given the opportunity to present testimony.

Public comment will be limited to three minutes each person.

At that time, if once three minutes are up, the microphone will be turned off by the clerk.

There's a button here and I can't ever find it.

The mayor will specify the time the appellant and applicant has for his or her response to testimony or evidence.

The talent will be given five minutes to respond.

That may not introduce new testimony or evidence or restate direct testimony.

Applicant will be given 10 minutes to respond.

That may not introduce new testimony or evidence or restate direct testimony.

The staff may provide responses to testimony received from the appellant applicant public and maybe ask to answer questions from the city council.

The mayor will close or continue the hearing and the city council will deliver it on the matter and adopt findings if appropriate.

The final decision may be deferred for preparation or of draft findings consistent with a preliminary decision.

I will now go through the script that is in compliance with what has been read.

Do any council members have any testimony or evidence received outside of the hearing process, such as X partake communication.

I will begin to my right on some member Orozco.

You thought you were in court.

She said no.

I am a member.

May I please vote for the mayor.

And I will call.

And in my case, I have been speaking with members of the public.

public, various members of the public as I held town hall meetings and I'm out engaged

very much with the public and received emails from concerned individuals. Being out there,

there's a lot of communication that I've had with many individuals. Do we need the

note, the official emails that we have received from our, because all of us received emails?

Yes, well, if you'd like to, if you'd read them, I received emails, I do read my emails.

I do read my emails, folks. So, yeah. So, Mayor, do we need to modify? We do. Yes, if you would like

to modify it, modify it, receive email. Anybody else? Thank you. Okay. And then I also have

talked to you public members, not the, not what the folks that will be presented, but absolutely

have talked to community members, that's our job. Yes. I see a lot of community members

even here that I've spoken with. Okay. The next question is, do any council members have any

conflicts of financial interest with material effect? And if so, a member shall disqualify

themself? Yes, not a mayor, that is me. I need to refuse myself this time because I live in

facing to the project. So, I'll leave. I'll put him, he's your home.

We'll give you a moment here to figure things.

The staff. Sorry, now you can get the staff. You want us to go one by one for the financials and say

no as well. No, as long as you're kind of in general. Do we need to go over the financials

one by one? Should we? Council member Orozco here answered to the question

and any financial conflict. No. And there is a FPPC requirement

within the year where we do report to you know, Secretary of State and when we have any campaigns,

we do report whether we receive funding. And in the last year, I have not received any funding.

So that's the report that we have. I provide. So just to let you know, there is a last bit,

there was, but in the last year, I have not received any.

That I can recall, but if it's anything more than $250, you are now to allow it to take

part in this decision. That was last requirement thing. And I did ask for the city attorney

clarification about that. Just to make sure if anything can go above that. But I don't think

anybody else has. Am I in a timer, Madame Clerk?

The Mississippi Attorney.

I want to disclose that in 2016 and 20, I believe that you find it for any amount of $5.

From the developer in this particular case and in this matter in the last in 2024, nothing

that it needed $250. As I understand that this point for the county can't be sure of it,

but I want to make sure that for the sake of being thorough that I do disclose it for the

record that it is public and case that is intact. Thank you. It does not impact your decision.

In this case is a result.

Okay.

Thank you for letting me know. And this time staff will now present the staff report and

place relevant documents into the record and respond to questions from the city council.

And staff may present any testimony relevant evidence not previously presented in the written

report. Evidence is relevant if it proves or just proves a material fact and dispute and just

stop for the record please say your name and your position.

You don't need to have a name, do you?

You.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the council. Justin Hardy, Mayor Planner and the Liberty

Project Manager for the entire town of Vinear, worked on this project. Tonight I'm here to present the

appeal, the Liberty Project on the certification of the EAR and the Visting Tenant of the

Set of Vision map. I am joined with Bob Loughler-Masino who is a consultant that has been

assisting with the project since roughly 2018 who's sitting next to Mr. Rapperti.

And I'm also joined with a variety of staff members representing departments who have all

contributed bringing this item before you tonight. I'm hoping this presentation will come up.

Oh, you're waiting for the presentation technical difficulties.

Give you a minute.

During that minute, I would like the attorney who's providing guidance for us for this hearing to

introduce yourself please.

All right, just give me all stand up.

Thank you.

Justin, I think you get started on project background at least.

Okay, we're waiting.

So the outline should have come up, covering the project at a high level,

just provides some background since it hasn't been before you.

And then the appeals of the Planning Commission actions and then staff recommendation following.

The breach now shot of the project is roughly 342 acres. It proposed by the PEG family,

the Liberty specific plan and also has other associated land use entitlements along with a specific plan.

The project proposes 1503 units.

Can we speak a little louder please?

They're having a hard time hearing you.

The project proposes 1503 units, 10,000 square feet of commercial, 13,000 square feet of

private recreation space, including a 25 acres for the parks, one of which is an iNaker community park.

Liberty is one of the three large projects in Southport, Yarbrough, being one of them, River Park,

is together.

Have a map showing all of those for the public when it comes up.

As part of the project, there's a list of entitled requirements starting with a clearance

of the certification of the EAR, adopt the findings of fact, statement of our iterations,

and the mitigation monitoring plan and reporting programs, excuse me.

It also encompasses the Liberty specific plan, a Festing Tendative Subdivision map.

Here we go.

Here's a map of the free projects Liberty is in the upper right in the northeast village of the

framework plan.

And River Park is directly to the south and Yarbrough's further to the east,

in this out east corner.

So,

I already went over to people who are clearance, so adopt a Liberty specific plan as another

entitlement requirements, proving that the Festing Subdivision map,

the meaning of the zoning code, zoning map,

amend the framework plan, amend the general plan, and approve a development agreement.

The project chronology, the project was filed in October of 2013,

in May 2016, we held two scoping meetings.

I believe both were held at the Marina.

In August 2017, the EAR was circulated and the notice of preparation was issued.

In June 2024,

planning commission held an informational workshop.

We discussed the project.

We didn't bring the entitlements forward, just the discussion of what's coming,

becoming for them later.

September 2024, the draft documents were published for the October meeting.

October 2024, to January 2025, the commission held four individual hearings

during that time period.

On January 30, the planning commission took the following actions.

They determined equal clearance.

They certified the EAR, which the draft and environmental impact report from 2017.

The final environmental impact statement,

impact report, excuse me,

September of 2024, was when it was published.

They adopted the findings of fact, the statement of overriding considerations.

They adopted mitigation monitoring reporting plan as part of their action.

In addition to that, the commission approved the subdivision map for the project,

which has the primary authority on both of those.

They, in their motion, recommended that the council adopt a liberty specific plan,

amend the zoning code and zoning map,

amend the south port framework plan, amend the general plan 2035,

and approve a development agreement.

A pill of the commission's actions more specified.

We already covered the procedure at the beginning.

We'll move on to the appealable actions.

Is a certification of the EAR resolution 25-1 PC.

Approval of the Vestin tentative subdivision map 25-3 PC.

The recommendations from the January 30th planning commission action

are not appealable that will recommendations do this become.

There were two appeals filed at the time and they required appeal period.

One with Mr. Goddard on the fourth.

Mr. Keyes Lane, mid or one on the sixth,

which was withdrawn on March 4.

We were provided with that as

a memo with regard to the settlement agreement.

Responses to appeals will occur in the staff report.

We also occur in the city attorney memo.

The flood protection manager memo with the fire chief memo and the applicant attorney.

We'll start off with

claim number one from Mr. Goddard.

New information became available after the EAR was publicized.

The substantial unforeseen impacts occurred at the draft EAR publication.

Supplemental amended or EAR and recirculation of the draft environmental

report claims further elaborated in subsequent claims recovered in the staff report.

Dallas response claims were not supported by substantial evidence.

Panges in the regulatory environment do not warrant recirculation.

Reciproclization of the EAR.

The statute and guidelines in the effect time.

The release of the notes of preparation.

Govern the content of the EAR.

More detailed responses under subsequent claims are again

recluded in the staff report.

Number two, claim number two is a EAR evaluation of flooding,

dramatic change and risk assessment.

New and more severe risk information became available.

The city's effort to enhance flood protection ineffective.

No future efforts will ever be enough to take south port.

That's response claims in the FEIR revision to impacts of

Erie under WP7.

Is less insignificant with mitigation to significant and unavoidable.

There was no change in the EAR's assessment or description of flood risk.

The impact conclusion was reflected to correctly reflect the general plan EAR.

Mitigation measures allowed for in-loop fee payments and require

the disclosure for flood risk maintained in the EAR.

Additionally, levy and system improvements have less than the risk of forthcoming.

Improvements will also further less than the risk over time.

The regional efforts have also been improved that

reduce the city of West Sacramento's flood susceptibility with impact

and improvements to full some dam enhancements.

The Sacramento weir and the levy to the north of the weir.

The appellant provides no substantial evidence to support these claims.

The claim number three, the EAR just not property analyze risks associated with emergency

evacuation.

Flood risk have grown over time, south port roadway insufficient to accommodate emergency

evacuations.

Flood risk has lessons, this has response, cities will prepare to initiate evacuation or

partial evacuation and the draft EAR conclusion concerning emergency evacuation impact has

that seven is still accurate.

The claim number four, schools was eliminated from the EAR and the Liberty Project.

The school was eliminated from the project as a mitigation measure.

References under stature response.

Fifth, Washington Unified School District owns the property and has been deleted from the project.

The property is owned again by Washington Unified, not the project applicant.

The claim number five, characterization of flood risk,

balance sites, a description of an HDR engineering report, evidence of flood risk.

Alp appellant questions city compliance with various state and legislative requirement for flood

protection.

That responds to HDR description of the West West Africa Envision Platinum Award for

Sustainable Infrastructure with recognizing efforts to implement the south port levy

improvement project.

The project brings the levy to compliance with state and federal levy criteria.

Additionally, cities and compliance with legislative requirements, which are called for

200-year flood protection.

We are in task to do that honor before the required date.

The claim number six is the hearing process, insufficient hearing process.

Eight months from June 2024, the Planning Commission Workshop,

to January 2025 hearing, the Planning Commission has been delivered in its consideration of the

project, taking actions on January 2025, and all five public hearings were held.

In addition, the entire hearing process, including the two scoping meetings, the project has

been increased for noticing to a thousand radius, the versus the 500 that required.

In the staff's recommendation, the recommendation recommends resolution 2531 denying the appeal

thereby upholding the Planning Commission's decision of the January 30, 2025 actions.

That concludes my presentations.

The applicant is here and they're representative.

I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Mr. Hardy.

Are there any questions among the council members?

Mr. Attorney, you just have no, you know what, I'll ask my questions out.

I will ask various members of the staff who prepared memos to come up after

the additional questions and clear.

You do not leave in case this breaks on a little longer.

Thank you, Mr. Hardy.

Okay, I have one applicant for this appeal.

Mr. Kimber gotter, Mr. Goddard, you will be given 20 minutes present to your appeal

at the public, this public hearing before City Council and to the public.

This time, no other testimony or witnesses is allowed to speak until I'll public comment

and testimony will be heard during the public comment testimony period, which will.

We will let you know when that happens.

And Mr. Goddard, once you're up at the podium and ready to speak with that,

we'll then your time will begin.

Once you're ready to speak, your time will begin.

When we answer that question before you start the clock.

I'm asking a question before you start.

Oh yes, you may ask.

Yes, thank you.

That question is, we'd be swearing my witnesses in separately as they're giving evidentiary

testimony and accordance with a legal provision that SQL requires.

Council, inform me that we do not need to swear anybody in.

Will you consider extending time for the witnesses to speak to five minutes instead of three?

No, three minutes.

We're going to leave it at three minutes.

Thank you.

Just let me know when you're ready so we can begin the clock.

They're going to set up some charts for you so you can see them.

I would like the attorney to review whatever charts or props you have before we present.

You've seen them on the back of my submissions or their submissions in emails,

but certainly welcome to look at.

I got the thumbs up that you may present them.

It's okay, you will see these better if they can stand them along here.

Otherwise, it's very hard.

You know what?

If they actually do not, it would be better for better against the chairs.

That's what we blocked by this.

Yeah, the against the chairs is better for you.

Yeah, the dias because we can't see anything.

If you the closer you get, the less we can see.

Who's your audience for this?

Why don't I ask you that?

Who is here?

We are.

Okay, then you want to push it back that way.

Are you going to point our reference when you as you speak or somebody can help you?

I am, but I can probably do it from here.

Don't have a pointer.

Just for clarification, we do have.

We do have the public comment, but I'd like to email with

kind of numbers to see the packet.

Okay, thank you.

You may see if there's anything that's not already included in the packet.

I'm was unaware of the fact not having previously had this that the exit to here already photocopy.

And I see.

They're already photocopied.

So I don't know.

Mr. Goddard, did you provide at the a copy of the of these exhibits to us?

These exhibits are attached to my responses to the city clerk that contain four pages of legal

discussion.

And then on the back, you have smaller pictures of these items right here that you're looking at.

So you've seen them.

Let me show you.

Let me show you.

We should have seen that.

See that.

These pictures?

That's one.

Yes.

We do have the photos in the public comment packets that we received.

Are these them as well?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you so much.

Well, I'm assuming he wants to put them there so that anyone on television watching.

Yes, you can go on ahead and we have a copy of it here.

In case you want to flip it around to the public.

So the public can see.

We do have the copies here.

There's just the record.

No, we just wait.

Also posted online.

And for the other people you see.

If you don't mind it.

You can also go online and take a peek.

Sure.

I'd rather you be able to see these.

Our viewers online can go to the city's website.

To the city and to the city council agenda under there, you'll find a category.

This is public comments.

Is that correct?

And that way you can see the public comments.

There's a there's a packet.

And you will see and probably right in the middle.

It is well.

But I'm clear.

Can you reference which one it's from?

You put the packet on the city's website.

If you go to where the public, the agendas for the meetings are published and go to the

agenda for this meeting March 5th 2025.

Item three, the public comments for this item are published as an attachment to item number three.

Thank you so much.

For all that clarification.

And when you're ready, Mr. Goddard, you begin and we will begin the clock.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm here for two reasons tonight.

First, because there's a significant risk of flood in this community that's been downplayed

for far too long.

Second, because there's really no good way out of this community in the event of an emergency

evacuation.

And that too has been downplayed for far too long.

I will present and my witnesses will support evidence at first hand evidence of these

propositions, particularly as they refer to the Liberty 1500 unit housing development approved by

the planning commission to be built in a flood zone alongside the river.

Let's take a quick walk through the legal issues.

There's a couple of them.

They're hard to understand.

So I try to find a way to make it simple.

There are two underlying laws being violated with respect to this development,

both are regulations under the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA as it relates to

environmental impacts.

Impact reports called EIRs.

My first goal is recirculation.

The sequestection governing this is 15088.5.

It's called recirculation.

It isn't hard when a draft environmental impact report is followed by a final environmental

impact report and they don't agree, in this case seven years later in the Liberty

Development and the two don't agree.

This law mandates that the final EIR be recirculated again for 45 days so the community

can see and ask questions about the differences between these two documents.

The city attorney and the developer are trying to say that the draft EIR and the final EIR

don't disagree. They're the same.

That isn't correct.

I'll demonstrate why and why it is somewhat like swallowing a porcupine backwards to prove that.

It is clearly not true.

I call this the fish, the bird and the duck.

In this case the 2016 fish, the 2017 bird and the 2024 duck.

The fish, the fish is the general plan EIR done in 2016 and that one the fish looked up from

underwater and said yep the flood risk here is significant and unavoidable for any further

development in Southport.

Love, love.

The bird is the Liberty Project draft EIR done in 2017.

The near-sighted bird flew over the project a year after the fish talked and said,

looks good to me the flood risk is less than significant with mitigation.

He tweeted this good news out if the only workshop involved in the Liberty Project

elate in the game planning commission meeting which is not in a public workshop.

Any fluiwan tripping complacently the duck.

The duck is the Liberty Development final EIR done in 2024.

That's when an honest duck floated in seven years later.

Right in the middle of the beautiful new multi-million dollar set back leveeful of water.

While flying in the duck noticed the beautiful levee only improved a small part of the 50 miles

of the surrounding weak levees without even 100 and the or the required 200 year

FEMA safety certification.

The honest duck had to admit the truth and said the flood risk is significant and

unavoidable for more I'm swimming but they'll probably just adopt a statement of overriding

concern and build anyway.

If it wasn't so dangerous said the duck that kind of thinking would make me quack up.

My position on the law the bird in the duck say two totally different things.

People depended on the bird statement that the flood risk was not significant.

That's not true.

You've got to tell them what the duck said the flood risk is significant and unavoidable

so recirculate the truth let the public know the full risk and then see if the development

should still be approved.

The developers and the city's position on the law is hey wait don't forget about the fish

that's the 2016 amended general plan the fish called foul and it was right to begin with even

though the bird said something entirely different we should listen to the fish.

Forget about what the bird said let's just figure out a way to call the bird and the duck the same thing.

Why didn't the 2017 insignificant flood risk bird see the 2016 significant

unavoidable flood risk fish when the draft liberty EIR was done a year later.

The general plan amendment fish had been swimming around out there for a year.

I don't know the answer to that but let me take a stab.

I speculate that the bird did indeed see the fish but did not want to hear it because it would not

have gotten the project off the ground to initially declare it was dead in the water.

Do the significant unavoidable flood risk.

There's a lot of law behind all of that if you consumed any of it it's A B and C.

And the draft EIR in this matter doesn't match to finally EIR there's two entirely different

almost reversed flood risk assessments.

Try to bootstrap backwards I call it reverse bootstrapping or maybe boot unstrapping to say that the

2016 general plan was pretty good and pretty accurate about significant flood risk and so we

should look at that instead of the 2017 draft EIR EIR and say that 2016 general plan amendment matches

the later final EIR in 2024 will call that good it isn't good.

The draft has to match the final there's a significant difference in them you must

recirculate there is no unclarity in that law despite the fact you're going to hear a lot of people

try to make it unclarity including calling the bird's position a typo.

No it's not a typo it's clearly a different risk assessment.

The spurious argument here would overlook what the liberty draft EIR said because the general plan

agreed with the final EIR. It's it's not going to fly no matter how you cut that.

Sequo section 15162 is my other thrust and that's a second legal argument it demands a supplemental

or entirely new EIR. When new or more significant flood and emergency impacts exist now then we're

anticipated or studied seven years ago. We have annual flood reports that our west

Sacramento, West Africa we call it that basically tell us as they tell the central valley flood board

that we're we're getting on ever thinner ice but as far as emergency evacuation studies

none was ever done for this project or any other that I can find. My long time resident witnesses

will testify with fair arguments and abundance over what their eyes have seen and what they

have personally experienced regarding this section of the law were substantial changes with

respect to the circumstances under which this project is now be undertaken have come to pass

particularly in the areas of flood risk and emergency evacuation in possibilities.

You've chronicled millions and millions of dollars and how we spend it to improve these levy's

and there's not no doubt there's been improvement in areas of the levy.

The developer and the city though are trying to argue that the entire 50 miles of levy is

better than it was that's impossible. The alleged that I have no evidence to the contrary.

In law courts take judicial notice of common sense and here's some during the time that I just

spoke there was erosion among the levy's as when water moving fast meets dirt there's erosion

it's going it's getting worse over time not better certainly we rebuild portions of it we show it up

but another area is not the setback levy it's a beauty but just on either side of it we don't have

that flood protection or behind us we don't have that flood protection either there are I'll show you

numerous places in the levy where we've got all sorts of issues where they're seepage where there's

potential overtopping where there's boils you know this we've been working on these levy's ever

since I've been here there are a hundred years old they were made by farmers with tractors pushing

dirt up and they never had any quality standards and they never will and subsequent to that we've

been dumping dirt on them putting rock around them pressing them trying to make them work and give

us the safety that we need into which we are about to put 8,000 more units this chart to my left

shows you all the developments that are approved or pending in the south port bath tub the liberty

development is 1500 of those units 3000 were approved recently in the arbor development next comes

the river park with 2700 more units right alongside liberty and right there where the setback levy is

but I have I would say to the people in the liberty and future river park development turn around and

look at the levy behind you the deep water channel close to where I live has a lot of issues let me show

you some

just a quick walk along the deep water channel on the east side close to bridgeway island

we'll see these two spots where the rings are here's the pictures of those two spots

these are levies that are collapsing because they're made of clay they're made of loose dirt and you

can't really shore them up well that's not the only place we'll find this we've got a beautiful setback

levy but what does that do other than provide complacency to the people who want to build beneath

that and give you license to say looks good it's not good we don't have and won't get

200 year FEMA protection certification I don't know if it'll be in my lifetime or yours

but here's what your own EIR says in the liberty final EIR listen carefully to this is your

this is your EIR a levy failure anywhere in the south port basin would likely inundate the entire

basin according to the u.s. army corps of engineers the generally flat topography of west

sacrameno south of the deep water channel and the substantial flood deaths predicted for a levy

failure suggests that flood water could spread extensively into the liberty development area

even even if the south port levy setback levy would remain intact it will be years until flood

protection our flood protection goal is achieved and in the meantime new developments in the city

of west sacrameno that occur prior to the completion of the improvements to ensure full protection

may have 100 year protection or less we don't know nobody's ever certified what your protection

different areas of the levy had there's never been that kind of a certification therefore the

impact is significant and unavoidable until west sacrameno levy improvement plan is complete and

the required flood protection for the development protected by the levy system is obtained when will

the 200 year mandatory SB 5 FEMA flood protection goal occur how will it occur and what are we doing

in the meantime as we put 8,000 more units in a flood plain bathtub and that brings me to the flood

portion of my presentation which your seat belts on a little I'll try to be kind but it gets a little

rough this I call the flood game busted there's a game here after a statement like what I just read

how is it possible that we can in our minds be comfortable with 8,000 more units in that bathtub

this is what all developments look like together on the map

Cassandra noriaia deputy executive officer delta stewardship council and hydrology says

a significant break anywhere in the 50 miles 50 miles of levy around west sacrameno would in

and date with up to 20 feet of water throughout the community within two hours I'm going to come back

to that in emergency evacuation but that's an independent statement as is the one in the levy

or in the liberty final EIR that's your own your own summary of the flood risk

independent engineers who have surveyed west sacrameno levy's have paraded the same statement

of anywhere in the levy breaks two hours 20 feet of water there's a sitting at break on one side

it's going to flood the rest this

a little awkward trying to show you these but this chart on my right in my right hand your left side

shows the blue areas where we have significant levy issues that are not resolved that don't even have

50 year protection and yet we have green areas where we've shorted up the levies and they look

pretty darn good and that's where you want to put the developments because that when the people

there seem complacently safe and the developers will use that to justify putting the developments

there the chart on my left hand shows the degree of inundation of this city at different flood plain

levels the one you're wanting to get 200 year flood plain right here that only happens flood once

in 200 years that's good that's what you're striving for here's what happens if it happens in 100

years here's what happens in 50 years and here is a 25 year flood plain that's a significant chance

and the same overall flooding because of the low area is is it's not as deep but it's certainly

there is a 10 year flood plain these charts show you that conjecture about the flood and levy

certification levels or just that there's conjecture and we don't have anything that you could

sell to people if you were selling houses to say you're safe you're good to go everything's fine here

and yet we engage in that legal fiction why because we have a special law just for West Sacramento

that allows us all the way to 2025 to keep trying and if we keep trying in each year our local

flood board shows findings that one we have enough money this year to keep going make the plan

we got a plan we're going to keep at it we got the money for that year if you keep saying that every year

our small flood board complies of three people using this SB 586 law if you make those findings and

shows significant progress you can keep building whereas otherwise SB 5 would make a building more

a Tory amount of this place you wouldn't be building anything but we somehow got that law just for

us why just for us why doesn't anybody else have that that might tell you something about the

problems with our levy and yet we keep laying down huge developments the flood board is composed of

three people Tom Raimus an out of town developer council persons al-Cala and siltizio hall it takes

two out of three of those to say yes we find adequate progress and we're going to go ahead and build

and as long as we keep saying it we can keep going ahead and build however our most recent report

from wasafka to the central valley flood board tells us in the report that it'll take 1.2 trillion

dollars that's 80 million a year for the next 15 years to even get near 200 year flood protection

we don't have that kind of money i doubt you're ever going to get it i think this is a game i think

we keep extending that so that we can keep building and and that's just unconscionable behavior

people are going to move in here and think they're safe and you've given it in the liberty

e-i-r to the developer to tell people the risks so because it's significant and unavoidable and we've

adopted a statement of overriding concern with just me we're going to build anyway we're going to

put it in their deeds or have the developer tell them hey this is a flood zone beware it's buyer be

ware and if you can't get flood insurance don't blame it on us that brings me to emergency evacuation

but i'll leave that subject saying this if that doesn't sound like a flood game then you really

need to stop and look back on that and ask yourself who's on that flood board and who's on the

reclamation district 900 board that governs all of our waterways and our ditches and

oranges for developments to occur well that's Dan Ramus Tom Ramus's brother another out of town

developer does that not just make you a little bit queasy it should i don't know who appoints them

i don't want to ask but i'm going to guess emergency evacuation the non plan my researches

searchers and i have looked everywhere to understand what the city plan is we have a 64 page

2016 emergency non plan i call it because i still don't have a clue after reading every word of it

how i would get out of the community that's because there's no route plans we don't have

a traffic study except 2016 same date as the emergency plan our emergency plan and traffic study are

both about the same ages the EIR and the liberty development you'll likely do the usual tonight and

stand up the fire chief the police chief goodman and have them tell us as usual that we're working on

it and we got it under control and the police chief will say he's got the authority to evacuate

evacuate everyone and he certainly does as obvious as and and unhelpful as that is the fire chief will

say we have a plan we're going to keep working on it we're training prepared we're going to get it

done but there's no routes out of here so that leaves me wondering and anybody else who read that

plan what am i supposed to do it this is what we're supposed to do according to your plan as each

emergency presents its own specific challenges we cannot have a generic route plan instead we create

the route plan to accommodate the challenge during the incident and to best manage the flow of

vehicles and people as deemed appropriate with that we're working on a plan during the incident

we're going to find out what 55,000 people and 40 to 60,000 cars ought to do I can tell you what

they're going to do and perhaps the reason you don't want to put that in a plan is become painfully

obvious obviously everybody knows by common sense if you had a quarter of those cars trying to get

to Jefferson Boulevard or our beautiful new valley parkway they're all going to jam up in an

instant and if there's a flood and it's over the top of your car you've got dead people this is

unconscionable we've got five exits out of this community we have one to Clarksburg we got four that

come to the same place generally on i80 everybody's going to rush for those I don't know what other people

are going to do but I'm not going to say honey where's the evacuation plan that we're supposed to

receive the cars almost underwater and we're supposed to get some notification how to get out of here

here's the infrastructure route problem it's pretty simple it's just not enough exits each one of

these is an exit from this community it shows the choke points the traffic issues the traffic jams

at 8 a.m. in the morning all the greens are the green the orange zones show that you're almost

at gridlock just trying to get out of here to go to work with those are the exit there's no other

way out of here we never built the i5 bridge over the river we should have that would have

solved these problems and we could have done some better things by virtue of development right now

though we're placing all of these people in jeopardy 1500 more homes are being added to three to

the 3000 approved last November we're continuing to push these houses and put them down as fast as we

can for obvious other reasons that have to do a say cog and and our reenin numbers but that doesn't

protect the public this is why the liberty development is vulnerable vulnerable both to

recirculation for inconsistent e irs and requires supplemental or new e ir based on significantly

increased impacts of flood and emergency evacuation which have not been assessed thank you

no clapping please there's no there's no clapping please no clapping or i will

take the comment period back down i we need this time to keep moving

next the applicant i think you have um mr. terry teaple or who will be speaking

all right please state your name um on behalf of liberty you will be given 15 minutes to respond

no testimony or witnesses will be heard at this time i'll public comment testimony

will be heard during public comment testimony um the next which is the next item certainly thank you

my name is kevin good evening mayor borrero and members my name is kevin kempere

behind the land use attorney representing liberty and speaking to you on that team

all right is this any better that's better thank you all right so um excuse me yeah before you go

can we take the prop down please oh can we move all the props to the side the matter of fact

well this is not your prop right no what is it

there you go thank you city manager this is clever

all right awesome thank you again my name is kevin kempere and i'm the land use attorney here

representing the liberty team and i i definitely do not need 15 minutes i didn't come up with

the crafty parable in order to break down my arguments i'd like to keep it simple and i i think

the reason why is because i've had a chance our team has had a chance to look at the staff report

that's been prepared by bob logger of a cino and justin hardy and

jef michael and many others on the city's team and it's an excellent piece of work and it really

summarizes all of the issues and so to a great extent i don't feel like i need duplicate my

testimony to you tonight what's been said in that document but i would like to address a number of

the legal issues that have been raised by the first of these is recirculation the criteria

for recirculation under secret guidelines 150 8.5 is well described in the staff report and elsewhere

but the passage of time alone between the circulation and the draft eir and the preparation of

the final eir and ultimately a decision by the planning commission to certify it the passage

of time between those milestone events is really irrelevant under seqa it has a certain facial

appeal you think well life moves on the environment moves on city staff moves on you know everything's

changed but the reality is that the project hasn't changed the circumstances under which the

project is being undertaken have not changed and new information showing a significant impact that

was not previously disclosed has not been made the draft eir describes accurately the flood control

risk associated with the project in particular and development in the south port area in general

and there's there's been no change to that the finally eir recognizes that the

way that that impact is characterized versus the way it's described you know as a factual matter

changed to be consistent with the city's general plan i i beg to argue that if that change hadn't

been made mr. goddard would be here arguing that the city is minimized the characterization of the

flood impact by characterizing it is less than significant somehow when the general planning

ir has come to a contrary conclusion so there's no new information here there really isn't

mr. goddard raised many arguments about fair argument and suggests that the documents that he's

provided in his testimony constitute some kind of a fair argument that's a late argument in seqa

when you're talking about whether the fair argument rule applies you're talking about

what applies at the city's determination to prepare an eir in one hand or a negative declaration

on the other and though that decision was made in 2016 roughly for that actually and so

the fair argument rule doesn't have any application to this what we're dealing with at this

stage given that the planning commission certified the eir on January 30th is the substantial evidence

rule what is that it means that the planning commission's decision can be upheld if it is based on

substantial evidence in the record and that substantial evidence is described in the findings

adopted by the planning commission mr. goddard is entitled to his opinions he's entitled to his

arguments he's entitled to his exhibits and his internet downloads and his conjectures and all

of the rest but what he's not entitled to are his own fact or the ability to supplant what the

eir has described on these substantive issues with the information that he has provided you tonight

i i would tell you that mr. goddard didn't comment on the draft eir and he doesn't stand here in

front of you as a representative of a community group he filed the appeal on his own behalf and

is pursuing it in that and it's kind of late to the party you know i recognize that there are

residents in the city that agree with his position on things and i respect that and they're going to

talk to you tonight about that and that's respectable again they're entitled to have their views heard

they're entitled to have their views respected they're not entitled to have their views adopted

and so in contrast i would request that the city council

denied the appeal and adopt the decision of the of the city council um you know on the issue of

hazards there's the city has gone to great lengths to continually update its hazard and evacuation

plan the draft eir describes what the situation is related to flood risk and at the back other forms

of risk as well and nothing's changed of course as fire chief bins describes an evacuation plan is

always going to be an iterative process it's always going to account for changes and things along

the way it's going to account for an incident over here in this part of the city versus an incident

over here in this part of the city or somewhere in between and there's not going to be any set

rule some hard and fast rule or somebody you know is he mocking me he describes somebody looks at

the evacuation plan that's given to them so that's what we do got to adapt circumstances and that's

what the city's efforts and i hope staff can talk about that in a little bit more detail

um look it is just not the case that flood control and flood safety has declined in the last 10

years since the draft eir has been served um a couple of the council members sit on the wassafe

go board and are involved with rd 900 is that a conspiracy no it just might make you really

educated on the flood issues that pertain to us sacrameno sitting in both of those capacities

we've been involved in this project for well over a decade peritip on i we've been through various

council members various mayors and i can say to a person that five you or now and your predecessors

have had nothing in mind other than the well-being of the city of west sacramento and the safety of

its residents that's why this project has taken so long to get through the process it isn't because

it was shotgun through for the minimum of hearing and public review no staff and the city's elected

officials have done a fantastic job of vetting this project analyzing it negotiating a development

agreement with the project team that takes care of the city's needs one of which significantly

is funding for flood control measures um yeah i mean it's all part of the whole

puzzle here it all needs to happen um you know mr goddard was pretty candid about the terms of the

garbero settlement agreement i haven't had a chance to review it he said he posted it i am

curious about it um i spoke with him today and i asked him the pointed questions and mr goddard

all your arguments regarding flood control and your maps and exhibits and such um can't say i

agree with the analysis of the conclusions but honestly what is your your real reason for bringing

this appeal and he kind of stepped back and you didn't really want to answer the question and i think

he thought it was an impeding question and eventually he said well i'm not going to tell you

why i'm filing this appeal i wouldn't tell you that well he said he's here for two different reasons

flood control and hazards and he's here i supposed to spearhead some effort but i think we found out

tonight that he's actually here for a hundred and a hundred thousand two reasons because look

this is late to the party i don't believe his arguments are made in good faith obviously there's

folks that disagree but that's the fact of the matter and he said so himself so members of the council

i urge you to adopt the planning commissions certification of the EIR and approval of the

tentative map to adopt the recommendations in the staff report to adopt the findings that are in

the staff report and to step the earliest possible opportunity to bring this pod to a public hearing

on the remaining title thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you and i will ask that our

um police beef we are having many disruptions and commentary to the speakers

any additional disruptions i will have the chief s-court you out please because that is an

appropriate to have that we i would like to have quiet when we have somebody presenting to be

respectful to the speaker even though you disagree there may be disagreement we have staff who

will be speaking that she made disagree and i and i especially when staff speak police chief will

be escorting you out if there is a verbal disagreement the way that was just made to our last speaker

and i'm clerk are you ready for the public comment at this time now we will have public comment members

of the public and our individuals in support of either the appellant or the applicant will be given

the opportunity to present testimony public comment will be limited to three minutes and if the

three minutes are up the clerk will turn off the mic and you will not be heard um in in the

um or will will not be recorded so i would like for you to stay within the thirty um three minutes

i'm clerk julie tinkler ski

if you if you can pronounce your name correctly please

thank you hello can you hear me okay yes my name is julie tinkerously and i am here to support the

Goddard appeal of the liberty development i've been a resident of west sacramano for the last

20 years and i live between linden road and lake washington road and we purchased our home in 2005

we were assured that a bridge to sacramano would be constructed however now two decades later there

is still no bridge and no significant infrastructure improvements despite are increased in population

my main concern is the flood risk and emergency evacuation with our increased population

upon reviewing the city's website i was unable to locate a comprehensive flood management

emergency and evacuation plan as required by the draft eir the city does not appear to be in

compliance with the draft eir requirements as there is no publicly accessible formal plan

outlining the procedures for evacuating tens of thousands of residents it is also i'm sorry

it is essential to develop and disseminate these plans before an emergency occurs although yo

yo lo county does have an emergency operation plan available online it specifies that the evacuations

are to be managed by the local jurisdiction i am concerned about the city of west sacramanos

preparedness and capability to effectively evacuate thousands of residents in the event of

flooding or other catastrophic events as we all know west west sacramano faces heavy traffic

congestion especially during peak hours primarily due to the computer commuters this traffic

congestion accounts for only a small number of residents and does not include non commuters such as

remote workers retirees individuals with disabilities and the elderly the growing traffic

congestion is promoting my concern regarding the viability of an efficient evacuation plan for

the residents. California has faced numerous catastrophes in recent years highlighting it's the

necessity for preparing preparing potential is preparing for potential disasters in advance the

floods and fires that much of our state has seen demonstrates that these threats are real and can

occur anywhere it is crucial for the city to develop and implement implement planned emergency

responses and evacuation plans before adding more homes giving our current infrastructure evacuating

the existing population will be challenging if not impossible adding more residents without

proper planning will increase risks and complications during emergencies. I respectfully request

that the guttered appeal should be granted thank you for your time thank you. Sarah McKibbin

if you need somebody to shuffle those out I want you to lose your time from speaking with your

three minutes if you need somebody to shuffle those maybe you can have somebody help you so you don't

lose your time just walking over moving them you know what I mean. Give me ones. Yeah sorry very nervous

okay so my name is Sarah McKibbin and might me and my family have lived in the south port area since

2012 I am also here in support of the guttered appeal for the liberty of the liberty developed

and frankly appalled at the continued approval of liberty as well as several other large

developments for a total of over 8,000 new homes in the south port area alone these are being pushed

forward without updated or comprehensive evaluations of increases in traffic congestion and how that

would compromise emergency egress from the south basin. Oops I don't know the traffic impact

evaluations for the liberty EIR were conducted over seven years ago and doesn't consider any of the

other big developments waiting in the wings many of which had even more outdated traffic impact

evaluations. Even at current population levels there's significant constriction points along

morning routes which are basically the same egress or evacuation routes so that it's definitely

worse around River City High School and the freeway entrances. So I also just live west of the

liberty development and there's countless mornings where I have to wait an extra 10 to 15 minutes

to get on the freeways this is nothing I understand compared to traffic scene other where

other places but I can't even imagine what that would look like from the additional cars from

8,000 new homes let alone trying to evacuate all of the south basin especially if you were to

extrapolate traffic like this until all of the evacuation. I'm also concerned about local

flooding and how it would impact evacuation. These pictures or this picture is from my road,

Harmon road that flooding that occurs with pretty much every rain event. Localized flooding like

this would slow evacuation or make it impossible. This is also the road that the liberty development

people trying to access Jefferson Road to commute or evacuate would likely be traveling

down Harmon Road which is a two-way road and then with flooding like that during an evacuation it

would just make it impossible potentially to Jefferson Boulevard. Lastly I'm concerned about

Sacramento being west Sacramento being re-zoned as a special flood hazard area. FEMA is updating

their flood insurance rate maps and west Sacramento is the only one left. If the city hasn't achieved

the 200 year flood protection or levy protection by the time these maps are done all residents will

have to be carry flood insurance and all new homes and renovations will have to be flood-proofed

and elevated. I recently contacted my insurance and got a quote for $2,300 just even now.

So these are the kinds of thoughts that I think about. Thank you.

Kevin Kemper.

Never mind. Okay thank you. Gay Reinhardt.

You know I just can you lower the button down it just so hard to see.

That's better.

No it's okay I need it right. My name is Gay Reinhardt. I'm 83 years old. My husband and I are

longtime active residents of west Sacramento both having lived here close to 80 years. My

husband is a retired division chief of the west Sacramento Fire Department. We have been seen

and been involved in a lot of changes in our community. Tonight I am here along with all of you

to discuss the Liberty development where on January 30th 2025 the mayor's planning commission

approved 1500 more housing units in a well documented flood zone along the Sacramento River.

Oh and with no regard for the lack of current emergency exit and with none in the planned future.

You know that our levees are not safe that they still do not qualify for the required 100 and 200

year flood protection report. It is public knowledge that even today a significant levee break

anywhere in the 50 miles of levees surrounding west Sacramento would result in up to 20 feet of

water in two hours. Why does this not concern our public representatives? How do you justify

decisions like this? I would like to share an experience that I had in February of the year 1986.

It had rained for 10 straight days. I live in the south port area off of Davis Road and I saw that

everything around me was overrun with water. The river was about to come over or break through the

levee. In fact there were water boils at the end of Davis Road and my husband was out of town.

It was just me and my three children. I packed two ice chests, one with food, one with clothes.

I put them in my boat and I hope that maybe I could get out of there. I called my parents in

San Jose to tell them that if we died we loved them because there was no way of me making it out of

west Sacramento on the roads. That was 39 years ago and we are still in the same position only now

exacerbated as now our population and cars far exceed anything we had in 1986 and you were wanting

to add more and yet we still have only one exit to the south and four roads to the north which

all still converge into only one exit. Our elected officials are not willing to accept the fact

that we live in a known flood area where nothing has been done to approve our exit capabilities.

They have only ignored the truth and are willing to put more lives in danger. The real question here

is why? Could it be politics? Could we be trading health and safety for developer profits?

I would hope that this time you might truly take all of these things into consideration and do the

job that we elected and trusted you to do in our behalf. That is why I think that the Goddard of

Peale should be upheld. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Reinhart Scott Wagner.

Good evening mayor and council members. I thank you for the time to speak tonight.

My name is Scott Wider and I've lived in west Sacramento since 1992. I have almost 10 years of

experience in emergency management and been a volunteer disaster worker specializing in

evacuation behind a fire line. In California disasters come in many forms while fires, floods,

earthquakes, civil unrest and so on. In our community I have a serious concern for the potential

of flooding as noted in the information presented here tonight. I have working knowledge of CDAA which

is a California disaster act and and FEMA policy under the Stafford Act that dictates policy and

eligibility for damages incurred during a state or federally declared disaster. So I have some

concerns that in this community got from it if we had a situation such as that and FEMA came

back and found that there were compliance issues that we would not be funded for that disaster

that potential is out there. Okay, I'm here tonight to expect my utmost concern regarding the lack

of planning and inadequate infrastructure needed for a safe and orderly evacuation in the face

of a large scale flood. Here in west Sacramento we are surrounded by levies that leave us with few

options for building the necessary infrastructure needed for a safe and orderly evacuation for our

citizens. On any given workday we already lacked the infrastructure for time the exits out of

the city as it is in the morning let alone what would occur under a massive evacuation order.

With the failed bridge project we now have very limited options under a massive evacuation order

with the failed bridge with that sorry we have very limited options to expand on an already

inadequate amount of ingress egress routes for our existing population that's for our existing

where we are now. Again let alone for adding the proposed large scale liberty development plan

without first making sure we have the proper infrastructure that will allow a safe and orderly

evacuation. See I know all too well what an emergency evacuation entails. I worked the order of

Ville Dam evacuation where there were miles of traffic that caused chaotic congestion instances

of panic and flared tempers. By the grace of God the dam held and we had an example to learn from.

I worked the campfire where 87 people lost their life as a result of an outdated and inadequate

evacuation plan. I was there during the disaster and aftermath during the cleanup where there were

hundreds of abandoned cars where people had to flee them in the face of that disaster because of

that inadequate plan they didn't know which way to get out and the traffic was blocked and many of the.

Mr. Wagner can you please wrap it up your 30 minutes are up.

Thank you.

Aaron Whitesell.

Good evening. My name is Aaron Wetzel and I'm a 36 year resident of West Sacramento.

I'm here in support of the God Art appeal of the Liberty Development.

I have little little confidence currently that our 100 year old levies can keep us safe from

flooding in the south port area. We have two few outlets. The plan to add 8,000 more housing units

and approximately 15,000 more cars increases our risks. In 1992 and I first moved to south port,

Jefferson Boulevard was a two lane road with the four way stop sign at the intersection of

London and Jefferson. There were access issues back then traveling to and from south port.

A traffic accident or any roadblock for any reason meant there was literally no access

for out from either direction except to go down to free port. However, I never felt insecure about

getting out of the area and to a freeway outlet in the event of any type of emergency. We didn't

have the number of cars on the road with only 30,000 residents to warrant my concern. Maybe I was

naive, maybe I wasn't. Today however with over 55,000 residents I have zero confidence of the ability

of anyone in south port to get out in a significant flood or other catastrophic event. We have far

too many residents and cars relative to the few hard to get to freeway on ramps. Also that plan

bridge from south port to i5 has not materialized and likely never will. I recently tried to find

my evacuation routes on the city's website but all I could really really figure out was a zone

I'm in that wasn't really hard. I know where I live. What I don't know and couldn't figure out from

the city's emergency plan is the event of a catastrophe where is my route I'm supposed to use to

get out of here. An emergency plan with no route is not a plan it's just top. So it got me thinking

my only route begins on linden to get to Jefferson. It's likely in a panic most of a south of the

deep water channel in many neighborhoods will end up on Jefferson. With no emergency plan I'm thinking

no one knows how many cars that might be. Further many of us heading to Jefferson to go one way or

the other might not even be able to get on Jefferson because of the gridlock. What happens then?

We all sit on side streets and whatever comes what may. With the increased gridlock in south port

over the last 10 years or so it's irresponsible to not have a current traffic study and a real

emergency plan. Frankly we have too many residents on the south side already for our existing access

to outlets and other several thousand homes with several thousand vehicles trying to get out

is just insane. You all can't provide us with any security that we are currently safe. Let alone

being safe with the addition of more housing and thousands of more people and cars. You can't

provide us with a hundred or a 200 year FEMA flood certification likely for decades to come and

maybe billions to billions of dollars that we don't have. You can't expect the citizens of West

Sacramento to believe we are safe by having the fire and police chief tell us that they have it under

control but we don't have designated routes and sufficient outlets to get out of here. We

shouldn't have to face this possibility because this council and city manager are so pro development

citizens lives could be at risk. Thank you. Thank you miss Russell.

Bob Shabert.

You can raise it up. I will do that.

I'm here tonight in support of Mr. Goddard's appeal. We can talk about law all night but

something we should discuss is common sense. I guess we didn't learn about that law school.

I keep over in the early 70s when I joined the sheriff's office. I worked streets in the last

nine, 1987. We have the keys to West Sac PD. I've watched our city grow. This is not our master plan

that we have back in the 80s for West Sacramento. I live on Bridgeway Lakes and I'm with a law

firm in old Sac. It takes me 18 to 20 minutes if I don't go during traffic time to get to old

Sac from Bridgeway Lakes. During traffic time it's 25 to 35 minutes. We have a major accident which

we've had a few on Southport Parkway or Jefferson Boulevard. It takes 45 minutes to 50 minutes to get

the old Sac because generally we have all of our police units tied up to Sergeant in all four units

which takes me back to 1987. When we're the sheriff's office we had a sergeant three units one or two

reserved deputies and two CHP units. Fast forward today. 55,000 people. That's the same.

I hope nobody ever has to experience a panic of citizens trying to leave a community. It's

something we don't want to experience. We don't have a law enforcement or the fire personnel to handle

that. If you look at West Sacramento or in Ireland, we're out of my water and what's worse is we're

like an hourglass. All the roads come down to a point. Bridgeway Lakes, if I had to escape quickly

to the South I'll take the river road but I guess I'll be sharing with about 55,000 other people

and they might be. And then of course if somebody wanted to litigate it afterwards and say,

gee, we had inadequate police and fire. Yeah, we'll just what they had. I'll hide behind government

code 6 845 since we have no liability. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Schable.

Thomas McDuffey.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmembers. I'm Bethel Buildard. I don't know what to say. I'm

probably just going to ramble but I'll mention a few things. In this document that I've been looking at

here, I put a lot of faith in the words. I want to believe the words that I read but when I see

something that appears to be partly ambiguous or unilaterally slanted one way or the other,

I get confused on it. But anyway, Liberty Island proposes roads that are not going to come on a

public road. It doesn't tell me here that Davis Road is going to have a buffer as prescribed in your

resolutions. And if they're going to put a road through over what I consider to be a non-public

road, Davis Road, then you've breached that buffer and that's going to make it more difficult

for the people who live in their residential rural zoning.

History wise, if I had time, I would go back and share with you how all of this happened and

that we've been a flood zone for since the 1900s when it was originally purchased by the West

Sacramento investors. And when I read something, for instance, it says,

Eastbots of Record no longer required to serve a subdivision shall be abandoned prior to the

concurrent with the first phased final map. That doesn't make sense to me. Where would

Eastbots be? What are you talking about when you're, Eastbots? Are you talking about

Draenies ditches that you may want to cover up or something? The picture she showed you here on

Harman Road, that water didn't stand like that until they covered the ditch up at Harman Road to

put that other development in. Now they've taken several other ditches away. The water is building

up a ditch's building pressure, trying to get out because it can't sit for long and you're blasting

out ditches like blacker. It's eroding because there's too much pressure being forced down that

ditch rather than the water's sitting, waiting its turn to get out. But what do I know?

The city engineer shall determine the need for dewatering prior to issuance of grading permits

and dewatering shock imply was section 22. I don't see in here anywhere would it speak of the city

or the developer or anybody standing responsible for our domestic wells if dewatering takes them

down to where they're not sufficiently operating. Who is going to take care of that? Who's going to pay

for that? I'll tell you the EIR I want to say okay find ER hasn't changed nothing's changed but

the verbites that I recall it says no homes could be built until a 200 year floodplain. Now

amen.

Any stunk in?

Good evening mayor and city council my name is to the stunk in my husband is a fourth generation

member of this community and I've been here for almost 45 years. Back in 1988 quality urbanization

and development was formed to address problems within our community I was one of the founders.

I see no significant changes from then until now and our population keeps growing and growing

and growing. I have been blessed to be able to be here tonight. Back in 2013 I suffered a catastrophic

stroke. Play it forward to today two years ago. I was put on a ventilator because of the

pneumonia and the flu that was going around. This is not about me. This is about the accessibility

of moving from this city into Sacramento to where there was medical treatment

and ambulance can't roll over other cars. My concern is from a humanistic point of view

I have lived catastrophe and by the grace of God I am here talking to you. I don't take this

slightly I don't like being up here but I feel that it's important for you to realize

that the EIRs that are outdated. I've got grandchildren nine of them that I would like to see

being able to grow up in this community being able to be a productive citizen

and with your projected build out which we saw clear back in 1988 and beyond back through there.

I want my grandchildren as well as everybody else families to be able to go ahead and live in a

safe community. I want to know that if I suffer health issues which unfortunately I've been through

that I'm going to be able to get out of this town and have the help. Thank you. Thank you Mrs. Duncan.

Robin Davis.

I'm Robin and I've lived on the north side of town for about four years and I'm here today to

respectfully ask that you grant the appeal and delay approval of this project until the environmental

impact report is recirculated for public review. This is crucial so that the public can fully understand

the risks related to flooding and emergency evacuation. Issues that were not adequately

addressed in the outdated seven year old EIR. Many of my neighbors have voiced concerns about the

increased population in the area particularly in relation to flood risks and emergency evacuation

plans. While I feel fortunate that my home is on wheels and offer some flexibility in an emergency,

I still worry about how I could safely move myself and it to higher ground. I've experienced first

hand the severe congestion between West Capital and Merkley Avenue to get on the freeway especially

during peak hours, making evacuation even more challenging. The heart of my request is rooted in

transparency and education. We need more opportunities for the public to understand these risks and

have their voices heard. I've seen this council's commitment to public participation, transparency,

and workshops, but I fear that the interests of developers are overshadowing the legitimate

concerns of residents. While I fully support the need for housing, particularly affordable and

smaller options, I believe developers should not have the power to dictate what, when, and how we

build and the quality of our infrastructure. This is a sustainability issue and at the moment,

the developer's interest appeared to be taking precedence over public health and safety.

The 2024 final EIR clearly states that flood risks are significant and unavoidable. Yet we are

moving forward without recirculating this critical information to the public or holding a public

workshop. Why is transparency being limited now? I urge you to consider and ensure that this

project is thoroughly reviewed with full public input. The Goddard appeal should be upheld.

Thank you, Ms. P. We have no additional requests to speak.

Thank you, Madame Clerk. All your assistance here.

We will at this time move next. Mr. Goddard, if you have talent, you will be given 10 minutes

to respond, but you may not introduce new testimony or evidence or restate direct testimony.

Sorry, Mr. Council, we have a vote.

Thank you. I think of the guidelines that are available there was five minutes.

Five minutes.

Yes.

The appellant.

Five minutes. You have five minutes.

And if you want to lower the podium, do you need to bring your pop back?

Yes.

You know what the giving the developer 10 minutes to do a rebuttal and a citizen five minutes.

I also know that they should be the same.

It was your discretion initially was the time for set previously after discussion.

So was it 10 minutes or five minutes?

It's five minutes and 10 minutes for the appeal because you got an additional time during the

presentation because you got 20 minutes initially.

You got 20 minutes. So this time is 10 minutes or five minutes.

This time it's five.

It should be the same as the developer unless you want to favor the developer, but

no, the developer is getting the developer's getting five minutes.

The developer's getting I got you.

Is that right?

That's well, that would be fair wouldn't it?

That's what I'm doing.

Five and five.

You get 10, you get five.

Everyone gets five.

Everyone five and five.

How about we both take 15?

You get five, you get five.

That's right.

Sorry, I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

I'm sure we all get confused.

I do understand that this is your discretion.

These are staff suggestions.

These time limits.

This is your choice.

This is your decision.

And you don't have to agree with your staff.

I know you want to, but it certainly needs to be fair.

Whatever you're going to do.

So either I got five, developer has five or I got 10, developer has 10.

I think she said everybody gets five.

Everybody gets five.

You good with that?

Maybe again, the clock will be going on.

Thank you.

I'm good.

Thank you very much.

I would like to yield a minute of my time to a witness that you should,

and I want to offer this in rebuttal because you should have taken the time to hear him.

Probably the smartest guy in this room

who's doing this job who can tell you something you might learn from.

It cut him off of the kneecap immediately.

I'd like to ask Scott to come up and take a minute and conclude what he was saying

as part of my rebuttal because it is really good to listen to.

But I'm pleased to pause the clock.

I have a question for our council.

At this time, the appellant is only allowed and no new additional information.

Is that correct?

That was the procedure that you set up.

Correct.

That is the procedure.

It's not new additional information.

All right, the move point.

I'll continue and finish.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I want to, I noticed tonight there is not one citizen here advocating for this project.

Why is that?

It's a real good question.

It's a developer-driven project.

It's a city-driven project.

It's an effort by the city staff, a city manager,

to continue to put down these developments and get out from under the reigning numbers.

But it's unsafe for the community.

I think we've spoken in abundance.

Why not, as a point that I haven't made before,

hold the train, do an emergency plan update with routes before you approve these developments?

Why didn't we do that a long time ago before we started putting this stuff down?

I want to mention that I did speak with the

opposing council here this morning.

I'm appalled at how that all came out just now.

But I want to say to these citizens who came down here and

just graciously stood up here and told you what they thought gave you excellent facts.

They researched.

They worked.

They participated.

They did everything that a person could do in this community to take part in their city government.

And I appreciate every one of them.

I was impressed by what I heard.

Fantastic.

Really well done.

I hope you take it into heart what they said.

These are not props.

I didn't pay them.

I didn't force them.

I didn't do any of that.

Some of them I haven't seen before.

These are people.

They represent probably a hundred each one of them that isn't here that feel like

there's something really wrong here.

And they want you to know it.

They know it.

They want you to say that you know it.

They want to hear you tell the public that you know it.

They want to bust the flood game tell people what the risk really is.

What the emergency vacuumation issues really are.

And if that much is only done tonight, this was a success.

I think they did a great job in spelling it out.

I would not call an opposing counsel and ask him for his strategy at the evening meeting.

I have more respect and courtesy than to insult someone's intelligence by that.

I think we hear a lot of vindictiveness for some reason.

I mean it for the money.

I'm a serial appellant.

The developers attorney is a serial representative of developers and he gets paid a lot to do it.

Is that worth anything that we have these kind of arguments?

What's important here?

Not sailing people's character.

I haven't done that and I don't.

I'm here just to tell you that I've made it a goal.

You try to do this one thing as an old man.

Try to get the truth out here.

Let people decide what they think.

And then ask the city government to pay attention.

This is this whole loop of developers.

Contribute to campaigns.

City council.

Wish developments.

I don't know saying you're doing that.

It's but it is a typical thing.

The developer isn't giving you money because he loves you.

He obviously wants to see you like his project and move it through and that's what they do.

And there's nothing seriously wrong with that.

Developers have a right to make money.

That's what they do.

There's nothing wrong with that.

I'm trying to stop all the development of the world.

This one here though and the one's in the the southward basin.

It's crazy stuff.

It just really is.

If it lets Scott finish tonight, he would have told you how bad the mayor and paradise felt

because she didn't work hard enough to get an evacuation plan in place.

And it came home to roost.

And long after you people are gone and you will be.

If that happens and it does, I mean we have disasters look around.

This is an anomaly.

We're ripe.

This is the place.

It's the worst levees in California from what I can tell.

You're the decision makers.

You wanted to point that out to you.

And I conclude with just the simple statement.

No matter how loud, no uh,

yell, nobody cared until the rain came.

And then it was too late.

Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Carter.

Next, the appellant will be given five minutes to respond but may not introduce new

testimony or evidence for restate direct testimony.

Mr. Kemper.

Thank you Mayor Guerrero.

Kevin Kemper again on behalf of the applicant.

A couple of things.

As it relates to again, the flood control.

Look, there's no disparagement of all the residents here that have come and shared their

testimony and described their.

Their beliefs, their observations, their experiences as it relates to life in West Sacramento

and flooding and driving and roadway conditions.

That being said, these things are analyzed in the EIR.

They've been presented.

And obviously the point of this hearing tonight is an appeal hearing on the decisions

made by the Planning Commission with respect to the EIR on one hand and the tentative map.

The other.

Your job as City Council sitting here hearing an appeal is to make a judgment based on

substantial evidence as to whether the EIR is adequate as an informational document.

The purpose of an EIR is not to advocate for a project or for that matter to advocate against it.

It's simply to analyze the impacts in so many areas of the project as it's been proposed.

And as well as to analyze the effective cumulative development which would include

the large projects, the Arborone River Park as well as just generalized development.

And that is the role of the Council tonight.

Did the Planning Commission make the right decision based on what was in front of it?

That is actually a wholly different decision than whether

you're in favor of the project on the whole.

This will come back to Council on a hearing on the development agreement on the specific plan

which is really the backbone document of the project and other entitlements as well.

And I imagine that most of the folks that are here tonight are going to be at that hearing and

I respect that. And they're going to have their views about whether the Council should approve

this project not and they're entitled to those and they're entitled to have the Council listen to those.

For sure.

But tonight the Council's decision is really in the form out of an appeal and whether the

Planning Commission made the right choice when it certified the EIR and approved the map in January 30th.

One point I'd like to address and I won't remember the gentleman's name but no disrespect from that.

He had raised the issue of easements in the map and how a tentative map

has language in it that it eliminates all existing easements within the property.

That's standard language. That's standard procedure.

It's not that drainage is being eliminated in the project.

It's being relocated and the project has very detailed plan for drainage and run off and all

of that and the tentative map shows where the new easements are going to be which may not exactly

duplicate some of the antiquated easements that have been on it. I just wanted to make that clear.

And with that I will certainly welcome any questions that any of you may have of myself for

very people and all I have for you tonight. Thank you for your time.

I will allow staff to provide responses to testimony received from the appellent applicant,

public and they may be able to council may be able to ask

to ask for this.

Yes, thank you.

This is our opportunity to ask all the staff, nobody go this time.

So I will, I don't want to keep people up here just to prepare for flood protection.

That's all emergency evacuation.

Our far Marshall bronze on says here.

Okay, thank you. And then

Paul Dirksen is here on behalf of what's safe protection question.

Thank you Paul.

We have other staff as well so if there's a topic I suggest just calling it out then I can call

the staff. Traffic impact bridges.

Yeah Jason McCoy from the Transportation Division is here.

Anything related to public infrastructure Mark Collier from the Millenous here as well.

Public construct that's right.

So I would just suggest that's as the questions come up if it's not apparent.

Council members I wanted to give you a chance to ask questions.

No, I'm fine.

Council member Alcala.

For concerns that folks have population in regards to the kind of effect plan we have.

And let me maybe start.

Thank you questions that I have.

When do we see a completion for all three projects?

1500 Liberty all the YAR per oh and assuming that

is it the other project?

River Park.

When we see a completion for all these

So we look.

I mean they're market driven.

4000 homes in my community was

brood in 1999.

Just finished with the last

unit.

So it could take with liberty we've looked at around

10 to 15 year build out.

And on the cycle of market.

We as staff don't take that.

Any approval of any project would take another 18 to 24 months to do

infrastructure and mapping.

Get through those permits.

At that point then infrastructure.

If those were granted within to go forward taking

the amount of time it would need to get that before any vertical.

The structure would be.

Bell.

So that you're probably looking three or five years.

Any belt to go vertical.

So let's say the completion let's assume everything is through.

We're looking at 5000 new homes.

In West.

So that increases that increase.

Everyone has.

Quite a few more.

And I guess I'm.

I mean I see gridlock.

I go to my yo Salano air quality management.

When all cars have backed up.

Take me almost an hour sometimes.

Here's.

Was a little.

Fast on the wheel.

Still.

Big chain.

And I think that's one of the concerns.

The impact.

I mean I was looking at all the pros.

I love Liberty when I heard about Liberty years ago.

Full board.

At a presentation.

And I love the idea that they had multi level income housing.

You're talking to screen Titans the vendor to be in with the nice.

And this area.

Families.

There were a lot of positive that I really like.

About.

Housing developed.

And.

Now I'm really concerned some of the cons are we're losing our rural appeal.

Out in the West Sacramento area to South.

I always had a concern that we come to the bedroom community.

I'll get to my question.

Just going over some of these cons that I.

We have a good.

In a bedroom community.

I'm sure.

I was either for second,

specificity attorney.

I just want to make sure we stay in the framework of what was presented

before us.

It was.

I don't want to question.

The overall development of all of our projects.

We need to really focus on the arguments presented and the fine and that's where our findings are.

You want to.

We should just keep to the appeal.

All right.

3 to 5.

Okay, the appeal.

I think one of the things.

I mean, can I remind the council to speak into the microphones for having difficulty hearing.

Okay, so this was done seven years ago.

And I've read that that normally when you do an E.I.

Are they good for about three to five years, depending on circumstance and all.

So I guess my question is.

On the appeal.

There were concerns that were raised that.

When the planning commission didn't have access to the difference in the draft as opposed to what the E.I.R.

Initially said.

Can you can you maybe address some of those concerns and some of the individual.

I don't.

I guess I'm having a difficult time finding out on the appeal.

If the planning commission had an opportunity to listen to public comment as we're listening to it now.

The public comment was provided to the planning commission on October 19th November 7th to

November 19th in January 30th.

Okay, in the public hearing.

Okay, so right, so individuals such as these individuals showed up to this public hearing.

Before the planning commission.

There's some new ones tonight, but there were other.

Okay, so they had enough.

So I guess in terms of the appeal.

We've heard a lot of testimony and I guess my question is.

Is an E.I.R.

So updated.

After seven years.

With all the changes that are coming about.

That there is reason to give some credence.

That's an appeal should be.

Considered.

If you answer.

I can speak to that.

Um, first there is there is no law that requires an E.I.R.

to be updated with insert and created.

Question is whether or not the information is still current.

I think from my perspective in having.

Look at the issues that have been raised similar.

Some of some of the same traffic issues or similar traffic issues were raised with the R.

Um, I understand that people have witnessed a lot of growth that's occurred in Southport.

However, the E.I.R. is a forward looking document.

And it is intended to be.

An information document that we'll look at.

Not only the situation at the moment in time when it's prepared,

but also what is anticipated to be developed.

So the E.I.R.

did contemplate development that has occurred.

The developments that we were looking at.

I think Mr. Goddard put up a graphic.

Those are all developments that were consistent with the general plan.

Consistent with zoning.

And so would have been taken into account.

In looking at things like.

All right.

And then in terms of other.

Issues that were raised in terms of whether or not.

The flood situation is different.

I think I would defer to fall on that.

But my understanding.

Is that.

Look.

I think Mr. Kemper made the point.

The E.I.R. is an information document.

The question before you is whether or not the E.I.R.

contained information.

Dealing with the issues that have been raised.

I think at one point Mr. Goddard quoted from the E.I.R.

As an to to provide an example of the risk of flood.

And my answer to that is yes, that's exactly right.

The I.R. described the fact that there was a risk of flood.

It is it is ultimately an information tool.

For which the.

Planning Commission and then council.

Makes decisions on substantive questions.

Of whether this project should go forward.

But the appeal today is primarily focused.

On the adequacy of the E.I.R.

And I think.

From my perspective and staff perspective.

The I.R. analyze those.

There are folks here who have an opinion that they don't.

Like the conclusion that.

A project should go forward and I can respect that.

But that's not.

An issue of the adequacy of the I.R.

2016 reference was made.

The reference to 2016 E.I.R. was made.

At the 2016 E.I.R. was the general plan.

Yeah, correct.

And I guess that's what I have some concern was that it differs so much.

They're saying from the.

From the one that we currently have.

Well, the 2016 general plan E.I.R.

Was the I.R. prepared for the general plan 2035 that is in effect.

A. The change between the D.I.R.

that the draft E.I.R.

and the finally I.R. for Liberty.

Was made in part in recognition of the fact that.

The recommended.

mitigation.

In the draft E.I.R.

for Liberty was actually inconsistent with the general.

And as you'll recall, the city has required that all

projects had to be consistent with the general.

Who had created an anomalous situation where you had.

The general plan identifying risk of flood as a significant unavoidable impact.

That the council overrode.

And the draft E.I.R. for Liberty suggesting.

Well, except we could mitigate it to less than significant.

And that the approach that was taken was to say for the finally I.R.

We need to make sure that the Liberty I.R.

is conclusion on flood risk is the same as the general plans conclusion on.

The draft on the 200 years.

I saw those maps.

They were.

That's another.

I mean, what would be the difference between 200 year as opposed to a 25.

I'm going to call.

I will.

I will allow for staff to answer all those questions as well.

In other words, all of the testimony that has been presented.

If if after.

We have a chance.

I want like the opportunity for staff.

It doesn't require all of us to ask all those specific questions.

I wanted the staff to.

To answer some of the testimony that was provided.

And also.

The presentation from both the applicant and the appellant.

But.

But I just want to make sure that what you heard.

I was hoping that staff will be able to answer those questions to.

If you if you want to take a second to give staff a chance to speak about that first,

we can take that moment at this time.

And then we'll bring it back to for the council to be asking questions.

So why don't we allow for.

The staff to present.

Feedback all of everybody from what you've heard tonight.

Do you have anything else to add, Mr. Hardy?

No, I'll defer to.

There's staff.

Okay, thank you.

And just to help.

Try to frame this because I mean, I'm asking Paul to talk about flood protection.

He's very very passionate about this.

I think the nature of the question where you were going is to start with kind of a basic explanation

of what do we mean when we say a 200 year flood versus a 25 year flood risk.

And then how how is the city?

You know, the requirements around SB five compliance that were brought up.

So just hopefully Paul that that makes sense in terms of giving an overview.

And then specifically.

You know how the city's progressing towards SB five compliance.

I took notes, but I don't have a prepared script.

So a couple of things.

Yes, a number of years ago, bigger waters act was passed to try to improve FEMA mapping

requirements across the nation.

West Sacramento does continue to be unmapped.

Our FEMA map is from 1995.

It still shows that most of the city is in zone X.

Zone X

anticipates that there's protection from a one and 100 year chance of a flood.

So that's the FEMA requirement.

The Central Valley Board relative to SB five is seeking to get 200 year flood protection

for the entire Central Valley.

And so when we do our reports annually to talk about adequate progress,

we talk about the role that we've been taking, the projects that we've completed,

the plans that we have, our financials relative to being able to carry out the project.

So I just want to make so those are two distinguishing things that I want that I heard tonight

by a number of people.

Let me also say that I want to recognize that we all should recognize that this city is surrounded

by levies and there is an inherent risk for flooding.

However, since 2007, the city and then West Saifga has been on a regular mission

to correct the efficiencies of the entire levy system.

We have taken the approach of addressing the worst case first.

So luckily for us, the voters of the state of California approved flood funds in 2006.

We were able to compete for significant project, the CHP Academy, the Rivers Project,

the I Street Project, and then the largest and most ambitious of all the projects southport.

Southport was a continuation of a project that the Army Corps of Engineers had already worked on,

a small setback levy that people don't really realize I don't think too often.

But right at the Stone Lock opening to the Sacramento River, right along the West Bank,

they built a small setback levy.

The southport levy then connected to that levy using modern engineering methods

and to produce a levy that would qualify as a 200-year flood control levy.

200-year certification only comes when the entire system has achieved 200 years.

And so it's something that we're continually striving for and continuing to work toward.

Timing. A number of pieces of the information that were provided to you around the

deficiencies of the West's Sacramento system and its deficiencies are taken from the same period

that the Army Corps of Engineers was evaluating the city and its levy system.

And those deficiencies were notable significantly because of how the levy were constructed.

Every some of the things that you heard today are true. They were constructed by farmers.

They were constructed by using dredgings from the river. They did rely on

gravity and a lot of work to try to make sure those levy were complete.

Before the Army Corps of Engineers and this project became federalized, we went through

thorough evaluations. Those were done by HDR and other engineering firms to identify

what deficiencies should be addressed first. The projects that I've already mentioned to you are

where those greatest deficiencies were, the most notable problems. You saw some photos this evening.

That showed slumping along the the deep water ship channel levy. That's true. It happens with

there are slumps in levy's. And what else did you see? You also saw them covered with plastic or

visibly and secured with sandbags. Every year we generally have to look and monitor all of the

levy's, especially during high water events. High water events are those when the water is raising

or is at 36 feet above ground or mean sea level and continuing to rise. RD 900 as the

reclamation district is actively patrolling when that happens. Similarly in the north part of

the city, the Department of Water Resources has responsibility and there are people also get out

and patrol the levy's. There is a lot of cross communication and coordination to make sure that

if we identify a levy that may be failing or a deficiency that we can address it.

One really important clarification here. It's $1.1 billion and not $1 trillion. That was a

that's a misstatement. I don't know where that comes from but the fact of the matter is in 2020 when

Army Corps of Engineers did their total cost update, it was $1.1 billion. Congressional authorization

granted to the city with a new start in 2022 authorized that amount of money to be able to complete

the entire West Sacramento project. If you have any of the, I tried to, I tried to cover the gamets

of things that I heard today, recognizing the citizens have concerns and that there are reasons

to be concerned at the same time, West Africa and the city have been working diligently to try

to correct the deficiencies and have the strongest levy system that we could have to protect

lives and property. There was a reference to a Noriega statement, 50 mile radius, if there was a

break within a 50 mile radius within two hours, we would be under 20 feet of water. Does that make

sense? So I've seen the, so we specifically contracted with a firm to do flooding and

in-dation scenarios, risk scenarios. And if there were a significant levy breach,

that one of the, if it happened in the north, the north area basin would, general, would flood.

And if it was still un, unmitigated, that flooding would probably continue into south port.

But this is a breach we're talking about. This would be something that's going to happen. It

would generally be an extraordinary event or some other force that would cause that.

Different from other catastrophes, specifically earthquakes, we generally are watching

when there are atmospheric rivers that are forecast. We prepare, we start, the public works

department starts preparing the fire department starts preparing, west-safegas starts preparing,

the reclamation districts across California start preparing for major water events.

So we are always hoping that we're always going to get to be able to mitigate.

And thus far, we have not had experienced the breach.

Some of the flooding that was talked about in 1986, very significant year for flooding across

across Northern California. I believe the city of, that's the year that the city of Nichols

also experienced significant flooding is before the south port levy was built. And so that,

that those, those items that were brought up in terms of Davis Road have been mitigated with

the new south back levy.

Go ahead. We heard, I'm always interested in data and being able to verify some of our sources.

And so one thing for your word, but also because this is what you work on. We heard that West

Sacramento has the worst levy in California. Is that the case and then how is that rated?

So first of all, I don't know how anybody could say what is worse because catastrophic failures

happen through levy systems. What I can tell you is that in recent history, we've never seen a levy

breach. And when we've had deficiencies, they've been correct.

Is there, I think of it kind of like our roads, right? And I guess it's all relative.

There's rating for roads, right? And so just as an example, you'll hear our residents say,

like, man, we have the worst roads, right? But when you actually again look at the rating of it,

again, it's all relative, that's not that that's not the case, again, according to what is an

agreed upon by experts. And so in this case, I guess what you're hearing me also ask is,

is there agreed upon ratings for levy's or is that, is that not something that that happens?

And if not, that's okay. But then to your point, if there is an array, I don't know sort of

short of it being subjective that we could actually say, city of West Sacramento has the worst

levy's in California. Yeah, I would tend to agree with you. There's not a specific rating system

for levy's. As I said, a little bit earlier, the 200 year level of protection comes from a certification

when the system is complete, which is why we report the central valley report about how is

the system, how is our system that protects the city? Just and I want to make sure I understood.

And so one of the things that you noted was as you are improving the system, and I don't

sit on West Africa. And so I'm sad my colleagues not out here because I'm sure Verna would be

able to also understand this. Yes, yes, but both wasn't, it was not a hit.

Promise if it was you'd know. But in regards to just understanding what you noted on the system,

that it needs to go through the the 100 or the 200 years, or you mentioned something along the

lines of in order for it to be fully rated, it had to have lived a certain life cycle. Did I

misunderstand that or? So whenever we've complete a levy portion, we generally,

well, we've done it with and without the Army Corps of Engineers. Presently we're

we're completely working with the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the state of California.

But these smaller sections, we go through the process. The course still had the Army Corps of

Engineers still has to approve the levy plans. They still have to approve the levy at the end of it.

But to get to a 200 year certification requires a certification of the system and not a particular

segment. Okay. I'm just trying to I'm trying to get to it. So I'm not. It's a difficult question

to answer because it's something that we're always striving for. And as was pointed out,

the system is dynamic. There is a rose nutter curse. There are times when we do have these small

we have deficiencies that need to be addressed. And so it's it's going to be an ongoing

just like you hear your example of calling, you know, talking about streets, you know, in street

maintenance is the same same idea. You know, we fixed the street 10 years ago, but oh my gosh,

I got to go back and fix it again. And the same thing can be set up part of the levy segments

that are protecting the city. The fall, I think it's it's worth reiterating again in terms of a

flood risk standard from the email standpoint that if you could talk about that again that from

that standpoint, the city is not in a flood zone from a from a flood risk standpoint on the federal level.

That's right. That's right. So people use the term flood zone and I don't it's just kind of

it's just confusing to me. So essentially because they, FEMA uses a lettering system, right? So

they talk about it as being zone X, which is there's less than a one and one percent chance of a

flood happening in any given year. And that's the that's the best rating system that I can provide

really. Because otherwise it's not because we're not at a place where all the improvements have

been completed and all of the segments are known to be providing the 200 year flood protection. So

we're not at a place where we can say it's certified as a 200 year or a which would then put

us into a zone which would be to say it's less than one half of one percent in any given year

of a flood. So you're going to have to because if it's confusing for you and you're an expert,

you can imagine how I have a PhD. I don't have a PhD in everything. And so I'm going to reflect back

what what I just heard. And so within any given year we have less than a one percent chance of a

major flood. Did I that I articulate that correctly? That's correct. Okay.

That does not feel like the worst levee system in in California. So I guess I I struggle with

is that normal to have less than a one percent chance or is it that really it should be less than

a half percent chance or no no thanks for asking the question. So let me let me let me provide a

little bit more clarity. Rural levees are much worse off than urban levees generally speaking.

There's been a there's been a regular movements and monies and capital expenditures to improve

the urban level of risk protection. So Sacramento has been working through that. West Sacramento has

been working through that. Now we see that happening in San Joaquin County as we know,

last year we saw the Paharro project. But that has also become a federal project very similar in

size to West Sacramento's. And so that's it we're all trying to work towards that level the higher level

of protection. Furthermore all of the projects that I've named are generally effect only one of

them is really affected by the Sacramento we're in the yellow bypass that I've mentioned

because we've been really focused on the Sacramento River because it is very dynamic and it has a

lot of hydraulic forces that cause that have potential to cause greater deficiencies.

Because of the Sacramento we're and the Sacramento we're expansion those that likelihood is

reducing all that is is being reduced. So there's the Sacramento we're opens when the waters reach

flood stage I believe they're 29 and and rising. What that when that happens I don't know if you've

been out there if you've been at the or if you've been at Discovery Park or somewhere around where

you could see that but essentially what happens is that waters start from the American rivers

starts flowing upstream and into the bypass and the bypass has a way of neutralizing some of

that water and carrying a greater much greater volume of water than the Sacramento River thereby

also reducing the risk. So when we're talking about a major high water event the we're provides a

significant amount of protection not something that I can actually kind of quantify but I'm telling

you that it's a it's a major improvement to the system. The fact that the Folsom Dam now has a

new spillway also allows them and new and new shutters allows them to have more controlled flows.

So when I first started working in the program that wasn't the case and some

when was that I started working in this program in 2011 okay and so some of the flows were

were very significant and caused a lot of concern because really what happens is you see the American

River has a direct shot right at the shores of West Sacramento so I just I want to point out that

those two those two improvements have really provided a certain amount of engineering control

and a level of protection that's difficult to quantify on a when we're talking about this

generally in a general sense. And so last question at least for me for now and so what is normally

happened because you talked about major levy improvements not only happening here but there are

projects happening across California you mentioned a couple and what is the normal process as you

continue to work to improve even having less than a 1% chance of a major flood event is it

is the normal process for cities that you've seen right I'll say that that you've seen to wait

on building or do you build and also improve at the same time I'm trying to figure out what

should be the expectation and what is the general expectation. Thank you for the question.

Yeah so as councilwoman Akala will attest to there's been a significant amount of work recently

being done in the north area of the city between the Sacramento weir and the tower bridge

and the work that we're doing is largely investigative in nature so we've been doing geotechnical

borings in the rivers up by the rear all of that feeds into the design because what most

most levy's are earthen levy's and so they're all made up of some sort of soil types they look at

the various soil types and if there's some soil types it's much more vulnerable to flooding or to

deficiencies others are more cohesive in nature and provide a certain amount of resistance to

those forces similarly we've had a risk codray from the Army Corps of Engineers look at different

pinch points or different locations where there could be deficiencies so I say all that because

you can't have a continuous levy construction program because it takes three to five years to

get to a final design you have to go through the process and the Army Corps of Engineers process

is rigorous and difficult and I have to also say it feels very long.

Okay I heard that. Yeah thank you.

This is maybe you can't answer this maybe it's our council it needs to answer it.

rather concerned with the state that was made about a conflict I said on the board with

councilwoman the pizio hall and with Tom ramus on the board.

Is there any conflict here with Dan ramus as a developer is he involved?

Well Dan ramus as a board member would be subject to the political reform act just as you are

and would presumably recuse himself when a project came before him that created a conflict

interest but I don't advise them but he is subject to all the same conflict of interest rules you

are. And just to be clear there were talking about two of the ramus family Tom ramus is an

RD900 board member representing RD537 on that board Dan ramus there was an incorrect statement

that Dan ramus is an RD900 board member that is not true as you know. Yeah we are RD900 board members

your council members. What was safe mentioned that's why I'm asking. I want to make certain because it was said I want to make

that's clear.

Just one more question if you're okay with it.

I'll go ahead and ask the question and can go. Okay so who's next?

I'm just going to ask one of the chief she she was kind enough to allow me just to

and I promise it really is just the last one. We experience I think it was last year our mayor

council of Roseco myself and Sopiza whole had the opportunity to have Conx woman Matt Sui as well as

the national representative for the Army Corps of Engineers hopefully I said that correctly.

Come out and actually recognize our levies and so I have to admit there also for me is a level

of cognitive dissonance that is happening in which I'm trying to connect having the national

representative sort of cross the country come to Wesak and say you are a beacon for your levies

and the work that you've done and then what I heard tonight and so maybe just touch on just a tiny

bit what we were recognized for and and and our levies system because I I'm unsure if whether

our residents just didn't know or because it if you were to sit through public comment tonight it

sounds as it sounds as if any minute now we are going to be underwater and I don't necessarily

think that is reflective of the many years I've been here and heard from on our levies system

and and so I think it would just be important to note that. So two things one is the south port

project is a unique project because of how it's constructed and where it's constructed

so a setback levy in an urban area is not very common it's something that you generally would see

more in a more rural area where someone might be willing to say yes I'm willing to give up some

property or more flood protection from my farm or my farm or my farming community so that was one

thing but the other thing about south port is there's three things I'm going to talk about one

it so it was done in phases right three phases of south port one what beyond once we got to

build a setback levy so the setback levy is unique and that it also has a cutoff wall and a

seepage berm so these are two that's a redundant system that helps to provide flood protection for

the area of south port from the Sacramento River so that's one two you may recall that before

that levy was built people had their exit was to go out of south river road south river road was

relocated to village parkway this was this was another phase of this project so the whole idea was

to try to separate flood maintenance and flooding emergency response activities from the general

public so that was the second thing also a very important thing in terms of evacuation keeping

people safe and still being able to flood fight lastly it also included a mitigation area to

try to mitigate for that project as well as future project that mitigation area I don't know

if you've been out there lately but when we planted those trees in 2017 they were little s uplings

today I told you got no word that was right there they're 40 feet tall now what happens so when the

water when the water rises south port mitigation area floods up right the water comes up against the

levy but it's already been slowed down because of all of that roughage that's been planted there

so it caused it's the velocities are reduced the potential for erosion on the new levy is reduced

and it really provides a very redundant and strong system thank you thank you I want to take a

moment to you know get a break we do have one witness that was sorry one witness that was left

out on the list and I it's getting to be 10 o'clock in late in case you wanted to

hold my neighbor um all of you can just wait for a second and we'll have Ms.

Flint come on up met em clerk you can thank you Miss Flint I want to do apologize on the record

to Miss Flint that was my fault I missed her comment hard that's okay um it's punishment for the

way I acted at the last year so anyway um my name is Pat Flint I'm a 76 year resident of

West Sacramento and I currently live in south port this is a condensed version of my written testimony

as you are where I have long been an advocate for public safety on your website flood his

under flood history West Sacramento is particularly susceptible to flooding due the location of the

confluence of the Sacramento American rivers due to Hurricane Katrina the United States Corv

engineers up the standards for the levies and the city as mandated by the state of California

must have a 200 year flood protection also from your website in 1986 in 1986 record flows and

high winds caused severe damage to levies we were in the process of moving back to California from

Arizona the yellow bypass was overlapping the levy into West Sacramento at the time we were not

sure if West Sacramento would need to be evacuated in 1997 the New Year's Day flood is one of the

largest experienced floods in northern California as a result of high water levies along the Sacramento

and yellow bypasses and with the RD within the RD 900 along the Sacramento River sustained heavy

damage we were in Virginia and heard about it on the national news in 2005 2006 the Central Valley

storms caused significant runoff over much of California this caused many rivers and streams to

rise above flood stage this is one of the scariest times for me a relative notified me that heavy

equipment was working to shore up the West Sacramento side of the levy in south port nothing was being

reported on anything in West Sacramento the river road was closed it was closed off I called

several city numbers checked city website nothing I finally checked I finally reached an officer

at the non-emergency number police station and he informed me that the police fire

police and fire were out there monitoring the levies along the RD 900 along with RD 900 crews

we had boils considerable seepage at the time boils and considerable seepage at the time

and I knew that that would compromise our levies what was going on how severe was the damage on our

levy would I have had enough time to get my elderly mother if she still resided in the state

streets no city communication no emergency preparedness no known evacuation and no known emergency

centers so giving me to 2017 northern california saw the wetest winter in almost a century many rivers

were at flood stage on February 7 heavy flows damage a spillway at orville dam I was in like Tahoe snowed

in all highways were closed I was worried that the volume of water from the orville dam and

reservoirs that were at capacity might cause flooding in West Sacramento getting back to the

liberty development it was a project I fully supported until the city started changing amending

zoning and the general plan

thank you miss wet

all you know mine coming back I have questions but I think I think my council members here have

I think Mr.

just a moment ago my colleague was asking a barrage of questions which I found very very helpful in

painting the picture of the way we should be framing this conversation but before we continue

with that because I negated lots of my questions as a result of your responses might ask you

you would mention that you began this project specifically in West Sacramento in 2011

I joined the flood team in 2000 okay I was saved in prior to joining the flood team did you

have any expertise in the area of flood no I did project management I worked in the redevelopment

agency prior to that and in 2000 how long have you been employed at the city of West Sacramento

it'll be 21 years and 15 and of those 21 years 14 of them have been specifically

were all related to flood matters that's correct and currently what is your title sir I'm the flood

I'm the flood manager and what type of training or experience have you received in order to do the job

that you do oh well I've done a besides there's a lot of project management it's been mostly it's

a lot of on the job training a lot of trainings that I've attended participating with various flood

managers throughout the region but I do not I have I have a degree in planning and development

and but I do not have I'm not an engineer are you part of any associations have to do with flood

or any flood management association yes thank you and have you traveled to Washington DC and

dealt with any of the flood teams on the national level related to issues related to West Sacramento

yes for the last three years and as part of your duties has it been your experience to have

an intimate knowledge of West Sacramento levy program specifically absolutely and

sometimes this program is big 25 miles around or 52 miles protecting the city 25 where miles

it's a big project and much of the work that is done through our program is working both with

the state as well as the Army Corps of Engineers as well as a wide cadre of consultants that

participate in either evaluating levy's or providing environmental clearance

cultural resource investigation and making sure that the tribes are represented and understand

what is going on so that we're not providing disturbing any of any of their known or unknown

relics so it's a there's a wide there's a wide range of responsibilities to carry out a levy

program and it beyond just construction of a levy I'm sure they said I'm not answering your question

no you're entering it perfectly thank you I'm wondering had you had the opportunity to review the

flood plan with the West Sacramento yeah and would you say you've done so one time or more than one time

I read I probably more than one time but I referenced it every once in a while

and you had mentioned the Southport and spoke about the levy setback and you're referencing how

it even the complexion of that area has changed even the last few years since we've we've put

that work in correct yes and and um and tonight we've heard a variety of different claims from

members of the community as well as the appellant and many of which have you know I've written down

and if there's a found to be very alarming and like my colleague council members

supposed to meet up but early mentioned I've also been part of many events and conversations where

we have been lauded and celebrated for our expensive and extensive investments in our flood

our levy excuse me I wrote down that we are now at a more increased and significant risk of flood

with respect to the Liberty project is this based on your training experience and your your

intimate knowledge of our blood system is it your contention that that is a correct

representation that should the Liberty project be approved that this would increase the

the people's flood risk here in the city of West Sacramento no I don't believe so

and what leads you to that conclusion sir

um development behind the levies has been occurring um for the whole time that I've been working

in the flood program whether that's in the bridge district or whether that's the um I'm sorry

Perella project I guess it is Seacons project um they continue to build behind the setback levy

and so it caused no increase or concern for flood risk because of that new development and

I don't see how new development in and of itself can be seen as causing an increased

flood risk earlier my colleague uh councilman or councilman early had mentioned um that it is our

or maybe she questioned whether or not it is that we for continue to fortify the levies well

continuously building and development and and it was your answer that yes we do

and that is a common practice throughout the region throughout other cities throughout the

state of California um generally unless the city is built out

and I let me be really clear the central valley we really respond to the central valley board

and to the central valley's requirements so really we're talking about the levies that are in

northern California not as well I don't want to speak for the entire state um but generally

speak we're talking about the water flows that come from everywhere from Lake Shasta and from

the other the American River watershed Mr. Dixon is it your duty as a member of this uh the city

staff and being the flood manager to do everything you can to protect and serve the members of

the west Sacramento community absolutely that's why I do this job thank you and if you already hear

the contention that uh if this council were to approve the planning commissions um approval

for the Liberty project if if you were to hear that the contention that in doing so we would be

putting lives in danger would you agree with that assessment no thank you bye mayor all right

how's the member of color good questions um how many houses are planned for River Park

I know it hasn't come up yet project

it's a flood question because it has to do with how many houses we're getting out there the safety

of getting people out okay it's a somewhat complicated because you have the 2008 unit count

about 27 32 units and they're currently requesting leave it seven three so kind of

corner increase but that hasn't come for you yet no I know I know but we're looking at

overall safety are you that's why it's that's how um evacuation that's fine that's how I'm leading

so that's the so I do I do want to ask all another question before we get to the evacuation

I just want more question real quick and then and just how long would it take to evacuate

her population that we have because it's concerned still in evacuation I would like to speak

past all it's specific okay all right go ahead thank you all I have a few um

levy issues here that I've been hearing tonight and um and I'll I appreciate my colleagues

you know emphasizing the work we've been doing them especially the work that you know

the city has been doing and of course this is of any issue is that that is a um crisis that would

reach a crisis our um and it has a disaster is a flood and that has been the city's priority for

especially after New Orleans you know we saw what happened there quickly prioritized getting

um uh tax revenue measure on the ballot approved and we've been working very hard thank you so

much for describing all the work that has been done um to reach to the 200 year flood level

protection that we have and currently what we have is flood level x okay and with that are we

required to have flood protection insurance but no flood zone x does not require flood insurance

I'm still asking we still no if any caller ask me I tell them you live behind a

levy I would suggest that you have flood insurance thank you and I really would like to have

the staff answer the questions please thank you and um with that because I heard that somebody

at you know received flood protection and had a high fee um can you speak a little bit about the

cost of flood insurance here in West Sacramento I can speak generally okay um so um

FEMA has also gone through something that they call um flood insurance 2.0 and the

it doesn't have full congressional support but the intention of the FEMA staff was to try to make

sure that the premiums that were being collected were going to cover the loss it for many years

FEMA and the flood insurance program has been underfunded and therefore they've been trying to

advance a project so that when you come to the actuarial tables that it's closely amount that people

are paying for flood insurance is more closely tied to the potential for law okay thank you

oh Paul could you clarify though that the it I believe it was always the case that buying

flood insurance when it's not required if you're not in the flood zone versus waiting until after I

think that's kind of where the question was going um there is a difference in the rate when you're

fired to buy flood insurance could you just quickly so explain that I remember that as an issue

yes thank you getting earlier into the flood insurance program is of great benefit because if you

try to use the program after at their a catastrophic event you're already going to have a higher rate

so there's a there's a grandfathering clause as they say um that helps um minimize rate increases

I recall um we received little inserts in our bills Aaron do you remember that asking um

notifying us to purchase flood insurance yeah I think that was at a time in the city when um

there was there was more of a thought that remapping could be you know happening sooner

um and so there was a push to hey if you're if you're if you're but if you fought by flood insurance

I think as Paul said we live behind levies it's not a bad idea uh flooding can incur many forms

there's internal drainage uh that can cause problems and floods and flood insurance supplies

there as well so so I think we did a push to encourage people to buy it uh knowing you know

and still the case that if if you wait till after remapping which you know we don't know when

that will occur but uh could eventually um there is a significant savings uh between the two

okay and I believe that's still the case it sounds like I tried um I I I you familiar with the

Davis road buffer that your issue is that somebody else's issue because I heard something about a

Davis road buffer um I believe that that is citing something that happened years ago

what I can't be sure it's not a we don't look at Davis road as a levy so let me put it that way

it's not something that my okay that's fine and and the comment record regarding black

blacker canal and water backing up into that eroding that is there is there is there something

can you is there something about that that is or is it an RD 900 issue it is an RD 900 issue the

blacker canal has been an ongoing um issue because of um I don't know about erosion but I do know

that gets clogged up and I know that it backs up and that there's it's caused a lot of problems

for neighbors okay that's that I'm familiar with it but it's not it's not part of the levy system

it's not part of the levy system okay thank you and um I think one last question is about the

deep water ship channel um you answered quite a quite a few of my questions I saw the photographs

and I do know that Department of Water Resources has provided some guidance and the reason for that

is not because there there could be a breach I think there's that water um along the

port has a lot more control over how much water goes in there based and based in the future if we

if they wanted to shift the direction of water if needed that there was a reason to you know build out

that levy but in this case can you help us understand because the as although we've been hearing

about all the work there is an area in the along the deep water channel that is not getting

worked on or is it can you just give me a little more background and because of the central valley

flood protection you know system you described how water goes into certain directions and there's a

lot of control where the water can go for the safety and I know when we go up to um DC to advocate

there's this great map which talks about where the what you know the direction of all the water and

the areas that we need to shore up and we have had a lot of response over the years to shore things

up and you know as you mentioned the the Folsom Dam and what happened there so because of that I

just wanted to bring up the um an area that I just didn't want to overlook in the conversation

was the deep water ship channel and you know what it can be done or is that a threat in the city?

um so um it's very kind of a difficult conversation but deep water ship channels levy's um

the port levy's let me put it this way it's probably better for the port levy's the water that

affects the port levy's um is water that's come you know that is either from flows and it

maintains a certain level right it's also connected tidally to the to the bay right to the to the

to the greater delta that levy when you think about how the deep water ship channel comes and then

it makes it hard um if you're looking if you're looking from the south right it makes a right hand

turn right into the into the turning basin so that's the east that's the that's the east that's the

west let the port west levy and if you look you know that the deep you know that beyond that is the

bypass that levy slope has seen a number of different sloths different different deficiencies that

have been corrected in many different years um a previous um previously a previous um group put in

some drainage instead of just naturally draining it like we were talking about the blacker

canal doesn't have a culvert we put in a culvert to try to direct the what the that water and keep

it from causing more harm at the toe of that levy that levy does have failures but I also want to

remind people if you walk out there you know that it's quite a ways from that levy from that side of

the levy to the deep to the um to the the olobipaths so the chances of a breach over at that levy

are fairly small there's a lot of there's a lot of material between that levy slope and the in the

the olobipath it's a little bit different as you move up towards highway 80 so after the turn that the

that the where the port is that levy this that we call it the olobipath east levy was repaired in

2023 this past year during final inspection they noticed some deficiencies the Army Corps of

Engineers acted on that they declared an emergency and they built a new adjacent levy so when it

came time to address a significant deficiency as we were coming in the flood season the team

responded specifically the Army Corps of Engineers responded in a major way and was able to use

material from the port from their operations to be able to build a setback levy so that also has

gone through a major repair and we are confident that part of that emergency repair will become part

of the permanent repair and it will be evaluated just like all the other levy's to make sure that

it is providing the level of protection that we're seeking all right thank you and and you

mentioned I know I just want to reiterate it you know whenever there is a boil a breach or something

happens can you explain the number of partners that we have to to do the repair work

and and and how things get funded and taken care of so that the city is safe there are some so

because the Army Corps did that fix they came to that they charged in and took control and

and they worked directly with the Department of Water Resources and West Athga to make sure that

we could put in that repair smaller sloughing we the reclamation district reports back to us we

talked to our consultant group we talked to our team and we tried to address those of

even at the south port levy there was a little bit of slippage there was some some

remember what they called it it was a settling issue and so it needed a small repair on the

landside not on the water side or on the landside and it was just basically to make sure that we kept

maintained the levy geometry as designed so we have particular approaches to monitoring

and trying to correct deficiencies in a timely manner to ensure that there is not a breach

great thank you so much Paul I appreciate your piece thank you

okay so next round of questions is emergency evacuations yeah that's okay so I'm

satisfied with the flood and everything you've done to mitigate you know potentially

be problems in our levees since we're fine they didn't come the safe report feel very confident

with all the federal monies and everything but the evacuation I think has been a big concern

getting more people into an area thinks of referred to it Mr. Dr. Bain referred to it as a

bowl so I guess that's the concern I have currently our evacuation plan how long would it take

to evacuate whether it's the flood or anything else that some cat something cat is strong so if I

can have whoever's going to talk about an evacuation plan if you can first respond to the applicant

the balance and public comments if you have any comments first to respond to that and then

council member akala's questions after that please okay does that make sense sure okay good evening

by the way madam mayor members of the council Brian Johnson fire marshal thank you Brian you know

just trying to process all the all the comments in here there's a few different things I think one

we do have an evacuation plan if you see the chiefs memo there's a link to the city's web page that

has some of our documents and a link to the county's website where there's a long list and the reason

why that exists is that we are a member of yellow county join emergency management system which

brings a lot of the cities together along with the county OES to work together collaboratively

to write these plans put them together now they may appear as look as yellow county but we are

in yellow county the principals the guidance that the documents provide our universal across the

the board so with that access those plans they are west Sacramento plan of us being in yellow county

I think you also noticed in the in the memo it stated that we are taking that yellow county

evacuation annex making some amendments to make it more west Sacramento centric given the exposure

that we have to to flood it is a very big tool for us and so we just want to make sure that it's

solid across for no question as intent to it's for with us and that is in the process of being

completed right now I think looking at some of the questions and concern is maybe the availability

of information given we're in the process of updating our plan and tools that accompany that

plan for the public and for emergency services we plan to have workshop now we did one in 2019 I

don't know if you remember Madam Mayor you were there with just a couple of people yes I remember that

which is kind of typical not nobody really gets excited with emergency management other than

maybe the chief a couple other people but yeah and in the mayor we plan on doing that on doing

that again it sounds like you know the structure of the settlement will include a couple of those

workshops but we may do a couple others to cover a larger subject of emergency management in general

and big on personal preparedness so we do have a plan it is available to the public and we have

some workshops that we can explain those plans emergency management efforts in general and other

tools that be helpful so I hope that helpful maybe I hope some of the people here today

and then is there any specific questions I think we all might have

I'll come over to call out is questioning the emergency evacuation if we

have a call on what it takes how long would I that's it all depends I don't

what do you project I mean obviously we tell a whole city evacuation are we talking a minor we

haven't done studies to talk about specific section there even a whole evacuation of the city

in general I'm not trying to be difficult it's just that there people out there that are concerned

they're feeling that if we do it had a levy break that there would be a real problem

well go 20 feet under the facility we have a major there's no well it all depends on the

this we we respond to the problem that's presented to us so that's you know one of the

well what's the plan how are you going to get us out here we don't know until the plan

to the problem is presented and I know that makes it difficult to to accept because

because you want to be informed you want to know how to get out but I can't tell you okay you're

going to go this route you're going to take the street you're going to turn right and left because

if the problem's there that's not going to be helpful to the public one thing one tool that we do

have for the public is our general map or evacuation map and it highlights all the major

thoroughfares that go through the city because those are going to be the ones that we utilize one

way or another Brian is there any city that knows that can answer that any city model that can

that has a modeling that the council members asking in West Sacramento no any city in California

in other words this is typical in this is the United States and also I think just to put a

put a finer point on that you can hopefully build on this to your to your question it part of what

it depends is in a in a flood situation let's say it depends on where a levy breach occurs

that that will greatly impact the focus of the of the evacuation area the routes that can be used

so if you want to elaborate on that again it goes to the the we react to the problem that's presented

to us again if there's a breach in the north the south could be safe depending on the situation

right how how significant severe was the was the breach and as we meant as I mentioned in Yarbara

I don't want to kid anybody evacuate and people they provided some examples evacuations are

going to be difficult it's going to take they're going to be logistically challenging strategically

complex it's it's going to be difficult to do we we don't do it every day not everybody's ready to

do it every day we can control a lot of things we can control the streets that we send people we

control the intersections the staff how we light but what we can't control is the almost 60,000

different elements of the evacuation plan of people not prepared don't have gas don't want to

follow instructions and that's what makes it so difficult to do to move that amount of people

now I can't talk to the capacity of our of our streets that's just the tool that we use to get people

out it will take time and again it will be it will be challenging I can't that's that's the reality

it it is going to be that and we're creating and are we as a council when we approve these things

creating a greater danger by increasing more homes in the area I can't they agree with that

you're creating you're putting more more vehicles on the road that is correct

okay this is the pins I just like to jump in here a little bit I would just like to say that

in most occasions the levy the river levels are not a surprise as the rivers rise

we know the lake levels we know the river levels we work closely with our partners

reclamation we have free winter meetings that include the reclamation districts public works

yellow OES emergency managers our neighboring departments we make sure that we're collaborating

whenever storms start coming I heard atmospheric rivers earlier all the email chains start going

when these rivers hit different levels like monitor stage and I hate to say flood stage flood

stage doesn't mean we're flooding I don't know why they use that term flood stage they know when

that reclamation starts patrolling the levies if we were in a situation where we thought I heard the

word river topping or water topping over the levy we would have evacuated long before waters

of that copied over the rivers our evacuation or you'll see would have been activated perhaps for

weeks at that point and we'd be making decisions daily the city manager the staff this would not

most likely be a knee jerk reaction this would be a well thought out in planned event we have

evacuation warnings and editorial evacuations we train every year we're in all hazard organization

but inevitably every year our EOC trainings revolve around flood when we were surrounded by levies

and when we do that we work with our neighboring departments OES yellow county neighboring cities

PD and so we ensure that we are able to initiate an evacuation we would activate our EOC and we

would have a coordinated evacuation effort so when it comes to river levels yes there could be some

boils there could be sloughing we've experienced those in the past we take that information in we

make determinations in the EOC and we respond accordingly long before the water whatever top over

the levy we would have already initiated evacuation warnings we would initiate an evacuation

mandatory and we would be evacuating our community so I hope that helps thank you

is it help okay great council member um a roll school you have questions it's all you

riding away we often hear from stands 11 and said I have something to say for no actually I was looking

for some type of reassurance um and I think I heard a lot of it was help okay don't forget oh yeah

there's a mark here you okay yes council member early um I think this is less uh question and more

statement um as as someone who deals in probabilities who deals in I'm a statistician by training and

the organization that I run I'm constantly looking at models based on what is the information all

the data and information that we possibly have from previous years trends everything putting it

all together and I think um and I'll and I'll use what's happening right now as an example um what's

happening federally just as an example of trying to anticipate something that is never happened before

and or happens every 100 years and trying to get a definitive answer around you know to council member

Oculus point of yeah but how long would it take right like if this were to happen and it is difficult

when it when it comes to the the one in a lifetime situation to say and this is how long it would

take and it's because there's no data to inform that and and so unbeknownst probably to many of

the our residents and citizens that that live in in west Sacramento there are constantly emergencies

there are constantly emergencies that the staff are dealing with and addressing and we have no idea

that they're happening we do but we as everyday people have no idea that they are constantly

dealing with emergencies but because of their preparedness because of the work that is happening

we don't know because it doesn't impact us in that way and so it is difficult and I and I completely

understand to have a plan that lists um potential avenues for responding to an emergency if this happens

then it would go here if this happens in here and and and and so I understand on a certain level the

the uncertainty in not having a definitive answer to a once in a lifetime event or something

that could happen but when it comes to potential floods when it comes to the things that are happening

all the time every year um again those emergencies are being addressed which is I think also

where I've had some difficulties and and some things that I've heard this evening because I know

them to not be true because we as city council members in my very short amount of time being on

city council since 2021 I've seen them addressed I've been trained in the emergency responses right I

sit with staff when we are dealing with potential flooding and and what's going to happen and it

isn't just oh my gosh what's going to happen you know within the next hour and our it is days

leading up to working with our city manager working with our assistant city manager working with

chief bans working with chief strange and I understand that it's like but what happens if again

that once in a lifetime we are constantly dealing with emergencies and so that that is the one thing I

will say as it relates to the evacuation plan I have other questions and comments um for for other

staff but I did want to just note that okay and just to clarify um once we close from everybody

we can only deliberate not ask anymore just wanted to make sure we cover that face um fire

fire marshal just want to say you've you've are one of the most top notch you know emergency prepared

um member of our community and um thank you I just want to remind everybody that you forced us to go

to a four hour training here it was quite informative but I don't think any of the council

ever did that and thank you for that oh you're welcome thank you thank you we did we did as as a

council just wanted to make sure we never it was it was not open to the public we all sat

in a training to understand um and and we learned not only that but we learned how um an

emergency happened I'm not sure did you say I sat there okay so we learned how the PowerPoint

presentation had a big ol binder had a lot of questions um about about an emergency and um how

it worked and and also from my experience working for LA county and um as as a council member

in the Sacramento Valley division as we saw you know what happened in paradise and and what

happened in Orville I was actually one of the people that was I was visiting a friend and

heard the early warning um when I was sitting in church they shut it down they said get

pack your bags and leave and that's exactly what I did when I received the warning I left

without a problem no traffic it was those that decided to sit and waited out that experienced

the traffic and that's sometimes what happens some people ignore the warning and and you do have

unfortunately a situation where there are deaths um sometimes I've seen you know um working

in you know through county human services that we do have to um help mobilize more resources for

those that are incapacitated to be able to move those are some of the deaths that we heard because

they weren't able to physically walk um you know there were there were there were other challenges as you

heard you know the you know the gas runs out of the car and they're not able to get the gas I've

so in hearing you know from my friends during that Orville um damn experience it was they didn't

have enough gas in their car they were waiting in lines to get gas to get far enough um they were

waiting too long to pack their bags um there was just a number of things when it when it comes to

an emergency there is no time and and and I want to say that I appreciate that when our fire

department is out giving us a list to learn how to pack and be prepared no matter what we should

always all be prepared to evacuate immediately it's not something we should take for granted

and then on top of that heed the warnings and I understand that um our fire chief has given us

recommendations thanks to measure O to take a look at um you know providing more notifications and

you know we live in a region where some of the notification systems can give some false alerts you

know because we're trying to coordinate it so say something's happening in a Davis all of us get

the alerts so we're just trying to work out those kings um as we move forward in improving our

emergency alert system but I want to say that I appreciate all that you've done to help the

residents of West Sacramento be prepared in case there is an emergency I think we could always do more

uh well I appreciate you know learning more from um our um representatives here about how we

we have gaps like you said you may be on the internet we need to take a look at that and also

informing you know one or more they consider no four hour training like we did and learn all

about what's happening um I don't mind doing that if that's what it takes for the community to

feel safe and and to take these um to take this seriously so whatever we can do to support

you know you and that way support the community so that if such a situation happens that we provide

them with all the knowledge for an emergency evacuation I'm not going to wait till 3000 homes are

built I'm not going to wait for anything to happen I think it should happen now but I also

you know um realize that when we do build more housing then we have other issues which our traffic

person I'll be asking him next um you know that that we're going to be addressing these situations

um as we move forward because this is not just going to happen overnight it's going to happen

you know over the next 15 20 years as we do housing construction and I appreciate that you've

been involved in the development of what's been happening um because included in this um

in this you know developer what I see developer agreements is the additional public safety resources

as we have more housing um and with that with measure O we are expanding the number of police

officers and the number you know we have a whole new engine we have 11 firefighters in the

academy right now we are building the resources to try to match the growth and I anticipate that we

will do more so with that I just want to say thank you so much. Just count some

ever our call how often do we um update our emergency plan we do it every year is there

living documents they're updated as necessary so like I mentioned the last big formal

um completion I guess of the last was 2009 and so now we've got the newer version

at 2024 that was I think we finalized it September October of last year and then again it's just

coincidental that the subject has come up while we were working on the plan and all these like

newer tools that we wanted to offer to the so we'll just continue doing them. We should sit in

another four hour training just for that. I probably there would be two hour workshop but two hour

workshops. I appreciate it the training. I had lots of questions. Thank you.

All right one last thing it should be noted that our hazard mitigation plan it was just completed

they've been working on it for the last couple years Brian who oversees it and it will be coming

to the council next month for approval and so yeah they're constantly all year long putting

trainings to just saying they're working on this all year long we take emergency management

serious we work with all of our partners we collaborate with them I got to say reclamation

our flood control that's a good group of people they really take it serious and as far as communicating

with the residents there are several ways to communicate with the community in the case of emergency

and Brian knows them well you can talk about Everbridge and he just sent a flyer out I'll let you

talk about that. There's so many different elements to the emergency management general alert

warning is huge you know it complements the evacuation if we can't communicate the message to you

how do you know what to do and to utilize those resources so some of the that we do on a

on a low level of priority-lip social media internet everybody uses that. Everbridge or alert

yellow just rebranded from yellow alert alert yellow is kind of the if you're familiar with the

reverse time-on-one concept there's an emergency we will call you and let you know there are some

limitations to that program but worst case we need to contact everybody we use wireless emergency

alert part of the iPod program that the federal government runs that we go through the

county to use it we can contact all the cell phones in a given area that we choose so if there's

a flood event or something we set up in set an area and everybody's phone is going to be ringing

with the message you know that they need that so many different ways and I get we have another

plan an alert warning plan to complement this one. And what I will say and Martha we we actually

just experienced this in our area there was a kiddo that was lost a three-year-old and again

most people wouldn't even know that this was happening last week actually literally in my

neighborhood and the police were searching going door to door and then they used this emergency

when we couldn't find the parents of this lost child they said we're gonna we're gonna ping only

in this geography so that everyone knows that this this kiddo is actually missing had wandered

from their home talk about scary and again it is we do have these systems in place and I think it

is one of those things where you don't know about them until it comes time where you you need them.

We will get a hold of you if we need to get a hold of you. Yeah thank you so much.

Thank you. Appreciate it.

Mia's council over there you seem to be amused by something that you're reading.

Does it have anything to do with this?

I'm

Were you communicating with someone else texting?

I'm just concerned.

Mayor.

I just can we not do that this past?

All right I think it's important to know.

I don't think it's part of the process at this time.

I think it's a question though.

Okay and I'm running it at this point.

I'm done asking.

Fair question.

Thank you if you can please say your name and if you can help us in responding to

the appellate the applicant the public comment and then we'll open it up for council if you get this question.

Okay Jason McCoy I'm a supervising transportation planner in the Transpiration Division Manager for the city

been here for a couple of and a half years.

A few things to unpack.

I heard a lot of talk about bridges.

I also heard failed bridges which I was surprised to hear.

Our bridges are moving forward that are planned.

I'm assuming that by fail it means we haven't seen the bridge move forward.

So there are a few things to understand.

One is that when you're dealing with movable bridges

you're dealing with something that is extremely complex.

You're dealing with the need to do environmental documentation.

Bozikwa and Nipa these documents are expensive and it takes at least 10 years to get through

this type of process.

The Ice Street Bridge replacement also known as the Sea Street Railyards Bridge.

That has been moving forward through final design.

The project is a partnership between ourselves and the City of Sacramento with Sacramento being

the lead on that bridge.

And that bridge is moving forward.

The final design should be complete by the end of this summer.

And with any luck we'll have all of the funding necessary

in order to start advancing the construction bids and moving forward with that project.

There are a couple of other bridges.

I heard the Sutterville bridge mentioned.

I think it's really important to understand that back in 2010 there was something called

the Sacramento River Crossing study that looked at a number of different locations for any proposed

crossing of the Sacramento River.

That included the North Market and South Market area.

North Market.

The alternatives that were looked at included the Sea Street and Railyards Bridge.

That was the one that was selected to move forward in the North Market.

In the South Market there was Broadway Bridge that connected 15th Street in West Sacramento to

Broadway as an alternative as well as the Sutterville Road Bridge.

Sutterville Road Bridge did not advance and that is because it experienced an extensive amount

of opposition from CalTrans, the California Department of Transportation,

who is concerned about additional traffic going on to I-5 resulting in ridlock of the system.

From the City of Sacramento and in particularly the residents in

the city there that absolutely did not want to see that project move forward.

They were concerned about traffic congestion.

They were concerned about in particular folks coming from West Sacramento into the

Land Park neighborhood which they didn't want to see happen.

They were concerned about overtaxing their amenities over in Land Park.

There were also a number of West Sacramento residents that were opposed to the Sutterville

Road Bridge in particular because they did not want to see the potential for truck-cut-through traffic

for those that are trying to avoid any congestion on I-5 to decide to drive through

West Sacramento to cut through to the industrial areas and continue on to I-80.

So based on all of that opposition that alternative did not advance.

What was selected to advance was Broadway Bridge.

Now that bridge had received $3 million in grant funding to study the environmental impact

of the bridge and to complete the preliminary design. Both of those were completed.

We could actually move forward with advancing the final design of that bridge.

But it does require an extensive amount of funding to make that happen.

In general you're talking about $14 million for a movable bridge of that size

to advance through final design.

For construction you're talking about between $200 million and $350 million.

To put that in perspective the Sea Street Rail Yards Bridge is a $320 million project.

We are receiving funding for that through the Highway Bridge program because we are going to be

eliminating a number of other bridges. So when I say bridges I mean the approach ramps to the

historic I-Street Bridge. So CalTrans looked at that as a potential win-win.

We get rid of the Jibum bridge approach which is a pretty extensive structure.

We get rid of the structure that goes into City of Sacramento. That's another structure.

The approach ramp that goes up to the I-Street Bridge in West Sacramento.

We get rid of that. All of these get inspected by CalTrans. CalTrans looked at this as,

hey you get this one bridge we get rid of these approaches. So that's how we were able to secure

some funding for that project. For other projects like the Broadway Bridge we do not have the

Highway Bridge program that we can utilize because we do not have other bridges that we would be

eliminating or replacing. So as a result we are very reliant on grant funding.

Unfortunately the latest word came down from the Department of Transportation that says

in order for us to be us being State of California and all the cities within to be considered for

grant funding under this new administration we have to meet a lot of objectives that are

actually illegal by state law things like we must help with deportation. So unfortunately because

state law prevents us from being able to do that sort of thing we are going to be less able to

get grant funding in the near future. So I just want to state that that is a fact.

There is another bridge that I am currently working on and that's thanks to the City Council

authorizing funding for looking at the enterprise crossing over the Deep Watership Channel.

The city has an IOD which is an irrevocable offer of dedication as part of the Southport

industrial area that connects from Promenade Street at Southport Parkway across the Deep Watership

Channel to Enterprise. We are currently studying that. We are looking at three different alternatives,

a low level bridge, a high level bridge and a movable bridge, all of which are going to require

again extensive funds to advance. So as this environmental document progresses I'll be bringing

this to the City Council and the public to review, provide comment and with any luck we'll be

able to advance that project in the near future as well. I did hear a little bit about capacity.

So with regard to the streets in West Sacramento and just with regard to Dr.

Erlie's comment about modeling all of traffic in our region is evaluated using what's called

the SACSIM model and that's done by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments. The SACSIM model

looks at a 2035 to 2050 condition for the entire region. The City of West Sacramento has our own

model that we use based on the SACSIM model. That model is done every time we're updating the general

plan or when we're updating the general plan mobility element that was last done in 2024.

The engineering firm AECOM did an analysis to the 2035 level. Councilmember O'Cala you asked

about how much development is going to happen in these individual developments over what time frame.

That's a little hard to determine but in the model when you look at SACSIM model in our own model

it looks at 2035 and I'm going to estimate here it's about 1200 units out of all of those

developments moving forward. So even in 2035 it's not the anticipating build out. We're not going to

get there even at 2050 we're more than likely not going to be building out. So what we're already

doing is as part of the next general plan update our traffic engineer is looking at updating the

model for a 2050 scenario. So not just 2035 but going beyond the general plan. That's going to be

necessary for the next general plan update. It's going to be necessary for our traffic impact fee.

It's going to be necessary for future projects to understand what impacts a future general

plan amendment is going to have. There's a number of projects that are moving forward that aren't

anticipating the general plan. There's like a 200 unit housing development that's being posed.

So we need to be able to understand how that fits in the context of the entire area.

So from a capacity standpoint we already know that each of these developments river park,

Yarborough, Liberty, they were already analyzed in the model. So we already know that based on their

anticipated build out up to 2035 they're not going to have a significant impact on the capacity of

our roadway system. That's already in the general plan. Yes, there's traffic. I've been here for

you know over 10 years. I have seen traffic increase. The more people have kids they need a place to go.

The regional model looks at in migration and it looks at births and you have to be able to respond

to increasing population. We're not going to tell people not to move here. We're not going to

tell them to stop having kids. So we've got to be able to plan for it. So right now I can tell you

our general plan has looked at it. It's planned for it. We know we can handle it.

Okay, and we're coming up to 11 o'clock. So I just want to bring it back to council. I just want

city manager city attorney attorneys. Can we deliberate a little bit on the process

up to 11 o'clock at this time? You have no limitation. You can continue until you're done.

I am asking. Okay, just want to make sure if you're thinking of the

the Arboros settlement. Yes. That of course you haven't adopted that ordinance yet. So it doesn't apply.

And even then it would have you cause prior to 11 o'clock and the council would vote whether to

continue. Okay, just want to make sure that's why I said. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Thank you so much, Mr. McGoi. Okay, so I believe that council members will have

questions for you at this time. Do you have council member? Questions? Good.

Council member Alcala. You answered my question. Okay, it was excellent. Thank you very much.

A presentation. Yes, it was very helpful background. But that's because you've been here firm.

Would you like me to go through the

checking on the credentials background? How long have you been here, Mr. McGoi? Working for

the city of LA. I mean, it's the city of West Sacramento. So I've been with the city of West

Sacramento for seven and a half years prior to that. I worked for engineering firm,

Mott McDonald, working primarily on high-speed rail, North Philadelphia, Amtrak station,

while I'm working on streetcar. Right. Before that, I worked for our design group during community

planning. And I've got my master's in transportation and undergrad in environmental studies and

planning. So, you know, this is my bread and butter, what I've been doing for 30 years.

And you've accomplished writing successful grants the city has received.

Since I've been here, our division is brought in just a little over $15 million.

And on top of that, I think your success includes building safer streets.

I'm really excited about that. I mean, I've heard a lot about folks who like West

Sack in the 80s, but I think it's gotten better. If we have our trail system, we've got, you know,

bike lanes now. We have more transit options than ever before.

Via, which we came up with the idea for that, was the first of its kind in the nation,

and really happy about that. So, I think we're heading in the right direction mobility-wise.

And as a result of the planning, when we first started, we have more connectivity from the north

to the south in order to get throughout the city, you know, as well. Yep. And we continue to

improve that. We've got the bridge over US 50 now, connecting Sikamore Trail.

We actually received another 3 million roughly in grants to look at the next bridge over the

barge canal to connect with the barge canal trail between Sikamore Trail. And then also looking at

going north to Sacramento Avenue under the Capitol Court or Railroad Gracks.

And you referenced, you know, your appreciation to Council for the establishment of the

enterprise bridge. And it can, you know, I know we haven't talked about it much, it's kind of

too theoretical at this point, but just to put that out there, the timing of building and

constructing a bridge, we've started that at this point and along lines of the timing to get a

bridge up and running. Sure. It's, enterprise is one of our next priorities over the

Seastry Railyard's bridge. Simply because the enterprise bridge is evaluated in our 2035

general plan as an improvement that needs to happen by 2035. So it's really essential that we have

that additional link. We applied for and received authorization to get the enterprise bridge into

CalTrans climate, climate action plan as a secondary evacuation route in the future.

So we are already looking with our eye toward expanding additional routes into and out of the city.

That is in, like I said, the 2035 timeframe, Broadway Bridge is in 2045 timeframe. So it's already

programmed in Seacog's regional plan as being at 2045. So we still have some time for that.

Is it too late to add any more bridges to the plan to the general plan?

Never too late. You can add any, you know, we have a whole general plan process that includes,

you know, getting public input, getting council direction, getting input from our commission members,

anything that, you know, is necessary to do should be in the general plan.

There have been residents who express concern about building more housing and what happened

to the Sutterville Bridge, as I explained pretty much along the same lines that you described.

Is it still possible to put the Sutterville Bridge back on the general plan?

You could, but this is one of those improvements that absolutely needs to have buy-in from

primarily needs to have buy-in from CalTrans because you are connecting directly to CalTrans

facilities. You have to have buy-in from the city of Sacramento because obviously it's going to

impact them. You also need to have buy-in from Seacog. So all of these entities need to be at the

table and everybody needs to come to an agreement. Broadway Bridge is a bridge that was agreed to

by both cities to advance. However, it's not the priority of the city of West Sacramento right now

because, as I said, 2035 Enterprise is for the city of Sacramento, it's not their priority either.

They're really focused on the Truxel Bridge, getting across from Richard's Boulevard of Truxel.

After that bridge is done, after Enterprise is done, I think it's very likely that, you know,

we'll be looking at other connections and that could be either going back to Broadway, which we

already have the environmental clearance for, or if there is another option to go back to

the centerville, if there's concerns from the region and concerns from Sacramento, I don't see

why that couldn't happen. However, the same issues are going to come up again.

Okay. On traffic, the traffic issues that were raised, you did speak a little bit. Are you the

bright person to ask about the traffic situation? I'm the manager of the Transportation Division,

so under me is our traffic engineer as well as our senior transportation planner and our associate

level planner. So you are in. Okay, great. So yes, there is a lag time when if there was a traffic

accident, you know, I've experienced it personally where the timing can go from, you know, 20 minutes

to 45 minutes to an hour, you're stuck in the city. Even if traffic is being redirected,

it's going to take a while to get out. And it's, you know, during peaks, you know, time periods,

and I understand we're figuring ways out to reduce that, such as the lighting, you know,

the traffic lights just get synchronizing them a little bit. Are there any other plans to help

improve that? I am working on advancing what's called West Act forward. I've applied for

just under half a million on that and we'll be matching that with funds already allocated by

City Council to look at transit priority, signal priority, and to look at ways of speeding up

transit in general. That could include in dumplings, signal prioritization. There's a number of

time signals down, say Jefferson corridor so that each of the signals winds up flowing faster.

With regard to evacuation, I think it's important to remember that if something does happen,

God forbid, you're not just dealing with, you know, one side of the street that you're going to

be forced to go on while other people are going toward danger. Those sides of the street will then

flush out. So you'll, you know, we'll be relying on our first responders and, you know, PD

fire departments come out and as they mentioned, they'll know hopefully things in advance

in order to have a traffic control plan in place to get people out.

To give you an idea, we've been working together for the last year on the A's coming into town.

We know that with the A's coming into town, there's going to be a lot of folks coming in.

There's going to be a lot of folks staying. We know that there's, you know, capacity on the roadways

to handle this, but we're relying on our coordination amongst our different departments to figure out,

okay, do we need to close off a certain segment of the street, which we are planning like tower

bridge gateway, for instance, so that we can flush people across tower bridge, flush people to the west,

to, you know, go to different parts of the city, go down south port. We've relocated all of the

via and Uber lift over to seventh and TBG to stay out of the way. We've worked with our transit

agencies like YOLO TD to put in sweeps. That's two buses going at the same time to come in and they

can actually go through the close streets in order to get more people to use transit. We're working

on potential offerings where hey, show us, you know, your ticket and you know, you get a free ride on

transit, you know, that sort of thing. We're going to get a good transportation briefing on that.

One of the future council meetings, I think. I find I could just add, because I want to, you know,

just reiterate, this is all great information, great questions, I understand where they're coming from.

What we're doing tonight is looking at sort of the merits of the EIR and the map that's under appeal.

And on that note, I, the reason I'm chiming in here is not to cut you off. It's to note that

remember what's next with the project should the appeal. If the project moves forward, there's

a development agreement. There's a specific plan with this project and a lot of the

topics that are being masked about tonight, they'll have a lot more relevance when you see the DA.

So on that note with traffic, for example, there are several commitments not to get

ahead of the process, but the development will actually be funding directly, both reimbursements

for improvements to cities already done. Also, future roadway improvements that will be extremely

relevant to topics like traffic. So I think what what what we're talking about tonight is the EIR

analyzed all these topics on the basis of its consistency with the general plan and and,

you know, are there adequate mitigations? That sort of thing. And so I just just want to make

sure that we're sticking with, you know, sort of that, an overarching framework. And I think we'll

be expanding Jefferson with the Yardboro road. So that'll be expanded. And that does play into

an exit for or, you know, for the entire city. If there's a flood, even though it's another

project and that other project is working on it, it does speak a little bit to the evacuation.

Right. South of Linda. It'll be widened out to Portland, it's already.

Okay. Good to know.

Yeah. So I think a lot of what Jason's covering are things that the city's doing,

you know, independent of what's happening with this project or other projects in Southport.

But just more of a reminder that, you know, with the project itself night, whether it's a mitigation

EIR or a term in development agreement, there are several really extensive improvements that

this project will be responsible for either providing itself or paying for that address,

particularly traffic. So I just wanted to highlight that.

And I'm confident that the project is consistent. The EIR does match up with the general plan,

particularly because I know that the model was developed in the 2035 timeframe.

Back in 2016, I know that the traffic model for this is consistent with the general plan. So I'm

confident that this is not going to be a surprise when it moves forward.

Okay. Thank you so much. I appreciate it, Mr. McQuay.

Public infrastructure.

I wanted to give you a chance to provide any comments from what you've heard from the

appellant, the applicant, and public comment. Any questions, council may I have for you?

Well, I heard a concern regarding watering.

The approval of that fires that they can fly with second-party to if the city and

security term is that watering is required.

Oh, you can't hear. Sorry. I didn't know what that's going through.

You hear me now? Yes.

Okay. Yeah, regarding view watering, if it's determined that the city engineer

decides that view watering is required and that's based on the water table and the depth of

branching and that sort of thing, of course. And we have section 22, which

outlines a very comprehensive analysis that needs to be done in the in the event of

watering. There's an analysis of the soil parameters, the depth, the zone of influence of the

drawdown and any improvements that are located within that zone of influence such as

domestic wells, flatwork, structures. There's a survey that's done prior to the view watering.

There's a survey that's done following the view watering and any impacts are identified.

And I don't want to say the blame, but the contractor is made responsible for it.

So that's how that's...

Okay. Thank you.

I'm not sure what other... I'm not sure what other public infrastructure questions were brought up

that haven't already been addressed.

Paul, are you the one that might be familiar with the Davis Road Buffer?

Is that familiar? No.

No, but I think everybody else answered a lot of the questions that we've had.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think there was another question regarding

the channel that Blacker Channel. Yeah.

And the fact that this project is raining to it. Yes.

And with any subdivision improvement, there's an increase in the impervious area

and there's an increase in runoff. This project is being designed to drain to a detention facility,

which attenuates the flows and limits the outflow to the channel to the available capacity.

We have a drainage master plan that has identified the drainage system for the entire south port area.

This project is consistent with that. We've identified target outflows and

there will not be an adverse impact to the channel as a result of the project.

That's helpful to know. Thank you.

Just on that, and I just want to reflect back. So there won't be an adverse.

Is there actually going to be an added benefit then by doing this?

Or it'll just operate the same?

The channel itself, it'll just it'll operate the same.

Added benefit if there's local funding, that sort of thing, with the development of this project,

you know, it's going to have a drainage system that's going to convey all of the runoff to this

facility. So I'm not familiar with the buffer that Davis Road, or if there was one at the time,

but the redevelopment of this area is going to address the drainage for that entire area,

and potentially along with the levy improvements and everything that's else that's occurred down there,

going to alleviate the need for such a buffer. We're not only looking at

mitigation of the increased flows within the boundary of the project. We're also ensuring that

there are no adverse impacts to the perimeter that we're not blocking.

So it's going to flow better. Am I getting that does sell I could add a benefit, sir?

Yeah, we've got surface flow. We've had uneven areas. We've got funding. We're going to have pipes

that convey. Thank you. In the photos that you saw where there was, I don't know, did you see the

photos? You didn't see them. Because we saw some flooding in some areas. I think it was on Harman Road,

or I don't know if it'll help, because it sounds like there was some drainage that was over a

period of time with something that happened, that those that the drainage has been eliminated,

and that's why you have these big holes of water today. I don't know what that's about, but

Well, I'm trying to think of what project that's developed down there that might have actually led to that.

I couldn't think of one either that I think it's just naturally occurring. I mean, you drive

through the county and you see flooded agbills all over the world. Yeah, if this

so that was a photo that was used and I've given that it's presented to us. I'm just curious and

I'll be willing to work with you to learn more about how to resolve that. Okay, because we don't

want to ignore complaints presented. That's it. Oh, right. We're being right along.

So I don't have a question. I have a question for City Attorney. So just I just want to make

sure she's there. Don't close it. Yes. Please ask your question now. Which city attorney?

Not you. I think actually I think that's really important for the council members now. I'm not a city attorney.

You're the council. I just here to work for the mayor and I'm not I'm not have nothing to do with

the subject matter in this. I'm not giving any advice on the subject matter on this. I'm strictly

here to find the mayor on the hearing process and making sure that everybody gets heard that wants

to be heard. I'm not a subject matter expert. I am strictly here for that limited purpose. That is it.

That is why I'm here. And I appreciate your help. Thank you so much.

And I just think it's important to let that be known. I just want to be just it's been interchangeably

saying city attorney. Mr. Mitchell is your city attorney. I'm just in five three. I think I'm

only calling you councils. Is that okay? And I wasn't referring to you when I asked for city

attorney. I mean, I just think it's good because I think it's really a fair point. The city council

members to know what my role is. It has nothing to do with either project. Nor does it have anything

to do with what on the agenda. It's strictly what is the process how we do that? We're going.

No funny business texting. Yes. I'm joking. I couldn't help it.

I'm just seeing this is a hot topic. I get it. But I just want to let everybody know.

So I just want to make sure since we're referring to council, our hearing officer here

with respect to the process earlier when councilmember all call it interjected. He had mentioned

that we needed to get back on topic and I want to make sure that we're following accordingly.

So that way we can move forward this process. I know we've had a lot of cover.

That's correct. And in fairness, I wanted to just make sure we didn't. None of the council members

have given the opportunity to ask any questions yet of the appellant or the applicant. But I wanted to

make sure that that happened before you close the hearings. But for example, if council member

of all council member, a Roscoe had a question for Mr. Goddard. I wanted to make sure they had the

chance to do that. And same thing with the project. So I just wanted to make sure because we're going

to get gotten missed. I got lamb here. Thank you so much for that. Appreciate it.

That's up to you. Do you want to ask the question to the city?

I think we'll be. So we've addressed a lot of things. But one of the other things that did get

brought up and I just want to highlight it. And I think it's important to ask, what are the

current contribution limits in West Sacramento or city council? So as we're writing,

$500 over the past decade because that was recently changed to $500 I think in the past year.

What was it prior to that? Well, you had 250 then depending on whether someone contributed

money to their own account, you went up to their own campaign. We just like start off with how

this applies. Absolutely. So one of the things that we heard during testimony, we heard quite a bit

was one, this whole entire council is beholden and I might not be using the exact language to

developers that these votes can't be shouldn't be purchased by developers. In fact, we actually heard

from Goddard that, you know, I'm not saying you all would do it, but that in certain cities,

that does happen. And so I thought it was important just to level set what are the contribution

limits here. And I will speak for me. I won't speak for anyone else, but at $250 at $500,

none of our none of my votes are for sale. My ethics aren't for sale. And so the decisions that

I will be voting on and making here are not based on contributions that I have received. No

amount of dollars can buy my votes, my values or my ethics. Definitely not $250 and definitely not