Public Meetings - San Leandro, California

The Community Police Review Board (CPRB) met on December 22, 2025, to discuss police department updates, the Independent Police Auditor's (IPA) monthly and annual reports, and community concerns. The meeting began with announcements including the resignation of board member Peter Franco and a statement from the Chair on the dismissal of criminal charges against former officer Jason Fletcher in the Stephen Taylor case. The board approved minutes from November 19, 2025, and received reports from the police department and IPA. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the November 19, 2025 meeting were approved unanimously (5-0, with two absences). Public Comments & Testimony - Douglas (community member): Announced the opening of the Stephen Taylor Sanctuary of Life Park on January 24, 2026, at 10 a.m., and invited the community to attend. He also noted the dismissal of charges against former officer Jason Fletcher and anticipated a wrongful death lawsuit. - Dr. Evans (community member): Raised concerns about police response to homeless encampments, property security, and the lack of accountability for incidents at the John George Pavilion (a state psychiatric hospital). She questioned how the police department handles false reports and property crimes. Discussion Items - Resignation of Board Member Peter Franco: Chair read Franco's resignation letter, effective January 1, 2026, citing increasing job demands. Franco expressed support for the CPRB's mission. The board thanked him for his service. - Chair's Statement on Stephen Taylor Case: The Chair read a personal statement noting the dismissal of all criminal charges against former officer Jason Fletcher. He emphasized that the police union's characterization as "vindication" was incorrect, and called for the police to acknowledge the loss, reaffirm commitment to de-escalation policies, and celebrate positive legacies such as the CPRB, Alternative Response Unit, and the Navigation Center. - Police Department Report: Chief provided updates: three recruits graduating from the academy, four starting in January, two lateral applicants in background, and one candidate for a records position. She gave a brief statement on the Fletcher case, recognizing the tragedy and encouraging respectful dialogue. Assistant Chief Torres reported on RIPA data collection, explaining that forms are triggered by any detention or contact, and that San Leandro collects additional data points (intelligence-led stops, resident city, perceived race/ethnicity before stop). He clarified that officers use a single electronic form (LEFTA system) that expands fields for force or searches. Virtual reality training is still available for board members. - IPA Monthly Report (Denise): For November 2025: 13 uses of force (11 reviewed by department and IPA, no agreed-upon course of action (ACCA)), 4 pursuits (5 reviewed, no ACCA), 5 complaints (1 reviewed, no ACCA). IPA noted that 17 incidents were reviewed with no ACCA, indicating fewer issues and appropriate department action. Board members requested more granular data, including narrative summaries, officer duplication, and types of calls. IPA provided details on June and November spikes: June had 16 uses of force (14 actual, 2 stop sticks), with 25 employees involved (7 had two, 1 had three). November had 13 uses of force (12 actual, 1 stop stick), with 16 employees (3 had two, 1 had three). Types of calls included domestic violence, stolen vehicles, assaults, etc. IPA agreed to consider adding more detail to monthly reports, balancing resource constraints. - IPA Annual Report (Denise): Covered October 2024 to September 2025. Key highlights: 18 complaints reviewed (no disagreements), 73 uses of force reviewed (18 recommendations), 147 pursuits reviewed (66 recommendations, leading to pursuit policy review), 1 critical incident (no recommendations). IPA added commendations for exemplary behavior. The pursuit policy update is expected to be presented to the board in February 2026. IPA also noted that a RIPA data analysis will be available around March 2026. Board members discussed the need for independent policy review and not solely relying on IPA. - Board Reports: Outreach subcommittee reported new flyers nearly ready. Ad hoc committee on crowd control met and will meet again January 9, 2026. Chair raised concerns about FLOCK data sharing with federal agencies, noting Richmond canceled its contract and Oakland added conditions. Board plans to schedule an update on FLOCK data audit by IPA. Key Outcomes - Minutes Approved: Unanimously (5-0). - Training Carried Over: Board agreed to postpone discussion of further training to next meeting, with members to review IPA's syllabus and prioritize topics. - Ad Hoc Committee Updates: Crowd control committee continues research; outreach flyers to be finalized. - Future Agenda Items: Board will schedule updates on FLOCK data audit (pending IPA availability), police department budget impacts (to be determined), and pursuit policy review (expected February 2026). - Next Meeting: Scheduled for January 2026 (date not specified).

The Facilities & Transportation Committee (FTC) met with all three members present and heard two major Public Works/Engineering updates: (1) the annual street overlay and rehabilitation project on Hesperian Boulevard (including a road diet and Class IV bikeway segment), and (2) a federally funded Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 project to enhance seven uncontrolled crosswalk locations citywide. No votes were taken; both items were informational updates with committee questions and staff follow-up. Public Comments & Testimony - No public speaker cards were submitted; public comment was opened and closed with no testimony for both agenda items. Discussion Items - Annual Street Overlay & Rehabilitation Project Update – Hesperian Boulevard (I-238 overpass to Mayfair Drive) - Staff presentation: Adrian Tascano, Assistant Engineer. - Existing conditions described: six travel lanes (three each direction) with bike lanes and parking lanes. - Project description (key elements): - Pavement work: a 2.5-inch rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA) overlay segment described as between I-238 and (Patriot Drive) (staff also referenced the overall work area as between I-238 and Mayfair Drive). - Bikeway: installation of Class IV bikeways between Springlake and Olive Street; where installed, travel lanes would be reduced from 6 total to 4 total (two each direction). - Safety/operations features: green thermoplastic in high-conflict areas, select high-visibility crosswalks, signal/pedestrian timing adjustments, audible pedestrian push buttons at most signalized crossings, and a pedestrian beacon discussed for the corridor. - Transit interface: buses would pull into a shoulder/bus area described as shared with bicyclists at certain locations (painted buffer/crosshatch areas were described as painted, not raised). - Related work: railroad crossing improvements by ACTC’s RCEP at the Springlake–Hesperian railroad crossing, including tying into nearby signals to improve coordination when trains preempt signals. - Schedule stated: bid opportunities targeted for mid-January (year not explicitly stated, but discussed in the context of spring 2026 work), contract award in mid–late February, curb ramps and prep for mill/overlay in spring 2026, and overall completion summer 2027. Staff clarified that the long duration was driven largely by signal equipment procurement lead times (up to 6 months). - Budget stated: - Construction estimate $4.2 million plus contingency of roughly $420,000–$430,000, for an overall estimate of about $4.7 million. - Total project budget stated as $5.6–$5.7 million, including $1.5 million ACTC grant funding (for Class IV bikeway/landscaping/buffer) and remaining funds from city sources such as Measure BD and SB 1. Staff additionally noted RHMA use is supported by a CalRecycle grant covering the incremental cost of rubberized asphalt. - Committee Q&A / positions and concerns: - A committee member asked about parking loss, noting residents near Springlake apartments rely on on-street parking; staff estimated losses in the “20–30 range” and said the Class IV segment begins after the Springlake crossing. - Questions focused on bus/bike interactions in shared zones and whether crosshatching was raised (staff: painted only). - The Mayor asked about RHMA vs. HMA, cost, and reliability; staff stated RHMA is more expensive but more reliable for heavy traffic loading and supported by CalRecycle incremental funding. - The Mayor raised a strong concern about utility street cuts after paving (citing Washington Avenue as an example) and requested staff apply pressure and coordination expectations so the newly paved road is not cut up again for at least five years (acknowledging emergencies cannot be controlled). Staff described plan-sharing and quarterly coordination with utilities and noted receiving EBMUD’s upcoming project list. - Funding detail: staff clarified the city share is not General Fund; a large portion comes from Measure BD direct distribution, with FY26 direct distribution dollars allocated to the project. - HSIP Cycle 12 Uncontrolled Crosswalk Enhancements Project (7 locations) - Staff presentation: Robyn Chey, Associate Engineer; additional responses from Public Works Director Marquise (last name unclear in transcript), Senior Engineer Nicole Castellano, and the City Engineer. - Background described: tied to the Local Roadway Safety Plan adopted in 2022. The city applied for HSIP Cycle 11 and was not selected; re-applied in 2024 for Cycle 12 and was awarded. Staff stated the project was presented to the local BPAC on November 18, 2025. - Improvements described: FHWA countermeasures including Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs), Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), high-visibility crosswalks, supplemental signage/striping, pedestrian refuge elements, and ADA curb ramps. - Locations listed (7 total): - RRFB treatments (orange on map): Manor Blvd & Crosby St; Manor Blvd & (Doran/Douance) St (street name unclear); Dutton Ave near Arbor Dr; Farnsworth St & Devonshire Ave (noted as a new crosswalk). - PHB treatments (red on map): 150th Ave & Lark St; East 14th St & Lorain Blvd. - Crosswalk enhancement only (black on map): Farnsworth St & Chapel Ave. - Schedule stated: begin design early 2026, complete design by end of 2027, start construction after design, and complete construction by 2029 (calendar year, per staff). - Budget stated: total project cost $2.0 million, with 10% local match ($200,000). - Committee Q&A / positions and concerns: - A committee member expressed appreciation that multiple improvements were located in the Manor area and supported moving/realigning a crosswalk away from a driveway. - Daylighting / red curb policy (AB 413): - A committee member asked whether the city would paint curbs red to enforce the “20 feet” daylighting setback near crosswalks. - Public Works Director stated implementation focus has been primarily downtown/painted-parking areas and that painting red citywide may not be sustainable; the city is aiming to build compliance culture similar to fire hydrant no-parking expectations. Staff noted red curb can be considered in locations where problematic parking is observed. - 150th & Lark jurisdiction/cost: A committee member asked whether Alameda County would share costs because part of 150th is unincorporated; staff responded the street (to back of sidewalk) is within San Leandro, though properties beyond sidewalk may be unincorporated. - Farnsworth & Chapel pedestrian activity: The Mayor raised concern about high pedestrian use (marketplace/church area) and asked about prioritizing red curb/daylighting there due to turning movements and visibility; staff said they would consider additional measures if it becomes problematic. - Funding clarification: staff explained HSIP funds are federal when the award is over $1 million (this project is), administered through the state on a reimbursement basis. - East 14th & Lorain PHB rationale: the Mayor noted proximity to signalized intersections and asked about criteria and spacing. Staff cited FHWA guidance (volumes/speeds/lanes) and explained the location was elevated from RRFB to PHB because additional severe injuries occurred in/around 2022 at that crosswalk. The City Engineer added that placement is driven by where pedestrians actually cross—between “generators” and “attractors” (e.g., retail, clinic/services, residential, and BRT stop proximity). - Staff clarified that a previously installed rapid-flash device at East 14th/Lorain was temporary during BRT construction and is not currently present (per Senior Engineer Nicole Castellano). Key Outcomes - No formal actions or votes; both items were presentations and committee discussion. - Staff were implicitly directed through discussion to: - Continue/strengthen utility coordination to reduce post-paving street cuts, with an expressed council expectation of avoiding cuts for approximately five years where feasible. - Consider daylighting/red curb treatments at crosswalk enhancement sites if parking behavior creates safety risks (with current implementation focused downtown). - Next steps communicated by staff: - Hesperian project: proceed toward bid/award (mid-January bid window; mid–late February award target) and phased construction activities through summer 2027. - HSIP Cycle 12: begin design early 2026, complete design end of 2027, and complete construction by calendar year 2029.

The San Leandro City Council met on December 16, 2025 (the meeting began on December 15 but extended into the early hours of December 16). Key actions included providing direction on a proposed rent stabilization ordinance, reconsidering the release of a 2024 revenue measure survey, authorizing further exploration of a 2026 revenue measure, and approving a motion to video-record closed sessions. The meeting was marked by lengthy public testimony and council debate. Consent Calendar - Unanimously approved (6-0, with Council Member Azevedo initially absent) all consent calendar items, including item 5F earmarking nearly $2.2 million in homelessness grants. Public Comments & Testimony - Non-agenda public comments: - Noelle and Mason Rashid (Davis West property owners) described repeated vehicle collisions at Cascade and Tudor Road, causing significant property damage. They requested traffic mitigation, citing a faulty intersection design and four accidents in two and a half years. - Rob Rich urged the council to periodically remind the public about the $150,000 rewards for unsolved murders, marking the 11th anniversary of Joel Ramirez's death. - Douglas Spalding commented generally about collective trauma and urged the council to seek restorative facilitation. - Rent stabilization public comments (25 speakers in person and online): - Supporters: Ginny Madsen, Douglas Spalding, John Meadows‑Schwartz, Mayna Young (partial support with caveats), Richard Becker (via Carol Haberkoss), Emily Rich, Deborah Acosta, and Mike McGuire argued for strong rent protections, a 2025 base year, a 3% cap, and enhanced enforcement. They emphasized tenant stability and preventing rent spikes. - Opponents: Chris Tipton (East Bay Rental Housing Association), Anthony Adesi, Sandeep Sukhija, John Sullivan, Jennifer Rizzo (California Apartment Association), Chuyit Lian, Derek Barnes (East Bay Rental Housing Association), and Emily Grego (San Leandro Chamber of Commerce) argued that strict rent control would discourage investment, reduce housing supply, increase litigation, and hurt mom‑and‑pop landlords. They cited rising insurance, utilities, and maintenance costs. - Several speakers addressed enforcement models and fee structures. - Closed session recording public comment: One speaker (Douglas Spalding) spoke on item 10A and 10B, urging transparency and release of survey data. Discussion Items - Rent Stabilization Ordinance (Item 8): - Community Development Director Tom Liao presented three enforcement options: passive (no rent registry, $1.2M/year), mid‑tier (basic enforcement, $1.9M/year), and enhanced (full registry + stabilization, $2.4M/year). The enhanced option required a general fund loan of $1.3–$2.2 million over 3–6 years. Staff recommended proceeding with enhanced enforcement and a full cost‑recovery model. - Council clarified key points: the 2‑FTE rent registry staff was already budgeted ($648K); the new costs were the delta for stabilization. Staff reported that a 65% CPI cap would almost always be lower than 3%. - After discussion, council gave guidance (by consensus of three council members, with the mayor agreeing): rent increase cap of 3% or 65% of CPI, whichever is lower; base rent tied to 2025; and confirmation of the enhanced enforcement option with the full cost‑recovery model. Council also confirmed no capital improvement pass‑throughs, no banking, and no exemptions for small properties. - Item 10A: Reconsideration – Release of June 2024 Revenue Measure Survey: - Mayor Gonzalez’s motion to reconsider (to allow a vote on releasing the survey) passed 5‑2 (Aguilar and Azevedo opposed). - After further discussion, council approved a resolution to waive attorney‑client privilege for the limited purpose of releasing the draft survey results (the document had been prepared under privilege and was not previously public). Vote: 5‑2 (Aguilar and Azevedo opposed). - Item 10B: Reconsideration – Explore Revenue Measures for November 2026 Ballot: - Mayor Gonzalez’s motion to reconsider passed 6‑1 (Azevedo opposed). - Council Member Aguilar initially moved to continue exploring a revenue measure. Council Member Viveros Walton substituted a motion adding that the city attorney’s privilege be waived for the same level of survey data as released in 10A. After debate, the substitute motion passed 4‑3 (Aguilar, Bowen, Azevedo opposed). Staff will engage Clifford Moss for outreach and survey work (first phase already budgeted at $92,000). - Item 10C: Video and Audio Recording of Closed Sessions: - Council Member Simon proposed directing staff to video‑record closed sessions, with recordings held by the city attorney for accuracy/investigations. The city attorney explained legal constraints under the Brown Act: recordings (tied to the minute book) are only available to council members or a court if a Brown Act violation is alleged. Council Member Viveros Walton expressed concerns about cost, data security, and lack of investigator access. - After a motion to call the question passed 4‑3, the main motion passed 4‑3 (Simon, Aguilar, Bolt, Azevedo yes; Gonzalez, Bowen, Viveros Walton no). A formal resolution will be drafted. Key Outcomes - Rent stabilization direction: Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance with a 3% or 65% CPI cap (whichever lower), a 2025 base year, no capital improvement pass‑throughs, no banking, and full cost recovery via an enhanced enforcement model. Staff will return in February/March 2026 with a fee study and finalized budget. - Revenue measure survey release: The June 2024 survey results will be released to the public (limited waiver of attorney‑client privilege). - Future revenue measure exploration: Council authorized continued exploration of a potential November 2026 ballot measure, including a consulting agreement with Clifford Moss, with survey data to be released absent further privilege claims (4‑3 vote). - Closed session recording: Council approved the recording of closed sessions; recordings will be retained by the city attorney and governed by Brown Act restrictions (4‑3). A formal resolution will be brought to a future meeting. - General: The meeting extended past 11 p.m. with multiple extensions. Council thanked staff for their professionalism.

The San Leandro City Council met in regular session on Monday, December 8, 2025, beginning at 7:05 PM and adjourning at 8:56 PM. Actions included unanimous approval of the Consent Calendar, unanimous approval of an 18-month extension of animal shelter services with the East Bay SPCA (with significant budget impacts discussed), and extensive public and council discussion about the proper procedure for scheduling disciplinary hearings requested by the Vice Mayor—resulting in votes to schedule both the disciplinary hearing date and a separate meeting to consider waiving attorney-client privilege regarding an investigative report. Consent Calendar - Approved unanimously (motion by Councilmember Viveros-Walton, second by Councilmember Azevedo). - Closed session report: No reportable action, though staff received direction. Public Comments & Testimony - Lucas (Zoom) (Consent Calendar): urged that if travel funds were found to have been improperly spent, responsible parties should reimburse the City; suggested adding such consequences to the handbook/conduct policy. - Douglas Spaulding (Zoom) (Consent Calendar): raised concerns about board/commission vacancies and participation, including an at-large appointee to the Community Police Review Board who “practically never goes,” and suggested adding San Lorenzo USD representation to the Recreation & Parks board. Discussion Items 5A — East Bay SPCA Animal Control/Shelter Services Contract Extension (Police Department) Presenter: Police Captain Ali Khan (with Animal Control Supervisor Ed Bell available for technical questions) - Background/need: San Leandro has relied on East Bay SPCA for shelter services since 2021. Staff conducted a multi-county survey (began March 2025, concluded September 2025) and found East Bay SPCA was the only viable provider due to capacity/staffing constraints elsewhere. - Service data presented: - Average intake reported for July–October: about 34 animals/month, including an average of 16 intakes by animal control officers and 14 brought in by the public. - Animal-related calls for service (through October): 1,972. - Shelter outcome metric stated: 93% live release rate. - Staff stated East Bay SPCA has taken 300–400 neonatal kittens that are not counted against San Leandro’s contract cap. - Cost/budget discussion (key figures stated): - Anticipated cost for FY 2026 and FY 2027 stated as $398,500 per year. - For FY 2026: funded via adopted appropriation of $217,500 plus $181,000 in salary savings (as presented). - For FY 2027: adopted appropriation of $217,500 plus an additional $181,000 appropriation to be considered in the mid-cycle update. - Action requested: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2, extending the agreement 18 months through June 30, 2027, and increasing the agreement by $579,000, not to exceed $1,517,000. - Pricing/threshold clarification raised by the public: - Lucas (Zoom) asserted the proposed agreement lowered a base threshold to 250 animals, increasing step charges earlier; staff responded that the 250 figure reflected a six-month period and that, combined, it aligned with the annualized volume (staff stated it “does bring it up to…500”). Council questions/discussion highlights: - Council clarified statistics (e.g., “dog vs people” as dog bites to humans; separate reporting for health department). - Discussion that San Leandro has no leash law for cats, contributing to a practice of generally avoiding “catnapping”/unnecessary impounds. - Public education concerns: Councilmember Bolt described constituent confusion about why some strays cannot be dropped directly at SPCA without going through Animal Control; staff described “checks and balance” on intake and efforts to increase reunification. Public comment on 5A: - Douglas Spaulding (Zoom): questioned why the additional $181,000 required for FY 2026 and FY 2027 seemed disproportionate compared to intake increases; asked whether cost increases were inflationary or service-related. - Susan (Zoom): requested a more “balanced approach,” expressing concern about lack of support for community members addressing feral cat issues; referenced Hayward’s relationship with Animal Fix Clinic. - Lucas (Zoom): questioned the stepped fee schedule and asked why thresholds/charges appeared to change; urged greater transparency and fiscal prudence. 5B — Disciplinary Hearing Scheduling (Councilmembers Aguilar and Simon) Introduced by: City Attorney Rich Piarrotta - Procedural reset explained: The City Attorney stated that a prior action at the Nov. 3, 2025 meeting related to discipline was not properly agendized, rendering the entire motion null and void under Robert’s Rules of Order (as adopted by the Council). - Legal/process framework discussed: - Discipline requests must be handled in open session; City Attorney cited Brown Act limitations and related case law. - The investigative report discussed was described as attorney-client privileged; releasing it would require a separate, properly noticed action to waive privilege. - Council discussed the disciplinary options described as A–D (discipline short of censure) and whether training could be required (training could be urged/asked for; enforceability and “due process” implications were discussed if conditioning restoration of privileges). Public comments on 5B (positions and themes): - Sarah Bailey (in person): urged release of a redacted investigative report; argued the public cannot meaningfully participate without facts; expressed a position that alleged misconduct should be addressed transparently. - Leo T. West (in person): criticized the lack of public facts; characterized the dispute as a “soap opera” and urged new elections. - Mike McGuire (in person): requested seeing the report and facts; expressed a preference for resolving differences through elections and civil discussion rather than escalating conflict. - Douglas Spaulding (Zoom): urged release of the report; stated scheduling discipline without details was frustrating; expressed support for moving forward after the rent stabilization meeting. - Deborah Acosta, League of San Leandro Voters (Zoom): urged a public vote on waiving privilege and releasing a redacted report; argued discipline should not proceed without public facts; requested additional transparency measures (including publishing emailed agenda comments). - Rob Rich (Zoom): urged named councilmembers to listen with empathy and consider unconscious misogyny; asked the council to return focus to governance. - Lucas (Zoom): argued delays undermined accountability; urged release of relevant materials. - Melissa Wong (Zoom): criticized process confusion; urged training for council and residents; cautioned delays allow speculation. - Laura Blumenthal, League of San Leandro Voters (Zoom): thanked the City Attorney for clarifying procedural errors; urged moving to completion and releasing the report. - Whitney Walker (Zoom): asked for transparency and accountability; urged release of the investigation results. Vice Mayor Bowen statement (selected factual points stated): - Said she filed an HR complaint on Jan. 6, 2025, after approximately eight months of what she described as ongoing misconduct. - Stated that “nationwide, 81% of women and 43% of men” have reported some form of sexual harassment or assault in their lifetime (as part of her remarks about reporting and accountability). - Expressed a position that her goal was restorative and to “course correct” behavior through accountability, potentially including training and other measures. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar: Approved unanimously. - Item 5A (East Bay SPCA contract extension): Approved unanimously. - Outcome: Authorized an 18-month extension through June 30, 2027 and an increased not-to-exceed amount of $1,517,000 (as presented). - Item 5B (disciplinary scheduling): - Disciplinary hearing date set (including up to censure): Council voted 4–3 to schedule disciplinary hearings applying to both Councilmember Aguilar and Councilmember Simon on Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2026. - Vote tally stated: Yes (4) = Vice Mayor Bowen, Mayor Gonzalez, Councilmember Bolt, Councilmember Viveros-Walton; No (3) = Councilmembers Simon, Aguilar, Azevedo. - Waiver-of-privilege item scheduled: Council voted 5–2 to agendize Jan. 5, 2026 for discussion and possible action on whether to waive attorney-client privilege regarding the Oct. 31, 2025 investigative report (as referenced during discussion) to support the censure-capable process. Closing / Adjournment - The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:56 PM, honoring the late Stephen Cassidy and citing his civic contributions, including work related to school funding “to the tune of half a billion dollars,” support for Lit San Leandro, advocacy for 1% for the arts, the Truth is Beauty statue, and Measure VV. Flags were stated to be lowered to half-staff for one week in his recognition.

The San Leandro City Council met Monday, December 1 (called to order at 7:01 p.m., adjourned 10:03 p.m.) with extensive community and business recognitions, followed by routine approvals on the Consent Calendar and two major action items related to public disclosure of a 2024 revenue survey draft and whether to continue exploring a 2026 revenue measure. Attendance at roll call: Mayor Juan Gonzalez, Council Members Aguilar, Azevedo, Bolt, Simon, Viveros Walton present; Vice Mayor Bowen absent. Closed Session Report-Out - City Attorney reported no reportable actions. - Announced a future agenda item (Dec. 8) related to Vice Mayor Bowen’s request for discipline; stated there was no majority direction to waive privilege on the report referenced. Recognitions & Awards (Community Partners, District Awards, and Excellence Awards) - Mayor highlighted that downtown “free” events relied on sponsorships and estimated 42,000+ attendees downtown across events. - Recognized downtown event sponsors contributing $5,000+, including: - Chase / JPMorgan Chase (recognized; not present) - Port of Oakland (speaker: Luana Espana), described sponsorship and volunteer “sweat equity” for events such as Cherry Festival and SL Pride - Prologis (recognized; not present) – $5,000 - Reyes Coca-Cola Bottling (recognized; not present) – $5,000 plus nearly $2,000 in donated product - Kaiser Permanente – $10,000 (speaker: “MG”/Mary Grace) - Waste Management – $10,000 (speakers: Sean Das, Virginia Harrington) - Ava Community Energy – $10,000 (speaker: James Cunningham) - ACI – $10,000 (speaker: Bernie) - Optimist Club of San Leandro – $25,000 (speaker: Robert Herron) - District leadership awards: - District 1 (Viveros Walton): Lynn Drogo / TAGS (Teen Advocacy Going Strong); TAGS described serving ages 13–24, operating at 1711 E. 14th St, and noted Giving Tuesday. - District 2 (Azevedo): Dan Dillman, President/Artistic Director of San Leandro Curtain Call / Historic BAL Theatre; spoke about supporting arts and mentoring youth; asked for community support. - District 3 (Aguilar): Rob Roby, service on Human Services Commission; recognized work supporting seniors and community events. - District 4 (Simon): Melissa Wong (remote remarks), active in Washington Manor HOA, budget transparency, and advocating participatory budgeting. - District 6 (Bolt): Menica (surname not provided in transcript), recognized for pro-democracy organizing; stated 10 people attended an initial Presidents’ Day “No Kings” event and 2,300 demonstrators attended June 14; thanked multiple community groups. - District 5 (presented by Mayor for Vice Mayor Bowen): Eve King, founder of Juniper Corner (nonprofit begun in 2023); described a planned 6,000+ sq. ft. permanent play space at 1900 E. 14th St with planned opening Feb. 2026. - Mayor recognition: - Janine Hanelt: led Relay for Life team “Walk a Mile for Kyle” for 20+ years, raising $100,000+ for cancer research. - Mayor’s Awards for Excellence: - Small Organization: Palin’s Martial Arts (two San Leandro locations; programs described from age 3 to adults) - Medium Organization: Asian Health Services (founded 1974; referenced 51st anniversary; expansion including dental/mental health near City Hall and a PACE Center planned for late 2026) - Large Business: Energy Recovery (speaker: Rodney Clement), noted company moved to San Leandro in 2000; referenced prior peak of $2B market cap and stated company grew from 5 employees and “burning $5M” to generating “about $150M” in cash - Innovation & Entrepreneur: CoreShell Technologies (speaker: Cicely Lee), described EV battery development and pilot manufacturing line in San Leandro; stated hope for automaker vehicles using batteries by 2026–2027 - Service awards: - Councilmember Viveros Walton: 5 years (Library Historical Commission; Council service) - Brody Scotland: 5 years (Arts Commission / Arts, Culture & Library Commission) - Councilmember Aguilar: 10 years (Human Services Commission + Council) - Jen Wachison: 15 years (Senior Commission; meetings third Thursday 10 a.m.–12 p.m.; noted December hiatus; work on Age-Friendly initiative) - Tom Silva: 20 years (Rent Review Board; not present) Consent Calendar - Approved unanimously (Vice Mayor absent). - Public commenter Douglas Spaulding (Zoom) highlighted “nearly $100,000 in library grants” (items 5C–5E) and asked about: - Item 5A contract with Dillard Environmental for debris cleaning (requested clarification) - Item 5F (LINKS shuttle): suggested exploring minimal fares (noted “90,000 riders per year”) - Item 5G Cherry Festival: suggested evaluating vendor fees - Public commenter Alvaro Ramos (Zoom) urged LINKS planning to prioritize local business, citing opposition to supporting major employers such as Amazon/Walmart and referencing boycotts and inflation impacts. City Manager Report - Cookies with the Cops toy drive: Dec. 2, 5:30–8:30 p.m. in front of Police Department; toys to support families via Davis Street Family Resource Center. - 28th “It’s a Wonderful Night” downtown: Friday (date not stated in transcript), begins 5:00 p.m.; tree lighting 5:30 p.m. at Estudillo Plaza. - Promoted downtown Augmented Reality Art Walk; map at sanleandro.org/publicart. Public Comments & Testimony (Non-agenda) - Douglas Spaulding noted World AIDS Day; urged transparency and requested release of a report referenced earlier; also previewed concerns about a citizen committee developing a $150 million parcel tax and stated he would raise an alternative proposal later. - Emily Grego (San Leandro Chamber of Commerce CEO) congratulated awardees, emphasized business contributions, and promoted upcoming Chamber events. - Jesse Rubin (League of San Leandro Voters): - Urged Council action (even if report not released) regarding findings about Councilmember behavior, citing credibility and the Council handbook. - Stated Councilmember Azevedo should step down due to FBI charges, while acknowledging “innocent until proven guilty”; characterized continued service as harming public trust. Discussion Items Action Item 10A — Limited Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege (June 2024 Revenue Measure Tracking Survey Draft) - Staff explained the document was a draft June 2024 community survey results presentation prepared during exploration of a potential Nov. 2024 revenue measure; Council directed staff on July 15, 2024 to cease the Nov. 2024 ballot effort, so the draft was never finalized or released. - A Public Records Act request had been received for the draft; staff stated only Council could waive the privilege. - Public comment: - Douglas Spaulding asked who requested the document and how to request it; Clerk explained PRA requests can be submitted via website form or email. - Sarah Bailey opposed release of additional survey data beyond what is public, arguing it could be used to support an “unjust” citizen-led parcel tax campaign. - Vote outcome: Motion to adopt the resolution failed. - Yes: Gonzalez, Viveros Walton, Bolt (3) - No: Azevedo (1) - Abstain: Simon, Aguilar (2) - Absent: Bowen - Mayor stated intent to seek reconsideration at the next regular meeting (Dec. 15, per council discussion). Action Item 10B — Exploring Potential Revenue Measures for November 2026 - Staff presented: - Council previously supported exploration (special meeting Feb. 2025, per staff) and staff proposed $500,000 during the budget process, which Council denied, requesting staff return with year-end results. - Preliminary (unaudited) FY 2024–25 General Fund update: amended budget projected $20.7M use of reserves; actual projected use was $5.9M, with $9.1M encumbered and carried over; projected ending fund balance $69.6M. - Proposed “next steps” costs discussed included $92,000 for outreach/survey work (noted as already within an existing contract authorization), plus additional potential costs if proceeding further (informational campaign items and other costs shown up to $321,500, with election costs occurring regardless). - Staff stated the operating budget gap was about $15M, while infrastructure needs were described as in the hundreds of millions (staff did not provide a precise figure during the meeting). - Public comment themes: - Several speakers supported continuing exploration and emphasized focusing on roads and public safety, with repeated references to the Washington Manor fire station and roadway needs. - Some speakers argued polling was unnecessary and urged immediate movement toward a measure; others supported polling and asked that results be made public to help community campaigning. - Douglas Spaulding supported continuing exploration but argued against “two measures,” preferred a city-led measure, and proposed narrowing scope (e.g., fire stations and Neptune Drive). - Council deliberation: - Multiple Councilmembers expressed that the City’s infrastructure conditions warrant a revenue measure. - Councilmember Azevedo opposed continuing exploration, stating residents had already indicated they did not want to raise taxes and argued taxes were already too high. - A motion was made and seconded to continue exploring a revenue measure, but the motion was later clarified to include conducting the work under attorney-client privilege (with possible future waiver by Council). - Mayor objected to conducting the survey process under attorney-client privilege, expressing concern about transparency and questioning legal applicability to polling work. - Vote outcome: Motion to continue exploring revenue measures under attorney-client privilege failed. - Tally stated as 3 yes, 2 no, 1 abstention, with Vice Mayor Bowen absent (individual vote breakdown not read into the record for this item). - Mayor stated intent to seek reconsideration at the next meeting. Key Outcomes - Consent Calendar approved unanimously (Bowen absent). - Action Item 10A (release of draft June 2024 survey results) failed: 3-1-2 (Yes-No-Abstain), Bowen absent; Mayor announced plan to seek reconsideration Dec. 15. - Action Item 10B (continue exploring 2026 revenue measure) failed after amendment/clarification that work proceed under attorney-client privilege: 3 yes, 2 no, 1 abstention, Bowen absent; Mayor announced plan to seek reconsideration. - Meeting recessed at 8:24 p.m. and returned at 8:25 p.m. Council Reports - Council Members Aguilar, Azevedo, Bolt reported attending the National League of Cities City Summit in Salt Lake City (dates stated by Aguilar as Nov. 20–22; Aguilar noted he paid out of pocket). Topics included workforce development, volunteerism, homelessness systems, and civic leadership. - Councilmember Aguilar and public commenters noted World AIDS Day (Dec. 1) and spoke to its significance. Adjournment - Meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m.

The San Leandro Senior Commission met on November 20, 2025, beginning at 10:01 a.m. and adjourning at 12:15 p.m. The meeting included updates on senior services and upcoming events, extensive public testimony about FlexRide fixed-route shuttle barriers (including elimination of “wave stops”), a presentation on the new CityServe Tri-Valley Ride Care transportation partnership launching in January 2026, and an Age-Friendly Initiative progress report with statistics (e.g., digital literacy participation and FlexRide membership/ridership goals). Consent Calendar - Approved (via roll call) bundled items to approve the November 20, 2025 agenda and the minutes of the October 9, 2025 special meeting (noting an agenda/labeling “version issue” confusion during the motion). Public Comments & Testimony - Hilda Harris (Flex program participant) expressed concern/opposition to ending the FlexRide “WAVE policy” (notice received Oct. 13, effective Nov. 1), stating designated stops are too far apart and that her nearest stop would be about a mile from where she previously waved the bus. - Sky Wu expressed concern about FlexRide barriers: limited schedules, stops that require long walks for seniors with mobility aids, missed pickups when riders are not directly at the sign, and resulting waits of an hour or more. Speaker also stated Flex delivers about 2,000–3,000 service loops annually and that despite about 14,000 seniors in San Leandro, only a couple hundred are enrolled/actively using the program. - Sarah Bailey (Chair, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission) highlighted BPAC presentations on transportation safety projects, encouraging commissioners/public to review BPAC agenda materials on: - East Bay Greenway (protected bikeway and pedestrian crossing improvements along East 14th, turning at San Leandro Boulevard) - Hesperian protected bike lane/crosswalk improvements - Highway Safety Improvement Program concepts such as HAWK (pedestrian hybrid beacon) signals - City staff invited FlexRide commenters to stay for later discussion on the FlexRide assessment. Presentations CityServe Tri-Valley — Ride Care Program (new transportation partnership) - Catherine Gilbreth (Ride Care Program Manager) and Jeanette Pace (Director of Senior Services) presented a new pilot partnership to provide free, door-through-door transportation. - Target eligibility (as presented): adults 18+ with a disability and older adults age 50+; riders must be ambulatory/relatively independent (walkers/rollators/canes/leg braces accepted). - Service model: volunteer drivers pick up at home, take riders to medical/pharmacy/grocery/social-services destinations, and wait at the appointment location for the return trip (“no corner to stand on; no phone call needed”). Volunteers may attend appointments if requested (e.g., for hearing/visual impairments). - Volunteer vetting: application, onboarding, DMV record, DOJ/FBI background checks, and verification of license/insurance/registration. Insurance coverage remains with the volunteer’s insurance, with rider/driver waivers. - Service area stated: multiple Alameda County cities including San Leandro (among others). Presenter cited demographics and noted (as stated) that in San Leandro about 62% of residents are 18–64. - Timeline: outreach and enrollment underway; program expected to begin providing rides in January 2026. - Pedro Naranjo (Senior Commission Secretary / city staff) added context: - Partnership emerged from Age-Friendly assessment feedback and is funded as a pilot using Alameda County Measure BB paratransit allocation (approved by Alameda County Transportation Commission). - City will build metrics/evaluation; if effective, San Leandro will seek continued funding through annual ACTC proposals. - Commissioners asked about contact info, volunteer recruitment, care coordination staffing, volunteer/vehicle vetting, accessibility (including deaf/ASL support), and capacity targets (CityServe stated 32 volunteer drivers currently and a goal of about 50). Discussion Items City staff report & upcoming events (Pedro Naranjo) - City offices closure reminder: closed between Christmas and New Year’s, except essential services (e.g., police, water pollution control). - Senior Commission vacancy: following Commissioner McHenry’s transition, a nominee was placed on a City Council agenda but withdrew due to moving out of town; recruitment will restart (referenced Council Member Bowen’s district). - Homeless Point-in-Time Count: Thursday, January 22, 2026, approximately 5:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. Volunteers needed; contact Elsa Castillo (staff) for registration. Staff described field teams (pairs/trios), optional surveys, and onsite HQ support roles (coffee/donuts, check-in). - Thanksgiving Luncheon: scheduled for Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025, 12:00–2:00 p.m.; partnership with Spectrum Community Services. Staff reported 168 confirmed attendees at the time of the meeting and invited commissioner volunteers. - Senior Services Expo: December 4, 2025, 1:00–3:00 p.m. (focused on programs/services in the Senior Community Center building, distinct from the June senior fair). - Program highlights shared via photos and statistics: - AC Transit/ACTC training events (Clipper card and mobility training) - Health checks and fall prevention activities - Digital literacy classes (Tech Exchange) - Day trips restarted: first trip to Oakland Museum had about 14 participants; Oakland Zoo charter bus previously transported over 50 people. November 2025 Age-Friendly Initiative Update (Pedro Naranjo) - Plan Sustainability - Participation in Alameda County Age-Friendly Communities Council (meeting Oct. 17), including committee work and partner spotlights. - Age-friendly webpage updated; outreach at community events (e.g., “Second Fridays,” BASIB autumn fair). - SOS Meals on Wheels agreed to distribute the monthly senior calendar to Meals on Wheels participants. - De-escalation training “save the date” pending; commissioners/volunteers invited. - Personal Protection - Community Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Training Program (UC Berkeley/California Walks) report finalized and posted; staff planning next steps and expected to present findings at a Senior Commission meeting in early 2026. - Emergency evacuation transportation pilot planning: using FlexRide shuttles during shelter activations; design phase with subject matter experts targeted for late January/early February 2026, with a goal to run a drill in the Jan–June period. - Great California ShakeOut participation described as a “drop, cover” exercise; evacuation drill planned next. - Digital literacy (Tech Exchange): 4 workshops completed; each workshop had 6 classes; 82 individuals completed the program (in English, Spanish, Cantonese), and each participant received a refurbished free laptop. - City Transportation/Engineering presentation to Senior Commission scheduled for February 2026 (topics to include pedestrian safety infrastructure programs). - Health & Wellness - Virtual caregiver trainings (Healthy Brain Initiative) started Oct. 17 and run through year-end; staff reported low participation and sought ideas for improved outreach. - Transportation — FlexRide fixed-route assessment and “wave stop” change - City is conducting a comprehensive FlexRide fixed-route shuttle assessment (consultant: Pear Street Consulting / Mike King). Staff described three focus groups completed: current riders, potential riders, and drivers, plus an active survey (paper copies at Senior Community Center and library; also online) and key-informant interviews. - Staff stated the current fixed-route design includes 15 stops per loop and about a 1-hour loop. - Staff explained the wave stop policy was eliminated primarily due to safety concerns (whether pull-over locations are safe for riders/drivers/traffic) and noted operational impacts on keeping to schedule. - In response to rider impacts, staff described an interim approach: for locations where riders previously waved, MV Transportation will assess whether a wave stop location is safe; if deemed safe, it may be temporarily allowed pending the full redesign. - Staff stated FlexRide currently has 717 enrolled members and a current-year target of 8,119 rides, with an annual goal to increase membership and utilization by at least 5%. - Staff also described biweekly meetings with MV Transportation to address specific rider complaints (missed stops, late shuttles, pass-bys) immediately rather than waiting for long-term changes. - Commissioners discussed promotional challenges (program naming and confusion between fixed-route vs. “on-demand/Uber-like” service) and requested opportunities for commissioners to ride the FlexRide shuttle to better understand and promote it. - Social Connection - Senior day trips restarted: next trip scheduled December 17, 2025 to Filoli Historic House & Garden (noted as weather- and mobility-dependent due to outdoor walking). Additional Commission Actions / Planning - Lunch with Seniors: Commission discussed reviving “lunch with seniors” and inviting Supervisor Lena Tam (and potentially other elected officials) in 2026, subject to scheduling coordination. - Senior Stories (America 250): Commissioner Shalini proposed using the computer lab to help seniors upload stories to America250.org (prompt described as future-focused; formats include text/video/picture). Public comment suggested partnering with local schools for intergenerational support (students assisting seniors). Key Outcomes - Approved consent items (agenda and October 9, 2025 special meeting minutes) by roll call. - Received and discussed public testimony expressing concerns about FlexRide service design and the removal of wave stops; staff committed to interim stop safety assessments and ongoing operational fixes while the broader assessment proceeds. - Transportation program developments: - Announced Ride Care transportation pilot partnership beginning January 2026 (enrollment underway). - Confirmed FlexRide assessment underway through Jan. 2026, with consultant presentation to the commission expected early 2026. - Confirmed key upcoming dates: - Thanksgiving Luncheon: Nov. 26, 2025 (12:00–2:00 p.m.), 168 confirmed. - Senior Services Expo: Dec. 4, 2025 (1:00–3:00 p.m.). - Filoli day trip: Dec. 17, 2025. - Homeless Point-in-Time Count: Jan. 22, 2026 (5:00–9:30 a.m.). - Transportation/Engineering staff presentation: Feb. 2026. - Adjourned by roll call vote at 12:15 p.m.

The San Leandro Rent Review Board met Tuesday, October 28, 2025, convening its first meeting in over a year (members discussed the last meeting as Oct. 22, 2024). The Board approved prior minutes, elected its Chair and Vice Chair, and reviewed the FY 2024–2025 annual report on the Rent Review Ordinance (RRO) and Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance (TRAO). Discussion repeatedly focused on (1) why the Board receives few/no formal hearings, (2) the role of ECHO Housing in counseling/mediation, (3) limitations of rent market data sources, and (4) how state rent cap law (AB 1482) interacts with San Leandro’s 7% hearing threshold. The meeting adjourned at 8:31 PM. Consent Calendar - Approval of minutes (Oct. 22, 2024): Approved 5-0. - Note/discrepancy raised: Chair Silva questioned whether there had been a meeting after Oct. 22, 2024 due to his recollection (related to chair/vice chair elections). Staff stated the last meeting was Oct. 22, 2024 and prior chair/vice chair elections occurred in Oct. 2023. Public commenter Ginny Madison stated she believed there were “two meetings that year,” including an “extension of one of the last meetings,” but no date was confirmed. Public Comments & Testimony - Douglas Spalding (housing provider/landlord): Questioned the Board’s purpose given infrequent meetings; stated tenants fear retaliation and may not believe they will get a “fair shake.” Expressed a position supporting dissolving the Rent Review Board and argued for a professional housing officer/adjudicator instead of the Board. - Ginny Madison (tenant advocate; stated she has attended since 2014/2015): Expressed a position that the Board needs more “teeth” and that tenants do not believe they are supported. Supported a stronger ordinance (referred to as an “RSO”/rent stabilization ordinance) and stated the current framework relies too heavily on Chair Silva. - Mark Yanowitz/Janowitz (tenant advocate and small landlord): Suggested the Board/city consider lowering the 7% rent increase threshold that triggers eligibility for a complaint/hearing, as a way to increase use of the process; noted tenants may feel insecure about bringing complaints. - Maria Cerveño (San Leandro resident; translated): Expressed a position in favor of staying in San Leandro and remaining in her current community with her four children; stated she feels comfortable with current rent and community. - Ana Maria Diaz (property manager): Reported hearing mixed frustrations from residents but stated residents are generally comfortable in the community; expressed a position supporting San Leandro continuing to improve for residents and landlords. - Roberta McClish (resident at St. Maurice Gardens; disabled; Section 8 participant): Expressed she feels safe in San Leandro and at her gated property; stated she could not afford rent without Section 8 and would likely become homeless otherwise; expressed positive views of recent management improvements. Discussion Items 5A — Election of Chair and Vice Chair - Chair: Tom Silva elected/continued as Chair, 5-0. - Vice Chair: (Vice Chair continued; name not stated in transcript during the motion) elected/continued as Vice Chair, 5-0. 5B — FY 2024–2025 Annual Review: Rent Review Ordinance & Tenant Relocation Assistance Staff report highlights (reporting period: July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025): - Rent Review Ordinance (RRO): - 28 inquiries received by ECHO Housing related to the RRO. - 20 inquiries from tenants; 8 from landlords. - 11 inquiries were ineligible for a Rent Review Board hearing. - Eligible cases were reported as resolved through mutual agreement between tenant and landlord. - 3 cases involved rent increase notices being revised to comply with ordinance requirements. - 0 Rent Review Board hearings occurred during the report period. - Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance (TRAO): - 19 inquiries received by ECHO related to TRAO. - 12 from tenants; 7 from housing providers/property owners. - 2 households reported receiving relocation assistance. - 3 referred to legal services. - 11 inquiries were not eligible under the ordinance. - Rent data: Staff stated average rents continue to grow and San Leandro’s rents remain slightly below the Alameda County average. - Data sources discussed: Yardi Matrix and RentCafe. Staff noted Yardi Matrix data represented approximately 2,919 units in San Leandro (a subset of the market). Board questions and concerns: - Board members questioned whether the report sufficiently “assessed effectiveness” as required by the enabling rules, and requested more context such as: - Historical comparisons (pre-COVID years; pre/post AB 1482). - Whether RRO and TRAO inquiries overlap (staff stated they did not analyze overlap and acknowledged it could be added in the future). - Limitations and coverage of Yardi/RentCafe data vs. smaller landlords not captured. - Correcting a typo noted by a board member: AB 1482 date listed as 2029 should be 2019. - Staff explained ECHO’s role includes education/mediation; many issues are resolved once parties are informed about notice rules and state law caps. Public comment on Item 5B: - Sierra Diaz (landlord): Explained Yardi reporting often uses A/B/C property categories and smaller buildings may fall into “C.” Expressed concern that lowering allowable increases could reduce property improvements; provided cost examples (speaker statements): security costs “close to $8,000/month,” trash bills “$10,000–$12,000/month,” and contamination fees of “$87 per item” flagged by trash-company cameras. - Mark Yanowitz/Janowitz: Argued the annual report should explicitly address effectiveness of the program. Stated the city’s rent registry should improve data quality. Stated concerns about property maintenance should be addressed through code enforcement and that proposed rent stabilization policies should allow petitions to ensure landlords obtain a fair/constitutional return. - Ginny Madison: Stated she receives frequent calls from tenants trying to understand their options and asserted that ECHO Housing’s call-handling across multiple jurisdictions may limit detail. Asked to see what ECHO’s “grid”/records look like and wanted more detail on what callers are told (including mobile home-related guidance). Shared anecdotal examples: a tenant at Gateway facing a stated 20% rent increase; a unit listed at $2,199 remained vacant 3 months then reduced to $1,895; tenants moving from downtown San Leandro to the Central Valley for cheaper rent. Board deliberation themes: - Whether the program is functioning primarily as a screening/education system (through ECHO) rather than producing hearings. - Whether mediation should remain with ECHO (expertise) or shift toward the Board; staff emphasized ECHO’s specialized housing-law mediation role and noted tenants must choose to pursue a hearing. - Interest in obtaining ECHO’s process (e.g., an SOP/flow chart) describing how inquiries are triaged and when parties are informed/encouraged to seek a hearing. City Staff Announcement (Future Policy Work) - Staff announced City Council will meet December 8, 2025 to review a draft rent stabilization ordinance and program cost options. Materials to be posted at sanleandro.org/housingprotections. Board Reports / Announcements - A board member distributed Craigslist listings for San Leandro 1BR/2BR units and asserted the market is “very soft” and that asking rents (e.g., around $1,900/month for some 1BRs) appeared lower than figures cited in the Yardi/RentCafe-based report. - The same board member announced retiring as a rental housing advocate and stated they were “celebrating 10 months of recovery,” and noted they are no longer a director of CAA. - Another board member clarified that Chair Silva had not been Chair for the full 10-year period referenced by a public commenter, and stated that pre-COVID the Board had “lots of cases,” with frequency affected by COVID and AB 1482. Key Outcomes - Minutes approved (Oct. 22, 2024): 5-0. - Chair election: Tom Silva elected/continued as Chair, 5-0. - Vice Chair election: Vice Chair elected/continued, 5-0. - FY 2024–2025 annual review accepted/recommended to City Council: Board approved the report as presented, 5-0. - Formal Board recommendation/direction to City Council (separate motion): Board voted 5-0 to notify City Council that under AB 1482, Alameda County regional CPI stated as 1.3% effective Aug. 1, 2025 – July 31, 2026, resulting in a 6.3% cap (5% + CPI), which is below San Leandro’s 7% Rent Review Board hearing threshold—meaning rent increases may be capped below the level that would trigger Board hearings. - Next steps: Annual review to be presented to City Council at a future regular meeting; City Council scheduled to review a draft rent stabilization ordinance on Dec. 8, 2025.

The Community Police Review Board (CPRB) met on November 19, 2025 to approve prior minutes, receive updates from the Police Department and Independent Police Auditor (IPA), hear public testimony (including on ALPR/Flock data sharing and the pending Jason Fletcher manslaughter case), review oversight metrics (use of force, pursuits, complaints, and backlogs), discuss AI and oversight topics from a regional NACOLE conference, and vote to amend the SLPD First Amendment Assemblies policy to incorporate specific state-law requirements governing kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control. Consent Calendar - Approved October 15 meeting minutes with no corrections. - Vote: passed 6–0, with 1 absence (Peter Eichel was absent at roll call). Reports Police Department Report (Assistant Chief) - Announced “Cookies with the Cops” on December 2, 5:30 p.m.–8:30 p.m., in front of the Police Department; included cookie-decorating and a toy drive. - Staffing update: - 4 police recruits currently in the academy. - 3 projected to graduate next month, then begin an approximately 18-week field training program. - A 4th recruit projected to graduate next year. - Department stated it is actively hiring and hopes to improve staffing enough to move away from an “emergency schedule” described as ongoing for “four plus years.” - Board invitation to attend virtual reality use-of-force training at the Police Department: - Dates given: Mon Dec 1, Thu Dec 4, and clarified as Wed Dec 10 (initially discussed as “Thursday the 10th/11th,” then corrected). - Time: 6:00 p.m.–8:00 p.m. - City Attorney guidance discussed: up to 3 board members may attend together without additional meeting/agenda constraints. Independent Police Auditor (IPA) Report (Jeff; Denise provided monthly numbers) - IPA continued bi-weekly meetings reviewing ongoing incidents. - ALPR audit: IPA reported an ALPR audit was submitted to the Police Department for review; IPA expected departmental responses on fixes made since the audit began, with a final report anticipated in December or January. - IPA annual report: not presented because it had not been fully reviewed by the Chief (who had “just returned to work” per IPA); expected on the December agenda. Use-of-force “spike” follow-up - IPA explained a previously discussed high month initially shown as 17 uses of force was actually 15, because 2 entries were stopstick deployments during pursuits. - IPA and SLPD characterized the 15 as “low level” force and stated they were reviewed and found within policy. - Examples provided: force used to overcome minimal resistance, including control holds, physical force, takedowns, and handcuffing with resistance. - IPA noted one incident involved a taser display (described as displayed and not utilized). - Board questions focused on: - Clarifying what “low level” means. - Whether the spike could be explained by call type (IPA and Assistant Chief stated nothing out of the ordinary was found). October oversight metrics (reported at the November meeting) - Use of force: 4 incidents in October (context discussed that monthly figures had varied—e.g., “four, eight, seven, and then…14” was referenced as the earlier spike). - Reviews: 7 reviewed by the Department and 7 by the IPA. - 1 ACA (Agreed-upon Course of Action) noted; example given involved remediation for tactical communication skills (including language use described as “Jem’o-Matter,” as transcribed). - Queue: 46 use-of-force cases referenced as “in the queue” for a later stage of review. - Pursuits: 5 pursuits in October. - Reviews: 15 reviewed by the Department and 15 by the IPA. - 12 ACAs described, including remedial action for unsafe driving, supervisor identification/documentation of policy issues, and report-writing clarity/consistency. - Queue: 34 pursuit cases waiting for review. - Complaints: 2 new complaints in October. - Reviews: 4 reviewed by the Department and 4 by the IPA. - 2 AUCAs (described as tied to the same case) involving remedial action related to misconduct (details limited due to confidentiality). - Queue: 19 complaint investigations waiting to come to the IPA. Repeat issues and remediation - In response to board questions, IPA confirmed there are repeat offenders (general statement; no identifying details). - Remediation described as progressive, including coaching/mentoring/training, escalating to documented counseling, written reprimand, or further discipline. - SLPD confirmed it uses Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs); members noted microphone audio issues during this exchange. Complaint confidentiality / request for aggregated complaint-type reporting - City Attorney advised that complaints and officer names are generally confidential personnel records under Penal Code 832.7, with limited exceptions. - City Attorney stated the City can provide a general overview of complaint types and actions taken that does not identify officers or reproduce complaints verbatim. - Board requested a summary/overview report of 2025 complaints, including complaint types and outcomes, and basic breakdowns (discussion included interest in identifying patterns such as repeat issues without naming officers). - Timing: Board asked that the report be available in time for publication with the agenda for the next meeting (December). Public Comments & Testimony - Speaker reported attending a court hearing on whether to dismiss the manslaughter case against former officer Jason Fletcher; stated Judge Reardon ruled the case would not be dismissed and would proceed to trial in January. The speaker characterized the matter as significant in the context of post–SB 2 accountability changes. - Speaker urged the City to stop sharing Flock (license plate reader) data with agencies allegedly violating California law prohibiting sharing ALPR data with out-of-state/federal agencies; cited an October 3, 2025 California Attorney General lawsuit against El Cajon and alleged San Leandro shares data with El Cajon. The speaker also raised concerns about immigration enforcement use, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and cited other cities said to have rejected/canceled Flock. - During discussion of complaint/use-of-force review, a speaker urged that “anomalies” may reflect bias and asked for deeper analysis including demographics (race/age) of individuals against whom force is used, and asked about the threshold for concluding remediation is not working. - During NACOLE conference discussion, a speaker expressed concern about AI editing/standardizing language and supported a cautious approach. - The same speaker asked what happens if residents flee suspected ICE activity and go to a police station for help—asking whether SLPD would protect them and require a judicial warrant. - Regarding First Amendment assemblies policy, a speaker described a patrol officer asking whether the speaker’s banner message was “appropriate,” and argued content is protected by the Constitution; urged policy sensitivity to “low-level” First Amendment activity (banners/signs). - A speaker cautioned that Lexipol updates could overwrite local policy improvements unless changes are tracked and preserved. Discussion Items Regional NACOLE conference report (Chair Bailey) - Chair reported on a NACOLE regional conference held in San Francisco in August (attended in person by board members including Tim and Jenny; Eric attended a second day; Zaidia attended virtually). - Main themes discussed: - AI in law enforcement and oversight, including: - Body-worn camera video indexing/labeling. - AI-assisted redaction (a statistic was cited: 40 hours manual redaction vs 1 hour using AI). - Concerns about AI-assisted report writing, including potential bias and “auto-filling” narratives (example term discussed: “furtive movement”). - San Francisco pilot reportedly did not yield anticipated time savings due to time spent validating AI outputs. - Mentioned SB 524 (described as signed “last month”): if an officer uses AI for a first draft, the draft must be preserved with the final report and signed off for the audit trail. - Implicit bias keynote by Stanford professor Jennifer Eberhardt; emphasis on how “what we see and where we look” affects policing, and on adding “friction” to slow decision-making. - Community engagement ideas (including outreach mapping in larger jurisdictions) and website usefulness. - ICE/local law enforcement interface and oversight; included a discussion question about how a local duty to intervene applies when observing federal agents’ force. - RIPA data quality concerns raised from other jurisdictions; Tim noted examples from San Francisco involving missing/incorrect entries. - IPA stated it did not audit RIPA data in 2025 yet, but expects to do an audit comparing 2024 to 2025 once 2025 data is complete, looking for anomalies. - Assistant Chief explained SLPD uses a phone application for RIPA reporting, includes fields beyond minimum requirements (examples mentioned: whether the person was identifiable before the stop; high- vs low-discretion search; and city of residence), and would attempt to provide screenshots/format examples to the board. - Assistant Chief reiterated SLPD’s duty-to-intervene policy would apply to observing unlawful force, with reporting up the chain and to the relevant outside agency. Policy amendment: First Amendment Assemblies (SLPD Policy 413) - The Board considered an amendment to SLPD policy on First Amendment assemblies, specifically the section on use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents for crowd control. - Chair proposed adding the specific statutory requirements from Penal Code 13652(b)(1)–(11) that were described as omitted from the Lexipol template. - Assistant Chief stated the policy already references Penal Code 13652 and that the department had no issues with the proposed change. Key Outcomes - Approved October 15 minutes: 6–0, 1 absent. - Directed staff/IPA/department (as discussed) to provide the CPRB a non-identifying overview of 2025 complaints (types, outcomes, and basic breakdowns), targeted for inclusion with the December meeting agenda packet. - Adopted policy amendment to update SLPD Policy 413 (First Amendment assemblies) to include the explicit statutory requirements governing crowd-control use of kinetic energy projectiles and chemical agents. - Vote: 6–0, 1 absent. - Formed an ad hoc committee on broader crowd control policies (beyond the specific statutory insertion) with Tim, Denise, and Joseph volunteering to participate. - Noted upcoming items: - VR use-of-force training sessions at SLPD (Dec 1, Dec 4, Dec 10; 6–8 p.m.; up to 3 board members per session). - IPA annual report expected in December. - Budget topic deferred; Assistant Chief clarified the City is in a mid-cycle budget period (bi-annual budget) with baseline adjustments rather than a full new budget cycle; further reporting to the board anticipated.

The San Leandro City Council Facilities & Transportation Committee held a meeting focused on (1) an informational presentation on the I-80 Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Central Segment signal/communications upgrades and (2) review of the committee’s 2026 meeting calendar for conflicts around travel and holidays. No public comments were received, and no formal votes were recorded in the transcript. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comments were given on non-agenda items. - No public comment was offered on Item 3A (ICM presentation). Discussion Items - 3A: I-80 Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Central Segment Project (informational) - Presenter: Adrian Toscano (Assistant Engineer) presented project background, location, improvements, milestones, schedule, and funding. - Project purpose (project description): Maintain traffic flow on local streets during freeway incidents (e.g., collisions) by using coordinated communications and detection technologies; not intended to “divert” traffic generally, but to manage traffic that exits the freeway during incidents. - Project area (project description): San Leandro Boulevard (from Wana Ave to Washington Ave) and Washington Ave (from San Leandro Blvd to Wana Blvd), described as a fully connected corridor. - Planned improvements (project description): - Installation of adaptive/synchronized signal controllers (described as developed by Cubic/Trafficware/Cubic ITS) that adjust signal timing in near real-time based on detected conditions. - Detection and communications upgrades, including traffic cameras and fiber-optic communications between intersections, enabling intersection-to-intersection coordination. - Integration with the City’s ATMS/ETMS traffic management system (as stated) for remote monitoring and troubleshooting. - Trailblazer signs (permanent, pole-mounted signs that activate during incidents to guide drivers to alternative re-entry points to the freeway). Staff noted existing examples already installed in the city from the prior segment (including one near the old Town Hall area and one on Davis Street). - Operations discussion (speaker questions/answers): - A committee member asked how “AI technology” would be used for safety/operations; staff explained the adaptive system uses camera detection data to adjust timings and prioritize flows during unexpected congestion. - Staff indicated the upgraded system would also be used during normal (non-incident) traffic conditions, not only during major events. - Staff stated camera detection would take precedence over in-pavement loops because cameras are more reliable and can detect farther upstream than the immediate approach. - A committee member asked about standardizing detectors citywide; staff described an objective to move toward consistent camera types/software as upgrades occur. - Intersections and scale (project description): - Staff stated the City has 63 signalized intersections. - A committee member observed approximately 14 signalized intersections (dots) shown along the corridor map (approximate count stated by the committee member). - Caltrans maintenance responsibility (project description): - Staff reported Caltrans agreed to maintain the I-80 off-ramp terminal signal at Washington Avenue for this segment (not typical for these projects, as local jurisdictions often maintain ramp terminal signals). - Discussion clarified (as stated) that other ramp locations were not changed by this project; Davis Street was described as maintained by Caltrans, while Marina had been relinquished to the City previously. - Key milestones (project description): - MOU/agreements with Caltrans: June (year implied 2025 based on surrounding context). - 100% design/specifications/estimate delivered by MTC: August. - E-76 authorization from Caltrans (authorization to proceed/spend federal funds): September. - Schedule (project description): - Bid opportunity posting targeted for Winter 2025–2026 (presenter noted a slide typo and clarified it should read “winter 25–26”). - Contract award targeted February 2026. - Construction anticipated to begin Spring 2026. - Completion anticipated Winter 2026–2027 (discussed as roughly about one year of construction duration). - Budget and funding (project description): - Construction contract engineer’s estimate: $1.1 million. - With 10% design contingency: a little over $1.2 million (as stated). - With bid alternates plus contingency: a little under $1.5 million (as stated). - Federal funding for construction: $1.6 million. - Construction engineering budget: $250,000 (city staff time and/or consultants for QA/inspection/oversight, as stated). - Bid alternates described as primarily related to potential additional fiber network work (e.g., more fiber, new conduit/pull boxes/trace lines). - 3B: Review of 2026 Committee Calendar - A committee member flagged a potential conflict on May 14 due to likely travel to Sacramento. - The committee raised potential scheduling concerns for Nov 25 and Dec 16, described as possibly falling on the day before Thanksgiving (Nov 25) and a potential conflict with other board/commission commitments (Dec 16), and suggested the City consider adjustments. - The committee indicated general consensus that the calendar was acceptable subject to the noted availability/conflict information. Key Outcomes - Received an informational presentation on the I-80 ICM Central Segment project; no vote recorded. - Provided staff scheduling feedback on the 2026 committee calendar (noted potential conflicts around May 14 and holiday-adjacent dates); no formal action recorded. - Staff were asked to share a photo/example of a trailblazer sign for committee understanding (informational follow-up mentioned).