City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening.

Welcome to this, the June 8th meeting, the Livermore City Council. Call the meeting to order. Roll call, please.

Council Member Berrientos. Council Member Branning.

Here.

Council Member Dunbar.

Here.

Vice Mayor Wong. Here. Mayor Michon.

Here. If you'll please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

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

Thank you. Do we have a report out for the city attorney? Do we have a report out from the closed session?

Kim Seeley, your city attorney. There's no reportable action.

Okay, moving on to proclamations and presentations. We have the appointment of our new poet laureate. It is Faith Alford. Alford, I'm very excited about that. There she is, hey. Welcome aboard, Faith. So we have Alan McFarland is going to be making the presentation.

Good evening, honorable mayor and city council members. Excited to be here with you for this item and the next one as well. The item we're here for tonight is the confirmation of the new Poet Laureate. The Poet Laureate process is typically handled primarily by the Commission for the Arts. We received, I'm sorry, two applications were submitted and the Commission for the Arts received And the Commission for the Arts appointed an ad hoc committee who held interviews for the two applicants. And the full Commission for the Arts is recommending appointment to a regular term beginning on July 1st, ending on June 30th of 2028 for Faith Alper. This completes my report. I'm available if you have any questions.

Any questions? Great. Well, terrific. So do you have a motion to approve?

I move approval and just a quick correction. It's Faith Alpher.

I'll second. Great. Okay. Moved and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Passed unanimously. Thank you very much. Welcome aboard, Faith. Come on down for the oath of office to be sworn in. Come on down.

I state your name.

I, Faith Alford, do solemnly swear Do solemnly swear.

That I will support and defend.

That I will support and defend.

The Constitution of the United States.

The Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of California.

And the Constitution of the State of California.

Against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

That I will bear true faith and allegiance.

That I will bear true faith and allegiance. To the Constitution of the United States. To the Constitution of the United States. And the Constitution of the State of California. And the Constitution of the State of California.

That I take this obligation freely.

That I take this obligation freely.

Without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion.

Without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion.

And that I will well and faithfully.

And that I will well and faithfully.

Discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.

Discharge the duties on which I am about to enter.

Yes.

Welcome aboard, Faith. Okay, next, we have the presentation of the 2026 High School Junior and Senior Arts Awards. Mr. McFarland. Oh, excuse me a sec here. Got my script. Historically, the city of Livermore has supported our local youth and arts in the community by holding the high school Senior Awards for the Arts. Beginning in 2026, however, the Commission for the Arts decided to expand the awards to incorporate both high school juniors and seniors from Livermore. Juniors will receive $500 awards and the seniors will receive $1,200. These students were invited to submit applications and the winners were selected based upon their accomplishments and achievements in the arts at their school and recommendations from their teachers. The city's commission for the arts reviewed the applications and made the final decision on awardees. Tonight, I have the privilege of honoring 13 awardees, six juniors and seven seniors, presenting them with their award checks. Mr. McFarland, do you have your presentation as well?

Just a brief remark, Honorable Mayor and City Council, just to say that we're excited to be able to expand arts opportunities, especially to the youth in the community, and appreciate the City Council's support for that.

Absolutely. So tonight we have with us Commissioner Tracy Son of the Commission for the Arts, who will join me in distributing the awards. Three of the students, Cole Gable, Grady Castro and Nicholas Baxter, were unable to be here tonight and we will have the awards mailed to them. So, Mr. McFarland, if you'd be so kind as to read off the awards and we will present them.

Okay, so we'll do this first with the Granada High School seniors. Our first awardee is Jillian Wedekine for visual arts. Our second awardee from Granada High School is have to read a little.

Oh, you will get an individual shot in there. So here you know. Everybody pay attention.

OK, the next awardee, Livermore High School juniors, Alan Berglund for visual arts. For performing arts, Azriel Fang. For visual arts, Elos Sablan. For visual arts, Reece Boswell. We'll now move to our Granada High School seniors. First up, Stephanie Gomez for Media Arts. Lauren Meyer for Visual Arts. And for our last category, this will be Livermore High School seniors. And first up is Abram Carr for visual arts. And Amelia Silva for visual arts.

Well, thank you. The arts are alive and well here in Livermore. As Picasso said, art washes from my soul the dust of everyday life, and it certainly contributes to our quality of life. So next, we're moving on. Speaking of quality of life, we're moving on to our 2025 Climate Action Plan Progress Report. This will be presented by Tricia Ponto, our Sustainability Program Manager, and Lydia Vance,

Hello, Mayor and City Council. I'm Lydia Vance. I'm the Sustainability Program Department Assistant, and I'll be talking about the 2025 Climate Action Plan Progress Report. I'll start with a quick reminder about the Climate Action Plan, which was adopted in 2022. It has three high-level goals to prepare the community for climate impacts, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, and to establish Livermore as a climate action leader. Each year, the city prepares a report to track progress implementing the Climate Action Plan. The 2025 progress report covers implementation highlights and an updated greenhouse gas emissions inventory, which we conduct every two years. The inventory allows the city to track progress towards its reduction goals and identify areas where more resources are needed to stay on track. For some quick numbers, city staff continues to approve a high volume of permits for solar panels, heat pumps, and electric vehicle chargers. And there are hundreds of all electric housing under construction. The city continues to increase the number of electric vehicles in the city's fleet and use renewable diesel for our combustion fleet vehicles. The city's landscape team has been working hard to expand our tree canopy and spread organic mulch. They have also given out free compost to residents. The city also acquired over 100 acres of open space for conservation, added miles of new bike lanes, and distributed millions of gallons of recycled water. Now for just a few project highlights. I'll start with the $1.6 million grant that we received from the California Energy Commission to expand our electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The grant will help fund the installation of 100 EV charging ports across five city facilities, enabling the city to transition its light duty fleet to electric alternatives. The city has been partnering with Ava Community Energy to install solar energy storage systems at the Civic Center Meeting Hall and Maintenance Service Center. The projects will help expand the city's portfolio of clean and renewable energy, provide backup power during outages, reduce time-of-use energy costs, and lower reliance on diesel generators. As of now, the installation is complete and the project should be operational soon. We have been partnering with high school students at Quest Science Center on a heat mapping project. The students designed and built mobile and stationary temperature sensors to identify urban heat islands. We then took this data and have been creating a heat vulnerability index to help identify where to implement cooling strategies in Livermore. The city had a lot of engagement with and from the community in 2025, such as Community Service Day, the citywide garage sale, Arbor Day tree planting, and Luna the Moon Tree's first birthday. The city most recently completed a greenhouse gas inventory for the year 2024. Total community-wide emissions were approximately 540,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent, which is a reduction of about 13% since our last inventory in 2022. Transportation continues to be the largest sector of community emissions, accounting for approximately 61% of total emissions in 2024. Transportation includes both passenger vehicles and commercial vehicles. The city also completed its first municipal greenhouse gas inventory in recent years, providing a renewed baseline for tracking emissions from municipal buildings and operations. Total municipal emissions for 2024 were approximately 4,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent, largely driven by employee commute. The city will continue to monitor emissions over time to measure progress, identify reduction opportunities, and continue its commitment to being a leader in local climate action. The complete progress report is available on our website. And we also encourage folks to check out our Instagram account where we post more about sustainability and climate action in Livermore. That concludes staff's presentation and we're available for questions. Thank you.

Any questions for the staff? you very much a great uh great program and i think it shows our commitment uh to uh to climate action and uh i particularly wanted to point out that uh there has been public opposition to the city acquiring open space using public funds to acquire open space and as the report shows we continue to be committed to acquire open space and parkland. And we've acquired over 100 acres just this last year for a permanent preservation of open space. And these are strategically placed around the fringes of our community, in particular for a wildlife corridor. So certainly appreciate the commitment that the staff and the council has shown that we are serious about this and great work on the Climate Action Plan. Thank you so much.

yes i just wanted to note uh one thank you for all the work the breadth of the work in this plan between residents businesses source of emissions is wide and you have to go after and remember a lot of things in a very wide range of things that you have to do day to day so thank you for all the work um just a Hammering home, transportation is 61% of the emissions. MTC has a commuter benefits program. So if you commute into the South Bay, you are entitled to some degree of benefits over a certain number of employees. So take a look at that. There's emergency ride home even. If you have a kid to take care of and you're worried about that return, every little bit helps. Thanks. Excellent. Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Council Member Barrientos.

Hi. Thank you for the report. I'm really impressed with it. I'm a teacher. I like visuals. So it's easy to understand, and you did a really nice job. Thank you. And hopefully the city keeps going on the path we're going right now.

Okay, excellent. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Moving on to 3.4, which is a proclamation declaring June 2026 as Pride Month. So with that, I actually have the proclamation in front of me. So I will read the proclamation. I'll be presenting this to former council member, Brittany Kick. Is she in the audience? There she is. There's Brittany. Okay. So we have a proclamation of the city of Livermore proclaiming Pride Month, June 2026. Whereas Pride Month is a time to recognize and celebrate the history, achievements, resilience, and contributions of LGBTQ plus individuals and communities, while reaffirming the ongoing pursuit of equality, dignity, and inclusion for all people. And whereas Livermore has long been and continues to be home to people of diverse backgrounds, identities, and experiences, and our community is strengthened by inclusion, mutual respect, and collaboration across differences. And whereas the City of Livermore recognizes the importance of fostering a community where all people feel safe, valued, seen, and empowered to participate fully in civic and community life, And whereas the City Council of the City of Livermore opposes bigotry, intolerance and hate, and affirms that the community is best served through leading by example and upholding shared values of welcome, inclusion, tolerance and respect, while creating opportunities for dialogue and understanding, Now, therefore, the City of Livermore City Council proclaims June 2026 to be Pride Month in the City of Livermore, celebrating the LGBTQ plus community and reaffirming the city's commitment to equity, inclusion and belonging for all residents. Ms. Kitts. Yeah, you used to be up here, and now you're going to turn on your own mic. There we go. It's on. You're up.

Thank you for the proclamation. This is year number seven for a celebration that will be in October, and year number six for the proclamation in June, because our first celebration was in that October, so we're going to timeline it a little bit. Um, but I just wanted to point out what a difference has been made in the past seven years in the visibility and inclusion in our community. If you look at our Instagram page or at our calendar, there are, I think 15 different LGBTQ specific pride celebrations happening in June that we have nothing to do with. We didn't plan them. We didn't ask for people to plan them just by increasing visibility. We've allowed people to feel. safe and welcome to celebrate here and leave their dollars and their tips and their excitement here in town rather than driving out to San Francisco and Oakland. So when we have these kinds of community celebrations and the feeling of welcome by having that flag up, it's good for humanity and people and all the feel good stuff, but there's a real benefit economically for our community too. And I think we're seeing that. um in our businesses and as i was sitting back there i'm listening to awards getting messages from new businesses who just opened in town and hey i heard that this is happening and can we participate and we want to support you and so um just thank you to the city for being a part of this almost i mean we're over five so when you round up almost a decade of support and inclusion um uh yeah so again thank you so much it's um been really nice to just focus on this and let you guys do all the good work you're doing up here. I did want to just end by saying this will be our first celebration without one of our board members who died earlier this year. And he served on many boards in the county. He was, I think the last time I saw him was actually at a council meeting here while he was here for the homeless count report. his commitment was to public service. That was his biggest focus in our community. And so at Pride this year, we do plan to have a big focus on service and community building. And so this is a public invitation to all of our nonprofits to get in touch. We'll be doing a better job of getting in touch with you to figure out how are we going to increase your volunteer numbers this year. That was his goal and his drive was to make sure that everyone participated civically volunteering in one way or another. City Council Chambers, I look forward to seeing you all on October 17 for another celebration. City Council Chambers, of storytelling and history telling and a special honor for for dangerous.

City Council Chambers, Okay next we're going to item five, this is the open forum, the city clerk will explain how people can participate.

Thank you, Mayor. To provide comment, please fill out and turn in a speaker card found at the entrance of the council chamber. Speakers will be announced in the order received. Once public comment opens, each participant's name will be announced and their three minutes will begin once at the lectern. Please note, a speaker is not required to answer any questions from the city council and the city council is not required to answer questions from the public. However, the mayor has the discretion to ask staff to adjust the speaker's comments when a council member believes it is relevant to a particular business item. The mayor will announce the conclusion of the public comment period after comments have been voiced into the record. There are currently 20 speakers for open forum.

Okay, so we will take, as our custom, we will take public comment on open forum for 30 minutes so we can then go back to the meeting and accomplish the business of the city. And then we'll come back, reopen it after the conclusion of the city's business and reopen the public forum for the additional comments. So at this point, we'll take comment until about five minutes to eight, and then we'll move on to the business.

The first speaker will be Mary Perner, followed by Laura Weber.

There are 20 speakers. We can go ahead and recognizing that we have a lot of speakers, I'll leave it up to the speakers to moderate their time.

The first speaker?

You can lower the dais. You can lower the podium. There's a little switch on the side.

Dive, dive, dive.

You got to love technology, huh?

Good evening, Mayor Mahshan, council members, and staff. My name is Marion Kermer. I've been here in Livermore. Having come from Wisconsin, I've been here since 1987. One of the things I truly love about California, and in particular the Tri-Valley and its community, is its diversity. And I really appreciated your words, your proclamation about diversity a few minutes ago. Because we are a highly diverse community with folks of many colors, backgrounds, and nationalities, My townhouse complex is representative of that. There are folks from all over the place, Hispanic, Muslim, Hindu in my community. And there are people from all over the place who maintain my HOA community. I speak some Spanish and I get to use it almost every day walking around town and walking around my complex. And I'm grateful for that. When I go to the doctor at Kaiser, all of my doctors are from other countries. None of them are native to this country. The reason I am speaking today is because I have deep concerns about the federal correctional institution in Dublin. there is speculation that ice or representatives of ice may be looking at that facility as a place to incarcerate the diverse community and this room represents a lot of that um who are they they are deemed to be illegal we are very concerned about that i represents couple of groups here. I'm a member of about, I think, six nonprofit groups here in town, and several are represented here tonight. I ask the council members to please add an agenda item to your next meeting to oppose the ICE reopening of the FCI, Federal Correctional Institution, in Dublin. I think it will... Having that there will impact the level of safety that is felt in this community. It will impact so many things. It will affect who is willing to come out and do the work. For example, in my complex, in the yard, the arborists, the roofers, they're from all over the place. I want them to feel secure in this community, as they should, for all of their efforts, not to mention all the wineries. So anyway, thank you for your time this evening, and I hope you will consider putting that on the next agenda.

The next speaker is Laura Weber, followed by Leo Friedman, followed by Christian van den Heuvel.

OK, excuse me. I want to make sure that everybody here feels comfortable to speak. So that's why I ask that if you approve of the speaker's comments, just raise your hand. because that way we can see it and the speaker does not. I don't allow applause and we don't allow booing either because we want everybody to feel comfortable and welcome to speak. So I would ask that if you agree with the speaker, raise your hand and that way nobody is intimidated and that they feel free to speak. So thank you very much for your cooperation. Ms. Weber.

Honorable Vice Mayor Long and Council, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak, and thank you for the eloquent words of the proclamation you just read for Livermore Pride. My name is Laura Weber. I have lived here, I can't believe, for 22 years, and I'm in District 3. I'm a leader in the cultural arts community here, and I love living in Livermore precisely because of what you outlined in your proclamation honoring Pride Month, which really honors all of humanity. And Livermore is a beautiful, a tolerant, an empathetic city. and it cares for all its residents and strives to keep us all safe and free. And to that end, I am echoing Mary's request that the City Council add to a future meeting agenda a proposal to adopt a resolution to oppose an ICE detention facility in Dublin. With an ice detention Center 15 minutes away from our city, this will mean a significant increased presence of ice officers in our Community either seen or unseen. And in other cities and communities, we have seen repeatedly that this has caused fear and chaos and real harm. The evidence shows us that an ICE presence makes us all feel less safe, less trusting of local authorities. ICE targets non-white people on their way to and from work, to and from school, regardless of their actual citizenship or immigration status. This will have a chilling effect on our population here in Livermore. Immigrants, specifically I would like to speak to the fact that they are often caregivers for the elderly and disabled. They are a huge part of the caregiving workforce here in this community in Livermore, contributing to our local economy as employees in assisted living facilities, skilled nursing facilities, and in in-home care. If ICE is a local threat, These caregivers will stay home. They will be afraid of abduction without question or harm. And our elderly and disabled will suffer neglect and they will be at risk. Family and friends will have to be caregivers of last resort and facilities will fail to be able to care for their residents and this will hurt the local economy. I hope our city council will lead by example to show this concern for our residents of Livermore and agree to consider a proposal to adopt a resolution opposing an ICE detention facility in Dublin. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Julio Friedman, followed by Christian Vanden Heuvel, followed by Karen Jefferson.

Hello. I'm pretty sure I'm the only Julio Friedman in town. Honorable Mayor Marchand, Vice Mayor Wang, council members, I'll be brief. I asked the City Council of Livermore to add a proposal to adopt a resolution opposing an ICE detention facility in Dublin. I don't need to tell any of you this. This is a community of farmers and ranchers as much as anything else. Farms and ranches staffed by immigrants. Do we really want ICE raids made easy? At farmers markets? In front of schools? My mother is in an elder care facility in town that is staffed almost entirely by legal immigrants from Tracy, Manteca and other communities in the Central Valley. They have anxiety to even come into work to take care of the people there. My admin is a legal immigrant and a single mother. ICE activity limits her ability to come to work, to raise daughter, to pay taxes. ICE activity adds anxiety, grief, and risk, and it adds cost to citizens and neighbors alike. Adding infrastructure Adding infrastructure in the form of detention centers, staging areas, parking in the town next door for ICE agents and operations will surely increase activities in Livermore and elsewhere in the Tribal. Preventing that same infrastructure will limit their ability to do so. This is a serious matter for our community. It must be discussed. Action is required. Se requiere accion. Thank you.

Next speaker is Christian Van Heuvel, followed by Karen Jefferson, followed by Greg Scott.

Well, good evening, Mayor Marchand, council members. My name is Christian Vanden Heuvel. I'm an elected trustee on our school board. I'm a pastor here in town. I'm married to a teacher at one of our high schools. And I am also here asking you to add an item to a future agenda, a resolution opposing the reopening of FCI Dublin as an ICE detention center. Here's what I see up close. When fear moves into the neighborhood, It shows up in our schools first. I sit with families who feel this directly. My wife stands at the front of the classroom every day and watches how it affects her students. I have a daughter in high school. She has friends who are scared to come to school, scared about what could happen to their parents, their brothers and sisters. This city, has already said who we are. In your own words, Livermore is a place where all people are valued and treated with dignity. Our police department has told residents plainly that no one here should fear reaching out for help. That's who we want to be. And a detention center down the road would push against that. Kids stay home because a parent is afraid to drive them. When attendance drops, our schools lose funding. And our teachers would do what teachers do. They protect their students, a job that none of them signed up for. I'm asking you to put this on a future agenda and to consider standing by what we've already said about ourselves. Thank you.

Next speaker is Karen Jefferson, followed by Greg Scott, followed by Jennifer Hayes.

To the mayor and city council members, my name is Karen Jefferson and I'm a member of the Beautification Committee. I'm speaking to you tonight to inform you that the nominations are open for two Beautification Committee Awards and ask that you nominate or encourage residents of your district to nominate themselves for the awards. The two awards are the Beautification Award and the Beautification Community Service Award. Both of these awards recognize the efforts of our residents in making the City of Livermore the beautiful city that it is. The Beautification Award recognizes residential and commercial properties that have enhanced their outdoor spaces that are visible from a public street or a trail. The enhancements include both landscape and hardscape elements. Properties with water wise or native plant landscapes, historical renovations, and other structural and landscape renovations are a few examples of the properties that could be nominated. The next award, the Beautification Community Service Award is a relatively new award from our committee and is in the second year of existence. This award recognizes individuals or organizations who have been involved in the community service to beautify the city of Livermore's public spaces. This includes maintaining or improving public property or educating citizens about those public spaces with a goal of making the city a more beautiful place to live. Examples include litter cleanup, maintain or enhance the hardscape or landscape of a public space and educate residents about the beauty of our city. The deadline for the nominations for both awards are September 15th. I have given the city clerk pamphlets for your perusal for the two awards. And the beautification committee's goal this year is to have nominations from every district in our city and ask for your help in encouraging nominations in your district. If you see a residence or commercial property with lovely landscape or hardscape, please ask them to apply for the beautification award. If you know of a group or an individual who has volunteered to beautify the city, please ask them to apply for the Beautification Community Service Award. We all want to recognize the residents and businesses who make this city a more beautiful place to live.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Greg Scott, followed by Jennifer Hayes, followed by Julie Wild.

Good evening. I'm Greg Scott. If the city is committed to the climate action plan, I would urge the city through the general plan update for the next general plan to specifically state you're not going to break the urban growth boundary for one. Also on immigration, I'm aware that the Trump administration in court stated that they had the legal right to bulldoze the Statue of Liberty. Well, my favorite bumper sticker is the one that says, who's the illegal immigrant pilgrim? I have a relative that came over on the Mayflower. They wouldn't understand this. I have German relatives that fought in the American Revolutionary War. I have Norwegian relatives that came over in the 1800s. They wouldn't understand this country today. I'd also like to thank Jean King, Joan sepala and Lynn sepala for what they've done to this community. With all they've done for this community. I also applaud them for they had every right to do a referendum against the placement of Eden housing at the time. Their signature, they weren't told the signatures wouldn't be counted the time they turn their signatures into the city clerk. And the first day they weren't told that those signatures wouldn't be counted. It wasn't till days later, the signatures They were told it wouldn't be counted by the city attorney for administrative because it was administrative, not legislative. I think that was rather disingenuous. I'm learning about city Eden housing. It's not that the opponents of Eden housing were against affordable housing. They were against the placement of Eden housing and rightly so. I am under no political reservation as they were or a restraint. I'm learning about Eden housing. Mr. Marling says he refers to plutocrats as if he knows who Pluto even was. Well, that's interesting because we taxpayers subsidize Eden Housing. It's the 501 and you can live more. You can go learn about Eden Housing through the form 990s and see what they do. This this mission statement even housing is eating housing mission is to create a sustained high quality affordable housing communities that advanced equity and opportunity for all. that's very interesting because the compensation list is for eating housing Linda mandolini in 2024 made $622,898 with an additional $39,896 I don't know if I get the pronunciation of this right but oh Shola. Olatoye, who the Chief Operating Officer, made $505,808 with an additional $27,244. Tatiana Blanc made $472,462 with an additional $19,946. She's the Chief Financial Officer. Andrea Osgood, Chief of Real Estate Development and Executive Vice President, made $402,885. additional $43,716. If we're for equity, what is the lowest paid, how does the lowest paid employee, how do the lower paid employees who need housing afford housing? And they call that equity. It's not equity. It's affordable housing for the few and it's more expensive for the many is what it is.

Our next speaker is Jennifer Hayes, followed by Julie Wild.

Mr. Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Jennifer Hayes. And forgive me, I will be reading my comments. I live in District 3. I've lived in Livermore since 2004, and I just retired after teaching 22 years in our public schools. Yay! Tonight I want to urge this body to adopt a resolution to oppose the reopening of the FCI Dublin as an immigration detention center or any other kind of correctional facility. As you all surely know, the Bureau of Prisons has transferred FCI Dublin site to the General Services Administration, and that makes it eligible now for the Department of Homeland Security to perhaps purchase it or establish nice detention. And as many speakers before me have um very eloquently explained some of the threats that that would be so i would really like to see this body take um the matter seriously as an educator i've worked in many with many immigrant families over the years and i've seen firsthand the impact of ice raids detention political rhetoric and what it does to students the students have difficulties engaging in their learning they become very anxious and distracted and fearful families stop attending school events like open house like parent-teacher conferences, sporting events, and even their kids' concerts. They don't want their children to go on field trips or to science camp just down the road. My colleagues and I have had to scrap lesson plans for a whole entire day the day after elections to talk to our students, to reassure their parents, to explain to them whether the Livermore Police would or would not cooperate with ICE agents. We did our best to explain as accurately as we could discussing the implications. At the start of this past school year, it was such a release to have the city of Livermore issue a statement affirming our community's commitment to, quote, diversity, inclusion, and the shared commitment of its community members to respect and support one another, ensuring that all our community members feel safe, welcomed and valued. And also, our police department reiterated that it's our policy, their policy, that the immigration status of individuals absent other criminal behavior is not a matter for local police action. Livermore is a town of immigrants. It was founded by Anglo-Americans living under the Mexican flag. The labs and the vines have attracted people from all over the world, my husband included. We have more than 70 languages spoken in the school district. Let it not be forgotten that although we are celebrating 150 years of Livermore history, that's just a blink in the millennial presence of native peoples, including the Ohlone, Yokut, and Miwok tribes. The rest of us are all immigrants to this land. Let us recognize the universal experience that brought us or our ancestors to this place and stand together to refute the immoral and cruel plan for a nice descent. Detention Center in Dublin. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Julie Wild.

Good evening, Mayor Marchand and fellow city council members. I am with so many here tonight. And it's heartwarming, actually, to see us standing together to say not here. As a member of the Muslim community, fighting for justice is a part of our purpose here. We are given three ways to do this. The first way is to stop injustice is to use our bodies or hands. We protest. We hold signs. We close roads. Secondly, if we cannot use our bodies, we must use our voice with letters to the editor or making public comments at a city meeting like this. And lastly, if we cannot use our words for fear of persecution, we must dislike it in our hearts and it must weigh heavily on our minds. Many in the Muslim community aren't here today for a very real fear of persecution. So I use my unique privilege here today to speak and ask that the resolution be placed on the agenda at a future city council meeting. I grew up in Minneapolis and had to watch while friends lived through illegal home invasions and innocent people shot dead in the streets. We all know who Nicole Good is, and we know who Alex Pretty is. On a daily basis, cities were shut down. As we've had other speakers mention, school children, families are traumatized. The people of Minneapolis and around Minnesota, they were living in a dystopian version of life that included constant drone surveillance. I think not many people knew that unless you were in the Twin Cities, but there were drones everywhere. It's basically a police state that no one would ever imagine. The thought of this nightmare coming to the Tri-Valley both haunts me and activates me. It's why I stand here to speak out so that my neighbors are safer and so that Livermore is safer. there is strength and solidarity i've seen it here in livermore um with various communities and cultures come together in front of the bankhead theater we fill our streets with different celebrations we come together as neighbors and differences fade or aren't as noticeable that is our collective strength so in closing i mean as other speakers have said this is a matter of humanity What we wish for our neighbor, we wish for ourselves, and we protect another person like they were a family member when we show up. For others, we show our moral courage and decency. This is who we are, and violence and fear don't belong here. Please take action.

The time is now 7.50, and our next speaker is Douglas Yoshida.

Hello, members of Livermore City Council. My name is Douglas Oshita. I'm an emergency physician at Stanford Tri-Valley Medical Center in Pleasanton. I also work in the urgent care in Livermore. I've taken care of this community for over 25 years. I come to you tonight not only as a physician, but as the son of a Japanese-American man imprisoned by his own government. I urge you to adopt a resolution opposing the conversion of the Dublin FCI to an ICE detention facility. In 1942, when my father was 15, his entire community was given 48 hours to gather what they could carry, then transported to a concentration camp because Roosevelt invoked the Alien Enemies Act to incarcerate over 125,000 Japanese Americans without due process. We now recognize this is one of the gravest civil liberties violations in modern American history. The Trump administration has resurrected the same act to conduct mass roundups and deportations, including of US citizens without due process. The parallels are not incidental. They are a direct repetition of a policy our nation has already recognized as a moral failure. The Dublin FCI was closed after the staff was systematically raping the women inmates. I cared for some of those people. This cannot continue or this legacy cannot continue. As you may have heard, this facility is also unfit for human habitation. Converting it will strain our already burdened hospital and degrade care for everyone across the Tri-Valley area. Our heart attack center and stroke center designations are already under threat because of overcrowding. Research has also shown that communities near ICE facilities face arrest rates of up to 16 times greater than comparable communities. After my father's release, the same army that imprisoned him grafted him. He served. He proved his loyalty to a country that has stripped him of his rights. As his son, I'm honoring his memory by refusing to remain silent while history repeats itself. I ask each of you to demonstrate that same patriotism by standing against policies that repeat the worst chapters of our past. In fact, tonight, there's also a survivor of those camps, Dr. Wes Murakami, He was in prison in Tule Lake as a newborn. He survived that. He's been a dentist and living in the Livermore community for several years. Please sign a resolution. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Cleo Holm. Or was it Cleo Howe?

This will be our last speaker and then we'll conduct the business of the city and then we'll come back and we'll reopen the open forum. So please.

Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Cleo Hum. I'm a long time Livermore resident. I'm here to respectfully urge the council to place a resolution on a future agenda to oppose the reopening of the FCI Dublin facility as an ICE immigration detention center. The City of Dublin in December 2025 and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in April this year have already passed this resolution, both unanimously. An environmental assessment of almost 3,000 pages in length identified major environmental and infrastructure concerns that confirms the facility is unsafe and uninhabitable. The assessment identified the property as an active cleanup site and warned the conditions could pose health and safety issues that would cost tens of millions of dollars to try and mitigate. Issues include asbestos and mold, diesel fuel contamination, a leaking sewer system, the buildings, some of them are crumbling. There could also be unexploded munitions. The property stands as a useless and stark symbol of an unsafe and uninhabitable place of human abuse. Opposition will also deter, hopefully, the social and economic damage that ICE presence has on communities and businesses. Please, place this resolution on a future agenda. Oppose the reopening of the FCI Dublin facility as an ICE detention center. Thank you.

Thank you. So now we're going to move on to the, we'll temporarily close the open forum. We will conduct the business, which is on the agenda, and then we'll come back and we will reopen the open forum. So with that, we're moving on to the consent calendar. Is there any council member that wishes to pull an item from consent for discussion? Seeing none, I'll be willing, is there any public comment on consent?

No public comment, Mayor.

Okay, very good. In that case, I will entertain a motion to approve the consent calendar. These are typically passed on a single motion. I'll move. Council Member Branning makes the motion. Is there a second? Council Member Barrientos makes the second. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? It passed unanimously. Thank you. Moving on to... Let's see. The public hearings, we have 7.1 is a public hearing, a ballot tabulation for Shea Ora. This is for the Landscape Maintenance District. And this is a public hearing.

Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Jarrett Rasmussen, and I am a senior civil engineer in the Community Development Department. Tonight, we are conducting a public hearing for the annexation of Shea Ora, Tract 8612, into the Landscape Maintenance District, LL 857, which will provide additional funding for the maintenance of public landscape amenities installed with the residential subdivisions, Shea Montage, Tract 7610, and Shea Sage, Tracts 8212 and 8216. Landscape maintenance districts, or LMDs, are a type of assessment district that allows cities to collect funds for the maintenance of public landscape amenities. Property owners within an LMD are assessed annually based on their proportionate share of landscape maintenance costs. Annexation into an existing LMD requires two city council meetings. The first meeting is for a resolution initiating and declaring the intention to order the annexation for which this project was approved by city council on April 13th, 2026. And the second is the public hearing we are conducting tonight. LMD number LL857 was formed in June of 2006 to provide a funding mechanism to maintain public landscaping amenities installed with the Shea Montage and Shea Sage residential tracks. When the LMD boundary was formed, it did not include the Shea Ora project area, which is west of the Sage property, since at the time it was zoned for commercial use. In 2020, the Isabel Neighborhood specific plan changed the zoning of the land just west of Sage from commercial to residential. Shea Ora, Tract 8612, was entitled in July of 2024 for the development of 164 townhomes. The project was conditioned to annex into LMD 857 to contribute maintenance funding to the landscape amenities installed with Shea Montage and the Shea Sage developments. This map shows the existing and proposed boundaries of the LMD LL 857. The dashed area shows the boundaries of the Shea-Ora project that would be annexed into the LMD. And the area with the solid boundary is the existing boundaries of the LMD. Staff recommends that city council do the following. One, conduct a public hearing and consider written and oral protests. Two, tabulate the ballots from the landowner. And three, if there is no majority protest represented by the landowner ballot, adopt a resolution ordering the annexation of Shea or Attract 8612 to Landscape Maintenance District LL 857. Adopting the engineer's report, confirming the levy of the first assessment and directing actions thereto. This concludes staff presentation. Staff is available for questions. Thank you.

Any questions for staff? okay thank you uh thank you very much for the presentation uh this is the time and place uh of the public hearing for the proposed annexation of the aura uh shea project uh tract 8612 to the city of livermore landscape maintenance district uh number ll 857 before i formally open the hearing i have some remarks first uh some rules about the speakers anyone wanting to speak is requested to fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk At the public input portion, the city clerk will call the speaker's names. When you hear your name, please come to the speaker's microphone. Each speaker may speak once and will have three minutes to speak. If you do not wish to speak but want to submit written comments, you may do so any time before the close of the public hearing. Please give those comments to the city clerk. They will be part of the record of the hearing. Second, all of the property annexing is owned by a single property owner. There is only one ballot, which the city clerk has received but not yet opened. Once the hearing is formally closed, the annexation ballot will be opened and tabulated by the clerk. Under the law, ballots are disclosable public records and open for inspection during and after tabulation. The annexation ballots are required under Proposition 218. The ballots are weighted based on the dollars to be assessed on each parcel in the district. If the ballot is not in favor of the annexation, the annexation process is ended and we cannot take any further action on it. If the ballot is in favor of annexation, the council will have the authority to approve the annexation, adopt the related engineer's report, and confirm the levity of the assessments on the annexing property. Approval by the ballot process does not automatically levity assessments. For that reason, any oral or written remarks about the assessment district will be considered by the council, but will not count as part of the formal Proposition 218 ballot approval process. Third, how we will proceed in this hearing. After we formally open the hearing, there will be a brief presentation by staff, which I believe we already heard, about the proposed annexation and discussion of the engineer's report. Next, we will receive oral presentations. If you ask questions, they will be answered after everybody has had a chance to speak. Depending upon the number of questions, we may have a short break to complete replies to the questions. After that, I will ask if the property owner would like to change or withdraw their ballot and then closing the hearing. So we've had the staff presentation. There are no questions. I am now going to open the public hearing. Do we have any speaker cards? And is there anybody that wishes to speak?

Yes, Mayor. We have two speakers. We have Carl Wente, followed by Tom Dominguez. Carl Wente.

it's all about timing right. Okay, who is the next speaker.

The next speaker is Tom Dominguez.

Good evening. i'm Tom Dominguez. And I also support the council's adoption of a resolution opposing. the Federal Correctional Institute in Dublin being transferred.

Microphone. This is about 7.1. This is regarding the landscape maintenance district for Montage Shea. And so different beast. This is 7.1. And we will bring you back for the open forum, which is item number five on the agenda.

Mayor, we've received no more public comment.

Pardon me?

Mayor, we've received no more public comment.

Okay. I'm still waiting for Mr. Wente. Okay. Well, if Mr. Wente is not here, I will close the public comment period and bring it back to the council. So you have the... Well, I guess I will ask if the property owner wishes to withdraw or change the ballot. Mr. Best.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No, we do not wish to withdraw or change our ballot.

Okay. So that's the case. Then we will close the public hearing and the city clerk will tabulate the ballots and announce the results. The suspense is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

There is one ballot to approve.

I'm sorry?

There is one ballot to approve.

Okay, so there was one ballot the ballot voted to approve so therefore the City Council may consider the adoption for the landscape maintenance district inclusion, is there any discussion, do I have emotion.

I'll move approval of the staff recommendation.

Okay. Council member Dunbar makes the motion to approve.

I'll second.

Seconded by council member Branning. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstentions? It passed unanimously. Thank you very much. Moving on to 7.2. This is a hearing to consider a request to amend project approvals for the vesting tentative track map and site plan design review known as Aura and Serenity. Presentation by Emily Ledoux.

Good evening, Mayor Marchand and members of the City Council. My name is Emily Ledoux, an assistant planner with the Community Development Department. And tonight I'll be presenting the requested amendments to the Shea Aura and Serenity projects. Both projects are located in the Isabel neighborhood specific plan serenity is located at the northeast corner of the portola avenue and color collier Canyon road intersections or is located at the southwest corner of the portal avenue and tranquility circle intersection. In 2022, the City Council approved the Serenity Project for a total of 299 units, consisting of 89 for-sale condominium units and 210 for-rent apartment units. It included 60 affordable units and 51 accessible units at the time of approval. The townhome portion of the Serenity Project is currently under construction. The 210 for-rent apartment units included in Chase Serenity are also under construction, however they are not included in this request. In 2024, the City Council approved the ORA project for 164 for-sale condominium units, including 33 affordable units and 17 accessible units. ORA is targeting final map approval this upcoming July. Both the Serenity and Aura projects were approved in full compliance with the inclusionary ordinance and received density bonus concessions and waivers. The ordinance does allow for an alternative means of compliance, such as in lieu fees, but any alternative means must be identified and approved with the project's entitlements and ultimately implemented through a required affordable housing agreement. Neither project included alternative compliance options at the time of entitlement. Due to market conditions, the applicant, Shea Homes, has experienced increased difficulty selling moderate income for sale units at Serenity and anticipates similar challenges with the Aura project. Moderate income units are the majority of the for sale opportunities offered in the city's affordable homeownership program, but they have become increasingly difficult to sell. Additionally, through the city's affordable homeownership program, qualified buyers are declining opportunities to purchase the units due to financial uncertainty and the overall cost of ownership. As a result, a portion of the constructed moderate income units at Serenity have remained unsold for an extended period of time. For these reasons, the applicant is requesting to amend the approved projects to authorize an alternative means of compliance for previously approved moderate income units, likely an in lieu fee payment, to satisfy the affordability requirement instead of providing the affordable units on site. The total number of units for both projects would remain unchanged, and a portion of the moderate income units would instead be sold at market rate. To maintain the concessions and waivers the projects were granted under state density bonus law, the projects must maintain a minimum of 10% of overall units as affordable provided onsite. Therefore, only a portion of the approved moderate income units would be authorized for an alternative means of compliance. The applicant is requesting an alternative means for up to 25 moderate income units for both projects, which would then be sold at market rate. The approved median income units, which are a deeper level of affordability compared to the moderate income units, would remain the same. The alternative compliance method would be implemented through a future affordable housing agreement for Aura and an amendment to the existing affordable housing agreement for Serenity, both of which are scheduled to be considered by the council later this summer. As previously stated, the overall unit count would remain the same, and therefore the requested amendments would not result in any physical changes to the project or environment that were not otherwise considered in the original project approvals. Satisfying the affordability requirement for the Serenity and Aura projects through an alternative means of compliance would provide the opportunity for flexible funding that may be directed towards deeply affordable projects serving lower income and special needs populations. Producing affordable units in the extremely low, very low, and low-income categories remains challenging due to high costs of land, construction, and labor, which often exceed the revenue generated from lower rent and for-sale prices. Consequently, many deeply affordable units require significant subsidy, particularly 100% affordable projects. The city currently does not have sufficient affordable housing funds to subsidize enough units to meet its RENA obligations in the lower income categories. Existing projects funded by an alternative means of compliance include Chestnut Square, Eden Downtown Apartments, Vineyard 2.0, Avance, and Pacific Avenue Senior Housing Phase 1. Should the projects satisfy these requirements through an alternative means of compliance, such as an in lieu fee, the City would receive funding for deeply affordable projects to potentially facilitate their construction more quickly. Projects that could benefit from these additional funds include Pacific Avenue Senior Housing Phase 2 or the Walnut Street project. The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council adopt resolutions approving the amendments to the Shea Aura and Shea Serenity projects. This concludes staff's presentation, and we are available for questions. But first, the applicant would like to say a few words about the project.

Mayor Mrakas, You can bring that up you get this little button there on the side, but don't break the microphone okay.

Mayor Mrakas, The one that says up. Mayor Mrakas, There you go yeah that's pretty cool. Mayor Mrakas, So this may remember the city council, my name is David best i'm with ship homes, thank you for hearing all right, and I did a great job of explaining what's going on here I don't really have much to add. I did want to highlight that the request is to have the opportunity to fee out of some of the moderate income units that were required under the original approvals here. All the median, which is a deeper level of affordability, all those units will still be delivered. And like Ms. Ledoux said, we have been experiencing some difficulty actually getting those homes sold to qualified buyers at the moderate income level. So that's the request. And we will come before you at a future meeting with the actual negotiations for what that in lieu fee will be, which will be negotiated with staff. And there'll be an amendment to the existing affordable housing agreement for Serenity and a new affordable housing agreement for Fort Worth. So I'm here to answer any questions you might have as you deliberate. Be happy to help you out.

Very good. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Best at this point? Okay, thank you very much. Is there any public comment?

Yes, Mayor. We have three speakers for public comment for 7.2. Alan Marling, followed by Jane King, followed by Carl Wente. First speaker is Alan Marling.

Mayor and Council. In the summary, the applicant says it's hard to sell units. That is, it is easier for low income folks to rent rather than buy outright. My question is, why can't these units in question also be leased rather than abandoned affordability? I would prefer either the builders rent them out or the city buy them and rent them if that is possible. Thank you.

Next speaker is Jane King followed by Carl Wente.

Hi, I am Jane King. I urge the council not to adopt these resolutions to approve the subdivision amendments. Affordable units are needed and wanted by the public. If you approve these resolutions this evening, instead of establishing more affordable units, the council will be reducing the number of affordable units by 26, going from 51 to 25 for these subdivisions. The developer agreed to these conditions and they should be held to their agreement. The city should not set a precedent of changing agreements because of changing financial markets. Maybe if there had been some unforeseen catastrophes, such as a level six hurricane or an eight point earthquake, but that's not the case. Financial circumstances do change for developers and for the public. Do not eliminate these units now, but give some time for improved conditions when the public will be able to afford them and the units will be there for them. And I think there is more and more work being done on providing subsidies for affordable housing in the country as a whole. And maybe financial conditions were changed from these volatile times, and maybe there will be more funding in the future. So do not change the agreement now. I wish that there were more for lower income units available, but at this time, if the moderate units are not affordable, it may be even harder to have lower income units be available to the public. The Isabel-specific plan has housing affordability requirements that should be maintained inside this transit-oriented plan area. Each planned area should provide for their own required affordable units. In-lieu fees should be used inside the area where in-lieu fees are not adequate and should be increased to better reflect actual building costs. Right now, the in lieu fees are not adequate. With a single vote this evening, you can eliminate 26 affordable units. It will be much harder to get 26 affordable units back in the future. The land is now there for housing with inclusionary units, and the plan has been approved by the city and the developer. Do not lose them. Do not set a precedent. Do not decrease the number of affordable units being built in Livermore. Do not approve these amendments. Thank you.

Next speaker is , followed by Matt Monteiro. Matt Monteiro.

Just giving up on Carl. Okay. Yeah, I would like to speak in favor of approving the resolution, basically because as far as I'm concerned, we need to support our developers as much as possible to bring online as many units as possible. And that should be our guiding star. I've spoken to the council before about the futility of affordable housing, both the cost and I think the staff did a very good job presenting the crux of the problem that there's simply just not enough money to subsidize the units because they're very expensive to build because of labor. Since the previous speaker mentioned market conditions, I would like to argue in the opposite direction. We had a great period of low interest rates and relatively low labor post the financial crisis. This opportunity was completely squandered. We did not build enough housing. And I see the macroeconomic conditions actually getting worse. We've spoken about the ice facilities here before and immigration, the workforce that actually builds these housing is going to shrink. The interest rates and financial situation is probably going to get worse and not better. Inflation is going to rise. So there is no conceivable thing on the horizon that would say that these moderate and low income units would be easier to build in the future than they are, or easier to sustain. Therefore, like I said, I urge you to go along with what the developer sees as fit, because at the end of the day, they are the expert, they are the heroes that actually built the homes. And I know they are vilified. by a lot of people, developers being greedy. But as far as I can see, they are actually the ones that put roofs over people's homes, over people's heads. And they should be given deference to that endeavor as far as I'm concerned. Thank you very much.

There are no additional speakers, Mayor.

cutting out on me. Okay, so Carl hasn't come back, but I will go ahead and close the public comment period and bring it back to the council, closing the hearing. Comments from the council?

Well, questions first.

Okay, questions and comments. The floor is ours.

Staff, what was the last time that we adjusted the in-move fees numbers? Could you get that on the background while I ask further questions? Where do I start? Um, I, I asked this question of staff earlier already. This is not the action considered here is not going to set a precedent that would bind any other action of this type in the future. Correct.

Correct.

This is a one-off, um, you know, I'm looking also at my city attorney for this as well.

Yes, any determination for alternative means of compliance is taken on a case-by-case basis. So every individual case and every individual project is treated differently and separately based on the facts and circumstances of that project. Right.

There is a claim that this is going to be reducing the number of units But it's typically our experience that we actually get a higher number of units per dollar for in lieu fees because we can leverage state grants for these larger 100% affordable projects, some of which really do need to be clustered together like senior housing or housing for people with disabilities. Is that a fair statement?

Correct.

OK, I want to be really clear that we're not reducing the number of units. We are converting units to dollars so that we can build a total thing separately. I was in the background here looking at TOS. So the rate for these units at present for three bedrooms is The maximum in-home is $191,000, and the for sale price would be $626,000. Is that correct? And the going rate for these units on Zillow is in the $850,000 to $900,000 range. So we're talking about $200,000 or so difference from the actual unit price. Correct. For a family of three or four that is making $191,000, they may be able to afford the net purchase price of the for sale home without the restrictions, correct? Correct. And as a result, they may not want to buy these units because they put themselves into a restriction where they reduce their own upside if they resell in the future because they're forced to resell it at a lower rate. Is that fair to say? Yes. So that's what we're seeing here. That's the reason why this is being captured like this. And this is why the staff made the recommendation that's on the table tonight. We have tried selling these. We've been... advertising them, we have a number of ways of advertising them. It goes on social media portals, email threads. We have a single point website I think these days, correct? OK. The last thing I'll say is that in this interest rate environment, the holding costs of just leaving them empty and not sold for an extended period of time would be an extremely high amount of money that would serve no purpose. punish the developer for something, I guess. I'm not really sure what that buys us. Meanwhile, we have developments on the table today that are in mind that we are working on that this in-lieu fee can go towards. Walnut and Pacific Avenue Phase 2 that We like, we know what Pacific Avenue phase two looks like. We already approved phase one. It's a consolidated unit that needs onsite care or at least some sort of onsite support. So it makes sense to cluster them together. So that is the reasoning why staff is making this recommendation today.

Okay.

I'm going to leave it there for the moment and let it come back around.

Councilor Dunbar. Councilor Brannon.

We need to switch sides. No, no, no. All right, so I don't have any questions, I have comments. Okay, we'll go to questions first. You want questions first? Yeah, we'll handle questions.

Council Member Barantos?

I'm having trouble with a public benefit. So what does deeply affordable mean? What's that?

So when we're, can you hear me? When we, I'm Fran Earl, your housing and human services manager. So council member, when we say deeply affordable, we're talking about the very low income, which would be 50% of the area median income and below. So the projects that we typically serve through, as council member Dunbar mentioned, the Pacific Avenue Senior Project, and some of our other like avance the projects that were built by non-profit developers targeting those um those households that are not served on the on the rental market okay that's it vice mayor

I also have a lot of questions. I'm trying to figure out how to group together so I don't sit here and ask 50 questions. And I did get some answers from staff previously. So one of my questions is, and the staff report talks about the one and two bedroom units being more popular and people, more demand for those. And how far along is the construction on these projects? And is it possible to consider building more one and two bedroom units rather than the three bedrooms if those aren't as in demand?

When the project was approved, it only included two and three bedroom unit types. And as for both Shea Aura and Shea Serenity, they have made substantial progress in the construction process with Shea Serenity having... only seven buildings remaining to be built and Shea Ora on the verge of final map approval. And so at this point, it would be infeasible for the projects to redesign to add one more one and two bedroom units.

But I wonder if that's something to consider for future projects that we not get back. I'm trying to figure out how to avoid continuing to have this issue. So maybe something to keep in mind. And the side report, it also talks, and I think you also said in the presentation that a portion of the constructed moderate income units at Serenity have remained unsold for extended periods. Can you say what an extended period means?

The first set of, thank you, Council Member, the first set of units were released in last November and December. And so that was an initial release of five units. And of that release, one remains unsold. In addition to that, there was another release of three, four additional units in March, early March. And those remain unsold at this time. Okay. I see that. That was in the staff report. Okay.

So do we also see a surplus of moderate income units in any of other projects in the city? Or is this something we're seeing in the market generally and not just with this project?

I can speak to, I believe that in the Isabel neighborhood plan area, because our requirement was 20% split between with 5% at median and 15% at moderate, we have a large pipeline of moderate income units that have been secured through housing agreements. And what we're finding now is just that the demand for those and the available buyers is less than what's being offered at the market right now through those projects. And we have four projects building and offering units all at the same time right now.

Okay. I was also reading that some of the lower demand for these units is the restrictions. Do we think the restrictions are not serving us? Are they creating more problems than they're solving? Should we revisit what those restrictions are?

I think it's in our experience and speaking with the buyers who have opted out of the opportunities, we've had five eligible buyers that have decided not to pursue a purchase after looking at units. And what we've heard, it's not the restrictions as much as it is the financial uncertainty and the cost of home ownership. Our sense is that people in the moderate income category classification, they can access the rental market more readily. And so that step into homeownership is a, it's just a steeper step for them and on their budget, they have more options. And so we're finding that it's a combination. It's not just the restrictions are really, I think the city's program has been designed to be very flexible and good for, for folks as an investment, but it's really the just the, questioning the financial environment and the cost of homeownership. for that level.

Yeah, I think it was either in the staff report or maybe responses from staff to me earlier that maybe that's a reason why there's more interest for that income level to rent rather than buy. And so I wonder if we could, maybe not for this project in particular, but in the mix of housing we create in the city that we think about the three bedroom moderate income units being more rentals rather than for sale. I'm trying to figure out how to meet the interest and the demand in the market rather than having these surplus units and then there's demand in other types of housing.

Let's see.

I think that answered a lot of my questions. Yeah, maybe I'll think about this a little more, but I think I'm good for now. Thank you.

Okay, great. Thank you. Um, one of the concessions that was granted, there were several waivers and concessions granted, uh, that prevents the city from requiring two bedroom units. And yet the two bedroom units are in the higher demand, uh, Would there be a possibility to instead convert the three-bedroom units to the market rate and converting these two-bedroom units, since this was a concession that was granted, to go back and convert these into the two bedrooms into the BMR units?

You're correct that the concession that the developer used through the state density bonus law prevents the city from requiring a variety of units that are representative of the project as a whole to be provided as affordable on site. So with the concession used by the developer, they were permitted to designate only the three bedroom units as affordable.

Okay, that was in the original agreement and the original entitlement. And now they're coming back to us and asking us to change that original entitlement. Would they be willing to compromise on that concession?

I think that's a question you'd have to ask the developer. Mr. Best.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think I can answer your question. The question is, would we be willing to swap three-bedroom for two-bedroom units?

Or maybe not, but on an equal bedroom, perhaps not the individual units, but on trading the bedroom sizes.

Yeah, it's an interesting dilemma because your ordinance that you're Your actual ordinance says that we're supposed to provide an equal mix of bedroom and bathroom counts on the affordable units as we're offering on the project for the market rate units. And so we actually have two, three and four bedroom units in this project. And so by giving you three bedroom units, it hits that sweet spot of the same average bedroom count. for the affordables as if you would take the average for the project as a whole, if that makes sense. And so at the time that we designed the project, we designed the three bedroom as the affordable unit and the other ones as the market rate units. One issue is that when you're talking about for sale homes, one and two bedroom condos just aren't really sellable in the marketplace, especially in this urban environment such as Livermore. If we were in Emeryville or San Francisco, you could do that. So most people looking to purchase a home, they want three bedrooms plus.

But the three bedrooms, the affordable units are not selling.

That's right. So I think what I'm trying to get at is that if we were to try to put the lower bedroom count affordable units into the marketplace, we're actually also having trouble selling the two bedroom units at market. But the way we designed the project, the two bedroom units have rooftop decks. So they're actually spec'd up more for the market, for the market rate buyer. So in this particular project, those units would, you know, are already in the marketplace.

Okay. Thank you. Council member Dunbar mentioned that we would be able to leverage these dollars to, for projects like, like Eden housing and Pacific apartments. They're talking, it's, removing 25 of the affordable units into an in lieu fee. How many units, calculating the in lieu fee, how many units would that buy us, for example, at Pacific Senior Apartments?

For Mayor, for Pacific Senior, we are per unit subsidy for phase one was about $82,000 a unit. So we would, I mean, based on that estimation, we would likely get two subsidies, be able to subsidize two units per.

Two units.

Yeah.

So we're giving up $25,000 over $26,000 and we can leverage that into getting two.

would be an estimate but that would be the ballpark okay two per excuse me this is paul spencer assistant city manager so two for one so instead of 25 you'd get 50. expand a little bit please so uh based on the subsidy provided we're able to afford to build approximately two units for rental for seniors, for example, instead of one unit at Shea. So for each unit we lose at Shea, we can get two rental units.

Okay. So it would be 50 units. Right. And that would be, so that would account for the subsidy, but not necessarily the cost of the entire unit. So if we were required to put in $82,000 as the subsidy to match the what SAHA is putting in. So we wouldn't be putting all of the in lieu fees to subsidize the unit. We were putting in $82,000 into that. Correct.

Those projects utilize tax credit financing and a variety of sources to make up the whole funding package.

Okay. Okay. That makes sense. Okay, that answers my question at this point. Okay, very good. Thank you. Bringing it back, any further questions? Okay, on to comments. Oh, you have more questions?

Oh, I was just going to follow up to see if we had an answer to my original question on when the last update to InMufi is working.

The last update to the in lieu fee was done in 2021, and that was to codify the current methodology for projects with more than 11 residential units. And that was to outline that the fee is calculated as the difference between the base estimated sales price and the affordable sales price.

And so that effectively allows us to adjust it for conditions every year because it's a formula.

It makes it essentially project-specific. Yes.

Right. So it's continuously adjusting per project.

Correct. Yes.

So, yes. Thank you.

Okay. So in other words, we can recalculate the in-lieu fee for this project. And so, again, going back the – And so five units were released in November and December, six months ago. And so three of those units were sold. And then four units have been sold altogether. So some of them sat for six months and some for three months. And almost half of them are sold. Do you see an advantage in, I know Council Member Dunbar has made the comment about this is expensive and they're burning money at this point. Do you see an advantage in waiting to see if there's a turnaround in the clientele that's going to be moving into these or acquiring them?

Our housing agreement has standard language that the developer provide us with 90 to 120 days notice prior to the unit being ready for occupancy. So we are working with a developer quite in advance of that unit being ready and offered at market to find an eligible buyer. So at this point, we have been working with them for about 10 months to line up.

So you're putting in a notice of availability four months before it's completed.

Right, exactly. That's correct. Yes. All right.

Thank you. Customer Briantos.

Right now, I'm kind of confused on what's going on right now. It seems like we're negotiating here. Is there any way we can kind of table this and come up and make some...

more time to figure out what you want to do might be better for them and for the city either we can't table well um certainly we could uh but uh mr best has already said that that they're going to be going back to negotiations and coming back uh to finalize the agreement uh so at this point we're just we're deciding whether or not this is going to be allowed

I just have one more question. How often have builders come back to negotiate amendments to the agreements? How often does this happen?

For amendments like this, it doesn't happen frequently. The city has allowed a few amendments to occur with developers at times of difficult housing market conditions where they've been able to fee out of units that were already authorized through agreements. There's normal adjustments that happen through amendments to alter particular deal points, but this is... This is fairly unusual.

Yeah, they did that in 2010 with Royal Crossing because of the market downturn. They came back. And I think in 2013, there was a signature project that they did it similarly, but it doesn't happen frequently.

Okay, but it's not the first time. We're not setting precedent. This is not technically the first time.

And we have the latitude to do this. It's not setting a precedent. So this does not bind us into a future agreement.

Correct. But it could open the door for more people to come back and renegotiate. But this isn't the first time it's happened.

So I think staff would try to push our future developers to ensure that they've put in a strong good faith effort, the kind of time that we're talking about here before we brought something to you.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Any further questions? You have clarity? Yes. Okay. Okay. All right, I believe we're going back to Councilmember Dunbar. You had some follow-it comments.

Sure. I mean, I'm looking at staff. Staff has a recommendation on the table here to address what I think I just heard. Staff recommends approving this development agreement, presumably because they know how long that's been attempted to be advertised, and they think it's a good deal for the city in terms of what we'll be able to get out of it relative to what the developer is obligated to give. Is that a fair... assessment correct we pride ourselves here on coming with a recommendation not an open discussion necessarily and we appreciate that up here because it helps us drive to an answer um i guess my my final question is what's the sale up what's the sale up rate for market rate roughly maybe mr best can answer that if he knows by comparison to the units that we're talking about here

It's a great question, and that actually will be negotiated with the agreement amendment that will come back to you. So currently, those three bedroom units, we have several of them that can be sold at market, same unit, and the market price for that is $785,000 right now. It's been advertised. We haven't actually sold one yet, so that actually might be a little bit high. We'll kind of see how it goes. But, you know, basically from a financial perspective, it's a wash for us as a developer because the in blue fee is going to be equal to the difference between the market rate that we could sell it for and the affordable price. And so we would love to sell them as affordable units because it's financially equal to us. The problem is that we've had several of these homes unsold, finished, ready to move in for anywhere from three to six months. So that's why this is a little bit of a unique situation. And yeah.

For the four market rate units that are four bedroom that have sold.

mean how long are they on the market correct um well our desire would be zero days once they're complete they're moved in um i can say currently we have uh no four bedroom units we have three two bedroom units and i believe three or four three bedroom units still available that are basically complete and ready to move into out of a total of i gotta do the math um of 60 units that are built the answer i'm looking at is substantially less than nine months oh yes yeah yeah that's kind of what i'm going for here substantially we have we have one home that seems to be a dog right it happens in every project that's been on the market for two or three months but normally within a month to two months of having the home completely outsold thank you

All right. I didn't have any questions because I have met with Mr. Best. I have met with staff. I've met with Mr. Best again. I've met with staff again. I've met with staff again. I've spent more time on this particular item than most any other item I've actually worked on. This is something that's near and dear to my heart, of course. Housing and affordability are something that I think is very important. To cut to the chase, I am in support of staff's recommendation, but I want to explain how I got there and some of the other things I want us to consider along the way. As a council, we have discretion here. We can say, hold on to them as moderate units. We can give staff direction on how we negotiate going forward. We can provide additional feedback, but I actually think that staff really has the right ideas about this um particularly my conversations with mr spence have been really about that this is a specific moment with a specific problem with a specific project that also has specific benefits to the city that we normally wouldn't necessarily need right now our in lieu fund is very low um we have a really good inclusionary ordinance i'm Very much. I've spoken out multiple times about how proud I am of our inclusionary ordinance. How, if we're going to make changes to it, I want us to make it stronger. I don't want us to ever chip away at it. I think it's a really good ordinance. If anything, this has shown that we might need as our conversations go forward to look at more of the median or lower when we're doing for sale, because at least in the current market, The moderate units and for sale market rate units have gotten too close to each other in price. So maybe we need to strengthen our ordinance. Maybe that's a conversation. But right now, I don't want to make a decision about our ordinance based on the moment we're in right now either. It's a good ordinance. It's a strong ordinance. We have one of the better inclusionary ordinances in the region. However, Because our ordinance is so good, we don't do a lot of in lieu fees. We'll do fractional units. We'll get a little money here and there. Normally, in this process, if we were anticipating this, Shea Holmes should have come to us earlier and asked for this as part of the initial entitlement, and we should have looked at the market conditions. We should have had that conversation. And we didn't have that market at the time when this was being entitled two years ago, everything with good staff agreed. We agreed everyone was on the same page. So what we're left with is we can decide if we wanted to, as counsel, it's our choice. We could decide to punish Shea Holmes for trying to put roofs over people's heads. We could leave units vacant that. are not moving right now and may potentially move, or we can provide people with homes. So immediately provide people with the opportunity to buy the homes that are available currently and the ones that are coming on market. We can replenish our in lieu funds to provide housing for people who are in those categories of low, extremely low, very low. We, end up with working with a partner who is saying this is a situation in which they're willing to make sacrifices and they've come back. There was expense for even asking this question. So Shea Holmes has borne some expense just to ask the question of us. So they're serious about wanting to move forward with this. I think for all forms of community benefit I can think of, this is the right choice to make. I also want to make it clear that I don't want to stand up in situations where developers use density bonuses to set up situations where in the future they come back to us and say, well, we've designed this product that now won't sell. And now that it won't sell, we're coming back to try to modify. You know, I don't want us, I want us to be really cognizant of what got us here and not to do this again as much as possible. And sorry, not sorry, Mr. Bress, I want you to take him to task on this. Like the next part is the negotiations and I want staff to go and use the highest valuation we can find. I want us to try to get as much money as we can. This is every dollar we get is going to go to the housing fund. And so I think, you know, Mr. Best is coming back to us with a situation that is partially the market, partially choices that they made as a developer, partially just the reality of where we are right now in the time and all of that, I think, we should negotiate for the most possible money we can get to our in lieu fund. We should be working to try to make sure that we maximize that fund because that is going to then be turned around into housing for some of our most vulnerable residents and people who often in the median for sale range have choices. The in lieu funds will be going to people who have no choices. The last thing I want to say as we're looking forward from this and for people to understand is there is a big difference between the way that affordable rental units work and affordable for sale units work. I could not explain it clearly in a reasonable amount of time. It's a very complex system. But unfortunately, the way that the federal and state government have set it up is it is actually currently more advantageous for everyone to build rental units, even if we live in a world where I want it to be more advantageous to build for sale units. I want people to have that opportunity to buy a home with city and state and federal subsidies to be able to get into that market, build wealth, acquire future homes, acquire generational wealth. But to be frank, the system we have right now doesn't reward that and makes it actually more difficult, more expensive and more uncertain in the affordable for sale market than the affordable rental market. And so this will get us people who need the housing into the housing for a longer period of time, more people and more opportunities. Again, don't think this is a precedent. I don't want it to be. I don't want this to happen in the future. I don't want us to go for in lieu fees regularly. It is efficiencies when builders are building items. There are good reasons to have them doing inclusionary housing, lots of good reasons. But at this moment for this project, I feel actually very strongly after all my conversations with staff and Mr. Best that this is a major benefit to our community currently this one time. I would be, I was very opposed to this at the beginning and a lot of education got me too strongly in favor now. So.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your comments and for your insights. Customer Burrientos, comments? Okay, thank you. Vice Mayor. There we are.

I'm going to turn these on today.

Mine keeps going off.

I did a similar swing. I started with a lot of questions and a lot of just questions and have swung probably not as wild of a swing, but a swing nonetheless. I'm I'm convinced by Shea Holmes having been a good partner for the city and especially by staff recommendation. I know our staff works very hard on these projects and making recommendations to us. And I ultimately trust your assessment, but also the answers that I've gotten to the many questions I had previous to the meeting and also during this meeting, that they're very good answers. And I feel better about supporting this. I would just urge us to see what changes we can make going forward in terms of the mix of, you know, whether it's for sale versus rental at different income level units. So we are delivering the most in demand housing because there is so much demand for affordable housing. It's a shame to then build affordable housing that ends up not being what the market is calling for. So whatever we can do going forward on that. But I do also know we are really in need of in lieu funds for the very low income units that we're trying to build and which is also greatly in need. So I appreciate all the work and everything that's gotten us to this point. I appreciate Shea Holmes. And so thank you for all the effort.

All right, well, thank you. Yes, this is the value of the public hearings. We all went through 726 pages of the staff report, and we all developed questions. We worked with staff. And like most of us up here, I had some real problems with what I saw as the elimination of – affordable housing that we had banked upon, that this was something that we had worked with to provide the inclusionary housing, which I think is very important. But it's also very important to have affordable housing. The piece that tipped me over was the two-for-one, that we can subsidize two low-income apartments, particularly at Pacific Avenue, where the senior project is going in. Seniors are the most at risk for homelessness. This is the highest demographic that's going in to homelessness are the seniors. And so this is why it's so critically important to get the Pacific Avenue built. This is what the importance of getting Chestnut when we put in 72 senior units at Chestnut. We've been fighting to get 130 units at Eden housing in the downtown. So again, The more the better. This is not an ideal situation, but it's the situation that we're in right now. And I commend staff for continuing to work on this. This is kind of a big, hairy beast. And I appreciate you knocking it to the ground and taming it. But I see that there is... an overall benefit to providing more housing for our seniors that are most at risk if they become homeless. So I will support the staff recommendation. And I sincerely appreciate the effort that the Planning Commission put in this. I know that the Planning Commission struggled with this as well, which is one of the reasons that we struggled, because we read the minutes of the meeting. And so we know the issues that they were grappling with so certainly appreciate the uh uh the effort and with that i will uh bring it back to the council if there's no further comments uh i'll entertain a motion i'll add two pieces before i uh make a motion i'll say that developers are neither heroes nor villains they are simply businesses and businesses

that we can negotiate with when they have specific concerns that allow us to create advantages for what we need in the moment. And I think that's what staff has done here tonight and in the prior minutes. The other thing that I'll add to about seniors was that I read that the average age of people in the shelter at Open Heart Kitchen is 60 years old. And I knew it was going up, but I think I about fell out of my chair when I read that. So I agree with that sentiment that getting Pack Avenue phase two moving with any inland fees we can get will go a long way. And with that, I'll make the motion for staff recommendation.

Okay, motion made by Council Member Dunbar. I'll second it. Okay, seconded by Council Member Branning. Any discussion on the motion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposition? Any abstentions? It passes unanimously. Thank you all very much. Thank you for the tremendous work on this. Bear with me for a moment. Aha, there we go. So now we're on to 7.3, which is the public hearing and the resolution of renewal for the Livermore Valley Wine Heritage District. So next on the agenda is the public hearing for the renewal. I just said that. This hearing is being conducted to receive public comment regarding the levy of assessments and to allow affected business owners the opportunity to submit written protests. Ms. De La Vega and Mr. Potter.

Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Teresa de la Vega. I'm the management analyst, too, for the Innovation and Economic Development Department. And the item before you tonight is the Livermore Valley Wine Heritage District Renewal Public Meeting. Our public hearing, sorry. The Livermore Valley Wine Heritage District is a business improvement district established in 2021 in accordance with state law. The district is for a five-year term, which ends on June 30, 2026. This slide, which was presented to the council twice before, shows the renewal process and milestones required by state law. We have completed multiple steps, and tonight we are at the final step of the renewal process, which is this public hearing. The purpose of the public hearing is to provide an additional opportunity for public comment and written protests from assessed wineries. Council may adopt the resolution of renewal if a majority protest does not occur. Adoption of the resolution of renewal will have the following effects. First, extension of the district for an additional five-year term beginning July 1, 2026 and ending June 30, 2031 to allow continued revenue generation and continuity of district services. Second, approval and adoption of the management district plan with minor administrative adjustments, such as increasing the city collection fee from 2% to 2.5% to reflect the increased consultant cost. All the primary components, which are district boundary, assessment, service plan, means of governance, and term of five years remain unchanged. And third, authorize the city manager to execute the agreement for services, which effectively governs the city's relationship with the wine growers and identifies the wine growers as responsible for all district services as outlined in the plan. Staff recommends the City Council hold the public hearing and adopt the resolution of renewal unless a majority protest is received. As of the publication of this report, staff has received one valid written protest that does not constitute a majority protest. Staff has also received one public comment. The City Clerk will provide a final count of the written protests received and confirm whether a majority protest exists. That concludes our presentation. Staff is ready for questions, and so are the wine growers. Thank you.

Very good, thank you very much. I will now open the public hearing. Members of the public and effective business owners may speak at this time. If you are a business owner who wishes to protest, please submit your written protest with your name and signature. Protests from business owners are required to be in writing in order to be considered in the tally to determine whether a majority protest has been reached. I will now open the public comment period. Do we have any speakers?

Yes, Mayor. We have two speakers. The first speaker is Ken Wong, followed by Carl Wente. Ken Wong?

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Thank you for the opportunity for speaking tonight and also for your thoughtful considerations for the final approval. A wine heritage district is more than a destination. It is a commitment to continue to preserve the identity, history, and long-term sustainability of the wine country here in London. This region is one of California's oldest wine-growing areas. Its continued vitality depends on careful I wish you thoughtful planning and strong family support. And thank you again for your leadership and your partnerships and also for recognizing the importance of this effort.

Yeah.

Carl Wente.

Welcome back.

Ken Wong is our incoming president of the board. I'm the vice president of the board, have been since the inception. And it's a good thing for the community and what we're doing. So I think you guys know the right thing to do, I do believe. What's most, what's very critical because you all are stewards of government and thus, necessarily fiscal stewards is that we are running a tight operation a pragmatic operation it is not a lot of dollars to get the word out for who we are and what we do but brandy addington uh shout out and your great team um jenny patty thank you all for what you do we spend the dollars well so please continue this I'm pretty sure, but I'm not sure because this is a closed ballot. My family is representing a lion's share, a large portion of what is coming through this. We resoundingly support Hazardous Wine Growers Association. Thank you for what you do. Thank you, city staff. Thank you to those who put a uniform on to protect us. Thank you to those who put a bulletproof vest on to go to work. Namaste.

There are no additional speakers, Mayor.

Okay, very good. So if there's no further speakers, I'm going to close the public hearing. At this time, are there any additional written protests to be submitted? If there are, please bring them up now. Seeing none, it's now closed, the acceptance of written protests. City Clerk, if you'll please provide the final protest count.

One, which was the one previously received.

Okay. And so one does not constitute a majority. So there is, is no majority protest. So if there's no majority protest, we bring it back to the council. The public hearing is closed. Do I have a motion for approval? Okay. Moved by council member Berrientos. Seconded by the vice mayor.

Yes.

Second. Any discussion on the motion?

Just a quick comment to thank our wine growers very much for the work they do. And just to point out what was said, the efficiency of the dollars that are spent by Wine Growers Association is incredible. I'm really just very impressed of how well you do with the amount of money you have as far as advertising outreach and all of that. So you've done an incredible job with a very limited budget. So thank you.

And we are the oldest commercial wine region in California. And Petit Syrah, Cabernet, and Chardonnay all owe their birth to this region. So very proud of the region that we have. So with that, any further comments? All right. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstentions? It passed unanimously. Thank you all very much. Okay, with that, yes. Yes. Oh, yeah, five-minute break. Thank you. Yeah, we usually stop at nine. All right, so we'll take a five-minute break. Be back here shortly. Mine keeps turning off. Yeah.

It keeps turning off. Yeah, it's really odd. Turn it off now.

All right, let's get everybody back here. All right, we're getting ready to fire this back. Great. Welcome back to the June 8th meeting of the Livermore City Council. We just coming back from a break, call a meeting back to order. And we're going on to matters for consideration. This is item 8.1. It's a resolution approving the adoption of a technology disruption policy in accordance with Senate Bill 707 and a resolution amending and adopting city council meeting rules of procedure.

Good evening, Honorable Mayor Marchand and members of the City Council. Kim Seeley, your City Attorney. I am going to provide a brief summary of Senate Bill 707 and the requirements that are imposed on the City of Livermore. SB 707 was signed into law in October 2025. Some of its provisions took effect on January 1st, 2026, while others take effect this coming July 1st. This presentation focuses on those provisions taking effect on July 1st. Purpose of SB 707 is to primarily expand the use of remote access and participation at city council meetings. It is also to standardize teleconferencing among all agencies so that the rules are the same for all agencies. And finally, to improve public engagement. SB 707 is found in the Brown Act and therefore the primary changes are set forth in the Brown Act. The first change is to impose public access requirements for eligible legislative bodies. An eligible legislative body is defined as a city council of a city with 30,000 or more population. And therefore Livermore is considered an eligible legislative body subject to SB 707. The second major change is regards to the expansion of teleconferencing roles for council members. With respect to the first requirement, the public access requirements for eligible legislative bodies, the city is required to provide public access and comment through two-way remote participation. And this is generally through two-way telephonic service or two-way audio visual platforms. The second requirement is to adopt a policy addressing technology disruptions of service at meetings. And basically what this is, is once a technology disruption is identified, the city has to attempt to fix the two-way remote participation issue for at least one hour. If the issue is resolved before the hour, let's say, for example, 15 or 20 minutes, the meeting may resume. If, however, the issue cannot be resolved after one hour, The city can choose to adjourn the meeting or continue without the use of remote participation if the city makes a finding by a roll call vote that it is in the public interest to continue the meeting. And the third criteria for public access requirements is to engage with underrepresented communities. This is primarily done through the city's website, which the city of Livermore currently has a fairly extensive website on meeting requirements. We will be... updating that website to be compliant with SB 707 and also doing additional outreach to encourage groups to participate through media or civic organizations. The second primary change from SB 707 is the expansion of teleconferencing. And just so you're aware, traditional teleconferencing affected by SB 707. Rather, SB 707 created teleconferencing as a reasonable accommodation, and it also expanded alternative teleconferencing. And alternative teleconferencing is often an umbrella term used for various forms of alternative teleconferencing. It includes just-cause emergency circumstances, those used to be separate criteria. Now they're combined into one. They're all just cause. There's also state of emergency circumstances, eligible subsidiary bodies, teleconferencing and the like. So it's a broad range of teleconferencing forms that are available to the council. And both the public access requirements and the teleconferencing rules have been incorporated into the rules of procedure. So what the rules of procedure have done, it's threefold. First, they've included the remote participation in the rules. Second, we've amended Appendix A to include the teleconferencing forms that are available to the city council. And then third, Appendix C, we've also added the disruption policy to the rules so that you can access all of the information in one document. In terms of recommended actions, the first action is to adopt a resolution adopting the technology disruption policy in accordance with SB 707. And the second action is to adopt a resolution adopting and amending the city council rules of procedure consistent with SB 707. And I'm available for any questions as well as Stephanie from the city clerk's office.

Thank you very much. Let's see. Do we have any public comment on this?

Yes, mayor. We have one comment. One speaker, Greg Scott.

Greg Scott. This all sounds good with SB 707, especially on the decorum and the experience the city council has had with decorum with the Zoom calls. The problem I see is in cybersecurity. It doesn't address cybersecurity adequately enough, which makes you quite vulnerable. The state's been incompetent in regulation on generative artificial intelligence and agentic generative artificial intelligence. You should back up and look at, there's three main cultures to generative artificial intelligence. There's the doomsayers, which say it's going to destroy us all. I don't know about that since most chat box can't even count how many R's are in strawberries. There's also the effective altruists, and we've seen an example of that with Sam Bankman Freed and his FTX crypto scam. And then there's the effective accelerationists, which is pedal to the metal with the technology, which has been the position of the administration until recently. A little bit of a problem with their tech boy elected president. position, SD Vance, who got on the phone. They're very worried about something, and what they're worried about, the vulnerability, is anthropics mythos technology, which can identify weaknesses in the cybersecurity. And it can be good if good is intended, but it can be very bad if bad is intended. And also, the technology from OpenAI, the cyber chatbot, 5.5. It also can identify cybersecurity weaknesses. So the weakness here is in cybersecurity. And I'm just cautioning you on that matter. I think you need to include some cybersecurity provision because you're vulnerable. And you can't depend on the state because the state is just incompetent. And the administration is just all for making the money and doesn't want to regulate it, but they're getting worried. When they get worried, there's a problem. So I urge you to take caution with the cybersecurity on this issue. Thank you.

We have no additional speakers, Mayor.

Okay, so we're going to close the public comment period, bring it back to the council. Any questions or comments from the council?

Just we were done bar just to address that cyber cyber security incident that took us offline would be qualified under a technology disruption as specified in this policy and we would be able to address and move on subject to the rules specified correct.

That is correct SPS 707 does require the city to adopt a technology disruption policy livermore went a step further. and added its own cybersecurity provision in here to be specifically addressed such that the city, if there is a cybersecurity incident, the city may temporarily suspend the affected systems. So that is specifically called out in Livermore, which is meant to address those cybersecurity issues.

Very good. Council Member Brenning.

Yeah, just a comment. So I'm all for additional access and I'm all for the additional outreach. I think that the intent of this bill was really good, but I just do feel the need to highlight this is an example of a policy that is being imposed by the state in which the state themselves would not be willing to comply by the rules of. It is being pushed upon cities in a way that was not well thought out on implementation or the potential disruption or the potential for harm. We're implementing it in this way currently because that's what is required by the state, but there are no similar rules for our state legislature. They are actually quite opposed to similar types of access and commenting at their level So while I'm very happy that we are expanding the ability for people to participate in the governance process, I think that, you know, and I will be voting to approve this because honestly we have no choice. Uh, but, um, I think it's important to get into the record that this was forced upon us. Cal cities was opposed to it. Most cities were opposed to it because the implementation of it is actually done very poorly. Um, will survive, we will work with other cities to make sure that we have, you know, the best possible practices, we will do what we need to moving forward, and we will be fine. But it was poorly, poorly designed, poorly implemented, while maybe well intended. I'm, I am displeased that we are here right now, moving forward on this for, as I said, a state mandate that they would not themselves hold themselves to.

Well, of course, the state is not bound by the Brown Act, which all of us in local government, we have to adhere to the tenets of the Brown Act. And also the state, which converted a $95 billion surplus into a $26 billion deficit. They are now requiring us to take fiscal training when we have a balanced budget. and and they can't balance a budget so we have to abide by these rules and i i agree with councilmember branning that uh these are unfunded mandates that they continue to heap upon us uh and we have to comply and they don't so thank you for that comment yes um i just wanted to add that um what we

what the mayor talked about at the beginning in public comment for raising your hand is gonna become critically important with this. We have been Zoom bombed before and we wanna make sure that everybody has the opportunity to speak and is comfortable doing so. So I really appreciate everybody going with that program after the mayor asked for it and thank you for that.

Okay, any further questions, comments? Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Do we have, all in favor signify. I thought we moved this. I thought, didn't you guys move and second it? Okay. Okay. Well, we'll do that again then. So we're willing to entertain a motion. I thought that we already had that, but okay. Nobody seems to be recognizing that we had a motion.

So I'm just going to move ahead with it.

Okay. Okay. Council member Berrientos makes the motion. I believe it was seconded in my, in my, imagination by the vice mayor. I'm just trying to move the meeting along. Okay. What can I say? Okay. Any further discussion on the motion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? It passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Okay. Moving on to council member reports and matters initiated.

Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, this is your city manager, Mariana Birch. Just a reminder to take the remainder of the public comment.

Oh, I'm sorry. That's right. We were opening up the public comment period again, the open forum. So we will reopen the open forum.

Our first speaker is Sam Ludwig, followed by Alan Marling, followed by Jane King. First speaker is Sam Ludwig.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, and City Council members. My name is Sam Ludwig. I'm a Livermore resident of six years, a Marine Corps veteran, and I work at the Lawrence Livermore Lab. But I want to be clear that I only represent myself and my own personal opinions here. I am here to urge the Council to propose the adoption of a resolution opposing an ICE detention facility in FCI Dublin. I believe that having an ice hub next door will make hiring and retention at my workplace even tougher than it already is. Stress levels will skyrocket as my coworkers and I worry about our communities while trying to focus on important work, let alone those of us who have vulnerable family members. This is not an environment that attracts the type of conscientious, diverse, dedicated workers that we need. I'm also concerned that the Tri-Valley will become a 24-7 flood zone of ICE operations that endanger our residents and drain city resources when righteous people have no choice but to act. We also how the community responded in Minneapolis to protect their own And we have twice that number of people living in the Bay Area. So our East Bay neighbors already drove out ice out of the Alameda Coast Guard base last October. So I highly doubt that they will hesitate to join us just because we're on the other side of the hill. I hope that we will do ourselves proud, take a stand together, and publicly oppose this predatory ice camp that would inevitably put the Tri-Valley and Livermore in the news for all the wrong reasons. Thank you.

Next speaker is Alan Marling.

Mayor and council, as a Livermore resident, I ask you to create a resolution in opposition the reopening of the FCI Dublin facility as an ICE detention center. Ice is a lawless and dangerous secret police, which threatens the lives of immigrants and citizens alike, as well as endangering US democracy itself.

Next speaker is Jean King, followed by Jolie, followed by Lugan Parwes.

City Council, I agree with many of the speakers that have spoken tonight about the facility. I too ask you as the City Council and the representatives of the city to pass a resolution opposed to the changing of the facility in Dublin to an ICE detention center. Thank you very much.

Next speaker is Joe Lee, followed by Mujgan Parwaz.

I know there are pressing issues, but I appreciate the time I get to speak about free software, somewhat more philosophical issues. So thank you and thanks especially to Vice Mayor Wang for coming to the event three weeks ago. We had the fortune of being joined by not only Vice Mayor Wang, but also Ronald Minnick. Just by chance, he joined us and he's significant to the free software movement because he is the original author of Linux BIOS, which was a project started about 20 years ago at Los Alamos, which is to provide us with free software BIOSes that we can flash onto our BIOS chips. So he joined us. We got a visitor from Lawrence Livermore National Lab who shared a little bit about how the lab uses GNU slash Linux. And we also had a visitor from the Santa Clara County, a young student who came and talked about the his installation of the 64 bit build of the new the new operating system with the herd Colonel, which is. somewhat rare it's the 64 bit build and he's one of the first in the world to install it on hardware so that was remarkable he presented that and talk to the Ronald minute about it too and. And since we're on the topic of teleconferencing, I just had this thought of would it be possible to comply adversarially by instead of using Zoom, for example, using free software, Jitsi. Jitsi Meet was developed, it predates Zoom. It was developed at the University of Strasbourg and it's free software, released under a free software license that we could run on our own servers or run on a server that's hosted by someone else. If we choose, yeah, I'll just leave it at that. Thank you.

Next speaker is Mujgan Parvez, followed by Matt Matteo and Anne Everton.

Good evening, honorable mayor, esteemed council members. My name is Mishkan Parwais. I'm a 20-year-plus resident of the city of Pleasant, sorry, Oregon, Pleasant, but of Livermore. And I come here to you also in favor of placing a resolution on the council's agenda to oppose the reopening or repurposing of the FCI Dublin facility, specifically as an ICE detention center. Why do we specifically talk about ICE? It's because ICE has been operating unlawfully and inhumanly in its attainments and treatment of not only undocumented but also documented peoples. If ICE were to have its way, it would probably, as somebody said tonight, bulldoze the Statue of Liberty. The Statue of Liberty has a bronze plaque that specifically says, give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tose to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door. as myself as a refugee that came here and many others that have come upon here at the united states of america the statue of liberty is what we stand for so i ask that being that we are in california the number one state in the union It is a home to the most diverse immigrant populations in the country. Building an ICE detention center here directly contradicts our values of what we talked about tonight with the proclamation for Pride Month, our values of inclusion, dignity, and respect for all families. The Bay Area thrives itself on diversity and welcoming culture. We reject any attempt to bring fear, surveillance, and separation into our neighborhoods. And unfortunately, the last thing we would like to see in this year, the Tri-Valley community would be to be known for and to have a detention center that only brings fear. Instead, what we should be doing, as we've discussed with other items tonight, we should be focusing on resources in investing in uplifting families, education, and positive economic growth. So again, with my last 43 seconds as a refugee that came here when she was seven years old and is now a naturalized citizen, I am as fearful as an undocumented person here. And none of us should feel like that anywhere in the United States, anywhere in the world. And I not only ask that the resolution be placed on the council's agenda, but that this council unanimously pass that resolution when it's on the agenda. Thank you.

The next speaker is Mateus Montero, followed by Ann Everton, followed by Sib DeClark.

Council, first, thank you, Evan and Steven, for coordinating your clothing so you could confuse Mayor Marchand. I wanted to say I've seen on on homes and first the repaving followed up with a bike path being painted. It really makes a big difference. I know that these kind of opportunistic projects are something that we can do on the cheap and they make a big difference. I will still say, I think that stretch of road is still too wide. The cars are going too fast. They hardly stop for pedestrians. And one day I will be run over on my way to Safeway. So I'm putting it on the record. A little quick anecdote from other residents that lived there for much longer than I have, 20, 30 years. I asked them why they don't walk to Safeway and they feel unsafe. And ironically, they told me when 84 was going through there, they did go and walk because there was so much traffic, the cars were going slowly. So I just think that should be a consideration whenever we discuss. I figured out this button now. OK, so that's one thing I want to talk about. Thank you, but more work to be done on that intersection to make it safer and more walkable. Second is senior citizen facilities. I think we should try to get our local senior citizens into those facilities if we can. because it's a virtual circle. We free up a home for a family in Livermore. We can reevaluate that home and get a higher tax base. And we of course get a Livermore citizen into a home that they can actually afford to live in. So I don't know if that's possible to do to somehow encourage that or reach out. I'm sure some of those people are like, I don't even know if they're aware that these units exist, but we should make an effort, because it helps us out, which I think should be obvious to everyone on this Council. um and then the last thing i'll say about housing again I hate how much time and like. and mental effort and everyone has really good intentions. Everyone that speaks to here I know wants the best, but it really is, I think, kind of a symptom of the problem is that local governments are spending way too much time trying to micromanage housing. And I just heard a couple of comments on the previous 7.2 item from Christy Wong and Evan Brang about them thinking What will the market do? How will we fit the market? And respectfully, that shouldn't be your job, right, to try to guess. I bought a home that's from 1952 for multiple times its value adjusted for inflation, and it has the same amenities than it did in 1952, and there's no other consumer product that's out there that's like that. And I think that, yeah, that's the reason. Okay, I'm out. Thank you.

The next speaker is Anne Everton, followed by Sib De Clark, followed by Paula Campbell. Anne Everton? Sib De Clark?

Right. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. My name is Sibde Clark. I have been a resident of Livermore for 12 years and I speak in support of creating a resolution opposing the use of FCI Dublin as an ICE detention center or any other detention center for that matter. A Livermore father has already been taken by ICE after routine check-in and deported. His son just graduated high school without his father in the stands to cheer for him. Children from mixed status families in Livermore live under constant fear of losing a parent. That fear follows them to school every day, robbing them of their childhood. If that is not enough for us to oppose such a facility, let us consider this. Enforcement expands to field capacity. So new facility means more operations in Livermore. I am a historian and someone who grew up in Europe of parents and grandparents who saw happen there what is now starting to happen here in the US, my new country. If things keep going in our country the way they have this past year and a half, five years from now, any one of us may be the ones risking ending up in the detention center for exercising freedom of speech. Let us remember, every human being who has found themselves in the type of situation my family lived through also found themselves saying, we never thought this could happen here. I encourage you, as many other people who have spoken here tonight, to please put such a resolution on the agenda and unanimously vote yes in its favor. Thank you very much.

Paula Campbell, followed by Laurie Herbert, followed by Dana Thomas.

Good evening. I'm Paula Campbell. I've been a resident of Livermore for 25 years. Thank you for allowing us this opportunity to speak openly. I am here representing Culinary Angels, a nonprofit that's been in Livermore for 10 years. Culinary Angels prepares nutritious meals and delivers these meals free of charge to Tri-Valley and San Ramon and Danville residents who are in the throes of the cancer challenge, we also deliver a meal to their caregiver. It's a wonderful organization celebrating 10 years. In those 10 years, we've delivered over 23,000 meals to our community members, our friends and family. This month is not only Pride Month, but it's also Cancer Survivor Month. And in honor of Cancer Survivor Month, Culinary Angels has a promotion with. Restaurants, downtown restaurants every night of the week for the month of June, Mondays at La Conda, Tuesdays at Sons of Liberty, Wednesdays, Thursday, Demetries and Friday mornings and lunch at mornings on first these wonderful local businesses are actually donating proceeds from each tab back to Culinary Angels so that we can prepare more meals and provide this nutrition to more of our neighbors and family members. So I'm here to just announce it to all of you and those sitting behind me and encourage you to tell your friends, families about this promotion this month. And if I may, I'd like to give the flyer to the city clerk so that perhaps it could be passed around the city offices. So thank you very much. Thank you for what you do for us. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Lori Herbert, followed by Dana Thomas, followed by Carl Wente. Lori Herbert. Our next speaker is Dana Thomas.

Also short. Thank you for this opportunity to address you all, mayor, vice mayor, and city council members. My name is Dana Thomas. I live in Stephen Dunbar's district. I'm active with Indivisible Tri-Valley, and I am also here to urge you to put the resolution to oppose the reopening of FCI Dublin as a detention center on the agenda in the future, and also to pass it. If I swore to put a facility in Dublin, it would certainly affect all of us. And our city government would not be immune. Plummeting revenues at area businesses would tank sales tax revenues. And I believe the statistic that came out of Minneapolis was that they lost over half the revenue in their businesses. So that would certainly affect all of us. Frequent protests drawing backlash from ICE would keep our police busy with that instead of patrolling their meat. City resources would be spent receiving and responding to the concerns of frightened residents. And speaking of frightened residents, it's not only immigrants and citizens of color that will be frightened. Many of us, including myself, have joined the Rapid Response Volunteer Network to act as legal observers, ready with the camera to document ICE abuses. Camera footage is what exposed the lies when ICE agents shot a Minneapolis man through his closed front door and claimed he was on his lawn beating them with a shovel. It was also what exposed the truth when DHS claimed that Alex Preti was approaching agents brandishing a weapon. Footage from legal observers showed him backing away, gun holstered, before agents forced him to his knees, disarmed him, and then shot him in the back. Alex Pretty was out there that day with his camera as a legal observer, and it got him killed. I would be lying if I said that I wasn't afraid of doing that work. But when ice comes, I'll do it anyway. because our city needs people with courage who are afraid but act anyway to protect it. Please, each one of you, be one of those people today. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Carl Wente, followed by Tom Dominguez. Our next speaker is Tom Dominguez. Anne Everton. Laurie Herbert. No additional public comment.

There we go. Okay. In that case, I'm going to close the public forum and bring it back to the council. Next thing on the agenda is council committee reports and matters initiated. So let's move to council member Branning.

Thank you very much. I would like to start by saying happy pride to everyone. It's been a busy couple of weeks. All of my report outs are in my report out. uh so i want to address the audience today first of all by thanking everyone for coming out uh i appreciate everyone's comments and i appreciate everyone's concerns um it's and i want to reiterate where the city is so the city has worked very diligently to make sure that all of our residents feel safe we are I will speak for all of council for a moment and say that all of us have voted on resolutions, we voted on policies, we have worked with our police, fire, all of our public safety agencies to make sure that they are doing everything that they can possibly to keep our residents safe, to make sure that Livermore not only is safe, but feels safe. It is the highest priority as I believe all of us have said at some point, it is really the highest priority of the city to make sure our residents are safe. uh speaking for myself i am very very sympathetic to everything that was said today uh i absolutely agree with the audience on on many of the points they raised and i think it's important that the city uh looks forward into how to be most effective in making sure that we have a coalition that we are really working to actually have meaningful impact in this realm or which I would like to ask staff if what we can do is can we reach out to the city of Dublin and the County of Alameda to see how we can best support them in the efforts that they've already begun. And then after getting guidance from our neighboring city, particularly I'm interested in Dublin's stance, but after getting guidance from the city of Dublin, taking the actions necessary to try to make sure that our federal advocates, our Tri-Cities Council, our other methods of which we have coalitions between the cities, whether that's an action that comes before council or whether that's actions that staff can take directly, I want you to do what is appropriate with the next steps to really make sure that we are doing All we can to really push back against this in conjunction with our partners that we have currently. Does that sound like something that would be appropriate for the city to perform Through the mayor.

This is your city manager Mariana bird. Yes, that is doable council member branding. So there is direction from the city council tonight with staff to pursue that Avenue, we will go ahead and and do so.

Then I would proposed that as matters initiated for staff to follow my direction.

We got nods. We got Council Member Berrientos.

I did speak to a council member from Dublin and he said that they would like an endorsement. We don't have to write a whole resolution, just endorse what the resolution they came up with. It's kind of a, it doesn't attack ICE. And it just points out the facility that is playing like Alcatraz falling apart. And that's his suggestion that we should just endorse the resolution.

Well, I think with the customer branding's point about, you know, what is the best thing that we can do for a meaningful impact? And I think that's, we ask staff to work with the other neighboring communities and find out what is going to constitute a meaningful impact. And I agree with that. Looks like we got consensus.

Well, I have a slightly different take.

Okay. I want to, if I can turn over to the city attorney really quickly, how much discussion are we allowed to take at this point? None.

Well, you can take discussion to do a motion to direct staff to come back with something.

I just want to make sure. I know this is a tricky point right here.

Yes, you're not taking action on the actual item. You're just directing staff.

Can you clarify, you're asking for... staff to approach city of dublin and the county to see how we can support their work on this or their resolution yes um i just have a slightly different or perhaps in addition to that to explore what effective actions cities can take for ourselves, for our residents of Livermore, what can cities do that is effective? I would like that in addition, regardless of what their needs are, what can we do for our residents? Even though we don't have a federal prison here, we do have a lot of immigrants and undocumented immigrants. And I myself am an immigrant. I have been very worried about traveling overseas. My daughter's overseas. I've been afraid to travel because I'm not certain I'll be allowed back in. I've been carrying my passport everywhere I go since early last year. Going to the grocery store, it's under my table right now. I understand deeply the fears of our community. I would like to take action that will be effective. I don't want to take action that ultimately has no legal teeth, but could actually draw attention to ourselves. And so I'd like to explore what can the city do within our jurisdiction that would be helpful and not in the form of making statements that ultimately have no teeth.

Pardon me? Yes, go ahead.

Okay, I subsidize people, of course, I'm brown, and that's what they look for. And I am concerned about that statement. If they have more, and I session here, they will come out. And the head chief guy, whatever you call him, said they're going to ramp it up. My wife is freaked out about this. She makes me carry a passport too. By the way, I am brown. I could be a good target. She's concerned. I'm concerned for the people around me. One of my assistant coach, one of his friends, they were just talking back and forth about getting their papers ready. And the other one said, fine, I'm good. And a week later, he was gone. They had picked him up and taken him away. So it's out there. I'm not sure how many of us know. People have been snatched up. And I don't want to go to El Salvador right now, even though my mom and dad are from there. That prison apparently is not a very good place to be.

Honorable Mayor, members of the City Council, this is your City Manager again, Mariana Birch. I think just maybe summing up what I believe the direction to staff is, and that is to both reach out to the City of Dublin to identify what support they might need from the neighboring city, as well as to explore any meaningful actions that the city can take when it comes to perhaps not direct protection, but making sure that our community feels safe and protected. And that may include reaching out to our federal representatives. Does that sum up the direction?

And we've already made the statement from our police department that our top priority continues to be the safety of our residents. And that continues to all residents.

Thank you.

All right, thank you for that step is sufficient direction okay very good, thank you, thank you all for your comments tonight greatly appreciate it, thank you. Council member Dunbar.

Not a lot more to report than what's on my list here and wanted to thank everybody for coming out and offering your comments tonight. I think Council member branding said it right in that. There's very little I disagreed with in any of what was actually said. And it's what to do about it. I think talking to our neighbor Dublin is the right move.

Thank you. Anything that you wish to highlight from your report?

Well, I did forget to put down two things. I did go to the L Street Garage a little late when I got my cookie. And I did spend Three hours down at the more downtown street fest and ran to Chrissy as she was exhausted after she'd been there. And that was a big event. If you haven't been there, it's fun to see the people and some of the vendors I know. So it was interesting. Three hours walking around. And I don't think I saw all of them either. And that's all I got to say.

All right, Vice Mayor, anything you wanted to highlight?

No, just everything I submitted. But I did also want to thank all the community members who came out and spoke tonight, and especially those of you who stayed through the two hours in the meeting to get an opportunity to speak. And as I said before, this means a lot to me personally. And those of you who aren't immigrants who came here to stand up for us, I deeply appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. And again, thank you for everybody that made the time to come out tonight and to make your comments and the ones that emailed as well. I certainly appreciate hearing from our community. Two things I wanted to highlight. On Saturday, we celebrated the 150th anniversary anniversary of our light bulb uh our world famous continuously burning light bulb 125 years uh we had over 800 people singing happy birthday to a light bulb and i just think that's the coolest thing it just underscores how remarkable livermore really is uh and that on june 26th We are going to be celebrating the 150th anniversary of the city's incorporation. When we became a city, that's going to be June 26th at Livermore and Plaza in the heart of our downtown. And another really cool thing, it was also on June 6th. The Livermore Valley Arts put on an immersive art display at Livermore and Plaza projecting the history of art. um, on, uh, on the wall. And it was fascinating to see inside of seven minutes, uh, 50,000 years of art. So it was a lot of fun and it just speaks to the richness of the culture of our community. And that's, I think one of the strengths of the fact that we are such a diverse community. Uh, yes. Last, last minute in here.

Uh, I just want to add one event that's coming up, uh, that I think is really cool to remind me. Um, The first ever Livermore Day at the Dublin Leprechauns is this Thursday. So I just want to hype that. I get to throw out the first pitch. So I'm kind of excited.

Did you want to highlight the Wine Down in the Park?

Oh, yeah.

Wine Down in the Grove.

Yes. Wine Down in the Grove is also coming up, which is a fundraiser for the LARPD Foundation. It is fantastic. Oh, no.

It's June 26th. June 26th.

It is on June 26th. It benefits the scholarship program for the LARPD Foundation. And it was a fundraiser that I originally kicked off. And it is a lot of fun. A lot of fun. There are still tickets available.

So come to the 150th celebration of the city and then wind down in the park.

I'm going to both.

Wind down in the grove. Okay, with that, there being no further business to come before the city, we are going to adjourn to a regular city council meeting Monday, June 22nd at seven o'clock. Oh, I did, thank you very much. Recognizing that the city of Livermore lost one of our great advocates and one of our champions for the disadvantaged and the abused. Anne King, one of the founders of the Tri-Valley Haven passed away. And she is a great loss. She had a tremendous passion for our community and for those victims of domestic violence. So she passed away. So I would like to adjourn this meeting in her honor and memory of Anne King.